jump to navigation

Christmas colors fire political protest. December 4, 2011

Posted by ourfriendben in gardening, wit and wisdom.
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
2 comments

Red and green are the colors of Christmas. They’re also the colors of chiles*, and folks in New Mexico have gotten all fired up about protecting the purity of their most famous crop. (Hatch, New Mexico is renowned as the “chile capital of the world.”) The result is Occupy Green/Red Chile, a protest movement that is taking to the streets in major New Mexico cities like Albuquerque, Santa Fe and Taos. But what are they protesting?

Turns out, it’s a topic familiar to all of us who care about plants, agriculture and gardening: genetic engineering. According to Susan Montoya Bryan’s article “Green chile lovers fired up over genetic research,” rising labor costs and pervasive diseases have decimated New Mexico’s chile crop, so that now only 25% of the original tens of thousands of acres are still in production.

One of the New World’s most successful exports, chiles are now grown worldwide, and their presence is so taken for granted in Indian, African and Asian cuisine that it’s easy to forget that they’re a New World crop. And now less pricey chile imports are eating into New Mexico’s chile profits.

New Mexico State University, which has had a Chile Pepper Institute and been researching and breeding chiles for decades (including such popular cultivars as ‘NuMex Big Jim’), has turned its attention to genetic engineering in an attempt to help plants resist diseases, boost productivity, and get the peppers up where they’re easier to harvest mechanically. (If you’ve grown hot peppers yourself, you’ll know all about hunting around under the leaves to find ripe peppers for harvesting or the biggest green poblanos for stuffing. Our friend Ben can’t imagine mechanically harvesting a pepper crop. And imagine the labor costs of hand-picking them.)

Genetic engineering raises red flags for different reasons. Some people simply object to having mouse or pig or whatever genes inserted into their plants, when there hasn’t been enough time to see what the long-term effects will be. Not to mention, Silence Dogood reminds me, the moral chaos into which this will plunge vegetarians. 

Others—including the majority of people concerned about protecting plant diversity—are concerned about interbreeding between vigorous genetically engineered hybrids and heirloom plants which have been cherished, sometimes for centuries, for specific qualities of flavor, texture, color, fragrance, ability to withstand certain climatic conditions and problems, etc. This can happen if insect-pollinated heirloom crops are planted near genetically modified fields, or it can happen across long distances if wind-pollinated heirloom plants (like tomatoes and corn) are grown within gale-force reach of genetically modified plants.

The lessons of history, both ancient and modern, all point to the importance of maintaining diversity in our crops, our animals, ourselves. The Irish Potato Famine might never have happened if every person in Ireland hadn’t been growing a single cultivar (cultivated variety) of potato which happened to be susceptible to the blight. Had the hundreds of varieties of potatoes that exist been grown, doubtless many would have proved blight-resistant, and since it took several years for the blight to become disastrous, seed potatoes from resistant types could have been shared, averting the tragedy. (This also points up the importance of not depending on a single crop, be it potatoes, rice, wheat, corn, soy, or you name it, for a nation’s sustenance.)

On a less extreme scale, last year’s canned pumpkin shortage was caused by a crop failure of Libby’s carefully selected and exclusively grown ‘Dickinson’ winter squash cultivar, the source of their canned pumpkin. While our friend Ben ventures to guess that nobody’s going to die from lack of canned pumpkin, unlike the millions of Irish who died in the Potato Famine and millions more who were uprooted and forced to leave friends and family for new lives in new lands, the cause is the same: lack of crop diveristy.

Living in litigious times as we do, crop contamination and reducing diversity aren’t the only objections to growing genetically modified crops, a lesson Monsanto has taught us all so well. University researchers work hard to benefit their states’ farmers, usually drawing no profit beyond their modest salaries. But then agribusiness monsters like Monsanto enter the game, patenting genetically modified crops and forcing growers to purchase their overpriced seed every year if they want to grow the new supercrops.

On the surface, this seems like good old capitalism at work. Nobody has to buy Monsanto seed, after all, do they? And if they choose not to, and to keep on growing the varieties they prefer and saving their own seed for future crops, that’s a free-market choice, isn’t it? Maybe their harvest and profits will be lower, but that’s their decision.

Except it isn’t, at least according to Monsanto. If Monsanto’s modified genes find their way through pollination into somebody’s heirloom crop, Monsanto sends its dogs after them and sues them out of business, even though the farmers are minding their own business and not only have done nothing to incorporate Monsanto’s genes but are horrified by their line’s corruption. Monsanto has shown itself ruthless and successful, time after time after time. No wonder the Occupy Green/Red Chile folks fear that the university’s work will, rather than helping New Mexico farmers, drive them all out of business.

Our friend Ben completely sympathizes with the concerns of Occupy Green/Red Chile, which I feel are totally legitimate. And with a Master’s degree in horticulture, having worked alongside the dedicated professors and researchers trying to help farmers, orchardists and gardeners, I really do appreciate their efforts.

It’s the mindless, heedless greed of corporations like Monsanto that make my hackles rise.  As long as their quarterly report looks good, they don’t give a damn if they destroy the world, even in the next quarter, much less the next generation. If I had my way, every Monsanto executive would be flipping burgers at McDonald’s for their day job, then heading off to work as Wal*Mart greeters for their second job. Perhaps in their abundant spare time they might consider the evil they’ve done and are still doing, not just here but worldwide. “The evil that men do lives after them” was never, ever so apt.

