Answer: no, not yet. But if the plans of the Food and Drug Administration are carried out the way they have stated them today, the answer in the relatively near future will be… maybe. There will be no way of telling. Because the FDA announced Thursday that it will start hearing proposals from food companies that want to market GMO meat. Fish, chicken, cows… everything.

GMO coffee is a legitimate concern of this blog. And therefore GMO agriculture is an adjunct. I admit GMO meat is not really in my portfolio, but frankly I just can’t help it.

The people who publish Consumer Reports magazine apparently feel the same way. Their Director of Food Policy asked editorially if this meant that the pork for sale at our markets in the near future could have mouse genes in it… but will not be labeled in any way to warn the consumer?

As Dezi Arnez said to Luci on more than one occasion, “You got some ’splanin’ to do’. Translated to the present time and the current situation, I think the FDA has some serious explaining to do to the American people. But they have no intention of explaining anything to us. GMO meat is on the road to appearing someday soon in your grocery store, unannounced.

Lest you think this future is far away, an East Coast aquacompany called Aqua Bounty Technologies said they hope to apply for approval within a few months for their genetically altered salmon. They say it tastes exactly like any other farm-raised salmon. Of course, that is not the point. There are several things that taste just fine, like trans-fats in pastry. But we all know what kind of total health disaster that man-made food component has turned out to be.

Let me go down a sidestreet for a moment to mention that farm-raised salmon (shrimp too) are not the pleasing pink color you see in your supermarket’s fish department. They are pasty white. The farms feed them a coloring agent called astaxanthin (ass-ta-zan-thin), or absolutely no one would buy their product. How do I know this? In the USA, astaxanthin is produced primarily right here in Kailua Kona, at NELHA, the economic zone that was created to help companies make sea-oriented products. I also know that the company producing this carotenoid pigment in great vats of sea water heated by the tropical Kona sun, huge paddles constantly churning oxygen into the brew of microalgae … sorry, got swept away by words for a second… anyway, they make a precisely printed book of color swatches for the farms that show exactly what color the salmon or shrimp will turn if they feed them a certain quantity of astaxanthin just prior to sending them to market.

Back to GMO meat. It is not too late. But it almost is. Thursday’s proposals are open for public comment for 60 days before they seep into the marrow of the agency’s infrastructure and GMO meat is, for all intents and purposes, a done deal in the United States of America. I personally do not know how to comment in such a way that would change their minds. But maybe, just maybe, you do. It is possible that someone is reading this who is expert and knows how to make such a comment. If so, please take a look at the FDA release and take it from there. You would have the gratitude of a great many of us who stand firmly opposed on this issue.

The County Council Environmental Management Committee brought a bill to the full council yesterday that would make it illegal to “test, propagate, raise, plant, grow, introduce or release genetically engineered taro and coffee.” Well, it can hardly get better than that! County Corporation Counsel and the county Prosecutor’s Office are also on board, both having reviewed the bill before it went to the full council and finding no fault with it.

Angel Pilago, Council Vice Chairman and candidate for Hawaii County Mayor in the next election, introduced the bill. In my mind, that was a very smart move on his part. This is a crucial issue for the people of the Big Island, and he is sure to garner a great deal of political support from taro and coffee farmers who are solidly against GMO crops in Hawaii Nei.

As always, there is a catch. The Hawaii state legislature could, conceivably, create a law that supersedes county law. But our county Corporation Counsel has said it would depend on the exact wording of such a law. And there is no such law before the state legislature at this moment in time.

Second catch: it has to pass. I think it is likely. Even council member Dominic Yagong from Hamakua (ha-ma-coo-ah) on the northeast side of the island, who is not really against GMO in principle, has gone on record stating that he is against the introduction of GMO plants when the farmers oppose it. For coffee and taro, that is certainly the case, with strong economic and cultural reasons behind the opposition. So there should be enough votes to see it through. I certainly hope so.

Ten of twelve citizens testifying before the council came out fervently in support of the bill. I think that is probably a representative proportion of all the voters on the island.

This is a very exciting and long-awaited development. I’ll let you know when we have a final outcome.

