USDA has approved GM alfalfa

[southerngurl]

Such foolishness. We're talking about eventually losing the alfalfa we know today.

http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/p..._Factsheet.pdf

Send a letter to the president. Maybe someone will read it.

http://action.foodandwaterwatch.org/...ction_KEY=5667

[April]

I have sent so many letters and emails - I wish that the letters meant as much to our government as corporate dollars mean. So frustrating!

[southerngurl]

Yea, I guess our letters need to be written on green paper.

[goto10]

I don't want to start anything but GM crops really aren't that bad. None of the crops we have today just occurn naturally like tomatoes, cabbage, potatoes. Those were all selectively bred to be like that over thousands of years. GM crops accomplish similar things, and sometimes impossible if transgenic, over only a few years. I would prefer GM crops over crops doused in pesticides and herbicides. And the crops that are GM like corn, soy, cotton and now alfalfa, aren't really the sort of plants that get out of control. Wind won't blow their seeds away and scatter them everywhere.

I only wish alfalfa grew out of control, I've been trying to grow a tiny plot for myself for the past two years without herbicides and everything else just out-competes it and corn is already one of the most unnatural crops on the planet thanks to selective breeding. If you planted corn and left it to seed and drop seeds and assuming those seeds grew, and they did that for generations, you'd eventually have some kind of grass that didn't event produce what we know as corn today.

Now if someone starts GMing thistle for some reason, then I will be worried.

[julieq]

Will the alfalfa be Round Up ready like the corn they plant locally I wonder? Unfortunately around here they do aerial spraying of the stuff and I end up with severe asthma attacks.

[goto10]

Originally Posted by julieq

Will the alfalfa be Round Up ready like the corn they plant locally I wonder? Unfortunately around here they do aerial spraying of the stuff and I end up with severe asthma attacks.

http://www.environmentalleader.com/2...te-gm-alfalfa/

yes they are but now i am wondering how intelligent this is. The leaves of the plant ARE the crop unlike corn or soy which get washed or processed. Who would want to feed alfalfa with herbicide on it to their livestock and what farmer in their right mind would actually spray the stuff? Unless I misunderstand what Roundup Ready means.

[julieq]

We've basically given up trying to grow an organic garden here. The planes fly over and end up spraying our house, barn and seven acres pretty thoroughly when they're trying to cover the local corn fields. I'd imagine we're already getting some Round Up floating over the adjacent alfalfa fields unfortunately.

[Bearfootfarm]

am wondering how intelligent this is. The leaves of the plant ARE the crop unlike corn or soy which get washed or processed. Who would want to feed alfalfa with herbicide on it to their livestock

A lot of time elapses between the last spraying and the harvest

[southerngurl]

Originally Posted by goto10

I don't want to start anything but GM crops really aren't that bad. None of the crops we have today just occurn naturally like tomatoes, cabbage, potatoes. Those were all selectively bred to be like that over thousands of years. GM crops accomplish similar things, and sometimes impossible if transgenic, over only a few years. I would prefer GM crops over crops doused in pesticides and herbicides. And the crops that are GM like corn, soy, cotton and now alfalfa, aren't really the sort of plants that get out of control. Wind won't blow their seeds away and scatter them everywhere.

I only wish alfalfa grew out of control, I've been trying to grow a tiny plot for myself for the past two years without herbicides and everything else just out-competes it and corn is already one of the most unnatural crops on the planet thanks to selective breeding. If you planted corn and left it to seed and drop seeds and assuming those seeds grew, and they did that for generations, you'd eventually have some kind of grass that didn't event produce what we know as corn today.

Now if someone starts GMing thistle for some reason, then I will be worried.

All the breeding man has done to alter their food crops is simply finding genetics that were already there. Not putting new ones there.

You seem to misunderstand, it's not that alfalfa is going to take over, but rather contaminate the seed stock. The pollen will fertilize non GMO crops and that seed will be contaminated. We're not allowed to play loud music that disturbs our neighbor. Should we be legally allowed to contaminate the genetics of his crops?

Show real studies that prove GMO's are not harmful.

