1.Judge Rejects Approval of Biotech Sugar Beets
2.Government Failed To Evaluate Environmental and Economic Risks of Monsanto Product

EXTRACTS: Judge White said the "potential elimination of farmer's choice to grow non-genetically engineered crops, or a consumer's choice to eat non-genetically engineered food" constituted a significant effect on the environment that necessitated an environmental impact statement. (item 1)

"The Courts have made it clear that USDA's job is to protect America's farmers and consumers, not the interests of Monsanto." (item 2)
---
---
1.Judge Rejects Approval of Biotech Sugar Beets
ANDREW POLLACK
New York Times, September 22 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/23/business/23beet.html

A federal judge has ruled that the government failed to adequately assess the environmental impacts of genetically engineered sugar beets before approving the crop for cultivation in the United States. The decision could lead to a ban on the planting of the beets, which have been widely adopted by farmers.

In a decision issued Monday, Judge Jeffrey S. White of Federal District Court in San Francisco, said that the Agriculture Department should have done an environmental impact statement. He said it should have assessed the consequences from the likely spread of the genetically engineered trait to other sugar beets or to the related crops of Swiss chard and red table beets.

The decision echoes another ruling two years ago by a different judge in the same court involving genetically engineered alfalfa. In that case, the judge later ruled that farmers could no longer plant the genetically modified alfalfa until the Agriculture Department wrote the environmental impact statement. Two years later, there is still no such assessment and the alfalfa, with rare exceptions, is not being grown.

In the new case, Judge White has not yet decided on the remedy. A meeting to begin that phase of the case is scheduled for Oct. 30.

But the plaintiffs in the lawsuit said they would press to ban planting of the biotech beets, arguing that Judge White’s decision effectively revoked their approval and made them illegal to grow outside of field trials.

“We expect the same result here as we got in alfalfa,” said Andrew Kimbrell, executive director of the Center for Food Safety, a Washington advocacy group that was also involved in the alfalfa lawsuit. “It will halt almost any further planting and sale because it’s no longer an approved crop.”

The Center for Food Safety was joined in the suit by the Sierra Club, the Organic Seed Alliance and High Mowing Organic Seeds, a small seed company. The defendant, the Department of Agriculture, said it was reviewing the decision.

Some beet farmers and sugar processors declined to comment Tuesday on the decision, saying they needed more time to analyze it. But they said that the genetically engineered sugar beets had proved immensely popular since first being widely grown in 2008.

The beets contain a bacterial gene licensed by Monsanto that renders them impervious to glyphosate, an herbicide that Monsanto sells as Roundup. That allows the herbicide to kill weeds without harming the crop.

“Growers have embraced this technology,” said Duane Grant, a farmer in Rupert, Idaho, who said industry surveys suggested that 95 percent of the sugar beets planted this year were genetically modified.

Mr. Grant, who is also the chairman of the Snake River Sugar Company, a grower-owned cooperative, said easier weed control allowed farmers to reduce tillage, which in turn saved fuel and fertilizer and reduced erosion.

Mr. Grant, as well as some other growers, sugar processors and seed companies like Monsanto, had sought to intervene in the case. Judge White said that other than filing a friend-of-the-court brief, they could not participate in the phase of the lawsuit examining whether the Agriculture Department fulfilled its obligations under environmental law.

However, those groups are expected be allowed to take part in the next round of the case, involving the remedies. “We’re going to use that opportunity to advocate the need for that technology and vigorously defend our growers’ freedom to plant Roundup Ready sugar beets,” said Luther Markwart, executive vice president for the American Sugarbeet Growers Association.

Beets supply about half the nation’s sugar, with the rest coming from sugar cane. About 10,000 farmers grow about 1.1 million acres of sugar beets, Mr. Markwart said. That makes it a small crop compared to staples like soybeans and corn.

The Agriculture Department did conduct an environmental assessment before approving the genetically engineered beets in 2005 for widespread planting. But the department concluded there would be no significant impact, so a fuller environmental impact statement was not needed.

But Judge White said that the pollen from the genetically engineered crops might spread to non-engineered beets. He said that the "potential elimination of farmer's choice to grow non-genetically engineered crops, or a consumer's choice to eat non-genetically engineered food" constituted a significant effect on the environment that necessitated an environmental impact statement.

In March, Judge White had asked the federal government if the Obama administration would take a different stance in the case than the Bush administration had. The new administration said there would be no change.

David Berg, president of American Crystal Sugar Company, the nation's largest sugar beet processor, said food companies had accepted sugar from the biotech beets. “They’ve been a big nonevent in terms of customer acceptance,” he said.
---
---
2.Government Failed To Evaluate Environmental and Economic Risks of Monsanto Product
Press release, September 22 2009
http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2009/09/22-20

*Court Finds USDA Violated Federal Law by Allowing Genetically Engineered Sugar Beets on the Market

SAN FRANCISCO - In a case brought by Center for Food Safety and Earthjustice representing a coalition of farmers and consumers, a Federal Court ruled yesterday that the Bush USDA's approval of genetically engineered (GE) RoundUp Ready sugar beets was unlawful. The Court ordered the USDA to conduct a rigorous assessment of the environmental and economic impacts of the crop on farmers and the environment.
 
