Monsanto GM-corn harvest fails massively in South Africa

Good news in the fight against GMO's.. (sorry south africa and those you supply)


http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/270101

Monsanto GM-corn harvest fails massively in South Africa
By Adriana Stuijt.
Published Mar 29, 2009 by ■ Adriana Stuijt
1 more article on this subject: Mar 7, 2009 - Blogger says Monsanto aggressively monopolozing seed business - 2 comments


South African farmers suffered millions of dollars in lost income when 82,000 hectares of genetically-manipulated corn (maize) failed to produce hardly any seeds.The plants look lush and healthy from the outside. Monsanto has offered compensation.
Monsanto blames the failure of the three varieties of corn planted on these farms, in three South African provinces,on alleged 'underfertilisation processes in the laboratory". Some 280 of the 1,000 farmers who planted the three varieties of Monsanto corn this year, have reported extensive seedless corn problems.

Urgent investigation demanded
However environmental activitist Marian Mayet, director of the Africa-centre for biosecurity in Johannesburg, demands an urgent government investigation and an immediate ban on all GM-foods, blaming the crop failure on Monsanto's genetically-manipulated technology.

Willem Pelser, journalist of the Afrikaans Sunday paper Rapport, writes from Nelspruit that Monsanto has immediately offered the farmers compensation in three provinces - North West, Free State and Mpumalanga. The damage-estimates are being undertaken right now by the local farmers' cooperative, Grain-SA. Monsanto claims that 'less than 25%' of three different corn varieties were 'insufficiently fertilised in the laboratory'.

80% crop failure
However Mayet says Monsanto was grossly understating the problem.According to her own information, some farms have suffered up to 80% crop failures. The centre is strongly opposed to GM-food and biologically-manipulated technology in general.

"Monsanto says they just made a mistake in the laboratory, however we say that biotechnology is a failure.You cannot make a 'mistake' with three different varieties of corn.'

Demands urgent government investigation:
"We have been warning against GM-technology for years, we have been warning Monsanto that there will be problems,' said Mayet. She calls for an urgent government investigation and an immediate ban on all GM-foods in South Africa.

Of the 1,000 South African farmers who planted Monsanto's GM-maize this year, 280 suffered extensive crop failure, writes Rapport.

Monsanto's local spokeswoman Magda du Toit said the 'company is engaged in establishing the exact extent of the damage on the farms'. She did not want to speculate on the extent of the financial losses suffered right now.

Managing director of Monsanto in Africa, Kobus Lindeque, said however that 'less than 25% of the Monsanto-seeded farms are involved in the loss'. He says there will be 'a review of the seed-production methods of the three varieties involved in the failure, and we will made the necessary adjustments.'

He denied that the problem was caused in any way by 'bio-technology'. Instead, there had been 'insufficient fertilisation during the seed-production process'.

And Grain-SA's Nico Hawkins says they 'are still support GM-technology; 'We will support any technology which will improve production.' see

He also they were 'satisfied with Monsanto's handling of the case,' and said Grain-SA was 'closely involved in the claims-adjustment methodology' between the farmers and Monsanto.

Farmers told Rapport that Monsanto was 'bending over backwards to try and accommodate them in solving the problem.

"It's a very good gesture to immediately offer to compensate the farmers for losses they suffered,' said Kobus van Coller, one of the Free State farmers who discovered that his maize cobs were practically seedless this week.

"One can't see from the outside whether a plant is unseeded. One must open up the cob leaves to establish the problem,' he said. The seedless cobs show no sign of disease or any kind of fungus. They just have very few seeds, often none at all.

The South African supermarket-chain Woolworths already banned GM-foods from its shelves in 2000. However South African farmers have been producing GM-corn for years: they were among the first countries other than the United States to start using the Monsanto products.

The South African government does not require any labelling of GM-foods. Corn is the main staple food for South Africa's 48-million people.

The three maize varieties which failed to produce seeds were designed with a built-in resistance to weed-killers, and manipulated to increase yields per hectare, Rapport writes.

 

I am really sad for the farmers and all the people they feed. Monsanto is evil. What if this spreads to other varieties of corn? Corn easily cross pollinates.