That’s asking a lot, isn’t it? And if we think about it, I believe we must wonder if anything is that containable. We have been assured by the United States Department of Agriculture that these assumptions are true, and they say they have the science to back it up, with no chance of being wrong. Do I hear an echo of ‘famous last words’?

But the first crack in the glass was when farmers started finding the gene in their crops, even though they had not planted any GMO seed. Some thought it obvious that the genes were not as tightly bound to the original GMO plants as was believed. But there were alternate explanations that were also possible, including seed blowing off of a supply truck as it went past a non-GMO farm, or even carried on the wind from farm to far. So that was not definitive proof.

The second crack appeared along with the superweeds which started growing along with Roundup Ready® corn. The weeds somehow caught the GMO gene that makes a plant resistant to the herbicide Roundup®. If you use that herbicide, available in most big-box stores, on your lawn or garden, you will notice they seem to have changed it’s formula. For example, you can now apply it right before a rain, which you could not do previously. My thought is that they are rather desperately trying to get around the resistance that the GMO crops have caused in weeds. I think this is reasonably direct evidence that the spliced genes has the capability of transfer to non-intended plant life.

But all the real-world evidence has been dismissed by the USDA as irrelevant. The formal finding of the USDA is that the proteins involved with the gene splicing are safe for “food, feed, cultivation… and breeding”, and present “no safety concerns”. End of story. Case closed.

Should it be closed so tightly, in the face of evidence to the contrary? Since the 1990’s, reports have been filed with the USDA by a growing part of the scientific community that has qualms about GMO. One in 1998 showed exactly how the DNA of the GMO proteins can … dare I use the word… infect many species. Not only plant life, but also animals and humans. This study was sent to the USDA by Dr. Mae-Wan Ho. Some think she is too radical, but usually conservative MSNBC news has used her as an on-camera commentator for the controversy surrounding Genetically Modified Organisms. She earned a Ph.D. in biochemistry in 1967 and was a Postdoctoral Fellow in Biochemical Genetics at the University of California, San Diego. She now is director of The Institute of Science in Society. You can look her up on Wikipedia. She is definitely a player.

Apparently the USDA thinks her science lacks merit, because they routinely ignore the reports she files with them, including the one mentioned above. Is that because she is wrong? Or is it because if they admit she is right, they would have to immediately pull the plug on GMO food?

Alarmingly, she details how the type of gene splicing used today happens to break the genetic code in a very vulnerable place in the chain. Once broken there, she claims, the DNA can pick up other genetic alterations from viruses that normally inhabit the soil. This is not a good thing. She reports that a certain very rare human disease has become much more common since the advent of GMO, and she places blame squarely on the shoulders of the genetic modifications in the GMO crops now in the open fields of America.

Her conclusions are that genetic additions to food are inherently dangerous, and are done in such a way that provides a means of transfer outbound to other life… viruses, plants, animals, and humans.

Usually when there are two diametrically opposed points of view… say the USDA’s and Dr. Mae-Wan Ho’s… the truth often lies somewhere in between. But in this case, if she is even partially correct, shouldn’t programs to produce genetically modified organisms cease instantly? The potential level of harm could be incredibly high. I think it would be wise for such a moratorium to be established quickly, until opposing scientists with good formal credentials can be convinced that GMO is indeed safe.

Or should we just wait and see?

But I’m kind of an ‘overview’ guy, and because of that, I’m concerned with the long-term future of coffee, which dovetails with the future of all food crops. Genetically modified organisms, GMO crops, is the gorilla in the room, when it comes to the future of food, and so I must be concerned about it. I think we all must be. Because it’s true… we are what we eat. That is becoming more and more clear.

I give my respect to all the fine people on the Big Island who have put their time and effort into protecting Kona Coffee from turning into a GMO crop. The umbrella organization is The Coalition to Protect Hawaii Coffee. It includes the Kona Farmers Alliance, Hawaii Organic Farmers Association, Kona Coffee Council, Kona Coffee Farmers Association, Hawaii Coffee Association, Kona Young Farmers and Kona Pacific Farmers Coop. Nancy, the manager at Sugai Kona Coffee is one of the many who are particularly concerned with this issue. My hat is off to you all.

