The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) has prepared a draft environmental assessment (EA) of genetically modified sugar beets, including an option to permit planting of the beets under certain conditions.
A federal district judge ruled in August that the planting of GM sugar beets should be halted until the USDA completes an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), expected to be completed by the end of May 2012. However, the USDA said that it would allow limited planting of the sugar beets while the EIS was prepared and issued permits to four companies, which are understood to have already planted seedlings to produce seed for the 2012 crop - a move that the court ruled was illegal last month.
The USDA said its EA has been drafted in response to a request from KWS SAAT AG and Monsanto - currently the only supplier of GM sugar beets - for administrative action to allow continued cultivation of Roundup Ready sugar beets under certain conditions.
Deputy administrator for the USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service APHIS biotechnology regulatory services Michael Gregoire said in a statement: "APHIS takes its role in protecting plant health very seriously and is well aware of the importance of this decision for sugar beet growers and processors. We are issuing this environmental assessment to share our decision-making process as transparently as possible and allow for public comment."
Three alternatives
The draft EA puts forward three alternatives: Deny the request for partial deregulation or similar action, halting production until the EIS is completed; authorize production under APHIS-imposed conditions to limit potential plant pest risks; or allow partial deregulation "under conditions imposed by Monsanto/KWS through technology stewardship agreements, contracts or other legal instruments."
Under this third alternative, APHIS would no longer regulate Roundup Ready sugar beets.
View the Original article
Showing posts with label Issues. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Issues. Show all posts
Tuesday, 9 November 2010
Tuesday, 26 October 2010
Senate Ag Committee Hearing- EPA Issues
A news release yesterday from the Senate Agriculture Committee stated that, "U.S. Senator Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry, today called on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to provide America's farmers and ranchers certainty and stability, not additional burdensome and costly environmental regulations. Lincoln's comments came during a Senate Agriculture Committee oversight hearing to examine the impacts of EPA regulation on agriculture. The Hon. Lisa P. Jackson, Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and Rich Hillman, of Carlisle, Ark., were among those who testified.
"'At a time when every American feels anxious about his or her own economic future, our farmers, ranchers, and foresters are facing at least ten new regulatory requirements that will drive up their costs and make it more difficult to compete in the global marketplace. These regulations rely on dubious rationales and, as a consequence, will be of questionable benefit to the goal of conservation and environmental protection,' Lincoln said. 'Farmers face so many unknowns - the last thing they need is regulatory uncertainty. Our farmers, ranchers and foresters need clear, straightforward, and predictable rules to live by that are not burdensome, duplicative, costly, unnecessary, or in some cases just plain bizarre.'
"Lincoln pointed toward EPA's Clean Water Act permit requirements for pesticide applications as one example of an expensive and duplicative process that is creating unnecessary hurdles for farmers. She noted that farmers are not only struggling to meet these requirements, but are often left guessing on which requirements to meet."
Yesterday's release added that, "Lincoln also reiterated her opposition to EPA overseeing the regulation of greenhouse gas emissions, noting the extraordinary burden it would place on farmers across the nation.
"'I flat out disagree with EPA's regulation of greenhouse gases,' Lincoln said. 'I fear that federal courts will order EPA to regulate small sources of greenhouse gases. This could mean unnecessary regulation for thousands of farms all around the country. We cannot allow this to happen. And as I have said time and again, it should be Congress, not unelected bureaucrats, who should be writing the laws to regulate greenhouse gases.'"
View the Original article
"'At a time when every American feels anxious about his or her own economic future, our farmers, ranchers, and foresters are facing at least ten new regulatory requirements that will drive up their costs and make it more difficult to compete in the global marketplace. These regulations rely on dubious rationales and, as a consequence, will be of questionable benefit to the goal of conservation and environmental protection,' Lincoln said. 'Farmers face so many unknowns - the last thing they need is regulatory uncertainty. Our farmers, ranchers and foresters need clear, straightforward, and predictable rules to live by that are not burdensome, duplicative, costly, unnecessary, or in some cases just plain bizarre.'
"Lincoln pointed toward EPA's Clean Water Act permit requirements for pesticide applications as one example of an expensive and duplicative process that is creating unnecessary hurdles for farmers. She noted that farmers are not only struggling to meet these requirements, but are often left guessing on which requirements to meet."
Yesterday's release added that, "Lincoln also reiterated her opposition to EPA overseeing the regulation of greenhouse gas emissions, noting the extraordinary burden it would place on farmers across the nation.
"'I flat out disagree with EPA's regulation of greenhouse gases,' Lincoln said. 'I fear that federal courts will order EPA to regulate small sources of greenhouse gases. This could mean unnecessary regulation for thousands of farms all around the country. We cannot allow this to happen. And as I have said time and again, it should be Congress, not unelected bureaucrats, who should be writing the laws to regulate greenhouse gases.'"
View the Original article
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)