Maharashtra govt. clears GM crop trials despite Agriculture Minister’s reservations

Today's Paper » NATIONAL

MUMBAI, December 18, 2013

Priyanka Kakodkar

Vikhe Patil wanted a public hearing to be held before clearing the trials

Maharashtra Chief Minister Prithviraj Chavan overruled reservations expressed by the State’s Agriculture Minister Radhakrishna Vikhe Patil in clearing no objection certificates (NOC) for “confined” field trials of genetically modified crops in the state, The Hindu has learnt.

The NOCs were granted last month to 28 applications from seven companies and a government body on orders issued by additional chief secretary (agricultural) S K Goyal. “Confined” field trials are conducted in a restricted area under close supervision to prevent the contamination of external crops by the genetically modified (GM) variety and vice versa.

The Hindu  has learnt that Mr Vikhe Patil wanted a public hearing to be held before clearing the trials. “On issues of new technology which impact communities, public hearings should be held,” Mr. Vikhe Patil told  The Hindu .  Mr. Chavan, who is attending the state assembly session in Nagpur did not respond when asked for his comments.

Mr. Vikhe Patil said he was wary after the Bt cotton experience in Maharashtra. “The experiment with BT cotton has been a disaster. It has impacted local cotton varieties which have not been protected,”said Mr Vikhe Patil. He added, “Bt cotton yields have been low. It is meant for irrigated farms, not rain-dependent crops,” Mr Vikhe Patil added.

The Union Environment Ministry had asked for a stay on field trials of GM crops till the Supreme Court rules on a public interest litigation opposing GM crops.

Before the confined field trials can begin in Maharashtra, a final clearance will have to be sought from the Ministry’s Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee (GEAC).

The NOCs have been granted to transgenic varieties of rice, wheat, maize, brinjal and cotton. The companies granted clearances include Monsanto India Ltd, Mahyco Ltd, Bayer Bio Science Pvt Ltd, Syngenta Bio Sciences Pvt Ltd, Pioneer Overseas Corporation, Dow Agro Sciences India Pvt Ltd and Ankur Seeds Pvt Ltd. The government’s Central Institute for Cotton Research has also been given an NOC.

The clearances have been given on the basis of a report of a committee headed by eminent nuclear scientist Anil Kakodkar. Most of its members were drawn from of state agricultural universities. The committee also had a scientific think tank team which included the director of the CICR K R Kranthi as a member. This, even though the CICR had itself applied for an NOC for GM crop trials.

“The Kakodkar committee recommended the approval of certain NOCs based on conditions and we have accepted their report,” said Mr. Goyal. The Kakodkar committee had been set up by the Chief Minister and deliberated on the issue for almost a year. It submitted its report in August.

“The Maharashtra government should not have cleared field trials when the case is still before the Supreme Court. There is no difference between confined and open field trials. The former is a misnomer,”said Aruna Rodrigues, lead petitioner in the Supreme Court case against GM organisms.

She added, “The committee which cleared this should have had independent experts on food crops, not scientists linked to government bodies or those who do not have food crop expertise.”

The trials will have to be conducted under supervision, according to the conditions laid down by the Kakodkar committee. “The trials will have to be conducted on the land of a state agricultural university. They will have to be monitored by a committee chaired by the district collector. The trials will be inspected by experts and the companies will have to ensure there is no external contamination,” said state agricultural commissioner Umakant Dangat, who was a member of the Kakodkar committee.

The Kakodkar committee had initially received 32 applications from 11 companies. It finally cleared 28 applications. It rejected the Rubber Research Institute of India’s proposal for an NOC on trials involving the rubber crop. It pointed out that the scientific data submitted by the body was not satisfactory and that rubber was not a primary crop in the state.

Permitting field trials for GM crops has long been a contentious issue. In 2010, the then environment minister Jairam Ramesh had imposed a moratorium on the release of Bt Brinjal till scientific studies proved its safety. 

 In 2012, the Parliamentary Standing Committee called for a halt to field trials in different states saying the regulatory mechanisms were weak and the impact of transgenic crops on bio-diversity was still not clear.

 Also since 2005, a petition against GM crops is being heard in the Supreme Court. In June this year, the Technical Expert Committee appointed by the Supreme Court called for a halt to open field trials of GM crops till stringent conditions were fulfilled. It also called for a ban on the release of any genetically modified organism where India is the centre of bio-diversity.

 The issue has seen a clash between union environment minister Jayanthi Natarajan and Union Agriculture Minister Sharad Pawar, a firm advocate of GM crops. Mr. Pawar had argued that transgenic crops can solve the problem of food security.

