Farming of GE Crops on Wildlife Refuge Challenged

Apr. 11, 2006 – A coalition of environmental and public advocacy groups says the federal government is illegally leasing hundreds of acres of protected refuge lands in Delaware to private farms, some of which are producing genetically modified crops.

Sign up to receive NewStandard headlines and extras by e-mail weekday mornings!

Your privacy is strictly respected.

The suit, filed in federal district court in Wilmington last week, claims the US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) violated three major acts of Congress by leasing about 500 acres of the Prime Hook National Wildlife Refuge in Sussex County without completing the process for reviewing the potential impact on the refuge.

According to the plaintiffs, at least 431 acres of this land were leased to private farmers under special contracts that allow the use of genetically engineered (GE) crops. These actions, they claim, violate the Administrative Procedures Act, the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act, and the National Environmental Policy Act.

"National wildlife refuges are public lands; they’re for all of our enjoyment," said Nancy Ruggeri, a staff attorney at Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER), a plaintiff in the suit. "It’s just not right to go in and be conducting operations that can harm the wildlife and the native species found on these refuges without the appropriate environmental assessments."

The Prime Hook National Wildlife Refuge, about 10,000 acres of protected marshes, woodlands, grasslands, ponds and forest on the Delaware coast, was established in 1963 to preserve the habitat of migrating birds. According to the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), which manages the land, the area is home to about 267 species of birds, 35 types of reptiles and amphibians and 36 different mammals.

About 10 years ago, the FWS began leasing out parcels of the refuge to farmers under so-called "cooperative farming agreements." On its website, the FWS states that the purpose of the crops is to provide "winter food for the refuge's resident wildlife species as well as wintering waterfowl."

But Nicholas DiPasquale, conservation chair for the Delaware Audubon Society, another plaintiff in the suit, told The NewStandard that farming on the refuge is "in fact destructive to wildlife" because it fragments and disrupts the habitat. He said the Fish and Wildlife Service has not proven that agriculture is needed to support the purpose of the refuge, though they are obligated to do so under the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act.

"Migratory birds don’t have to rely on agriculture crops for food or for sustenance," said Dipasquale, a former secretary for the Delaware Department of Natural Resources.

Plaintiffs state that farming in national refuges has little to do with the mission of protecting wildlife, and the planting of GE crops adds another layer of controversy.

"Until I heard about this, I actually had no idea that there would even be farming at our wildlife refuges," Miyoko Sakashita, staff attorney at the Center for Food Safety, another plaintiff, told TNS. "I imagined them as wilderness areas that the birds would visit and they would just be there for the animals and not for farmers to be going in and planting crops and making a profit off it."

Sakashita said her organization is primarily concerned about farmers’ use of proprietary corn and soy seeds, designed by the biotechnology giant Monsanto to resist the company’s herbicide Roundup. Critics predict the planting of "Roundup Ready" crops will also lead weeds to develop a resistance, in turn increasing the use of pesticides and undermining the habitat and the health of the animals on the refuge.

Another concern, Sakashita said, is that Roundup-resistant "superweeds" may spread to other areas. Researchers at the University of Delaware say they have already discovered evidence of mutant forms of marestail or horseweed elsewhere in the state.

FWS officials themselves were aware of the risks of planting of GE crops on refuge lands, according to internal agency documents obtained by the plaintiffs and reviewed by TNS.

In a February 2003 memo to managers of FWS-run refuges, Regional Chief Anthony Léger wrote, "We do not use genetically modified organisms in refuge management unless we determine their use is essential to accomplishing refuge purpose(s) and the Director approves the use." Léger further instructed regional managers that they must "thoroughly research and justify [GE crops’] use over native or non-engineered" crops.

Just over a year later, FWS biologist Annabella Larsen wrote in an e-mail to Prime Hook manager Jonathon Schafler that she could not "condone or justify the use of GMOs" in Prime Hook’s farming program, referring to genetically modified organisms. Schafler himself wrote in a memo, "The GMO issue has bothered me for some time."

Other documents reveal disagreement within the agency. According to June 2003 meeting notes titled "Conference Call regarding Genetically Modified Organisms," some refuge managers reportedly believed a ban on GE crops in refuges would result in the loss of farming, which they thought would negatively affect the wildlife. But others were more skeptical, questioning the entire refuge agricultural program.

The notes also state that managers agreed the agency "would benefit from a very thorough examination and summary of the literature [on GE crops], particularly with respect to any potential negative environmental impacts."

But plaintiffs argue that mandatory environmental assessments should have been done before the agency permitted farmers to start planting GE crops.

"Whether or not it’s good to farm national wildlife refuge land, and whether or not it’s ‘good’ to use [GE] crops, are things that have to be determined scientifically, and they haven’t been," PEER’s Ruggeri said.

Cooperative farming agreements currently permit farming on federal wildlife refuges in Alabama, Tennessee, North Dakota, Oregon and other states. Up to 100,000 acres of national refuge land contain GE crops, according to internal FWS documents. Nationwide, the agency manages about 96 million acres of refuge land.

FWS officials and a farmer operating on refuge land did not return several requests for interviews by press time.

Promotional Tools

Share this article with the world using these popular services!

Plaintiffs are asking for an injunction barring farming and commercial land-use in the Prime Hook Refuge until the required environmental assessments and studies are completed. The FWS has until the beginning of June to respond to the complaint.