December 23, 2024
Column

Targeting farmers for political gain

As a person who works with farmers every day, I take issue with the recent column “Counter-revolutionaries in Montville” (BDN, May 2), which praised the Montville town meeting vote to ban the planting of genetically modified crops, calling it a “distant echo of the American Revolution.” But instead of targeting red coats from away, Montville has taken aim at its own citizens – farmers who are just trying to survive. Instead of throwing off the yoke of oppressive government, Montville’s ordinance banning genetically modified organisms creates more government by requiring farmers to clear their planting decisions with town officials.

No amount of talk about “idealism and independence” can conceal what really happened in Montville. Since 2005, two activists who came here from Vermont have been trying to launch a town-by-town campaign to ban GMOs similar to the effort that failed in Vermont. After two years of intense lobbying, Montville finally bit.

There are two problems with the Montville ordinance. First, it violates Maine’s right to farm law. The Maine Department of Agriculture and the attorney general have sent letters to the town to let them know Maine towns are prohibited from banning farming practices that are “best management practices.” The law was passed to make sure Maine farmers have access to all farming methods so they can stay competitive.

But the biggest problem with Montville’s action is that it targets farmers just to make a political statement. This battle isn’t about food safety as the activists want you to believe. Foods with genetically modified ingredients have been on our grocery shelves for more than a decade and not one single health problem has ever been documented. It’s not about protecting organic farmers either. The U.S. Department of Agriculture says that not a single organic farmer has lost certification because of GMOs. This is a political battle being run by people who have no stake in Maine farming, but who are willing to use our farmers to “send a message.”

Farming is a tough business, and it isn’t getting any easier. The rising price of oil is pushing up the price of fertilizer and fuel. This year, some Maine farmers will experience losses. Some may have to give up farming altogether. To remain competitive, farmers need to be able to choose the crops and farming methods that best suit their situation.

For example, some Maine potato farmers plant canola as a rotational crop. Canola is used to make cooking oil. At first we thought conventional canola would fetch a premium in the marketplace. It turned out this wasn’t the case. So some farmers switched to planting genetically modified canola, looking for higher yields.

Dairy farming is in flux too. In past years, a number of Maine dairy farmers switched to organic production to capture higher organic milk prices. Now some of them are switching back because the higher cost of organic feed for their cows is wiping out the price difference. The point is farmers need more options, not fewer.

Coexistence is a tradition in farming. Just because I choose to farm organically doesn’t mean you have to, and vice versa. Differences are worked out over the fence. Coexistence is also the state’s official policy on organic, conventional and GMO farming methods.

Montville residents have an opportunity to right the wrong done at town meeting. Repeal the ordinance. And if they still want to send a message, find a way to do it that doesn’t victimize farmers who are just trying to make a living in hard economic times.

Vernon DeLong is executive director of the Maine Agricultural Bargaining Council, which negotiates produce contracts on behalf of its members.


Have feedback? Want to know more? Send us ideas for follow-up stories.

comments for this post are closed

You may also like