Month: June 2014

Fact Check: SHAKA Movement Claims vs. the Evidence

Let’s do some fact finding here with what the mainland based SHAKA Movement claims as the basics of the backing for a moratorium.  This is a response by Dr. Harold Keyser who took apart their claims and put some facts behind it.
A Response to the Findings in
A Bill Placing a Moratorium on the Cultivation of Genetically Engineered Organisms


Harold H. Keyser, Ph.D.
Soil Microbiologist and Maui County Administrator, Retired
College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources, University of Hawaii Manoa

On February 21st, 2014, the above named bill was filed with the Office of the Maui County Clerk. The justification for the bill is in the Findings section. A review of this section reveals a lack of understanding of agriculture in general, a lack of supporting evidence for claims made, and a disregard for the voluminous findings in mainstream science over the past two decades on the benefits and risks of genetically engineered crops. The Findings section of the bill is copied below along with my inserted responses, links to publications, and additional resources and documents are listed at the end.


SECTION 2: Findings

Cultural Heritage & Environmental Protection
  1. The rapid and unregulated growth of commercial agricultural entities engaged in the cultivation and development of GE Organisms threatens the stability and growth of Maui County’s agricultural economy, the health of its citizens, and its environment. Moreover, the lands of Maui County and the water surrounding it have cultural and spiritual significance to the indigenous people of Hawaii. This cultural and spiritual heritage will suffer irreparable harm if the natural environment of Maui County is contaminated by GE Operations and Practices.

Response:  Cultivation and development of GE crops is highly regulated, by USDA APHIS, FDA and EPA. For specifics in Hawaii, see USDA Regulation of Biotechnology Field Tests in Hawaii, USDA APHIS, BRS Factsheet, February 2006. Also see EPA’s web sites on registration, regulation and use of pesticides. The National Academy of Sciences, American Medical Association, World Health Organization, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science have repeatedly reviewed and affirmed the safety of GE crops and food.

  1. Maui County residents have a right to decide if the risks associated with the GE Operations and Pactices are unacceptable and to take action to suspend such Operations and Practices.

Response: Maui County residents have the right to continue to grow GE crops in their gardens, such as papaya, and commercial agricultural operations have the right to continue to farm GE crops in accordance with federal and state regulations.

  1. GE Organisms are not part of the natural environment of Maui County and instead exist in the County as a possible invasive species. Protection from the possible threat of damage and/or potentially irreversible alteration of the environment and cultural heritage from the threat of invasive GE Organisms is supported by the Hawaiian Public Turst Doctrine, the Hawaii State Constitution, and other State and County envrionmental laws.

Response: The only plants in Maui County that are part of the natural environment are those remaining from before human contact. Certainly, highly bred commercial onions, cabbage, lettuce, papaya, banana, mangoes, and just about all crops we grow, are not. GE crops are then no different in this respect.

  1. The genetic engineering of plants and animals often causes unintended consequences. Manipulating genes via genetic engineering and inserting them into organisms is an imprecise process. The resultus are not always predictable or controllable. Mixing plant, animal, bacterial, and viral genes through genetic engineering in combinations that are not selected for in nature may produce results that lead to adverse health or environmental consequences and threaten Maui County’s cultural heritage, Environment and Public Trust Resources.

Response: Unintended effects from plant breeding are described in the scientific literature. To date, the documented unintended consequences specifically from genetic engineering include substantial reduction in mycotoxin content in Bt corn, increased lignin in Bt corn, and GE petunias with diminishing color over generations. Any method of breeding can have unintended results, and products from GE breeding are the only ones thoroughly assessed prior to marketing. GE is the most precise plant breeding technique available.

Pesticide Concerns
  1. GE Operations and Practices can have serious effects on the environment. For example, in 2013, 93 percent of all soy grown in the U.S. was engineered to be herbicide resistant. In fact, the vast majority of GE crops are designed to withstand herbicides, and therefore promote indiscriminate herbicide use. As a result, GE herbicie-resistant crops have caused 527 million pounds of additional herbicies to be applied to the nation’s farmland. These toxic herbicides damage the vitality and quality of our soil, harm wildlife, contaminate our drinking water, and pose health risks to consumers and farm workers.