He has also claimed that farmers are themselves opting for Bt cotton since they find it profitable because it has higher yields and is also as disease resistant.

 Keeping the ongoing Supreme Court case in mind, Evironment Minister Jayanthi Natarajan had in July put the field trials of GM crops on hold.

Besides the court case, she also pointed out that the regulatory mechanism to monitor transgenic crops was still in a nascent stage.

“The experiment with BT cotton has been a disaster. It has impacted local cotton varieties which have not been protected,”said Mr. Vikhe Patil

More In: NATIONAL | Today's Paper

SOURCE : http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/maharashtra-govt-clears-gm-crop-trials-despite-agriculture-ministers-reservations/article5472574.ece

Organic Farming Cooperatives In Nepal: One That Is Exclusively Run By Women

by Nicola Wong | 13 December 2013

Panchakanya Agriculture Cooperative Ltd. is a Nepalese women run cooperative that supports its members in farming organically and has helped increase their income derived from farming. (shutterstock)

The first cooperatives in Nepal were formed in the Chitwan district as part of a flood relief and resettlement program in the 1950s. These cooperatives were credit societies with unlimited liabilities; in the event of any credit default, the members of the society are jointly liable for its obligations to contribute to any deficiency in the asset of the society.  It was not until 1959 when the Nepalese government enacted the first Cooperative Societies Act, as part of government initiatives to use cooperatives as part of its development program. Over the course of seven Five-Year Plans, the Nepalese government embarked on several programs to organize and increase agricultural cooperatives in Nepal. The government controlled the majority of cooperatives in Nepal up until the Cooperative Act of 1992, which provided freedom for the farmers themselves to organize and form their own cooperatives.

A number of successful cooperatives are being run by local communities in Nepal. In particular, Panchakanya Agriculture Cooperative Ltd. uses of organic methods pumpkins, beans, and tomatoes. Panchakanya was loosely formed in 2001 when Uddav Adhikari, who worked as a travel agent in Kathmandu, noticed his clients enquiring about natural and organic foods in the area. Uddav Adhikari decided to introduce organic farming methods to farmers in Kathmandu. He raised awareness about the impacts of pesticide use on soil productivity, the health of farmers, and the nutrition of the produce.


It was not until 2003, that Uddav’s Village Development Committee (VDC) and four surrounding VDCs formally created Panchakanya. Following this, under the leadership of Uddav’s wife, Nirmala, the cooperative became a collective effort of women farmers—something that had never been established before in Nepal. Panchakanya’s mission is “to improve the social and economic well-being of the members by promoting self-help and mutual cooperation.” Today, the cooperative is run exclusively by women. It focuses on promoting organic production by its members and by non-members and other farmers in surrounding villages.


Currently, Panchakanya has a total of thirty-five members but there are many more women are eager to join. The average land holding of each member-farmer is about 0.3 hectares, which is used to grow tomatoes, beans, cucumbers, pumpkins, and other crops. During the winter, when off-season vegetables command a higher price, members focus on peas, potatoes, leafy vegetables, cauliflower, and cabbage.


All of Panchakanya’s members are farming organically and their incomes have also increased. Besides this, the women of Panchakanya have also created a microlending enterprise, whereby each member deposits NPR 100 (US$1.30) per month and loans are made available to buy agricultural inputs and meet household costs. To further develop Panchakanya, members established a village input center to supply seeds and other materials to cooperative members. This has helped prevent member-farmers from purchasing seeds and other materials from sources outside the community, which tend to be more expensive.


Another benefit to the community has been a lower cost for healthcare. The reduced use of pesticides has resulted in less diarrhea and dysentery in the community. Following in the footsteps of Panchakanya, many other cooperatives in Nepal have started replicating their organic approach to farming.

Source: http://foodtank.com/news/2013/12/organic-farming-cooperatives-in-nepal-one-that-is-exclusively-run-by-women

Connecticut becomes first state to require labeling of GMO's

Posted: Dec 12, 2013 1:00 AM ISTUpdated: Jan 09, 2014 4:00 AM IST

By Steven Yablonski, Managing Editor - email

By Susan Raff - email

By Joseph Wenzel IV, News Editor - email

 

Gov. Dannel P. Malloy signs GMo bill in Fairfield on Wednesday. (Picture courtesy from governor's Twitter account)

FAIRFIELD, CT (WFSB) -

Connecticut has become a pioneer in food labeling as it is the first state to pass legislation to make companies say if their products contain genetically modified organisms or GMOs.

