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

A splinter group of more than 200 Sacramento Valley rice farmers is claiming
that even experimental plantings of genetically modified rice jeopardize key
export markets, February 2007 by Jim Downing.

The group, Rice Producers of California, plans to release today a market
study that documents the powerful opposition to such technology in several
key export destinations: Japan, Taiwan, South Korea and Turkey.

While the study generally reinforces conventional wisdom about these
markets, the fact that the group saw fit to commission a study at all
illustrates the anxiety that many export-dependent farmers continue to feel
about genetically modified crops.

The DNA of such crops has been altered to yield traits such as herbicide
resistance or enhanced nutritional content.

Greg Massa, who farms rice near Chico and is the group's co-chairman, said
he wants a ban on any outdoor planting of genetically modified rice.

Due in large part to export concerns, transgenic rice, as it is known, has
not been planted by commercial farmers in the United States or in most other
countries in the world.

But it has been planted in experimental plots, and last summer traces of a
rice variety containing the herbicide-tolerance "Liberty Link" gene were
found to have contaminated commercial rice in several Southern states.

Futures prices for long-grain rice plunged as European importers reacted by
demanding that each shipment be tested, and some other countries banned
imports. Suits seeking classaction status have been filed on behalf of
farmers against the German company that developed the rice, Bayer
CropScience AG.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture has yet to determine the source of that
contamination. Bayer did not respond to a request for comment.

California farmers grow short- and medium-grain rice varieties, not
long-grain, and were not affected by the Liberty Link incident. But the
event reinforced for some farmers the fragility of export markets.

"We have customers that want a very specific product," said Placer County
rice farmer Nick Greco. And, he said, the risk to that product presented by
outdoor test plots of transgenic rice -- however small -- is unacceptable.

Only one small test plot of transgenic rice was planted statewide last year,
said Kent McKenzie, who directs the grower-funded California Rice Experiment
Station in Butte County and is on the state board that oversees the
introduction of new rice varieties.

As much as 40 percent of California's $200 million to $400 million rice
harvest is sent overseas. Nearly all of the rice grows in the Sacramento
Valley. Rice is the region's most widely planted crop.

Massa said his group commissioned the study being released today to bolster
its position in a simmering dispute with the California Rice Commission over
transgenic crop policies. "They have been too willing to be accommodating
(to biotech crop interests), and not willing enough to protect the farmers,"
he said.

Massa's members are all farmers, while the rice commission represents both
firms that mill and sell rice, as well as the state's roughly 1,000 rice
farmers.

Tim Johnson, president of the California Rice Commission, said that his
group is in the process of reviewing its policy on genetic engineering. That
review, he said, would address the issue of contamination arising from test
plantings.

Johnson also noted that the rice commission pushed state legislation in 2000
that created a board with the authority to regulate the introduction of new
rice seed varieties, genetically modified or otherwise. No other crop in the
state is subject to such state-level oversight.

"The California Rice Commission has been very proactive in addressing
biotechnology and other issues in the industry," he said.

For the study, a consulting firm interviewed dozens of rice importers in the
four countries that represent the leading markets for California rice. The
conclusion: Buyers in Japan and South Korea would reject genetically
modified rice, and buyers in Taiwan and Turkey have strong objections as
well.

Last week, farmers and activists seeking more thorough federal review of any
new genetically modified crop won a significant court victory.

A federal judge in San Francisco held that the U.S. Department of
Agriculture had not properly considered the potential environmental and
market impact of the introduction of a new variety of alfalfa developed by
Monsanto Corp. The ruling could lead to a mandatory and far more exhaustive
review of new genetically modified crops than has previously been required.

[www.sacbee.com]