Response: The USDA Economic Research Service’s comprehensive study on Pesticide Use in U.S. Agriculture: 21 Selected Crops, 1960-2008 provides the actual data; since peak applications in the mid-1980s, the amount of herbicide applied to all US soybeans is down almost 25% along with a 33% reduction in pounds of active ingredient applied per acre, even with increased acreage. Similarly, they show that herbicide application to all 21 crops is less than the mid-1980’s peak, and they compare the same trend reported by EPA for all pesticides. The associated herbicides (glyphosate and glufinosate) for GE crops are much less toxic than the herbicides they replaced, are used at lower concentrations, have a shorter half-life in soil, and are found in much lower concentrations in water than previous herbicides. See: The Impact of GE Crops on Farm Sustainability in the US, National Research Council, National Academies Press, 2010.

  1. Increased use of herbicides in GE Operations and Practices has resulted in the rapid development and proliferation of previously unknown herbicide-tolerant superweeds. The proliferation of these superweeds threatens to overtake the habitat of native flora and fauna in uncltivated lands and forces farmers to use increasingly toxic and expensive herbicides to remove them from cultivated lands.

Response: There is nothing new or ‘super’ about herbicide tolerant weeds; they are controlled with either an herbicide with a different mode of action or by tillage. Glyphosate is in sixth place among herbicide groups in terms of the number of resistant biotypes, behind chlorsulfouron, atrizne, dicolfop, 2, 4-D and paraquat. Herbicide resistant weeds are not unique to farming with GE crops, having arisen in the late 1950s, some 40 years before GE crops. Minimizing their occurrence and economic impact is important and a part of good agricultural management. See International Survey of Herbicide Resistant Weeds

  1. GE Operations and Practices and associated pesticide use pose a high risk of fostering rapid evolution of pests known as superbugs that become resistant to organic pesticides, to the detriment of conventional and organic farmers who are forced to use increasingly larger volumes and/or stronger pesticides to manage these new pests.

Response: The major organic pesticide in common use by GE and organic operations is Bt. To date, the incidence of Bt resistance remains low with emphasis on abundant refuges and multiple-trait Bt crops.

  1. In some GE Operations and Practices, multiple Pesticides are applied at the same time or applied in close time proximity to each other (“pesticide cocktails”). This practice is often being used on test crops in a trial and error manner to test and develop new Pesticide resistant Crops. In this process it is possible that new and unknown chemicals are created. Although individual Pesticides have been tested and regulated for their use in isolation, there has not been adequate testing and/or regulations concerning the various chemical combinations that occur during GE Operations and Practices, and few if any of which have been tested in either short term or long term animal or human studies.

Response: All modes of agriculture (GE, conventional, organic) across the country use a mixture of pesticides, depending upon a myriad of changing conditions. EPA regulates pesticides including combinations, and routinely makes recommendations on mixing of products. Risks of possible unknown chemicals (theoretical as it is) would not be unique to use of GE compared to non GE crops.

Regulatory Issues
  1. Inadequate regulatory oversight at the county, state, and federal levels leave the citizens of Maui County with significnat concerns regarding the immediate safety and long term effects of GE Operations and Practices threatening the integrity of Maui County’s cultural heritage, agricultural economy, tourism economy, and the health of its visitors, citizens, and the environment.

Response: This appears to be a superfluous repetition – see response to Finding 1 above.

  1. The rapid development and introduction of GE Organisms, combined with inadequate regulatory oversight at the stae and federal levels, have left the citizens of Maui County with significant concerns regarding the long-term safety of GE Operations and Practices. The Hawaii Department of Agriculture does not have an adequate regulatory structure in place to monitor GE Operations and Practices or to aid in the understanding of the impacts of these Operations and Practices on Maui’s economy, environment, cultural heritage, or public health. The direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts on Maui County regarding the long-term intensive GE Operations and Practices and associated pesticide uses have not been properly or independently evaluated.

Response: This appears to be a superfluous repetition – see response to Finding 1 above.

Economic Considerations
  1. Agriculture is a [sic] important component of Maui’s agricultural economy. Organic agriculture is a rapidly expanding sector of Maui’s agricultural economy.

