Top 10 Concerns Growers Have About Biotechnology

Growers for Biotechnology (www.growersforbiotechnology.org) are actively involved in supporting research, development and accurate information about agricultural biotechnology to help promote its acceptance. Al Skogen, a grower from central North Dakota and chairman of the organization, has compiled this list of questions most often received from growers about biotechnology acceptance and impact.

With more than 90 percent of soybean acres and nearly 75 percent of corn acres planted in biotech seeds, there are few farmers who need to be convinced about the benefits of biotechnology. “Most of the questions we receive today are about wheat and other crops important to growers in the Northern Plains,” Skogen says. “Most of the people I talk with see that wheat is falling behind other crops and they want to know when biotechnology might come to wheat.”

Lack of biotechnology in wheat is hurting that crop’s competitiveness on the farm. When can we expect use of this technology in wheat?
While there is ongoing biotech research, both public and private, in wheat, there is no active strategy to commercialize a wheat biotech trait.  It takes a minimum of five years – and more likely closer to 10 – to validate the economic value of a trait, do field trials, complete the regulatory process, ramp up seed supplies and prepare the market.  At this point, it appears that the nearest possibility for release of a biotech wheat trait may well be a drought tolerant trait in Australia.

What traits are being looked at for wheat?
There are several traits which present possible solutions to major problems in wheat production in consideration.  They include herbicide tolerance, fungal tolerance, drought and cold tolerance, insect tolerance, and increased nitrogen use efficiency, as well as end use quality.

What are the prospects for Roundup Ready wheat to make another try?
Monsanto continues to monitor the wheat industry’s interest in and aligned support for biotechnology traits in wheat; however, the company has no active research and development program in wheat at this time.

Should we be concerned that countries we compete with, such as China, Australia or Canada, may commercialize a biotech trait before we do?
Whoever has first access to a beneficial trait, regardless of the crop or country, will have an immediate efficiency advantage, which will translate to a competitive advantage in the marketplace.  The producer who has the lowest per unit production cost of a given crop always wins. Having said that, we have a mature, structured and more efficient regulatory process and business operating environment than most other major crop producing countries. Our system allows trait developers to move a trait through the commercialization process more quickly than other countries. As producers, we need to monitor and defend our process as the most credible in the world while working to convince U.S. technology companies that the wheat industry is committed to biotechnology.

Are our wheat markets at risk if we introduce biotech wheat?
Global acceptance of crop biotechnology is increasing rapidly and other countries are redefining their regulatory processes to accommodate production and trade of biotech crops. There will always be resistance driven primarily by anti-technology activist groups; however consumers generally are not concerned. With the current supply shortages, end users are much less concerned today about biotech backlash than they are about access to a safe, adequate supply of wheat.

Is our grain origination system equipped to segregate GM and non-GM grains and will there be increased costs of segregation forced upon producers when we market biotech wheat?
We have a perfectly capable system already in place today to segregate.  In fact it is done every day in corn, soybeans and other biotech crops, and in wheat for a multitude of reasons.  Proper segregation must be initiated by the buyer, offering incentives to drive the segregation event. This is the way it is accomplished in the marketplace today. This system rewards the grower and shipper for delivering a specialty product such as non-GM, organic, or other specific trait that the buyer desires.

Can genetically enhanced crop production and organic co-exist?
Some progressively minded organic producers believe that biotechnology could be a valuable tool in organic crop production. It is safe and environmentally friendly and enhances soil conservation practices. Non-GM protocols in organic production were initiated by the producers of organic crops and their markets as a way to differentiate themselves and extract premium prices. It is important to know that USDA organic standards, as requested by the organic industry, prohibit the intentional planting of biotech crops but not the unintentional or adventitious presence of biotech traits in the crop. Organic proponents who demand zero tolerance demand something that is not required for organic certification.

Should I be concerned about increasing technology fees eating away at the potential advantage of this technology?
The responsibility falls upon producer to always ensure that he is receiving the greatest value possible for every input dollar he spends.  If the cost to use the technology exceeds the return, producers will not buy the product. Companies must charge a technology fee that covers their costs of bringing a product to market ($100 million or more) and also enables them to maintain a healthy research environment that will continue to increase our access to all of the tools necessary to meet the needs of ever expanding global demand.

What role can our publicly owned university research play in biotechnology development?
Public research at our land grant universities has a high level of credibility.  Therefore, private/public biotech research collaboration can improve the efficiency and scope of trials, validate economic value, improve producer and consumer education, enhance the regulatory approval process and pave a more effective path to commercialization of useful traits. It is important to note in the case of wheat that while private tech companies have traits or the capability of identifying and transforming traits, the varieties are predominantly owned by land grants, therefore, any effective broad based release would require public/private collaboration.

What is the future of biotechnology development in minor crops such as barley, field peas, sunflower, etc.?
The potential market for the trait must be perceived to be large enough to warrant the investment.  In all cases it is important that growers of a particular crop being considered for a trait be fully engaged and supportive of the trait.  This can reduce the potential cost of commercialization considerably.  Case in point, even a broad-acreage trait like Roundup Ready wheat could not gain acceptance and was deemed too big of an investment risk without full support of the wheat industry and was dropped by Monsanto. In some cases minor crops offer an opportunity for the public research arena to get involved through advantageous public/private partnerships.  This is already being done successfully in canola research.

Growers who want to keep apace of developments in the biotechnology arena can sign up for the bi-monthly e-mail newsletter distributed by Growers for Biotechnology.  Sign up at www.growersforbiotechnology.org.