Farmers Must Be Told The Truth About GE Ryegrass Performance
The AgResearch $25 million GE rye grass trials conducted from 2017-2022, found that the field trials results did not meet the expected performance end points. The GE rye grass died back when under competition and if the temperature went over 26C, overall, there was a yield penalty. The planned feeding trials to be conducted in 2020 had to be postponed as the GE grass did not generate enough fodder to feed any animals. [2]
Information, received under the OIA, from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) said they had not approved the grass trial and AgResearch reported that the GE rye grass for the lamb study, GE rye grass for the lamb study, was grown in separate pots in controlled laboratory conditions in the Palmerston North glass house and turned into non-viable dry matter (hay silage) taking 18 months to collect enough to carry out the experiment. [3] [4]
The 24 lambs were divided into two groups 12 fed GE rye grass and 12 as controls. They were fed for 11days in special pens to record their emissions. Compared to the controls the methane levels were 7% for the GE rye grass vs 4.4% for the controls.[2]
'How often do farmers feed their lambs dried unviable 18 month hay grown in laboratory glasshouse conditions, never," said Claire Bleakley, president of GE Free NZ.
This does not match the successful proven alternatives available today and farmers are being sold a GE failure. Linseed oil added to supplementary feeds have a higher methane reduction rate Multi-species forage is also delivering greater reduction (13%) in emissions than GE trials and research has shown the New Zealand based company growing red seaweed for supplements can reduce methane emissions by 90%. [5] [6] [7]
The Gene Technology Bill will allow exempted, unregulated, unmonitored GE trials and release into the environment and the food chain with no safety, accountability or regulatory oversight. The drafting of the Bill did not even consider the poor results and failures of the New Zealand field trials.
'This unapproved study is a waste of money and a misleading farmer promotion for a failed GE experiment,' said Bleakley 'GE rye grass cross contamination will affect performance of the pure non-GE grass seed, once released it cannot be recalled".
References:
[2] Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment,
https://www.gefree.org.nz/assets/Uploads/C10X1603-CR-1.pdf
https://www.gefree.org.nz/assets/Uploads/C10X1603-CR-2.pdf
https://www.gefree.org.nz/assets/Uploads/C10X1603-CR-3.pdf
https://www.gefree.org.nz/assets/Uploads/C10X1603-CR-4.pdf
https://www.gefree.org.nz/assets/Uploads/C10X1603-CR-5.pdf
https://www.gefree.org.nz/assets/Uploads/C10X1603-CR-6.pdf
[3] https://www.gefree.org.nz/assets/Uploads/OIA-response-ENQ-49181-B8B4F3.pdf
[4] https://www.gefree.org.nz/assets/Uploads/Letter-GE-Free-New-Zealand-HME-Livestock-Feeding-Trials.pdf
[5] https://www.thecattlesite.com/articles/2565/feeding-linseed-reduces-methane-production
[6] https://www.fas.scot/article/multispecies-or-herbal-leys-what-are-the-advantages/
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scoop
22-07-2025
- Scoop
EPA Approves Two Biological Controls To Combat Noxious Weed
The Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) has approved a rust fungus and a flower weevil to control Darwin's barberry, a spiny invasive shrub. Environment Canterbury, on behalf of the National Biocontrol Collective, applied to use two biological control agents to combat Darwin's Barberry ( Berberis darwinii) in New Zealand. Those biocontrol agents are a rust fungus ( Puccinia berberidis-darwinii) and the Darwin's barberry flower weevil ( Anthonomus kuscheli). Darwin's barberry is a resilient noxious weed found in disturbed forests, pastures, shrubland and short tussock-land. It is a threat to indigenous ecosystems throughout the country, as well as to pastures where livestock graze. Standard control methods such as herbicides or weeding are often costly, impractical and harmful to the environment. It is native to Chile and Argentina and was introduced to Aotearoa New Zealand as a garden plant in the 1940s. Fruit-eating birds deposit seeds far from the parent bush, increasing its spread. The plant can be found throughout New Zealand - particularly in the Canterbury, Otago, and Wellington regions. These biocontrol agents could also be used to target Darwin's barberry elsewhere in the country. Both the flower weevil and the rust fungus proposed for introduction are native to South America. All organisms new to New Zealand must receive approval from the EPA before being released into the New Zealand environment. "The independent decision-making committee approved the introduction of these two organisms following a rigorous, evidence-based assessment," says Dr Chris Hill, General Manager of Hazardous Substances and New Organisms at the EPA. "The applicant's risk assessment showed that these agents are highly unlikely to harm native plants or animals. The weevil does not bite or sting, so there is no health risk to people, and the rust fungus is also benign." Dr Hill says the decision followed public consultation, engagement with mana whenua, and consideration of international best practice. "New Zealand has a strong track record of using biological control agents to manage invasive weeds with minimal impact on native ecosystems," he says. In recent years the EPA has approved other biocontrol agents for weeds such as purple loosestrife, old man's beard, Sydney golden wattle and moth plant.
