1.WWF defends position on Round Table on Responsible Soy
2.WWF: "You're stabbing us in the back"
---
---
1.WWF defends position on Round Table on Responsible Soy
Caroline Scott-Thomas
FoodNavigator.com, 3 June 2009
http://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/Financial-Industry/WWF-defends-position-on-Roun d-Table-on-Responsible-Soy/?c=IqRMlWypgO60PnIRee7AHw%3D%3D&utm_source=newsletter _daily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Newsletter%2BDaily
or http://tinyurl.com/rbanf6
The World Wildlife Fund (WWF) has defended its support of the Round Table on Responsible Soy (RTRS), despite strong opposition from over 80 international environmental organizations.
The groups signed an opposition statement to the RTRS standards agreed last week, condemning them for promoting genetically modified (GM) soy as "responsible". They have called for the abandonment of the Round Table on Responsible Soy, saying that its agreed voluntary production standards are too weak to protect biodiversity, GM soy http://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/content/search?SearchText=GM+soy should be excluded from the program, and "RTRS allows and encourages the expansion of soy monocultures".
But WWF has said that it is a "technologically neutral" organization, although it will continue to promote labeling of RTRS soy that is non-GM.
Defending GM inclusion
Forest conversion programme coordinator at WWF Carrie Svingen told FoodNavigator-USA.com that it is important to include the largest part of the soy industry in any discussion on sustainability.
She said: "Our core issue is deforestation and loss of natural habitat...We are interested in shifting the industry at large towards sustainable production, so we have to address the issue with the industry at large."
GM soy accounted for 58.6 percent of worldwide soy production in 2007 - a greater proportion than for any other crop. Additionally, 64 percent of Brazil's and 98 percent of Argentina's soybean crops were GM in 2007.
Responsible soy?
However, Clare Oxborrow, a Senior Food Campaigner for Friends of the Earth - one of the opposition letter's signatories - told this website that increased herbicide use associated with GM soy means that "there is no way that you can look at it and say that GM soy is sustainable...The only responsible soy is less."
She added: "It [the RTRS document] is not to improve sustainability; it's to improve the perception of sustainability."
Oxborrow also said that there were "too many caveats" in the RTRS agreement which could still allow deforestation.
The declaration specifically forbids expanding soy cultivation on land cleared of native habitat during an initial 12-month field test period. But it excepts producers if they produce "scientific evidence from a comprehensive and professional third party assessment of the area concerned" showing that it does not contain primary forest, other High Conservation Value Areas or local peoples' lands.
WWF has also expressed its concern about a lack of unity on the issue within the RTRS.
"WWF is working within the RTRS to ensure that the RTRS standard contains strong criteria for the protection of biodiversity and other environmental and social values threatened by the indiscriminate expansion of soy production," it said.
According to figures from the Food and Agriculture Organization, world soy production increased from 144 million tonnes in 1997, to 216 million tonnes last year. In the same period, land area used for soy has increased from 67 million hectares to 94 million hectares.
Signatories to the opposition statement include the Institute for Responsible Technology, Friends of the Earth International, the Global Forest Coalition and the Soya Alliance.
The full statement and list of signatories can be accessed online here http://www.bangmfood.org/take-action/23-take-action/36-letter-of-critical-opposi tion-to-the-round-table-on-responsible-soy. The RTRS statement is online here http://www.responsiblesoy.org
---
---
2.WWF: "You're stabbing us in the back"
NOTE: This is a translation for GMWatch of a powerful open letter to WWF from NGOs in Germany. The German original can be found at http://www.bluehende-landschaft.de/nbl/nbl.news/news.nbl.6/index.html
EXTRACTS: We do not accept that the WWF should contribute to keeping alive a failed system of intensive farming.
Do you seriously believe you could force corporations like Monsanto and Syngenta to make concessions, and hold them at bay?
How do you explain to the NGOs in the South ... that you are pushing a process to legitimise the cultivation of GE soy against their wishes.
Isn't it clear to you that by doing this you're stabbing us - and many more NGOs in the South and North - in the back? Are you not aware that your own credibility is at stake?