* “Chile” is the correct way to refer to the fruits of the hot pepper plant in the Americas; “chilli” is typically preferred in Britain and the East. “Chili” is the famous soup or stew made with chiles.

What’s the deal about GM foods? February 25, 2011

Posted by ourfriendben in critters, gardening, homesteading, wit and wisdom.
Tags: , , , , ,
3 comments

Our friend Ben was enraged to read yet another article, this one in today’s Yahoo! News finance section and picked up from an AP release called “Shoppers wary of GM foods find they’re everywhere,” basically implying that GM foods were safe and people who thought otherwise were stupid.

“GM” stands for “genetically modified,” usually by giant agribusiness corporations like Monsanto to make the crops resistant to their herbicide Roundup, so farmers can spray their fields with herbicide early and often without having to worry that it will kill their crops along with everything else. The range of genetic modifications can be much wider, including putting animal genes into plants. The result is to turn our planet and all life on it into a giant lab, since no one knows what the results of this global-scale experiment will be.

But the “experts” keep insisting that GM foods are safe for human consumption, and the folks raising their voices in protest too often come off sounding like idiots who don’t know what they’re talking about and are simply opposing change for the sake of it. “If you mess with nature there’s a side effect somewhere,” George Siemon is quoted in the article as remarking. Gee, is this some Wal*Mart shopper who’s being interviewed coming out of the store? No, it’s the CEO of Organic Valley, the U.S.’s largest organic farming cooperative. “Many of these opponents [of GM foods] acknowledge that there isn’t much solid evidence showing genetically modified foods are somehow dangerous or unhealthy. It just doesn’t seem right, they say,” the article adds, making opponents of GM foods appear to have all the intelligence, education, and deductive reasoning of Homer Simpson.

So far, five major crops—corn, soybeans, cotton, sugar beets, and alfalfa—are USDA-approved for GM production, and according to the article, GM salmon will soon follow. (If you don’t think of cotton and alfalfa as “people food,” think again: cottonseed oil is used as a “vegetable oil” in tons of foods, including chips, cookies, and crackers, and what about all those alfalfa sprouts?) God knows what will be next.

Our friend Ben is not qualified to say precisely what will happen if we humans consume herbicide- and pesticide-resistant crops or genetically modified animals. I would, however, prefer not to become a human lab rat myself, and would appreciate it if GM foods were at least required to be labeled as such. (They aren’t.) But I don’t think that’s the real issue, and the real issue is one that farmers, plant and animal geneticists, botanists and gardeners, homesteaders, and historians are all admirably qualified to talk about: the deliberate limitation of diversity. 

A historian could tell you all about what happens when diversity is squandered for a single crop: We get the Irish potato famine, when the one variety of potato grown all over Ireland proved suceptible to the blight. Had hundreds of varieties been grown, doubtless some would have proved resistant. And had a wider diversity of crops been grown, the failure of the potato crop would have been far less devastating.

At this point, you may be thinking, but surely there are many varieties of corn and the like being grown, so why worry? Two reasons: contamination and lawsuits. Companies like Monsanto thrive because farmers have to buy their seed fresh from Monsanto every year. If they only had to buy them once, then saved seed from their crops and grew the subsequent years’ crops from their saved seed, Monsanto’s profits would decline. So Monsanto sends spies, for lack of a better word, out into the fields to make sure that’s not happening, and sues the hell out of anyone if the spies find that it is.

Fair enough, the companies have invested bazillion dollars developing their seeds, surely they should reap the financial rewards. Except there’s one little problem: The pollen from genetically modified plants often finds its way onto non-GM, often heirloom or open-pollinated plants, and contaminates them, destroying the pure strains that have been carefully raised to suit a given climate and to meet very specific flavor and use requirements. This is especially true of wind-pollinated crops like corn, since the pollen has been designed to carry over great distances.

Now, if I were a farmer or gardener who had carefully kept my own heirloom strain of corn alive and pure down through the generations, and I found that it had been contaminated by some god-damned GM corn, I’d be tempted to sue Monsanto or whatever company created the GM corn that ruined possibly hundreds of years of careful breeding and seed conservation for damages. After all, a priceless local resource would have been lost through corporate greed and heedlessness.

But oh, no. That’s not the way it works. Instead, the bazillion-dollar multinational corporation’s spies take a sample of crops from my field and determine that their GM genes are in my corn. Then they sue me for everything I’ve got, claiming that I’m unfairly taking advantage of their technology and developments without compensating them, when I’d actually as soon be dead as see my family’s generations of careful breeding contaminated by their god-cursed herbicide-friendly creation.

And horrifyingly, they win. And win and win and win. To my knowledge, not one farmer who’s found himself in this situation has ever, even once, triumphed over the unspeakable, monstrous, amoral corporate greed that drives these bloated pigs to sue and sue and sue. To crush all opposition like the dictators we claim to hate and oppose. If Monsanto were, say, Muammar al-Gaddafi or Kim Jong-il or Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, would we sit back and let them destroy principled, poor, hardworking individuals in the name of greed? I would like to think not. And yet, we sit back and do nothing as Monsanto and their ilk grind our farmers in the dust and destroy crop diversity—our only hope of continued abundance, or even survival—in the process.

This, in my opinion, is the real issue, and the real evil. This is an issue history has qualified each and every one of us to talk about. We don’t know what consuming GM plants and animals will ultimately do to us; nobody really knows, we’re all lab rats. But we do know what reducing the genetic diversity of plants and animals will do to us, and our friend Ben can sum it up in one word: extinction, and not just for the crops or animals involved.