Exiled to rural northwest Connecticut, NYC brand consultant says her work has gained from the beauty of nature

Rural Intelligence, an online publication for the Berkshires and part of the Hudson River Valley, says it "asked some long-time readers in a variety of fields to reflect on what they miss from their pre-covid lives and how they are compensating for those losses." Here's one of the submissions.

Diane Meier (Photo by Jerry Bauer)

By Diane Meier

I build equity for companies and brands; in part, by reading the culture and understanding the ways assets can be created, ignited, or developed in perception or value. Manhattan embodied my drive. It carried my family’s history. And for decades, the streets of the city were my tea leaves. The material that drove insight. But here we are. Lockdown in the Northwest Corner. Surrounded by beauty and calm and Nature. Yikes.

Was I afraid of what I might lose? Of course. But to my great relief, I’ve found that I’m no less informed and certainly no less effective right here. Quite the opposite. Teams of clients, expanded staff, experts and consultants are available to me, and I to them, from everywhere in the world. And my inspiration flies in on a screen.

Across digital publications and countless platforms, one can’t miss an enormous interest in immune-boosting nutrition, and products that support sustainable practices. There’s more interest in science and biotech than I’ve seen since the invention of the heart transplant. Corporate positioning is now inextricably linked to traceable social responsibility. And when cities erupted just weeks ago, and important brands immediately posted that they “stood with the protestors,” a cultural exhale was equal to thunder. I’ve always known what to make of the signals, but now they’re even more visible and far more diverse, from London and Sydney to Omaha. Suddenly, the streets of New York seem provincial.

To the right of my screen, a full view of our East Field reveals a great horned owl who comes to sit each evening behind a cowlick of grass. Hydrangeas are blooming and trumpet flowers are about to burst. The skies are always changing. The Natural World is just being noticed, now that my gaze can encompass the cultural, the commercial, and the natural by just shifting focus at my desk in the Big Barn.

Ingmar Bergman once said that he couldn’t have a clear thought on the streets of New York. I suspect he would have appreciated the dramas of our hawks and bears, and the views of the field and the Litchfield Hills. And if he was uninterested in reading the cultural messages buried on the small screen, he wasn’t expected to save billion-dollar companies. For those of us who are asked to do just that, the new idea that where we live can deliver the beauty of Nature and the vitality of Commerce is an amazing gift I’m not taking lightly. But in the spirit of what I do –– I know I’m not alone in this revelation, either.

In that regard, I welcome my new neighbors to the world of “Rural Intelligence.” If ever a name were right and proper, it’s found its moment. Realizing this surely has been, at least for me, one of the great gifts in The Great Pause.

Diane Meier is an author and president of Meier, a New York City-based marketing firm. She lives in Northwest Connecticut.

Quick hits: Amtrak gets backlash for proposed cuts in rural routes; 'Stranger Things' gets 1980s newspaper wrong

WSJ graphic shows Amtrak lines and the one a reporter took.

Here's a roundup of stories with rural resonance; if you do or see similar work that should be shared on The Rural Blog, email us at heather.chapman@uky.edu.

Amtrak is facing rural backlash over a proposal to cut long-distance routes, Jason Bellini reports in a seven-minute video for The Wall Street Journal, after taking the Crescent from New York to New Orleans. Ted Mann of the Journal wrote a story about the proposal a few months ago; it has a map of all lines and how much each loses.

The third season of "Stranger Things" features a subplot in which a teenage girl, interning at the local paper in 1985, is ridiculed and humiliated by her male colleagues. The show nailed many aspects of '80s life, but it got that one wrong, Kelly McBride writes for Poynter.

A biotech company CEO lays out a roadmap for how the biotech industry could help revitalize rural America. Read more here.

House Republicans call USDA mandatory farmer surveys 'invasive' and 'irrelevant'

House Republicans say the U.S. Department of Agriculture's annual mandatory surveys to farmers are too long and the questions are intrusive, reports Agri-Pulse. The survey, mailed to 2.1 landowners last year, was 24 pages and 326 questions for operator landlords—who farm the land they own—and 12 pages for non-operator landlords. Members of the House biotechnology, horticulture and research subcommittee, led by Chairman Rodney Davis (R-Ill.) called the survey “invasive” and “irrelevant.”