GMOs are used to help plants be resistant to herbicides and pesticides, but it's done by taking DNA from a bacteria or a virus, which is inserted into the seed. GMOs are commonly found in  corn, soy, canola and sugar.

Gov. Dannel Malloy held a ceremonial bill signing in Fairfield on Wednesday to commemorate a bill that requires certain foods intended for humans to be clearly marked that it is entirely or partially genetically engineered.

"People need to demand GMO labeling," Malloy said. "Some companies are doing this and we need to move in that direction."

According to the statement, Connecticut's law goes into effect after four other states enacted similar legislation.

"I am proud that leaders from each of the legislative caucuses can come together to make our state the first in the nation to require the labeling of (Genetically Modified Organisms)," Malloy said in a statement. "The end result is a law that shows our commitment to consumers' right to know while catalyzing other states to take similar action."

In addition, a combination of northeastern states with a combined population of at least 20 million, including Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New York, Pennsylvania and New Jersey, must adopt similar laws.

Officials said the bill also includes language that will protect local farmers to ensure regional adoption of the new labeling system before it will require local farms to analyze and label genetically engineered products.

Buying foods that are organic has become popular and in health food stores, it's not common to find products that are already labeled GMO-free.

Lisa Storch, who owns the Catch A Healthy Habit in Fairfield, said more and more people want to know what's in the foods they eat.

"It's little steps at a time," Storch said. "(We are) trying different avenues as far as healthy eating and what works for you."

Copyright 2013 WFSB (Meredith Corporation). All rights reserved.

Source: http://www.wfsb.com/story/24195364/connecticut-becomes-first-state-to-require-labeling-of-gmos

'This is the time!’ Connecticut gov signs first GMO labeling law in US

Published time: December 12, 2013 16:44 

Edited time: December 13, 2013 16:06

The governor of Connecticut hosted a ceremonial signing outside an organic restaurant in the city of Fairfield on Wednesday to commemorate the state’s passing of what could be the first GMO labeling law of its type in the United States.

Voters in Connecticut decided back in June to approve a bill requiring that all foods meant for human consumption that contain genetically-modified ingredients be properly labeled. Unless some neighboring states in the region follow suit, however, the status of that law remains in limbo.

The Connecticut bill requires at least four other Northeastern states with a combined population of no fewer than 20 million to approve similar acts before it can officially go on the books. And while so far proponents of a GMO labeling initiative have found allies in one adjacent state, it could very well be a long-time coming before the proper support is rallied.

Voters in Maine have already elected to pass a near-identical measure, but residents in a region that includes Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island and Vermont must come together to do the same in at least three other locales.

Outside the Catch A Healthy Habit restaurant in Fairfield on Wednesday, Gov. Dannel Malloy implored his counterparts to consider joining in their fight.

“I am proud that leaders from each of the legislative caucuses can come together to make our state the first in the nation to require the labeling of GMOs,” Malloy said, according to Fairfield’s Daily Voice. “The end result is a law that shows our commitment to consumers’ right to know while catalyzing other states to take similar action.”

Tara Cook-Littman, the director of GMO Free Connecticut, applauded the efforts by advocates in the state and country working towards new laws.

“As the catalyst for GMO labeling in the United States, Connecticut residents should feel proud,” she told reporters. “We are hopeful that legislators throughout the Northeast will follow the lead of Governor Malloy and all our legislative champions by passing laws that give consumers transparency in labeling. It is a great honor for all of us to stand with Governor Malloy as he signs the first in the nation GMO labeling law.”

More than 60 countries across the world have approved mandatory labeling laws for GMO foods already, and polling suggests that the vast majority of Americans are in favor of doing the same. So far, in fact, almost half of all US states have introduces bill that, if approved, would either require labeling of GMO foods or prohibit them altogether.

"Surveys have always found 80 to 95 percent of people wanting labeling," Consumers Union senior scientist Michael Hansen told the Rodale News health site back in April. "People are paying attention to food, and because of that they're more interested in GMO issues and buying food that's more local and food without pesticides and other added ingredients."

Now with Connecticut taking the lead, Gov. Malloy hopes other states will do the same.

"This is a beginning, and I want to be clear what it is a beginning of," he told the Fairfield Citizen before Wednesday’s event. "It is a national movement that will requiring (food) labeling."

"People need to demand GMO labeling," Malloy told WFSB News on the day of the ceremonial signing."Some companies are doing this and we need to move in that direction."