RNZ News
17-07-2025
- RNZ News
Academic warns over using AI to reduce costs of Regulatory Standards Bill
An academic is warning artificial intelligence is not the silver bullet David Seymour has suggested it will be for reducing the cost of the Regulatory Standards Bill. Victoria University senior lecturer in Artificial Intelligence Andrew Lensen spoke to Charlotte Cook. To embed this content on your own webpage, cut and paste the following: See terms of use.
Scoop
14-07-2025
- Scoop
Majority Of Submitters Opposed The Gene Technology Bill
An overwhelming majority of submissions rejected the Gene Technology Bill as it threatens exports, domestic economy, consumer choice and democracy. Of the 14947 submissions received by the Health Select Committee on the Gene Technology Bill 97% were opposed to its passing into law. By any measure, this Bill fails to meet basic Regulatory Standards due to its flawed and heavily biased industry input that has deliberately omitted an economic analysis on its costs and benefits as well as considering the real time impacts of the cruel failures of the GE field trials conducted in New Zealand over the past 30 years. Fears of exempted unregulated genetically engineered (GE) organisms harming the economy also prompted large organisations who supported some parts of the Gene Technology Bill to warn it needs major changes or will threaten exports. The Gene Technology Bill's GE exemptions not requiring regulation removing any liability for contamination and people's basic right to choose prompted Lisa Er's petition to 'Halt the Gene Technology Bill and set up a Commission of Inquiry.' Lisa Er, the original founder of Lisa's Hummus has always listened to the public demand for GE-free food and the right to avoid genetic engineered ingredients. Lisa says "The Gene Technology Bill failed to follow sound and fair processes and did not consult with the public and other stakeholders. "The range of gene editing techniques that would be excluded from regulation would mean GE products entering the environment and food supply untested, unregistered and unlabelled. "There was inadequate consideration of Te Tiriti obligations, and insufficient requirements to protect people and the environment from the risks of GE contamination." Stopping to hold an inquiry will allow major flaws in The Gene Technology Bill to be considered and addressed, including: Ignoring the Protective Precautionary Principle: risking ecosystems and rural jobs. Excluding Treaty of Waitangi Principles: disregarding Māori rights and perspectives. Denying Consumer choice: by excluding many GE organisms from regulation and labelling. Shifting Liability: without requiring GE users to manage risks. Clean up of Genetic drift and contamination is at the cost of the contaminated party. No Supply Chain Segregation: removing the ability to preserve the integrity of GE-free crops and exports. No Ethical Standards: excluding animal welfare and ethical concerns from consideration. Ignoring Economic Risks: losing the added value of New Zealand's non-GMO exports. Ignoring Reputation Risks: deregulating away New Zealand's competitive advantage and global reputation for clean, safe, GMO-free food. Removing local councils' ability to enforce GE-free regions, precaution or local protections under the RMA. There will be a formal handover of Lisa's petition on the steps of Parliament on the 15 July. There will be a gathering at 12 -1pm. [1]