Response: Yes, according to USDA’s latest National Ag Statistics Service’s annual survey and their latest Certified Organic Production Survey (Oct 2012), the sales of organic farm products in Hawaii of $7.475 million accounts for 1.2% of all agricultural sales, produced on 2,701 organic certified acres (1,049 in pasture/range), or 0.24% of the state’s agricultural acreage. Data by county in Hawaii could not be found.

  1. Maui County’s local economy is also dependent on the success of its tourism industry, which makes up the County’s largest employment sector. The protection of Maui’s land and waters is crucial to the continuing success of Maui’s tourism industry.

  1. Maui’s agricultural economy relies on maintaining its reputation for high quality organic and conventional crops. Preserving the identity, quality, and reliability of Maui’s agricultural products and exports is critical to its economic well-being.

Transgenic Contamination
  1. The contamination of agricultural products with GE Organisms can have a myriad of significant impacts. Organic and many foreign markets prohibit GE products and even a single event of Transgenic Contamination can and has resulted in significant economic harm when the contaminated crops are rejected by buyers.

Response: The predominant GE crops in Hawaii are seed corn and papaya. The papaya growers have established foreign markets which includes testing of non-GE papayas prior to shipping. According to the USDA NASS, in Hawaii there are two farms producing certified organic sweet corn and one farm producing certified organic corn silage/green chop; to date, no reports of economic loss from cross-pollination of non-organic corn are in the public domain.

  1. Transgenic contamination can and does occur as a result of cross-pollination, co-mingling of conventional and GE seeds, accidental transfer by animals or weather events, and other mechanisms. Transgenic contamination results in GE crops growing where they are not intended. For example, since the introduction of GE papaya in Hawaii County (Big Island), more than 50% of the non-GE papaya crops on the Big Island have been cross-contaminated by GE papaya.

Response: The 2006 report from GMO-Free Hawaii claimed that papaya seed collected from backyard gardens or wild trees from the Big Island had a 50% incidence of detectable GE seeds according to the results from a commercial lab. No further confirmation or follow up study has been conducted other than UH CTAHR’s survey of papayas from across Kauai which found zero incidence for presence of GE papaya trees or their fruit.

  1. Transgenic contamination prevents farmers and the public from having the fundamental right to choose whether or not to grow crops that are free from GE. Farmers and other parties who lose non-GE standing and markets through no fault of their own as a result of transgenic contamination have no adequate legal recourse.

Response: There are no publically available reports in Hawaii documenting loss of non-GE standing and markets due to cross-pollination from GE corn or papaya.

  1. Currently, no mechanisms exist to ensure that transgenic cotamination will not occur.

Response: Cross-pollination in corn and papaya is well understood. In papaya, using hermaphrodite plants (combined with roughing out females) is the commercial standard, with self-pollination occurring at a very high rate before the flower opens, which greatly minimizes cross-pollination. In corn, it is well established from foundation and certified seed production that timing and distance are effective mechanisms for minimizing cross-pollination.

  1. There are no known or proven scientific methodologies or procedures to recall GE Organisms or remediate/decontaminate the Environment from any damages once GE Organisms are released into the Environment and contamination has occurred.

Response: Not so; a simple procedure is to cease planting of a given variety. Detection of unapproved StarLink corn in the food supply in 2000 led to an immediate halt in further planting combined with continuous monitoring for its presence in US corn supply. Six years of testing showed US corn to be 99.99% StarLink free, and EPA then submitted this data in their proposal to cease the monitoring. It was successfully recalled and caused no allergies. See: US EPA Office of Pesticide Programs, Concerning Dietary Exposure to Cry9c Protein Produced by StarLink Corn and the Potential risks Associated with Such Exposure, October 16, 2007.

Risk of Harm to Soil Resources
  1. GE Operations and Practices in Maui County primarily involve seed crops and test crops that include aggressive and repeated use of pesticides before planting and during the growing cycle of these crops. Such Operations and Practices present risks and significant harm to soil resources. Some of Maui County’s soil microbes are harmed by the application of pesticides used in GE Operations and Practices.

