Conservation

Modified genes on the rampage

The Rothwell Incident - Modified Genes on the rampage in Lincolnshire? The Wildlife Trusts seek an indefinite moratorium on GM crops unless the benefits can be proven safe and sustainable, and the risks can be showed to be groundless. In the short-term there should be a complete ban on imported GM produced food to protect the UK agricultural industry from unfair competition.

The Rothwell Incident

 

 

Setting the scene

Human beings have been deliberately modifying plants and animals since the earliest days of farming.

 

Selection has given us the breeds and varieties we know today.

 

Darwin gave us a theoretical base for evolution. Mendel set out the principles of genetics and the basis of a genetic vocabulary, including such concepts as mutation, hybrid vigour, dominant and recessive characteristics and cross breeding. We think nothing of owning a pedigree dog or buying F1 hybrid seeds for the garden.

 

We see conservation of genetic resources as an important part of a biodiversity strategy. We are pleased to be preserving ancient genes in the Trust's Hebridean sheep flock, a rare breed, and believe this to be quite as important as protecting endangered wild species.

 

 

The situation today

 

Today a great deal is known about DNA and how it is organised into genes, though there is still much to learn.

 

Many of us look forward to the prospect of gene therapy for inherited genetic diseases. Biologists in particular are fascinated and excited by the possibility of modifying or transferring genes to achieve new and interesting characteristics which might represent an agricultural or medical revolution.

 

Why then are so many of us concerned about the production and testing of GM crops and the introduction of GMOs (genetically modified organisms) into our food chain?

 

And why did a notorious Lincolnshire breach of government guidelines on the testing of Genetically Modified Crops catch the international headlines?

 

 

 

Concerns fall into two main areas

 

The first and most understandable is biological. We do not know what escaped genes will do in the environment and we do not know what might happen to us when we eat products derived from GMOs. Claims that the guidelines are sufficient to prevent cross-pollination with conventional crops or their wild relatives seem unconvincing to many people, especially beekeepers, who know how far afield their honeybees travel to collect nectar and pollen, over three miles in many cases. Arguably, every site of GM testing in Lincolnshire is within reach of honeybees and other pollinating insects, so the risk is there at least in theory. Wind pollinated crops also spread their pollen a good deal further than the guidelines imply.

 

The other area of concern is one of ethics, trustworthiness and confidence. Labelling foods with GM ingredients is a positive step, but does not address the fact that we have come to distrust scientists when they claim that some new discovery is safe and low risk, and there is good grounds for such scepticism. A chapter of disasters from Thalidomide to BSE has made us reluctant to give the scientist the benefit of the doubt, especially when enormous potential profits and multinational companies are involved. Bland government reassurances have a hollow ring in our collective experience. To many of us there is something rather indecent and sacrilegious about the idea of copyrighting a living organism for profit, especially in a world where old varieties of vegetable are actually being made illegal by food regulation.

 

 

 

Statement from the Wildlife Trusts Partnership

Such concerns have prompted John Cousins, Agricultural Policy Director of the Wildlife Trusts, to express the issues in the following statement.

• The Wildlife Trusts want an indefinite ban on the cultivation of Genetically Modified Crops in the UK unless or until they are proven to be completely safe.
• Intensive farming practises have had a disastrous effect on biodiversity in this country and GMOs have the potential to do far worse. While The Wildlife Trusts recognise that there could be benefits in the use of GMOs, not enough is yet known about the possible dangers. We need to know more about the impact of GMOs on people's health, on the environment and eco-systems.
• It is thought that GMOs may offer certain advantages in improvements in crop yield; greater resistance to insects and fungal disease. There are other potential benefits, which include new, cheaper ways of manufacturing pharmaceutical and industrial products, and the generation of new business. However, these benefits may come at a very high cost, which we have no way of predicting at present.

 

 

 

The Wildlife Trusts have the following concerns about the introduction of GMOs:

 

• It is possible that characteristics from genetically-modified species could be transferred to other species, resulting in super-resistant weeds for example.
• There are potential health implications related to herbicide-tolerant crops - if more herbicides are able to be used that means that people could be exposed to more residue.
• Herbicide-resistant crops would allow farmers to kill off all arable weeds, resulting in ever more sterile fields with no food source for invertebrates, and therefore no food for their predators. GM crops have the potential to upset a whole eco-system.
• Once GMOs are released there is no calling them back.
• There is a possibility that GMOs could lead to an increase in mutations or irrevocable disruption in the natural system.
• The use of GMO crops could result in changes in land use that would be harmful to wildlife and the environment.

The Wildlife Trusts seek an indefinite moratorium on GM crops unless the benefits can be proven safe and sustainable, and the risks can be showed to be groundless. In the short-term there should be a complete ban on imported GM produced food to protect the UK agricultural industry from unfair competition.