I want to be clear that I in no way speak for any of the organizations or people listed above. But I wanted you to get a feeling of how seriously this subject is being taken here in Hawaii.

This is my viewpoint. If you’ve ever done any gardening, you no doubt remember how quickly you found out that there is a lot more to it than meets the eye. A plant can be doing quite well, and then suddenly, for no apparent reason, it isn’t doing well at all. You end up with an empty pot and no idea what went wrong.

You can sympathize with farmers, whose livelihood depends on a successful crop. Whatever it takes to get that crop ripe, and and visually attractive, and marketable… well, I can see the temptation to try just about anything. You can understand them grasping at whatever help is offered, from any source, to make enough money to pay back the bank what they’ve borrowed in order to plant, tend and harvest the crop. And hopefully have enough to live on until the next crop is harvested.

That goes double or triple or a hundred times more for corporate farms. Anything to make that tomato look good enough to eat and last long enough to get to market. Anything for more profits.

But like the plant that suddenly goes wrong for no apparent reason, the food we eat is also more complex than just its appearance. It’s what’s inside that counts. And there is new evidence that what is inside GMO food is inherently, intrinsically and insidiously dangerous. GMO crops may be far less beneficial than even we anti-GMO people have thought. And that’s sort of a scary thought.

Details next time, which I hope will be tomorrow.

I have to make a disclaimer here, and tell you that this post is somewhat speculative. But maybe it will give us heart as we contemplate the future. I was talking with a coffee farmer from just south of Kailua, discussing the possibility of GMO genes contaminating a farmer’s crop by accident, and then the company that made the gene taking ownership of the crop. He had not even considered that disturbing scenario before. But since it has actually been tried in the past, he became very concerned about the future. Which made me feel a little concerned for bringing it up.

So this post is dedicated to him. Maybe the future is starting to look just a little brighter.

One rather serious mistake that GMO marketers are making, which may have far reaching consequences, is that they are overselling what GMO can do. The hype placed in industry publications by Monsanto promises to increase grain production by 100% within 22 years. But in reality, they do not have the roadmap to get there from here. So far, they have made GMO grains resistant to herbicides, specifically Roundup®. They will have to manipulate genetics far more profoundly, in exponentially more difficult realms, in order to double yield. And yet they have had few successes outside of simple herbicide resistance.

Assuming they have tricks up their sleeves that we don’t know about… and to be fair, they might… the timeframe is still simply awful. 2030. That’s a terribly long wait for a hungry world. If they can deliver. Which I frankly doubt.

But say that the wait is acceptable, and they can somehow manage to pull several different colors of rabbits out of their mink-lined top hats. There may be a completely fatal marketing mistake that has already been made, and may be too late to undo.

The kings of GMO have tunnel-focused their efforts on just four crops that are superstars in the USA: cotton, corn, soybeans and canola. All but about one-seventh of the GMO crops in the entire world are comprised of just these four foods. But the vast majority of farmers in the world, especially farmers in poorer countries do not grow these crops! They grow garbanzo beans and spelt and gourds and strange crops whose names I do not even recognize.

In order for GMO to fulfill its promises to the world, one of two things must happen. Farmers in every country must change over from their traditional foods to a short list of American favorites. Or the GMO behemoth must start producing modified varieties of more kinds of crops than you can shake a stick at. Including, of course, the one most dear to the hearts of BehindTheCoffee.com readers… coffee.

And that is where real farmers have started to put their collective foot down. Hard. After our euphoric honeymoon with the first four GMO brides of Frankenstein, we have stepped back, taken a good look at the baggage that came with those relationships… the ’superweeds’ that took on the characteristics of Roundup-Ready® Corn and are now immune to that workhorse herbicide… the unknown effects of foods with GMO structures in them… the unbridled spread of GMO throughout the ecosphere, despite assurances of ‘it can’t possibly happen’. And a significant portion of us have simply said ‘no’ to the further horrors which undoubtedly lie somewhere down that road.

