Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

HuckleB

(35,773 posts)
Fri May 13, 2016, 10:50 AM May 2016

As consumers shift to non-GMO sugar, farmers may be forced to abandon environmental and social gains

http://weedcontrolfreaks.com/2016/05/as-consumers-shift-to-non-gmo-sugar-farmers-may-be-forced-to-abandon-environmental-and-social-gains/

"...

But it isn’t just the simplicity or the significantly improved weed control of the Roundup Ready sugarbeet system that convinced farmers to switch. Conventional sugarbeet herbicides can cause severe injury under adverse environmental conditions. Some growers refer to conventional sugarbeet herbicides as ‘chemotherapy’ for the beets. They injure and weaken the beets, but they hurt the weeds a little more. This is why the conventional herbicides were often applied multiple times at short time intervals. A higher, one-time dose of the herbicides would provide better weed control, but it would also cause more severe injury to the beet crop. As with chemotherapy, the weeds would eventually die after several applications, but the beets would be substantially weakened (like the photo on the left in the figure below). Conversely, Roundup applied to Roundup Ready sugarbeet (photo on the right) virtually eliminated the potential for crop injury due to herbicides.

The improved weed control provided by Roundup Ready varieties led to rapid environmental gains. By 2009, only two years after widespread adoption of GMO sugarbeet, over 50,000 acres of land was converted to some form of reduced or conservation tillage practices in Nebraska, Colorado, and Wyoming. That number is probably much higher now. Conservation tillage practices improve soil health, reduce soil erosion, and preserve soil moisture. Conservation tillage simply wasn’t possible in sugarbeet before the introduction of Roundup Ready varieties, because intensive tillage was needed to obtain adequate weed control in the crop.

The combination of improved tillage, reduced crop injury, and improved weed control has contributed significantly to increased sugarbeet yields in the High Plains growing region. Not all of the yield gains can be attributed directly to GMO, but I would suspect is is a substantial proportion.

So to summarize, GMO sugarbeet has reduced herbicide use, increased soil health, decreased risk of crop injury, increased yield, and has even allowed farmers to spend more time with their families. Knowing all of that, I was struck by the last line of Dan Charles’ piece, where a sugarbeet grower, Andrew Beyer, is quoted:

“To me, it’s insane to think that a non-GMO beet is going to be better for the environment, the world, or the consumer.”

But Beyer says he’ll do it if he needs to. He’ll do what his customers want.


..."


-------------------------------------

The real-world resulting harms of the anti-GMO movement are about to kick into gear.

3 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
As consumers shift to non-GMO sugar, farmers may be forced to abandon environmental and social gains (Original Post) HuckleB May 2016 OP
Yeah, but I bet we'll see a reduction in Autism and Parkinson's !1! progressoid May 2016 #1
LOL! HuckleB May 2016 #2
I saw one of the videos mentioned in that OP progressoid May 2016 #3

HuckleB

(35,773 posts)
2. LOL!
Fri May 13, 2016, 02:33 PM
May 2016

Yup. Or something...

There's another "glyphosate is evil" thread in GD. Of course, acknowledging this reality is not in the plans of the OP.

Latest Discussions»Culture Forums»Skepticism, Science & Pseudoscience»As consumers shift to non...