Thank you, ladies and gentlemen, for inviting me to speak to you today from the perspective of the organic sector.
My name is Ted Zettel. I have been an organic farmer since 1983.
Twenty years ago I participated in the founding of Organic Meadow, a farmers' cooperative, which is now the leading brand of organic dairy products in Canada. I am also the president of the Organic Federation of Canada, which represents the organic sector to the federal government on regulatory issues. I also sit on the Organic Value Chain Roundtable and have worked in consultation with their task force on genetic engineering to prepare these comments today.
For the last 28 years I have made my living producing organic food, developing and providing for organic markets, and teaching fellow farmers about the methods of cultivation and livestock husbandry that are needed to satisfy this growing consumer demand. There are about 3,900 certified organic farmers across the nation similarly engaged in and dedicated to organic production.
In June 2009 the organic sector saw the implementation of the Canadian organic regulations, which regulate the term “organic” and require all organic production and processing to conform to a national standard. Since that time, Canada has negotiated an equivalency agreement with the U.S. and is in the process of negotiating similar standards recognition agreements with Europe and Japan, the major global markets.
In 2008 the organic sector in Canada was worth about $2 billion in retail sales. Close to three million acres of farmland in Canada are managed organically. Global organic sales have gone from about $15 billion in 1999 to $51 billion by 2008. North America has been leading this growth in recent years. Now organic products represent about 3.5% of all food and drink sales here in North America.
Organics is an important segment of the national and global economy, and it is poised to continue to grow and to continue to appeal to the millions who want to buy food that has been produced without synthetic chemicals, in harmony with nature, and without GMOs--yes, without GMOs. The use of genetic engineering in organic agriculture is prohibited in all organic standards worldwide. The industry is clear and unanimous in prohibiting their intentional use. Many consumers who wish to avoid consuming products containing GMOs reach for organic for that reason, and because the law does not require foods with GMOs to be labelled, it is really the best way for people to ensure that the food they're eating is GM-free.
I stand before you today to speak on behalf of thousands of farmers and millions of consumers across the country who wish to choose organic and GMO-free food. Consider our rights, our choices, our desires, and our livelihoods when you deliberate on the policies that will determine the face of farming and the future of Canada's food supply.
First, let me emphasize that organic agriculture proponents believe that the most effective biological technology is the technology that can work without genetic manipulation. From a historical perspective, genetic manipulation as it is currently practised is essentially a new frontier with yet unknown and potentially harmful long-term health and environmental consequences.
The most effective biological innovations that will protect against weeds, pests, and diseases, build soil biological health and diversity, and produce healthy, nutritious food are encompassed by organic production techniques. We applaud Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada's involvement in the organic science cluster, which will further essential studies of these areas of knowledge.
All these avenues of developing agricultural practice build self-reliance within the farming community and contribute to the long-term resiliency of the food system, since they draw on the resources from within the farm and are aimed at the development of a self-sufficient farm ecosystem.
Do GMOs do this? No. To date, all genetically modified crops have been designed either to withstand chemical applications or to contain pesticide in the plant itself. We must be honest in assessing the effect GE technologies have had on agriculture.
The trend toward simplification of cropping systems and dependency on outside resource-heavy inputs, which is accelerated by the use of these tools, does not place Canada in a better position to respond to the challenges of the future. These technologies continue to be opposed by Canada's non-GMO and organic markets in North America, Europe, and Japan. Contamination by GMOs will continue to pose a problem for organic and non-GMO producers, so organic producers and consumers are at odds with the promise of biotechnology. Although it is clear that biotech crops make a lot of money for the biotech companies, the benefit to farmers or consumers is extremely dubious, even in the short term. It is also clear that GMOs threaten the viability of the organic sector when GM plants and seeds stray into organic fields and seed supplies.
While we in the organic food business are a small minority within agriculture, our opposition to genetic modification and the expansion of GM technologies remains firm, and we are convinced that our position is shared by a majority of Canadians.
Therefore, I would like to outline what we would propose to be the principles for establishing an agricultural policy that can be embraced by Canadians, a policy through which our government chooses to protect a sector of the food system that will be vital to coping with the coming era of resource scarcity and ecological uncertainty. These are the principles upon which we propose this policy be built.
Principle 1: organic agriculture is a production system with answers to many ecological and health challenges. Organics have a lower carbon footprint, use less energy, build soil, conserve biodiversity, protect our water, and produce products with lower chemical residues and, in some cases, higher nutritional value. Consumers want organic products both locally and in export markets. Organic agriculture is an important facet of the Canadian economy that must be protected.
Principle 2: organic consumers and markets expect organic products to be GMO-free. Products of organic agriculture lose their value if they are mixed with GMOs. GMO contamination is an unacceptable harm that must be mitigated and avoided.
Principle 3: organic agriculture is the gold standard for traceability, segregation, and identity preservation. This effort costs money, and this cost should not be borne solely by the organic sector, which is not the cause of the problem. Costs and measures for ensuring successful and respectful existence of both farming systems should also be borne by biotech users and biotech developers.
Principle 4: developers and users of GE crops should be held liable for their escape. Biotech companies and farmers growing GMO crops should compensate organic farmers for financial losses due to adventitious presence of GMO plants and seeds.
Principle 5: commercialization of GE crops should not be allowed without a full assessment of potential impacts to the environment and to health, as well as on the economic consequences for farmers, including market acceptance and the ability to produce uncontaminated seed.
In this regard, we cannot fail to comment on the imminent risk to the entire organic production system posed by the spectre of GE alfalfa. Not only is organic alfalfa exported as an organic seed, but it is also integral to the organic livestock and dairy sector--the value chain to which so much of our commerce is tied. It is also an essential in the crop rotation of most organic farms.
To compromise alfalfa does not compromise only a limited forage commodity. Alfalfa is grown in virtually every agricultural region from coast to coast. From the organic sector's perspective, the possible introduction of a GE variety undermines our entire system of production. We urge you in the strongest terms to delay the commercialization of GE alfalfa until a full examination of the economic consequences is completed.
Finally, principle 6: consumers have the right to know if a food contains products of genetic engineering. They should be given the ability to choose to eat these foods or to choose not to eat them. We believe that labelling of food derived from GE crops should be mandatory.
I thank you for this opportunity to share our perspective. I would be happy to answer any questions.