Sara Weil (click on thumbnail to see larger photo)

Sara was a great intern and remains a dear friend of people in the Traprock community.  She lived and worked and played with us for a year at Traprock.  Here is what she wrote for the Traprock Peace Action Report while she was an intern in 1999:

            Hi!  As the new intern at Traprock Sunny requested that I write a few lines to introduce myself.  I came to Traprock in November after several months of considering the idea and after finishing up my obligations as an organic vegetable grower in Belchertown.  Last year I grew about a half acre of potatoes; about three acres each of feed corn and hulless oats; a small area of sweet corn; a cutting garden of flowers filling a 120 x 35 foot area, 1200 tomato plants and about 7,200 row feet of dry beans.  Some of these were individual projects, others jointly conducted with other farmers at the New England Small Farm Institute, Arnie Voehringer and Bob Novick.  Some of the dry beans were from special seed I had acquired from Lawrence Hollander of the Eastern Native Seed Conservancy located in Great Barrington.  The Eastern Native Seed Conservancy specializes in seeds native to this region.  Lawrence sent me seed that he wanted to have "grown out": six cultivars of native American bean seed.    He has been collecting seed from native Americans in order to preserve the dwindling reserves of these seeds. The beans I grew were Tonawanda, Stockbridge Indian, Six Nation, Iroquois Cranberry, Kahwanake, and Deseranto Potato bean.  The beans from the harvest will all be returned to the Eastern Native Seed Conservancy.  I grew them in order to refresh the gene lines.  Seed cannot be kept in storage indefinitely.  It must be "grown out" periodically to maintain viable seed.  Last year was a change for me from the previous four years I had spent learning about and eventually managing a 108 member Community Supported Agriculture farm.  I still feel committed to the concept of the CSA farm with which you are perhaps familiar.  Common Wealth CSA, of which Wally and Juanita Nelson are two contributing farmers, is an example in the Greenfield area.  There are several in the Valley.  Overall in the U.S. there are more than 600 CSA farms.  It is an excellent model for helping maintain local, small-scale farms and for bringing people closer to their food supply.  If you don't know about it you might consider learning more about such a farm near you.  By becoming a member you will be supporting a farmer and you will be eating the most healthy and freshest food possible without growing your own.  The more I learn about the trends in modern large-scale agribusinesses the more convinced I become of the importance of these farms and of the importance of the organic movement in general.  In late 1997 the federal government released its proposed national organic standards.  There was a general outcry from organic farmers around the country.  The proposed standards clearly undermined the goals of food purity and sustainability that organic farmers strive for.  Some of the most obviously offensive "standards" allowed the use of sewage sludge for fertilizer, food irradiation, and genetically engineered seed.  Those came to be known as the Big Three.  There were other offenses in the document.  The quantity of letters received by the USDA was so great that the entire document was scrapped.  Had this not occurred organic farmers were contemplating a variety of responses that included renaming organic farming so as to avoid being connected with the spurious standards which seemed specifically designed make it possible for agribusiness to access the suddenly lucrative organic market.  Now farmers are warily awaiting the second set of proposals and meanwhile enjoying the organic regulations that evolved naturally over the years on a state-by-state basis as farmers sought a standard by which to measure the word organic.  Today the word inspires a confidence in the consumers.  Hopefully this standard will continue to thus inspire.  I participated in the recent struggle to preserve the integrity of the organic label by writing a letter to the USDA.  Recently I have become concerned about the subtle creep of genetically engineered food stuffs into the American food supply.  I have made the pursuit of knowledge on this topic one of my independent projects while I am at Traprock. 

There has been a general outcry around the world about the marketing, use of test-plots and sale of genetically engineered seed. "Following in the wake of mounting  worldwide criticism of Monsanto's "Terminator Technology," the CGIAR organization, the world's largest international agricultural research network, announced that they would boycott all Terminator Technology seeds." (Ronnie Cummins, Oct 31, 1998, The Columbus Free Press)  Austria and Luxembourg have banned specific genetically engineered crops fearing potentially catastrophic environmental consequences (Frank Bajak, Associated Press Writer, Tuesday February 16, 1999). In a recent decision,  recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone has been banned in Canada.   A British newspaper reported that their government was considering charging Monsanto with violating environmental pollution laws for a Roundup-resistant rapeseed (canola) farm test site where GE rapeseed plants contaminated an adjoining non-GE rapeseed plot.   In India, fields of genetically engineered cotton have been burned to the chants of "Cremate Monsanto".  This is a partial list of reactions.

