Congressional Republicans Unhappy with GE Alfalfa EIS
Three congressional Republicans assert that the U.S. Department of Agriculture
(USDA) has no authority to weigh economic factors in conducting
an environmental review for genetically engineered (GE) alfalfa under the
National Environmental Policy Act and the Plant Protection Act. In a January
19, 2011, letter submitted to USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack, they vilify him for
including an option that would impose geographic restrictions and isolation
distances on the crop. House Agriculture Committee Chair Frank Lucas
(R-Okla.) and Senators Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) and Pat Roberts (R-Kan.)
contend that the option was included in the final environmental impact
statement (EIS) solely “to interfere in planting decisions based on the risk of
economic harm due to pollen drift.”
According to the congressmen, the option “is a poor substitute for existing
options available to farmers to amicably resolve the concerns regarding co-existence of agriculture biotechnology, conventional and organic crops.” They also claim that “the implications of such decisions could potentially
hinder the future development of varieties necessary to address the growing
needs to produce more food, fiber and fuel on the same amount of land
with fewer inputs.” The letter criticizes litigants and the courts for “unwisely
interfer[ing] in normal commerce,” without otherwise discussing the cases
that led to orders requiring USDA to conduct an EIS for GE crops several
years after deregulating them. See House Agriculture Committee Press Release,
January 19, 2011.
