Proven in the Jungles of Vietnam as Part of Agent Orange!
Dow Chemical is seeking USDA approval for a genetically engineered (GE) version of corn that is resistant to 2,4-D, an herbicide that was used in the formulation of the highly toxic defoliant Agent Orange. Agent Orange (half 2,4-D by composition) was extensively used in Vietnam by the military to destroy forests and crops.

Dow’s Christmas gift for America was formally announced, by the USDA, in the December 27, 2011 edition of the Federal Register. If the federal government wants to bury something in the news, and burn up part of our window to publicly respond, you can bet they’ll do it around the holidays. The public has 60 days to comment on Dow’s petition for deregulation. LEARN MORE...

TAKE ACTION

As 2011 comes to an end, we are revving up our important campaign to Safeguard Organic Standards: getting genetically engineered ingredients out of certified organic baby food, so...

Since 2006, Martek Biosciences, owned by multinational biotech giant DSM, has been selling its DHA (docosahexaenoic acid) and ARA (arachidonic acid), synthesized versions of the essential fatty acids that are naturally found in breast milk, to companies manufacturing organic infant formula, baby food, other food products.

Now the National Organic Program says the 2006 approval was illegal and they're conducting a formal review of the Martek products for the first time. READ MORE...

Tell organic baby food brands to stop using GMOs!

Free Webinar with Jeffrey Smith next Tuesday 12/6, at 8:30 pm EST

In 2012, the Institute for Responsible Technology and a coalition of groups will seek to protect infants and babies from GM baby food and infant formula, and raise awareness of parents nationwide about the importance of raising children on non-GMO food. If you wish to be involved with this outreach effort, join Jeffrey this Tuesday. He will share our ideas and key talking points, solicit feedback, answer questions, and discuss ways you can get involved.

To register for this free webinar, please sign up at: https://www1.gotomeeting.com/register/172743024

The Farm Bill, which is renewed every five years (2008 was the most recent) could reach the legislature a year earlier than it should.
The so-called super committee, whose so-called job is to cut $1.2 trillion from the national deficit, has as their deadline November 23, the day before Thanksgiving. The Farm Bill is on the chopping block. If the Farm Bill passes in its current form, commodity crops will continue to receive support through subsidies, and they may receive additional insurance as well. Funding for conservation and nutrition would be reduced or eliminated. Please let your representatives know that you are opposed to the "secret farm bill" and support the Local Food, Farms, and Jobs Act.

Small farmers and urban poultry owners alike are threatened by the USDA's new proposal for animal identification. The agency has proposed a rule that imposes costs and paperwork burdens on farmers, ranchers, backyard poultry owners, sale barns, vets, and state agencies in order to track animals that cross state lines.

The proposed rule is a solution in search of a problem. The USDA has failed to identify the specific problem or disease of concern, and the real focus of the program is helping the export market for the benefit of a handful of large corporations. LEARN MORE / TAKE ACTION

Nanotechnology is a powerful new set of technologies for observing, taking apart and reconstructing nature at the atomic and molecular level. This level is measured in nanometers and 1 nanometer (nm) is equal to 1 billionth of a meter. For reference, a molecule of sugar measures 1 nanometer (nm), which is about as big in relation to an apple as the apple is in relation to the earth. A human hair is huge by comparison, about 50,000 nm wide.

Nano means more than just small; the radical reduction in size means that seemingly ordinary materials may behave completely differently than in their larger bulk or macro form. In recent years, nanoscale ingredients have been incorporated into more than 1,300 consumer products like baby bottles, cutting boards, food containers, food packaging, computer parts, curling irons, hair brushes, cosmetics and sunscreens. However, studies show that the unique properties of nanomaterials can create unpredictable and potentially hazardous risks to human health and the environment.

Currently, companies do not have to identify or test their products for containing nanoscale ingredients and they don’t have to submit nano-specific safety data.  In the absence of labeling and nano-specific safety data, neither consumers nor the EPA know what products are using nanotechnology and if those products are safe.

Tell EPA to begin protecting consumers now – don’t put off public safety any longer!

For decades, family farmers and ranchers who raise livestock have endured abuses from corporate giants that control the market. But, you can help level the playing field for independent farmers and ranchers.

