>
>sanet-mg-digest Wednesday, March 17 1999 Volume 01 : Number 905
>
>
>
>In this issue:
>
> Monsonto's price
> NPR Piece on Monsanto,Etc
> Re: NPR Report on Monsanto
> Re: Re: npr story on monsanto GE
> (Fwd) Greenspan Says World Troubles Hurt U.S. Farmers
>
>See the end of the digest for information about sanet-mg-digest.
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 09:44:19 EST5EDT
>From: "Anita Graf (Staff)" <agraf@agecon.uga.edu>
>Subject: Monsonto's price
>
>> "The speed at which GM organisms have been developed and introduced by
>> multinational companies and the scientific community has left many people
>> completely unaware of and uninvolved in the process," the panel said.
>
>I was talking to a friend of mine today who happens to be stock
>broker and I asked him what's going on with Monsonto stock (wondering
>to myself how all this bruhaha we've been reading about lately re.
>the backlash against GMOs is effecting the bottom line over there)
>and he told me that it had been in a holding pattern for some time,
>but recently it's gone up (!!). He says that there are rumors of a
>takeover. Anyway, it would seem that whatever resistence to GE is
>brewing out there, it isn't giving off any economic signals yet to
>dampen the GE enthusiasm... Anita
>
>To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
>"unsubscribe sanet-mg".
>To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
>"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
>
>All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
>http://www.sare.org/htdocs/hypermail
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 09:15:19 -0800
>From: Charles Benbrook <benbrook@hillnet.com>
>Subject: NPR Piece on Monsanto,Etc
>
> Much could and needs to be said about the NPR piece on Monsanto
>(part I), the Dupont-Pioneer deal, Monsanto's stock price, and the
prospects
>for farmers to make a living growing soybeans in the U.S. But for now just
>a few points.
>
> The NPR piece shows what good PR can do and get for a company that
>knows how to "work with" the media. Not a bright day for NPR. What amazes
>me is that senior Monsanto officials can get away, unchallenged, with
saying
>things like "RR beans lowered their (farmers') costs and raised their
>yields." The evidence is now overwhelming and indisputable that average
>yields of RR varieties are about 4-6% less than conventional varieties.
The
>definitive and most recent comparative analysis was carried out by Dr. E.S.
>Oplinger of the Univ. of Wisconsin, Madison, who has managed a North
Central
>regional project assessing soybean varietal performance for years. Dr.
>Oplinger compared yields of 5,172 conv. varieties paired with 3,067 RR
>varieties in 8 states in 1998. The RR varieties yielded between 86% and
>113% of the conv., and average yields were 96% of conventional. There were
>just two areas where RR did better -- Illinois and southern Michigan.
>Outside these areas the average yield drag was greater, on the order of 6%
>to 8% (data from "Performance of Transgenetic Soybeans -- Northern US," Dr.
>E.S. Oplinger, M.J. Martinka, and K.A. Schmitz, Dept. of Agronomy,
UW-Madison).
>
> This places the minimal average yield drag at about 2 bushels per
>acre, or $10.00 (and it was much more on many farmers). That $10.00 plus
>the technology charge, plus the 2-3 applications of Roundup (not the one
>alleged in the piece), plus the 2 or 3 other herbicide a.i.s that must be
>applied make for the most expensive soybean seed+weed management system in
>modern history -- between $40.00 and $60.00 per acre depending on rates,
>weed pressure, etc. Not long ago, in 1985, the average seed plus weed
costs
>on farms in Illinois was $26.72 per acre (USDA cost of production data),
and
>represented 23% of total variable costs; now, they represent 35-40%. (For
>details and data sources, see the paper I did for the Univ. of Illinois
>symposium at <www.pmac.net/IWFS.pdf>). No wonder Monsanto is throwing in
>free resprays and replanting, and other crop insurance-like benefits as an
>added bonus.
>
> Every independent set of data, recent analysis of RR beans I have
>seen reaches the same conclusion; the technology increases costs somewhat,
>but imposes a "price" farmers are willing to pay for the
>simplicity/robustness of the weed management system. Oplinger et al. end
>their paper saying: "It is anticipated that soybean growers will continue
to
>increase acres planted to RR varieties and will sacrifice yield for ease of
>weed control." They will also sacrifice some net income per acre. This is
>a perfectly rational reason for farmers to adopt the technology; weed
>management is probably the number one management challenge all soybean
>farmers face. Monsanto should not be ashamed to cite these reasons in
>explaining why the technology is being adopted. But Monsanto needs to drop
>the "feeding the world", "lowering costs", "lowering pesticide use" claims
>because they do not hold water and will undermine, further, the reputation
>of the corporation, and in so doing feed the already considerable cynicism
>abroad about the trustworthiness of this company.