"This is the time," he said to the Citizen. "You better get ready; people are coming and this is not a movement you are going to stop."

Malloy was flanked by state lawmakers from both the right and the left at Wednesday’s event, and Republicans and Democrats alike are now aligning themselves in the fight.

“This bill moves forward and reinforces our fundamental right to know what is in our food so we can make informed choices about what we feed our families,” said Rep. Tony Hwang (R-Fairfield-Trumbull), according to reporter Christina Chiarelli. “Consumers may or may not wish to purchase foods that they know to be genetically modified, but they need the information made available to them to make those informed choices.”

“Passing this bill is courageous and monumental,” added Rep. Philip Miller (D-Essex). “It is an affirmation for healthy, sustainable agriculture and responsible stewardship of our food supply. The ever growing grassroots efforts of Connecticut citizens has come to fruition with the passing of this legislation. I thank Governor Malloy for being a champion of our right to participate in building our economy as fully informed consumers and citizens.”

Currently 15 nations in the European Union require labels on GMO products, and Zambia, Benin and Serbia have all instated prohibitions against products. Just earlier this week, China for the fifth timeblocked a cargo shipment of US corn from entering the country, citing concerns of GMO contamination.

Source : http://rt.com/usa/connecticut-malloy-gmo-labels-148/

WATCH : Organic Farming - Part 1 & 2 (Hindi) by Shramajeevi

Published on Dec 6, 2013

Full length documentary film 'Organic Farming - part 1' (Hindi) by Shramajeevi.

SOURCE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGvaWp4hjQA

____________

Published on Dec 7, 2013

Full length documentary film 'Organic Farming - part 2' (Hindi) by Shramajeevi.

SOURCE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXUH64d13Tw


http://www.shramajeevi.com Also visit http://images.shramajeevi.com for agricultural and rural images and http://contacts.shramajeevi.com for farming related contacts.

NEWS : Failure of Monsanto Bt Cotton

By K P Prabhakaran Nair

Published: 06th December 2013 06:00 AM

Last Updated: 06th December 2013 01:20 AM

On February 12, 2011, the justice department and the US department of agriculture held a meeting in Ankeny, in suburban Iowa, the “corn belt” of US, to probe alleged “competitive dynamics of the seed industry”. Outside, a huge coalition of families of farmers, consumers and other critics of corporate agriculture gathered chanting “bust up big ag (agriculture)” demanding the end of the stranglehold of Monsanto on the seed industry through unfair market manipulation. It would be educative to examine our experience.

In November 2009, Monsanto’s scientists detected unusual survival of the dreaded pink bollworm (Pectinophora gossypiella) in Bt cotton fields, thrashing its very stand that Bolgard I,  India’s first genetically modified (GM) crop, officially released for commercial cultivation by the Genetic Engineering Approval Committee (GEAC, then, now rechristened as Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee) on March 26, 2002, is resistant to the dreaded insect attack. This author was the first agricultural scientist in India to raise objection to the GEAC’s decision, based on incontrovertible facts. A heated debate followed, including a PIL in Supreme Court. In January and February 2010, samples taken from the fields were tested in Monsanto’s laboratories, confirming that Bolgard I was, indeed, susceptible to the pink bollworm attack, and the pest is now resistant to the pest-killing protein in Bolgard I. Monsanto has been arguing that “there has been no confirmed cases of poor field performance of Bt cotton attributable to insect resistance”. Eight years down the line Monsanto admitted its failure. The question is why?

Before I answer, here are some important facts. Bolgard I was priced at Rs 1950 for a 450-gram packet and Monsanto garnered a sale of Rs 260 crore in the first cotton season justifying the astronomical price based on a “trait value” of  Rs 1250 per packet. This author, while in China, noted that the same Bt cotton seed was selling at USD 2 a packet (equivalent to about Rs 100 then)–a far cry from the Rs 1950 charged to Indian farmers. An outcry followed, and the Andhra Pradesh government, where cotton is a principal crop, intervened, invoking the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices (MRTP) law and clamped a ceiling price at Rs 750. Still, the company made huge profits. Obviously, Monsanto  had different business strategies in India and China. The Bt cotton produced by the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences was offering stiff competition, while in India that was not the case, because both ICAR and the Central Cotton Research Institute chose to sleep, and when they woke up and tried, the attempt not only failed, but was a fraud.

