Biotechnology Australia
Gene Technology Information Service
Fact sheet 12

Potential genetic engineering issues for rural producers

Biotechnology is a rapidly emerging industry and has potential importance for Australia because we rely on biological systems for much of our economy. Advances in Australian biotechnology, including gene technology, may help keep our country competitive and at the cutting edge of agriculture, food processing, forestry and environmental management. In 2003, producers worldwide planted genetically modified (GM) seeds on more than 67 million hectares of cultivated land. For comparison, this land area is equivalent to nearly 9 per cent of Australia’s landmass.

Currently, Australia grows only GM cotton and GM carnations commercially, although two GM canolas have also been licensed for commercial growing. About 220,000 hectares are planted under GM cotton.

As with any new technology, we must carefully consider gene technology issues so that any associated risks are managed and benefits are maximised.

Those who consider using this new technology need up-to-date information to make informed decisions. Many factors can affect the decision to use gene technology as part of primary production. The decision to grow a GM crop may include considerations of the size and aggressiveness of a pest population in an area, the local cost of applying insecticide or herbicide, the cost of GM seed and those suitable for a given area, expected profit margins, market acceptance and the behaviour of competitors in other producing or importing countries.

Potential benefits

Genetically modified crops have the potential to offer many benefits to primary producers and others, including:

• higher crop yields and quality, combined with competitive production systems

• faster growth in plants and animals

• improved taste, textures and/or nutritional value for consumers

• better transportability and preservation of harvested produce

• new food products and ingredients

• improved resistance to animal and plant pests and diseases

• better plant tolerance of environmental extremes, such as drought and salinity

• plant production of specialty chemicals

• better cotton fibre quality

• improved vaccines and diagnostic testing for animal diseases

The technology may add to the productivity, quality and cost-effectiveness of crops and livestock. New niche marketsmay emerge for products tailored for specific uses.

Studies of some GM crops overseas and GM cotton in Australia, show a significant reduction in spraying of chemical insecticides. Some GM crops overseas, though not all, also use less environmentally persistent herbicides. Coupled with a potential drop in fertiliser use (if GM plants can use existing soil nutrients more effectively), it could lessen farming’s chemical impact on the environment and human health.

Potential risks

However, there are concerns that GM crops may:

• contaminate other crops or plants through crosspollination in some crops

• require farmers to use herbicide-tolerant crops and companion herbicide(s) supplied by a single company

• lead to farmers using more chemicals and sprays on herbicide-tolerant crops

• have unknown long-term effects on the environment, and humans and animals that eat GM products

• allow target insects to develop resistance against pest-resistant crops, and/or affect non-target insects

• be toxic to non-target organisms

• be unacceptable in some overseas markets

• harm Australian agriculture’s ‘clean, green’ image

• increase weediness or cause new weediness

GM technology’s potentially harmful implications focus on possible unknown impacts on the environment and
anticipated damage to our overseas market image.

Australian GM plant licences and crops

Australia has licensed several GM plants for commercial use (all of these licences were granted only after a rigorous risk assessment process by the OGTR):

• five varieties of blue/purple carnations with extended vase life (including FLORIGENE Moondust™ and
  Moonshadow™).

• three varieties of GM cotton: insect-resistant cotton (INGARD®, Bollgard® II), herbicide-tolerant cotton (Roundup
  Ready®), and combined insect-resistant and herbicide-tolerant cottons (INGARD®/Roundup Ready® and Bollgard® II/Roundup Ready®).

• two types of GM herbicide-tolerant canola — Invigor® canola and RoundUp Ready® canola. These are the most
  recent GM crops to have been licensed for general release, but they are not yet being grown commercially.

Implications for farming practice

Under the Gene Technology Act 2000, the Gene Technology Regulator regulates certain dealings with gene technology activities. OGTR regulations ensure that potential hazards to individuals, the community and the environment are identified and managed as required. The regulations require the controlled conduct of gene technology research in laboratories, and the controlled and safe release of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) into the environment.

Approved GM crops or livestock must be released under specific licensing conditions and adhere to a risk management plan. That includes having a risk management plan specially tailored for each GM product and farmers’ circumstances. Farmers must adhere to all the conditions in their plans or risk losing their licence to grow the GM crop or animal. Among the conditions, they are required to provide buffer zones and be open to inspection and monitoring by OGTR representatives.

Storage and handling implications

Some countries, such as the United States and Canada, have chosen not to separate GM and non-GM crops. However, as the majority of markets to date are demanding this separation, Australian farmers want to be able to meet these individual requirements in order to export their product.

