OGM e mercato

["AlessandroGimona"<agimona@libero.it>]

Cari tutti,
due notizie che riguardano la sovranita' dei consumatori e la effettiva 
possibilita' di scegliere se utilizzare o no OGM.

spero interessi,
saluti
Alessandro Gimona



GENETICALLY MODIFIED ORGANISMS FOUND IN BIOLOGICAL ANIMAL FEED: MORE
         EVIDENCE THAT EU LAWS ON GM ARE BEING DISREGARDED
         March 12, 2001
         JMCN
         http://www.organicts.com/newsnow/
         Genetically modified organisms were found in organic animal 
feed [Keystone]
         Switzerland's agriculture ministry has announced the discovery 
of
         genetically modified organisms (GMO), in organic animal feed. 
Meat from
         animals fed on the
         contaminated fodder was then sold under an organic label by 
Switzerland's
         two main food retailers, Migros and Coop.
         The agriculture ministry spokesman, Jorg Jordi, confirmed the 
report in the
         Swiss newspaper, SonntagsZeitung. Jordi said that 17 per cent 
of the soya in
         the animal feed was genetically modified.
         While genetically modified soya is not illegal in Switzerland, 
the legal
         limit for animal feed to be certified as organic is three per 
cent.
         The inspection on the soya was carried out in February, 
following a request
         from the company producing the feed, Nafag. The company 
initially ordered a
         test from a laboratory in canton Fribourg which showed its feed 
contained
         only 1.7 per cent of GMOs.
         It is unclear why Nafag then asked for a second analysis.
         Farmers working for Coop and Migros received over 1000 tonnes 
of
         contaminated organic feed from the company based in Gossau. 
Coop and Migros
         have asked Nafag to collect the leftover fodder, which is to be 
destroyed.
         The affair represents a loss of more than SFr1 million for 
farmers, who will
         have to sell their animals at a lower price than that obtained 
for organic
         animals.
         But Nafag has no intention of covering the loss, because it 
holds the
         laboratory in canton Fribourg responsible.
         A law introduced in 1999 requires that all food containing more 
than one per
         cent of GMOs must be labelled.



         FARMER CALLS MONSANTO THREAT A BLUFF
         March 12, 2001
         Cropchoice news
         http://www.cropchoice.com/leadstry.asp?RecID=260
         Monsanto is threatening to pull the plug on its wheat research 
in North
         Dakota if the legislature approves a moratorium on transgenic 
wheat. One
         farmer regards this threat as "hollow."
         Japan, Europe and the Middle East, all big U.S. wheat 
customers, have said
         they'll take their business elsewhere if Monsanto proceeds with
         commercialization of its
         transgenic Roundup Ready wheat. The biotechnology giant 
designed the variety
         to resist the herbicide Roundup (glyphosate).
         For the last 10 years, the Europe Union and Japan have 
purchased about 45
         percent of the wheat that the United States exports. They 
bought nearly 2.3
         million of the 5.5 million tons of U.S. wheat exports in 
1999-2000,
         according to the USDA.
         Sensing the importance of those sales to North Dakota family 
farmers, who
         produce 70 percent of the country's hard red spring wheat and a 
majority of
         the durum wheat, state legislators introduced House Bill 1338. 
The bill
         would place a moratorium on the cultivation of transgenic wheat 
for two
         years. Following House approval earlier in the year, the Senate 
Agriculture
         Committee took up the matter last week.
         That's when Monsanto issued its threat, one that North Dakota 
farmer Todd
         Leake dismisses.
         "Their threat that they would not do research in North Dakota 
is hollow and
         ridiculous," Leake says. "What they're (Monsanto) trying to do 
is bluff the
         legislature, which is not appreciated."
         The purpose of HB 1338 is not to stop research, he says, but 
rather to
         create a
         mechanism to judge foreign acceptance of transgenic wheat.
         So far, rejection, not acceptance, abounds.
         Jef Smidts of Andre & CIE Antwerp, a European importer and 
trader of U.S.
         wheat, wrote in a letter: "We are absolutely convinced that the 
European
         miller will abandon GMO (genetically modified organism) hard 
red spring
         wheat...GMO wheat for sure will be a market destructor."
         Another letter came from Julian Watson of Rank Hovis, one of 
the largest EU
         millers. It said:
         "So that you are completely clear on Rank Hovis's policy toward 
GM wheat. We
         do not want any level of such grain in our supplies from you. 
To date, we
         have been able to say to our customers that GM wheat has not 
yet been
         brought to the market.
         This now needs to be backed up with preventative actions.
         Please advise us of what steps you have taken to ensure that GM 
wheat is
         prevented from entering or commingling with wheat in the entire 
spring wheat
         supply chain.
         You should treat this issue with the utmost gravity and 
priority given that
         the alarm generated by even the perception that spring wheat 
may contain GM
         traits, could be enough to jeopardize the entire export 
programme to the
         EU."
         If Monsanto persists with transgenic wheat and if farmers plant 
it, Europe
         and Japan have other options. They could buy wheat from Ukraine 
or
         Kazakstan, Leake says.
         Australia, a major wheat producer, has sent signals that it 
will refrain
         from growing transgenic wheat.
         St. Louis-based Monsanto says that passage of HB 1338, whose 
language is
         similar to the regulatory stand of the Canadian Wheat Board and 
wheat
         industry, would send a negative message about transgenics.
         "That's a ridiculous assertion," Leake says. "It's a positive 
signal to our
         markets in that we are sending the message that we'll continue 
to be able to
         provide them with non-genetically modified wheat. We are 
listening to our
         customers."
         The Senate Agriculture Committee (two members are sponsoring 
the bill) and
         then the full Senate will pass the moratorium legislation, 
Leake predicts.
         Gov. John Hoeven, a proponent of value-added agriculture, 
likely would sign
         it.


Alessandro Gimona
agimona@libero.it