>
> While Monsanto does not seem to worry much about losing consumer
>trust in Europe and Japan, U.S. farmers (and the U.S. government) should be
>concerned and will, in the end, pay the price if the effort to drive RR
>beans down the throats of Europeans backfires into a search for non-GMO
>soybeans from other countries.
>
> Plus, things are not getting any better down on the farm. Soybean
>prices are way down, export markets are soft. As weed shifts continue in
>areas planted heavily to RR beans, and as resistance spreads to additional
>weed species (the first signs of tolerant weeds are appearing in several
>states), farmers will have to increase rates of Roundup applications and
>intensify use of other active ingredients, to fill gaps in control. Costs
>will rise, the income squeeze will get even worse.
>
> Contrary to a Monsanto scientist's claim on the NPR piece, Roundup
>does not kill everything green except for transgenic crop varieties. If
>that were the case, most farmers using RR systems would not be applying at
>least 2, and on many farms, three additional active ingredients.
>
> Someone posted that Monsanto's stock price is holding. Keep
>watching that space. The Dupont-Pioneer deal seals off the most likely
>route to salvation for Monsanto -- Dupont's deep pockets. Monsanto is
>desperate for a new partner to help cover its $700 million plus cost of
>capital, etc from the seed mergers of the past few years. Not too many
>companies around that can float that sort of cost. There remain a couple
of
>major deals to go in the pesticide and seed industries, and then it will
be,
>for all intents and purposes, over. Expect Monsanto, Zeneca, American Home
>Products, Novartis, and Bayer to be involved in a few additional mega-deals
>in the next 12-24 months.
>
> We will have one industry where we used to have two, and 4-6 major
>players where there used to be a couple of dozen, and many dozen regionally
>significant players. No one has much of an idea, nor any credible way to
>project the consequences of these changes. Its unchartered water in
>turbulent times. We are all invited along for the ride, which will be
>exciting and at times divisive, as the economic interests of one part of
the
>agricultural system (probably farmers) suffer at the expense of other
>players. There will be many surprises, positive and negative. What seems
>clear to me, in any event, is that public institutions and policies, like
>those governing research, technology returns, intellectual property,
>markets, information, are not keeping up and that new forces shaping the
>performance of the new seed+pesticide industry will largely emerge within
>the private sector, from the demand side, both farmers for inputs and
>consumers for food.
>
> chuck benbrook
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Charles Benbrook 208-263-5236 (voice)
>Benbrook Consulting Services 208-263-7342 (fax)
>5085 Upper Pack River Road benbrook@hillnet.com [e-mail]
>Sandpoint, Idaho 83864 http://www.pmac.net
>
>
>To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
>"unsubscribe sanet-mg".
>To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
>"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
>
>All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
>http://www.sare.org/htdocs/hypermail
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 07:52:22 -0600
>From: "Mark Ritchie" <mritchie@iatp.org>
>Subject: Re: NPR Report on Monsanto
>
>I was on an previous NPR show about biosafety/biotech in which my
>impression from the NPR producer was that they she and NPR were pro-biotech
>and pro-monsanto. On the show that was aired I had one sentence and then
>there were 4 strong proponents of biotech.
>How about some calls to NPR to complain??
>
>At 04:04 PM 3/16/99 -0700, Ed and Sue Sparling wrote:
>>>>>
>Dear Sustainable Ag Network Subscribers:
>
>How did you all react to the "All Things Considered piece on Monsanto?"
>
>My reaction was that the Monsanto PR dept had a big hand in it.
>Interesting that Clinton is going to give Fraley (former PR man for
>Monsanto) a medal. Ouch!
>
>I have to wonder if tommorow's part 2 will incorporate a serious
>consideration of concerns about the effects of bt GM plants on the organic
>farming sector. It seems pretty irresponsible reporting if Dan Charles
>(NPR reporter) hasn't talked to Charles Benbrook (for example).
