Late on Christmas Eve DEFRA published a report saying ( as I understand it - it is only a summery, we have to wait until they are back at work for the full report) that GM genes have been found outside the trial sites. "There may be a need to review isolation requirements in keeping with current legislation on contamination thresholds in crops, in light of this research." http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/gm/research/epg-1-5-84.htm While this comes as no great surprise, some environmentalists have been saying this for the past three years and many of us farmers have started to realise that they are right, it is the timing of DEFRA's admission that is curious. This is a six year study that finished two years ago yet they choose to issue it late on Christmas Eve, is that an attempt to bury an embarrassing report or were they just too merry to suppress it? Try telling your local DEFRA office "I'm sorry I have not sent last years IACS form yet, I'll try to get it to you by next Christmas" and you would still be 12 months quicker than they are. Even more curious is the fact that just when reports were showing a GM presence outside the site NERC stopped looking for it! (anecdotal evidence from the trial sites only I'm afraid - NERC will not confirm or deny it) This is why I will be asking those farmers doing field trials who are interested in finding out the facts (Jack?) to co-operate with some independent research. The good news is that the report suggests that GM hybrids do not survive and multiply and again I hope independent research will substantiate this. This would be very different to the experience of farmers in the US where roundup resistant weeds have become a problem they are knocking 17% off rental value (see www.syngentacropprotection-us.com/Resources/Prod/Touchdown/Land_Values.pdf&BID=45925538&EID=4491

No need to panic about GMO's they will never be allowed in this country, just another pawn in the WTO talks - as pawn status it is above mear mortals (farmers and fishermen). P.S I haven't got my IACS payment yet, I guess thats justice for being one of the first last year.

Dear Tom, Boxing Day not over and another smokescreen already. Still we must not falter in our search for the truth, however the American page did not appear. I did manage to get DEFRA,s page and ACRE,s advice which is in line with our experience, see below. Keep up the search for truth!!! ACRE's advice ACRE considered the results of the monitoring carefully. ACRE's risk assessment of GM oil seed rape has always assumed some gene-flow will occur and that this does not in itself constitute a risk to human health or the environment. It was concluded that the extent of gene flow observed in the monitoring between GM oil seed rape and adjacent crops, feral oil seed rape and wild relatives was entirely within expectations. The persistence of GM volunteers and feral oil seed rape plants were also entirely within expectations. ACRE members were content that the results of the monitoring were consistent with the existing risk assessment and no further action was necessary. ACRE welcomed the immediate publication of the monitoring report. HAPPY NEW YEAR Jack Caley. PS I will spare you all the disclaimers and political correctness as one other humorous contributor gave us!!!

Dear Jack If you experience is that gene flow is "within expectations" please could you tell me what your expectations are. How far beyond your own land do you expect GM genes to spread? 100yards? half a mile? Of course the number of plants will decrease dramatically with distance but I will keep quoting a figure of one plant every two square yards at 400 yards as measured in Canada until you can give me a better estimate based on measurements taken here. Sorry I can not get the weblink to work anymore either (perhaps because it was confidential!) but I paste a summery below. ------------------------------------------ The US is being hit by Roundup Ready resistant weeds and an independent market research study, which has been discreetly circulating, says Roundup Ready resistance is set to hit the economic value of farmland wiping around 17% off US land rentals. What's more, 46% of the farm managers surveyed in the study said weed resistance to glyphosate, the active ingredient in Monsanto's herbicide Roundup, is now their top weed-resistance concern. The report warns, "Suddenly, glyphosate-resistant weeds have become more than an in-season production and profitability issue. They can also affect the long-term value of farmland". It also says, "These survey findings should make both farm managers and landowners take notice" because "The economic consequences are significant" and can represent for landowners "a major loss of cash flow". Glyphosate is being massively used in North America thanks to Monsanto's GM herbicide-resistant 'Roundup Ready' crops. But there is growing concern among weed scientists and land owners about the emergence of glyphosate-resistance. As the report notes, "The high volume of glyphosate being used across the country as a result of RR technology adoption makes this a very real concern for growers, professional farm managers and the owners of farmland." Glyphosate-resistant marestail has already been found in Delaware, Tennessee, Kentucky, Indiana and Ohio. Marestail (horseweed) is a prolific seed producer and the seeds are easily blown around by the wind so this is a major problem. But the problem doesn't stop there. Glyphosate-resistant rigid ryegrass has been reported in California. Weed scientists in Iowa and Missouri are already testing waterhemp from fields that seem to be showing more tolerance to glyphosate. There are also complaints about marginal control of velvetleaf, ivyleaf morningglory and lambsquarters control with glyphosate. The latest bad news for Monsanto, which has always promoted Roundup as a way of simplifying farm management issues, comes courtesy of its main rival, the world's largest biotech company, Syngenta, which commissioned the market research study report and has been quietly circulating it to farmers and landowners via its PR company, Gibbs & Soell. Syngenta hopes to profit from the wave of concern over Roundup resistance as people rush to use extra chemicals, and crop rotations not involving RR crops, to try and head off the build up of glyphosate resistance on their land. But American famers using Roundup Ready crops could be headed up a cul-de-sac. According to weed scientists, such as Iowa State University's Mike Owen, it's doubtful whether this kind of resistance management will be viewed as economically feasable at elast in the short term. As Owen told a packed-out meeting of North Central Weed Science Society in St. Louis recently, he expects growers to try and carry on using glyphosate in the same way to try and avoid the extra expense of other chemicals until they are finally forced by resistance to switch to something else. But an article reporting on the Weed Science Society meeting concludes, "With few, if any, new blockbuster chemicals in the pipeline, the question may become whether there will be alternative programs to switch to if glyphosate loses its effectiveness." [see "Glyphosate resistance dominates weed science meetings", Mike Holmberg, Farm Chemicals Editor, Successful Farming December 6, 2002, http://www.biotech-info.net/dominating.html] Among the CONCLUSIONS in the Syngenta report: *Specific weed resistance can reduce a farm's rentable value by 17 percent *The greatest weed-resistance concern is glyphosate tolerance in RR crops *More than half of farm managers placed it ahead of their concerns about weed resistance to atrazine, Pursuit, ALS herbicides or propanil *Almost two-thirds (63 percent) of these professional farm managers expect the importance of glyphosate tolerance to increase in the future when determining rental values and land appraisals. "Given the increasing adoption of RR technology in corn,soybeans and cotton,these professional farm managers and rural appraisers felt the importance of glyphosate-resistant weeds will increase in the future.Overall, 63 percent said it will become a bigger problem." *Almost half (47 percent)now require practices to manage weed resistance... This is expected to grow to 54 percent in the future *Seventy percent said the use of weed resistance-management practices already influence their tenant selection. The report also looks at western Australia, where weed resistance to herbicides is becoming a big problem for land productivity. e-mail your request for a copy of the report to Jennifer McManus of Gibbs & Soell at <mailto:jmcmanus@gibbs-soell.com>

