US farmers may stop planting GMs after poor global yields

[sailingaway]

Some US farmers are considering returning to conventional seed after increased pest resistance and crop failures meant GM crops saw smaller yields globally than their non-GM counterparts.

Farmers in the USA pay about an extra $100 per acre for GM seed, and many are questioning whether they will continue to see benefits from using GMs.

"It's all about cost benefit analysis," said economist Dan Basse, president of American agricultural research company AgResource.

"Farmers are paying extra for the technology but have seen yields which are no better than 10 years ago. They're starting to wonder why they're spending extra money on the technology."

One of the biggest problems the USA has seen with GM seed is resistance. While it was expected to be 40 years before resistance began to develop pests such as corn rootworm have formed a resistance to GM crops in as few as 14 years.

"Some of these bugs will eat the plant and it will make them sick, but not kill them. It starts off in pockets of the country but then becomes more widespread.

"We're looking at going back to cultivation to control it," said Mr Basse. "I now use insecticides again."

One of the issues if farmers do move back towards non-GMs will be the availability of seed, he said, as around 87% of US farmers plant genetically modified seed.

The top performing countries by crop yield last year were in Asia, in particular China, where farmers do not use GM seed.

http://www.fwi.co.uk/articles/06/02/2013/137518/us-farmers-may-stop-planting-gms-after-poor-global-yields.htm

[oyarde]

I would not use any of that seed , money ahead not to.

[Pisces]

Interesting. I believe the drought in the MidWest last year was a large part of why crop yields were down in 2012. I wish the article had been more specific about what types of GM crops they are referring to. I'm assuming corn is probably one of them. I'll have to ask my Nebraska farming relatives about this. They tell me all the concerns about GM corn are overblown but I suppose they may be a bit biased.

If farmers are paying a lot of money for seed that doesn't perform any better than non-GM seed then they need to stop wasting their money. Especially as more and more people are becoming wary of GM products.

[Anti Federalist]

Read an article the other day that the SCROTUS is leaning toward ruling in Monsanto's favor WRT to the GMO crops and their seeds.

Upshot: Monsanto will "own" all food stuff plant life on the face of the earth, basically.

[sailingaway]

and they want to start altering human dna. I bet that would be 'patented' too... :p

Honestly, that sickens me, them claiming naturally reproduced seeds.

[bolil]

UH OH, the pests that mutated to resist glyphosate be getting it on. Hey monsanto, f u.

[Anti Federalist]

and they want to start altering human dna. I bet that would be 'patented' too... :p

Honestly, that sickens me, them claiming naturally reproduced seeds.

I'm sure you're up to speed on it, but for those who don't know, the upshot is this:

Monsanto produces a "Frankenseed": GMO modified for pest resistance or what have you.

Those seeds are planted, and in the course of the growth cycle, cross pollinate with unmodified seedlings and plants.

The DNA is now present in that crop and any future crops grown from that cross pollinated batch or further pollinated (contaminated I say).

And, according to Monsanto, if they can find any trace of that original DNA, they "own" that plant.

Even if the farmer miles away, who wants nothing to do with Monsanto and their abortions, has his crop contaminated by this drek, he's now on the hook to pay fees to Monsanto for use of their patented GMO seed product.

[Flugel89]

I'm sure you're up to speed on it, but for those who don't know, the upshot is this:

Monsanto produces a "Frankenseed": GMO modified for pest resistance or what have you.

Those seeds are planted, and in the course of the growth cycle, cross pollinate with unmodified seedlings and plants.

The DNA is now present in that crop and any future crops grown from that cross pollinated batch or further pollinated (contaminated I say).

And, according to Monsanto, if they can find any trace of that original DNA, they "own" that plant.

Even if the farmer miles away, who wants nothing to do with Monsanto and their abortions, has his crop contaminated by this drek, he's now on the hook to pay fees to Monsanto for use of their patented GMO seed product.


Do they accept fees in certain metals? Such as copper and lead? That would be my first offer if they came to my door. Then again Im not growing anything right now except my distaste toward theifs.

[luctor-et-emergo]

Interesting. I believe the drought in the MidWest last year was a large part of why crop yields were down in 2012. I wish the article had been more specific about what types of GM crops they are referring to. I'm assuming corn is probably one of them. I'll have to ask my Nebraska farming relatives about this. They tell me all the concerns about GM corn are overblown but I suppose they may be a bit biased.

If farmers are paying a lot of money for seed that doesn't perform any better than non-GM seed then they need to stop wasting their money. Especially as more and more people are becoming wary of GM products.


One of the biggest problems the USA has seen with GM seed is resistance. While it was expected to be 40 years before resistance began to develop pests such as corn rootworm have formed a resistance to GM crops in as few as 14 years.

I think so too. Although the problem also exist with the varieties that have been modified to resist herbicides like the well known "round-up". These plants can survive spraying the herbicide and any other weed should be killed by the substance, leaving only what the farmer has planted. The graph below shows the development of the same or similar resistance gene in weed populations.

http://www.agbioforum.org/v12n34/v12n34a04-fig1.jpg
http://www.agbioforum.org/v12n34/v12n34a04-mitchell.htm

The blue line is the number of species of weeds that have found to be resistant to Glyphosate (commercially sold as Round-UP). The red line shows the number of states in the US where these resistant weeds can be found.

[tangent4ronpaul]

I think so too. Although the problem also exist with the varieties that have been modified to resist herbicides like the well known "round-up". These plants can survive spraying the herbicide and any other weed should be killed by the substance, leaving only what the farmer has planted. The graph below shows the development of the same or similar resistance gene in weed populations.

http://www.agbioforum.org/v12n34/v12n34a04-fig1.jpg
http://www.agbioforum.org/v12n34/v12n34a04-mitchell.htm

The blue line is the number of species of weeds that have found to be resistant to Glyphosate (commercially sold as Round-UP). The red line shows the number of states in the US where these resistant weeds can be found.

The more those lines go up, the better! It may be the only way to get rid of Monsanto.

-t

[thoughtomator]

Wait 'til those farmers find out what kind of damage raising GMOs has done to the soil in their fields and start suing over it.

[BAllen]

Maybe they should use natural pest control...........chickens.