NOTE: Romania's Agriculture Ministry wants the EU to adopt GM crops. But an article (below) in the Romanian press shows how GM crops can only be ushered into a region on a tide of ignorance.

Look at this quote from Romania's agriculture secretary, Adrian Radulescu:

"GM soy is a miracle plant which fixes nitrogen [a fertiliser] in the soil, allowing the establishment of subsequent crops without the farmer needing to buy additional inputs for the new crop."

This is, of course, garbage. Soy is a legume, so it does fix nitrogen in the soil - but so does non-GM soy and most other legumes. And GM soy cultivation in South America has left the soil so poisoned with Roundup and so depleted of nutrients that it's unable to support any other crop. Finally, farmers are having to use more and more glyphosate on GM soy plus other herbicides, in an effort to control glyphosate-resistant weeds.

Mr Radulescu should take Syngenta's advice and read the summary of scientific research on GM soy at:
http://www.gmwatch.eu/images/pdf/gm_full_eng_v15.pdf
It's also available in five other languages, including German, from here:
http://www.gmwatch.org/component/content/article/12479-reports-reports
---
---
Romania in genetically modified dilemma
Romania's Agriculture Ministry is pushing Brussels to allow recultivation of genetically modified crops - but opposition groups are lining up economic arguments against their development.
Report by Nicoleta Banila
The Diplomat
March 2011
http://www.thediplomat.ro/articol.php?id=1819

Romania's agriculture could return to becoming a major cultivator of genetically modified organisms (GMOs), if new European Union legislation passes.

The European Commission has given signals it will approve the relaxation of rules for approving GMOs, by allowing each Member State the right to refuse cultivating GMOs on its own territory.

Currently only two GMO products have the right to produce in the European Union, which has a strict policy on cultivation compared to the Americas and much of Africa.

Romania has allowed cultivation of one of these crops - Monsanto's MON 810 maize - within its borders.

But there is fierce debate at local and international level over whether GMO cultivation makes economic sense in the future European Union.

Romania's Agriculture Minister Valeriu Tabara is a strong supporter of GMOs. He says that livestock breeders, farmers and food consumers would benefit if GM soy can begin re-cultivation in Romania, following its ban in 2007.

However the public seems suspicious of GMOs. 81.5 per cent of Romanians want the Romanian authorities to ban GMOs and 74.1 per cent do not want to consume GMOs, according to a 2010 national poll by InfoMG Romania (which is against GMO cultivation) and IMAS.

The law allowing member states to choose if they want to ban the cultivation of GMOs is at a discussion phase.

"It could be the beginning of a different agriculture in Europe," says Ramona Duminicioiu, general manager for Cluj Napoca-based NGO InfoMG. "We are against this, because in parallel with this decision, it is another rule giving a smoother authorisation procedure to GMO products."

GMO campaigners do not expect a result this year. The EC will draw up the law, which will then need approval of European Parliament.

Soy demands

Romania's lands were heavily cultivated with GM plants before joining the EU in 2007.

In 1998, Romania cultivated 12 varieties of GM potato, 14 types of GM soy and GM maize. The most extensive culture was soy.

Farmers who profited from soy production have been lobbying hard to reintroduce the GM variety. The League of Agricultural Producers in Romania (LAPAR) has sent an open letter urging the Government to permit GMOs in Romania, arguing it would help Romania become an important player on the European market and help lower food prices.

Romania's agricultural academics have also declared themselves in favour of GMOs, citing data that reveals losses of up to 117 million Euro, due to the import of soy, grain and oil.

"GM soy is a miracle plant which fixes nitrogen [a fertiliser] in the soil, allowing the establishment of subsequent crops without the farmer needing to buy additional inputs for the new crop," says Adrian Radulescu, state secretary in the Agriculture Ministry.

Europe is already heavily importing GM soy with the approval of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), from South America especially. A move to allow Romania to cultivate GM soy could help with ensuring European food security.

According to the Agriculture Ministry, about 70,000 hectares of classic soybeans are cultivated now in Romania, while nearly 900,000 tonnes of GM soy are imported every year.
"I have never received an explanation [from the European Commission] why, if we still eat imported GM soybean, we are not allowed to cultivate it," says Nicolae Sitaru, president of LAPAR.

Sitaru believes that the EU is hesitant to free up the development of GMOs because of economic dependence of customs duties, which taxed nearly 40 million tonnes of imported GM soy in 2010.

Health risk probe

Members of civil society strongly debate whether health problems emerge from consuming GMO products.

The responsibility for this falls onto the EFSA, which takes up to five years to approve GMOs, after which the European Commission makes a final decision to greenlight cultivation.

Research by the EFSA approved two genetically modified organisms for comercialisation and cultivation in the European Union, maize Monsanto MON810 and BASF's Amflora potato - the starch of which is used in textile manufacture.

Because GMOs have to pass the EFSA safety test, producers of GMOs argue that there is no sense to opposition to their cultivation.

"Opposition to GMOs [on health grounds] is incomprehensible, because all plants go through the fire panel of EFSA," says Cristina Cionga, corporate affairs manager at Monsanto Romania.