Response:  Pesticides are used by conventional, organic and GE crop producers. Best management practices should be followed by all. There is a lack of evidence to show that soil resources are differentially affected by pesticide regimes associated with the different modes of production.



Risk of Harm to Water Resources
  1. Areas of Maui’s groundwater are already significantly contaminated with Pesticides, including DBCP and TCP, from former conventional pineapple growing operations. GE Operations and Practices in Maui County involve unprecedented use of Pesticides which greatly exacerbate an already existing problem.

Response: Data from the Maui County Department of Water Supply on the wells at Hamakuapoko shows that the levels of these organic residues are very low, and after treatment with the installed granular activated carbon filters, the three target organic residues (DBCP, EDB and TCP) all were below the EPA limits and in almost all cases non-detectable. Also, the 2013-2014 State Wide Pesticide Sampling Pilot Project Water Quality Finding by HDOH, HDOA and USGS does not support this alleged finding; urban areas on Oahu showed the highest number of different pesticides, and Oahu’s streams had the highest number of different pesticides detected.

  1. Many field sites are left fallow for significant periods of time while repeated Pesticide applications are applied. Pesticide laden water runoff from is [sic] exacerbated by repeated Pesticide treatments to fallow sites, presenting short and long term risks of significant harm to ground and surface water, beaches, and reefs.

Response: What data there is (see the previous response) does not support this alleged finding.

Risk of Harm to Air Resources
  1. Pesticide drift and fugitive dust from GE Operations and Practices present short and long term risks of significant harm especially to air resources, farm workers, and to persons living downwind from GE Operations and Practices.

Response: The alleged finding is not supported by existing data. The Final Project Report for Kauai Air Sampling Study (Li et al., 2013) was conducted to address community concerns about possible pesticide residues and odorous chemicals in and around Waimea, Kauai. Results of indoor and outdoor air samples showed that those pesticides that could be detected were well below the health concern exposure limits or applicable screening levels. While this data was collected in Kauai, it is instructive for Maui County which has a similar mix of agricultural operations.


Additional Resources and Documents:

CTAHR Biotech in Focus

USDA APHIS Biotechnology: Compliance with Regulations

USDA APHIS BRS Update FY2012and USDA APHIS BRS Update FY2011

An overview of the last 10 years of genetically engineered crop safety; no significant hazard detected in 1,783 scientific records

Kauai cancer inquiries report from Hawaii State Department of Health and Hawaii Tumor Registry reply regarding Kauai cancer inquiries

Genetically Engineered Plants and Foods: A scientist’s analysis of the issues, Part 1 and Part 2 by Peggy Lemaux, UC Berkeley

Academics Review: Scientific analysis of unsubstantiated claims by Jeffery Smith about agricultural biotechnology

