今天（2010年3月3日），全国有机联盟（简称NOC）宣布，超过20万人向美国农业部（USDA）提交了针对基因工程苜蓿提出的关于“环境影响报告书草案（DEIS）”的影响和实质的评论意见。现在，包括社会团体，NOC，食品安全中心（CFS），有机消费者协会，食品和水源监督机构以及食品民主等机构均动员他们的成员发表评论来促成这一前所未有的为数众多的行动。

此外，300多个公共利益组织，农民，奶制品供应商，零售商和来自美国和加拿大的有机食品生产商向美国农业部发表了措辞强烈的信函，呼吁它拒绝批准孟山都公司的基因工程，草甘磷苜蓿（基因苜蓿）。信中列举了该基因工程对有机物和非基因工程苜蓿干草及种子不可避免的污染以及对有机乳制品，牲畜生存的可能存在的威胁，表达了肉类和乳制品生产商最急迫的拒绝态度。乳制品生产商、NOC、全国杂货商联合协会，CFS和其他团体都认为，如果像现在这样缺乏法律依据而对产生基因污染的公司负责的话，那将是不负责任的政府才会有的政策。

2006年，CFS中心起诉美国农业部（USDA）通过非法的手段赞成孟山都公司的基因苜蓿。按照法律要求，美国农业部在重新规定作物种类之前没有执行环境影响报告书（EIS）。联邦法院站在CFS一边，禁止基因苜蓿的种植直到美国农业部分析完成基因苜蓿对环境，农民和公众的影响。今天是对EIS草案提交公众评论的最后期限，这个草案是赞成孟山都公司的基因苜蓿的。

美国农业部的EIS称有机食品的消费者不用担心基因工程对他们食物的污染，尽管大量的事实与此相反。消费者调查显示，75%以上的受访者反复地说他们不愿意吃被基因工程污染的食物，他们购买有机食品的五个原因之中最重要的一条就是想要避免购买基因工程生产的食物。

农民之家和有机谷公司的CEO乔治西蒙说，“基因苜蓿正好是对有机工业的结构产生了威胁”，“有机产品的消费者需要种子和产品保持不被基因工程污染。”

独立，实证研究和过去的经验表明，基因工程的花粉和种子的污染在空气中不可能通过蜜蜂或者其他的媒介传播六英里以上的距离。种子也可以在收割设备的帮助下或者通过靴子的带动，田地里运输干草和种子的卡车的带动传播很远的距离。在过去的十年中，两百个已知的基因工程污染案例已经被纪录下来。最近的污染最严重的案件，在油菜（油菜）作物。由于广泛的污染，在加拿大西部油菜作物和食用油不能再被打上有机食品和非基因工程食品的标签。

Organic Policy Coordinator at Center for Food Safety.的Lisa J. Bunin,博士说,继续放宽对基因工程作物的监管会对我们的食品供应，有机物种多样性以及不断增长的世界人口赖以生存的传统农业体系产生巨大的威胁。“一方面，不断地仅从少数几个基因工程公司手中购买种子，并不断提高他们在全国种子购买中所占的比重，另一方面，为了提高种子的有效性，而产生了一种新型的数量有限的农药。”

尽管基因工程苜蓿有不可避免的污染，EIS不承认这种伤害，把全部抵制这种污染的负担强加到非基因工程的作物的农民身上，并对食品的生产者，消费者和出口商不采取任何保护。Liana Hoodes（Director, National Organic Coalition）说“如果草甘磷苜蓿允许出售，产生的连锁反应将消灭多种有机物和非基因工程产业，从有机种子，饲料加工到有机奶农及其零售商，无一幸免。”“每个美国人有权利种植，销售，使用用非基因工程食品和有机食物的日子将一去不复返。”

虽然EIS的承认，基因工程苜蓿会增加草甘磷除草剂的使用，自从绝大多数农民不再大量使用苜蓿（百分之九十三），它忽略了一个事实，种植基因工程苜蓿可能需要许多农民在一开始就使用农药。这就可能导致化学毒素在某些以前根本没有毒素存在的地区的传播。在过去的13年中，基因工程的作物的种植已经极大地提高了除草剂在玉米，大豆和棉花上的应用，达到了3亿8千3百万磅。基因工程苜蓿的重新规定可能会非常明显地带来高毒性给环境的负担。

Conventional South Dakota alfalfa seed and hay grower, Chuck Noble.警告说 “我们的基因库是非常宝贵的，我们不能承担通过那些所谓的生物科技公司之手摧毁它的代价，” “如果我们已经在百万人忍受饥饿甚至面对死亡的时候从欧洲人那里学会了种植马铃薯，度过了艰难，人类需要种子的多样性来保护和对抗疾病和饥荒，基因工程严重影响了这种多样性。”（杨丹翻译）

