WHAT IS A GENETICALLY MODIFIED ORGANISM?
A genetically modified organism ( GMO) is a plant, animal or micro-organism whosegenetic code has been altered, subtracted or added, either fromthe same species or a different species in order to give it characteristics that it does nothave naturally. This is not any form of seed selection or conventional plantbreeding- this is a new set of technologies which have been around for approximately twenty years. These crops and animals would not ever be created through evolution or breeding techniques. For example, Bt Corn, one of the most prevalent GMO crops, has a bacteria injected into the corn DNA, as a pesticide-this is contained in the corn, as well as the pollen.
ARE THESE GMOS STERILE ?
Geneticallymodified organisms, are not, by and large sterile (exceptions include the terminator seeds and others). In general, their reproduction, (which is exponential)- their genetic traits, and pollen can cross into other varieties and species, both domesticated and non domesticated.
ARE GMOs ON TRIBAL LANDS?
The US Department of Agriculture, through its’ agency APHIS, “…has approved the introduction of over l5,000 genetically engineered organisms, although no genetically engineered crops have been field tested on tribal lands…”
Many of our reservation communities are checker-boarded, with various land ownership patterns. In other words, while tribal lands may not be locations for field testing, tribal lands and communities may be impacted by these field tests.Some 47 million of the more than 54 million acres of tribal and individualIndian trust lands are rangeland and cropland. Seventy percent of cropland isleased to non-Indians. We are unsure as to regulations on these lands, but within our reservation borders, fee lands held by non- Indian land holders maybe the site of test plots. As well, many non Native landholders on lands adjoining or nearby the reservations can also be the site of test plots, and we are unsure of the level of test plots or possible contamination.
HOW MUCH FOOD IS PRODUCED FROM GENETICALLY MODIFIED ORGANISMS?
Worldwide,many countries and corporations have expressed concerns about Genetically Modified Organisms, in fact, banning their import. US industrial agriculture however has aggressively pursued genetically modified crops. Today, some 89% of soybeans, 80% of cotton, and 40% of corn is genetically modified. Crops which are “Round Up Ready”, for instance, are all genetically modified to resist weeds, while other transgenic crops are nowbeing modified for insect predation and climate change related concerns. Some 80% of all genetically modified seeds and crop lands originate from the Monsanto Corporation.
WHY SHOULD NATIVE PEOPLE BE CONCERNED ABOUT GENETICALLY ENGINEERED TRANGENIC CROPS?
The environmental impacts of genetically engineered crops are very significant:Genetically engineered crops contaminate wild, heritage and domesticated varieties of plants. This has been a very signifcant problem and is central to a number of lawsuits. This has already resulted in extensivecontamination. This particularly has occurred in maize land races grown in remote regions in Mexico despite an official moratorium in place since l998. In a small study undertaken in Vermont, the Vermont Public Interest Research Group looked for traces of transgenic proteins in corn samples from l2 farms acrossthe state. Each of the farmers volunteered to have their crops tested. One sample of organic corn grown in closest proximity to a conventional farm showed significant contamination, testing positive for the Bt toxin protein CrylAB. We do not believe that any level of risk is acceptable and recognize that genetic drift is prevalent.
Though the Bt protects crops from pests, lowers prices and increases food supply, the promise of this technology has been overshadowed by the concerns of the unintended effects of Bt corn on humans and the environment. The process in which Bt corn is created, is by inserting a gene from the bacteria Bacillus thuringiensis into the corn cell genome. Components of the genetically modified corn are washing into streams near cornfields andeffecting the caddisfly, a central part of an aquatic food and ecosystem. An Indiana University environmental science professor Todd V. Royer and colleagues discovered that these plant pieces washed into local streams to a great extent and that during storms these by-products could travel even further and flow into large rivers and lakes. The caddisflies had higher mortality rates and grew smaller. This would effect the food chain of an aquatic ecosystem.
