Return to TFB Main Page
Return to Texas Agriculture Archive

October 20, 2000

Judge dismisses biotech critics' complaint

U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly has ruled that biotech critics failed to prove the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) violated procedural and environmental laws in establishing biotech policy or that the agency should mandate the labeling of biotech foods, according to Cotton's Week, the National Cotton Council newsletter.

Unless FDA decides biotech ingredients are materially different from conventional products, it "lacks a basis upon which it can legally mandate labeling, regardless of consumer demand," the judge wrote.

FDA officials announced this spring that they would propose mandatory safety reviews of new biotech products, while insisting they believe biotech foods are safe. Such reviews are now on a voluntary basis.

Anti-biotech groups do not plan to appeal the decision, but will wait to see what rules FDA proposes for mandatory reviews.

Anti-biotech groups are also likely to again challenge the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in coming months as it decides whether to renew registrations for Bt varieties of corn, cotton and potatoes.

The environmental group Greenpeace lost a case in July when a federal court dismissed charges against EPA.

The agency concluded then that scientific evidence indicates that that Bt crops have a positive ecological effect when compared to likely alternatives, including crops produced by conventional means.

Nutrient management courses set

Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has revised its policy to require training and certification of anyone who approves nutrient management plans for use in programs that NRCS has been assigned national technical responsibility.

The NRCS, in cooperation with the Texas Cooperative Extension, has set a series of meetings to satisfy this certification. The 20-hour course will be held at various locations across the state over the next year. Course dates and locations include the following: Nov. 13-16, College Station; Jan. 22-26, 2001, San Angelo; Feb. 5-9, 2001, Mt. Pleasant; Feb. 19-23, 2001, Stephenville; March 5-9, 2001, Amarillo; March 26-30, 2001, Corpus Christi; Sept. 10-14, 2001, Weslaco; and Oct. 15-19, 2001, Lubbock.

For details contact Dr. Sam Feagley, Texas A&M University at 979/845-1460 or Monty Dollar, NRCS at 254-742-9885.

RFA poll: Consumers want ethanol

According to poll results released recently by the Renewable Fuels Association, there is strong public support for government action to promote the use of ethanol.

More specifically, the RFA poll found "by wide margins" public support for: ethanol over foreign oil; requiring ethanol-blended gasoline rather than permitting oil companies to choose whether to use ethanol; and candidates who support increased ethanol use.

RFB President Eric Vaughn pointed to the poll results as a call to action for elected officials and candidates.

"Public policy is lagging behind public opinion," said Vaughn. "This Congress and all the candidates for public office have an opportunity to support a sensible U.S. energy policy. The message of the poll was clear: the first step should be to increase the use of domestic ethanol."

The survey questionnaire and results are currently available at http://www.ethanolrfa.org/pr100400.html.

Assistance comes as lifesaver

USDA distributed a record $28 billion—about half of farm income—in direct assistance to American farmers and ranchers in the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30.

Without government assistance, farm income would have hit its lowest level since 1984. Assistance to farmers included $8 billion for loan deficiency payments and marketing assistance loan gains.

It also included $11 billion for supplemental income assistance payments enacted in 1999 and 2000.

Ag Secretary Dan Glickman's announcement of the figures came as USDA closed out the fiscal year by issuing nearly $5.5 billion in additional emergency payments to almost 1.4 million eligible farmers.

Notable Quotables

"The big question is: Should Freedom to Farm be fixed or replaced?"

Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) referring to the on-going discussion among politicians, administration officials, farmers and ranchers about what should be done when the 1996 farm law expires in 2002.