Association Perspectives

Two Keys to Prevent Wheat from Sharing Same Fate as Oats

By Scott Swenson, MAWG

With preparations for the 2007 growing season underway, I can’t help but notice my neighbor’s seed corn business and the truckloads of seed product leaving his yard every day.  I farm in west central Minnesota where we are fortunate to have planting decision choices, and where wheat has seen a dramatic decrease in acres, switched over to corn and soybeans.

One of the main reasons for this is the genetic advantages corn and soybeans have over wheat, due in part to biotechnology. The genetic gap grows wider every year, and one of the significant repercussions of this, already happening but little discussed, is a parallel disparity in crop insurance experience.  It makes sense: the better the yields and genetic pest and disease resistance, the fewer crop losses and the better crop insurance history. Over time, it means better, more affordable crop insurance coverage for corn and beans compared to wheat, and just another reason not to grow this crop.

Yet some are still hesitant to embrace biotech wheat, because of the impression that some consumers might not want it.  Well guess what folks, most wheat foods on grocery store shelves today already contain biotech ingredients. Take a loaf of bread, for instance.  The main ingredients are flour, sugar, yeast, and shortening/oil. With the introduction next year of Roundup-Ready sugarbeets, three of those four key ingredients in wheat bread will be genetically enhanced through biotechnology. 

We’ve proven a segregation system can work in soybeans and corn: it will work with wheat as well. If a domestic or foreign customer wants a non -GMO wheat, the market will be able to provide it.

I serve on the board of directors of the Minnesota Association of Wheat Growers because I want to see wheat remain viable. It is a crop with significant advantages in rotation with other crops. I believe it’s in the best interest of the exporters, millers, bakers, and others who rely on an abundant, safe, domestic supply of wheat to not let this crop fade away, and become a largely imported crop, like oats. The U.S. now imports more oats than it produces, mostly from Canada. “Acreage has continued to drop as better returns for other crops have caused farmers to switch out of oats,” says USDA. 

The recent recall of pet foods containing tainted imported wheat gluten should be a red flag.  National Association of Wheat Growers President John Thaemert pointed out that while every food safety issue cannot be avoided, it is extremely unlikely that a situation like the issue with tainted Chinese wheat gluten would happen with U.S.-raised wheat.  In this case, the source is a known toxin that is prohibited from being used in food in the U.S. However, the U.S. food chain goes to great lengths to ensure food safety, and that includes the safety of biotechnology, the most regulated and studied technology ever introduced in the history of agriculture.

I hope we do not sit back and allow a vocal minority, whose reasoning is not based on sound science, to steer the future of wheat.  An encouraging development is the adoption of two key resolutions by NAWG and U.S. Wheat Associates urging that:

• USW and NAWG meet as soon as possible with Australian and Canadian wheat growers regarding the development of a time line for the release and commercialization of biotech wheat. 
• USW and NAWG identify trait developers and initiate a dialogue to encourage the research, development and commercialization of biotech wheat.

Action on these two fronts can’t come soon enough – let’s get on it, if we want to prevent  wheat from sharing the same fate as oats.

Swenson farms near Elbow Lake, Minn., and serves on the MAWG board of directors.