The possible health impacts of genetically engineered crops are a threat to our community: Bt proteins incorporated into 25% of all transgenic crops worldwideare also potent immunogens and allergens. Scientists have cautioned against releasing Bt crops for human use. As another study notes, “food crops are increasingly used to produce pharmaceuticalsand drugs, including cytokines known to suppress the immune system and induce sickness..."
WHAT ARE CULTURAL CONCERNS?
The Cultural Impact of genetically engineered crops and contamination has been significant and is an essentialpart of regulation. In this we note that our wild rice is a part of our migration story as Anishinaabeg people and a centerpiece of our culture. We are a people whose history is formed by our wild rice. We are similarly people who understand the significance of corn, and other foods as central to our culture, way of life, spiritual, ceremonial practice and strength as a people. We see the genetic contamination of our foods as paramount to a cultural destruction and threat
“From the traditional perspective, these seeds encompass more than just characteristics. They are sacred heirlooms, which are “witnesses to the past.” These seeds hold cultural value and cultural memory that is a vital part of traditional culture and history. A cultural community that persists in its farming tradition does not simply conserve indigenous seed stock because of economic justifications, the seeds themselves become symbols, reflections of the peoples own spiritual and aesthetic identity, and of the land that shaped them.” Rowan White, Mohawk Farmer
WHAT ARE PEOPLE DOING TO CHALLENGE GENETIC MODIFICATION?
In 2007,New Mexico Pueblos secured a state resolution recognizing the significance of traditional corn varieties, and opposing the genetic contamination of these varieties. The Ojibwe have opposedany test plots of genetically modified wild rice, as pollen drift from any wild rice paddy can be up to several miles- meaning ultimate contamination of wild varieties. Native Hawaiians have opposed the genetic engineering of Kalo or taro plants, on the basis of potential contamination of heritage varieties and cultural opposition to “genetic modification of ancestors and relatives.”
Successful litigation against Monsanto and the Scott company was based on a long-running dispute over the United States Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) approval ofthe open-air field testing of genetically engineered “Round-up Ready” (GE) grasses without assessing any potential environmental impacts. The GE grasses are owned by Scotts Grass Com-pany using patents owned by Monsanto. In 2008, the Federal Courts determined that environmental assessments were required.
Last year,the Federal Court of the Northern District of California ruled that USDA violated NEPA by approving for commercial sale Monsanto’s GE “Roundup Ready” alfalfa without sufficient NEPA environmental review and ordered a halt to the sale and planting of GE alfalfa until USDA prepares an environmental impacts statement (EIS). In 2006, the FederalDistrict Court of Hawaii ruled that the USDA violated the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and NEPA by granting field trials of biopharmaceutical, drug-producing,GE crops without first conducting necessary environmental review. And on January 23, 2008, the Center for Food Safety, along with the Organic Seed Alliance, the Sierra Club, High Mowing Seeds and Earthjustice, filed suit against USDA for approving GE sugar beets for commercial use in violation of NEPA without first conducing proper environmental review.
WHATCAN INDIGENOUS COMMUNITIES DO ABOUT THESE ISSUES?
First of all, get informed. The USDA through APHIS recently had a comment period on changes in regulations on genetic engineering- there were only three tribal comments in the process. Tribal communities were not informed or did not participate, and should ask for full disclosure. Today most genetically engineered test plots are considered “private property and trade ” interests and this should be challenged by tribal governments. We believe that APHIS should adopt Alternative 4, or imposition of a strict confinement regime on all field tests of GE crops equivalent to that presently required for pharmaceutical andindustrial crops. Tribal communities need to be aware of possible health, environmental and culturalimpacts on our communities, and should consider tribal codes and enforcement of these concerns, as sovereign legal entities. Tribal communities can continue to safeguard our seed and plant heritage by growing out our crops. In all cases, we need to look to buffer zones and other protection for our heritage seeds.
We believe food security is a matter of homeland security. Finally, we arealsoconcerned that a cultural impact assessment of any proposed field test be anessential element of an environmental impact statement. This would require full tribal and Indigenous consultation and participation .