The federal district court for the Northern District of California ruled that the U. S. Department of Agriculture’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) violated the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) when it failed to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) before deregulating sugar beets that have been genetically engineered (GE) to be resistant to glyphosate herbicide, marketed by Monsanto as Roundup.  Plaintiffs Center for Food Safety, Organic Seed Alliance, Sierra Club, and High Mowing Seeds, represented by Earthjustice and the Center for Food Safety, filed suit against APHIS in January 2008, alleging APHIS failed to adequately assess the environmental, health, and associated economic impacts of allowing Roundup Ready sugar beets to be commercially grown without restriction.
 
"This court decision is a wakeup call for the Obama USDA that they will not be allowed to ignore the biological pollution and economic impacts of gene altered crops," stated Andrew Kimbrell Executive Director of the Center for Food Safety. "The Courts have made it clear that USDA's job is to protect America's farmers and consumers, not the interests of Monsanto."
 
While industry asserts that the adoption rates of GE sugar beets has been high, food producers have shown reluctance in accepting GE beet sugar. Over 100 companies have joined the Non-GM Beet Sugar Registry opposing the introduction of GE sugar beets, and pledging to seek wherever possible to avoid using GM beet sugar in their products: http://www.seedsofdeception.com/includes/services/nongm_sugar_beet_registry_display.cfm .
 
Sugar beet seed is grown primarily in Oregon’s Willamette Valley, which is also an important seed growing area for crops closely related to sugar beets, such as organic chard and table beets.  GE sugar beets are wind pollinated and will inevitably cross-pollinate the related crops being grown in the same area.  Such biological contamination would be devastating to organic farmers, who face debilitating market losses if their crops are contaminated by a GE variety.    Contamination also reduces the ability of conventional farmers to decide what to grow, and limits consumer choice of the foods they can eat.  In his September 21, 2009 order requiring APHIS to prepare an EIS, Judge Jeffrey S. White emphasized that “the potential elimination of a farmer’s choice to grow non-genetically engineered crops, or a consumer's choice to eat non-genetically engineered food, is an action that potentially eliminates or reduces the availability of a particular plant has a significant effect on the
human environment.”
 
The Court found “no support in the record” for APHIS’ conclusion that conventional sugar beets would remain available for farmers and consumers and held that the agency’s decision that there would be no impacts from the GE beets “unreasonable.”
 
The Court also held that APHIS failed to analyze the impacts of biological contamination on the related crops of red table beets and Swiss chard. “Organic seed is the foundation of organic farming and organic food integrity, said Mathew Dillion, Director of Advocacy of the Organic Seed Alliance. “We must continue to protect this natural resource, along with the rights of organic farmers to be protected from negative economic impact from GE crops, and consumers rights' to choose to eat food free of GE components.”
 
“The ruling is a major consumer victory for preserving the right to grow and eat organic foods in the United States,” stated Neil Carman of the Sierra Club.  “Environmental impacts of Roundup Ready sugar beets were also not considered by APHIS, and they need to be fully evaluated.”
 
“Roundup Ready” crops allow farmers to douse their fields with Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide without killing the crop.  Constant application of the herbicide has resulted in weeds becoming resistant to it.  There are now millions of acres across the U.S. of such “superweeds,” including marestail, ragweed, and waterhemp, and farmers are using greater applications of Roundup or other, even more toxic chemicals.  According to an independent analysis of USDA data by former Board of Agriculture Chair of the National Academy of Sciences, Dr. Charles Benbrook, GE crops increased herbicide use in the U.S. by 122 million pounds a 15-fold increase between 1994 (when GE herbicide-tolerant crops were introduced) to 2004.
 
Earthjustice attorney Paul Achitoff noted, “Although touted by Monsanto as offering all sorts of benefits, GE crops offer consumers nothing, and are designed primarily to sell herbicides.  The end result their use is more toxics in our environment and our food, disappointed farmers, and revenue for Monsanto.”
 
A 2008 scientific study revealed that Roundup formulations and metabolic products cause the death of human embryonic, placental, and umbilical cells in vitro even at low concentrations.  Other recent studies suggest Roundup is an endocrine disrupter, and that some amphibians and other organisms may be at risk from glyphosate.
 
In addition, Judge Jeffrey S. White in his ruling has scheduled a meeting in his courtroom on October 30, 2009 to discuss the remedies phase of the case, including potential injunctive relief.
 
Monsanto has been the subject of increasing speculation that the Department of Justice’s antitrust division is scrutinizing the biotechnology company’s control of the markets for GE crops, and for commodities such as corn, soy and cotton.
 
The case is Center for Food Safety v. Vilsack, No. C 08-00484 JSW (N.D. Cal. 2009).  The decision follows on the heels of a June 2009 decision from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirming the illegality of the APHIS’ approval of Monsanto’s genetically engineered alfalfa.

CONTACT: Environmental Groups
Paul Achitoff, Earthjustice, 808-599-2436
Andrew Kimbrell, Center for Food Safety, 703-927-2826
Zelig Golden, Center for Food Safety, 415-826-2770
John Bianchi, Goodman Media, 212-576-2700
Matthew Dillion, Organic Seed Alliance, 360-385-7192
Tom Stearns, High Mowing Seeds, 802-472-6174
Neil Carman, Sierra Club, 512-288-5772