The 2014 survey "was administered by USDA’s National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) and used to generate data on farmland owners and the economic health of the farm sector,” reports Agri-Pulse. “Questions for operator landlords dealt with farm-related income and expenses, investments and insurance policies. But there were also questions that some committee members considered unusual—dealing with healthcare expenses and household entertainment expenditures, along with vacations and charitable donations.”

Davis said "questions about donations were inappropriate for a mandatory agricultural survey, and other Republicans on the panel agreed,” reports Agri-Pulse. Rep. Ted Yoho (R-Fla.) "called the survey questions ‘offensive.’" Rep. Austin Scott (R-Ga.) "told the hearing’s sole witness, NASS Administrator Joseph Reilly, ‘it’s none of your business how much money (landowners) are giving to charity.’” Rep. Dan Newhouse (R-Wash.) expressed concern that the length of the survey would cause some farmers to refuse to answer.

Reilly said the survey’s "list of questions helped NASS 'gather a full economic profile' for American family farms," reports Agri-Pulse. "He also said the agency does 'everything possible to secure the information' gleaned via surveys from being made public." Producers who refused to complete the survey, or ignored it, could face a $100 penalty. Agri-Pulse is subscription-only but offers a four-week free trial.

More cattle ranchers turning to DNA testing to identify prize animals

Cattle ranchers are using technology to test the genetic value of livestock, allowing breeders to "identify prize animals whose offspring will yield a larger volume of tastier steaks," leading to higher sale prices to beef processors, Jacob Bunge and Kesley Gee report for The Wall Street Journal.

Cattle breeders say having animals' DNA scanned by a gene-testing firm—which costs up to $100 per animal and includes sending a blood sample to the lab—allows them "to assess a bull’s genetic value with the same accuracy as if it already had sired up to 20 calves," Bunge and Gee write. "Testing also can save money on animal upkeep by culling cattle with less-desirable genes."

About 20 percent of purebred animals registered by the American Angus Association in 2014 were genetically tested, up from 1 percent in 2010, Bunge and Gee write. "Two-thirds of commercial cattle ranchers in the U.S. say their cow herds include animals with Angus genes, according to the association."

"Soaring cattle prices are helping fuel investment in beef genetics," Bunge and Gee write. "The nation’s cattle herd has dwindled to its smallest size in 60 years after years of drought in the southern Great Plains parched pastures and drove up feed costs. Tight supplies of steers and heifers have meant record prices for young beef cattle in the U.S., and retail beef prices were projected to climb 11 percent to 12 percent in 2014, according to U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates."

"Some ranchers, anticipating bigger payoffs, now aim to rebuild their herds with animals boasting better genes, said Luke Bowman, spokesman for Select Sires Inc., an Ohio company that provides dairy and beef-cattle semen to breeders," Bunge and gee write. "That is helping drive a surge in prices for high-quality breeding animals, Mr. Bowman said, with bulls fetching as much as $250,000 now, compared with about $50,000 four years ago." (Read more)

Online tool provides information on chemicals regulated by EPA

Data on regulated chemicals is now easier for journalists and the public to view through an Environmental Protection Agency online tool called ChemView, "which provides information on chemicals regulated under the Toxic Substances Control Act," Laura Barron-Lopez reports for The Hill.

"The new functions include improving the display and content for the reporting tool and new links to pollution prevention information," Barron-Lopez writes. "The database will also include information on consent order and new use rules for new and existing chemicals."

James Jones, assistant administrator for the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, told Barron-Lopez, "In the absence of Treform, EPA is moving ahead to improve access to chemical health and safety information and increase the dialogue to help the public choose safer ingredients used in everyday products. The additional data along with a customer satisfaction survey will make chemical information more readily available for decision-makers and consumers." (Read more)

'Right-to-farm' measures spread through Midwest

The right-to-farm movement is catching on in some Midwest states. The proposed laws or constitutional amendments are backed by powerful agriculture interests that "want to declare farming a right to fight back against animal-welfare activists and opponents of genetically modified crops." Measures have been approved in Indiana and North Dakota, and an amendment is up for vote in Missouri next month, Donnellee Eller reports for The Associated Press.

