 |
|||
 |
" I heard it |
||
January 12, 2010
· AFBF president: Farmers must challenge critics
· Global warming theory called into question
· Cold wave wreaks havoc with Florida crops
· Monsanto won’t block generic seed production
· Deadly scorpion venom provides safe pesticide
AFBF president: Farmers must challenge critics
In his annual keynote address on Monday, American Farm
Bureau Federation President Bob Stallman issued a call to action to Farm Bureau
members and a stern warning to critics that farmers and ranchers will no longer
tolerate opponents’ efforts to change the landscape of American agriculture.
Stallman spoke at the organization’s annual meeting in
Calling on Farm Bureau members to rally as one during these challenging times, Stallman said there are already too many external forces tugging at agriculture’s seams without farmers and ranchers being divided amongst themselves.
“Emotionally charged labels such as monoculture, factory farmer, industrial food, and big ag threaten to fray our edges,” said Stallman. “We must not allow the activists and self-appointed and self-promoting food experts to drive a wedge between us.”
Stallman said that Farm Bureau continues to represent all farmers and ranchers, no matter their size of farm, commodity raised or political philosophy. Farmer’s missions of feeding the nation and the world, caring for the environment and respecting neighbors’ rights has not changed from when AFBF was founded in 1919. But the ways in which farmers and ranchers carry out their mission have changed, said Stallman, which is not understood or respected by critics of modern agriculture.
“A line must be drawn between our polite and respectful engagement with consumers and how we must aggressively respond to extremists who want to drag agriculture back to the day of 40 acres and a mule,” said Stallman. “The time has come to face our opponents with a new attitude. The days of their elitist power grabs are over.”
Stallman said curtailing such “power grabs” has never been as critical as it is now because of the poor economy, a growing population and legislative and regulatory efforts that threaten agriculture’s ability to feed the world.
“At the very time we need to increase our food production,
climate change legislation threatens to slash our ability to do so,” said
Stallman. “The world will continue to depend on food from the
Climate legislation currently in Congress would shift as
much as 59 million acres of food production into forestry, which is equivalent
to setting aside every acre of land used for crop and food production in
Stallman concluded by recalling a quote by General George Patton: “Make your plans to fit the circumstances.”
“Our adversaries are skillful at taking advantage of our
politeness. Publicly, they call for friendly dialogue while privately their
tactics are far from that,” said Stallman. “To those who expect to just roll
over
Global warming theory called into question
(Feedstuffs.com) – Much of current global warming theory is based on distortions of scientific evidence, blind devotion to simple notion and outright greed, according to a speaker at the American Farm Bureau's 91st annual meeting.
Christopher Horner, a fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, contended that the theory suffers from problems with the measurement of the earth temperature and its interpretation. Comprehensive data collected since the Middle Ages reveal a natural process of fluctuation in average temperature. These data have been derived from studies of tree rings, ice cores and thermometer readings.
“The climate has always changed,” Horner said. “The question is, how does society respond to it—hysterically or rationally?”
Since the late 19th century the earth’s average temperature has increased by an average of one degree Fahrenheit.
“When it’s warm, there is more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere,” he said. Thus, the presence of higher concentrations of the gas, as detected in recent atmospheric samples, is not necessarily proof that the condition was created by human action.
Moreover, a careful assessment of late 20th century and early 21st Century temperature data contradicts global warming theory.
“There is no net warming,” Horner declared. “In fact, there has been a slight decline (in temperature) since 2001.”
The reliability of temperature data gathered during this period is, itself, subject to question according to Horner.
“Between 1985 and 2000 we had the hottest decade in
history,” he pointed out. “But there was no measurement at Siberian temperature
stations.” Much of the data collection was concentrated in urban locations in
Europe and the
Late last year, the revelations of leaked e-mail correspondence from certain climate scientists posed the likelihood of a more sinister danger associated with global warming theory. The so-called “ClimateGate” episode, Horner claimed, showed that many scientists are more interested in garnering research dollars with little additional investigation than with engaging in independent investigations. The episode “warrants an immediate stay of further steps” in any public policy guided by the theory.
Horner lampooned the reliance members of Congress have placed upon such theory in proposing climate change legislation now under consideration.
“It is all pain, no gain,” he said. “It is all empty gesture. It is a rationing scheme under which the state decides how much of something you may use. It will raise the price of energy.”
He urged farmers and ranchers to examine critically the
“offsets” offered by the legislation. These features of the legislation amount
to an “accounting gimmick” that will not aid agricultural producers or most
other members of
Misguided congressional legislation should be abandoned, Horner said. “It is premised on demonstrably false results. It would accomplish wealth transfers and not affect the climate. It's about revenues, rents and ideologies.”
He cited the product of the recent climate change conference
in
Agricultural producers and other citizens of this country must confront the issue directly and insert rationality into the debate, Horner explained. He believes demand for reliable, comprehensive scientfic evidence is the first place to begin.