[Heritagefarm]

There are bucketloads - but none of them are to be trusted.

[Bearfootfarm]

The pollen will fertilize non GMO crops and that seed will be contaminated.

Only if you grow it within about 3 miles or less and only if you are growing it just for seed.

Seed companies know how to grow pure seed, and most people only grow it for hay

[sammyd]

I'd imagine we're already getting some Round Up floating over the adjacent alfalfa fields unfortunately.

You wouldn't have to imagine.

The leaves of the plant ARE the crop unlike corn or soy which get washed or processed. Who would want to feed alfalfa with herbicide on it to their livestock

Corn usually doesn't get washed and neither does soy.
Roundup is usually sprayed early when the plants are first growing to give the tolerant plants a better start, it would have months of "washing" in the rain same as any other crop.

Show real studies that prove GMO's are not harmful.

Show me ones that prove they are......

[April]

It's not that we KNOW that GM crops are harmful. It's that we DON'T know they're not. The shady science behind the studies "proving" that they're safe makes me uncomfortable and makes me wonder what data didn't make it to the report.

I don't know what the long-term end result of GM crops will be to human health. And in this land of much-touted freedom and dearly held rights I should have the choice not to experiment on myself and my children. I can't make that choice because it doesn't have to be labeled. I also predict that the greed-driven organic outfits are going to use this as an opportunity to jack the prices of non-GMO alfalfa up, if it's even possible to ensure that alfalfa remains non-GMO because of cross pollination. So, it's going to really cost me to make the choice to wait on real results of GM crops. That's not a GM crop problem, though - that's a greed problem that I guess is just human nature. Whole 'nother topic

The transference of the foreign genes from GM corn to totally unrelated weeds is another problem - it's just going to mean more and harsher herbicides in the future of agriculture after all of the weeds end up being roundup-ready as well. I don't think that anyone can dispute that herbicides have detrimental health effects. (Affects? Effects.)

I just think that we shouldn't all be forced to leap without looking and I don't appreciate my own government dragging me down a road I'd rather not travel.

Phew - spleen vented. Sorry.

[Bearfootfarm]

The transference of the foreign genes from GM corn to totally unrelated weeds is another problem

Just how does that happen?

[April]

Just how does that happen?

I'll admit to using a hype tactic there that I hate when other people use. Gene transference between different plants can occur, but it doesn't really occur frequently. Here's an article with a couple of folks talking about it: http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2005/jul/25/gm.food It's kind of hype-y too, so filter as per usual.

However - the result of that is resistance to round-up necessitating the use of more/stronger herbicides. That result happens naturally as the weeds develop their own resistance even without the help of the GM crop genes.

So the basic problem is the same, but I totally shouldn't have gone for the shock factor in my objections.

I really would like to hear some sort of good evidence that I shouldn't be concerned about GM crops, though. I do understand their financial positives; it's just that the potential negatives are huge and scary.

[Heritagefarm]

I'd like to throw an interesting fact out here: during our recession, the organics industry was one of the few that actually grew.

[rambler]

Actually what I hear on organics, or non-gmo crops, is that the premiums have gotten lower, and it is less worthwhile to grow such products. There is less demand or intrest in the whole deal.

Perhaps we are both right & the sales have increased; while their 'value' has decreased?

===

Weeds develop resistance to herbicides - including Roundup - by natural selection. There is no wild-eyed gene transference between corn & pigweeds as some here are suggesting that will ruin all our crops.

Many other herbicides have some weed resistance, it is a natural progression of nature, and something we all have dealt with for decades. Scare tactics is all that is, not science worthy.

====

We do know that world populations and demand for feed & food is growing. W do know that food shortages cause angry people, and destablized portions of the world, in addition to those starving. We do know using technology, such as hybred corn, and now gmo techonlogies, results in more feed/food available at lowerprices, and a more stable supply of foods from year to year.

There is no way to 100% prove or garentee anything. Went throuugh this in highschool when we had to prove 100% that 2 plus 2 is always equal to 4. One cannot prove it _always_ is, tho we humans will now take it as a fact that 2 plus 2 does always equal 4, and our proofs always have to be based on those bedrock 'proofs'.

