IRAQI FARMERS, BEWARE!

ONE MORE REASON WHY IRAQ SHOULD BOYCOTT

MONSANTO SEEDS

An anti-Monsanto sign in a crop field




U.S. Farmers Realize Disadvantages of Genetically Engineered Seed
http://www.sott.net
Tiffany KaiserDailyTechWed, 06 Oct 2010 00:04 CDT

http://mylogicoftruth.wordpress.com/2010/10/06/u-s-farmers-realize-disadvantages-of-genetically-engineered-seed/

Seed farmers throughout the United States are complaining that biotech seeds (which are genetically altered seeds) are becoming much too expensive, resistant to weed killer, and can contaminate conventional seed crops. However, they still continue to use the seeds. But with anti-competitive practices being investigated on biotech seed companies, seed farmers may change their minds.

“The technology has really been hyped up a lot,” said Doug Gurian-Sherman, author of a 2009 study for the Union of Concerned Scientists, which concluded that yield increases have come mainly from conventional plant breeding. “Even on a shoestring, conventional breeding outperforms genetic engineering“.

Genetically altered seed is used by a majority of U.S. farmers because weeds at one time were much easier to kill with herbicides such as Roundup. Also, these biotech crops, like corn, contained genes that allowed them to “manufacture” their own insecticide meaning farmers did not have to pay money and spend time killing insects with store-bought insecticides. In addition, biotech seed companies like Monsanto have created a monopoly in the seed business, buying smaller seed businesses and selling nothing but their genetically engineered seed. Traditional seed has even become hard to find because most “crop improvements” produced by conventional plant breeding are only sold together with biotech traits.

But with rising costs and recent resistance to herbicides, biotech seed has become less favorable and farmers are taking notice. For instance, last year, the price of biotech soybean seeds rose 24 percent while corn seed rose 32 percent. The U.S. Justice Department is investigating the anti-competitive practices of Monsanto, and Monsanto is countering by saying it plans on offering more seed options at lower prices next year.

“There just isn’t competition out there,” said Craig Griffieon, a farmer in Ankeny, Iowa.

Biotech crops have grown resistant to herbicides mainly in cotton fields in the Southern United States where giant ragweed and horsetails are affecting thousands of acres. But the problem is spreading toward the Midwest now as well.

As far as genetic contamination of traditional crops that are grown near biotech crops goes, farmers have testified that biotech crops have lowered the value of their conventional crops.

“If you’ve got your conventional seed right next to your neighbor’s [biotech] seeds, the pollen flies,” said John Schmitt, a farmer from Quincy, Illinois who had to sell a third of his conventional corn for much lower prices due to genetic contamination. “It’s nature.”

A majority of farmers still use biotech seed also because they believe that biotech seed yields more crop at harvest, but even Monsanto doesn’t argue that most of the increase in crop yields is due to traditional plant breeding. Conventional seeds produce just as well as biotech seeds, but as noted before, conventional seed is becoming harder to find.

While biotech seed is used more so than conventional, farmers are slowly getting the picture by realizing that there aren’t many benefits to genetically altered seed as opposed to conventional seed. According to the latest statistics, the amount of farms using biotech seeds only rose one percent last year, from 85 percent to 86 percent. This is the smallest increase since 2001. In Illinois specifically, the percentage of acres using biotech corn seed decreased from 84 percent to 82 percent, where soybeans reduced as well from 90 percent to 89 percent.

---------------

REPOSTED:

Excerpt of my speech at Third Iraqi Turkmen Media Conference in Istanbul - 10-12 April 2009
http://www.kerkuk.net/haberler/koseyazisi.aspx?dil=2057&metin=2009042129

The fate of Iraq's food sources and agricultural heritage is being looted behind closed doors

On the subject of Iraq's future a lot has been said and published in the media, U.S. and EU experts are giving their opinions and advice, which are mostly patronizing and which do not necessarily represent the interest of the Iraqi people. These "experts" concentrate almost exclusively on the business opportunities in Iraq for their companies and their interest is centred principally on Iraq's oil, gas and agriculture.

Iraq, as we all know, can be self-sufficient, it has water, wheat and oil. Today, because of the war and occupation, Iraq has to import wheat and even oil and a great number of Iraqis do not have access to water.

The future of Iraq's oil is being decided under Occupation (by the US through their lackeys in the Iraqi government and by the Kurdish warlords) long term contracts which are giving away Iraq's oil riches are being signed and these will bind Iraqis for several generations.
What is more, the fate of Iraq's food sources and agricultural heritage is being looted behind closed doors.

The US-UK's deliberate bombing of Iraq's civilian infrastructure of water purification and electrical plants, cattle feed lots, poultry farms, fertilizer warehouses, pumping stations, irrigation systems, fuel depots and pesticide factories - the very infrastructure of Iraqi agriculture - has destroyed the Iraqi Agriculture.

The invasion of Iraq was not only about oil, the US corporate agribusiness is now overseeing the "rehabilitation" of agriculture in Iraq and this means the doom of Iraqi farmers.

