Why does the paper industry go through all the trouble of paying
researchers, finding experimental land and the general expenses of creating
"super trees"? There are already inexpensive choices out there. For example,
hemp and other fiberous plants. WHere is the sense in it all. It really
makes me want to scream about the complete ignorance of so many people that
actually have a say in these matters. I know people are out there trying to
be heard, but why do the paper companies not see the choices? Are "super
trees" really more cost effective?
-baffled
>From: "Viviane Lerner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: STUDIES IN WOMEN AND ENVIRONMENT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: FW: Forests in danger from GM super-tree says WWF
>Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 10:15:18 -1000
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf
>Of MichaelPwsort
>Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 1999 8:07 AM
>To: unlikely.suspects :;
>Subject:
>
>
>GUARDIAN (London) Wednesday November 10, 1999
>Forests in danger from GM super-tree says WWF
>Field trials, including five in UK, 'not properly controlled'
>
>Paul Brown, Environment Correspondent
>
>Environmentalists yesterday warned of the dangers of genetically modified
>super-trees which can cross pollinate with native trees over a distance of
>400 miles and which are being grown in field trials without knowledge of
>the consequences.
>
>Other GM modifications under trial raise the prospect of silent forests,
>devoid of insects, flowers and birds. The idea is to create super-trees
>that grow rapidly, resist rot, and defy insect attack. The trees would be
>sprayed from planes to kill all life around them.
>
>In a report published yesterday, the World Wide Fund for Nature said 116
>trials on GM trees had taken place since 1988 without proper controls or
>research into the effects on the wider environment. Seventy of the trials
>are being carried out in the United States and five are in Britain.
>
>Francis Sullivan, director of programmes for WWF-UK, said there was the
>prospect of large blocks of land in Britain and North America being given
>over to one super species of tree, creating sterile environments. "The
>genie of genetically modified super-trees is already out of the bottle. We
>must make sure it does not get out of control otherwise such trees could
>run riot through the forests of the world without us knowing what are the
>consequences."
>
>The report, which was written by Rachel Owusu for WWF, says that
>commercial planting of GM trees is likely to happen soon in Chile, China
>and Indonesia, despite the inadequate research into environmental impact.
>The report points out that pine pollen can travel up to 400 miles to reach
>another tree, making it impossible to monitor the effects of cross
>fertilisation on native stock. The organisation is calling for female only
>trees to be grown to avoid this risk.
>
>Scientists are also trying to grow trees with salt tolerance and drought
>and frost resistance, which could thrive in more places. One of the
>experiments in Britain involves growing poplars with less lignin, the
>woody substance that makes trees strong. Removing some of this would make
>the trees softer and easier to pulp, which would in turn make paper
>cheaper to produce.
>
>But environmental scientists believe that unintended side-effects pose
>risks, partly because trees live so long and are known to adapt to
>changing circumstances. For example, poplar trees bred in Germany not to
>flower - so as to avoid cross contamination - did so years earlier than
>they were programmed to do so, baffling the scientists.
>
>GM trees that do cross fertilise with each other or with native species
>could create super "weed" tree species which would displace slower growing
>normal trees and at the same time destroy the habitat of many creatures.
>Trees provide food and shelter to many interdependent organisms including
>insects, birds and mammals. Their root systems are often vast and closely
>interact with soil organisms like bacteria and nematode worms.
>
>Mr Sullivan said: "We are not against genetically modified trees in
>principle, but we want more research and above all openness about what is
>being planned. We need to know the pros and cons, about the dangers of
>cross fertilisation of native species, and of sterilising large areas of
>the landscape. Does this mean greater profits for a few timber companies,
>or more wood for all mankind? And are silent forests a price worth paying
>for these advantages?"
>
>WWF is contacting its network of 100 companies, which are already
>committed to using timber from sustainable sources, to urge them t18% ban
>GM wood products. Sainsbury is among the companies which have already
>pledged a ban.
>
>Among the 30 tree species that so far have been genetically modified are
>apple, banana, birch, chestnut, elm, peach, pear, pine, plum and walnut.
>In Britain, Shell has been carrying out two trials of eucalyptus in Kent
>to improve growth rates and examine herbicide tolerance. Derby university
>has modified the paradise apple to examine resistance to pests and
>diseases, and Astra Zeneca has had two trials in Bracknell, Berkshire,
>with low-lignin poplars - those trees were cut down by GM protesters in
>July.
>
>
>
>=================================
>
>
>*** NOTICE: 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 the included information for research and educational
>purposes. ***
>
>
>
>
>
>
>--
>For MAI-not (un)subscription information, posting guidelines and
>links to other MAI sites please see http://mai.flora.org/
>
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
