US to consider if rule needed to separate bio-crops
Date: 30-Nov-00
Country: USA
Author: Julie Vorman
Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman said the USDA wants the food industry, farm groups, grain exporters and consumer activists to offer suggestions on what, if anything, the USDA ought to do to help farmers market biotech crops in a way that will preserve public confidence.
Under federal law, the USDA is responsible for promoting American farm exports, which generate some $50 billion annually and are a crucial part of farm income.
But the department also is responsible for inspecting meat and poultry plants, preventing plant diseases, approving field trials of new gene-altered crops, and maintaining US consumer confidence in a safe food supply.
"One of the things we want to talk about with the world, with the public, is what is our role? What ought to be our role in dealing with the marketing of these products?" Glickman told reporters after addressing a meeting of the USDA's agricultural biotechnology advisory committee.
The USDA will publish on Thursday in the Federal Register a detailed notice asking for public comments and guidance.
SHOULD USDA CERTIFY BIO-CROPS?
Among the key issues are whether the USDA should be involved in reviewing or certifying the performance of companies' systems to carefully segregate gene-altered grain from conventional crops.
Another issue is whether the USDA should create definitions for biotech and non-biotech crops as part of its quality grades and standards.
The department also wants to know if it should expand its accreditation of laboratories that detect biotech grains and oilseeds to other kinds of gene-spliced crops, such as fruits, vegetables and ornamental plants.
"We've got to make sure we do it in the way that makes the most sense," Glickman said, referring to any possible new biotech regulations.
Most US farmers, grain elevators, processing firms and shippers are accustomed to handling corn, for example, as a commodity crop that can be freely interchanged because the quality is roughly the same for most varieties.
The contamination of huge quantities of the American corn supply with StarLink bio-corn this year has been blamed on the accidental commingling by farmers and grain elevators who were not aware of the need for strict segregation.
StarLink, made by Aventis SA , was approved by the US Environmental Protection Agency for use only in livestock feed because of concerns about human allergies. As part of that licensing approval, Aventis had to promise to keep the corn completely separate from varieties headed for human food use.
In September, traces of StarLink were found in taco shells and more than 300 kinds of chips, cornmeal and other foods were recalled by food companies. Several key buyers of US corn such as Japan and South Korea have balked at purchasing more shipments because of fears of contamination.
"I'm not sure that the particular company (Aventis) did an effective job of doing what they needed to do to protect the situation here," Glickman said. "It is something that I don't think industry was ready for."
SEGREGATION CRUCIAL FOR NEW BIO-CROPS
New regulations and programs to strictly separate crops may be even more important as agribusinesses develop the next generation of bio-plants that are engineered to produce pharmaceuticals and nutritional benefits, USDA officials said.
Some seed companies are already at work creating plants that will offer such consumer benefits. Currently, gene-spliced plants are designed mainly to fight pests and increase yields for farmers.
"When you are talking about something like pharmaceuticals, I think all of us envision it being a carefully regulated crop. It's not going to be deregulated like we have done with Bt corn," said Keith Pitts, a special advisor to Glickman on biotech issues.
StarLink is a variety of Bt corn, so-named because it contains a natural pesticide known as bacillus thuringiensis.
But some US crops are already being carefully separated throughout production