Nevertheless anti-GM activists cite research by French scientist Gilles Eric Serralini in 2007, showing that Monsanto maize MON863 caused serious damage in the liver and kidneys of rats.

But Monsanto argues that all its products are evaluated even after a launch on the market. "If anything bad is signalled by confidential sources, and it turns out to be the case, the product is withdrawn from the marketplace," says Gabriel Baeasu, general manager at Monsanto.

The one GMO type verified for cultivation in Romania - Monsanto's MON 810 maize - dropped its amount of cultivation from over 3,000 hectares in 2009 to 800 hectares in 2010. The corn is allowed for cultivation because it is the only type of maize resistant to the corn burrower worm.

"Its sale rate in Romania was never at a very high level," says Gabriel Baeasu. "It should be used only when there is an insect infestation."

Monsanto's Cristina Cionga adds that another problem is the lack of certainty among the farming community over whether they can cultivate the corn, as the Environment Ministry has announced plans to impose a ban.

"When there is such a state of uncertainty, farmers are not tempted to buy," she says.

Anti-GM economics

Some NGOs argue against GMOs because its cultivation is not financially advantageous, while GMO free-crops are worth investing in because they have a higher value status on market.

"GMO-free products are a big growing market and are worth almost double the value of GMO products," says Ramona Duminicioiu.

Their development could also be unpractical, because there are GMO crops resistant to herbicides. These herbicide kills all weeds except the GMO crop, and plants become resistant to the herbicide, argue campaigners. Therefore the levels of herbicide have to increase.

There also has to be a 200 metre buffer zone around GMO free crops to ensure there is no contamination of neighbouring farms with GMO crops, which can limit the exploitation of areas of agricultural land.

Another problem is in the sale of crops, which farmers will have to keep separate from non-GMO products, which will mean a whole separate processing channel for GMO-free crops.

It will "not be easy" to allow GM maize in Romania, says Paul Claxton, CEO of seed producer Syngenta Romania, as it would have to be sold as Romanian GM maize only and could not be consolidated with any other form of soy.

Those against GMO cultivation argue that it may give quick returns in the short term, but in the long term is not beneficial to the development of agriculture.

"GMO technology is not sustainable, because it involves the complete destruction of species of weeds and insects that would otherwise constitute an important resource for soil fertility," says Ion Toncea, president of the National Federation of Organic Agriculture (FNAE).

He believes that organic farming is more consumer oriented, while GM farming works only as a form of financial support to farmers.

Toncea also believes that the reintroduction of GM soy will not have the desired effect because the seed and herbicide package is too expensive for farmers.

But Adrian Radulescu believes such a move would reduce the use of pesticides and herbicides. "GM soy has only a single herbicide, which needs only one application," he says.

Inspection assured?

There is concern from civil society over the possibility of illegal GMO cultivation in Romania, but no proof this is going on.

"Since 2006, authorities have made no inspections in the field to see if farmers are not growing GM soy," says Duminicioiu. "There is no proof this ban was surveyed and controlled."

Romania has a special body created in Agriculture Ministry in 2006, specifically for GMOs control and inspection, called the State Inspection for Control of Genetically Modified Organisms (ISCOMG).

Its 47 inspectors are responsible for authorising of GM varieties and must guard the 50 growers of genetically modified organisms [MON 810] registered in Romania at this time from sowing, harvesting, storage, until stocks are exhausted.

Most expanded areas cultivated with MON 810 in 2010 were Arad, Cluj, Buzau, Braila and Calarasi.

ISCOMG states that between 2007 and 2010 there were no reported incidents relating to contamination of conventional or organic crops of corn with the authorised GM maize.

Inside the food chain

Although there is a ban on cultivation, genetically modified products still enter Romania through the food chain. Romania imports genetically modified soy in animal feed, which then enters into meat and into the fertiliser.

InfoMG has made requests to over 20 companies, asking if they are using GM content for animal feed, and received only two answers from Banvit Foods, Tecuci and Agrimat Matca, Bucharest, which admitted to using GM fodder. Another label for a company which produces food for chickens shows that GM content is mixed with the other content. There is pressure from anti-GM campaigners at EU level to label all animal meat which uses animals who have consumed GMO material.

Seed firms bank on GM future

Multinational seed companies in Romania are mainly in favour of seeing further GM development in Romania.

"The Agriculture Ministry has always been quite open and this meets the requirements of farmers, who want GMOs," argues Monsanto's Gabriel Baeasu.

Seed producer Syngenta is also confident about a biotech future. "As a company, we feel GM crops are a must, we hope that the EU will accept them, because in the EU, Romania is one of the few countries that still has land for cropping," says Paul Claxton, CEO for Syngenta Romania. "I would like to see the EU take the proper steps to examine the scientific evidence and approve GM."

He believes that in five years, GMOs will see approval in Europe.

Dan Maftei, marketing manager for Euralis Romania, is also ready to develop.

"We have a portfolio of such products and we are ready if the authorities will allow GMOs," he says.

Meanwhile German seed producer Saaten Union says it will never produce genetically modified seeds, but believes that, for farmers, the choice of GMOs could be a more economic solution.

Additional reporting by Michael Bird