 

PR?

02-Apr-2009 : White Maize in South Africa

In recent weeks, some South African maize farmers have reported variations in pollination in three white maize hybrids sold by Monsanto during the 2008/2009 growing season. The three hybrids contain either Roundup Ready or the stack of Roundup Ready and YieldGard. In some cases, the variable pollination causes a reduction in the number of kernels.

Monsanto announced several weeks ago it will fully compensate farmers who experienced the reduction in pollination and will do this before harvest. Teams of company representatives have either visited the farms or talked by phone with about 400 farmers who make up all of the growers who said they had a potential reduction in pollination. After detailed, in-field investigations involving Monsanto and the farmers, the teams concluded that roughly 75,000 hectares, which is about 25 percent of the total planted hectares, were affected in some way by this variation in pollination, according to Kobus Lindeque, the Monsanto team lead in Africa.

While there is variation in pollen production, the average pollination in the fields is about 90 percent. That means, on average, the yield reduction is about 10 percent, keeping in mind that portions of some fields were significantly more affected than that, he said.
Research teams confirmed that the biotechnology traits provided superior weed control and insect protection. They worked exactly as they should in all of the fields visited, according to Lindeque.

In order to maximize seed production yields during the 2007 seed production, the male and female inbreds of these three hybrids were reversed. This process of reversing the male and female is a common practice in hybrid production that existed before the advent of biotechnology. In this situation, the three hybrids produced using the same female inbred have experienced variable pollen production. Monsanto teams have reviewed the seed production method for the three hybrids and will make the necessary changes to ensure good pollinating hybrids in the future.

Pollination variation is not uncommon and can be influenced by several factors such as weather or agronomic practices. In some cases, such as this one, seed production methods can also contribute to lower pollination.
Lindeque said the maize hybrids with biotechnology traits are safe. The two traits contained in the three white maize hybrids have been thoroughly tested in South Africa for genetic quality and purity. He said the hybrids meet all of the company’s strict quality-control standards.
The safety of maize with one or both of these biotech traits has been independently reviewed and approved by regulatory authorities in Europe, Asia, North and South America. They agree that these products are safe and protective of the environment.

Maize with the YieldGard trait has been grown for a decade in South Africa. Maize with the Roundup Ready trait has been grown for the past four years in South Africa.

The next phase of the inquiry will involve meetings between Monsanto and every farmer impacted by the yield loss. Monsanto has committed to compensate farmers for any yield loss in these three hybrids. These meetings should take place over the next two months.

http://www.monsanto.com/monsanto_today/for_the_record/south_africa_gm_corn.asp

 

What about actual harvest production? Isn't that why you plant? In which case they didn't work as the consumer expected. I doubt any farmer would plant without and expectation of a resulting harvest.

A little research on their use in the States:
http://ngin.tripod.com/241002a.htm

[/FONT]​

 

pr? of course its PR. more like BS! and i dont believe a fucking word of what monsanto says about this.

as has already been stated,monsanto is pure EVIL.

as far as the compensation (buying the farmers off to keep their mouths shut is more like it,as usual ) , SO FUCKING WHAT??

what does it matter if the farmers are fully compensated ?? it still means all that corn is out of the food supply in a region already overwhelmed by famine..

this issue runs much deeper than simply making sure the farmers are paid for their loss. what happens if this happens in america this year as well? think there are starving people in the world now?? then what?

 

KANSAS CITY, Mo., April 2 (Reuters) - Monsanto Co (MON.N), the world's largest seed company and a purveyor of genetically altered crops, said on Thursday it recorded a $42 million pre-tax charge because of problems with corn grown in South Africa.

Monsanto made payments to South Afrucan growers after "pollination and yield concerns" arose with three white corn hybrids grown solely in that country, said Monsanto vice president for investor relations Scarlett Foster.

"These three hybrids appeared to produce less than optimal amounts of pollen," she said.
The hybrid issue was isolated on less than 4 percent of the roughly 6 million acres (Massive harvest failure?) of corn planted there, Foster said.
The compensation to farmers amounted to about 5 cents a share after tax.