We will never certify GM soy "sustainable". We will not shy away from calling the RTRS a greenwashing project..
We are heading for open dissent with the WWF - in the media and amongst the general public.
***********
Open Letter to WWF: Cultivation of GM soy cannot be sustainable
Dear colleagues at WWF!
Since the first genetically modified products reached the markets in the EU with soy and corn in 1996, the representatives of the relevant companies and the scientists and politicians who are working closely with them declare: agro-genetic engineering could not be dispelled anymore, its triumphant advance would not stop at Europe nor Germany. Resistance was futile.
This did not happen: Only one genetically modified crop is approved for cultivation on EU fields: the corn MON 810 developed by Monsanto. It was sown only on 1.2 percent of the total EU area under corn, six countries banned it. In short: Hardly any movement was and is as successful in the EU as the anti-GE movement. For that we have been fighting since 1996, and we’re proud of that. Our recipe for success: It is we who convinced the European public with our arguments - not the protagonists of agro-GE, their lobby campaigns and PR agencies. We come from the heart of society - we are environmental activists, housewives, bee keepers, mayors, conventional and organic farmers, medical doctors, food producers. We are rooted locally - farmers and local politicians are establishing GM-free regions and municipalities, and exclude the cultivation of GM crops on their property.
But not only the EU, with its well established democracies and its strong civil society, is a stronghold against GE agriculture, resistance in South America is growing too. This is mainly because of the negative experiences the local population is having with the cultivation of GM soy. For instance, the Grupo Reflexion Rural (GRR) in Argentina recently reported the annual use of 200 million litre glyphosate on soy fields causes a health disaster: cancers, deformities, autoimmune diseases, respiratory and skin diseases are on the rise, the president has established a fact-finding committee, options for compensation are reviewed.
Dear colleagues, we are following with great concern the process of the Round Table on Responsible Soy (RTRS) that was co-initiated by WWF, and that finally aims at a certification system that will declare the cultivation of GM soy "sustainable" or "responsible". With this, this epitome of GM crops, which is being grown on half of the area cultivated worldwide with GM seeds, would be given a green guise. Maybe a few high conservation value areas that do not fall victim to the cultivation of soy would benefit, but certainly not the environment as a whole and least of all the people who live in the soy-producing regions. Winners would primarily be the multinational corporations, who sit at the table: the traders of agricultural bulk commodities such as Bunge, ADM and Cargill, oil companies in search for alternatives to fossil fuels, such as Shell and BP, and the GM companies, such as Monsanto, Syngenta and Bayer. They all are united in their desire to do business undisturbed by too much public criticism and they want to be able to tell consumers - particularly in the EU - look, the cultivation of genetically modified soy is sustainable and responsible, the WWF certifies this.
We do not share the WWF's opinion that the cultivation of genetically modified crops is a development that cannot be stopped any more, let alone reversed. For example in the No 1 GE nation, the US, farmers are now switching back to conventional varieties for the first time since the cultivation of GM soy started. They’re doing this because Monsanto drove seed prices up so high, because resistance to glyphosate is also becoming an increasing economic problem, and because on international markets a premium is now being paid for GM-free soy. A similar situation seems likely in the Brazilian state of Mato Grosso. Here soy producers express disappointment about the meagre yields of Monsanto’s soy beans. And since last year FrieslandCampina, which is one of Germany’s biggest dairy producers, has been using only domestically-produced feed for its premium brand "Landliebe", which they label as "Without GE"-milk.
We note the cultivation of genetically modified soy has reached its limits - the ecological and health damages that can be seen already, are all too apparent. We do not accept that the WWF should contribute to keeping alive a failed system of intensive farming. We are banking on the new labelling option "Without GE" to boost demand for GM-free feed and that the area cultivated with GM soy will thus decrease in the mid-term. We fight against a label with a sustainability certificate for GM-soy that undermines these efforts.
