News 
 National Rural News 
 Grains and Cropping 
 General 
 GM canola trace level readings confusing 

GM canola trace level readings confusing

17 Dec, 2009 12:04 PM
THERE have been vastly different interpretations of the detection of trace levels of Roundup Ready (RR) canola in non-GM canola segregations in Victoria.

GM levels of one per cent, theoretically just over the adventitious presence (AP) levels of 0.9pc set by the Australian Oilseeds Federation (AOF) for standards for non-GM canola were found in samples at GrainCorp’s sites at Dunolly, in Central Victoria and Lillimur, in the west Wimmera.

However, as these tests were found in 500-tonne running grade samples done by GrainCorp, and the bins storing the canola held 2000 tonnes, and the other three 500 tonne samples done in the same bin tested negative for GM presence, it took the AP levels back down to 0.25pc, well below the AOF’s 0.9pc prescribed standards for presence of GM material.

It means the canola can still be marketed as non-GM under Australian industry standards.

GrainCorp corporate affairs manager David Ginns said the finds showed the system was working.

“This shows that we are capable of segregating GM and non-GM canola safely through the supply chain and maintaining the industry standards for specifications."

However, Gene Ethics director Bob Phelps saw the incidents as evidence the Australian oilseeds industry was not committed to offering a non-GM product.

"Graincorp's assurances that GM and non-GM canola could and would be segregated throughout supply chains are worthless,” he claimed.

"Monsanto and Graincorp designed a shonky system to make GM contamination inevitable and all canola GM as soon as possible.”

The burning issue with the canola containing trace elements of GM material was whether grain buyers would accept it as a non-GM product.

Debate has raged among anti-GM campaigners and members of the supply chain on AP levels.

Non-GM lobbyists have claimed AP levels will not be accepted in many markets, and a zero tolerance policy is required.

However, Elders Toepfer Grain (ETG), which announced earlier in the year that it would not be purchasing Australian GM canola this season in a nod to the sensibilities of major customers in Europe and Japan, said it would continue to purchase grain from the two sites.

ETG managing director Mark Thiele said it would be business as usual when dealing with canola from the Dunolly and Lillimur sites – for now.

“We are continuing to monitor these incidents and keep in touch with our customers, but at this stage we’re continuing on as we were.”

Mr Ginns said GrainCorp did not anticipate any issues from the marketers.

As buyers were party to the development of the AP tolerance and the relevant “standards, we expect no problems with the relevant stacks.”

It is believed, although not yet proven, that the contamination has occurred due to a small scale delivery of GM grain, rather than a hybridisation of conventional and GM canola.

Mr Ginns said working on the testing, there had been about five tonnes of GM canola delivered into the sites.

“It is less than a full load, it may be something like some seed left in the bottom of a field bin or truck that a farmer forgot to clean out.”

He said in this instance, farmers would not be required to bear any costs because the canola met industry standards, but said there was scope for such a situation to arise, if loads were delivered into the wrong bin.

Mr Phelps said GrainCorp’s delivery systems needed reviewing to avoid rorting by unscrupulous farmers.

"The whole voluntary system is based on the honesty of GM growers and they evidently cannot be trusted.”

"Currently, the system just encourages GM cowboys to dump their loads at the nearest site to minimise their transport costs and maximise the possibility of falsely claiming a premium for non-GM.”

However, Mr Ginns said this was not the case, and there was a traceability system that could track down where a load containing GM material came from.

“We’ve got a good indication what grain is delivered when due to our sampling system, and it is possible to find out where the contamination occurred if loads are deliberately put into the wrong segregation.”

He said the incidents of low levels of GM material needed to put in context.

”GrainCorp has received more than 250,000 tonnes of CAN (non GM canola) so far this year and the detections relate to 10 tonnes, or 0.004% of receivals.”

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
Attention canola buyers, buy South Australian canola you can be sure it is GM free unlike some other states who have been seduced by big chemical companies.
Posted by rancher42, 18/12/2009 10:16:21 AM
The only answer is do not buy anything with canola in it. There are only 2 things which work in our society; dollars and feet. Don't complain, just don't buy the thing or refuse to turn up.
Posted by denis, 18/12/2009 12:54:43 PM
GrainCorp's claim that the level of GM contamination in their silos is low is not credible. There are two kinds of tests - the five minute strip test can only identify the presence of GM but it cannot specify the percentage of GM contamination; the one to two week PCR test that can do this must be done in a laboratory and costs around $500. David Ginns of GrainCorp will not return my calls to confirm the situation but it's a fair assumption that they have relied on a strip test to confirm the presence of GM but are just guessing at the percentage of contamination. The Dunolly silo should now be declared a GM comingled site - the first but not the last of their abject segregation failures. Whether I'm right or wrong, GrainCorp should disclose the situation.
Posted by Bob Phelps, 18/12/2009 6:48:07 PM

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.
Related Coverage
ARTICLES
MULTIMEDIA
15 December, 2009
16 December, 2009
17 December, 2009
POLL
Q: Has your farm business made a profit in 2009?

Yes - profit
(19.8%)

No - loss
(59.3%)

Broke even
(20.9%)

Total Votes: 450
Poll Date: 13 December, 2009

Most popular articles

Advertisement



Stock & Land







Weather brought to you by:

Weatherzone

Classifieds

Front Page

Current Issue
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Advertising Terms | Copyright © 2012. Fairfax Media.
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...