The development of GMO versions of other foodstocks has been delayed, and sometimes nearly blocked, by informed farmers who have considered the alternatives, and have decided they can get more production using safe, traditional methods. One that is mentioned in Marks Blog points out that when more varieties of bees pollenate a crop, coffee cherry fruit set can be increased by 50%. Much better than having to buy GMO seed year after year! Because as you may know, GMO seed is not fertile. You cannot save seed from one year’s crop to plant the next year. You must buy new seed from its maker each year. Forever.

Many marginal product categories have been successfully created by a good marketing plan. Dare we hope that this disastrous product category will be undone by a marketing plan that is, fortunately, on the same level of competence as the product it is glorifying?

The bill, nice as it is, was enacted after the deadline for applications for crop insurance had passed for this year. That means farmers who did not sign up previously for coverage are not eligible for the vog benefits… unless they “Buy-In” in a special way with a special extended deadline.

They must apply at their local Farm Service Agency Office for an opportunity to be included in this program, and pay a fee of up to $900.00. They must insure all crops on all of their acreage, not just the ones affected by vog. They must do so by September 16. There are also some does-not-include’s that mean they are not covered with crop insurance indemnities or Noninsured Crop Disaster Program benefits. So it’s not a whole slice of pie.

For exact amounts of actual coverage and payment schedules, they are advised to contact the nearest FSA office. I include those numbers here:

Big Island (Hawaii County) 933-8381

Honolulu County 483-8600

Maui County 871-5500

Kauai County 245–9014

I hope that this aid really does turn out to be something useful for our fellow farmers. Like Bill, my heart goes out to them. Who could plan for vog? They have been blindsided in a way they could not have possibly guessed, so it is very right to help them out of the present situation.

My question is, are they in any condition to pay up to $900 right now for a benefit that will be paid some time in the future? Isn’t a lack of cash flow the problem in the first place? I’m hoping that the “Buy-In” will be substantially less for many farmers. But from the information provided, I cannot tell what the average might be. I would encourage our representatives to see if they can find a way to mitigate that payment. I’d suggest the “Buy-In” be waived under these circumstances.

Because what is needed is real help, soon. Not another outlay of cash. What do you think, Mazie and Bob?

Now here we go with the long version.

As you probably know, the key to growing things is nitrogen. There is no shortage of nitrogen anywhere on earth. The air is almost four-fifths nitrogen. Our lungs are filled with it each time we take a breath. Nitrogen passes freely through the leaves of plantlife.

But nitrogen in the air does little good for either plants or humans, because it is locked together in pared atoms with an extremely strong triple bond.

To become usable to plants or humans, the bond must be broken.

That’s tough. It takes lots and lots of energy.

Commercial methods of breaking the nitrogen bond require temperatures of 750 to 900 degrees Fahrenheit, at crushing pressures more extreme than those found over a mile down in the murky depths of the sea.

And now you know the dirty little secret of the ‘Green Revolution’. We spend immense amounts of energy breaking down nitrogen from its natural state so we can make it into usable nitrogen which is the main ingredient of… chemical fertilizer. Nitrogen comprises about 60% of all fertilizer used in the US, and it is VERY energy expensive to produce. It is the furthest possible thing from ‘green’. We may waste energy by driving large cars, but commercial fertilizer is an energy hog that out-eats all the SUV’s ever made.

How expensive, exactly? In 2005 …sorry, that’s the latest figures I could find…US farmers spent $2,980,000,000.00 on chemical nitrogen alone to grow just that one year’s crop of corn. That’s a hair shy of three BILLION dollars for just one year of corn only. It does not include all the other types of crops we grow. And it does not include any other chemical fertilizer components, nor the labor required to apply it. Imagine what the cost is going to be for this summer, given the gargantuan increases in energy prices. Imagine what food prices will be like next year.

Compare that to the cost of organic compost, which can approach $0 plus labor.

That’s not all. The usual form of nitrogen in chemical fertilizer tends not to be completely used by the crops it is lavished upon, and tends not to stay where it’s put. Rain, especially heavy rain, and flooding, especially the kind of flooding we’ve been having in the Midwest, washes it into the nearest body of water.

And there it is perfect food for phytoplankton, which very happily eats it and blooms and takes all the oxygen out of the water and we have Dead Zones. Very, very expensive Dead Zones.

