COMMENTARY
Hawai'i can decide if biotech has role in island agriculture
By Dr. Ania Wieczorek
Dr. Ania Wieczorek is an agricultural biotechnology educator at the University of Hawai'i's College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources.
As an agricultural biotechnology educator with the University of Hawai'i, I feel compelled to respond to the May 10 commentary by Bill Freese.
I am paid with public funds and employed at a public institution, and I have the interests of the citizens of Hawai'i foremost in my mind when I address issues related to my work.
It is thus of concern to me that Mr. Freese, who does not live here and whose background is not in agriculture, makes a number of erroneous statements regarding agricultural biotechnology in Hawai'i. I believe that Mr. Freese means well, but his article includes misinformation that requires a response.
I must first note that the College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources is dedicated to serving the needs of all Hawai'i's farmers by investigating all forms of technology, from organic agriculture to genetic engineering. Second, it is not true that most biotech crops in Hawai'i are experimental; rather, Hawai'i's principal genetically engineered crop is seed corn that is sent to the Mainland for field corn production.
Third, sterile seed biotechnology (also known as terminator technology) is not used in the agricultural industry, and although seed saving is an important aspect of many subsistence farms, most commercial-scale farmers annually purchase hybrid seed (which is sterile) to ensure uniformity of their crops.
Fourth, the nutritional content of food is not altered in the biotech crops currently on the market; if a nutritionally altered crop is developed, the FDA requires that it be labeled.
I do agree with the National Academy of Sciences' position that the use of agricultural crops for "biopharming" poses concerns and that plants other than food crops may be more suitable to use in "biopharming." We should remember, however, that biopharmaceutical crops are the most severely regulated of all crops, and the USDA is currently making these regulations even more stringent.
These are just some examples of what are surely inadvertent errors in Mr. Freese's commentary.
I strongly disagree with the conclusion he draws from them, namely that "Hawai'i can't have it both ways." I am convinced that organic, conventional and biotech agriculture can coexist here. The people of Hawai'i have great respect for one another's needs, and I
believe that farmers within local communities are capable of deciding for themselves and agreeing among themselves that it is their responsibility to avoid the possibility of cross-pollination between conventional and biotech crop plants.
This approach is particularly effective when decisions are based on objective data produced by institutions like CTAHR, USDA and EPA, rather than on biased opinion and misinformation. For example, neighboring farmers could agree to plant corn crops a few weeks apart, so that there is no risk of pollen drifting from one to the other.
We should also consider that seed growers, including those who grow biotech seeds, are as concerned about their products being pollinated by outside sources as are organic farmers. Seed growers must get their seeds certified and therefore maintain adequate distances between their seed source and neighboring crops.
As we look to the future of agriculture in Hawai'i, we should be open-minded and decide for ourselves what is best for the Islands. Just as we should not permit corporations to decide for us, we should ensure that mistaken information, however well intentioned, does not lead us to make unwise decisions.
Hawai'i values many forms of diversity, and we should strive to encourage diverse forms of agriculture.