“We want a richer world to deal with something that is always going to happen, not a poorer world,” Horner concluded.
Cold wave wreaks havoc with Florida
(AP via Ocala.com) FROSTPROOF - Growers were scrambling Monday and Tuesday to assess damage and pick as many oranges as possible from thousands of acres of citrus groves after the cold approached or surpassed records around the state.
A record-tying low of 29 was observed in
The cold has been extremely tough on the state's fruit and
vegetable growers, with crops such as citrus trees and sugar cane suffering
damage when exposed to temperatures below 28 degrees for more than four hours.
It was below 28 degrees more than eight hours overnight in the
agriculture-dominated area around
Overall crop damage tallies won't be available for days or
weeks, agricultural officials said. But the state Department of Agriculture
said there has been "significant crop damage" throughout the state,
from tropical fish farms near
"Temperatures have been ridiculous cold for South
Florida," said Eric Hopkins, vice president of Hundley Farms Inc. in
The state's largest citrus grower's group has been receiving reports of frozen fruit and damage to trees' leaves and branches, but it's not clear yet if those trees have suffered long-term damage. Frozen fruit must be rushed to a processing plant, or the flavor could be ruined.
Complicating efforts to assess the damage is "the sheer number of cold days we had in a row. I can't remember anything like it," said Michael W. Sparks, executive vice president and CEO of Florida Citrus Mutual.
The state's last "impact freeze" - a freeze so severe that it annihilates entire citrus groves around the state, causing tens of millions of dollars in damage - happened in 1989. It was only the fifth since 1835. It will take at least a month to determine whether this year's cold snap will be classified as another, Citrus Mutual spokesman Andrew Meadows said.
Homeowners in the Panhandle also were dealing with an
unfamiliar problem: frozen pipes. It was 14 degrees Monday in
Barry Atkinson, the owner of Destin Plumbing in Destin, said he can't keep up with emergency calls. Panhandle plumbing suppliers have sold out of many parts needed to repair broken pipes.
Monsanto won’t block generic seed production
(Bloomberg)
-- Monsanto Co. says it won’t block competitors from creating generic versions
of any of its gene- modified seeds as they lose patent protection, a decision
that may help mute calls for a
Farmers for the first time will be allowed to save and replant Monsanto’s Roundup Ready soybeans after the patent expires in 2014 and rivals such as DuPont Co. will be able to sell their own Roundup-tolerant seeds without restriction, Chief Executive Officer Hugh Grant said in an interview. Farmers criticized Monsanto in the 2008 documentary “Food Inc.” for its contracts that keep them from saving seeds after a harvest.
“Here is how we think patent expiration will look,” Grant said. “Farmers will be free to plant, to replant that seed. Licensees will be able to do the same thing.”
Monsanto could have thwarted proposed generics by raising multiple patent claims or safety questions with regulators, as some drugmakers do. Grant said his decision not to throw up obstacles starting with the 2015 planting sets the template the St. Louis-based company expects to follow as other advances such as insect resistance come off patent later in the decade, pushing beyond his previous comments on the topic.
“We are setting this as a precedent,” Chief Technology
Officer Robert Fraley said at the Jan. 8 interview in Bloomberg’s
Roundup Ready soybeans are engineered to withstand Monsanto’s Roundup, the world’s most popular weed-killer. Contracts protect its patents in part by prohibiting farmers from saving seeds from one year’s crop to plant in the next.
Justice Department Workshop
The U.S. Justice Department will hold a March workshop on
crop-seed competition and has made inquiries into allegations from DuPont that
Monsanto unfairly uses genetic licenses to dominate the engineered seed market.
Including seeds made by licensees, about 93 percent of
Grant’s lawyers in May sued Wilmington, Delaware-based DuPont, to keep it from engineering seed that resists Roundup in two ways, with the patented Roundup Ready trait licensed from Monsanto plus DuPont’s own genetic technology.
“Companies like DuPont will be able to stack” any genetic traits they develop on the new generics, Grant said.
David Begleiter, a New York-based
analyst at Deutsche Bank AG, said Monsanto’s decision is “part of their overall
response to the growing antitrust pressure coming out of
“By allowing generics, they are trying to push back on the claim that their business practices are anti-competitive,” Begleiter said.
Licensed Technology
Monsanto has broadly licensed its genetic technology to rival seed makers since 1996, when it began selling Roundup Ready soybeans, its first engineered seed, Grant said. The company also allows competitors to combine other genetic traits with its technology, a process known as stacking, with one or two exceptions, Grant said.
DuPont’s Pioneer Hi-Bred unit, the biggest
DuPont subsequently delayed commercial sales of both products until the middle of the decade. While that’s around the time Monsanto plans to allow competitors, including DuPont, to copy the off-patent Roundup Ready technology, Grant said he won’t drop the lawsuit because “five years is a ways away.”