Approximately Rs 1600 crore is spent annually on cotton pest control through insecticidal sprays,  about 50 per cent of the total spent on all crops. India’s cotton cropped area is about 5 per cent of the total. At the height of the so-called green revolution came hybrid cotton, and with time came the pests as well, like in other crops. In the 1980s fourth-generation synthetic pyrethroids  surfaced as “effective” pest control for hybrid cotton, with initial “spectacular” success. Soon, the pests outsmarted the insecticidal sprays and cotton began to succumb.

The high-powered central team of agricultural experts, which probed the failure of cotton in northern India, noted that the major cause for crop failure was the build-up of the bollworm in the early part of the season, followed by rapid succession of the broods and their epidemic outbreaks from September to October. The team strongly recommended banning pyrethroids for three years and noted a reprieve could be had only by mixing cotton crop with others to encourage multiplication of the predators and parasitoids. The team pointedly noted that the “monoculture mindset” of the green revolution enthusiasts was at the centre of this tragedy. The time-tested practice of mixed cropping was rapidly giving way to monoculture, and, environmental havoc was beginning to strike.

Can Bt technology save the cotton crop forever? Let us take the US example, where it was introduced in 1996. Bt cotton derives its name because of the transfer of a gene from a naturally occurring soil bacterium—Bacillus thuringiensis—into the plant cell through what is known as the “recombinant gene technology”. A biochemical fusion at the genetic level, between a plant cell and a bacterium, leads to an enzymatic reaction that blocks protein digestion in the gut of the bollworm, when it feeds on the cotton plant. Earlier, direct sprays of the bacterial broth were resorted to in the US. However, after perfecting the fusion technology, the genetically engineered cotton plant started to behave as though it created its own insecticide. Commercial exploitation started in the US in 1997 and review of field data clearly shows full elimination of insecticidal sprays, as claimed by Monsanto, simply doesn’t happen. Similar is the experience here.

Both Vertical Gene Transfer and Gene Use Restriction Technique, features of the Bt technology, portends ill for Indian farming. The former will lead to non-target plants acquiring pest resistance, and, the latter will render seeds of one season not germinating when used in the next.

Monsanto introduced Bolard II in 2006 and is now readying with an insecticide—Round Up Ready Flex (RRF), selectively used for Bt cotton and Bollgard III. The MNC is laying the foundation to tie the Indian farmer permanently to its seed and insecticide. And, its strategy is to completely eliminate all native cotton varieties in future, perhaps, 10-15 years from now. This will simply be suicidal to Indian cotton farming. It is worth noting in this context that Monsanto recently received the World Food Prize.

Monsanto’s belated “admission” of failure of Bolgard I is a clever and devious business strategy rather than an unequivocal admission of technology failure. Interestingly, Monsanto India had suggested that Indian farmers should now switch to Bolgard II to delay the resistance built up by the insect. The Supreme Court had ordered Monsanto to sell Bolgard I at a reduced price, until the issue of royalty is resolved. Monsanto has shot down two birds: leave the Bolgard I behind and the competition that cropped up from other private vendors, who bought its technology, and go for a kill by the “new” product, Bolgard II. It must be noted that the US justice department has launched an anti-trust investigation against Monsanto, which controls over 90 per cent of the biotech crops worldwide.

(The author is an international agricultural scientist and can be reached at drkppnair@gmail.com)

SOURCE : http://www.newindianexpress.com/columns/Failure-of-Monsanto-Bt-Cotton/2013/12/06/article1930013.ece

WATCH : Agricultural Machinery (Part 1 English, Hindi, Kannada & Part 2 in English) by ShramaJeevi

 

Published on Dec 5, 2013

Full length documentary film 'Agricultural Machinery - part 1' by Shramajeevi.

SOURCE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k1fM2Pa6Ml4

Published on Dec 8, 2013

Sample clip of Documentary 'Agricultural Machinery part 1 (Hindi)' sample clip by Shramajeevi.

SOURCE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0kgDjDymlck

Published on Dec 9, 2013

Full length documentary film 'Agricultural Machinery - part 1 (Kannada)' by Shramajeevi.

SOURCE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntly8t4G8Ww

-----

Published on Dec 5, 2013

Full length documentary film 'Agricultural Machinery - part 2' (ENGLISH) by Shramajeevi.

SOURCE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itiokWfoD8A

http://www.shramajeevi.com Also visit http://images.shramajeevi.com for agricultural and rural images and http://contacts.shramajeevi.com for farming related contacts. 

