enlarge
Jim Evans/Blethen Maine News Service
enlarge
Jim Evans/Blethen Maine News ServiceCiting a mandate to try to reduce the use of pesticides, the Board of Pesticides Control approved applications by Dow AgroSciences, Pioneer Hi-Bred International and Monsanto to register seven Bt corn products to be grown for animal feed.
While allowing the corn to be grown in Maine for the first time, the board plans to develop rules for the crops' use to alleviate organic farmers' fears of contamination.
"I'm only going to be able to say there aren't unreasonable risks if we add some conditions (for use)," said the board's chairwoman, Dr. Carol A. Eckert.
The board voted 6-0 to approve the applications under the conditions that the three companies report sales data to the board and support education and training. The board also agreed 6-0 -- John Jemison Jr. abstained from both votes for unstated reasons -- to develop rules for use.
Those rules, and how they are enforced, will be key to many of the roughly 60 people who filled the room at the Hampton Inn for Friday's meeting. While conventional farmers argued that the Bt corn will help make them competitive with corn growers around the country, organic farmers raised concerns of genetic drift, the creation of super-resistant bugs, and potential threats to the health and welfare of people and animals.
"We should not be endangering our food supplies with dangerous biotech gambles," said Jody Spear of the Sierra Club.
The board considered the applications in two primary areas: whether the Bt corn would have an adverse effect on the environment and whether farmers had shown a need to use the crop.
Genetic drift -- the cross-pollination of a genetically modified crop with a nonmodified crop -- may occur, said Jemison, a water quality and soil specialist for the University of Maine Cooperative Extension in Orono. European markets allow products to be labeled organic with up to 5 percent genetic modification.
"If zero is the intended goal, it's really always going to be difficult," Jemison said.
Pittsfield farmer Tom Cote argued, however, that eliminating use of some pesticides by growing Bt corn will be a net gain for the environment.
"I believe Bt crops are a bit better for the environment and the people who have to handle them,"Cote said.
While acknowledging the risks, the board ultimately decided it could mitigate the dangers by educating users and encouraging conventional farmers and organic growers to work together to help reduce the chance of genetic drift.
"We have to weigh that risk against pretty clearly defined benefits," said board member Daniel Simonds, a forestry consultant. "I'm having a hard time seeing the net adverse effect as being unreasonable."
Board member Lee Humphreys, a market gardener, said there were too many unknowns about the genetically modified corn, such as its long-term effect on the soil and in creating resistant bugs.
"I think it might very well be a short-term solution and farmers will be forced to use more pesticides in the future," she said.
Humphreys also mentioned 108 letters the board received opposing use of the corn.
"We represent them as well," she said.
Many of the organic growers who spoke against approving the corn suggested there was no real need for it. Logan Perkins of Protect Maine Farmers noted the number of organic dairy farmers that survive without pesticides or Bt corn.
"If they can do it, why can't everyone else?" Perkins asked.
Using Bt corn will increase harvests an estimated 10 percent, which will help give farmers an important economic edge, said board member Richard Stevenson Jr., a commercial applicator for Modern Pest Services.
"It may not run a farm out of business today, but if they don't take advantage of these technologies, they may not be there five or 10 years down the road," Stevenson said.
Reader comments
Click here to view or add comments on this story
Were you interviewed for this story? If so, please fill out our accuracy form