Monsanto gears up for special chemical mixtures against GM 'superweeds'

Monsanto to profit from farming problem it created


August 2001

A US patent recently secured by Monsanto reveals it is gearing up to profit from special chemical mixtures using multiple-class herbicide formulations to tackle the problem of GM superweeds. GM superweeds are a problem Monsanto has created from its own transgenic crop technology, a side-effect of which is to produce herbicide resistant volunteer weeds from a number of 'Roundup Ready' crops (see article below).  

After several years practical 'in-field' experience with GM herbicide resistant crops in the US these developments represent a 'de facto' admission by Monsanto of the GM 'superweed' problem, and the inherently unsustainable nature of the technology which has given rise to it.  

These developments also represent an astute - if somewhat breathtaking - business move which will enable Monsanto to derive additional income from sales of chemicals beyond its own glyphosate herbicide formulations. Specifically the intention appears to be to derive a new income stream from farmers who have grown 'Roundup Ready' crops earlier in their rotations and the novel volunteer weed problems that that creates.  

The extraordinary US patent acquired by Monsanto which permits this situation clearly anticipates the superweed problem arising from a wide range of GM glyphosate resistant crops - including corn, cotton, soybean, wheat, canola, sugarbeet, rice, and lettuce.

Meanwhile, just how much evidence does the UK government and the NFU need to call a halt to the proposed introduction of this unsustainable technology in Britain?   Certainly these kinds of long term agronomic and environmental effects are not being addressed in the UK GM farm scale trials, even though Monsanto's latest patent is a clear admission that such effects exist.  

The UK trials are based on an unscientific protocol which ignores a number of basic realities in relation to such crops of which this issue is only one - for more on this see: www.btinternet.com/~nlpwessex/Documents/gmtrialsscience.htm  

NATURAL LAW PARTY WESSEX
nlpwessex@bigfoot.com
www.btinternet.com/~nlpwessex

Disease and pestilence hits Missouri as GM soy expands - click here


http://www.cropchoice.com/leadstry.asp?RecID=390

Monsanto Sees Opportunity in Glyphosate Resistant Volunteer Weeds
by David Dechant

(Aug. 3, 2001 CropChoice opinion)  

While some see the unwanted presence of glyphosate resistant volunteer
corn plants in a field of RR soybeans (Roundup Ready, resistant to
glyphosate) as a problem inherent with relying on the RR system two or
more years in a row, Monsanto sees opportunity: just get a patent on the
practice of mixing with glyphosate other herbicides having a different
mode of action, and on the premixtures thereof!  

Never mind the fact that there is nothing novel about the practice of
mixing herbicides with different modes of action, as this has been done as
long as there have been herbicides. Never mind that nearly any farmer
could figure out on his own which herbicides to mix. That doesn't matter
to the US Patent Office, as Monsanto is now the proud owner of US Patent no.6,239,072.  

The abstract of the two-month-old patent reads as such:  
"The present invention is directed to tank mixtures and premixtures of
a glyphosate herbicide and a second herbicide to which a first species is
susceptible and a second species is resistant. Such tank mixtures and
premixtures allow control of glyphosate-susceptible weeds and
glyphosate-tolerant volunteer individuals of the first species in a
crop of glyphosate-tolerant second species with a single application of
herbicide."  

This sure flies in the face of the argument that RR crops require only
glyphosate or less herbicide for weed control. Because of the presence
of weedy glyphosate tolerant corn volunteers, farmers now routinely apply
a second herbicide when they are present in a field of RR soybeans. In
fact, many times farmers now have do so even if the previous corn crop was
not RR, because of cross-pollination from nearby fields of such corn.   In some cases, Monsanto even chips in for the second herbicide,
especially when the farmer grows RR corn.

