1.K-State's support for sustainable ag under scrutiny
2.Interest in genetically modified crops rooted in funding

EXTRACTS: "The amount of money going into sustainable or organic agriculture is miniscule compared to what's going into, say, genetic engineering," said Rhonda Janke, a sustainable agriculture professor at K-State. "Even if no one in the state of Kansas saw the need for genetically engineered wheat, we'd have three or four people in my building working on it because that's where the money is - someone on the national level thought it was important, so there's money for it." (item 1)

"There's no question at a federal level ... more funds are being funneled or being targeted to some of these kinds of areas [GM]," said Stephen Ferreira, an assistant specialist for plant and environmental protection sciences at UH. "Ten years ago you could hardly find money to do transgenic work." (item 2)

"Land grant universities are there to serve the interests of people living in rural areas. But it's hard to say that's happening when research is privatized for the benefit of a few." (item 1)

---

1.K-State's support for sustainable ag under scrutiny
Small-scale and organic farmers say university needs to do more to help
By Dave Ranney KHI NEWS SERVICE, May 28, 2007 http://cjonline.com/stories/052807/bus_173275622.shtml

MANHATTAN - The state's small-scale and organic farmers say Kansas State University hasn't done much to help them meet an increasing demand for fresher, healthier food grown closer to home.

Too much of the university's research, they say, is driven by big agriculture.

"The emphasis at K-State is on production agriculture," said Mary Fund, an organic farmer and the editor of Rural Papers, a publication of the Kansas Rural Center in Whiting, which advocates for environmentally friendly and family farms.

"It's geared toward bigger operations, more reliance on chemicals, and biotechnology" she said. "It's not geared toward the biological or ecological practices that meet the needs of sustainable ag farmers. It's not that they don't do anything. It's that they don't do enough. They're just following the money, and right now, there's not a lot of money in sustainable agriculture."

Most of the university's current $138.5 million research and extension budget is defined by funding priorities laid out in the 2002 Farm Bill.

"The amount of money going into sustainable or organic agriculture is miniscule compared to what's going into, say, genetic engineering," said Rhonda Janke, a sustainable agriculture professor at K-State. "Even if no one in the state of Kansas saw the need for genetically engineered wheat, we'd have three or four people in my building working on it because that's where the money is - someone on the national level thought it was important, so there's money for it."

That could change. Janke and others expect the 2007 farm bill, now being debated in Congress, to include more money for research on organic and sustainable agriculture.

The public, they say, has among other things grown wary of corporate agriculture's heavily processed foods that are often high on calories but low on nutrition. Members of Congress are listening.

"It's our understanding that one of the big differences in the negotiations leading up to the 2002 farm bill and what's going on now is that there are a lot more voices in the mix this time around," said Mike Matson, director of communications at the Kansas Farm Bureau.

K-State isn't opposed to small, organic, closer-to-market farms.

"At the Department of Horticulture, we're in the talking stages of redesigning a broader curriculum to emphasize sustainability," Janke said.

K-State officials also argue that much of the university's research is "size neutral."

"When we develop wheat that's disease resistant, it doesn't benefit just the industrial-agriculture model or just the sustainable model, it benefits both," said Bill Hargrove, director at the Kansas Center for Agricultural Resources and the Environment at K-State. "I think that's true for a lot of things we do."

But Chuck Hassebrook, executive director at the national Center for Rural Affairs in Lyons, Neb., said K-State and other land grant universities have been too complicit with corporate agriculture.

"There's a lot of buck-passing that's gone on," he said. "What we need from our land grant universities is leadership, what we get is 'Oh, we can only do what the funders are willing to fund.' "

Laws that allow public universities and private corporations to share patents have tainted some research decisions, said Kim Leval, a senior policy analyst at the Center for Rural Affairs.

"Land grant universities are there to serve the interests of people living in rural areas," Leval said. "But it's hard to say that's happening when research is privatized for the benefit of a few. It's even worse when the end products and their unintended consequences - global warming, environmental issues, small farmers not being able to compete, and the link between processed foods and the obesity crisis - hurt those they're supposed to help."

