|
Monsanto retreats on biotech wheat { May 11 2004 } Original Source Link: (May no longer be active)
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-0405110164may11,1,2445247.story?coll=chi-news-hedhttp://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-0405110164may11,1,2445247.story?coll=chi-news-hed
Monsanto retreats on biotech wheat
By Andrew Martin
Washington Bureau
May 11, 2004
WASHINGTON -- Battered by resistance from farmers and skepticism from the food industry, agribusiness giant Monsanto on Monday announced it was pulling the plug on its effort to market a genetically modified wheat plant that had sparked a raging controversy in the Great Plains.
In a release posted on its Web site, Monsanto said it was refocusing its research dollars on such things as corn, cotton and soybeans--crops where the company already has introduced successful genetically modified products.
Monsanto officials said the company's decision was spurred by continuing disagreement among farmers about the value of genetically modified wheat and by diminishing markets for spring wheat, a crop that has seen acreage decline by 25 percent since 1997.
"There are some things that are very specific to the wheat business that made this the right choice," Monsanto spokesman Chris Horner said.
Still, experts said Monsanto's decision, after a yearslong campaign to win public acceptance, could deter further research into new biotech products.
"I think what you're seeing is a reality check by Monsanto that they can't push this technology like they would like to," said Greg Jaffe, biotechnology director for the Center for Science in the Public Interest, a nutrition advocacy group. "I think what it says globally is we are not ready for a genetically modified product that is largely for consumer consumption."
Until Monsanto can iron out problems with consumer acceptance of biotech products, "it's unlikely you'll see any new crops engineered and marketed," Jaffe said.
While genetically modified foods have caused an uproar abroad, they have generally been accepted with little controversy in the United States. Biotech wheat was different, however, because nearly half of the American crop is exported, and farmers fear that wary foreign customers could reject their product.
A protein added to Monsanto's biotech wheat makes it tolerant of the firm's herbicide, which means weeds are killed and the wheat remains intact.
Wheat is also more controversial because its primary use is human food, while most genetically modified soybeans and corn are used for animal feed or as a secondary ingredient in processed food, observers said.
Nowhere was the debate over genetically modified wheat more intense than in North Dakota, where farmers and farm organizations split over the product's potential. Even state legislators disagreed: The North Dakota House of Representatives passed a moratorium on biotech wheat that was defeated by the state Senate.
"In the back of my mind, I thought someday, somehow we'd get a win on this," said Gail Wiley, a farmer in Montpelier, N.D., who spent the last five years fighting biotech wheat. "I certainly didn't expect it today."
Genetically modified wheat would have been "a disaster" because many foreign customers won't buy biotech crops and because it could have contaminated conventional wheat crops, Wiley said.
But Al Skogen, a farmer in Valley City, N.D., called the announcement a "great loss for the wheat industry," which he said has lagged behind other crops in new technologies.
"I've been thinking about it all day," said Skogen, former president of North Dakota Grain Growers Association. "This just sets it back further."
Skogen said he fears that Monsanto's decision would deter research into biotech wheat.
Monsanto's stock dropped 3 percent on Monday, closing at $31.98.
"It's not a huge issue for the investment community," said John Roberts, vice president for the Buckingham Research Group in New York. "It's an evolving issue, so there's going to be a lot of twists and turns."
There are about three dozen different projects to develop genetically modified wheat, but Monsanto's was the first to seek regulatory approval. Horner, the Monsanto spokesman, said he didn't expect the company to pull its applications with federal regulators, though a final decision hadn't been made. The company is the major player in the biotech field.
Jim Bair, vice president of the North American Millers Association, said his organization is wary of genetically modified wheat because the only benefits would be for farmers, who could expect higher yields and use fewer herbicides. Monsanto predicted biotech wheat would increase yields by 5 percent to 15 percent.
Critics of genetically modified foods hailed Monsanto's decision as a major triumph and said it would slow the company's efforts to spread biotech crops around the globe.
"It's clear that their reorganization is really a retreat," said Joseph Mendelson III, legal director of the Center for Food Safety, an advocacy group. "When you get farmers and consumers aligned about what the marketplace really wants, Monsanto doesn't stand a chance."
He predicted Monsanto's pullback would "change the equation" for other products, such as genetically modified rice.
"I would imagine that rice farmers who have export issues are looking at this and saying, `If wheat farmers can stop them, we can stop them,'" Mendelson said.
Monsanto said it would refocus the money it spent on wheat--less than $5 million this fiscal year--into other products such as oils that contain little or no trans-fat. Researchers also are working to enhance crops with such healthy attributes as omega-3 fatty acids.
"I think the acceptability of biotech would be helped with the introduction of a trait that would be apparent to consumers, whether it's more nutritious or has a longer shelf life," said Michael Rodemeyer, executive director of the Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology.
Copyright © 2004, Chicago Tribune
|
|
