The majority of corn grown in the United States is genetically modified, “GMO,” or bioengineered to withstand insect damage, herbicide tolerance, and plant virus resistance. A favorite old farmer friend of mine tells the story of how, before GMO corn seed became popular, neighborhood pot growers would sneak into corn fields and plant pots among the corn with great success. love. Plants benefited from irrigation water, and farmers didn’t spray herbicides to control invasive weeds and marijuana, making a big profit for trespassing entrepreneurs. As farmers started planting herbicide-tolerant corn, hippies had to find other ways to grow their crops, he said.

The public’s fear of GMO corn appears to stem from built-in insect defenses against the naturally occurring microbe, Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt.). Bt is also widely marketed to organic gardeners at $12.99 per quart to control burrowing species of caterpillars and pests. Although it is not labeled or classified as hazardous, the label recommends washing hands after use and before smoking or eating. that seems fair.

Stay up to date with: Register your daily opinion in your mailbox from Monday to Friday

The use of GMO corn gives U.S. farmers access to herbicides (and, mind you, safer herbicides) to feed more people and control weeds. As a result, more carbon can be stored through less tillage, less erosion from stumps left in the fields, and less water usage. That’s exactly what consumers want from producers. In short, it prevents farmers from being forced to return to the agricultural practices of the 1930s, which had very bad results. American consumers certainly don’t want other industries to take leaps and bounds, and neither does food production.

My favorite Yuma County corn farmer averages about 270-290 bushels per irrigated acre. In 1984, the same farm was barely yielding 190 bushels per acre. A bag of seeds cost about $85 in 1984, while a bag of seeds last year cost about $310. As I’ve said many times, I’m no mathematics expert, but if a farmer were to plant 1,000 acres of land at a rate of 2.5 bags per acre, that would be a big enough investment. Because I don’t want to see it fail. Also, we can’t afford to fail.

In 2022, Sri Lanka’s economy plunged into a terrifying decline after former Sri Lankan President Gotabaya Rajapakse banned the import of synthetic fertilizers and pesticides virtually overnight, forcing the country’s farmers to grow entirely organic crops. I fell. A group of scientists warned Rajapaksa of impending disaster and their predictions were correct. Nine out of 10 households were severely food insecure, fuel lines were stretched for days, and inflation nearing 55% was real.

Sri Lanka’s agrochemical ban was touted as a $400 million savings and an investment in people’s health and the environment, not to mention food self-sufficiency. Rice production fell by 20% in the first six months after implementation, forcing the country to spend $450 million on rice imports, exceeding the planned savings of $400 million. But the country’s real cash crop is tea leaves, whose production has fallen by 18%, forcing government subsidies to make up for lost productivity. It was agriculture and self-sufficiency that lifted Sri Lanka out of poverty in the 1960s, and the emotional forced labor of farmers set it back.

Mexico’s executive order banning genetically engineered corn is in direct violation of the USMCA and Mexico’s obligation to use science and risk-based policies to regulate biotechnology in a transparent manner. The decree will not only threaten the reciprocal trade relationship the United States and Mexico have enjoyed, but it will make it even more difficult for families to put food on the table. Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador cited the risks to human health and his desire for food sovereignty and self-sufficiency as the main reasons for the ban. This should sound familiar.

Self-sufficiency includes the ability of the middle and lower classes to feed themselves. Corn prices in Mexico are projected to rise nearly 20%, while prices of other commodities such as chicken are projected to rise nearly 67%. It is unsustainable for the majority of the population, other than the vocal elite who appeal their virtues by imposing their beliefs on others who can’t afford to pay more for food.

US Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack has long argued that GM crops are safe and science-based. The motivation behind Mexico’s ban on GM corn, which covers almost all bushels grown in the United States, is purely emotional.

Mexico is one of the largest buyers of U.S. corn, and U.S. farmers send about 17 million tons of mostly genetically modified yellow corn to Mexico each year, most of which is used as livestock feed. . Mexican authorities said they would continue to import genetically modified corn for animal feed. Ironically, the ban was changed to include only white corn, which is primarily used for tortillas and chips and exported in large quantities to the United States.

Rachel Gavel I write about agriculture and rural issues. She is associate editor of Fence Post Magazine, the region’s premier agricultural publication. Gavel She is the daughter of the state’s oil and gas industry, is part of a family that raises 12,000 cows across the state, and has authored children’s books to teach agriculture to students in hundreds of classrooms.