Fred Cholick, dean of agriculture at K-State, said the debate over whether the university does enough for sustainable agriculture soon may be overtaken by demand for bio-fuels.

"The ultimate source of energy, I believe, is the sun," he said. "And through agriculture - through plants - we can capture that energy for use in transportation. Everything we can do with petroleum, we can do with plants."

When that happens, he said, agriculture will forever change.

"There are going to be major shifts in the interactions between food, feed, fuel and the environment," he said. "Now, if you ask me what those shifts are going to be, I'd have to say I don't know - other than I'm of the belief that if corn is going to contribute to energy, corn prices are never going to go back below $2. When that happens, there will be shifts throughout the system."

---

2.Interest in genetically modified crops rooted in funding
By Sean Hao
Gannett News Service

HONOLULU - Driven by increases in funding, the University of Hawaii is conducting genetically modified crop research on bananas, tomatoes, petunias and lettuce in an effort to develop hardier, disease-resistant plants.

Researchers at UH's College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources are trying to develop sugar cane that's genetically modified to produce a vaccine to protect against rotavirus ”” a viral infection that can cause diarrhea and vomiting in young children.

"There's no question at a federal level ... more funds are being funneled or being targeted to some of these kinds of areas," said Stephen Ferreira, an assistant specialist for plant and environmental protection sciences at UH. "Ten years ago you could hardly find money to do transgenic work."

UH research into genetically modified papaya resulted in the development of a ringspot-virus resistant papaya.

However, UH's work on papaya and taro has caused a backlash among environmentalists. Cultural concerns about UH's work on genetically modified Hawaiian taro varieties ultimately forced the university to abandon that effort.

Some scientists remain reluctant to go into GMO work because of environmental and cultural concerns, said C.Y. Hu, associate dean and associate director for research at the UH CTAHR. That could hurt Hawaii farmers, should new diseases surface locally.

"If you don't want us to do that, we can accept that," he said. "But if we don't work on this and a disease comes in, it's going to wipe you out."

The projects have been going on for several years but have not been widely publicized. Other ongoing transgenic crop research at UH is being conducted on pineapple, orchids, anthuriums and limes.

Apart from papaya, UH's remaining genetic crop research is being conducted in greenhouses or laboratories rather than in open fields, which lowers the risk of environmental exposure.

Opponents of genetic crop research and genetically modified food contend that not enough is known about the long-term impact of such products. They point out that many countries, including Japan, won't import transgenic papaya and that transgenic crops could cross-pollinate with nontransgenic plants and taint Hawaii's image as a clean and natural environment.

So far UH's efforts have met with mixed success.

Hawaii papaya growers now can grow transgenic papayas despite the presence of the damaging ringspot virus. However, genetically engineered papayas have yet to generate the market acceptance and higher sales prices that nongenetically modified papaya command in some markets.

Now the university wants to develop a better banana - one that's engineered to resist infection from the bunchy top virus. Banana plants infected by the bunchy top virus suffer severely stunted growth and produce deformed fruit, or in advanced stages produce no fruit.

The project suffered a setback when UH researchers were unable to license genetically altered banana trees from Australia. As a result, UH researchers now have to develop their own virus-resistant banana, which "is years away," said Hu. "There's been some success, but it takes time."

Meanwhile, critics contend the $1.5 million spent so far on transgenic banana research could be better spent developing nongenetic techniques for managing the bunchy top virus.

"I think it's a big waste of money," said Sarah Sullivan, director for Hawaii Seed, an advocate for sustainable agriculture and a Hawaii that's free of genetically modified organisms. "It's a good example of how unsuccessful GMO research has been."

Transgenic papaya proponents, which include some UH researchers and farmers, contend that there is no way to control the ringspot or bunchy top viruses without genetic engineering technology.

Said Ferreira, "These sustainable or alternative approaches have not been ignored. They've been studied. There's nothing new they have to offer."