>> January 30, 2010 >> >> TM Q&A: The Real Truth about Whole Foods Market¹s Response to the >> >> USDA Genetically Engineered Alfalfa Decision For Internal Use Only ­ >> >> Do Not Distribute ­ Please Place in Logbooks >> >> >> >> What is the news? >> >> To our utter disappointment, the USDA decided to completely >> >> deregulate genetically engineered (GE or GMO) alfalfa without >> >> restrictions. This means farmers will now be able to plant Roundup >> >> Ready GE alfalfa beginning as soon as this Spring without having to >> >> take into consideration its potential to contaminate neighboring >> >> organic alfalfa fields or those that were planted with non-GE seed >> >> for markets and consumers who want the opportunity to buy non-genetically engineered products. >> >> >> >> Why are customers upset with us? >> >> They have been misled to believe that we have ³surrendered² to >> >> Monsanto and ³cut a deal² for co-existence and that we¹ll receive >> >> ³compensation.² Nothing could be further from the truth. We, along >> >> with the National Cooperative Grocers Association, the National >> >> Organic Coalition, the Organic Trade Association, Organic Valley, >> >> Stonyfield, United Natural Foods and many others in the organic >> >> community, were trying to secure protections for organic farmers so >> >> that if their fields were contaminated once the GMO alfalfa was >> >> released, biotechnology companies for the first time would be held accountable for their pollution and would be forced to pay for the damages. >> >> (No money would ever go to us.) We were also pushing for measures to >> >> protect seed purity so that non-GMO alfalfa supplies could be maintained. >> >> Unfortunately, none of those protections were approved. >> >> >> >> What does Whole Foods Market think about the USDA¹s decision to >> >> deregulate GE alfalfa? >> >> We are very disappointed in the USDA¹s decision to allow GE alfalfa >> >> to be planted without restrictions and believe it is irresponsible of >> >> the USDA to not require and oversee a program to ensure organic and >> >> non-GE farmers have a right to grow foods without fear of >> >> contamination from other farmer¹s GE crops and that consumers have a >> >> right to make the choice to buy non-GE products. >> >> >> >> What products would the use of GE alfalfa potentially impact? >> >> The issue with GE alfalfa is the potential contamination of organic >> >> and non-GE alfalfa which is used as a mainstay food for organic and >> >> non-GE dairy cows, beef cattle and honey bees. >> >> >> >> What does the term ³co-existence² mean related to the USDA and GE >> >> alfalfa issue and why did Whole Foods Market support it? >> >> Not allowing GE alfalfa or other genetically engineered crops was NOT >> >> an option that the USDA had up for consideration. >> >> Instead, the USDA was considering two potential decisions on what to >> >> do with GE alfalfa, either 1) full deregulation without requiring any >> >> restrictions on where on when it is planted or 2) conditional >> >> deregulation (or >> >> ³co-existence²) which would have set rules to protect non-GE crops >> >> from contamination. Whole Foods Market supported the ³co-existence² >> >> option, even though we continue to have reservations about GE crops, >> >> as that was the organic and non-GE industry¹s best chance at >> >> preserving seed purity and the opportunity for consumers to continue >> >> to be able to make the choice to buy non-GE products. >> >> >> >> What about the accusations from the Organic Consumers Association >> >> that Whole Foods Market is joining forces with the biotechnology industry? >> >> For groups to widely spread misinformation and lies about Whole Foods >> >> Market and other organic companies by saying that we are joining >> >> forces with the biotechnology industry (Monsanto) is beyond ludicrous. >> >> Our support of ³co-existence² always incorporated the following three >> >> central >> >> issues: >> >> · The protection of seed purity for all farmers, including organic, >> >> so we can maintain variety and avoid massive mono-culture >> >> · Compensation by the patent holder to the farmer for any losses >> >> related to the contamination of his crop >> >> · Public oversight by the USDA rather than relying on the >> >> biotechnology industry to voluntarily try to contain GE contamination >> >> as the USDA has the authority to protect all U.S. agriculture Why is >> >> the OCA spreading misinformation? >> >> That¹s a hard question for us to answer. Perhaps because we don¹t >> >> share their narrow view of what it means to support organics, or >> >> perhaps because we do not support them with donations. Either way, >> >> it¹s a shame that an organization that claims to ³campaign for >> >> health, justice and sustainability² can¹t simply tell the truth. This >> >> just confuses consumers. Despite all their noise, no industry leaders >> >> listen to the OCA ­ but uninformed consumers might. Their >> >> fear-mongering tactics, combined with the OCA¹s lack of transparency >> >> about its funding sources, underscore the fact that it is neither >> >> credible nor trustworthy. We can only assume their activities are >> >> intended for further fund-raising. (We do not give them any money; >> >> you¹ll notice that OCA¹s supporters are never targeted for their attacks.) Was Whole Foods Market the only one who supported the ³coexistence² option? >> >> No. The National Cooperative Grocers Association, the National >> >> Organic Coalition, the Organic Trade Association, Organic Valley, >> >> Stoneyfield, United Natural Foods and other companies and groups also >> >> endorsed the path of deregulation with restrictions, or coexistence, >> >> not because it was a perfect path, but because it was a path to >> >> create meaningful change right now in the regulating of >> >> genetically-engineered foods and the protection of non-GMO foods. >> >> >> >> What about those accusations that say Whole Foods Market has agreed >> >> to sell genetically engineered foods? >> >> We haven¹t agreed to anything! This is another attempt to twist the >> >> facts and has absolutely nothing to do with the negotiations to >> >> protect farmers. The reality is that no grocery store in the United >> >> States, no matter what size or type of business, can claim they are >> >> GE-free. While we have been and will continue to be staunch >> >> supporters of non-GE foods, we are not going to mislead our customers >> >> with an inaccurate claim (and you should question anyone who does). Here¹s why: the pervasive planting of GE crops in the U.S. >> >> and their subsequent use in our national food supply. 93% of soy, >> >> 86% of corn, 93% of cotton, and 93% of canola seed planted in the >> >> U.S. in 2010 were genetically engineered. Since these crops are >> >> commonly present in a wide variety of foods, a GE-free store is currently not possible in the U.S. >> >> (unless the store sells only organic foods.) Since the U. S. >> >> national organic standards do not allow the use of GE ingredients and >> >> practices in the growing or production of organic foods, choosing >> >> organic is one way consumers can avoid GE foods. The other is through >> >> labeling, of which we are strong supporters. We have advocated for >> >> mandatory labeling of GE foods since 1992, even before they were made >> >> commercially available. Accordingly, we were also founding members of >> >> the Non-GMO Project, which works to ensure the sustained availability >> >> of non-GMO choices through an industry-wide product standard to create a non-GE labeling program that can be fully substantiated. >> >> . >> >> What has Whole Foods Market done about trying to ensure we and our >> >> customers continue to have access to both organic and non-GE foods? >> >> Whole Foods Market has been a staunch supporter of non-GE foods in >> >> the marketplace. We have taken a strong and visible stance on >> >> biotechnology in agriculture, and will continue to do so. >> >> * Our 365 Everyday Value® and Whole Foods Market brand products are >> >> sourced to avoid ingredients grown from genetically engineered seed, >> >> and our partnership with the Non-GMO Project >> >> will >> >> enable us to verify and label these products. These include products >> >> that natural as well as those that are organic. >> >> * We provide extensive organic products throughout every department >> >> in our stores, enabling our shoppers to choose non-GE. >> >> * Beyond our stores, we have publicly advocated for clear labeling of >> >> GE food and shared our concerns that the USDA and FDA¹s policies on >> >> GE foods are not consistent with our consumers¹ expectations. >> >> * Since 1992, before GE crops were even commercialized, we have been >> >> educating and advocating on this issue, and we will continue to >> >> pursue our right to sell non-GE food. >> >> * We are proud to be a founding leader of The Non-GMO Project >> >> , which works to ensure the sustained >> >> availability of non-GMO choices through an industry-wide product standard. >> >> * We are committed to sourcing our store brand products to avoid GE >> >> ingredients, and we will continue to fight for strong organic >> >> standards that do not allow the use of GE crops. >> >> * We support the National Organic Standards, which prohibit GMOs in >> >> organics, and we champion informed consumer choice with regard to GMOs. >> >> >> >> Despite this major setback with the USDA¹s decision on GE alfalfa, >> >> will Whole Foods Market continue to work on ensuring that non-GE food remains available? >> >> We will continue to work aggressively on this issue because we >> >> believe that GE food ingredients should be clearly labeled, and that >> >> consumers who want to avoid them should have an actionable way to do >> >> so. While the USDA¹s decision will make our work more difficult, we >> >> are as committed as ever to ensuring that non-GE food remains >> >> available and we will continue to advocate for our farmers and for our shoppers on this issue. >> >> >> >> Where can we send customers for more information? >> >> >> >> We have posted a few of blog posts on The Whole Story that contain >> >> some of the information from above and we will continue to update our >> >> customers there. Here is the most recent >> >> post:http://blog.wholefoodsmarket.com/2011/01/no-regulations-ge-alfal >> >> fa/ >> >> >> >> >> >> Additionally, it may be helpful to direct passionate customers to >> >> third party sources of information, so they can see that we are >> >> supported. These are good articles to provide: >> >> >> >> From Megan Westgate, Executive Director of the NON-GMO Project: >> >> Full article: >> >> http://www.nongmoproject.org/2011/01/29/team-organic-will-never-surre >> >> nder-to- monsanto-now-we-continue-the-fight-together/ >> >> > >> ender-to -monsanto-now-we-continue-the-fight-together/> >> >> >> >> Excerpt: >> >> Leading up to the ruling, a broad coalition of organic organizations >> >> and companies were working around the clock in an attempt to >> >> influence the USDA¹s decision. The USDA had already made it clear >> >> that alfalfa would be deregulated, but hope remained that there might >> >> be some way to soften the blow. Organic Valley >> >> > >> 507950&i >> >> d=20674850824> , Whole Foods >> >> >> >> and Stonyfield Farm >> >> > >> falfa-de stroy-organic-dairy-a-letter-from-gary/> , along with many >> >> others in the organic community, were doing everything in their power >> >> to secure protections for organic farmers so that if their fields >> >> were contaminated once the GMO alfalfa was released, biotechnology >> >> companies for the first time would be held accountable for their >> >> pollution and would be forced to pay for the damages. These groups >> >> were also pushing for measures to protect seed purity so that non-GMO >> >> alfalfa supplies could be maintained. Unfathomably, these tireless >> >> organic organizations are now being criticized for their efforts. In >> >> total denial of the incontrovertible fact that the USDA was never >> >> even remotely considering a full ban on GMO alfalfa, some are >> >> suggesting that these group¹s efforts to make the most of a bad >> >> situation *somehow* (though no one is very specific on how, exactly) >> >> signals corruption, and are even calling for boycotts >> >> . HOW ON EARTH is taking >> >> this out on 1200 organic family farmers going to help anything?! This is divisiveness we cannot afford. >> >> >> >> From Chewswise, blog of Samuel Fromartz, author of Organic, Inc.: >> >> http://www.chewswise.com/chews/2011/01/vilsack-gm-alfalfa.html?utm_so >> >> urce=fee >> >> dburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ChewsWise+%28Chews+Wise >> >> %29 >> >> > >> ource=fe >> >> edburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ChewsWise+%28Chews+Wis >> >> e%29> >> >> >> >> Excerpt: >> >> The decision was a stunning reversal of a more measured approach that >> >> Vilsack appeared to be taking in December, when the USDA talked about >> >> considering the impact of the GM crop on other sectors of >> >> agriculture. But that was before he faced an uproar by the GM >> >> industry and the editorial page of the Wall Street Journal for >> >> playing nice with organic farmers. As George Siemon, head of the Organic Valley dairy co-operative, said: >> >> > >> /gm-alfa >> >> lfa-whats-happening-now/?utm_source=ff&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign= >> >> os110126 >> >> &utm_content=header> >> >> The biotech industry has waged a complete war on the Secretary of >> >> Agriculture for ... the consideration of a co-existence proposal. >> >> They used all their influence to have the Secretary¹s job challenged. >> >> There here have been op-eds in major papers and magazines (³Sack >> >> Vilsack,² Forbes), special meetings with the White House, grilling by >> >> the Justice Department, endless lobbying, and on Thursday of last >> >> week, a Congressional member forum was held where the Secretary was >> >> taken to the wood shed and asked repeatedly why he had not approved >> >> RR-alfalfa sooner. All this for simply opening the coexistence >> >> conversation and acknowledging that property rights and other markets should be considered. >> >> As Liana Hoodes, director of the National Organic Coalition, said: >> >> "Organic farmers and others are now left, once again, having to take >> >> all the precautions while biotech takes little responsibility."