The following is posted with permission from Joe Rowland, a beekeeper in
Central New York.  Although speculative in nature, Joe raises some
interesting possibilities that bear investigation.

GMO testimony submitted by Joe Rowland to the N.Y. Assembly standing
committees on agriculture, consumer affairs, and the assembly task force on
food, farm, and nutrition policy. 3rd October 2000.


Thank-you for inviting me to testify on the subject of genetically modified
organisms.  I'm a commercial beekeeper, and the secretary/treasurer of the
Empire State Honey Producers Association.  I also sit on the executive
committee of U.S. Beekeepers, a national trade association.

Honeybees are an important component of our agricultural economy.  Many
crops are dependent on honeybee pollination for cost effective production.
A recently published Cornell study set the honeybee's value to U.S.
agriculture at 14.6 billion dollars.  An additional value accrues to home
gardeners and wildlife who forage on wild seeds and fruit set as a result of
bee pollination.  Over ? of the 3 million colonies kept in the U.S. are now
trucked around the country for the purpose of pollinating our crops.
Thousands of colonies are moved into N.Y. every year and provide a valuable
service to N.Y. farmers and consumers.

Sadly, bees and beekeepers have had a rough time recently.  We must contend
with 3 exotic pests introduced over the past 15 years.  The wholesale price
of honey in inflation-adjusted dollars is lower than at any time since World
War II.  There also has been a resurgence of American Foulbrood, which had
been successfully controlled by antibiotics in the past.

Are GMO's a real or potential threat to honeybees?  I've tried to answer
this question by searching for publicly available research on the subject
and by drawing on my own knowledge of honeybee biology.

Honeybees collect and consume nectar and pollen.  Nectar is a complex sugar
solution which provides carbohydrates.  There is very little protein from
forage plants in nectar.  Since GM plants generally express their special
characteristics in the form of biologically active proteins, there is
probably not much danger to bees from nectar.

Pollen is their protein source, and when collected from GM crops, contains
the modified gene structure of the GMO.  It may also contain novel proteins
produced by the modified plant.  Pollen is the male fertilizing component of
flowering plants and so is a concentrated source of genetic material.
Damaging effects to bees from GMO's are most likely to result from pollen.
A colony of honeybees will collect and consume approximately 75 lbs of
pollen in a year.  Corn, canola, soybeans, and cotton yield pollen that is
collected by bees within foraging range of these crops.  All of these crops
have GM varieties which are extensively cultivated in the U.S.  Field tests
in England have shown that bee colonies 4.5 km from GM canola fields collect
GM pollen.  Bees forage in all directions, and pollen grains are transferred
between bees within the colony through bodily contact.  It is theoretically
possible that small quantities of GM pollen can be transported up to 9 km
from GM crops.

The recommended isolation distance between GM crops and non-GM crops in
England is 200 meters for corn, and 50 meters for canola.  It seems to me
that these distances are arbitrary and based more on convenience than on
actual isolation of GM crops.

Professor Mark Winston, a Canadian bee research specialist, has attempted to
review scientific studies pertaining to bees and GMO's.  As you might
expect, most GM research has been conducted by the biotechnology companies
who create GMO's.  What I did not expect is that this research is considered
proprietary information, and not subject to public scrutiny.  Prof. Winston
contacted the Canadian Food Inspection Agency and encountered a brick wall.
Their response was that, yes, honeybee larvae or adults had been examined in
tests with GM pollen.  They would not reveal what GM crops were tested, who
did the testing, what the experimental protocol was, or the results of the
tests.  Information which is absolutely essential for the independent
validation of Biotech company claims regarding the safety of GMO's is
unavailable to the GMO consuming public.  It is my understanding that FDA
policy is similar to the Canadian Food Inspection Agency.  This veil of
secrecy does not serve the public interest and should be lifted as a
precondition for EPA approval of GMO's.  Proprietary research on presently
approved GMO's should also be publicly accessible.