"Working with growers on production challenges is part and parcel of doing business," Foster said.
Monsanto spokesman Lee Quarles said the problem arose during the 2007 seed production season when a breeding technique went awry.
"We reviewed the method and are making the necessary changes," he said.

Monsanto said Thursday its net income fell to $1.09 billion, or $1.97 a share, in the second quarter ended on Feb. 28 from $1.13 billion, or $2.02 a share, a year earlier. (Reporting by Carey Gillam; Editing by David Gregorio)

http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssIndustryMaterialsUtilitiesNews/idUSN0220100420090402

That is true, it is why they plant. It went wrong - doh.
They have worked in the past; they will in the future...it just went a bit squew-whiff - for some of the farmers - this time.
You won't hear if it went well this year or for the next decade.
Just some of these particular crops have failed.
Any need for this: "an urgent government investigation and an immediate ban on all GM-foods, blaming the crop failure on Monsanto's genetically-manipulated technology."

She (Marian Mayet) is right in one respect, though: "failure on Monsanto's genetically-manipulated technology" - well, atleast the application of that technology. Marian Mayet, sounds like an alarmist to me.

SA seems to be doing fine.
http://www.southafrica.info/business/economy/sectors/agricultural-sector.htm

 

hippiehillbilly:

If you post something in large red text it must be true.
I don't give a toss about Monsanto.
I'm interested in GM crops and their potential.
If you want to over blow this go ahead.
I just posted the other side of the coin.

 

the case of the incredible shrinking hectares,you do realize thats even a smaller area than monsatans original press release dont you.their vice president of "INVESTOR relations" is quite the spin doctor.

im sure in another week this will all be a big misunderstanding and it will have never happened..

be sure and post that as well,we all know if you post something from monsatan or the MSM it must be true..

im glad your interested in a field designed to reduce the population of the world. hopefully you will eat lots and lots of GM foods and never reproduce..

New Study Links Genetically Engineered Corn to Infertility

go ahead and defend them,its nothing new. just because you post it doesnt make it true.

BTW to those who care,using monsatans numbers,and average GM corn yield per hectare and some quick math that amounts to roughly 140,000 metric tons(over 154,000 tons for you americans ) of corn taken out of the world food supply. as was stated in the OP, you can rest assured its much more than that no matter what they or their defenders say.

massive or minor? i guess that depends on how starving you are and what your corn ration is this year now doesnt it?

 

I think the solution is that farmers in South Africa wise up and start planting corn that they can harvest and save the seed from without paying Monsanto. They tried it, it didn't work, plant something else. If their sole concern was roundup resistance, then I suggest they start dealing with the weeds in another manner. If it's insects then switch to integrated pest management practices instead of a spray and pray mentality.

Many farmers in the US have forgone Monsanto crops and have seen an increase in their profits by saving on Monsanto fees, higher yeilds, less use of chemicals like Roundup so they save on the costs of those chemicals and costs of use(such as employee training and certification, protection of employees and public liability, safe storage and disposal of chemicals, and equipment used to apply), and higher prices on their produce because they can guarrantee that it's GM free. Plus they can save their seed and use it for the next crop.

 

I could be wrong here but it looks like:
4% of 6000000 = 240000 not 24000
25% of 240000 = 60000
Less than 75000 is 60000

Not wanting to get into any USUKguncrimegate statistical dibacle...though. Good grief.

Like I said, I was just posting the other side.
I don't actually give a toss about Monsanto.

1. It wasn't designed to reduce the population.
2. When a pro-organic site says: dangerous to health...
I question if they are being completly fair.
3. It would have been a funnier joke if the study had said it makes you impotent. It stated it reduced the fertility over several generations...
So - If I actually wanted kids - I'd be fine .

I'm not defending them. I'm posting other information that I am sure would not otherwise come to be posted. Almost my civic duty.

How was it taken out of the world food supply?
Could it not be eaten?
Are you talking about the potential yeild or the actual yeild?
As far as I can see, the farmers lost money not actual crops.

Doesn't South Africa export their surplus?
I think they will be just fine.