Hawaii Candidates: Beware of the Hawaii Center for Food Safety Questionaire

There’s a new super political action committee in town and they are out to influence local politics here.  The Washington, D.C. based Center for Food Safety set up office here and is raising money to change Hawaii to their liking.  This is actually a neo-luddite group that is disguised as a benign sounding consumer group which it is not.  They are really an activist group run by organic industry leaders and activists.  They are not about helping with food security and food safety in Hawaii or supporting agriculture in our islands unless it is their way.
Here’s a copy of the questionnaire that they have been sending candidates recently to see where they stand:
ImageImage
Let’s take apart some of the questions that they are posing to see what this innocuous sounding group is really after.
1) Do you support, and if elected, will you vote to require all agrichemical companies to disclose pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers that apply and GE crops they grow to adjacent landowners , businesses, and residents?
Basically, they want to apply the same anti-GMO ordinance that they enacted on Kauai to the whole state.  It is discriminating against a safe and approved crop as regulated by the Federal government.  Once again, they are seeking to divide and conquer agriculture in our islands by creating this divide again.  There already was a pesticide registry passed at the state level last year by a CFS favorite, Jessica Wooley.  Who is to say that they are not going to try to have all farmers covered by this law if they use pesticides?  How many burdens do we want to put on others for the sake of attacking the bigger industries here?
2) Do you support, and if elected, will you vote to increase financial and programmatic support for organic and sustainable farming?
First of all, the CFS is implying once again that only organic is sustainable.  The fail to mention to the candidate who does not do research that this “organic” issue is really a lobby created by an act of Congress.  It is under the USDA Agricultural Marketing Service to help farmers to sell their products at a premium.  This has nothing to do with food security or food safety or nutrition that’s even listed in the National Organic Program website.  Do we want candidates to support only farmers who want to sell high end food to consumers?  This group is not about making food affordable for the local people.  It’s about growing their industry plain and simple.  They use no evidence or science to dictate what has been shown to be truly sustaining.  Organic farming is not the only answer to food sustainability and nor is it about food security or affordability.  We need all the tools in agriculture to get Hawaii more food secure and not just funding premium products!  We’ve got to maximize the yields we get in our currently lands first and foremost to have the least environmental impact overall.
3)  Do you support funding state programs that expand support programs (including loans, business planning, safety certification, , education, grants in aid) for farmers growing food crops?
I have no problem with this question being asked and yes, we should look at supporting ALL farmers who grow things, not just food crops!  Agriculture in Hawaii is so much more than food.  Anyone who grows something here that is their livelihood should have our support, whether it be flowers, coffee, vegetables, cocoa, etc.  We’ve got to value ALL farmers and stop dividing up ag into what is and what isn’t considered agriculture.  The growing of things are only done by very few people and we should value and give them our support.
4) Do you support legislation that would preserved and support our native species, including pollinators, adversely affected by pesticide use?
This question posed is very biased in how they are presenting the issue.  First of all, the honey bees we have in our islands are anything but native.  We’ve brought them in nearly a hundred years ago.  They have competed with or very own native pollinators and as a result have decimated our true native species of bees.
Typical anti-GMO literature will give people the impression that there’s an armageddon of bee deaths.  The antis will all claim that GMOs and pesticides are killing them all.  It’s odd because the latest data points in the opposite direction.  The latest statistics collected by the USDA shows that honeybee colonies are definitely growing with Hawaii having some of the highest yields also.  Honey yields increased by nearly 15% this year.  If what they CFS is saying is true, this would not be the case given their statements.  Making a law based on false evidence will only have unintended consequences that we just don’t need.
5) Do you support the labeling of foods that have been genetically engineered?
This is typical of the CFS to be touting this.  The truth is the labeling issue is not about the right to know as they claim.  It’s about a means to a ban.  The simple idea of this label goes far beyond just putting a sticker on a package or a fruit.  It will include testing, segregation, and enforcement to create such a standard.  Do you think that Hawaii as a state can afford to handle such an issue?  The DOH has repeatedly stated that attempting to label some 20,000 products and making sure it is in compliance with such a law is going to cost each and every consumer.  Who does that hurt?  The ones with the least who can barely afford to make it now.
6) If elected, will you vote to protect home rule of counties over agriculture?
First of all, historically speaking, Hawaii was not unified and at a warring state for hundreds of years.  It wasn’t until a leader with a keen eye for leadership realized that they islands had to be unified.  That person was King Kamehameha who saw to it that the entire island chain became united.  Currently, we have politicians like Gary Hooser, Tim Bynum, Margaret Wille, Brenda Ford, Jessica Wooley, and Kaniela Ing who are supporting the home rule clause.  They want to undo the unity in Hawaii agriculture and have fabricated a war which only takes away from the big goal of food security and affordability.
Mr. Bynum is also finding out that passing such home rule laws come with a cost that he had ignored.  Guess who will have to pay for those costs?  Yes, all of the residents in those counties in the form of higher property taxes and fees to cover the implementation of such laws.
7) Do you support the growing of more food in Hawaii?
Um, yes, we all support he growing of more food.  Attacking farmers and the technology they use isn’t going to help achieve this goal.  CFS is clearly anti-biotech and anti-aquaculture which is some key components to our locally grown foods here.  Will that mean they will block new technology if it saves bananas from viral diseases that are hitting farmers now?  Does this group wish to be a part of solving the problem or are they contributors to the problem?  I see them as the latter when it comes time for more locally grown food.  Are they going to help fund research to help solve Hawaii’s food problems or only be takers?  Their history of lawsuits against farmers only tell me that they are going to impede options to farmers and ranchers.  That’s not what we need in Hawaii at all.
8) Do you support the legislation to access more locally grown food?
This question sends shivers down my spine.  How is more legislation upon farmers going to increase locally grown food? More laws mean more burdens and loops that farmers must go through to do their work?  What we actually needs is less legislation to achieve more locally grown food.  Real farmers already have to contend with the burdensome Food Safety and Modernization Act that costs thousands to implement, as well as labor laws, tax laws, and so many other laws that apply to their businesses.  Leaders need to incentivize farming not punish them, which is what we have done in the last several years.  Want more food here?  Support those farmers and work collaboratively to reach that goal.