The Indiana measure, "which was written into state law but not enshrined in the constitution—protects the rights of farmers to use 'generally accepted' practices, including 'the use of ever-changing technology,'" Eller writes. In North Dakota, it "prohibits any law that 'abridges the right of farmers and ranchers to employ agricultural technology, modern livestock production and ranching practices.'" The Missouri measure, which goes to voters on Aug. 5, is a constitutional amendment that "asks voters whether the right 'to engage in farming and ranching practices shall be forever guaranteed.'” Similar measures passed both branches of the Oklahoma legislature before dying in a conference committee.

But in Iowa, politicians say they aren't hearing much support for it, and no one seems to expect any such measure to go before the legislature in the foreseeable future. Ron Birkenholz, a spokesman for the Iowa Pork Producers Association, told Eller, “We’re getting along just fine without an amendment. Iowa is an agricultural state, and we’ve been farming for centuries without problems.” One reason no one has pushed right-to-farm in Iowa is that the state's constitution is more difficult to change than those in other states, Eller writes. "Proposed amendments must win approval of the House and Senate in two consecutive general assemblies and then go to the voters statewide." (Read more)

Lots of money spent on agriculture research, but not very much on rural community development

The amount spent on agricultural biotechnology research has exploded over the past 30 years, but very little is spent on understanding how rural people and communities can survive, according to new research from the Department of Agriculture's Economic Research Service.

"We spend billions of dollars trying to understand how crops and animals live, but only a smidgen on how humans and their communities can grow and develop," Bill Bishop of the Daily Yonder writes. It's understandable, he writes, that private businesses invest money in research and development that will earn high private returns, according to the economists who wrote the report, at least. However, a 2001 survey found that three-quarters of private crop breeding investments went to just three commodities: corn, soybeans and cotton, Bishop reports.

From 1980 to 2010, research spending by seed and biotech companies increased to more than $2 billion from $100 million. There was no increase in spending on social and community development research. "And that may be one reason why we know a heck of a lot about how to grow corn in a drought but not so much about how to develop rural communities that thrive," Bishop writes. "No wonder we have bountiful harvests and troubled towns." (Read more)

Editor: Exciting times in agriculture will need 'new blood and passion' to build rural communities

With populations moving out of rural areas, with some farmers finding it hard to press on against drought, with a lot of other obstacles we name daily, here comes Susan Crowell, editor of the Eastern Corn Belt's Farm and Dairy, to do a bit of cheerleading under the hot August sun. It's just so refreshing, we include a bit of it here, to wrap up the week.

"There’s farm material in carpets, plywood, concrete sealer, the foam in automobiles, industrial coatings, adhesives, lubricants, and, of course, fuel," Crowell writes. "Last year, PepsiCo unveiled a new bottle that was made entirely of plant material (switchgrass, pine bark and corn husks, among other things). In Missouri, they’re even breaking down hog manure into a tarry product that can either be burned to generate electricity, or used as an asphalt binder. That’s right, the road to agriculture’s future is paved with hog manure. . . Not only do we need these new products and new opportunities, but we need that new blood and passion to continue to build our rural communities."

Crowell then quotes Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack saying recently, "The greatness of this country, the soul of this country, lives in rural America." Crowell was clearly moved by that. "This year may be a difficult year for many farmers, but these are exciting times in agriculture. I wish I was 21 again." (Read more)

House plan to cut GMO crop oversight rings alarms

"An array of consumer and environmental organizations and individuals are ringing alarm bells over moves they say will eradicate badly needed safety checks on crops genetically modified to withstand herbicides, pests and pesticides," Charles Abbott and Carey Gilliam of Reuters report. "The measures could speed the path to market for big biotech companies like Monsanto and Dow Chemical that make billions of dollars from genetically altered corn, soybeans, cotton and other crops."

"They are trying to change the rules," Center for Food Safety lawyer George Kimbrell, who has lawsuits pending against government regulators for failing to follow the law in approving certain biotech crops, told the wire service. "It is to the detriment of good governance, farmers and to the environment."

