Researchers at Ghent University in Belgium set out nearly 20 years ago to do what seemed like a good thing for farmers — create a strain of rice that could withstand a popular herbicide that kills weeds in the fields.
The scientists were so successful that Bayer CropScience, part of the German chemical giant that makes and markets the Liberty herbicide, eventually bought the company that the university scientists formed.
Now lawyers for Bayer CropScience are in an Arkansas courtroom, fighting the latest of several lawsuits claiming the company is hurting rice farmers rather than helping them. Bayer has already lost three suits over the past five months, with more trials to come.
Growers in Arkansas, California, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri and Texas filed lawsuits against Bayer for hurting their sales after genetically altered rice escaped a Louisiana test plot. Bayer faces judgments of US$4.5 million so far in the three cases it lost.
Two key things have happened since the early 1990s. Concerns have grown about foods marketed directly to consumers that were raised using genetically altered seeds. And the experimental, Liberty-resistant strain of rice — called Liberty Link — got loose and made its way into the stream of commercially marketed rice.
The announcement by the US Department of Agriculture in August 2006 that traces of Liberty Link rice had been found in the US’ rice supply was not welcome news to rice farmers.
No nation has approved genetically modified rice for the marketplace. Rice futures plummeted by US$150 million immediately afterward. European nations quit accepting shipments of rice from the US that hadn’t been extensively tested to show they weren’t contaminated. Japan banned all US rice.
“In August, you’re at the end of the line as far as your options — you’re basically 30 days from harvest,” said Willie Oxner of Brinkley, Arkansas, recalling what happened that year. “There you are sitting with a crop, if the people who are taking it don’t know what they’re going to do, you’re in a panic.”
Oxner, a plaintiff in a separate lawsuit against Bayer over Liberty Link, said his 2006 rice crop brought in about half of what he had been expecting — US$3 to US$4 a bushel (about 20kg) rather than US$6 to US$7 a bushel. Beyond that, he said, was the turmoil of not knowing if he would be able to sell it at all.
“For quite a while, there was no indication that the rice would even be [marketable] — the scare and the unknown, it was like a wildfire,” he said. “It built up steam and went from bad to worse.”
The effects were felt across the Southern rice belt and even in California, which grows little of the long-grain rice raised in the South, and where no Liberty Link contamination was found.
There was “a really significant amount of confusion” and demands from overseas customers for facilities to be cleaned and for costly testing of export shipments, said Kirk Messick, senior vice president of Farmers Rice Co-op in Sacramento, California. Those testing requirements are still in place.
“Our export customers didn’t want [it],” he said. “Immediately we had requirements for ... testing for nearly all of our export market. We still today ... have to answer questions. There were a lot of hidden costs.”
Those costs come off the top of prices that farmers get.
In addition to compensation for the lower price of their crops in 2006, some farmers are seeking punitive damages. Earlier this month, jurors in Augusta, Arkansas, awarded US$500,000 in punitive damages.
In the Lonoke County case, the dozen plaintiffs are also seeking unspecified punitive damages.
That suit claims Bayer was not only negligent in its handling of Liberty Link rice, but acted with malicious intent by not announcing the contamination as soon as it learned of it. The suit says Bayer knew of the contamination as early as January 2006, before that year’s crops were sown.
Bayer attorney Dick Ellis said in court last week that the company acted responsibly in its handling of the experimental rice and if the farmers suffered any damages, they were minimal.
“It had some impact, but it was a small impact and didn’t last very long,” Ellis said.
He also disputed the effect of the European reaction, saying Europe was not a large market and that exporters quickly found new markets for the rice that would have gone there.
While some other major US food crops, such as soybeans, corn and canola, are grown with genetically altered seeds, Liberty Link rice has never been approved outside of test plots in the US.
Why there was such an outcry over the rice, and why the issue persists, may stem from rice’s place on the dinner table, while people don’t consume soybeans directly, said Steve Linscombe, director of the rice experimental station in Crowley, Louisiana — where the Liberty Link tests were carried out.
Another factor may be timing. The Liberty Link contamination came amid global economic turmoil that began in 1997 and prompted many countries to be more protective of their agricultural sectors, said Bobby Coats, an economist with the University of Arkansas Extension Service.
“Countries [were] uncertain about their economic future [and] focused on feeding their population,” Coats said.
For the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), China’s “century of humiliation” is the gift that keeps on giving. Beijing returns again and again to the theme of Western imperialism, oppression and exploitation to keep stoking the embers of grievance and resentment against the West, and especially the US. However, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) that in 1949 announced it had “stood up” soon made clear what that would mean for Chinese and the world — and it was not an agenda that would engender pride among ordinary Chinese, or peace of mind in the international community. At home, Mao Zedong (毛澤東) launched
The restructuring of supply chains, particularly in the semiconductor industry, was an essential part of discussions last week between Taiwan and a US delegation led by US Undersecretary of State for Economic Growth, Energy and the Environment Keith Krach. It took precedent over the highly anticipated subject of bilateral trade partnerships, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) founder Morris Chang’s (張忠謀) appearance on Friday at a dinner hosted by President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) for Krach was a subtle indicator of this. Chang was in photographs posted by Tsai on Facebook after the dinner, but no details about their discussions were disclosed. With
To say that this year has been eventful for China and the rest of the world would be something of an understatement. First, the US-China trade dispute, already simmering for two years, reached a boiling point as Washington tightened the noose around China’s economy. Second, China unleashed the COVID-19 pandemic on the world, wreaking havoc on an unimaginable scale and turning the People’s Republic of China into a common target of international scorn. Faced with a mounting crisis at home, Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) rashly decided to ratchet up military tensions with neighboring countries in a misguided attempt to divert the
Toward the end of former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) final term in office, there was much talk about his legacy. Ma himself would likely prefer history books to enshrine his achievements in reducing cross-strait tensions. He might see his meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Singapore in 2015 as the high point. However, given his statements in the past few months, he might be remembered more for contributing to the breakup of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). We are still talking about Ma and his legacy because it is inextricably tied to the so-called “1992 consensus” as the bedrock of his