www.checkbiotech.org ; www.raupp.info ; www.czu.cz

Swiss farmers, at the heart of this month's nationwide vote on the use of
genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in agriculture, are divided on the
issue, November 2005 by Scott Capper.

While some are enthusiastic about GMOs, others say more research has to be
done into their effects on farming and produce.

The government has recommended rejecting the moratorium, saying that it is
not necessary given the country's already strict legislation on gene
technology.

This position has been backed up by a slim majority in parliament, the
business world and an impressive group of Swiss world-class researchers.

Those in favour of a moratorium include green groups, consumers
associations, and perhaps more importantly, farmers themselves. All the
national farming associations have pronounced themselves in favour of the
moratorium, although some cantonal federations have taken the opposite view.

Elvira Bader, a centre-right Christian Democrat parliamentarian and farmer's
wife from canton Solothurn, says she doesn't fear GM technology as such. But
she believes the lack of research about its impact is reason enough to
introduce a moratorium.

"Introducing GMOs in agriculture presents no difficulties nowadays," she
told swissinfo. "But we don't know how to get rid of them if their effects
turn out to be bad."

Bader's 40-hectare property ? a large farm by Swiss standards ? has been
turned over to biological farming. One of her concerns is that if GM
technology is introduced she won't be able to avoid contamination of her
produce.

"Our products must not contain more than 0.5 per cent of GM substances," she
said. "If genetically modified organisms reached our farm, we wouldn't be
able to sell our milk under a special quality label and it would destroy
years of work."

Enthusiastic

Her party colleague, Josef Leu, is far more enthusiastic about the potential
of GMOs in agriculture. He says he would straightaway introduce the
technology onto his farm in canton Lucerne if he could.

"GM farming opens up new perspectives and would benefit the environment," he
told swissinfo. "We would be able to develop better plants using more
efficient and faster methods."

For Leu, who is also an agricultural engineer, one of the main benefits
would be decreased usage of pesticides and fertiliser. "For a farmer who
wants to adopt biological work methods, what could be better than doing away
with chemicals," he said.

But such statements leave many observers cold. Gérard Vuffray, who works for
one of the more militant farmers' associations, Uniterre, says that at
present there are no GM products on the market that are worthwhile
introducing in Switzerland.

"Besides the possible, if still unknown risks, it makes no sense from an
agronomical or economic point of view to introduce GMOs at this time," he
said. "Current GM products are designed for large crop surfaces, which is
not common in Switzerland."

"We also can also expect these organisms to spread if they are introduced.
Maybe in ten years time, there might be such a product that is acceptable,
but for the time being it's perfectly reasonable to consider a five-year
moratorium."

According to Vuffray, what is needed now is more research into GMOs and
their effects.

"Contrary to what is being said by many people, we think more testing and
research should be carried out so we know more about these products," he
told swissinfo. "Besides, the moratorium does not restrict research, only
the use of GMOs in agriculture."

Not interested

Vuffray believes that adopting GM technology would also be a step backwards
for Swiss agriculture.

"We would be forgetting all the improvements introduced in the past 25 years
that have allowed us to work in a more environmentally friendly way," he
said. "We would end up pouring more chemicals into the ground than we are
now, since there is a strong chance more resistant pests and weeds will
appear."

Most farmers in Switzerland say they are not interested in GM technology.
Serge Beck, a Liberal Party parliamentarian and farmer from the Jura
foothills, is among them.

Yet he has publicly voiced his opposition to the moratorium because he
believes Switzerland's law on gene technology is sufficient. But he is also
against it because of what he calls its incoherence as GMOs will still find
their way into the country.

"There are no restrictions on importing GM animal fodder and we cannot turn
back foodstuffs from the European Union containing GM substances," he told
swissinfo.

Missed point

Vuffray says that such affirmations miss the point.

"We can only vote on what happens inside Switzerland," he added. "If we
attempted to restrict imports, we would be breaking our international
agreements."

For Beck, the alternative to a moratorium is educating farmers about the
bigger benefits of GM-free agriculture, such as niche markets with higher
revenue.

"Personally, I don't want to be indebted to the agrochemical sector either,"
he added.

All farmers say they have strong ties to their land. In the end, they want
to hand on their properties in good shape to their children.

"I want to leave my sons something intact, in the same condition I found it
when I first arrived," said Bader.

For Leu, whose family has owned the farm for five generations, the aim is
the same, although the method is different.

"I want to hand my land on in the best possible shape, and that's why I want
to stop using chemicals," he added. "But to do that, I have to call on
scientific developments, including gene technology."

[www.swissinfo.org]

------------------------------------------
Posted to Phorum via PhorumMail