April 26, 2000 / By The Associated Press
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Environmental groups petitioned the Agriculture Department today to tighten its regulation of genetically engineered crops with the contention that the department has approved new biotech plants without ensuring they won't harm the environment.
Plants that are made resistant to pests could result in the development of weeds that are difficult to control or reduce the genetic diversity of existing crop varieties, the environmental coalition said.
"We need to know a lot more about the impact of these crops before we introduce them helter-skelter into the environment," David Adelman, an attorney for one of the organizations, the Natural Resources Defense Council, said.
The groups also asked USDA to withdraw approval of two new varieties of squash that were engineered to resist plant viruses. A recent study by the National Academy of Sciences questioned whether the department had considered adequately whether genes from the squash could spread to weedy relatives.
The department should require more testing and analysis of biotech crops, depending on the potential environmental risk, the groups said.
"Given the potential risks of these crops nationally and abroad and the unique role that U.S. regulators play internationally, ... it is essential that USDA adopt a scientifically sound and systematic approach to regulating the potential ecological risks associated with genetically engineered crops," the petition said.
Genetic engineering involves transferring one or more genes between organisms to transfuse specific traits.
USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service regulates field testing of genetically engineered plants. It later decides whether they can be released commercially on information provided by the company about the plant and its potential effects on the environment.
"We currently have a process for carefully reviewing these products, but we are always willing to look at new data and ways to improve the process and will carefully study the petition," USDA spokeswoman Susan McAvoy said.
A former APHIS geneticist, who now represents the biotech industry, said the department demands sufficient data from companies to determine whether new crops are safe for the environment. The department "does not defer to agribusiness to decide which tests are necessary," said Val Giddings of the Biotechnology Industry Organization.
The two squash varieties were approved in 1994 and 1996 after the agency considered fears that the virus-resistant plants would cross with a wild relative that's a weed and make it hardier.
USDA decided that was unlikely to become a problem, but the National Academy of Sciences study said longer-term studies were needed to prove that.
"Restricting the areas where the squash can be initially grown would be preferable to unconditional deregulation, at least until more data are available," said the academy's study, which was released earlier this month.
Giddings, who worked on the squash approval while at USDA, conceded the agency "did not have perfect knowledge" about its ecological impact, but "no one has identified any negative consequences to the environment."
The National Academy of Sciences study was a broad review of the government's regulation of pest-protected crops. The academy is doing a separate study of USDA's regulatory process at the request of Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman.
In addition to NRDC, other groups signing the petition included Greenpeace, Sierra Club, Environmental Defense and the Union for Concerned Scientists.
(posted without permission)
