Hygeia AnalyticsLogo

Menu

Skip to content
  • Home
  • About Hygeia
    Analytics
    • Dynamic Presentations
    • Keywords and Site Map
    • Hygeia Analytics – Who We Are
    • Why Hygeia?
    • Funding and “Sound Science”
    • Acronyms and Glossary
    • Sign-Up for Updates
  • Nutrition
    • Introduction and Nutrition 101
      • Good Fat Bad Fat
      • Fatty Acids
        • Primer on the Fatty Acids in Milk
      • Impact of Livestock Feeding
    • Antioxidants
      • Organic Farming Elevates Antioxidants
      • Maximizing Antioxidant Intake
    • Organic vs. Conventional Foods
      • Milk and Dairy Products
        • 2018 Grassmilk Paper
        • PLOS ONE Study
        • Dairy Meta-Analysis
      • Multi Food Meta-Analyses
        • Meat Products
        • Plant-Based Foods
        • Smith-Spangler et al.
        • Dangour et al.
        • The Organic Center Report
      • Food Specific Comparisons
        • General
        • Fruits and Vegetables
        • Wine and Wine Grapes
    • Considering Nutritional Quality
      • Impact of Genetics and Production Systems
      • New Tool for Food Security
      • Transforming Jane Doe’s Diet
      • Nutritional Quality Index
    • Nutrient Decline
    • Other Choices and Challenges
      • Human Health
      • Dietary Choices
  • Pesticides
    • Usage
      • Pesticide Use Data Sources
        • Pesticide Use Indicators
      • PUDS – The Pesticide Use Data System
    • Dietary Risks
      • The Dietary Risk Index (DRI)
    • Risk Assessment and Regulation
      • Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA)
      • Glyphosate/Roundup Case Study
      • The Lowdown on Roundup
      • Does Glyphosate/Roundup Cause Cancer?
      • 2019 Glyphosate Genotoxicity Paper
    • Impacts of GE on Pesticide Use
    • Environmental, Human Health, and Other Impacts of Pesticides
  • Ag Biotech
    • Key Historical Documents – Donald Duvick
    • Key Historical Documents – Arpad Pusztai
    • Herbicide Resistant Crops
    • Weed Resistance
    • Bt Transgenic Crops
    • Resistant Insects
    • Health Risks and Safety Assessments
    • Regulation of GE Crop Technology
    • Marketing, Economics, and Public Relations
    • Patenting and Intellectual Property Issues
    • Labeling
  • Other Issues
    • Animal Products
    • The Future of Food
    • Global Food Security
    • Natural Resources and Climate Change
    • Alternatives to Industrial Ag
    • Policy and Politics
    • Scientific Integrity
    • Soil Health
    • Yields
  • Recent Posts
    • Hot Science
    • In The News
    • Hygeia’s Blog
  • Special
    Coverage
    • Organic Apples in Washington State
    • Dicamba Drift Crisis
    • Organic Food Consumption Lowers Cancer Risk
    • Organic Integrity

The Chair of Malheur County,OR Weed Board Calls for Accountability for Damage from GE Crops

Posted on July 3, 2017 in GMOs, In The News | 304 Views

In a recent opinion piece in the Capital Press, Jerry Erstrom, the chairman of the Weed Board in Malheur County in southeastern Oregon, spoke out in support of holding ag businesses accountable for the damage caused by cross-pollination from GE crops.

Malheur County is in the heart of ranch country and right next door to the infamous Malheur Wildlife Refuge, which was occupied by several ranchers in early 2016 to make a case for de-regulation of federal lands.  It is similar country to Sherman County, OR which recently experienced it’s own controversy over weed control that we covered here on Hygeia Analytics.

Oregon farmers grow thousands of acres of grasses- the region is often dubbed the “Grass Seed Capital of the World.”   Mr. Erstrom is a farmer himself and “not opposed to genetially engineered crops” (he even grows Roundup Ready corn on his farm).  But, he has seen with his own eyes the negative impacts of GE contamination, and in particular GE creeping bentgrass, which is a popular grass seed for lawns and golf courses.

The editorial is posted in it’s entirety below, or view it on the Capital Press site here.

Source:

Jerry Erstron, “GE developers should be held accountable,” Capital Press, published online June 21, 2017.


GE developers should be held accountable

There is no way HB 2739 would stop the sales or production of Roundup Ready crop varieties, they are just too lucrative for the companies making and selling them.
I am a farmer in Malheur County, Ore., where I grow seed crops (including non-GE alfalfa), vegetables, and Roundup Ready field corn.

I am not opposed to genetically engineered crops, but as a farmer of some non-GE varieties and after my experience with GE contamination in my alfalfa seed production and with the GE creeping bentgrass escape, I am a supporter of making the right people accountable if crops are damaged. That is why I support HB 2739.

As the chairman of the Malheur County Weed Board, I’ve had a front row seat to the damage caused by Roundup Ready GE bentgrass, which spreads easily on the wind and through water, infesting irrigation ditches and cross-pollinating with wild relatives.

Because USDA let Scotts and Monsanto off the hook for cleaning up their mess in 2015, the burden is now on farmers and landowners to deal with this infestation. And that’s not cheap: Before 2015, Scotts was spending $250-350k a year to find and treat GE bentgrass.

I’m concerned for my crops, as the value would plummet if I am contaminated with GE traits. If my crop, or say a grass seed crop in the Grass Seed Capital of the World, is damaged, isn’t it fair that the company who made that GE trait pay compensation?

The opponents of HB 2739 say the sky will fall if HB 2739 is passed, with outlandish predictions like the end to all sales of GE seeds in Oregon or all innovation of new varieties. That is ridiculous — there is no way this bill would stop the sales or production of Roundup Ready crop varieties, they are just too lucrative for the companies making and selling them.

Why would groups like the Oregon Farm Bureau, Oregonians for Food and Shelter, and even OSU say such things? The answer is clear when you look at who finances these organizations: They all get funding from Monsanto and/or other Big Ag chemical companies. So that is who they represent, not farmers like me.

Jerry Erstrom

Vale, Ore.

 

Posted in GMOs, In The News | Tagged GE Impacts, Policy and Politics

Related Posts

FAQs re Biden-Harris Ag and EPA Transition Priorities→

Implications of EPA’s Decision to Renew Dicamba Registration for Over-the-Top Use→

Dr. Benbrook Testifies Before the Philadelphia City Council as they Consider Glyphosate Ban→

Guest Blog: The Big Meat Gang Is Getting Awfully Smelly→

Why Promoting Organic Integrity Must Become a Top Priority for USDA→

Guest Blog: Finding the Root Cause of Organic Fraud→

So What About the Integrity of the U.S. Organic Grain Supply?→

Guest Blog: Organic Food & Pesticide Residues, One Grower’s Perspective→

©2016 Hygeia-Analytics.com. All Rights Reserved.

Menu