EVENT: Organic Terrace gardening one day workshop on 21.12.2013 at AME Foundation

Kind Attention : Already attended can ignore this mail (Help to attend who are interested in the same)

Dear All,

 

As you may aware of the organic terrace gardening workshop is being conducted by Dr. B N Viswanath who is pioneering this since 2 decades. 

AME Foundation organizes one day workshop on Organic Terrace Gardening - 21st Dec 2013 (third Saturday).  

Please see below flyer for details and registration. Process has been begun already please confirm you participation on or before 15th Dec 2013

 

For any clarifications write to me and leave your full details (email, contact no. place).

 

Please confirm your participation/registration by replying to this email

 

 Thanks and regards

Arun and OTG Team

 PS: If already attended workshop please ignore this mail

Assuring best services

With regardsArunkumar Shivaray

Creating a transparent market for cotton growers

FIRST INITIATIVE: A price fixing committee by farmers decides on the price for their own commodity. Photo: Special Arrangement

SCI-TECH » AGRICULTURE

December 5, 2013

Updated: December 5, 2013 03:09 IST  

Appachi eco-logic cotton project is a unique organic cotton contract farm model in the Western Ghats region of Kabini Reservoir.

The project covers nearly 1,200 farmers spread over 1,875 acres. Over 17 per cent of the area comes under reserve forests of both Karnataka and Tamil Nadu and exposing the cultivation fields to wild animal attacks is forcing farmers to start cotton cultivation on a mono cropping basis instead of food crops.

Past story

For growing cotton the farmers for a long time were using only chemical fertilizers and pesticides extensively, thus destroying the soil fertility and the ecology besides paying a huge amount to buy the inputs.

“To begin with, the process, right from procuring seeds to selling the harvested produce, proved a nightmare for them since seeds would not be available on time and local moneylenders and middlemen used to fleece them since most of the farmers were either small, marginal or tribal growers,” says Mr. Arun Balamatti, Programme Coordinator, JSS Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Suttur, Nanjanagud Taluk, Mysore.

These inherent problems opened up a tremendous opportunity for Appachi cotton to try to bridge this gap, and carry the farmers through a value chain that would ultimately improve their lifestyle.

The firm entered into a contract with the growers and registered it with the Agriculture Marketing Department, Govt. of Karnataka. It tied up with selected seed companies for exclusively supplying non Bt cotton seeds, as very few companies provide non Bt seeds separately for organic farming purpose.

Advance payment

“For this, we had to pay 100 per cent advance money to the companies to secure non Bt cotton seeds. Each farmer was supplied one packet of seeds on an interest free credit. Many farmers do not own cattle, hence they needed support in sourcing organic inputs such as FYM, neem oil, bio pesticides etc.

We sourced all the critical inputs and distributed them on credit basis to the participating farmers,” says Mr. Mani Chinnaswamy, Managing Director, Appachi Eco-Logic Cotton Pvt. Ltd.

Apart from providing timely inputs, the firm regularly conducted training and hands-on workshops for capacity building among the farmers.

Selected farmers’ representatives were taken on exposure visit to Pollachi, Tamil Nadu to show them the ginning, spinning and weaving process and to make them understand the value of production and supply of clean cotton which ultimately decides the quality of the end product (the fabric).

Appachi sources its purchases from the Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee (APMC), five days a week. This is the only APMC in India where organic cotton is traded.

A price fixing committee is formed with farmer representatives who decide on the weekly prices every Saturday. This is a first initiative of its kind in India, where farmers have a say in deciding the price for their own commodity.

Fixed price

The price fixed by the committee is valid for the ensuing week; the price so fixed is communicated through voice SMS and bulk SMS to all the registered farmers. Best quality Bt cotton has been sold for Rs.5,500 a quintal.

“We have tried to bring in transparency at all levels; an exclusive cotton bag is designed to avoid contamination and to enable easy transportation; weighing is done with an electronic scale An organic premium of five per cent is offered for in-conversion fields for the first and second year farmers and a 10 per cent premium for third year growers. We ensure cash and carry system for all purchases,” explains Mr. Mani.

520 tons

As many as 52 truck loads (about 520 tons) of pure organic cotton has been supplied by farmers this season in the last two months, despite heavy rains affecting the crop at harvesting season.

“Appachi is aware that organic cotton alone would not be enough to ensure livelihood improvement of the small and marginal farmers. organic cotton apart, it encourages farmers to grow other organic crops such as ragi, maize, pulses and vegetables, which will be bought after the end of cotton season. We are lending technical assistance to the project,” says Mr. Arun.