Dear colleagues at WWF, it is inexplicable that in official statements WWF Europe takes a stance against genetic engineering, but as "WWF International" renders the same technology acceptable through decisions of the Round Table. The solution envisaged by some WWF groups - including WWF Germany - of establishing a GE line and a "Without GE" line through the RTRS, we consider as window-dressing. The consequence of such a strategy is that the "Without GE" line is kept small. On the other hand the "Without GE" line would be used immediately to whitewash the GE line.
We are asking you: Do you seriously believe you could force corporations like Monsanto and Syngenta to make concessions and hold them at bay? And how do you explain working together with companies like Cargill, Bunge and ADM, which aim to undermine the EU's GE legislation? Their participation in the Round Table did not in the least prevent them from a massive campaign against the Zero Tolerance for non-approved GMOs in the EU that has been running for two years now.
How do you explain to the NGOs in the South - after all there are now more than 200 groups - that you are pushing a process to legitimise the cultivation of GE soy against their wishes expressed through letters, rallies and diverse actions?
Isn't it clear to you that by doing this you're stabbing us - and many more NGOs in the South and North - in the back? Are you not aware that your own credibility is at stake?
How will you explain to your supporters, your contributors and members that the cultivation of GM soy is not all bad, that it's alright as long as no valuable protected areas were sacrificed for it?
And please consider: We will never certify GM soy "sustainable". We will not shy away from calling the RTRS a greenwashing project. With this stance we are heading for open dissent with the WWF - in the media and amongst the general public.
Dear colleagues, we ask you: Think about whether you have chosen the right path or whether it isn't time for some definite corrections.
We are looking forward to hearing from you.
Regards
_____________________________
i. A. Georg Janßen, Arbeitsgemeinschaft bäuerliche Landwirtschaft (AbL) [Peasant Farmer Association]
Cosignatories of the letter:
Arbeitsgemeinschaft bäuerliche Landwirtschaft (AbL) e.V., Georg Janßen,
Heiligengeiststraße 28, 21335 Lüneburg, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., www.abl-ev.de
Bund Ökologische Lebensmittelwirtschaft e.V. (BÖLW), Peter Röhrig,
Marienstraße 19-20, 10117 Berlin, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., www.boelw.de
BUND e.V., Martha Mertens,
Am Köllnischen Park 1, 10179 Berlin, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., www.bund.net
Bündnis für gentechnikfreie Landwirtschaft Niedersachsen, Bremen, Hamburg,
Annemarie Volling, c/o AbL, Heiligengeiststraße 28, 21335 Lüneburg
Demeter e.V., Stephan Illi,
Brandschneise 1, 64295 Darmstadt, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., www.demeter.de
Gentechnikfreie Regionen in Deutschland, Annemarie Volling, c/o AbL,
Heiligengeiststraße 28, 21335 Lüneburg, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.,C3%br /> www.gentechnikfreie-regionen.de
Interessengemeinschaft für gentechnikfreie Saatgutarbeit, Siegrid Herbst, Hohe Straße 9, 30449 Hannover, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., www.gentechnikfreie-saat.de
Interessengemeinschaft Nachbau, Georg Janßen,
c/o AbL, Heiligengeiststraße 28, 21335 Lüneburg, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , www.ig-nachbau.de
Mellifera e.V., Thomas Radetzki
Fischermühle 7, 72348 Rosenfeld, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , www.mellifera.de
Naturland e.V.; Steffen Reese,
Kleinhaderner Weg 1, 82166 Gräfelfing, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., www.naturland.de
NEULAND e.V., Jochen Dettmer,
Baumschulallee 15, 53115 Bonn, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., www.neuland-fleisch.de
Netzwerk Blühende Landschaft, Holger Loritz, Wetzelstraße 13, 96047 Bamberg,
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., www.bluehende-landschaft.de
Save our Seeds, Benedikt Haerlin, c/o Zukunftsstiftung Landwirtschaft,
Marienstraße 19, 10117 Berlin, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., www.saveourseeds.org
Zukunftsstiftung Landwirtschaft, Oliver Willing, Christstraße 9, 44789 Bochum, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , www.zs-l.de
6 May 2009
This is a translation. The German original can be found at http://www.bluehende-