A bill proposed by Oregon Gov. John Kitzhaber seeks to expand the authority of state farm regulators over genetically engineered crops.
Until now, the Oregon Department of Agriculture’s power to regulate genetically modified organisms ended when the USDA lifted federal restrictions on them.
Legislation introduced at Kitzhaber’s request—Senate Bill 207—would allow the department to establish “control areas” to separate biotech crops from organic and conventional crops if the agency determines it’s “necessary to avoid conflicts” from cross-pollination.
Under state law, control areas are intended to protect crops from pests, diseases and noxious weeds.
The ODA can create control areas for biotech crops if the USDA regulates them as potential plant pests, but the state agency loses the authority once they’re determined not to pose that risk.
However, lawmakers have specifically allowed ODA to extend that control area authority to canola. Seed farmers in Oregon’s Willamette Valley fear that canola could cross-pollinate with related crops and ruin their market.
SB 207 would amend that statutory language to include control area authority for genetically engineered crops.
The proposed bill requires the agency to specify the types of crops that are regulated within the boundaries of control areas or excluded from them.
ODA must be “reasonable and just” in how it uses the authority and conduct a “careful investigation” before creating control areas, according to the bill.
Oregonians for Food and Shelter plans to oppose the legislation in its current form, said Paulette Pyle, grass roots director for the agribusiness industry group.
ODA’s control area authority was intended for managing diseases, weeds and pests, not biotech crops, she said.
“For now, it’s a no go for us,” Pyle said. “Right now, we don’t see any need for it.”
Kitzhaber likely proposed the bill to assuage GMO critics who opposed legislation he introduced in 2013 that pre-empted most local government from regulating genetically engineered crops, she said.
“He’s trying to make the organic folks feel protected because they feel like they’re not right now,” Pyle said, noting that any bill will be subject to amendments. “We’re all going to be involved.”
Richard Whitman, Kitzhaber’s natural resources policy director, said he’s still consulting with members of the governor’s task force on genetic engineering and other industry stakeholders about GMO legislation.
The final language of the bill hasn’t yet been nailed down, but the basic concept is to create a voluntary process to resolve conflicts between farmers who grow organic, conventional and biotech crops, Whitman said.
The system would not be foisted upon growers without their agreement, he said.
“It’s not really trying to dictate a particular result,” Whitman said. “That should be dictated by the people on the ground.”
Friends of Family Farmers, which supports stronger biotech regulation, believes it would be a good idea to make clear that ODA retains the ability to create control areas for genetically engineered crops after they’re deregulated by USDA.
“That seems like an important clarification of the agency’s authority,” said Ivan Maluski, its policy director.
Maluski said he can’t comment on a possible voluntary coexistence process for growers of biotech, organic and conventional crops because he has not seen the actual legislative language.
Any coexistence measures between farmers are already voluntary, he said. “I’m not sure how it would be different from the current system.”
Source: www.capitalpress.com