Movies | May 05, 2010 | 9 comments

Red Flags Raised About Potential Negative Impacts of Proposed Large-Scale Release of Genetically Engineered Trees in the U.S.

Image
JanforGore
Washington, DC-- While the U.S. Supreme Court hears its first-ever case involving a genetically modified organism, alarms are sounding over the proposed planting of more than a quarter of a million genetically engineered (GE) eucalyptus trees in the U.S., and transgenic trees are being globally condemned.

On April 27, the Supreme Court began to hear a case challenging a ban on the planting of a genetically engineered perennial alfalfa. The ban was implemented due to concerns about escape and contamination, and the inability of U.S. regulators to protect the public. [1]

In April, Reuters released a report exposing the fact that U.S. regulating agencies have "dropped the ball" when it comes to evaluating the potential risks of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). [2]

Reuters highlighted concerns that, "the U.S. government conducts no independent testing of these biotech crops before they are approved, and does little to track their consequences after." The report even went so far as to state, "Indeed, many experts say the U.S. government does more to promote global acceptance of biotech crops than to protect the public from possible harmful consequences."

This is a particular concern since the USDA's Animal Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), one of the named agencies in the report, is considering approving a request by ArborGen to plant 260,000 GE trees across seven states even though researchers admit some of these trees produce viable pollen and some seedlings are assured to escape.

Referring to the questionable efficacy of the altered fertility technology in these GE trees, researcher Steve Strauss said, "There does not seem to have been any serious field studies, in any crop, sufficient to estimate the operational effectiveness of containment genes." Adding, "Until many such studies are published, it would be unwise to assume that genes can be fully and safely contained in the near future." [3]

Additionally, MSNBC [4], NPR [5] and PLoS Pathogens [6] recently reported that a new strain of a deadly pathogenic fungus, Cryptococcus gattii, has been causing fatal human illnesses throughout the Pacific Northwest. The fungus, which is known to grow on some species of eucalyptus trees, has killed one on four people in Oregon, and 40 out of 220 people infected throughout the region. While it is not known whether genetically engineered eucalyptus plantations would be a host for the fungus, the fact that some of the GE eucalyptus would have reduced lignin has raised concerns that they could be more susceptible to fungal infection.

Another study by researcher Claire Williams, recently published in the American Journal of Botany, found that pollen from trees remains viable over long distances. [7] This raises concerns about the potential for pollen from genetically engineered versions of native tree species like pines to travel large distances and contaminate forests. Williams' study found that, "GM pine plantings have the potential to disperse viable pollen at least 41 kilometers from the source."

On April 22, during the World Peoples' Global Summit on Climate Change in Cochabamba, Bolivia, a broad gathering of Indigenous Peoples, social movements and organizations from around the world, issued a consensus condemnation of transgenic trees (GMO trees) and monoculture plantations. [8]

"Given all of this evidence, the USDA should not even consider approving the release of any genetically engineered trees," insisted Anne Petermann of Global Justice Ecology Project and the STOP GE Trees Campaign. [9] "The fact that there are so many unknowns and no independent studies evaluating the risks of GE trees--which include human health risks and damage to forests and wildlife--is a major reason why the UN Convention on Biological Diversity in 2006 and 2008 urged countries to use the Precautionary Principle with regard to GE trees. The Precautionary Principle would require GE trees to be proven safe before they are released." [10]
  1. groups:
    Community,   Tech,   Green,   Movies,   13 more
  2. tags:
    Environment Health Climate Change Nature 28 more
  3. recommended by:
    julesrs007
  4.     
    |

9 comments // Red Flags Raised About Potential Negative Impacts of Proposed Large-Scale Release of Genetically Engineered Trees in the U.S.

  • Randall_Birge
    • +1
      Randall_Birge  
    • Image
    • It sems to me that one solution is to propose an alternative to the continued use of lumber products. If we were more receptive to the use of steel framing in residential construction we would impact one of the largest industry consumers. And by using recylced steel to produce the steel framing we would be using all those old cars coming off the road and turning them into a house. It looks like the timber industry has a stronger lobby than the steel industry. We need to make a stand on what we consumer to change. Check out this alternative: www.kokoonhomes.com and let me know what you think. These houses are eco friendly and very economical. I'm trying to get Habitat for Humanity and others to look at using them. Would be a great solution to the housing problems in Haiti as well.

    • 2 years ago
  • ampersand
    • 0
      ampersand  
    • This is wrong on so many levels it's staggering.
      JanforGore posted several excellent articles on the dangers of this unconscionable venture in the past year and it’s critical to follow the progress of this dangerous proposal.

      So much hangs in the balance for the earth for our antiquated English legal system (based on the sanctity of property rights over human rights, and forbidding any threat to "restraint of trade") to continue to allow business as usual in this century with only the vaguest allusions to any real review of the consequences.

      Even if a deaf, dumb, and blind, court ignores the science, and casts aside the possibly cataclysmic and unstoppable environmental threats posed by the brutal imposition of GE trees on US land and crops once this is unleashed, just the simple well-know impacts of allowing more eucalyptus plantations at all in the US should enable someone to call a halt this dangerous and unnecessary corporate experiment.

      International Paper wants more fast-growing trees as a cheaper raw material for its paper products.
      There are already plenty of alternatives to eucalyptus tree plantations for that. IP having done it before is familiar with eucalyptus plantation harvesting and has done the financial calculations that make this proposal attractive, without, of course, bothering with the environmental impacts of it which are mere 'economic externalities'.
      As I noted in a previous post, agricultural entrepreneurs extensively over planted eucalyptus in Portugal and Spain in previous decades.
      It has been an unmitigated environmental disaster.
      There has been an incalculable loss of already scare water resources to the insatiable water appetite of the eucalyptus, and massive forest fires due to its huge flammable oil content.
      Why anyone in their right mind would allow someone to attempt to replicate this horrific ecological disaster in the United States is totally incomprehensible.

    • 2 years ago
  • masterzip
  • nursediesel
  • JanforGore
  • crispyfritters
    • 0
      crispyfritters  
    • I live in California near the coast. Eucalyptus trees are already all over the place. They planted them a few decades ago, and now they're everywhere.

      I don't know if I'd characterize it as a "disaster", but I'd rather have more of the native oaks and cypress and redwoods (especially those) around. Eucalyptuses are just kind of ugly in my opinion.

      If they want to plant trees, maybe they should focus on researching native trees in different regions, and then spending money to grow and plant more of those in the correct area. Of course, they probably grow these things in the first place so they can sell those fruity nature products with "100% real eucalyptus oil!!"

    • 2 years ago
  • JanforGore
  • JanforGore
  • JanforGore
    • 0
      JanforGore  
    • And don't think ArborGen isn't paying very close attention to what happens regarding the USSC and Monsanto. Planting these trees in the U.S. would be an environmental catastrophe, and that is no exaggeration.

    • 2 years ago
more from Movies:

top videos