[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [SANET-MG] insect resistance management in gm crops



Wow Dale,
I will comment on two if your peculiar statements. First, "Farmers do
not spray Bt corn to control corn borer because Bt corn  provides
complete control, much better than chemical control.  This is
 common knowledge.  Spraying to control cutworm or flea beetle, the only
 insect pests likely to trigger spraying of Bt corn in the corn belt,
is usually done too early to provide control of ECB."
ans: Bt corn may control borer but in the refuge borer thrives for that
reason chemical pesticide spraying has been allowed to allow the 20% of
the corn crop to be sold unblemished.Of course, the pesticide spray
takes away the benefit of the refuge in controlling Bt resistant insects
and replaces it with just killing the resistant insects. The benefits of
refuge sprayed with chemical insecticide is mainly public relations to
fool the public. In conclusion, the refuge allows borer to thrive to
allow control of resistant insects. Therefore, it is not sane to claim
that Bt corn (with refuge) completely controls borer.
Next, your comment " Well, provide some evidence". It is hard to say
whether that is a parting insult or is related to the issue of chemical
insecticides killing Bt resistant insects. Shifting the burden of proof
 is a sleazy courtroom tactic that has grown popular among the public
relations people (prp) promoting GM crops. When false claims are made
about the safety or efficacy of GM crops the prp always seem to say that
 those who question them must provide the evidence that the GM crops
are harmful even though the purse strings are held by the corporations
and their bureaucratic lackeys. In the case of the publication on Bt
resistance the report seemed not to have been reviewed by scientists
with integrity but by public prp who guard the sales potential of Bt crops.
sincerely, Joe Cummins
>

Dale Wilson wrote:
Joe,


The information you put forward your belief that the insecticides
used on BT corn refuge will not eliminate resistant root worm or
borer is not supported by the information on the pesticides you
mentioned.


Insecticides applied to the refuge kill both Bt resistant and Bt
susceptible insects equally.  If such application killed all the
insects, the refuge would be ineffective at suppressing the evolution
of Bt resistance.  But these insecticides do not kill all (or
necessarily even most) of the insects, they provide *economic* levels
of control.  Very large numbers of ECB and rootworm escape.


Both poncho and cruiser are choro-nicotine compounds that have
acknowledged broad spectrum effect on insects and certainly
target root worm


Here are the labels:
http://www.gustafson.com/Labels/Poncho_label.pdf
http://www.syngentacropprotection-us.com/prod/insecticide/cruiser/index.asp?nav=labels

They only provide *economic* control of rootworm at the high rate of
1.25 mg/kernel.  Rates used in Bt corn (.25 and .125 mg/kernel
respectively) for control of secondary pests do not control rootworm at
all.  These chemicals do not provide any control ECB even at the high
rate.


there is nothing to stop farmers from spraying the refuge or
Bt crop plus refuge with any insecticide to stop borer or
cutworm damage of the crop.


Farmers do not spray Bt corn to control corn borer because Bt corn
provides complete control, much better than chemical control.  This is
common knowledge.  Spraying to control cutworm or flea beetle, the only
insect pests likely to trigger spraying of Bt corn in the corn belt, is
usually done too early to provide control of ECB.


Your claims that the insecticides used on Bt crops and refuge will
not eliminate Bt resistant insects are astonishingly false.


Well, provide some evidence.


real science reporting (not public relations) would normally
require evidence that the insecticides known to be sprayed
on refuge are not effecting the resistant insects or at the
very least a mention that the Bt corn fields are sprayed with
insecticide.


The insecticide uses you describe are clearly not relevant to Bt
resistance management.


Frankly, your efforts to obfuscate the issue are not helpful.


Sincerely, Joe, I am trying to clarify the issue.  If you can't
understand what I am trying to explain, we may just have to agree to
disagree about this.

Dale



__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250

********************************************************
To unsubscribe from SANET-MG:
1- Visit http://lists.sare.org/archives/sanet-mg.html to unsubscribe or;
2- Send a message to <listserv@sare.org> from the address subscribed to the list. Type "unsubscribe sanet-mg" in the body of the message.

Visit the SANET-MG archives at: http://lists.sare.org/archives/sanet-mg.html
For more information on grants and other resources available through the SARE program, please visit http://www.sare.org.

********************************************************
To unsubscribe from SANET-MG:
1- Visit http://lists.sare.org/archives/sanet-mg.html to unsubscribe or;
2- Send a message to <listserv@sare.org> from the address subscribed to the list. Type "unsubscribe sanet-mg" in the body of the message.

Visit the SANET-MG archives at: http://lists.sare.org/archives/sanet-mg.html
For more information on grants and other resources available through the SARE program, please visit http://www.sare.org.