There is a better way. Researchers have been finding out amazing, wonderful things about how plants break down nitrogen in nature. We do not have to use chemical fertilizers. We can start a real ‘Green Revolution’ without them. We just have to decide that our wasteful use of massive amounts of energy to break down nitrogen belongs to the past, not to the future. If we do that, the future could look a lot brighter.

Most people have a pretty good feeling about the so-called ‘Green Revolution’. I did. The very smartly crafted phrase creates visions of endless fields of good food growing in the sunlight, happy farmers harvesting huge amounts of large produce, and a supermarket full of luscious things for dinner.

The actual vision is better seen in the Gulf of Mexico, where each year the Dead Zone appears, usually in July. You can see an image of it on NASA’s Visible Earth site. Almost every year, it is bigger than the year before. It became mainstream news when it doubled its size in a single season, after the floods of 1993, to nearly 7,000 square miles. It got a boost from the New Orleans flood disaster, and is predicted to get another boost from the current Midwest flooding. If so, it will be probably be significantly larger than it was in July of 2007, when it came in at 7,900 square miles.

There is no oxygen in the Dead Zone.

There is no fish, no shrimp… nothing except water and the huge annual bloom of phytoplankton that strips the water of its life-giving oxygen.

There are nearly 150 Dead Zones in the world, most of which are off the east coast of the United States, and the rivers and coasts of Europe. The largest was 45,000 square miles in 2007. Needless to say, fishermen of the world are in a bit of a panic.

What causes this massive yearly phytoplankton bloom? NASA says ‘agricultural run-off’. That is the official government position. Big Agribusiness may argue the point, but there’s really no point to that. It is plain and simple. The culprit is chemical fertilizer.

Frankly, this is such a heavy subject that I think I’ll stop and regroup a little, and get into what chemical fertilizer really is in my next post, if you don’t mind. It’s fascinating, yet sort of like watching a train wreck. Terrible in every human way. But you can’t help taking a peek from between your fingers. I promise to give you a prurient peek next time.

If you buy local, you cut out a substantial cost to the environment by shortening the shipping distance. You also help to minimize costs to the grocer, some of which may get passed on to the consumer, if we’re lucky. Better yet, if you buy from a local farmer at a farmer’s market, you increase the benefits, both to the environment and to yourself, since you’re buying direct.

Admirable goals, and ones I agree with absolutely. There are fine websites that encourage this kind of thinking, like Local Harvest, and specific, homegrown sites like Portland Buy Local. They have maintained the spirit of the original movement.

But there is something else that has slowly creeped into the way that ‘Buy Local’ is being presented, and the goals are hardly lofty or beneficial.

In the mainstream media articles, you will often find that one of the main points being driven home is ‘do NOT buy Organic‘.

The reasoning goes, if there is an organic product that is not locally grown, then the transportation costs more than wipe out any benefits. So the ‘more green’ thinking should be to choose a local food, even if it is grown with pesticides and artificial fertilizer and is a GMO creation with fruit fly genes.

And before I say, ‘I don’t think so’, let me tell you where I’m coming from. Kona Mountain Coffee sells both Organic and non-organic coffee, in about the same proportions that the American public buys most Organic and non-organic foods. So although I like Organic, our business would produce the same profits either way. I have no profit motive to push Organic.

But I do feel motivated to stand up for Organic, because it is by definition non-GMO food. And really, it fits in perfectly with ‘Buy Local’. If the goal is to limit carbon expenditure on food, then locally grown Organic is the pinnacle product. Not only do you save transportation costs, both environmentally and economically, you save a great deal of energy by not using chemical fertilizers. (I’ll try to go farther into that in a future post.)

The more personal question is, of course, do you think it is better for your health to buy locally grown food that is GMO and harboring insecticides and herbicides and unknownicides… or would you rather have real food? Of course, if GMO is not an issue for you, then sure, it’s better to buy local frankenfood than transporting the same thing from Uruguay. Although frankly, the chance of getting GMO food from other countries is much less than it would be from US farms today. Sadly, even that is changing, and a higher percentage of crops in other lands are being planted with modified seed.