Today, just four companies own 83.5% of the beef market, 66% of the hog industry and 58.5% of the broiler chicken industry. These giant meatpackers and poultry processors have enjoyed unchecked market power, allowing them to control prices, issue unfair contracts with farmers and bully, intimidate and abuse farmers who stand up against corporate power.

Click here to tell your U.S. Senators it's time to stand firm against corporate greed and abuse. Tell them it's time to stand up for family farmers and ranchers and support the USDA in protecting them.

A new rule is being proposed for spinach, lettuce, and cabbage by a “marketing agency” that doesn’t have food safety jurisdiction or staff. But that’s not the worst of it.

The most powerful “Big Ag” players in the leafy green industry are pushing the National Leafy Greens Marketing Agreement (NLGMA) despite the fact that we already have food safety rules. We passed them last year in the Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA). Because of your input from the grassroots we made sure those food safety rules included alternative compliance measures appropriate for small and medium-sized farms. This new Marketing Agreement, dominated by Big Ag, could do an end run around these protections, and keep the family farm voice out of the process.

Oh, and there is even worse news to report…

After the E. Coli outbreak in 2006, these same industry associations in California came together to create a “marketing agreement” to help improve their image. Without any scientific basis, the CA agreement prompted the indiscriminate and unnecessary removal of conservation buffers and wildlife habitat deemed to be “incompatible with food safety.” Small family farmers also had many problems trying to comply with drastic rules designed for large-scale operations. The CA model illustrates just how ineffective and reckless this tool can be.

Now they want to take this failed model to the national level.

This confusing and duplicative rule could effectively shut small and mid-sized farmers out of the leafy greens market.

Tell the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) to withdraw their unnecessary and confusing rule.

Thank you for taking action to protect our family farmers.

The House Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee has adopted a government funding bill that if passed would turn back decades of progress to achieve a more sustainable and just food and farming system

This 2012 bill makes a second round of steep cuts to conservation, extension, research, renewable energy, and rural development programs. And just like in fiscal year 2011, none of the cuts are directed at crop subsidies, the largest federal agricultural spending item. Learn more...

If passed this bill will endanger our nation’s supply of clean water, increase the already alarming levels of soil erosion, and sell our farmers out to multinational meat and poultry conglomerates ... to name just a few.
 ACT NOW! Tell the Senate to Reject this Reckless Bill

June 2 Public Meeting on Indian Point:
Tell the NRC What Really Matters

TELL THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WHY INDIAN POINT IS NOT WORTH THE RISK! WE CAN REPLACE THE POWER - WE CAN’T REPLACE THE LIVES.

Join Riverkeeper on Thursday, June 2 and tell the NRC in person what you think about Indian Point. It’s the public’s last chance before the relicensing hearing in the fall to make sure the NRC, and our local elected officials, hear loud and clear about our concerns following the Fukushima nuclear disaster. The NRC has gamed the system long enough! It’s time for us to turn up the pressure on the NRC at this critical time, and the best way to do that is to show up and speak out!

The disaster in Japan -- nuclear reactors dangerously close still to meltdown -- has raised questions about the risks we Hudson Valley residents face with Indian Point nuclear power plant in our area.

* Americans in Japan within 50 miles of the Fukushima nuclear reactor have been advised to evacuate. Why, then, are Americans living with only a 10-mile evacuation zone?
* With 20 million people living within 50 miles of Indian Point, is a 50 mile evacuation even conceivable?
* With the spent fuel pools outside containment structures at Fukushima remaining out of control, many are now questioning the
safety of spent fuel rods at Indian Point.
* Would leaks from the plant impact Rockland’s drinking water if plans to desalinate the Hudson for drinking water move ahead?
* How crucial is the power from Indian Point?
* What can we do to shut the plant down?

Longtime environmental advocates Marilyn Elie, Susan Shapiro, and Maureen Ritter will moderate the discussion.

For more information, email pkurtz9@gmail.com or deby1012@verizon.net or call 845 358-3386.

When the Food & Drug Administration took public comments on genetically engineered salmon last Fall, 21,095 Organic Consumers Association activists sent letters urging the FDA to block Frankenfish. We expect the FDA to release an environmental assessment of the GM salmon any day now, and when they do, we'll have another 30 days to submit public comments, but FDA approval seems all but certain.