Now, it appears Monsanto wants
to prevent anyone from mixing on their own the following herbicides with
glyphosate, as well as to corner the market for premixtures containing
them: Assure, Poast, Fusilade, Select, Pursuit, and Raptor, their
generic equivalents, and other non-glyphosate herbicides.  It also looks
like Monsanto intends the same for controlling glyphosate resistant
volunteer wheat and rice plants, too, when they are present in fields of
RR soybeans, canola, sugarbeets, or cotton.  

Reading the patent description further, the scope of the "invention"
broadens:   "Therefore, the scope of the present invention reasonably covers the
presently-known glyphosate-tolerant corn, cotton, soybean, wheat,
canola, sugarbeet, rice, and lettuce, and any glyphosate-tolerant crop
species that may be developed. Also, although the development of
glyphosate-tolerant plants by use of conventional breeding without
recombinant DNA techniques is currently believed to be highly unlikely,
if any such naturally glyphosate-tolerant plants are developed they
would fall within the scope of the current invention."  

This patent even covers glyphosate resistant crops that don't exist yet
and maybe never will!   Reading still further, one finds examples of more combinations of
glyphosate volunteer plants that can be controlled in glyphosate
resistant crops, as sorghum and peanuts are added to the mix. One can't
help but wonder if that includes everything!   At any rate, Monsanto does admit that there could be one limitation to
modifying crops to be tolerant to glyphosate: the presence of
glyphosate tolerant weeds other than those from tolerant volunteer crop
species. But it downplays this, saying "No uncultivated species of weed
has been observed to naturally develop glyphosate-tolerance, and the
flow of genes for glyphosate tolerance from crop plants to related wild
species is not expected to occur."  

Perhaps the authors of the patent never saw the numerous reports, a few
here on CropChoice, about weeds in certain areas exhibiting an increased
tolerance to glyphosate applications. And while there may be no cases of
glyphosate tolerant genes jumping from RR crops into weeds,
http://www.weedscience.org (search for glycines) reports that there
already are resistant types of ryegrass, goosegrass, and horseweed in
different parts of the world.  

Finally, this absurd patent, which reads more like a scam than a
description of an invention, shows just how desperate Monsanto is to
hang on to its near monopoly in glyphosate, its cash cow for well over a decade.  

Monsanto's patent on glyphosate expired last September. However,
farmers in the US still pay twice as much for glyphosate as do their
competitors elsewhere in the world. That's because all generic startups
either have to develop from scratch the required EPA registration data,
which takes a long time and a lot of money, or go to the original
registrant, Monsanto in this case, and get a license to use its
registration data. Of course, they pay dearly for this, with the result
they have to overcharge for a long time to pay off the licensing fee.  

But someday, the generic competition will become more aggressive. So if
Monsanto can no longer monopolize the glyphosate molecule itself,
there's nothing better than trying to monopolize the uses of glyphosate
and the premixtures, as well as the fix to a problem it caused in the
first place, i.e., resistant volunteers. Last of all, thanks to the
inept US Patent and Trademark Office for facilitating this scheme, as
well as countless others.   Source:   Search on patent US patent #6,239,072 at
http://www.uspto.gov/patft/index.html
David Dechant grows wheat, corn and alfalfa in Colorado  


Breakthrough for Sustainable Biology - April 2001
US data reveals UK GM trials unscientific - Feb 2001
GE fantasy shattered by human genome project - Feb 2001
No Need for GM Vitamin A Rice - Feb 2001
Call for Wisdom in World Agriculture - Aug 2000
FAO report reveals GM not needed to feed the world - July 2000
Solution to the GM debate? - Feb 2000

Population duped by genetic engineers


Return to NLP Wessex GM page
Will GM crops deliver benefits to farmers? - some realities behind biotechnology myths

Solar Energy, Agriculture and World Peace

Can Organic Agriculture Feed the World?

Back to  Home Page

rainbow

Our News Page ¦ NLP Policies ¦ NLP Wessex  ¦ Contact Us
Genetic Engineering Campaign ¦ 1999 Euro Elections