permaculture

["Lawrence F. London, Jr." <lfl@intrex.net>]

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: GM Trees
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2003 18:54:25 -0700
From: Raquel & Greg <eatrice@PRINCETONCA.NET>
Reply-To: Sustainable Agriculture Network Discussion Group 
<SANET-MG@LISTS.IFAS.UFL.EDU>
To: SANET-MG@LISTS.IFAS.UFL.EDU


Frankentrees Are Spreading Across the U.S.
Associated Press

July 31, 2003

Genetically engineered trees quietly sprouting

BY: PAUL ELIAS, AP Biotechnology Writer

SAN FRANCISCO:

Biotechnology is coming to the forest and orchard.

Scientists are planting genetically engineered trees in dozens of research
projects across the country. They are working to create trees that grow
faster, yield better wood, produce hardier crops, fight pollution, even
serve as sentinels for detecting germ and chemical attacks.

Environmentalists fear dangerous unintended consequences.

"It won't be as widespread as agricultural biotechnology, but it could be
much more destructive," said Jim Diamond of the Sierra Club. "Trees are
what's left of our natural environment and home to endangered species."

The Sierra Club wants a moratorium on the planting of genetic engineered
trees outdoors until the science is better understood. But the plea has been
like a tree falling deep in the forest.

Tree researchers say their critics are missing all the ways that science can
give nature a fighting chance against ravages natural and manmade.

Biotechnology, they say, may provide just what is needed to help reverse
global deforestation and industrial pollution while satisfying increased
demand for wood and paper products.

Already, biotechnology has been credited with saving Hawaii's
$14-million-a-year papaya industry. A virus had wiped out 40 percent of the
crop and threatened to destroy the rest before seeds engineered to resist
the virus were introduced in 1998. Now the industry is thriving again.

About 230 notices of genetically engineered tree experiments have been filed
with the Department of Agriculture since 1989, with about half since 2000.
So far, papayas are the only approved engineered tree for market. The rest
are still experimental.

Some researchers are infusing trees with genetic material taken from viruses
and bacteria that helps them grow faster and fatter and yield better wood.
Others are splicing mercury-gobbling bacteria genes into trees, enlisting
nature to help clean polluted soil.

Still others are inserting foreign genes that might reduce the amount of
toxic chemicals needed to process trees into paper.

Fruit-tree farmers are looking for hardier trees with less reliance on
chemical bug and weed killers.

And the Pentagon even awarded Colorado State researchers $500,000 this year
to develop a pine tree or other plants that can change colors when exposed
to a germ or chemical attack.

Many field trials are backed by paper and timber companies hoping to design
trees that yield more wood and paper.

ArborGen LLC, a North Charleston, South Carolina-based biotechnology company
whose backers include International Paper and MeadWestvaco Corp., said it
has 50 field trials under way. Chief technology officer Maud Hinchee said
the company's work could reduce reliance on national forests by creating
faster-growing trees cultivated on industry plantations.

Poplar, eucalyptus, apple and coffee trees are among those being engineered.
Researchers even hope to revive the cherished American chestnut, devastated
a century ago by a tree-stunting blight that prevents them from growing
higher than shrubs become before succumbing.

All this is being done today because of better understanding of tree
genomes. The Dendrome Project at the University of California at Davis
offers detailed genetic information on 100 trees on its Web site.

Except for the Hawaiian papaya, no genetically modified tree is expected to
be commercialized for the next five to ten years. Trees grow much slower
than crops, and genetic researchers need years to compare generations.

Could biotech trees crossbreed with their natural brethren and ruin forests'
genetic diversity? The Sierra Club fears that, among other ecological
consequences.

Researchers hope to placate critics by engineering sterility into their
designer trees, so their effect on the environment can be contained. But
that technology remains elusive.

Forestry researchers are proud of their work but have become cautious about
disclosing where their genetically engineered trees are growing.

In June, three protesters were arrested after chaining themselves inside a
UC-Davis science building to protest tree research. And two years ago, the
Earth Liberation Front claimed responsibility for arson attacks in Seattle
and Clatskanie, Oregon, that caused more than $3.5 million in damage.

Oregon State University researcher Steven Strauss, who tends to a few
thousand engineered trees, said some of the protesters' are virtually
identical to those of scientists. After all, he is working to engineer
poplars that are sterile.

"The violent guys just don't understand the science," he said. "Genetic
engineering is not one thing, it's a thousand things. But the extremes want
to stop it all."


On the Net:

Sierra Club: http://www.sierraclub.org/biotech/trees.asp

Strauss lab: http://www.cgrb.orst.edu/mcb/faculty/strauss/index.html

Dendrome Project: http://dendrome.ucdavis.edu/