To achieve this, it is likely GM crops will need to be kept separate from non-GM crops not only in farmers’ fields, but also during transport and bulk handling. Australia has yet to decide on segregation procedures for GM produce. Segregation costs and who will bear them (growers, handlers, consumers) have also to be determined. The costs may include buying new transport vehicles, containers and storage facilities or rededicating equipment, if sales of GM varieties surpass those of conventionally grown crops.

Implications for sale of GM products

Despite claims that the arrival of GM crops on world markets will increase the price of conventionally grown crops as buyers seek to avoid GM material, there is no evidence of such behaviour so far. Australian economists have predicted that any resulting higher prices for non-GM products are likely to form only a small part of the world market.

When Canada started to grow GM canola and sell a mixed product, it lost its sales to the European Union, which prohibits GM imports. However, Canada soon found replacement markets in other countries, such as Japan. Many food manufacturers remain cautious about using GM ingredients in their products because of consumer resistance. Consumer support for GM products varies between countries and can change over time, so it is difficult to predict what crops will prove acceptable in the future. As manufacturers focus on new products, such as functional foods and ‘nutriceuticals’, consumers may accept clearly labelled food products with a GM component, if they believe they will improve their health.

Some consumers are concerned about conventional livestock that may graze on GM pastures, or are given feed containing GM material. They believe this will make the animal a GM product. This is scientifically untrue, but this mistaken belief may affect consumer attitudes to some meat and dairy products.

Some sectors are concerned that if Australia markets GM products, it will affect our ‘clean, green’ image and, in
particular, harm sales of organic and conventional (non-GM) products. Resolving this concern will depend on the efficiency of segregation procedures at all stages — from ‘paddock to plate’.

Legal implications

Because of the sensitivity over GM crops and livestock, farmers need to consider several legal implications:

• non-adherence to OGTR licence conditions for GM products and the associated risk management plan

• potential adverse effects on neighbouring properties or products, if GM material moves into other crops or
  livestock, and who assumes liability

• contamination of harvested products through careless transport or handling

Some people believe GMOs pose no unique risks and argue that liability rules commonly used for other agricultural undertakings should apply. They claim existing legal actions of trespass, nuisance or negligence should cover most concerns.

Others say agricultural biotechnology is fundamentally different from other forms of agricultural breeding technology. They argue the need for special legal liability provisions to ensure adequate relief for those who suffer loss due to the unintended presence of GM material.

An initial scoping study for the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry concluded that for the present,
monitoring alone is satisfactory. This is consistent with the Primary Industries Ministerial Council’s approach for industry self-regulation, with continued government monitoring. Applied common law and existing legislation apply to GMOs and their unintended presence.

Environmental implications

Some research shows growing GM crops may benefit the environment by reducing the chemicals sprayed to prevent weeds and insect damage and through the use of less persistent chemicals. For example, there are reports that the amount of insecticide used on GM insect-resistant cotton in Australia has been reduced significantly. On the other hand, there are some reports from overseas that GM herbicide-tolerant crops can lead to increased herbicide use, and more experience in Australia is needed before any such net benefits of herbicide tolerant crops can be claimed here. Further, in Australia, weeds are a major and costly environmental problem and GM plants could lead to increased weediness, especially in the case of herbicide tolerant GM crops. The target weeds could become herbicide-resistant or the GM crop plants could become weeds or could outcross with related plants, leading to increased weediness.

Growing GM crops that are able to utilise existing soil nutrients more effectively could help reduce fertiliser run-off into waterways. Research is continuing into the potential impact of GM crops on the soil. Results so far show there are some changes, but scientists have not yet determined whether they are good or bad. Similarly, the impacts on non-target organisms is still being researched. A 2003 study in the United Kingdom investigated the impact of GM agricultural practice on wildlife and found varying results. Growing some GM crops (spring canola, sugar beet) reduced wildlife, especially birds, because there were fewer insects and weeds on which to feed. On the other hand, GM maize enabled wildlife to increase around it. When CSIRO scientists looked at the UK study, they concluded the results were not all relevant to Australia because of our very different biodiversity conditions:

• the weeds and creatures living in Australian crops are different from those in the UK

• weeds in Australian crops are exotic invaders which are a nuisance and our wildlife does not depend on them as wildlife does in the UK

The implications for the environment of potential GM animals remain unknown, but good management practices may be able to avoid negative repercussions in some cases. Gene technology used to control feral pests, such as mice, rabbits and foxes, and weeds could also significantly help the environment. However these GMOs would need to be safe for the Australian environment and for the biological diversity in other countries in which those animals are not pests.

Document in PDF format: http://www.biotechnology.gov.au/library/content_library/BA_12_Rural_Nov04.pdf