Perhaps we should go back to the original thinking of ‘Buy Local’. Minimize carbon expenditure. Eat good food. But don’t throw out the baby with the bath water… don’t campaign against Organic or any other non-GMO food. Do what is sensible and reasonable, and enjoyable and healthy too. I think that is more ‘do-able’, and we’d end up having the best for both our planet and ourselves.

Interestingly, on the Big Island, it is easier to get more natural foods locally. And the shipping cost of mainland GMO foods and mainland Organic food is exactly the same, so there is a much smaller price difference between them on the store shelves in Kona than here in Colorado. One more reason it’s ‘lucky to live Hawaii’, as the local saying goes. Well, at least I get to visit from time to time. I suppose that’s not perfectly green of me. But… I just can’t help myself. I love Hawaii!

Well, probably there are several, but I’ll focus on just one. There are at least two facilities in the world that are ‘banking’ heritage seeds of plants from all over the world. The best known is probably the so-called Doomsday Seed Vault in Norway in the Arctic Circle, only 500 miles or so from the North Pole. Sponsored by $30 million from the Bill Gates Foundation as well as donations from the Rockefeller Foundation, Monsanto Corporation, Syngenta Foundation and the Government of Norway, among others, this is said to be a major effort to ‘conserve crop diversity for the future.’

So if there is a catastrophe of some sort… nuclear war, an astroid hitting earth, devastating weather… or perhaps failure of agriculture worldwide caused by glitches in GMO crops… there would be a source for seed stock to replant. To start again.

This is a most excellent idea.

One thought that this project gave me was that we need to get Hawaii’s unique biodiversity represented in this effort. I’ll take a look into it, but if there is anyone reading who has a way to help do that, please kokua ( co-coo-ah, to help out, one if the word’s meanings) and leave me a comment.

The first thought I had, however, was that we probably need to make a seed bank ourselves, here in Hawaii. Perhaps a much smaller facility, without the blast doors and airlocks of the Doomsday vault, because if we need those on this island… we probably won’t need the seeds.

And the reason I’m thinking that we need one here is that the Arctic seems to be melting awfully quickly.

BBC News reported on May 23 that ‘vast’ cracks have appeared in the Arctic ice-cap. As you read the article and see the video, you may think along with me that ‘vast’ may not be large enough a word for it.

The Canadian military was traversing a series of giant ice shelves in Canada’s far north along with some scientists, in a safari of snowmobiles. It was part scientific expedition, part a projection of national sovereignty as the question of oil rights under the melting polar cap becomes significant. They found 23% less sea ice this year than ever before. And even more astounding, cracks in the shelves so huge that they are hanging together only barely, like a jigsaw puzzle held together by the shape of pieces fitting together. They say it is extremely unstable, and may break apart at any time.

I’m reminded of the days, long long ago, when refrigerators had to be defrosted. You would take out all the food, put the refrigerator on ‘warm’ cycle, and wait for it to melt. If it was taking too long, and it always seemed that way to me, you could help it along by chiseling off some of the ice on the outside of the freezer compartment. At first it was very tough to do, very slow going. But all of a sudden it got easier, and big chunks started almost falling off, and then they were so loose that you could just reach in and take them out with no effort.

I’m wondering if that is the way with the gigantic freezer that is the Arctic ice cap. If so, the melting process may suddenly produces a great change. And if that is so, then the Doomsday vault may be in just the wrong place at the wrong time.

Or perhaps the Canadians are alarmist, and things will be just fine.

But sadly, probably not. Because please note that Monsanto and Syngenia are two of the major donors. They are perhaps the largest proponents of GMO crops in the world today. And another backer is the Rockefeller Foundation, which is generally credited for beginning the ‘green revolution’ founded on chemical fertilizers. I’m wondering if these are the people whose hand we want controlling possibly the last source of heritage seeds, pure seeds which may someday be the only ones not touched by the transgenic qualities of GMO crops.

There is no way, in fact no reason, to stop them. They will go their own way. But perhaps ordinary farmers and ordinary people should take a bit of charge of our own future. A Hawaii regional seed bank would be wonderful. Until then, perhaps all Hawaii farmers would be wise to set aside some seed in as safe a place possible, as generations before us have done. One day our children, or generations beyond, may thank us.