US groups win challenge to gene-altered crops

Oct 23, 2012 by Frederic J. Frommer

(AP)—A U.S. judge sided on Tuesday with environmental groups that challenged the planting of genetically-modified crops on National Wildlife Refuges in the South.

U.S. District Judge James E. Boasberg rejected the federal government's argument that the environmental groups' lawsuit was moot because the Fish and had already agreed to stop the practice after this year.

"Plaintiffs allege harms that are currently occurring and will continue throughout 2012," wrote Boasberg, an appointee of President . "Waiting for 2013 is not good enough." He set a hearing for Nov. 5 to determine appropriate relief, but also encouraged both sides to meet to see if they could agree on at least some remedies.

In their lawsuit last year, the Center for Food Safety and two other groups argued that the Fish and Wildlife Service violated environmental laws in allowing genetically modified in the agency's Southeast Region, which encompasses 10 states. The groups claimed the practice has harmful environmental impacts. The most common genetically-modified crops planted were corn and soybeans resistant to the herbicide Roundup.

The government responded in a filing that the practice will not be allowed after the end of the 2012 growing season until the region completes an appropriate environmental analysis.

The environmental groups pursued two similar lawsuits in the state of Delaware, which blocked planting of genetically-engineered crops in two wildlife refuges and, ultimately, resulted in the Fish and Wildlife Service's ending the practice in its 12-state Northeast Region.

In their lawsuit, Center for Food Safety, Beyond Pesticides and Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility said that there are several ongoing environmental effects of using the genetically-modified crops, including harm to , an increase in herbicide-, altered soil ecology and genetic contamination of natural plants.

Boasberg said it was premature to determine what relief would be appropriate now, but he said that groups have identified several steps that could help mitigate any effects from the genetically-engineered crops. They include requirements that no genetically modified crops are left in the field after harvest, to prevent transgenic contamination; that Fish & Wildlife survey and disclose the locations of genetically modified crops in wildlife refuges; and that spraying of pesticides on all genetically-modified crops be banned.

"Ultimately, we think genetically-engineered crops should not be grown on National Wildlife Refuges, which are safe havens for wildlife, for people, and to protect biological diversity," said Paige Tomaselli, a staff attorney for the Center for .

The Department of Interior, which houses the , said it does not comment on pending litigation.

Explore further: Synthetic biology on ordinary paper, results off the page

3.7 /5 (3 votes)
add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

'Superweeds' linked to rising herbicide use in GM crops

Oct 02, 2012

A study published this week by Washington State University research professor Charles Benbrook finds that the use of herbicides in the production of three genetically modified herbicide-tolerant crops—cotton, soybeans and ...

US court orders GMO beets destroyed

Dec 01, 2010

A federal judge has ordered what is believed to be the first-ever destruction of a genetically modified crop in the United States, saying that the altered sugar beets were planted illegally.

Greenpeace warns EU off herbicide-tolerant GM crops

Oct 22, 2012

Global environmental watchdog Greenpeace launched a new report Monday warning the European Union against authorising herbicide-tolerant genetically engineered (HTGE) crops, saying they would lead to herbicide-resistant ...

Recommended for you

Team advances genome editing technique

Oct 21, 2014

Customized genome editing – the ability to edit desired DNA sequences to add, delete, activate or suppress specific genes – has major potential for application in medicine, biotechnology, food and agriculture.

User comments : 1

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Caliban
5 / 5 (1) Oct 23, 2012

This ruling is an important milestone in the legal space surrounding GMOs. Its principal value arises from the acknowledgement that GMOs and their possible adverse effects in the environment(and, by extension, the human diet)are not at all very well understood, and that therefore, caution --maybe extreme--is warranted in their proposed introduction.

There is already a large --and growing-- mass of science that establishes that GMOs are less than benign.