Good For the Farmer? 

Gary Goldberg, CEO / American Corn Growers Association

If you had to define this whole contentious debate in one word, the word would be uncertainty.

"The uncertainty of knowing whether foreign markets will exist, the uncertainty over issues of the legal liability brought about by contamination of crops by cross-pollination, the uncertainty over whether the grain elevators are going to demand that farmers segregate GMO from non-GMO crops on their farms and the uncertainty of how all of these things will impact the economic well-being of family farmers.

"As farmers, we face uncertainty every day-with the weather, over federal farm programs, and over international trade agreements. The last thing farmers need is the uncertainty of whether we will have a market, foreign or domestic, for what we grow.

"And even if GE crops end up increasing yields, why would we want that? We

can't even sell what we have now. None of the benefits claimed by the biotech industry trickle down to the production end of agriculture, and the farmer ends up the loser. Always."

-Gary Goldberg, Chief Executive Officer, American Corn Growers Association, www.acga.org 

Are There Options Available to Farmers to Plant Non-GMOs?

ACGA GMO Brochure: Section 8

The door seems to be opening for greater opportunities for those agricultural producers who plant non-GMOs. A larger number of grain processors and handlers are offering premiums for non-GMOs. The Aurora Co-op in Nebraska, the state’s largest, recently began offering 7 to 8 cent premiums for non-GMO corn and 10 cents for non-GMO beans. 

Identity preserved loads of non-GMO corn and beans will find increased market demands. As shippers seek to serve overseas customers, non-GMO growers will be required and offered incentives.  

If a farmer can certify their crops to be non-GMO, they hold the promise of meeting consumer demand.

source: http://www.acga.org/GMOBrochure/08.htm 17feb01

GMO Brochure: Conclusion

The conclusion for U.S. farmers is clear. They must weigh the risks versus the benefits to the continued planting on GMO seeds. Simply put, are the benefits of planting GMO crops worth the risk of losing foreign and domestic customers? Each individual farmer will have to make that determination on his or her own.

The questions remain, such as: who holds the responsibility for maintaining separate channels for GMO and non-GMO crops; is the grain handling industry able to deal with a two tiered delivery channel, one for GMO and the other for non-GMO; who will test the crop and at what cost; what are the measurement levels for cross-pollination and whether buffer zones need to be planted to prevent contamination; is a 20 percent buffer sufficient to prevent harming beneficial insects and creating resistant weeds;  must farmers certify their crops as non-GMO; will labeling be required on all GMO foods; must liability waivers be established for farmers and the liability put on the shoulders of the seed corn industry; and who will pay for the increased cost of food products due to the costs associated with testing and segregation?  Until these and other questions are answered to a farmer’s satisfaction, alternatives to GMO seeds may need to be considered.

source: http://www.acga.org/GMOBrochure/09.htm 17feb01

Without coming right out and saying it, the American Corn Growers Association is telling the farmers to exhibit extreme caution with regard to GMOs. There are far too many unanswered questions to consider GMOs a good bet. This is excellent advice for anyone dealing with GMOs, whether they be crops, animals or medicine. Not only are there too many unanswered questions, but there aren't going to be any proper answers for a  very long time, if at all. The hype that the biotech industry peppers us with is just that, hype. This is by far the least regulated technology EVER. The information gaps are enormous. As an example, look at the news of the genome project. They were "shocked" to find far fewer genes than thought existed. Much more important is the admission that genes are not the almighty controllers of the human body, that there must be some other force controlling our bodies. The genes that they haven't figured out are referred to as "junk genes." If it were not for the fact that this is the best that corporate science can do, and that they are playing with our environment and lives, it would be a farce.

There are however, many things that are known at this time, and they put an extremely bad light on GMOs. There are countless reasons for banning them, or at the least, placing a 5-year moratorium on the use and manufacture of GMOs until the questions are answered (which will probably not happen, at least not in our life time). Some of the reasons for a ban, given what is known at the present time are environmental harm, reduced biodiversity, the spread of herbicide resistance to surrounding weeds, invasive species, social implications, loss of food security to corporate control, farmers being further reduced to the realm of BioSerfdom, horizontal transfer of cancer-causing bacteria to humans and other animals, novel organisms that could be quite harmful, the annihilation of whole species....and so on.

- Mindfully.org