Iraqi scientists are ringing the alarm bell, but unfortunately their warnings do not get the attention they deserve in the media.

The Occupation is destroying the economy and the future of Iraq.

Iraq, the Fertile Crescent, is home to the oldest agricultural traditions in the world. It was the centre of domestication for a remarkable range of today's primary agricultural crops and livestock animals. Wheat, barley, rye, lentils, sheep and goats were all originally brought under human control around 8.000 BCE. Iraq is where wild wheat was once originated and many of its cereal varieties have been exported and adapted worldwide.

The inhabitants of Mesopotamia have used informal seed supply systems to plant crops, suited to their particular environment. The saving and sharing of seeds in Iraq has always been a largely informal matter. Local varieties of grain and legumes have been adapted to local conditions over the millennia. Agriculture remains an essential part of Iraq's heritage.
Despite extreme aridity, characterised by low rainfall and soil salinity, Iraq had a world standard agricultural sector producing good quality food for generations.

According to the UN Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO), 97% of Iraqi farmers in 2002 still used saved seed from their own stocks from last year's harvest, or purchased from local markets, this despite the criminal sanctions which destroyed Iraq's agricultural sector.

U.S. Policies - GMOs and the Detrimental Effects of Order 81

When Paul Bremer left Baghdad after the so-called "transfer of sovereignty" in June 2004, he left behind the 100 orders he enacted as head of the occupation authority in Iraq.

Among them is Order 81 which he issued and signed on April 26, 2004 (paragraphs 51-79) on "Patent, Industrial Design, Undisclosed Information, Integrated Circuits and Plant Variety". This order amends Iraq's original patent law of 1970 and unless and until it is revised or repealed it has the status and force of a binding law; with important implications for farmers and the future of agriculture in Iraq, this order is yet another important component in the US attempts to radically transform Iraq's economy.

While historically the Iraqi constitution prohibited private ownership of biological resources, the new US-imposed patent law introduces a system of monopoly rights over seeds. Inserted into Iraq's previous patent law is a whole new chapter on Plant Variety Protection (PVP) that provides for the "protection of new varieties of plants". PVP is an intellectual property right (IPR) or a kind of patent for plant varieties which gives an exclusive monopoly right on planting material to a plant breeder who claims to have discovered or developed a new variety. So the "protection" in PVP has nothing to do with conservation, but refers to safeguarding of the commercial interests of private breeders (usually large corporations) claiming to have created the new plant.

To qualify for PVP, plant varieties must comply with the standards of the UPOV Convention, (International Union for the Protection of New Plant Varieties) which requires them to be new, distinct, uniform and stable. Farmers' seeds cannot meet these criteria, making PVP-protected seeds the exclusive domain of corporations. The rights granted to plant breeders in this scheme include the exclusive right to produce, reproduce, sell, export, import and store the protected varieties. These rights extend to harvested material, including whole plants and parts of plants obtained from the use of a protected variety. This kind of PVP system is often the first step towards allowing the full-fledged patenting of life forms. Indeed, in this case the rest of the law does not rule out the patenting of plants or animals.

The term of the monopoly is 20 years for crop varieties and 25 for trees and vines. During this time the protected variety de facto becomes the property of the breeder, and nobody can plant or otherwise use this variety without compensating the breeder. This new law means that Iraqi farmers can neither freely legally plant nor save for re-planting seeds of any plant variety registered under the plant variety provisions of the new patent law. This deprives farmers from what they and many others worldwide claim as their inherent right to save and replant seeds.

Corporate control

The new law is presented as being necessary to ensure the supply of good quality seeds in Iraq and to facilitate Iraq's accession to the WTO (World Trade Organization). What it will actually do is facilitate the penetration of Iraqi agriculture by the likes of MONSANTO, SYNGENTA, BAYER and DOW CHEMICAL - the corporate giants that control seed trade across the globe.

Eliminating competition from farmers is a prerequisite for these companies to open up operations in Iraq, which the new law has achieved. Taking over the first step in the food chain is their next move.

Food Sovereignty

Food sovereignty is the right of people to define their own food and agriculture policies, to protect and regulate domestic agricultural production and trade, to decide the way food should be produced, what should be grown locally and what should be imported.

The demand for food sovereignty and the opposition to the patenting of seeds has been central to the small farmers' struggle all over the world over the past decade. By fundamentally changing the law in Iraq, the US has ensured that Iraq's agricultural system will remain under "OCCUPATION".

Unfortunately, the mainstream media hardly cover this important subject and the majority of Iraqis are unaware of this Machiavellian plan which will devastate the future of their country's agriculture and irremediably change their lives and that of the future generations of Iraqis if it is implemented.

Organizations, activists, farmers and organic food advocates around the world have endorsed and will observe April 26 (day on which Bremer issued and signed this criminal law in 2004) as International Seeds Day (ISD).

A "Greedy, unjust law is meant to be disobeyed".

The Iraqi Turkmen media can play a paramount role in informing the Iraqi people and especially the farmers of the implications of Order 81, the future of Iraq's agriculture depends on it.