Fred Kirschenmann, Organic Farmer

Traditional Breeding | Labeling | Feed the World | More Comments from Fred Kirschenmann | Farmer's Role in Society | How Does Biotech Fit in Farmer's Role? | Impact of GE on Family Farm |

Transcript for Clip 1 -- Traditional Breeding

We've obviously been manipulating plant and animal organisms for a long time. The difference here is that we're now dealing with a new generation of technologies. It's not just genetic engineering, it's also robotics and nanotechnology. Each of these new generation of technologies are self-replicating. That is the basic difference. So that we're really setting in motion a dynamic there that we will not have control over because these are self-replicating. You can't pull them back; you can't stop them at some point and say o.k. that didn't work out and we don't want to do that anymore. So there are no exits here. That's the thing that's basically different. So in one sense...it's doing what we've always done. We manipulate things and try to get things to grow the way we want them to grow. But it's using a much more powerful technology now, so it is different.

Transcript for Clip 2 -- Labeling:

It seems to me that labeling is a fundamental right that consumers should have. I mean, we...live in a democracy and people should have access to information. The only way that you can have adequate access to information in terms of how your food was produced is if you have some kind of label that says "here's what happened." Even if there are only ten consumers that demand [labeling], it seems to me those consumers have a right to be heard. If someone does get ill and the food is not labeled, there's no way to track it. If someone comes down with an allergy and the food hasn't been labeled and there's no way to know whether or not the food they ate was a genetically engineered variety or not, how do you track that? So then you really can't protect future consumers from [potential food-related problems]. I think labeling is essential.

Transcript for Clip 3 -- Feed the World:

Even if we are wildly successful with producing tons of additional corn and soybeans or other commodities as a result of genetic engineering, it's not going to feed the world. I mean, we are producing more corn and soybeans right now than the world can possibly consume and we've got 840 million people who are malnourished on this planet. Hunger is caused by a very complex set of factors. It has to do with everything from local ecologies and local social systems, and fundamentally it boils down to the fact that people aren't entitled to food. It isn't that there isn't enough food available but they're not entitled to it for all of these complex social and ecological factors. Just producing more [food] isn't going to change that. So the reason that I say [it is immoral to the issue of world hunger as a reason to use genetic engineering] is that we are leading the public to believe that all we need to solve the hunger crisis with an expanding population is just produce more stuff, and that's not true.

More comments from Fred Kirschenmann...

Q: What do you see as the farmer's role in our society?

A: In our industrial agriculture the farmer's role is generally seen to be to produce as much food and fiber as they can, as efficiently as they can. I happen to think the farmer's role is more than that, I think the farmer also can produce clean air and clean water and quality soil and a lot of other public goods that we sometimes don't credit the farmer for.

Q: Given that position, how does biotechnology fit or not fit into the farmers role?

A: In my view biotechnology is a very complex issue and unfortunately I think we've oversimplified it. We generally look at it in terms of is there a specific gene which can create a specific trait that or specific outcome that we want in our production systems. So if we want taller corn we find a gene that we can zap in to get taller corn or if we want corn that kills pests we insert a gene to kill the pests. I think one of the things I've learned as a farmer is that life out there on the farm is a lot more complex than that. We are dealing with very complex ecosystems. So if the goal is to produce food and fiber on a long-term basis we have to look at the ecosystem which sustains that production. That's a very complex system. Biotechnology may very well be a tool to tweak some part of that system, but what we're after is not this single gene to get a single effect, what we're looking at is to make the whole system more robust and more resilient so that we have better production and more sustainable production.

Q: What impact will genetic engineering have on the family farm?

A: The way genetic engineering is currently used is very likely to further the attrition of families off the farm. Because primarily we're using it as a tool to further enhance the abilitiy of farms to produce more of a very narrow band of crops and that means we;'re going to have larger monocultures and try to use the technology in a way to make that work, when the toxics approach, the chemical approach is failing. So it will extend this trend that we've been on, to larger farms occupied by fewer and fewer farmers.


Top
Posted March 6, 2001