Thankfully, there are members of Congress, Republicans and Democrats alike, who are committed to stopping GM salmon, even if Obama's FDA gives it the green light. These Congresspersons know that GM salmon just isn't safe. Worse than even "normal" factory farmed fish, which are often deformed and disease-ridden, GM salmon is less nutritious, more likely to trigger allergies, and could increase cancer-risks in the people who eat it.

Please contact your Member of Congress and urge them to cosponsor H.R.521, Rep. Don Young (R-AL)'s bill to ban GM salmon, and vote for H.R.1 Amendment No. 491, Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA)'s effort to include a ban on GM salmon in the 2011 Continuing Resolution.

Take Action: Tell Your Member of Congress to Cosponsor H.R.521 & Vote for CR Amendment No. 491!

Despite public opposition, the USDA recently approved Monsanto's Roundup Ready, genetically engineered alfalfa for commercial planting in the absence of sound science to prove that contamination can be prevented or that it is safe for human health or the environment. Alfalfa is primarily used as animal feed in dairies. Now that GE alfalfa has been cleared for commercial production, dairies need to hear from you that you will not purchase dairy products from companies that allow GE alfalfa!

Despite the risks, the USDA has now made it clear that they are not interested in regulating Monsanto’s GE Alfalfa. They approved it January 27th for planting this spring by farmers with no restrictions.

Tell President Obama that you don’t want organic and conventional agriculture contaminated by GE Alfalfa, and that you have a right to eat meat, dairy, and eggs from livestock who consume non-genetically engineered crops. Read more and take action.

By Ronnie Cummins, Organic Consumers Association, Jan 27, 2011

In the wake of a 12-year battle to keep Monsanto's Genetically Engineered (GE) crops from contaminating the nation's 25,000 organic farms and ranches, America's organic consumers and producers are facing betrayal. A self-appointed cabal of the Organic Elite, spearheaded by Whole Foods Market, Organic Valley, and Stonyfield Farm, has decided it's time to surrender to Monsanto. Top executives from these companies have publicly admitted that they no longer oppose the mass commercialization of GE crops, such as Monsanto's controversial Roundup Ready alfalfa, and are prepared to sit down and cut a deal for "coexistence" with Monsanto and USDA biotech cheerleader Tom Vilsack.

In a cleverly worded, but profoundly misleading email sent to its customers last week, Whole Foods Market, while proclaiming their support for organics and "seed purity," gave the green light to USDA bureaucrats to approve the "conditional deregulation" of Monsanto's genetically engineered, herbicide-resistant alfalfa. Beyond the regulatory euphemism of "conditional deregulation," this means that WFM and their colleagues are willing to go along with the massive planting of a chemical and energy-intensive GE perennial crop, alfalfa; guaranteed to spread its mutant genes and seeds across the nation; guaranteed to contaminate the alfalfa fed to organic animals; guaranteed to lead to massive poisoning of farm workers and destruction of the essential soil food web by the toxic herbicide, Roundup; and guaranteed to produce Roundup-resistant superweeds that will require even more deadly herbicides such as 2,4 D to be sprayed on millions of acres of alfalfa across the U.S. Read more about this critical issue and take action!

In a precedent-setting final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on the planting of Monsanto’s genetically engineered (GE) alfalfa, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) acknowledges for the first time that GE contamination of organic and conventionally grown crops presents a huge problem in the U.S. Yet, the document falls woefully short of proving that GE alfalfa is safe for the environment or that it will afford all farmers their fair share of the US agricultural economy. In fact, the EIS sorely lacks the type of rigorous scientific data and analysis that the public expects from the Agency to justify going forward with any type of deregulation of GE alfalfa.

Click here to tell U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Vilsack that the science doesn’t support the agency’s proposed measures to prevent GMO contamination. The only way to fully protect farmers, consumers and the environment is to deny approval of GE alfalfa and adopt a moratorium.

Senator Leahy and Representative DeFazio are circulating a Congressional sign-on letter in the House and Senate "Asking USDA to Maintain the Ban on Genetically Engineered Alfalfa" 
Contact your Senators and Representative Today 
If you do not know who they are click here.

