GM Watch
  • Main Menu
    • Home
    • News
      • Newsletter subscription
      • News Reviews
      • News Languages
        • Notícias em Português
        • Nieuws in het Nederlands
        • Nachrichten in Deutsch
      • Archive
    • Articles
      • GM Myth Makers
      • GM Reports
      • GM Quotes
      • GM Myths
      • Non-GM successes
      • GM Firms
        • Monsanto: a history
        • Monsanto: resources
        • Bayer: a history
        • Bayer: resources
    • Videos
      • Latest Videos
      • Must see videos
      • Agriculture videos
      • Labeling videos
      • Animals videos
      • Corporations videos
      • Corporate takeover videos
      • Contamination videos
      • Latin America videos
      • India videos
      • Asia videos
      • Food safety videos
      • Songs videos
      • Protests videos
      • Biofuel myths videos
      • Index of GM crops and foods
      • Index of speakers
      • Health Effects
    • Contact
    • About
    • Donations
News and comment on genetically modified foods and their associated pesticides    
  • News
    • Newsletter subscription
    • News Reviews
    • News Languages
      • Notícias em Português
      • Nieuws in het Nederlands
      • Nachrichten in Deutsch
    • Archive
      • 2022 articles
  • Articles
    • GM Myth Makers
    • GM Reports
    • GM Quotes
    • GM Myths
    • Non-GM successes
    • GM Firms
      • Monsanto: a history
      • Monsanto: resources
      • Bayer: a history
      • Bayer: resources
  • Donations
  • Videos
    • Index of speakers
    • Glyphosate Videos
    • Latest Videos
    • Must see videos
    • Health Effects
    • Agriculture videos
    • Labeling videos
    • Animals videos
    • Corporations videos
    • Corporate takeover videos
    • Contamination videos
    • Latin America videos
    • India videos
    • Asia videos
    • Food safety videos
    • Songs videos
    • Protests videos
    • Biofuel myths videos
    • Index of GM crops and foods
  • Contact
  • About

GMWatch Facebook cornfield banner

INTRODUCTION TO GM

GMO Myths and Facts front page.jpg

SCIENCE SUPPORTS REGULATION OF GENE EDITING

Plant tissue cultures

GENE EDITING: UNEXPECTED OUTCOMES AND RISKS

Damaged DNA on fire

GENE EDITING MYTHS AND REALITY

A guide through the smokescreen

Gene Editing Myths and Reality

ON-TARGET EFFECTS OF GENE EDITING

Damaged DNA

CITIZENS’ GUIDE TO GM

GMO Myths and Truths front cover

LATEST VIDEOS

  • Herbicide-tolerant/Bt cotton chaos in Indian fields
  • Seed keepers and truth tellers: From the frontlines of GM agriculture
  • Myths and Truths of Gene-Edited Foods

KEVIN FOLTA: A rogue’s gallery

Roundup, dollars and Kevin Folta

Please support GMWatch

Donations

You can donate via Paypal or credit/debit card.

Some of you have opted to give a regular donation. This is greatly appreciated as it helps place us on a more stable financial basis. Thank you for your support!

Forest Stewardship Council backs away from genetic engineering

Details
Published: 05 April 2023
Twitter

Move follows global campaign calling on them to uphold their ban on genetically engineered trees

The Board of the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), the world’s leading forest product certifier, decided[1] at their March meeting to back away from a process that critics charge would have put forests at risk and would have opened the door to overturning FSC’s long-time core certification policy that prohibits the commercial use of genetically engineered trees.

“FSC is right to reject genetically engineered trees as a danger to forests,” said Kaitlyn Duthie-Kannikkatt of the Canadian Biotechnology Action Network, which closely monitored the FSC discussions. “The field testing and release of genetically engineered trees pose unprecedented threats to forests, wildlife, and communities that live near them.”

The Campaign to STOP GE Trees is hailing this as a victory in forest protection. The FSC decided not to proceed with a project to oversee field tests of genetically engineered trees, called a “genetic engineering learning process”.

To date the only commercial-scale plantations of genetically engineered trees in the world are genetically engineered poplars planted in China in 2001. However, Suzano, a Brazilian-based pulp producer and FSC certificate holder, was given permission by the Brazil government in 2021 to commercially grow eucalyptus trees that are genetically engineered to tolerate glyphosate-based herbicides. Under FSC’s policy, Suzano will not be able to grow their genetically engineered trees commercially without first leaving the FSC, a move that could have a potentially significant impact on their markets.

Other genetically engineered trees currently being advanced face a similar hurdle. Timber from GE poplars or pines developed by the company Living Carbon could not be certified as sustainable under the FSC Policy, limiting their value in a market looking for “sustainable” wood and paper. Likewise, wood or other products from the Darling 58 genetically engineered chestnut tree currently being evaluated for deregulation by the US Department of Agriculture would be ineligible for FSC certification.

“This decision by the FSC to reject genetically engineered trees reflects the serious questions of ecology and science raised by this technology that have been glossed over in recent years by corporate interests,” said Anne Petermann of the Global Justice Ecology Project, Coordinator of the Campaign to STOP GE Trees. “Here in the US, for example, even though genetically engineered trees pose significant social, ecological and economic risks, there is no protection offered by regulations as agencies are completely unprepared to assess those risks–either in the short-term or over the decades and millennia that genetically engineered trees could live and act upon the environment.”

More than 130 environmental and social justice groups from 34 countries, including 10 FSC members and GMWatch, signed a statement hosted by the Campaign to STOP GE Trees, calling on FSC to continue prohibiting the use of genetically engineered trees and to refrain from engaging with field experiments.[2]

GMWatch congratulates all the groups working on this issue, including those of our readers who signed petitions and wrote to the FSC asking them to uphold their ban on genetic engineering.

Notes

[1] Forest Stewardship Council Board Decision, March 31, 2023: https://fsc.org/en/newscentre/fsc-genetic-engineering-learning-process-will-not-go-ahead
[2] https://stopgetrees.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Open-Letter-to-FSC-November-2022.pdf

Menu

Home

Subscriptions

News Archive

News Reviews

Videos

Articles

GM Myth Makers

GM Reports

GM Myths

GM Quotes

Non-GM Successes

Contacts

Contact Us

About

Facebook

Twitter

Donations

Content 1999 - 2023 GMWatch.
Web Development By SCS Web Design