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

The wider environmental impacts of changes to the way that crops are grown
are considered in two new reports published March 2006.

The studies follow up the Farm Scale Evaluations (FSE) programme which
examined the environmental effect of genetically modified herbicide tolerant
crops.

Friday's report by the independent Advisory Committee on Releases to the
Environment (ACRE) considers the future development and regulation of new
agricultural technology and practices.

The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs also published a
report that puts the FSE results in the wider context of other GM crop
trials that have been undertaken, both in the United Kingdom and abroad.

The report also considers the broader changes that have taken place in UK
arable farming over the past century, especially its intensification over
the last 50 years and the associated decline in such species as farmland
birds.

The DEFRA-funded review highlights various issues for consideration,
including:


the importance of maintaining biodiversity within arable fields, and the
balance between effective weed control on the one hand and levels of
biodiversity on the other;


the need for agreed standards by which to judge the impact of GM crops or
other changes in arable production on the farmed environment.


Environment Minister, Elliot Morley, said: "Changes in farming practice have
impacted on biodiversity, but it is clear that farmers are increasingly
aware of the wider environmental effect of their work. Environmental
conditions linked to CAP payments as well as the strong take up of
environmental stewardship schemes, with 1.7 million hectares of English
countryside under environmentally friendly management, will have a positive
impact on farmland wildlife.

"The GM trials gave a real insight into how weed control regimes, in both
conventional and GM crops, can affect biodiversity within fields. This
raises a general question about the environmental impact of changes in
arable farming."

Mr Morley added: "I would like to thank ACRE for their contribution to this
debate. This is an important topic and both of today's reports will help us
to consider it further, by putting the FSE results in the broader context of
the long term changes that have already taken place in UK agriculture."

Other work is also in progress that directly addresses the wider point
raised by the FSE results of the environmental impact of changes in crop
production (whether conventional or GM). DEFRA is funding a research project
that aims to set out a detailed framework for assessing potential indirect
effects on the farmland environment of novel crops or cultivation practices.
The outcome of this project will further contribute to DEFRA's policy
thinking in this area.

Society could be losing out on the environmental benefits of new
agricultural technologies because regulators are only looking for the
potential damage, according to a new discussion document produced by leading
environment scientists.

While the scientists strongly endorse the need to make sure that new crops
and farming practices are not going to damage biodiversity, they argue that
the current regulatory system is flawed because it doesn't weigh this damage
against the potential benefits for the environment.

Professor Jules Pretty, one of the authors of the report, said: "We need to
ensure that society does not lose out on the potential benefits of new
technologies because we are looking too narrowly at the problems. For
example, if we only ask whether non-food crops are damaging biodiversity
then we could lose out their huge potential to help us tackle climate
change."

Professor Chris Pollock, chair of ACRE, who was chair of the Scientific
Steering Committee of the Farm Scale Trials on GM crops, said: "We feel that
the farm scale trials on GM crops were a great model for testing the enviro!
nmental impact of new technologies before they are widely introduced. But
many scientists also feel that by only asking about the dis-benefits of this
technology, policy makers cannot make a balanced decision based on a proper
risk benefit analysis."

The purpose of this report is to serve as a catalyst for debate about the
future development and regulation of novel agricultural technologies and
practices and their effects on the environment. ACRE will be seeking the
input of a wide range of stakeholders before finalising its recommendations.

ACRE is an independent advisory committee composed of leading scientists.
The committee's main function is to give statutory advice to Ministers in
the UK and devolved administrations on the risks to human health and the
environment from the release and marketing of genetically modified organisms
(GMOs). ACRE also advises on the release of certain non-GM species of plants
and animals that are not native to Great Britain. The Committee established
a sub-group to consider the wider issues raised by the Farm-scale
Evaluations following publication of the FSE spring crop results in 2004.
[www.farminglife.com]

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