Hub of the Battle Over Biotech

The center of the nation’s anti-biotechnology movement these days is in Northern California, where Mendocino County voters will decide March 2 whether to ban genetically modified organisms.

Measure H would prohibit genetically modified plants and animals from being raised or kept in the county, although processed food made with genetically modified ingredients would be allowed on store shelves.

Success could galvanize similar movements from Vermont to Hawaii. Failure could cast the same pall over activists that they felt after the 2002 defeat in Oregon of a proposal to require the labeling of all food with biotechnology ingredients.

Activists and biotech lobbyists are increasingly targeting state and local governments in the battle over agricultural biotechnology’s spread.

In 2001-02, 158 pieces of legislation relating to biotechnology were introduced in 39 states, according to the Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology. Nineteen of those bills sought to restrict segments of the industry, including Maryland’s five-year ban on engineered fish that passed in 2002.

But none has been as sweeping as the attempt in Mendocino County, a place where a frontier spirit holds sway.

The headquarters of the closely watched campaign is Ukiah Brewing Co., located in the heart of this working-class town that lumber built.

“I believe that genetic engineering at this stage is the biggest uncontrolled biological experiment going on in the world today,” Els Cooperrider, co-owner of Ukiah Brewing, a brew pub that uses only organic ingredients in its beer and food.

Cooperrider, who worked as a medical researcher for 20 years before opening the restaurant with her husband, a zoologist, said it was too risky to allow genetically engineered organisms to be released into nature: “It’s an irreversible process -- we can’t pull them back once we do it.”

Regardless of the outcome, Measure H is in keeping with a rugged, rural and remote county proud of its eclectic politics, quirky independence and somewhat hedonistic ways.

Its district attorney is a registered Libertarian who served time in prison on tax charges.

Its sheriff is a proponent of the legality of medicinal marijuana and a backer of Measure H.

Wine grapes recently surpassed timber as the region’s top-selling legal crop, although it’s no secret that marijuana is the biggest cash crop.

Growing numbers of organic farmers are also staking out small operations in the arable land below the county’s redwood-studded hills.

Some 3,500 acres of the county’s 18,000 acres of farmland are certified as organic, which means the crops were grown without pesticides and artificial fertilizers.

The law would have little practical effect inside Mendocino County if enacted, since there are no known genetically modified crops growing in the area, nor are there any commercially available biotech versions of the county’s main crops. And a biotechnology ban could benefit organic growers, who could use the law as a marketing tool.

“Beyond the political quirkiness, there is some protectionism going on here,” said Glenn McGourty, a University of California plant science advisor for Mendocino County who said he’s neutral on the issue.

Coffee growers in Hawaii have similar economic issues.

“We are following this real closely,” said Nancy Redfeather, an organic coffee grower near Kona. “It’s extremely relevant to what we’re trying to do.”

Many Hawaii growers are trying to ban outdoor genetic engineering experiments of coffee plants for fear that accidental cross-pollination with their crops will ruin their business prospects, especially in biotechnology-averse Europe.

Similar movements are underway in Vermont, where several towns have passed nonbinding resolutions recommending biotechnology bans. In Texas, activists want to ban the genetic engineering of plants to produce human pharmaceuticals.

Biotechnology’s critics complain that not enough is known about the effects of genetically modified organisms on health and the environment to allow for widespread consumption.

Federal approval is required for genetic engineering experiments, but once such products have been approved for human consumption, there’s no system of tracking where the plants and animals end up.

The industry counters that such negative effects have proved nonexistent in the 10 years since the Food and Drug Administration first approved genetically engineered crops for human consumption -- and that many farmers are embracing the technology to save money while growing crops engineered to resist weeds and bugs without pesticides.

If Measure H is defeated, it would once again highlight the biotechnology industry’s staying power and political muscle.

In 2002, companies and industry groups warning against a “biotech police force” spent $4 million to help defeat the Oregon proposition.

This time, the industry-backed California Plant Health Assn. sued Mendocino County in an unsuccessful attempt to alter the ballot’s language. It is expected to file another lawsuit if the ballot passes.

“It’s bad policy for individual counties to start banning certain crops,” association head Steven Beckley said. “It’s also denying farmers a technology they may someday need.”

The industry will campaign aggressively to defeat the measure, Beckley said.

Mendocino County Agricultural Commissioner Dave Bengston said he was officially neutral on Measure H’s fate, but was concerned with overburdening his seven-person department, which has been stretched thin by budget cuts.

“We don’t have staff trained in dealing with genetically modified organisms and no one in the country has a ban like this,” Bengston said. “So it’s up to us to figure out how we are going to implement this, and any way you look at it, it’s going to cost money.”