The future of genetically engineered crops is hanging in the balance, waiting for U.S. public opinion to sway the issue one way or the other.
Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) have been hit with both barrels from “consumer” groups who claim that GMOs aren’t tested and could cause unintended effects. They’ve won the public relations battle so far with their names for GMOs like “frankenfood” and protests that have made the front pages of major newspapers.
The potato industry has been at the front of the fight because GMOs are only a small percentage of the total acreage – about 3% of total planted acreage last year, said Bud Middaugh, executive director of the National Potato Council (NPC).
“They are trying to knock off potatoes because we are little guys and don’t have much money to fight it,” he said. “If they can knock us off, then they can go after the corn, cotton and soybean people.”
Turning the tide
The potato industry isn’t sitting still. There is a huge public relations campaign in the works to get the real truth out about all GMO crops.
On the potato side, the NPC is trying to start a dialogue with processors and quick serve restaurants (QSRs) about accepting GMO potatoes.
The PR campaign will target the U.S. consumer and should start sometime in March, according to Tom Hoban, of North Carolina State University, who spoke at the NPC annual meeting in Orlando, Fla. in late January. He’s conducted extensive surveys to find out what the public’s pulse is on the issue.
“Consumer acceptance will determine the success of the products,” he said. “Two-thirds haven’t heard much about it yet, so we still have time to get ahead of the issue.”
An independent third party will run the campaign and focus on the fact that using GMOs will make more productive use of the land, reduce inputs, promote sustainability and that independent scientists and the government have tested the products and proven they are safe, Hoban said. Companies with GMO varieties, commodity groups and universities are pitching in a large sum of money to start running ads and taking a pro-active stance on the safety and need for GMOs, he said.
To make sure the market stays open for GMO potatoes, the NPC has started a dialogue with processors and QSRs.
“The interest of the potato council is very much to keep the technology alive,” he said. “In the long term the council believes it has a great deal to offer all of agriculture and we don’t want to see it mothballed.”
No processor has openly come out and announced it will or will not accept GMO potatoes at U.S. processing plants. McCain’s has said it will not accept GMO potatoes at its Canadian plants. No fast food restaurant chain has come out and said it will not accept french fries made from GMO potatoes.
To find out what the position of the processors were, the NPC has talked to all of the major processors over the last six months about them accepting GMO potatoes.
“The collective response has been that they have to produce the kind of product demanded by the customers,” Middaugh said. “What we heard was that the processors are waiting for the QSRs to tell them.”
That answer led the NPC to open dialogue with the processors’ customers – chains like McDonalds, Burger King and Wendy’s. There has been varying response from the QSRs and no face-to-face meeting has been held.
Only one QSR is open to starting a dialogue with the NPC, Middaugh said. That will occur in early March when a conference call will be held between the chain’s management and NPC officials. Two other QSRs said they want to talk to the NPC after the conference call and one major buyer said it doesn’t want to talk about the subject at all.
“We have our foot in the door with one major user and we will learn a lot on our conference call,” Middaugh said. “We are hoping we can open dialogue because as one QSR said ‘we’ve heard it all from one side and nothing from the other.”’
To plant or not to plant?
Potato growers across the country are wondering just what the future holds for GMO potatoes.
A panel from the potato industry recently tried to answer the question at Potato Conference 2000 in Pocatello, Idaho in mid-January. All agreed that GMO crops are safe, have been fully tested and can be grown successfully.
“A few years ago there were performance questions,” said Mike Thornton, who is in charge of cultural management for NatureMark. “This technology does work on the field level. There is no difference in agronomic performance.”
The panel also agreed that GMOs will be accepted by the American public in the future.
“A survey last fall showed three-quarters of U.S. consumers supported GMOs if using the technology reduced pesticide use,” said Jim Zalewski, who is in charge of cultural management and pathology for NatureMark. “But, the majority of people said they’ve heard more negative than positive about GMOs.”
What the panel couldn’t answer was how the GMO potato industry would survive through the onslaught of anti-GMO efforts.
“If we succumb to knee jerk reactions, we will seal our fate on this issue,” said Zalewski. “We need to keep cool and keep some markets open for the products and let the PR catch up with it. We can’t just turn seed production on and off.”
The public reaction is the same as with any new product that has been introduced like microwave ovens and the artificial sweetener, saccharine, said Larry Branen, University of Idaho’s dean of the College of Agriculture.
“Saccharine has been banned by the FDA since 1979, but Congress put a moratorium on the ban,” he said. “It met a consumer need and it is still on the market. The warning label on every packet states, ‘Use of this product may be hazardous to your health. This product contains saccharin which has been shown to cause cancer in laboratory animals.’”
The panel did agree that GMOs are being pulled the wrong way – from the seed grower to the consumer – and that consumer demand should instead be pulling GMO products through to the marketplace. So far all the GMO crops being planted are perceived by the public as only benefiting the production and processing side and not the consumer, Branen said.
“We started with looking at products that would decrease inputs for growers,” Zalewski said. “There was no indication at that time that this concern would arise. After the fact, we are now looking at products that will meet consumer needs.”
It will take many years to develop these new products and in the meantime growers are caught in the middle and must decide if they want to risk planting GMO potatoes, said Mike Cranney, Cranney Farms, Oakley, Idaho, and former president of the National Potato Council.
“How can they afford to rake a risk and have a situation like this happen?,” he said. “Then the processor comes out and says they won’t use it and the growers are left holding the bag.”
Zalewski said there are some processors who are making the attempt to accept GMO potatoes and use product made from them in the U.S. market where there isn’t the consumer backlash like there is in Europe.
“It’s important to keep the technology moving,” Zalewski said. “I can’t predict what will happen in the future.”
One grower in the audience asked the NatureMark panel members if the company is going to pay growers to raise the GMO varieties so the technology doesn’t die before consumer acceptance catches up with the industry.
NatureMark officials said they wouldn’t pay growers to raise them, but is putting up a lot of money to pull the product through to the consumer in the national PR campaign scheduled to start in March.
Another grower in the audience asked if NatureMark can guarantee growers that they will have a home for their GMO varieties.
“Saying the processor doesn’t want it isn’t exactly true,” Zalewski said. “They want to give the customers what they want. Right now the quick serve restaurant industry is reacting to what ifs. Every grower has to make that decision and make sure the market they sell to will accept it. The fresh side has stayed fairly open, but you should still get assurances. There is nothing NatureMark can do to twist arms and guarantee there will be a home for the potatoes. It is the commercial growers’ responsibility to ensure he can sell them.”