Abbott and Gilliam note that the House could take up a measure that would allow biotech crops to be planted even if courts rule they were approved illegally. That could happen as early as next week. Opponents call it the "Monsanto Rider" because Monsanto's genetically altered alfalfa and sugar beets have been subject to court challenges for illegal regulatory approvals.

Last week 40 food businesses, retailers, family farmers and others sent a protest letter to House Agriculture Committee leaders "calling on them to strike pro-biotech provisions added to the draft of the Farm Bill," Reuters notes. "The measures followed several court rulings that regulators did not follow legal requirements in approving some biotech crops, and would nullify just such legal requirements in the future. Environmental hazards associated with biotech crops, including the rapid rise of 'superweeds' that cannot be killed with traditional herbicides, would not have to be taken under consideration by regulators in new approvals, the critics say." (Read more)

Monsanto gets a lot of attention in one bundle today, including gift for agricultural communications chair

The Society of Environmental Journalists gathered a few stories about the multinational biotechnology firm Monsanto Corp. in its headline digest today. In the roundup, the journalism group highlighted current reportage from international and domestic sources. The topics range from the St. Louis-based company saying it has new herbicides for "superweeds," to its funding of a University of Illinois agricultural communications chair, to revealing details about how much the company spends lobbying Washington to approve genetically modified seeds and other decisions that help it.

Monsanto and the university say the goal of the endowed chair "is to help graduates better convey the challenges and technologies of modern farming -- which, the agriculture business believes, aren't reaching the American public," the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported. "The university's new position comes as the agriculture industry is going on the offensive, waging a public relations campaign to win the hearts of American consumers who are increasingly distrustful of large-scale agriculture and concerned about the lack of transparency in the food system."

The university said the company won't influence who is hired and what is taught, but Ken Cook of the Environmental Working Group, who spoke at the univresity's first agricultural communications symposium last year, told the Post-Dispatch, "If you're concerned about presenting a view from a corporate standpoint, the demise of journalism is great news. My fear is that this is another way for Monsanto and big companies to begin to influence, quote, 'ag communications.' I didn't speak to any student while I was at that conference who was interested in becoming a journalist."

"Too often, 'agricultural communications' does not mean journalism, but public relations for agribusiness, sometimes masquerading as journalism," said Al Cross, director of the Institute for Rural Journalism and Community Issues, publisher of The Rural Blog. The institute is based at the University of Kentucky, one of many schools with a major in ag communications. It's in the UK College of Agriculture, not the School of Journalism and Telecommunications, where Cross works. At Illinois, the chair "will run a recently formalized degree program between the university's College of Media and College of Agriculture, Consumer and Environmental Sciences," the Post-Dispatch reports.

Here's another Monsanto link: our story reporting that Derry Brownfield, who founded and sold a radio network for Midwest agricultural and rural news, was taken off the network and sister networks because of repeated rants against Monsanto's restrictive seed-corn patents and fears by the network's owners that the company would reduce its advertising. "He thought they were bad for farmers, too big for their britches and generally bad for America," said Clyde Lear, who co-founded the network with Brownfield and fired him. Brownfield's obituary is here.

Soybean farmers hail plan to buy bio-based goods

The chairman of the Ohio Soybean Council told Brownfield Ag News that the Obama administration's plan to buy more bio-based products "will help get those green products from the lab to commercialization," Brownfield Network's Dave Russell reports.

“Our innovations are ongoing, we’ve got a great relationship with the Battelle Institute and they continue to find products to feed that pipeline,” John Motter said. “There’s a growing green industry in Ohio.”

"Two years ago, Ohio became the first state ever to create a statewide bio-based procurement program," Russell notes. It supports the Ohio BioProducts Innovation Center at Ohio State.

Feds announce moves to boost biobased goods, regional job creation, rural health technology

Three major Obama administration officials held a conference call today to announce three rural initiatives that will "leverage existing programs and funding," as a White House press release put it. "We know that when rural America is growing, the rest of America is getting stronger," Commerce Secretary John Bryson said on the call. The initiatives are:

• A directive by the president to federal agencies "to take decisive steps to dramatically increase the purchase of biobased products over the next two years," the release said. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said the order would increase by half the number of new products that are designated as biobased.