For more details interested readers can contact Mr. Mani Chinnaswamy, Managing Director, Appachi Eco-Logic Cotton Pvt. Ltd.,46, Meenkarai Road, Zamin Uthukuli, Pollachi, Tamil Nadu - 642 004, phone: 4259 234666 and mobile: 096880 44000.

SOURCE: http://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/agriculture/creating-a-transparent-market-for-cotton-growers/article5422115.ece

Seed is sovereignty

SANGEETA BAROOAH PISHAROTY } November 29, 2013

The HinduSuman Sahay, activist and founder of Gene Campaign, in New Delhi . Photo: V. Sudershan

New Delhi-based Gene Campaign works for conservation of genetic resources of the Global South. Its founder Suman Sahay says it’s time to take the debate on genetically modified food to the people

Call it my bias or a run through reality, after snaking through an urbane farmhouse colony of the country’s First Capital — strewn with plush houses of the well-heeled and their posh cars swishing by – the last thing you expect to hear is a resident talking doggedly about farmers’ rights. Well, set aside the moneyed, who is really interested in making farmers’ condition any better? The policymakers in their air-conditioned offices? The votehungry politicos? The mall-savvy middle-class? The industry with the huge advantage of a sizeable cheap migrant labour population?

Look at the media. Isn’t it sometime now that news about farmers’ suicides slipped from newspaper page one? Such news, if at all covered on news television, is for non-peak hours certainly. Simply because there would not be enough ‘eyeballs’. So what are we talking about here!

Sainik Farms resident Suman Sahay seems resolute. Point by point, she touches the objectives of Gene Campaign, an advocacy organisation she founded 20 years ago for the conservation of genetic resources of our crops and indigenous knowledge of agriculture by keeping farmers of this country, and the Global South, at the head of the table while decision-making. An unbridled conversation with Sahay, a Padma Shri-accorded genetic scientist, leads you to a string of hard questions to dwell on and seek answers for yourself.

The conversation begins far above the ground. “You know, India is the only country in the world to have given legal rights to farmers,” she begins. Completion of 20 years in the field is naturally a time to look back and Sahay counts this legislation — the Farmers’ Rights Act — as one of Gene Campaign’s key achievements. “It was during the GATT-WTO days (early 1990s). We picked up the issue and went to the barricades. We said, if you have to have intellectual property rights, there is no way you can have patents. We organised a nation-wide campaign of farmers without any money. Thanks to alliances and partnerships we could build up at that time, the campaign could be taken to 17-18 States,” she recalls.

The term ‘patent’ was not easy to explain to a farmer in pre-globalised India. She remembers telling farmers “there will be an iron cage in your field. The key to that cage will be with someone else. Only when that someone else opens the key will you be able to sell your produce and you will never be allowed to save the seed.” Powerful farmer leaders like Mahendra Singh Tikait were also roped in hammer on the point. “It was not easy to explain to the kisan union leaders either that how through patenting the control over agriculture would be lost. So we took the metaphor of East India Company. Tikait belonged to a generation which understood what East India Company did. We reminded him, it came to trade but stayed on to rule us. If we accept all the proposals of the Dunkel draft (Arthur Dunkel as its director general drafted its proposals), then it will rule us. This caught on and Tikait till his last days referred to the metaphor to oppose patenting.” A farmers’ rally led by M.D. Nanjundaswamy of Karnataka and Tikait was organised on a March morning in 1993 at the Red Fort.

Sahay says it was during this time that her organisation “got a new track”.

“We began as an advocacy organisation for farmers’ rights. When the GATT-WTO episode was unfolding, the entire debate was focussed on the product patents in the pharmaceutical sector. But we argued that the real deadly patent demand is on seed. Till then, nobody had realised it because the country was focused on the health sector and also big players were involved in it but it touched a chord somewhere,” she feels. As a geneticist, she “could see the game plan then, the legal terms used in the proposal.” She was particularly attuned because as a lab scientist in the University of Heidelberg (She obtained her habilitation in human genetics there), she “saw the genetic material coming in all kinds of conditions.”

“We have grown up in a climate where everything is exchanged between labs for free. Then suddenly, the whole patent thing began to happen, we could see where it was going. So our first effort was to stop it.”

Soon the farmers’ rights movement got a new symbol — the seed — and was named Gene Campaign “to conserve the genetic resources of the Global South.” Sahay recalls “understanding the issues herself from people like Muchkund Dubey, B.L. Das.”