Dear Peter I hope you are right and GM crops are not grown here but I do not share your analysis of the strategy nor have any faith in those moving the pieces. Tony Blair has no sentimental attachment to the British countryside nor its farmers and would sacrifice both for the prestige of having the world's leading biotech companies base their work here. To do this he intends to make sure that they can work here unhindered by public concerns about safety and restrict our right of appeal about what goes on our national seed list. Also sneaked in before Christmas were a number of applications for more GM trials. Among these was one for a GM wheat - even the US are resisting that - but more seriously one for a GM potato with ARMS (antibiotic resistant marker genes) which are supposed to being phased out, would the still be trialling them if they did not think they could get that decision reversed? We can still appeal against that one, details below, and I hope many of you will. A letter of objection from a farmer is worth a dozen from environmentalists, we are the people they are hoping to sell to. Let's use our computers to make a difference to the world in 2003. -------------------------------------------------- you can object either in writing to the GM Policy and Regulation Unit, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Zone 3/G9, Ashdown House, 123 Victoria Street, London, SW1E 6DE, stating the application reference number or to this email address gm-regulation@defra.gsi.gov.uk (Please ensure that you quote reference number in the subject line.) An application to release GM potatoes lodged by Advanced Technologies (Cambridge) Limited under Application Ref No: 02/R04/12. The GM potato has an antibiotic resistance marker (ARM). This alone is good grounds for an objection given that the new Genetically Modified Organisms (Deliberate Release) Regulations 2002 has a specific regulation (27) to phase out ARMS "which may have adverse effects on human health and the environment" although this doesn't come into full effect until 31 December 2008 for trial releases. However you might argue that as ARMs are to be phased out in commercial GM crops by 31 December 2004 "which may have adverse effects on human health and the environment", there is no point trialling the GMO that has an ARM! You have until 12 February 2003 to comment.

Dear Tom, If you persist you can raise Syngenta,s website and with the report. You will see Syngentas reasons for their approach and also a confirmation of their reasons for attacking Roundup etc. The predisposition towards " rogue weeds" is merely an extension of the Schmeizer approach, whose evidence was unsound anyway when you studied his farming methods. As I have said before the Soil Association and Greenpeace,s choice of him as an expert witness was very unsound. You did not have to visit his farm to realise that. The rogue weeds mentioned had nothing to do with GM influence. They were a problem there already. We have had weeds resistant to Roundup for a number of years, even with our limited use of roundup and long before we grew GM anyway. In any case we did not use Roundup Ready for GM. If you read fully through the whole lot you see confirmation of what we experience here, that is that proper rotational cropping, not like Schmeizers, takes care of any residue. Anyone who did not have any expectations of residues had little idea of the realities of farming. I enclose also a paste from Defra,s report:::: The co-existence of the B rapa populations with B napus crops and the numbers of hybrids found, suggested that gene flow has been occurring for some time between these populations. plus GM OSR volunteers found in fields were generally controlled in the same way as conventional volunteers. Outside the cultivated area establishment and survival of seedlings was very poor, and few feral transgenic OSR plants survived to maturity Defra was doing its duty in putting forward this report, working right up to Christmas, as I am sure you were. As I keep repeating, it is good that these matters are fully aired and discussed for assessment. We find no problem with the report, as in any case as has been proved by millions of acres worldwide. Bye for now, I am just about to eat a GM tomato sandwich as light relief from Christmas fare, Regards, Jack Caley.