• A national grant competition called "Rural Jobs Accelerator" with about $15 million for projects that promote innovation for regional job creation. The money will come from the Department of Agriculture, the Economic Development Administration, the Delta Regional Authority and the Appalachian Regional Commission. Details will be released in the next few weeks.

• The Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Labor will connect  "community colleges and technical colleges that support rural communities with the materials and resources they need to support the training of health information technology professionals" in rural areas, the release said. Mary Wakefield, administrator of the Health Resources and Services Administration, said the curriculum has already been developed and will be promoted by local and state workforce investment boards.

2/5 of farmers don't plant required non-GM corn designed to keep 'super bugs' from developing

More than two of every five U.S. farmers planting genetically modified corn are failing to plant a non-modified crop nearby to keep pests from becoming immune to a natural insecticide generated by the modification, a threefold increase from last year, according to Monsanto Co. and other companies that make the seed corn, Jack Kaskey of Bloomberg News reports.

The Environmental Protection Agency requires the growers to plant an adjacent "refuge" area, but "about 41 percent of 3,053 farmers inspected in 2011 failed to fully comply with the refuge requirement, according to data from the Agricultural Biotechnology Stewardship Technical Committee," Kaskey reports.

Last year's non-compliance figure was 15 percent. There is "concern that an increasing number of bugs may be developing resistance to modified crops," Kaskey writes. In July, Iowa State University researchers found that some corn rootworms (above) have evolved resistance to a gene engineered into Monsanto corn.

The National Corn Growers Association said it expected an increase in non-compliance "because of a new industry initiative that uses sales data," Kaskey writes. "Seed companies used their data to identify farmers who may not have purchased enough seed for a refuge, said Nick Storer, Dow Chemical Co.’s representative on the committee. “What’s new is that every grower had some sort of scrutiny this year,” Storer told Bloomberg. (Read more)

CO2-devouring algae may lessen the carbon footprint of coal-fired power plants

Coal-burning power plants may yet be the energy of the future, thanks to a carbon-dioxide-devouring algae. The University of Kentucky, the Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet and East Kentucky Power Cooperative are partnering to further investigate the use of algae to capture carbon dioxide from coal-fired plants and converting it to biomass, the university said in a release.

UK will place 135 interconnected tubes of algae (right) at the rural utility's Dale Station near Winchester to conduct a real-world test of the carbon dioxide reduction process. Officials hope to have 10 times as many tubes by early next year, Kelsey Sheridan of the Lexington Herald Leader reports. (H-L photo by Pablo Alcala)

The algae digest carbon dioxide and light in a process similar to photosynthesis in plants. (Read more) Once the algae has consumed the carbon dioxide, the by-product can be used to produce biodiesel, animal feed, fertilizer and chemicals. To view an explanatory video, click here.

The state agency committed nearly $1.3 million, the utility is contributing about $75,000 in in-kind and the university is providing $543,663. The research will be done by UK's Center for Applied Energy Research.

Monsanto aims for the grocery store with new biotech fruits and vegetables

Agri-business giant Monsanto, known for its Roundup Ready seeds that are engineered to be resistant to the common herbicide, is "developing new varieties of produce with added benefits for consumers," that may change how many shop for produce, Tim Lloyd of Harvest Public Media reports. The company's seed catalog now includes 4,000 fruit and vegetable varieties across 20 species. "The tearless EverMild onion and SweetPeak melon that turns light orange when it’s ripe are just the opening acts," Lloyd writes.

"Monsanto is definitely putting its time and its energy behind these investments in fruits and vegetables," David Stark, a vice president at Monsanto who oversees the company’s push into the checkout aisle, told Lloyd. "I’ve got tons of things coming." While the market for fresh produce sales totaled $39.8 billion in 2010 and represents a promising opportunity for Monsanto and other biotech companies, consumer resistance to genetically modified foods still exists. "The perception is someone’s been messing with my food," Kathy Means, vice president for the Produce Marketing Association, told Lloyd. "Though the U.S. government and others have deemed these breeding techniques safe, marketers still have to deal with these consumer perceptions."

