I have INSERTED what I know. Can you help with the answers to Lorne’s questions? Many thanks to Lorne for raising them.
Maybe we should be doing something?
Some of you will have valuable input.
Cheers!
/Sandra
=============================
Lorne writes:
Greetings All,
This is a heading from the Western Producer
CLEARFIELD WHEAT VARIETIES HIT MARKET
One seed company has shelved its herbicide tolerant wheat but another is stocking shelves with bags of a new one-pass weed control system .
Limited supplies of BASF Canada’s Clearfield wheat will be available to growers through Saskatchewan Wheat Pool and Agricore United in 2005.
——————-
LORNE’S QUESTIONS:
(1) Supplied by whom ?
(2) What does BASF stand for ?
(3) Do we smell Monsanto somewhere ?
(4) Is this variety a G.M. variety or the like?
All for now
Lorne.
=============================
QUESTIONS 1 and 2:
( Sandra): If you look at farm publications you will see “Clearfield” crop varieties advertised. And the herbicide “Odyssey”.
BASF is the world’s leading chemical company, headquartered in Germany, manufacturer of Odyssey, developer of Clearfield crop varieties engineered to be resistant to Odyssey. (More on the engineering process below.) My guess is that BASF is an anacronym for words which German-speaking people understand.
Strategically BASF is much smarter than Monsanto:
– They have been successful in playing down the corporate name; like most of us, Lorne knows “Monsanto” but he doesn’t know “BASF”, even though BASF is the largest.
– They have de-linked the name of their herbicide from their herbicide-resistant crop varieties and de-linked these from the corporate name. Monsanto’s strategies which connected the three created a lightning rod which BASF’s strategies avoided.
IMPORTANT
– “Clearfield” is marketed as being non-GMO. It is said to be “traditionally bred” (through selection of seeds that possess a particular attribute). Very nice strategy in today’s world! Read the “Clearfield” process below, and then make a decision: is the claim true? Is it a matter of semantics? Definitions? Is it propaganda? These are very serious questions, because the Univeristy of Saskatchewan is partnered with BASF in the development of Clearfield varieties.
The process involves mutagenesis: chemical agents are used “to force the DNA within seeds to mutate in unexpected ways”, after which seed selection takes place. BASF’s (may I use the word) “propaganda” (?) states that this is “non-GMO”, “Traditional breeding”? Below I raise the issue of the University’s participation in the promotion of propaganda.
– Europeans are far ahead of North Americans on most matters related to environmental protection. And corporate players do not run European Governments to the same extent that the White House is run by Monsanto.
BASF operates within the European context, Monsanto within the American. So BASF HAS TO play its environmental cards more effectively, and it does.
Its web-site has phrases like “Science around us – Social Responsibility – Environmental Protection and Safety” in positions of prominence on the page.
————————–
QUESTION (3): Do we smell Monsanto somewhere ?
BASF is a large chemical company which engages in the same agenda and activities as Monsanto and Dow. Industry members are competitors but they collaborate on matters that affect chemicals and transgenics, their common interest. Croplife International is one of the vehicles through which they collaborate. The documentary “Trade Secrets” demonstrates more of the collaboration through organizations such as the American Association of Chemical Manufacturers.
In my opinion Monsanto is the lightning rod for the industry because they have been more arrogant and stupid in their decision processes; their arrogance led them to underestimate the power of a single farmer. Several decisions regarding court cases have been stupid; they have and continue to supply us with many, many opportunities to expose them for what they are.
BASF, on the other hand, doesn’t hand us those same opportunities on a plate. I suspect that we don’t know BASF, only because they are more clever, which should give us concern.
——————————–
QUESTION (4): Is this variety a G.M. variety or the like?
Lorne’s question is about a herbicide-resistant variety of wheat, Clearfield wheat. These 2 articles are about Clearfield lentils, but explain things quite well.
They also describe the role of the University of Saskatchewan’s Crop Development Centre (CDC). If, as I have stated, the use of phrases such as “non-GMO” and “traditional breeding” is propaganda, then the University stands condemned, as a consequence of its participation in the promotion of non-truth/propaganda.
/Sandra
—————–
http://www.statpub.com/open/76532.html
Science Behind Clearfield Lentils
VANCOUVER – Jan 21/04 – STAT — The technology behind the development of the Clearfield lentils which are expected to be approved for use by the Canadian government this year dates back to 1922 and efforts by scientists to force the DNA in seeds to mutate in unexpected ways.
However, the first commercial applications of the technique did not appear until the 1950s. Researchers appeared to originally place more emphasis on using radioactive materials — neutrons, gamma rays, or X-rays — to force the DNA within seeds to mutate in unexpected ways. Now, chemical agents seem to be more often used. The technique is called mutagenesis.
In the case of the Clearfield lentil, seed from unspecified lentil varieties were exposed to a chemical which triggered unexpected mutations within the seed. Researchers were searching for mutations would result in a plant which is resistant to the imidazolinone family of herbicides. The herbicides used for this project are manufactured by BASF.
In simple terms, the seeds are then grown. They are sprayed to see if any mutated to become resistant to the target herbicide. The survivors are then crossed with a commercial lentil variety. The seed was planted and the plants again tested for herbicide resistance. The process continued until the breeders had a seed which was commercially acceptable and which was resistant to the herbicide.
————–
http://www.statpub.com/open/76205.html
Herbicide Resistant Lentil Pending
SASKATOON – Jan 17/04 – STAT — A new, traditionally bred lentil which is resistant to some herbicides could be available in Canada by the 2005 under an agreement between the University of Saskatchewan’s Crop Development Centre (CDC) and BASF Canada.
BASF Canada has signed a research agreement with the Crop Development Centre. “This joint initiative will lead to the commercialization of Clearfield lentils for western Canada,” says Rick Holm, Director, Crop Development Centre, University of Saskatchewan.
Howie Zander, Clearfield Business Manager, BASF Canada, said, “The development of Clearfield lentils expands current Clearfield technology and creates a global first – western Canadian growers can utilize this non-GMO technology and enjoy access to global markets. Having global market access while growing a variety produced under western Canadian growing conditions provides growers with a marketable crop that has the potential of exceptional grades and quality.”
The genetics for Clearfield lentils are developed through traditional plant breeding methods and will be supplied by the University’s Crop Development Centre.
The weed control in Clearfield lentils will come from Odyssey, a herbicide that is custom designed for all soil types and which provides western Canadian growers with exceptional control of both broadleaf and grassy weeds. Additional lentil protection is available to producers through the recently expanded list of BASF fungicides, namely Headline and Lance.
The CDC and BASF have a distribution agreement with the Saskatchewan Pulse Growers to provide Clearfield lentils to growers. In addition, BASF is currently working with the Saskatchewan Pulse Growers on a commercial agreement.