Gene Campaign organised a day-long discussion on the Dunkel draft in New Delhi then where it put forth “a list of minimum must for renegotiation.” She remembers representatives of all political parties coming to the discussion “because there was a lot of curiosity about it.” She now feels, “After that event, some amount of positioning began in the political parties.” One minimum must for renegotiation was “in exchange of giving it financial mobility, we should be given labour mobility.”

Gene Campaign shifted focus on Genetically Modified (GM) food on its 10th anniversary, debating its relevance, the safety measures required. She however, underlines, “We are opposed to it but we don’t belong to the vitriolic anti-GM brigade.”

As a scientist, she knows the ill effects of GM food, the dangers of not having genetic diversity. “Only last year, the United States lost its entire corn crop because of genetic uniformity. The Irish Potato Famine is your biggest example. In the time of climate change, the countries that have genetic diversity will have the answers, not those who have put their entire agricultural economy on say, five varieties,” she is categorical here. India’s large variety of crops, particularly rice, is its biggest wealth, based on which “it can be a food exporter one day.”

Food is not a mere necessity, she reminds you. “It is also a symbol of one’s sovereignty, a weapon.” Resorting to technology without gauging the need for it just doesn’t serve the purpose. “It is insane to have GM food when there is no need, when the safety measures are not followed. We have been arguing with the Government to send our people for bio safety testing to those countries who have been doing a good job of it but in vain.”

While there is a serious concern that the Government would let open its gene bank to private players and ICRISAT is already doing it, Gene Campaign through its gene and seed banks in States like UP, Bihar, Jharkhand, Himachal Pradesh and Uttarkhand — where it does field activities — has already collected 3000 accessions of traditional rice. “One of our biggest joys is that farmers come to us for traditional seeds. It is their property, we are only keeping it safe for them,” she says.

The need of the hour, insists the IARI alumna, is not to give in to the waves of urbanity but to resist it. “I am tired of hearing economists saying we need competitive advantage. My answer to them is, make farming more glamorous, make farmers entrepreneurs. It will dent the huge amount of disenchantment the rural population has with farming now, particularly among the youth.” Also a reason why she is opposed to this version of the Food Security Bill. “Because it delinks the producer from his produce.” She asks, “Where do you see the farmer in the Act? He is mentioned nowhere even though he is the one who will produce the food.”

“With so many people put on dole for votes”, she wonders, “Who will do farming?” A reason why she has an issue with MGNREGA too. “MGNREGA has no vision, just a populist scheme. It will have a huge effect on agricultural labour in some years. One is already sensing it.” Sahay notes here, “You know, I am downbeat about the Government’s attitude but upbeat about the possibilities.”

The activist rues that “the real tragedy in India is that there has been no good farmers’ movement, only episodes of it.” Gene Campaign, in coming times, is thinking of something on these lines. “May be, it is time to take the issue of GM food, the need to safeguard the seed, to the people yet again,” she says.

Losing genetic diversity

Suman Sahay warns that India is already losing a lot of genetic diversity not just in plants but in animals too. “We are a home for buffaloes. There is a kind of buffalo called Bhadavari. Its fat content is as high as 12 per cent, much coveted for it. But today, I think we don’t have its purest form,” says the scientist.

India is also the birthplace of rice, particularly eastern India. “In States like Odisha, Bengal, Bihar and Jharkhand, you will find non-sticky rice. When you move upwards to the North East, you will get both sticky rice and the non-sticky varieties. But when you move further to China, you will find only sticky rice. Rice probably followed a path that way,” she states. Unfortunately, many traditional rice varieties are either lost or in the process of extinction. “For instance, the red rice is nowhere to be found in Himachal Pradesh.”

A policy against bio terrorism

One of the recommendations that Gene Campaign put together at its 20th anniversary function in New Delhi was to have a policy on bio terrorism. The deliberate release of viruses, bacteria, toxins or other harmful agents to cause illness or death in people, animals, or plants in a country. Sahay explains, “The safety measures are prime when you are resorting to GM food because if something goes wrong, you will have no control. As a scientist, we know it can create new organisms, so it needs constant surveillance. But today, 30 to 40 per cent of our agriculture is based on BT technology and it is not need-based.”

There is also a lot of secrecy, she feels. “The intentions at times are not honourable.”

“Long before BT brinjal became widely used, I filed an RTI with the Department of Biotechnology seeking information on the tests it had conducted and their results. The Department wrote to me saying it was confidential. So I went to the Supreme Court which said it should be in public domain.”

Source: http://www.thehindu.com/features/metroplus/society/seed-is-sovereignty/article5405437.ece?homepage=true