"Clearly there are a lot of people who have questions about biotechnology, not just in the U.S. but around the world," Stark said. Monsanto hopes to deal with those concerns by basing its produce line around products that do not involve direct manipulation of the genetic code. Monsanto left the fruit and vegetable seed business for the most part in the mid-1990s but returned in the mid-2000s with the purchase of seed companies Seminis and De Ruiter. (Read more)

Organic growers lose ground in battle with genetic engineering; disappointed in administration

Based on recent rulings, the genetic engineering industry seems victorious in the battle over organics and genetically engineered crops. "The administration has announced a trio of decisions that have clouded the future of organics and boosted the position of genetically engineered crops," Lyndsey Layton of The Washington Post reports. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack "approved genetically modified alfalfa and a modified corn to be made into ethanol, and he gave limited approval to GE sugar beets," Layton notes.

Some supporters of organics say they have been disappointed by the administration, which they hoped would be friendlier to their interests. "It was boom, boom boom," Walter Robb, co-chief executive of Whole Foods Markets, a major player in organics, told Layton. "These were deeply disappointing. They were such one-sided decisions."

The argument centers on concerns about contamination. Organics supporters fear that pollen and seeds from GE crops could drift across fields to nearby organic crops. "Contamination can cost organic growers — some overseas markets, for example, have rejected organic products when tests showed they carried even trace amounts of GE material," Layton writes. GE crop advocates say the industry's farmers "should be free to grow the crops because they do not harm other plants," Layton writes.

Jim Greenwood, head of the Biotechnology Industry Organization, told Layton, "Biotechnology can help crops thrive in drought-prone areas, improve the nutrition content of foods, grow alternative energy sources and improve the lives of farmers and rural communities around the globe."

Vilsack seemed poised to restrict genetically engineered crops prior to the alfalfa ruling, but he said "ultimately regulations prevented him from restricting GE crops," Layton writes. Despite the recent rulings, Vilsack told Layton he hopes the two sides can co-exist. "I had no expectation that the dialogue was going to end in some grand understanding or a kum-ba-ya moment," he said. "This is going to require a lot of work by reasonable, smart people to get this done. It’s in the interest of the country for these folks to stop fighting and get together and figure out how to live in the same neighborhood." (Read more)

Biotech food foe says organic-farm rules don't do enough to limit genetically modified crops

Organic farming advocates were among the most ardent opponents to recent U.S. Department of Agriculture approvals of genetically modified crops, and now some say the key to preventing similar decisions in the future may be a narrow definitions of organic farming. For now, potential cross-pollination from g-m crops is not considered in the organic farming standards, Dan Charles of National Public Radio reports on "All Things Considered." If an organic farmer "plants non-[genetically modified] seed and uses organic methods, the harvest is organic, even if a few stray genes blew in," Charles writes.

Some anti-biotech activists like Ronnie Cummins, from the Organic Consumers Association, argue that organic farmers must move past simple compliance with organic regulations, in order to limit g-m contamination. "If you're not willing to sue the person who pollutes the organic crop and really undermines organic integrity, then we're not going to stand up for you," Cummins told Charles. "You've got to do the right thing." Most U.S. corn, which Charles calls one of the "most promiscuous cross-pollinators," is genetically modified, meaning that most organic corn in the U.S. typically contains anywhere from half a percent to 2 percent g-m organisms.

Charles Benbrook, chief scientist for the Organic Center, told Charles the anti-GMO campaign could result in a loss of trust from consumers in organic food. "It would be a shame for the momentum behind the growth in the organic livestock industry to be siphoned off or diverted because of one-tenth of 1 percent contamination in a source of animal feed," he said. Benbrook claims the only way to eat food with absolutely no GMO contamination is to import food from Europe, which is "hardly a welcome solution for people who see in the organic food industry the best hope for positive change and innovation in the U.S. food system." (Read more)

EPA steps up enforcement of biotech restrictions

The Environmental Protection Agency has begun a crackdown on bitoech corn farmers in an attempt to ensure insect-resistant varieties of the crop remain effective. This year EPA "is requiring Pioneer Hi-Bred and other seed companies to contract with outside firms to inspect farmers who may be out of compliance," Philip Brasher of the Des Moines Register reports. "Farmers caught violating the rules at least two years out of five will be barred from buying seed from the same company the next season." In 2010 the companies will begin adding special tags to seed bags to explain the planting restrictions.