>
>Ed Sparling
>Professor Emeritus
>Dept Agric Economics
>Colorado State University
>
><<<<
>
>
>Mark Ritchie, President
>Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy
>2105 First Ave. South
>Minneapolis, Minnesota 55404 USA
>612-870-3400 (phone) 612-870-4846 (fax)
>mritchie@iatp.org www.iatp.org/iatp
>
>To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
>"unsubscribe sanet-mg".
>To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
>"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
>
>All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
>http://www.sare.org/htdocs/hypermail
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 14:06:50 EST
>From: PetersFarm@aol.com
>Subject: Re: Re: npr story on monsanto GE
>
>Well, you know, we SANeters are bound to be disappointed (as I was) by any
>program about biotech, just because we've already been so well informed,
>thanks to SANet. Frankly, I'm glad to see/hear ANYthing on the subject
from
>ANY of the media (as long as it's not a Monsanto commercial). If that
>program gets 10 people thinking about an issue they were not even aware of,
I
>call that a Good Thing.
>
>(Betty) Ann Gras
>
>To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
>"unsubscribe sanet-mg".
>To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
>"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
>
>All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
>http://www.sare.org/htdocs/hypermail
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 13:43:58 -0500
>From: "Michele Gale-Sinex/CIAS, UW-Madison" <mgs@aae.wisc.edu>
>Subject: (Fwd) Greenspan Says World Troubles Hurt U.S. Farmers
>
>Howdy, all--
>
>So, since when has Alan Greenspan set himself up as spokesdude for
>the J. Random Powerful Pinstriped Guy Ministry of Agricultural
>Production System Expertise?
>
>This appeared in today's /SF Chronicle/. Notice that his touted
>"characteristic ambiguity" doesn't include his advice to farmers.
>
>Efficiency...productivity...latest technology. Keep saying it. Sooner
>or later my eyes are bound to glaze over.
>
>pax
>misha
>
>- ------- Forwarded Message Follows -------
>
>Greenspan Says World Troubles Hurt U.S. Farmers
>Fed chairman sees technology as means to increase
>efficiency
>
>Sam Zuckerman, Chronicle Staff Writer
>Wednesday, March 17, 1999
>
>
>Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan came to San Francisco
>yesterday to speak just hours after the Dow Jones industrial average
>briefly crashed through the 10,000 barrier for the first time ever.
>
>But the Fed chairman didn't utter a word about the market because
>high finance wasn't on his mind.
>
>Greenspan, who has frequently voiced his worries about speculation in
>stocks and coined the phrase ``irrational exuberance'' several
>thousand Dow points back, chose the occasion to speak about the U.S.
>farm economy.
>
>While the overall U.S. economy experiences a remarkable mix of robust
>growth, low unemployment and low inflation, ``agriculture has been one
>of the more notable soft spots,'' Greenspan noted, hurt by worldwide
>weakness in commodity prices.
>
>Greenspan's choice of San Francisco as a venue to speak about farming
>wasn't as odd as it seemed at first glance. His audience at the
>Moscone Center consisted of more than 2,000 community bankers in town
>for a convention of the Independent Bankers Association of America,
>many from small-town banks that specialize in loans to farmers.
>
>The Fed chief's outlook for the broader economy was, as usual,
>ambiguous and delivered in his characteristic on-the-one-hand,
>on-the- other-hand style.
>
>The healthy U.S. economy ``is partly the result of influences that
>may prove transitory, but a number of fundamental strengths imply
>more lasting benefits,'' he said.
>
>Greenspan noted that, after eight years of economic growth, ``the
>economy appears stretched in a number of dimensions, implying
>considerable upside and downside risks to the economic outlook.''
>
>Weakness in farm prices reflects the sick economies of key trading
>partners such as Japan and Russia, which have cut back their imports
>of U.S. agricultural products. Farmers won't see better times until
>troubled economies overseas recover, he warned.
>
>To survive under these conditions, farmers must keep on making
>themselves more efficient and more productive by using the latest
>technology, Greenspan said.
>
>c1999 San Francisco Chronicle Page B1
>
>To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
>"unsubscribe sanet-mg".
>To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
>"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
>
>All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
>http://www.sare.org/htdocs/hypermail
>
>------------------------------
>
>End of sanet-mg-digest V1 #905
>******************************
>
>
>To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the comannd
>"unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
http://www.sare.org/htdocs/hypermail