Home Page Link AgBioWorld Home Page
About AgBioWorld Donations Ag-Biotech News Declaration Supporting Agricultural Biotechnology Ag-biotech Info Experts on Agricultural Biotechnology Contact Links Subscribe to AgBioView Home Page

AgBioView Archives

A daily collection of news and commentaries on

Subscribe AgBioView Subscribe

Search AgBioWorld Search

AgBioView Archives





July 20, 2000


Woodsy, Reduced Pesticide, Palevitz correction, Minneapolis, Greenpeace


AgBioView - http://www.agbioworld.org, http://agbioview.listbot.com

Eco-Terrorists Accidentally Kill Woodsy Owl



Date: Jul 21 2000 15:00:30 EDT
From: "C. S. Prakash"
Subject: Genetic Engineering Reduces Crop Pesticide Use; Re:
GreenpeaceHead Steps Down: Barry Palevitz has ne

JULY 20, 2000: "Analysis by USDA's Economic Research Service indicates
that adoption of GE corn, soybeans, and cotton is associated with a
decrease in the number of acre-treatments of pesticides (number of acres
treated multiplied by number of pesticide treatments)."

AGRICULTURAL OUTLOOK -- SUMMARY July 20, 2000 August 2000, ERS-AO-273
Approved by the World Agricultural Outlook Board

This SUMMARY is published by the Economic Research Service, U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC 20036-5831. The complete text of
the report will be available electronically 2 working days following this
summary release.

Does Genetic Engineering Reduce Crop Pesticide Use?

Planting genetically engineered (GE) crops appeals to producers because of
the potential to simplify pest management, reduce pesticide use, and help
control costs. Analysis by USDA's Economic Research Service indicates that
adoption of GE corn, soybeans, and cotton is associated with a decrease
in the number of acre-treatments of pesticides (number of acres treated
multiplied by number of pesticide treatments).
Reduction in volume of active ingredients applied is less consistent,
since adoption alters the mix of pesticides used in the cropping system,
as well as the amounts used. Comparison of different mixes of
pesticides involves evaluating tradeoffs between the amounts used and the
environmental characteristics, primarily toxicity and persistence. For
example, the herbicide-tolerance trait in soybeans allows substitution of
glyphosate herbicides for other synthetic herbicides that are at least
three times as toxic as glyphosate and that persist in the environment
nearly twiceas long.

Ralph E. Heimlich (202) 694-5504; heimlich@ers.usda.gov

Approved by the World Agricultural Outlook Board Full text of
Agricultural Outlook will be available 7/21 at
The magazine in PDF will be posted in about 5 days, and printed
copies will be available in about 2 weeks.
From: Klaus Ammann
Subject: Debate 2000'0720 b: Barry Palevitz has never been scientific
of Greenpeace

Dear Friends,

I fully agree with Barry Palevitz (palevitz@dogwood.botany.uga.edu) that
this correction has to be circulated. compare Debate 2000'0720 a: About
Greenpeace, Greenpiece, Greenspirit and Genepeace. I am also quite sure
that Greenpeace could have avoided a lot of trouble ahead with having an
informed scientist of Barry's quality as a scientific advisor... I do hope
that FSN will react to Barry's request of a correction.


FSN can be contacted through: http://www.foodsecurity.net/fsnfeedback.php3

Please pass this along to the list.

Thanks for the article on Greenpeace. However, the article incorrectly
GREENPEACE, which a check of their records will bear out. I was a member
of the U.S. organization until last year, when I refused to renew because
of the anti-rational, anti-science nature of their campaign against GM
foods. I stated so publicly in a perspectives piece I co-wrote for The
Scientist (Oct. 11, 1999, p. 10). I felt that it was important to disclose
my membership in the organization, as well as my intention to withdraw. I
should add that the quote mentioned in the article was taken from that
perspectives piece. BTW, I have written to Greenpeace explaining why I
resigned. I have done likewise to the Sierra Club, which co-sponsored a
series of misleading anti-GM advertisements in the NY Times recently.


Barry A. Palevitz, Professor
Contributing Editor, The Scientist
Department of Botany
University of Georgia
Athens, GA 30602-7271
Prof. Dr. Klaus Ammann
Director Botanical Garden,
University of Bern
Altenbergrain 21
CH - 3013 Bern, Switzerland
Tel. +41 31 631 49 37
Fax +41 31 631 49 93

You can now download 23 of the most-requested charts and graphs showing
and future trends in the world food situation. Many of the figures are
on IFPRI's global model of future food supply, demand, and trade. All those
interested in the future world food situation are invited to use and share
these visuals. New visuals will be added as they become available.
DOWNLOAD AT http://www.cgiar.org/ifpri/2020/visuals/2020idx.htm


Date: Jul 20 2000 15:59:02 EDT
From: Andrew Apel
Subject: Minneapolis Protests

US, Minnesota, Minneapolis, STOP THE MAD SCIENTISTS Counter-Conference

Date Thu, 20 Jul 2000 03:48:53 -0400

A - I N F O S N E W S S E R V I C E

A Counter-Conference and Direct Action convergence to confront the
International Society for Animal
Genetics (ISAG) at their Minneapolis conference.


Events include "Where are the Mad Scientists? Overview of the art of
locating Biotech research in Universities, Government agencies, and
private labs."

For the full schedule, go to:


Date: Jul 20 2000 23:36:57 EDT
From: Andrew Apel
Subject: Desperate Measures


Greenpeace' campaign to export Euro-style hysteria to the Americas is
progressing nicely. The campaign has Canada mostly in hand; the next step
was the US western seaboard, which as a stronhold of environmental zealots
and liberals was a natural. In the latest weeks, they have targeted the
eastern US,
and only there have they met actual resistance, briefly but effectively,
by the CEI.

The US Greenpeace unit is financially beyond its means, and is desperately
making common cause with fringe elements in a bid to improve its financial
draw with a new assault made in concert with the organic profiteers. At
the same time, it is making a move on South America, possibly in concert
with RAFI,
which appears to have sided with the drug lords in combating the use of
biocontrols for drug-producing crops.

As usual, governments will pander to activists when convenient; if cocaine
were tomorrow erased from the planet, Colombia would suffer an
insurmountable blow to its balance of trade; therefore, biocontrols are of
course not good for the economy.

The problem with the so-called "pro-biotech" contingent is that they don't
have a covert political/economic agenda. If they did, they could
effectively move against tactics like this. There is a saying about nice
guys finishing last....