英文原文：

More Than 200,000 NGOs, Farmers, Consumers, and Organic Producers Call for USDA to Prohibit Genetically Engineered Alfalfa

Posted on March 3, 2010 by Heather

Resulting contamination of non-GE and organic alfalfa hay and seed would devastate livelihoods and organic industry

The National Organic Coalition (NOC) today announced that more than 200,000 people submitted comments to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) critiquing the substance and conclusions of its Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) on Genetically Engineered (GE) Alfalfa. Groups, including NOC, Center for Food Safety (CFS), Organic Consumers Association, Food & Water Watch, CREDO Action and Food Democracy Now, mobilized their communities to help generate the unprecedented number of comments.

In addition, more than 300 public interest organizations, farmers, dairies, retailers and organic food producers from the U.S. and Canada delivered a strongly worded letter to USDA, calling upon it to deny approval of Monsanto’s genetically engineered, Roundup Ready alfalfa (GE alfalfa). The letter cites the inevitable contamination of organic and non-GE alfalfa hay and seeds and threats to the viability of organic dairies, livestock, and meat and dairy producers as reasons for urging the denial. NOC, Organic Valley, Whole Foods, National Cooperative Grocers Association, CFS and others agree that it would be irresponsible government policy to approve GE alfalfa in the absence of legal requirements holding companies accountable for GE contamination, as is currently the case.

In 2006, CFS sued USDA for its illegal approval of Monsanto’s GE alfalfa. USDA failed to conduct an environmental impact statement (EIS), as required by law, before deregulating the crop. The federal courts sided with CFS and banned GE alfalfa plantings until USDA analyzed the impacts of GE alfalfa on the environment, farmers and the public. Today marks the deadline for submitting public comments on the draft EIS, which recommends approving Monsanto’s GE alfalfa.

USDA’s EIS claims that organic consumers do not care about GE contamination of their food, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Consumer surveys show that 75 percent or more of respondents repeatedly say that they do not want to eat GE contaminated food and cite their desire to avoid GE food as one of the top five reasons for buying organic.

“GE alfalfa threatens the very fabric of the organic industry,” adds George Siemon, one of the founding farmers and CEO of Organic Valley. “Organic consumers want seeds and products to remain unpolluted by GE.”

Independent, empirical studies and past experience show that containment of GE pollen and seeds is not possible GE alfalfa pollen can travel six miles or more in the air, via bees or other pollinators. Seeds can also travel long distances on harvesting equipment and on the boots and in the trucks of people who work in fields and transport hay and seeds. More than 200 known cases of GE contamination have been documented within the last decade. The most serious and immediate cases of contamination are in canola (rapeseed) crops. Due to widespread contamination, canola crops and oil can no longer be marketed as organic or non-GE in Western Canada.

“The continued deregulation of GE crops threatens our food supply and the diverse organic and conventional farming systems that have fed the world’s growing population for centuries,” said Lisa J. Bunin, Ph.D., Organic Policy Coordinator at Center for Food Safety. “It is unconscionable for USDA to increasingly allow the concentration of our nation’s seed supply in the hands of a few GE companies that produce a limited number of novel, pesticide-promoting seed varieties.”

Despite the inevitable contamination from GE alfalfa, the EIS disavows this harm and places the entire burden for preventing contamination on non-GE farmers, with no protections for food producers, consumers and exporters. “If Roundup Ready Alfalfa is permitted to be sold commercially, the ripple effect would wipe out many organic and non-GE businesses, from organic seed and forage growers to organic dairy farmers and retailers,” said Liana Hoodes, Director, National Organic Coalition. “Every American’s right to cultivate, sell and eat non-GE and organic food would no longer exist.”

Even though the EIS acknowledges that GE alfalfa would increase Roundup herbicide use, since the vast majority of alfalfa farmers do not use any herbicides at all (93 percent), it omits the fact that planting GE alfalfa would require many farmers to use Roundup for the very first time. This would result in the spread of toxic chemicals in regions where such toxins were previously non-existent. Over the past 13 years, the planting of GE crops has significantly increased herbicide use on corn, soybeans and cotton – by 383 million pounds. GE alfalfa deregulation would markedly add to that high toxic burden on the environment.

“Our genetic gene pool is extremely valuable, and we can not afford to destroy it by handing it over to the biotech companies,” warns Conventional South Dakota alfalfa seed and hay grower, Chuck Noble. “If we’ve learned anything from Europe’s potato famines when millions starved to death, humans need seed variety to protect against blight and famine. Genetic engineering severely compromises that diversity.”