Dear Jack I am still trying to work out what we agree about and what we don't. Perhaps it would help if I numbered every point. (1) Growing GM crops would substantially increase the problems of herbicide resistant weeds. (2) GM crops cross-pollinate with neighbouring crops to produce hybrids (3) with significant numbers up to half a mile away. (4) GM crops with ARMS should be phased out (5) so it is pointless to produce new ones (6) and you will be writing to say so. (7) Tony Blair wants us to grow GM crops (8) though he does not have the best interests of farmers at heart (9) unlike fw poll winner Prince Charles (10) who is opposed to growing GM crops (11) and was unfairly criticised by Lord Haskins for saying so. (12)The next leader of the NFU should be elected by one member - one vote. (13) If the last one had been more farmers would still be supporting the union (14) and farming would not be in the mess it is today. How many marks out of 14 for agreement?

Dear Tom, I am sure there are many things you and I agree on, especially on the need for progress and the betterment of mankind. I will try to the best of my ability to reply to your points in numbered order. 1/ Rather the reverse, GM will reduce the problems of resistant weeds. My knowledge of herbicides and weed control is not as good as it was but I do know that GM technology does represent an enormous increase in weed control allied to tremendous environmental benefits. From our practical on hand experience that is self evident. 2/ Genuinely, I am not in a position to answer your point no 2 properly as I am not fully qualified to do so. However one of the botanists who has done many tests here said they had run thousands of tests and found no cross pollination. He was maybe speaking out of order as we must all wait for the publication of those results. I can hardly wait also. In our particular case I do not see that as a problem as those plants will be easily controlled by normal rotational farming. 3/ As to distance, I am not qualified to answer that either, but again see it as no problem. 4/ I thought that the use of antibiotic markers was recognised as unnecessary, I had been told that they were no longer necessary and were not used. I had thought that GM potatoes were extensively used in Holland previously. Whether they still are and use antibiotic markers I do not know, but I had not heard of any resulting problems from the very substantial acreage there. (incidentally I do not know of any problems arising out of the very extensive use of GM foods already used in this country) 6/ I will write anything you instruct me to providing it is correct. 7/ I congratulate you on having access to Tony Blairs mind, possibly you can get a better deal for farmers, I do not have that privilege. 9/ I am impressed by Prince Charles winning the FW poll, and heaven forbid that I should agree with Lord Haskins, my sisters next door neighbour, but like me I am afraid Lord Haskins lives in a hard commercial world, not a rarefied niche market that produces less than would feed the cat population of this country. 12/ HURRAY, we agree on something, one man one vote. With the strength of one man one vote behind him, our old pig manager would be able to use the ability he showed when he worked here and has developed since leaving us in so many ways. The effort and sacrifice that Ben has given, and the negotiating skills he has achieved deserve support rather than divided or misguided minorities eroding what little he can achieve in a difficult agricultural scene. Happy New Year, Jack Caley

Dear Tom, I am sure there are many things you and I agree on, especially on the need for progress and the betterment of mankind. I will try to the best of my ability to reply to your points in numbered order. 1/ Rather the reverse, GM will reduce the problems of resistant weeds. My knowledge of herbicides and weed control is not as good as it was but I do know that GM technology does represent an enormous increase in weed control allied to tremendous environmental benefits. From our practical on hand experience that is self evident. 2/ Genuinely, I am not in a position to answer your point no 2 properly as I am not fully qualified to do so. However one of the botanists who has done many tests here said they had run thousands of tests and found no cross pollination. He was maybe speaking out of order as we must all wait for the publication of those results. I can hardly wait also. In our particular case I do not see that as a problem as those plants will be easily controlled by normal rotational farming. 3/ As to distance, I am not qualified to answer that either, but again see it as no problem. 4/ I thought that the use of antibiotic markers was recognised as unnecessary, I had been told that they were no longer necessary and were not used. I had thought that GM potatoes were extensively used in Holland previously. Whether they still are and use antibiotic markers I do not know, but I had not heard of any resulting problems from the very substantial acreage there. (incidentally I do not know of any problems arising out of the very extensive use of GM foods already used in this country) 6/ I will write anything you instruct me to providing it is correct. 7/ I congratulate you on having access to Tony Blairs mind, possibly you can get a better deal for farmers, I do not have that privilege. 9/ I am impressed by Prince Charles winning the FW poll, and heaven forbid that I should agree with Lord Haskins, my sisters next door neighbour, but like me I am afraid Lord Haskins lives in a hard commercial world, not a rarefied niche market that produces less than would feed the cat population of this country. 12/ HURRAY, we agree on something, one man one vote. With the strength of one man one vote behind him, our old pig manager would be able to use the ability he showed when he worked here and has developed since leaving us in so many ways. The effort and sacrifice that Ben has given, and the negotiating skills he has achieved deserve support rather than divided or misguided minorities eroding what little he can achieve in a difficult agricultural scene. Happy New Year, Jack Caley