There are a few publicly reported studies regarding the effect of GM pollen
on honeybees.  Minh-Ha Pham Deleque has done some work on this area for the
French government research institute, INRA.  She has studied the effects of
GM pollen from varieties of canola and soybeans on honeybees in a laboratory
setting.  Her findings indicate that none of the tested pollens kill adult
bees outright, but that they may shorten their lifespan and cause some
behavioral changes, particularly in a loss of their ability to learn and to
smell.  This may cause foraging bees to "forget" where flowers or even their
own hive is located.  Obviously, some issues have been raised by this work
which need to be further explored.

The most important research finding in this area has recently come from Jena
University in Germany.  Researchers there have shown that a gene used in GM
canola transferred to bacteria in the guts of bees.  I believe this is the
first publicly documented case of horizontal gene transfer from GM crops to
bacteria within any animal.  This discovery may have major implications for
the future of GM crops.  One main objection to GM crops has focused on the
fact that during genetic manipulations required to create GMO's, antibiotic
resistant "marker" genes are combined with the so-called genes of interest.
These combined genes are inserted into the target plant together.  Within
the plant, the antibiotic resistant gene has no expression and is harmless.
However, if this gene were able to transfer out of the GM plant and re-enter
a bacterium, this bacterium would become antibiotic resistant.  This might
render commonly used antibiotics useless against diseases attacking humans
and livestock, including honeybees.

At the beginning of my testimony, I mentioned the fact that bees in the U.S.
are increasingly afflicted with a strain of antibiotic resistant American
Foulbrood (AFB).  Before the advent of antibiotics, this bacterial infection
was the most serious bee disease in the world.  Tetracycline had been used
effectively against AFB for 40 years until 1996.  In that year, tetracycline
resistance was confirmed in both Argentina and the upper Midwestern states
of Wisconsin and Minnesota.  Since then, it has spread to at least 17
states, including New York.  During the 1990's, millions of acres of
Round-up Ready crops were planted in the U.S. and Argentina.  According to
my information, the antibiotic resistant gene used in the creation of
Round-up Ready crops was resistant to tetracycline.  After 40 years of
effective usage against an infective bacterium found in the guts of
honeybees, suddenly 2 geographically isolated countries develop tetracycline
resistance simultaneously.  A common thread between the U.S. and Argentina
is the widespread and recent cultivation of GM crops containing tetracycline
resistant genes.

I spoke about this with Dr. Haricho Shimanuki who until recently was the
research leader of the USDA/ARS bee research lab in Beltsville, M.D.  Dr.
Shimanuki is not aware of any attempt to analyze the resistant foulbrood for
genetic pollution from GM crops.  I think that with the proper equipment
these bacteria could be inspected for the presence of the Round-up Ready
gene.  That gene should have tagged along with the tetracycline resistant
gene if in fact this unlikely coincidence was due to horizontal gene
transfer between GM crops and foulbrood bacteria.

Since the public health implications of this are of major proportions, I
would urge you to immediately direct funds to a suitable independent
research facility such as Cornell for the purpose of determining whether or
not this unwelcome gene transfer has occurred.  If so, the state of N.Y.
should recommend to the FDA that the approval for GM crops containing
antibiotic resistant gene markers be reviewed and possibly revoked
immediately.

Biotech corporations have maintained that we should trust their research
findings which secretly prove to Federal regulators that GM crops are safe.
I would suggest that it would be wise to maintain a healthy skepticism on
this matter.  Often there is a fundamental conflict between the corporate
interest in short term profit, and the public interest in the health and
safety of the people.  In fact, we have recently seen examples of this
conflict exposed in the courts concerning other corporations.

I think there are enough valid uncertainties about GMO's to justify NYS to
require labeling of GM foods.  The world is now participating in a vast GMO
experiment.  New Yorkers should have the choice of opting out of this
experiment if they so desire.  GM food labeling would partially provide this
option.


Thank-you.