 

how could a failed crop be eaten?? you make no sense whatsoever.

if a crop failed that doesnt go into the food supply.. duh huh.. a waste of otherwise viable crop land.



where do they export their food to? obviously wherever that is is now going to receive less than they otherwise would have..

you can discount it as much as you want but it doesnt change the reality of what happened.

the fact is in a world scrambling to figure out how to feed the masses tens of thousands of viable acres of crop land were wasted on a failed harvest due to bad monsatan seed.

and all you care about is that the farmers were compensated. how pathetic.

and as much as you would like to make this out to be a isolated incident and no big deal this is just the latest in a string of failures worldwide.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Monsanto_in_India

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Monsanto_and_the_Roundup_Ready_Controversy

 

I see no mention of crops failing per se.
I see "variations in pollination" - not the actual crop withering and dying, therefore being unable to be eaten.

So what? It is only surplus. I'm sure other farmers in SA or other countries are quite willing to pick up the slack (if indeed any crops actually had to be destroyed or "failed".

There are huge mountains of unused crops around the world.
The trouble seems to be, nobody seems to want to sell it, countries can't afford to buy it and despots won't allow it to be distributed to their people (rather, raping their own women and doping their kids into fighting pointless land disputes or other pointless evil activities.)

If they only lost money... that is all I need to care about.

I'm aware this is not an isolated incident. But would prefer to not turn it into something it is not (if it isn't.)

 

your a moron. if the crop doesnt produce due to polination problems it failed no matter what it grows like in the field.

youve obviously never grown a vegetable in your life. if a cabbage plant doesnt head,it failed no matter if it grows or not,and the same can be said for corn,it doesnt matter if it produces a ear,if there are no kernals on it it failed.

god why am i even acknowledging such a STUPID post?
seeing the rest of it is using the same retarded logic i am just going to walk away..

 

Tried to grow weed once, does that count?

Don't walk away. I can appreciate a crop "failing" if due to it having "variations in pollination" it does not do ALL it sets out to do. Does that mean it can't be eaten? Does that mean it is destroyed? I've got a blind eye to this part of the process. You do say it "failed" and did not do all it set out to do, but, you do not say it couldn't be eaten or it has to be destroyed...sorry, but you seem to skirt around that point. Clarity would be nice. If it isn't destroyed and can be eaten, where do your earlier figures come from (hence me asking : "How was it taken out of the world food supply? Could it not be eaten? Are you talking about the potential yeild or the actual yeild?" It seems to be slighty weasel words at the moment, but, I appreciate you could be right.

 

Oh wow!

Hippyhillbilly, I think you're talking to someone who doesn't garden much... kinda like me asking beginner questions 4 years ago, and taking my time about "getting it" upon occasion.

Odon - a failed crop is one that never makes it to maturity... maturity being the phase at which actual fruit appears on a plant. SOMETIMES this means you could feed what grew to livestock, (that can live off of chaff & leaves) but just as often it means there's nothing there for ANY living critter to eat, let alone humans with their delicate digestive systems. So no, if the crop failed it essentially wasted time & space, and nobody had anything to eat for all that trouble. That's why this is such a disaster, and why some of us who think less highly of Monsanto are getting an evil chuckle out of this. For all of their "genetic engineering" and manipulation to make better/stronger plants... they've managed to create a crop that's literally good for nothing.

So here's a question... what are they gonna DO about this now? They've wasted the peoples' time & space, and there's no food to show for it. What now? What about the people that worked for that food? What about the people that were counting on that crop? Are they gonna be given any help now? Because it sure isn't THEIR fault this happened!
love,
mom

 

i agree "oh wow".. gnaw on a corn cob for a while and get back to me when you figure it out odon...

 

I'm not "TAKING MY TIME" as I asked questions (my second question was:"Could it not be eaten?" .)
If it "failed" therefore could not be eaten - fine.

Chalk it up to experience and move on i'd imagine.

Compensation.

What about them? I think they didn't work for the food per se...they worked so the crop could generate cash. They lost out on cash so have been compensated for the cash they lost.

They have been given compensation.

 

I don't eat corn cob.

 

noone else does either.. duh...

 

I didn't say anybody else did - duh.