BROOKLIN (Canada): After completing the world’s biggest study on the potential ecological impacts of genetically engineered crops, British scientists have concluded that the technology harms wildlife. The fourth and final report in the four-year study released this week found fields planted with winter canola (oilseed rape) genetically engineered to resist a herbicide had fewer bees, birds, butterflies and other insects than fields planted with conventional canola.

Rather than directly affecting wildlife, the genetically engineered (GE) canola fields had an indirect impact by suppressing the growth of broad-leaved weeds that produced flowers and seeds favoured by wildlife. While the GE fields did not have less weeds overall than conventional canola fields, they had more weedy grass species, which are not as beneficial to wildlife.

“It’s not surprising the British found unintended effects. GE crops are a new way of farming and that has a huge impact on the environment,” said Doug Gurian-Sherman, a senior scientist at the Centre for Food Safety, a Washington-based environmental NGO.

“We haven’t addressed the unintended effects of this new technology here in North America,” Gurian-Sherman said in an interview.

Britain’s 10-million-dollar study, called the Farm Scale Evaluation (FSE) trials, is the world’s largest attempt to look at the impacts of GE crops on biodiversity. Over the course of the experiment, scientists counted a million weeds, two million insects and made 7,000 field trips.

In the first three trials, about 180 fields from Scotland to the south of England were sown with maize, sugar beet, and spring canola with equal proportions of GE and non-GE varieties.

Fields with GE beets and spring canola also had considerably less wildlife than conventional fields. Although that was not the case for GE maize, critics complained that the herbicide used in conventional maize was about to be banned by Britain for its toxic effects.

In the fourth trial, GE and conventional winter canola were planted at 65 sites side by side and in a standard rotation with other plants, such as barley and wheat.

“This is a bloody good piece of science and will have a huge impact in its subject area for a long time to come,” said Chris Pollock, chair of the FSE scientific steering committee in a statement.

Although at least one strain of GE maize has been approved, there are currently no GE crops being planted in Britain. Monsanto stopped promoting its GE products in 2003 and Bayer withdrew its GE maize last year. The final FSE results may have shut the door to GE crops for the time being in Britain.

Nothing like the FSE trials were conducted prior to the approving of the use of GE crops in North America, says Gurian-Sherman. “Field trials done here were few and small in scale.”

Environmental impact studies only began after the commercialization and studies on the indirect effects have yet to be done, he said.

In Canada, the government adopted the view that GE crops were essentially the same as conventional and there was no need for such studies, says Stewart Wells, president of Canada’s National Farmers Union.

“We’re not opposed to the technology but wanted a proper scientific assessment done on a case-by-case basis,” Wells told IPS. “That’s never happened.”

Nor did the NFU and others get the broad-based consultations they asked for in the mid-1990s before the commercialization of the new crops.

“The current GE crops are designed for large-scale monocultural agriculture and that destroys biodiversity,” he said.—Dawn/The InterPress News Service.