The restrictions limit where and how much seed the farmers can plant, and "one of the rules requires farmers in the Midwest to plant at least 20 percent of their corn to varieties that don't contain a biotech toxin, known as Bt, that kills the targeted insect larvae," Brasher writes. The rule prevents insects from becoming resistant to the toxin. "Rules also stipulate how far the toxin-free field has to be from the insect-resistant fields," Brasher writes.

According to a required annual report, a third or more farmers violated at least one restriction last year. "The long-term value of that technology far exceeds any short-term gain that might be derived by circumventing those guidelines," said Julius Schaaf, a farmer at Randolph who is a long-time leader in industry groups. Schaaf noted industry and grower groups have worked hard to increase awareness of the restrictions. "Pioneer has given a training DVD to its sales force this year in hopes of improving farmer compliance," Brasher writes. (Read more)

USDA considers approving biotech corn; millers worry it could ruin their products

The U.S. Department of Agriculture will decide soon whether to approve a form of biotech corn designed specifically for ethanol production. Corn millers are urging Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack not to approve the corn, "claiming the biotech kernels could accidentally get into the processors' grain supplies and ruin them," a fear Syngenta Seeds, maker of the biotech corn, says is unfounded, Philip Brasher of the Des Moines Register reports. Mixing of the kernels could result in corn chips that crumble in the bag or cereal that's soggy before it gets to your mouth, Brasher writes.

"The Syngenta product is the latest of several thorny biotech and food-safety issues that Vilsack has had to face," Brasher writes, pointing to Vilsack's approval last week of genetically engineered alfalfa. Vilsack is also expected to rule soon on production of biotech sugar beets. "Meanwhile, the demand for biotech seeds to increase crop yields has helped fuel growth at Syngenta, Monsanto and Pioneer Hi-Bred," Brasher writes. Pioneer announced plans last month for a $32 million expansion that would add 132 jobs in Johnston, Iowa.

The millers don't question the crop's safety, but worry cross-contamination could compromise their products. The biotech corn contains an enzyme that helps break down the starch in the kernel, which would save ethanol plants in energy costs but is unsuitable for cooking into products like chips or cereal, Brasher writes. "We love biotech," Mary Waters, president of the North American Millers' Association, told Brasher. "We don't question the safety. It's just a question of can we still make the food products we make now." Syngenta spokesman Paul Minehart said there is little chance of  "the grain getting into the wrong hands, the wrong processes." (Read more)

USDA doesn't approve restrictions for GE-alfalfa

The U.S. Department of Agriculture has relented to industry criticism about its proposal for regulation of genetically engineered alfalfa. The USDA has decided that it will not restrict where genetically engineered alfafa can be grown. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack angered the biotech industry and farm groups last month when he announced that his department was considering restricting where the GE crop could be grown to ensure that it didn’t contaminate organic or other non-biotech crops, Philip Brasher of the Des Moines Register reports on the Green Fields blog. You can read our items about the controversy here, here and here.

Vilsack said on Thursday he still believed USDA had the authority to implement restrictions on the crop, but the agency "would be undertaking research and other measures to try to ensure that there would be adequate supplies of non-biotech seed after the genetically engineered alfalfa is in commercial use," Brasher writes. The research is focused on studying the spread of of the biotech gene and developing non-biotech varieties that are, among other things, protected against cross-pollination.

USDA's decision won't stop the legal battle holding up the crop's implementation. The advocacy group that successfully sued to halt the commercialization of the crop said it would challenge Vilsack's latest ruling. “There’s only one interpretation for all of this, which is massive pressure from the industry on the administration,” said Andrew Kimbrell of the Center for Food Safety. Vilsack countered that the measures to protect supplies of seed that isn’t genetically engineered "should reassure folks that there will be seed to preserve choice so that non-GE alfalfa can be grown by those who wish to do it." Vilsack said there is no question about the safety of the crop. (Read more)