So, if any one of you doesn't like gmo feeds/foods, there is no possible way to prove to you, in 100 years, that in every possible way it is always 100% safe always and ever more.

That just can't be proven to a doubter's satisfaction. It does not pay to try.

Just like, if I don't like goat meat, there is no way to prove 100% for absolute certain that I will never eat a speck of goatmeat. A hamberger crumb of goatmeat could get into my meat that is processed in the same building as other meats, or cooked on the same stove. No one can ever prove that I am truely safe from goatmeat 100%.

And yet, we get along, and the world goes forward.

We know this world has a limited food supply at some point. Do we let people starve, do we line them up and shoot them, do we put birth control in the water, or do we continue to expand our food production with technology, while working on the problems of a crowded world and finite resources?

We know there will be more people tomorrow. We know they will want to eat more. Should we continue to produce more food with technology, or should we return to farming methods of the 1940's when we got 50 bu of corn an acre instead of the 175 we get today?

We see current gmo products appear to be safe so far as we can prove things, are introduced responsibly to the environment, and make more food available more cheaply. The organic and natural markets continue to be available, and offer options to those who want them.

What do people want? Less food available, More hungry people? More expensive food? More world unrest? All waiting to prove something beyond what is ever possible to prove?

I respect people want choices, and I don't agree with certain govt regulations, and I agree as companies get bigger they spend more time looking at $$$ than looking at people, and I agree we need to move forward with respect & thoughtfulness and at times slowly. There are some good points in all of that along the way.

But the choice we are looking at is really: A bad food situation with real world issues of people dying, governments getting angry, people in real peril; or move forward with some technology with a very very very very tiny small chance of something we can't prove possibly showing up some century.....

Which side does one want to be on? Are willing to face the consequences of our choices?

If you want organic alfalfa to raise goats, I expect and support that such a product should be available to you. But I alsoexpect people to respect the whole world and look at what really happens if we stop technology, and the effect that would have on people around the globe.

And I don't want this thread to take over the goat area, so I won't follow up here, I said what was on my mind.

--->Paul

[Bearfootfarm]

I'd like to throw an interesting fact out here: during our recession, the organics industry was one of the few that actually grew.

But it's largely based on lies

[CaliannG]

I am pretty much against GMOs unless they can be proven not to cause harm to our ENVIRONMENT.

I haven't forgiven them for releasing that dang strain of corn still not fully tested. No, it didn't alter other forms of corn, or pig-weed, or thistle....no, it caused no harm to humans.

But it sure did a heck of a number on our BEES.

BFF, 3 miles is a good, long ways. I know that in Colorado, when I had my alfalfa pastures, I let it go to seed to provide the next years crop. Considering that I lived in the CITY, with a mall only a few blocks away, a big church across from me, etc....and the next nearest alfalfa *field was only 2 miles away from me, I could see how either of us planting GM alfalfa could have easily harmed the other.

(* On purpose grown. Actually, the vacant lot three places down from me had alfalfa, as well as the gun range next door. About a block away was an empty area they were going to turn into a strip center, and IT had alfalfa growing all over. You could plant some GM Alfalfa in a plot in the middle of central Denver and have that stuff contaminating the entire state in 5 years.)

I don't really like screwing with nature TOO much. Selective breeding is one thing....herbicide resistance is another thing. I'd really like the herbicides we currently have to continue working.

[Bearfootfarm]

when I had my alfalfa pastures, I let it go to seed to provide the next years crop

Then you should learn how to properly grow alfalfa

http://www.uwex.edu/ces/forage/wfc/p...in_alfalfa.htm

Reseeding alfalfa immediately following alfalfa is not recommended in most states due to the negative effects of autotoxicity

Autotoxicity in alfalfa is described as a process in which established alfalfa plants produce a chemical or chemicals that escape into the soil and reduce establishment and growth of new alfalfa if seeded too soon following the old stand.

If you're truly concerned about "contamination, the absolute WORST thing you could do is let yours seed.