Some news of interest. In the USDA press release announcing the extension of the organic rule comment period, Secretary Glickman went out of his way to reassure the organic community that the USDA was listening, and that it would be relying heavily on the public comments in the revision of the rule. The press release says between the lines that the USDA intends to have an additional period of public comment after revising the rule -- a request made by several leaders in the community.

The Secretary also said very clearly that the USDA had NOT proposed inclusion of GEOs, sludge, and irradiation, and had only requested comments. Some 6,000 received so far, with the vast majority against.

Also important -- new leadership for the USDA Nat. Organic Program (NOP) is forthcoming. Keith Jones from Texas will be taking over the top staff job. Keith will do a good job in this new role, and has a long and constructive record of involvement with organics. He has the temperament and back-bone needed to move the process along in a positive direction despite the efforts of some to dilute or divert the integrity of the rule. So recent developments from within USDA are positive.

We have placed several new items on the PMAC page relative to the organic rule --

* The latest in a series of excellent memos/ pieces by Fred Kirschenman, this one focusing on the applicability of the precautionary principle to the organic rule.

* Hal's insightful SANET post of a couple of days ago

* The full text of Benbrook's Guelph University speech on biotech, organics, ag is available.

In addition, we posted the excellent comments of Dr. Michael Hansen , Consumers Union biotech expert, to the Feb. 9-10 EPA scientific advisory panel meeting on Bt-transgenic resistance management plans.

The effort to preserve the efficacy of Bt is emerging as the "main event" in determining whether government agencies and academic scientists have the ability and collective will to stand up to the commercial steamroller that is sweeping across the country. To many, the evidence is overwhelming that Bt-transgenic will trigger resistance; even the companies admit that resistance is inevitable. The debate is over whether it will happen in 3, 5, or maybe 10 years. To many who understand the unique value of Bt to mankind and food production, the difference between 3 and 10 years is irrelevant. Hopefully the EPA will take strong actions in response to the information obtained during the two-day hearing, and will start to act in the broader public interest. Once Bt resistance genes gain a foothold in major lepodopteran insects, the efficacy of this key tool will be undermined for generations, at a minimum, leading to substantial increases in the use of high-risk conventional insecticides, and worse problems down the road. This is a train wreck that experience and sound science have fully predicted, but only courageous and very unpopular action by government can now stop.

chuck