Testimony of Roger Johnson
Agriculture Commissioner
House Bill 1026
January 16,2003
10:15 a.m.
House Agriculture Committee
Peace Garden Room

Chairman Nicholas and members of the House Agriculture Committee. I am Jeff Olson, Program Manager at the Department of Agriculture. I am here to provide testimony for Commissioner Johnson on House Bill 1026, which would establish a transgenic wheat board to monitor scientific, legislative and regulatory issues regarding transgenic wheat as well as monitor market acceptance issues and make legislative and regulatory recommendations.

Commissioner Johnson supports this bill with two modifications. First, the bill should provide the wheat industry the authority to approve or disapprove the commercialization of transgenic wheat varieties and secondly the composition of the transgenic wheat board should be primarily composed of wheat industry representatives, particularly those responsible for marketing such as the ND Wheat Commission and the ND Grain Dealers Association.

I want to be clear that Commissioner Johnson supports biotechnology and believes it offers tremendous potential to improve wheat production through incorporation of improved quality traits as well as enhanced agronomic traits that could improve pest management (e.g. scab resistance) and improved adaptability to different growing conditions. Research in these areas should continue but should be conducted in a way to prevent escape of the genetic events prior to approval.

Nevertheless, legitimate concerns exist regarding the effect of the future commercialization of transgenic wheat on the marketability of our number one crop. Regulatory and market acceptance of transgenic wheat will most likely evolve over time but commercialization prior to sufficient acceptance could have serious consequences for our agricultural economy.

Concern about acceptance of transgenic crops is highlighted by recent rejections by certain African governments of transgenic corn varieties that are commonly marketed in the United States (see attached press article). These are nations ravaged by famine. Who would have thought that nations facing starvation would reject food for their people? Their stated concerns involve uncertainty about safety issues and potential loss of their own markets in Europe.

Another recent example is the aggressive actions taken by USDA to contain soybeans possibly contaminated with an unapproved transgenic corn variety which occurred in Iowa and Nebraska this past growing season (see attached press article). The corn variety involved contained a gene for a pharmaceutical product. While this example certainly involves concerns about potential health issues, there are also significant marketing considerations.

Monsanto, the most visible developer of transgenic wheat, has been a part of extensive discussions with wheat industry and university cooperators and has developed certain milestones that they have indicated must be achieved prior to their decision to move forward with commercialization of a transgenic wheat variety ( see attachment). This is commendable and this dialogue should be encouraged.

Nevertheless, it is the wheat industry whose interests should dominate with respect to commercialization of new transgenic wheat events. Commissioner Johnson believes it is appropriate for the wheat industry to be vested with the authority to make determinations regarding whether sufficient market acceptance has been achieved and whether adequate systems for production and segregation are developed to protect the interests of the industry. Ultimately the North Dakota Wheat Commission should be the principle player vested with the authority to determine whether a transgenic wheat variety would be allowed to be commercialized in North Dakota. The Wheat Commission, which is a state agency composed of producer elected representatives, has the responsibility under state law to foster and promote programs aimed at increasing the sale, utilization, and development of wheat, both at home and abroad. They are in the best position to gauge the potential risks and rewards of a decision to commercialize.

The potato and sugarbeet industries in the United States have both rejected transgenic varieties and effectively prevented their commercialization. The structure of their industries allowed this to occur without specific legal authority. The wheat industry, on the other hand, is a more diverse industry making it more difficult to achieve industry-wide determinations and consequently exposing the entire industry to greater risk.

In conclusion, Commissioner Johnson supports HB 1026 with inclusion of provisions that would provide the wheat industry board authority to ultimately determine whether a particular transgenic wheat variety would be allowed to be commercially grown in North Dakota and secondly that the transgenic wheat board be primarily composed of wheat industry representatives, particularly those responsible for marketing.

Commissioner Johnson looks forward to further discussions. Thank you for your consideration. I would be happy to answer any questions you may have.