DuPont Lawsuit
Monsanto’s promise to allow generic versions of its crop seeds doesn’t guarantee generics will reach the market, said James Denvir III, a Washington-based attorney for DuPont at Boies Schiller & Flexner LLP.
Denvir, who led the Justice
Department’s breakup of AT&T, said Monsanto’s promise isn’t legally binding
and may not allow time for rivals to get export approvals for gene-modified
crops they develop from markets such as the European Union or
“There are a lot of questions that remain,” Denvir said. “It’s not at all clear that generic competition will ever happen. We want the way to be absolutely cleared for generic competition.”
The biotech seed industry lacks the type of legal framework for generic drugs created in 1984 by the Hatch Waxman Act, Denvir said. Monsanto’s pledge also doesn’t address the issue of blocking competitors from combining genetic traits that involve Monsanto technology, he said.
Dialogue With Government
While the competing suits are just a contractual dispute between competitors, the Justice Department inquiry is another matter, Grant said. Monsanto and DuPont filed comments on industry competition with the Justice Department last week.
“If you are in a dialogue with the government, you take it seriously,” said Grant, 51. “I feel very good about our business practices.”
Gina Talamona, a Justice Department spokeswoman, declined to comment.
Monsanto collects about $500 million a year from licensing the Roundup Ready gene to soybean seed producers such as DuPont, said Begleiter, who rates the stock a “buy.” Monsanto fell $1.72, or 2 percent, to $84.93 at 10:23 a.m. in New York Stock Exchange composite trading and gained 16 percent in 2009.
Switching Products
Monsanto has begun switching growers to its more expensive Roundup Ready 2 Yield product, predicting 7 percent higher yields. Roundup Ready 2 seeds will be stacked with new traits, such as healthier oils, that won’t be offered on the original, Grant said.
“Growers will decide, ‘Do I go with the old 1996 material or do I go with some of these new varieties?’” Grant said. “I’m fine with that setup.”
Allowing generics may win Monsanto some goodwill among farmers who say the company’s seed prices are high, said Chris Shaw, a New York-based analyst at Ticonderoga Securities LLC who rates the stock a “sell.”
“They know they are under the spotlight, so they want to make sure they are doing the right thing by their customers,” Shaw said. “It makes the customers happy, even if it costs them a little profit.”
Deadly scorpion venom provides a safe pesticide
(Wire Services) –
Scorpions deliver a powerful, paralyzing venom ? a complex cocktail of poisonous peptides that immobilize animal prey on the spot. Some of the toxins in this cocktail damage only insects, which is why a Tel Aviv University researcher is harnessing them to create a safe and ecologically sound pesticide.
Prof. Michael Gurevitz of
"Two decades ago I realized that scorpion venom is a goldmine for possible insecticidal and therapeutic agents. This raised the question of how to use them as ecologically-safe agents against insects in a farmer's fields, or in medicinal disorders," he says.
In his study of the toxins and the evolution of their genes he recently published a paper in the journal Molecular Biology and Evolution that demonstrates how computational analyses at the gene sequence level leads to better understanding of how to manipulate toxin activity.
A venom factory in the lab
Rather than isolating the venom constituents of the Israeli yellow scorpion, known to be among the world's most poisonous scorpions, Prof. Gurevitz developed genetic methods for producing and manipulating the desired toxins in bacteria. He then investigated how they act against insects and mammals, paving the way for potential use in the agriculture industry.
He went in this direction because attempts to insert a certain neurotoxin gene into a plant genome hoping for the plant to produce the toxin and kill infesting insects has failed. As a peptide, the toxin was metabolized in the insect guts, which evidently seems to require that it first be engineered to be able to penetrate into the insect blood stream to have its impact on the nervous system.
Prof. Gurevitz says that some neurotoxins in the scorpion are highly active against some insects -- leaf-eating moths, locusts, flies and beetles -- but have no effect on beneficial insects like honeybees or on mammals like humans. He continues to pursue an effective mode of delivery for what could be a new insecticide.
Prof. Gurevitz is considered one
of the world's pioneers in this field, having published numerous papers on this
subject. He spent six years as a research fellow at
A "Trojan crop" to hide a deadly poison
Since scorpion toxins must be modified to be able to penetrate the blood stream of an infesting insect, it is important to study the toxins and the way they interact with the insect nervous system. Only then would it be possible to modify them in such a way as to reach their target tissues in insects, he says. This is the direction he is working on now.
The agriculture industry already uses mostly pyrethroids, which also penetrate into insects and attack their nervous systems, leading to paralysis and death. Their main drawback, however, is the lack of specificity and the danger these compounds pose to the environment, livestock and humans.
"Why not harness potent natural compounds that venomous animals developed during millions of years of evolution?" asks Prof. Gurevitz. "I am developing the science so we can learn how to use them, and to learn how to produce agents to mimic their effect yet maintain specificity to certain kinds of insects."
End Transmission