***********************************************

WORLDWIDE FOREST/BIODIVERSITY CAMPAIGN NEWS

Frankentrees: Genetically Modified Trees Pose Concern

***********************************************

Forest Networking a Project of Forests.org

http://forests.org/ -- Forest Conservation Portal

http://forests.org/donate/ -- Support Forests.org

12/30/00

OVERVIEW & COMMENTARY

Research into genetically modified trees is increasing exponentially

and with little monitoring, as 300 permits for trials have been

issued in the United States over the last few years. So called

"Frankentrees" threaten the viability of global ecosystems in ways

similar to disruptive exotic species. Novel bio-engineered genes are

likely to drift into wild populations, posing a serious threat to

biodiversity and ecosystems. As genetically engineered trees become

"weedy", they are likely to drive out native tree species, out-

compete native populations and disrupt ecosystems dependent on those

trees. Genetically altered trees pose other risks given their

unnatural and unknown genetic traits. They may contain pesticidal

properties that harm non-target insects and birds. And they may

threaten future productivity of the land by absorbing more nutrients

from the soil than traditional varieties. The report below indicates

that genetically modified trees already have been released into the

wild in a number of places.

How arrogant - to presume to improve upon natural trees that - last I

checked - still grow, live and produce just fine. They do so on

their own natural schedules that is in complete harmony with the

natural environment. There exist very different visions regarding

how to meet human needs for forest products, which includes ecosystem

processes. One emphasizes manufacture and industrial production of

genetically engineered super-trees planted and harvested with factory

like efficiency. The other stresses protection of old-growth,

certified management of natural secondary forests and establishment

of new forests through regeneration, restoration and mixed

plantations. The first vision threatens the ecological fabric of the

Planet, while the second strengthens global ecosystems and

livelihoods. We should be conserving and better managing our

existing forests rather than playing God by attempting to engineer

our way out of an ecological problem. We cannot and should not

presume to understand the totality of global ecology - trying to do

so is dangerous and undermines global sustainability.

Forests.org joins other environmental groups calling for a global

moratorium on the release of genetically modified trees. We should

have faith in forests and their seeds, and not in genetic

engineering.

g.b.

*******************************

RELAYED TEXT STARTS HERE:

Title: Strange fruit: GM trees raise new crop of concerns

Source: Copyright 2000, World Watch Institute

Distributed by Los Angeles Times Syndicate International

Date: December 28, 2000

Byline: Danielle Nierenberg

While the spread of genetically modified crops has raised concerns

around the world, research into biotech trees has increased

exponentially in the last few years, with little monitoring,

according to separate reports by the World Wildlife Fund and the

American Lands Alliance.

In the United States alone, the U.S. Department of Agriculture has

issued more than 300 permits for trials of genetically engineered

trees, and officials are expected to grant permission to grow the

trees commercially by 2005. According to the WWF report, commercial-

scale trials may already be taking place in China.

By altering specific genetic traits, scientists hope to "make" trees

that will out-perform their natural counterparts. For instance, the

fruit industry is promoting research on trees that will have

resistance to viruses and diseases that now cost growers millions of

dollars each year.

Timber and paper manufacturers are developing aspen and cottonwood

trees that contain less lignin - the tough connective tissue that

holds trees together - to make the pulp easier to process and to

reduce the need for polluting chemicals. And researchers are

engineering trees with built-in salt tolerance that could be planted

in many of the world's arid regions.

Although growing more trees faster, with improved tolerance to

disease and extreme climate, might seem like the ideal solution to

deforestation, pollution and other problems, genetically engineered

tree plantations could cultivate serious environmental dilemmas.

Faith Thompson Campbell of the American Lands Alliance reports that

"experimenting with native trees in the U.S. and Canada virtually

guarantees gene drift." The drifting of novel bio-engineered genes

into wild populations is a serious threat to biodiversity,

potentially allowing altered trees to out-compete native populations

and disrupting ecosystems dependent on those trees, according to the

July 2000 report released by the alliance. Genetically modified

trees already have been released into the wild in a number of places,

including Israel, Chile and New Zealand.

Critics of biotechnology's rapid development predict that the same

risks posed by genetically engineered crops could be magnified in

tree species. Concerns that plants engineered to contain pesticidal

properties will harm non-target insects and birds are amplified

because trees distribute pollen further and they remain in the

environment significantly longer than seasonal crops like corn or

soybeans.

In addition, trees are subject to a greater variety of environmental

stresses, which could affect their "behavior" later on, according to

the WWF study. For example, genetically engineered trees might act

"weedy," driving out native tree species, or they might absorb more

nutrients from the soil than traditional varieties, threatening

future productivity of the land.

Because little is known about the long-term consequences of

genetically engineered trees on the environment, the American Lands

Alliance, WWF, Greenpeace and other environmental groups have called

for a global moratorium on their release. According to these groups,

it is better to reduce the "need" for fast growing trees by

encouraging consumer responsibility and less dependence on virgin

wood and paper products.

At the same time, they assert that more research and more regulations

are needed before trees are manufactured in laboratories, rather than

forests.

Danielle Nierenberg is a contributing writer for World Watch

magazine.

###RELAYED TEXT ENDS###

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is

distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior

interest in receiving forest conservation informational materials for

educational, personal and non-commercial use only. Recipients should

seek permission from the source to reprint this PHOTOCOPY. All

efforts are made to provide accurate, timely pieces, though ultimate

responsibility for verifying all information rests with the reader.

For additional forest conservation news & information please see the

Forest Conservation Portal at URL= http://forests.org/

Networked by Forests.org, Inc., gbarry@forests.org