The Dirty Truth about the Hawaii Center for Food Safety
I wrote an earlier post about why people, especially leaders, need to be very wary about this group.  This group is about taking away possible solutions and use the heavy handed fear tactics that have divided the Kauai community.  We don’t need more emotion, ideology based demands in Hawaii’s food security and sustainability issues.  We need to use data and evidence to guide the state towards the goal.  The Center for Food Safety isn’t about collaborating and HELPING Hawaii people achieve the goal but about blocking possible options.
From the Center for Food Safety website. Clearly fear peddlers and not supporters of farmers at all.
From the Center for Food Safety website. Clearly fear peddlers and not supporters of farmers at all.
If you as leaders and candidates choose to align with this group, you’ve just taken us 20 step backwards instead of forward.  This group isn’t from here and doesn’t have any connection to the local roots we all share in agriculture.  We need collaborators in these issues, not takers and fear mongers.  Why do we want to move Hawaii into the dark ages?  Open up people’s minds to what’s happening in the world instead of shutting it down in fear and ideology.  That’s the true responsibility of a good leader!
If you choose to align with people who believe that they must wear gas masks and hazmat suits on farms, then that tells me that I won’t be endorsing you as a candidate.  We don’t need fear peddlers in Hawaii.  We need people who do their due diligence and research the issues and not stand on ignorance and ideology.

There Would Be No Paradise Without Pesticides


Historical Iolani Palace in Honolulu, Hawaii
From the Babes Against Biotech to the new Hawaii Center for Food Safety, these outsiders want Hawaii to be pesticide free.  There is so much fear mongering created by these groups to an uninformed public about the true need for pesticides.  If we let these activists get their way, what would our islands look like without the help of these
“agro-chemical” companies?
Hokulea Would Not be Sailing the World
DOW AGROSCIENCES product, VIKANE, was used to rid our precious Hokulea of the Singapore ant problem. Hokulea was able to set sail on the voyage around the world without spreading an invasive species.  Kamaaina Fumigation donated their work to the Polynesian Voyaging Society…  “It’s always full circle in our culture to give.”
Historical Buildings Would Be Destroyed
Here are a few of the culturally significant sites and invasive species management that use pesticides to help preserve these buildings and natural habitats.
Sentricon
o Iolani Palace
o Queen Emma Summer Palace
o Waikiki Aquarium
o Hilton Hawaiian Village
o Kamehameha School – Oahu
Vikane
o Bishop Museum
o Hokule’a – drywood termites about 8 years ago and the ants currently
o Pearl Harbor historical buildings
o Kawaiaha’o Church, Honolulu
o Waikiki Shell
Vegetation Management (Invasive Species)
o Fireweed on Maui and Big Island
o Albizia – all islands
o Miconia – Maui
o Native grass propagation project with UH for DOT Roadsides
Pesticides are Needed to Preserve Paradise!
Can you imagine our Hawaii without the Iolani Palace or natural habitats overtaken by Miconia? Our native forests would be destroyed if it weren’t for the management of these invasive species and we would have lost the historical buildings to termites a long time ago.  Hawaii needs these pesticides to preserve the things that make our islands unique, despite what the activists keep repeating to people over and over.  If we let these outsiders dictate the rules, start saying good bye to some of our favorite places and monuments and our rain forests.
Fear and public opinion should never dictate what happens in our islands.  Evidence and data must guide us for the future of our islands.  That’s what our leaders need to use also first and foremost in making policy and informing the public.
Preserving the past is a good thing but sometimes we need the help of future innovations to complete that mission.