Call: the U.S. Capitol Switchboard: (202)224-3121 and ask for your Senator/Representative's office. 
 Speak with the agriculture staff person or leave a message:
►Ask them to sign on to the "Dear Colleague Letter to USDA about Banning GE Alfalfa"

Please send this URGENT message to U.S. Government leaders to protect your right to know which foods are made from genetically modified organisms (GMOs).

Click HERE and send an email today to the Secretaries of State (Clinton), Agriculture (Vilsack), and Health and Human Services (Sebelius). Please try to do this before Wednesday, May 5th, but don’t stop until they come around.

They must stop U.S. negotiators at an international (Codex) conference from May 3-7, from pushing an agenda that could make it difficult for anyone, anywhere in the world to label foods as genetically modified (GM) – or even make non-GMO claims on their product’s label.

The U.S. is taking the ridiculous and unscientific position that GMOs are not different from conventional foods, claiming labels that say GMO or non-GMO are misleading.

If they succeed at the meeting, the U.S. may then file lawsuits through the World Trade Organization against any country that implements mandatory labeling of GMOs, or even allows non-GMO claims on packages.

This Is a Grave Threat to the Non-GMO Tipping Point – We Must Push Back Now!

The growing evidence and concern about health dangers of GMOs is making waves. A renowned US Medical organization (American Academy of Environmental Medicine) called on doctors to prescribe non-GMO diets for all patients. Consumers are seeking non-GMO brands, and the fastest growing claim among store brands in 2009 was “GMO-Free” (Neilson Survey). The trade journal Supermarket News predicts GMO concerns will erupt this year, specifically because consumers are now given choices by the new Non-GMO Shopping Guide website and the Non-GMO Project’s third-party verified standard for making non-GMO claims.

Most Americans (53%) say they would avoid GMOs if they were labeled. But even 5% would likely be enough to create a tipping point of consumer rejection, forcing all GM ingredients out of our food supply.

We can see the tipping point just over the horizon, but it is now threatened by the US position at Codex.

Tell our government leaders that you will not stand for this outrageous obstruction of our democracy and human rights. Demand that the U.S. support the right for countries everywhere to label GMOs. And remind them that 9 out of 10 Americans want mandatory GMO labeling, and that President Obama actually made a campaign pledge to implement it—which are all waiting for.

If the U.S. government has its way, a powerful intergovernmental group you’ve probably never heard of may soon prevent anyone anywhere from labeling genetically modified (GMO) food.

Operated by the United Nations, the Codex Alimentarius is a collection of guidelines, codes and recommendations regarding food safety and labeling standards which are used by the World Trade Organization (WTO) to settle international disputes regarding food and agricultural trade agreements.

The U.S. Delegation to the Codex meeting is adopting a position that would make it virtually impossible to label foods as "GMO-free" anywhere in the world. Click on the link below to stop this end-run around our democratic process and make sure the voice of the American people is heard on GMO labeling.

Time is running out to help save family dairy farmers. We only have one day left to demand that the USDA set a fair price for dairy — please speak up now.

Should organic ruminants such as a dairy cows and beef cattle -- which have evolved to eat grass -- be permitted to be kept in feedlots or should they be required by USDA organic regulations to obtain at least a portion of their feed directly from pasture?
According to the USDA's new organic pasture rule, released in February 2010, pasture grazing is required in organic dairy production, but organic beef cattle may be exempt from obtaining any of their feed from pasture during the last four months of their lives.
Learn more and send your comments to the USDA before the April 19th deadline.

Tell Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas to Remove Himself from Supreme Court GMO Sugar Beet Case.

J.E.M. Ag Supply v. Pioneer Hi-Bred, 534 U.S. 124 (2001) granted large biotech corporations like Monsanto extensive patent protection over genetically modified seeds. This case was authored by Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, former General Counsel for Monsanto.

In Monsanto v. Geertson Seed Farms, No. 09-475, the U.S. Supreme Court will review an appellate court decision ruling that the USDA illegally approved Monsanto's GM sugar beets without determining whether organic farmers, consumers or the environment would be adversely effected.

Justice Thomas has an obvious conflict of interest and should recuse himself, but he has decided to reserve his power to rule on the GM sugar beet case.

As one blogger put it, "Fox, meet henhouse."

Please sign OCA's petition to Justice Thomas