Criticism and direct actions have elicited strong-arm responses.  US trade officials have repeatedly warned Tokyo that mandatory labeling of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) is unacceptable, and could lead to a US/Japan trade war.  Meanwhile several million petition signatures are in the hands of the Japanese government.  The former associate Health Minister in New Zealand, Neil Kirton, revealed in an interview in the national press that the United States Ambassador, Josiah Beeman, visited him twice in February and March (1998) and "bullied" him over the testing and labeling of genetically modified food.  Kirton was later fired and replaced by another government official who was willing to go along with the US "no labeling" position.  Polls in New Zealand and Australia show that consumers overwhelming support mandatory labeling (Ronnie Cummins, Dec 7 1998, The Columbus Free Press). 

            Last month in Columbia UN-sponsored talks on regulating trade in genetically modified organisms ran aground.  130 nations attended and demanded the right to restrict imports and be compensated for any environmental damage. A unanimous vote was required on the Biosafety Protocol.  The U.S. could not vote because it was not among the 174 countries that ratified the Biodiversity Convention produced at the 1992 Earth Summit. The talks ended without a final decision because six allies of the United States blocked it: Canada, Australia, Uruguay, Chile and Argentina (New Zealand? can't believe it; need to check).

            The crux of the controversy is possible threats to human health, the environment, and farmer's rights.  Too little is known about genetics generally to allow the release of these products in the environment.  The manipulation of genes, pulling them from one organism, inserting them in another even to the point of causing organisms to produce synthetics - these acts are a violation of a very basic nature.  Once released in the environment these altered organisms cannot be recalled.  Consider the destruction that has already been wrought by invasive organisms on native populations usually due to their importation via human means.  We have caused much unintentional destruction of native habitats in this way. Studies in ecology have shown that interspecies relationships evolved at a genetic level in what is called the gene-for-gene theory. Now, heretofore unknown organisms are being released into the environment.  The Earth becomes a laboratory in a test that many feel is too risky. Yet another example of the arrogance to which humans are prone.  The techniques to accomplish these adulterations arouse emphatic and unequivocal reactions from many scientists with the knowledge to anticipate the possible outcomes. Rather than begin the lengthy discussion of the dangers I'll leave this topic with a statement from Professor Richard Lacey MD, microbiologist, and Professor of Food Safety, world famous for his accurate prediction of the dangers of "Mad cow disease":  "The fact is, it is virtually impossible to even conceive of a testing procedure to assess the health effects of genetically engineered foods when introduced into the food chain, nor is there any valid nutritional or public interest reason for their introduction."

            While proponents claim that genetic engineering will be a magical solution to all manner of problems it is worth noting that to this point the main problem it has addressed is the profit margins of life science and chemical companies.  The principal result of planting Roundup Ready soybeans will be the increased use of the herbicide Roundup. 

            Still trying to leave this topic… one last sobering thought…"Biotechnology is helping to transform agriculture," said Val Giddings, vice president for food and agriculture at the Biotechnology Industry Organization.  In the United States last year, 25 percent of the corn crop, 38 percent of soy beans and 45 percent of cotton were genetically modified."  (Frank Bajak, Associated Press Writer, February 16 1999)  "Since 1994, Monsanto and a half-dozen other giant chemical and pharmaceutical companies -- working hand-in-hand with compliant regulatory agencies such as the Food and Drug Administration and the Department of Agriculture -- have begun to genetically engineer the food supply of North America and the entire world. 

            Starting with the controversial Bovine Growth Hormone (rBGH) and the Flar Savr tomato, and proceeding to a full menu of genetically engineered soybeans, corn, cotton, potatoes, squash, chicory, and canola (rapeseed), the Clinton administration has sat by and allowed the commercialization of over three dozen genetically engineered (GE) foods and crops, with absolutely no labeling or special pre-market safety-testing required.  There are already 45 million of acres of GE crops being cultivated across the United States, and most non-organic processed foods in American supermarkets now "test positive" for at least trace levels of genetically engineered ingredients."  (Ronnie Cummins, Oct 31 1998, The Columbus Free Press)

Back to Traprock Interns & Internships

Return to Table of Contents

Created on July 3, 2001 by Charlie Jenks; photos by Charlie Jenks