
Monarch butterfly decline linked to spread of GM crops - drjohnson
http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/monarch-butterfly-decline-linked-to-spread-of-gm-crops-1.2665131
======
JeremyBanks
To clarify the headline: the article doesn't suggest that this is a direct
consequence of the GM crops themselves, but rather than the adoption of
herbicide-resistant GM crops has led to much higher use of herbicides, killing
non-GM plants such as milkweed that would previously have also lived in the
fields and which are important to the Monarch's reproduction.

~~~
mercurial
The increased use of chemicals is one of the strongest arguments against GMO,
along with the power it grants to GMO suppliers.

~~~
icambron
The increased use of chemicals is the strongest argument against _the
increased use of those chemicals_. If you want to regulate something, regulate
that thing instead of killing off the technology that enabled it. GMOs in
particular have the potential to dramatically help humanity, and it would be a
huge mistake to cripple them as an alternative to banning the pesticides
directly.

The internet enables the propagation of child porn. I don't think that's a
compelling argument against the internet.

~~~
tormeh
I think you're right, but just to play Devil's advocate: Isn't it sometimes
more practically and politically feasible to kill off the technology that
enables the thing rather than to regulate the thing?

~~~
icambron
I suppose sometimes it might be, but then the question is whether it was worth
it. On GMOs particularly, there are a ton of malnutrition problems we could
potentially solve with this technology, and sacrificing that for political
expediency does not seem reasonable.

Edit: And we've only begun to scratch the surface of what GMO is capable of;
even if banning it were worth it now, what future applications are we
preventing? It would be like deciding the internet wasn't worth the child porn
it facilitated, but _in 1996_ (certainly banning the internet then would be
simpler and more expedient that trying to figure out how to monitor it for
that kind of thing). So more generally: killing technology because of it can
be misused destroys not just its current utility but all sorts of unimaginable
future potential. So the bar for being worth it should be set very high.

~~~
mercurial
I think there is a difference between "let's experiment with it" and "let's
make plenty of Roundup-resistant GMOs so that we can put even more junk in the
groundwater on a large scale".

------
JumpCrisscross
> _Farmers have been increasingly planting corn and soybeans resistant to
> herbicides, and then applying those herbicides liberally on their fields.
> That kills off plants between the rows of crops that aren 't resistant, such
> as milkweed... Because milkweed is poisonous to humans and to grazing
> animals, it's considered a noxious weed in many jurisdictions and is removed
> as such._

Humans want less milkweed around them. It competes with the crops we want for
space and nutrients, or poisons us and our animals. But we also want more
monarch butterflies, which need milkweed to reproduce.

We could encourage planting milkweed away from people. Manually this would be
challenging. A scalable solution is engineering an ever-so-slightly sturdier
variety of milkweed. This could be allowed to grow between rows of corn, or
perhaps in arid or rocky habitats people aren't (yet) bothered with.
Alternatively, we could encourage monarch butterflies to pick a less
troublesome partner.

~~~
Alex3917
> Humans want less milkweed around them. It competes with the crops we want
> for space and nutrients, or poisons us and our animals.

Not only is milkweed not poisonous, it's actually a delicious vegetable. It
tastes like a cross between asparagus and broccoli.

~~~
whyenot
This is profoundly untrue, at least for milkweed _sensu lato_

Most _Asclepias_ species contain cardiac glycosides and can be highly
poisonous. Milkweed extracts were spread on arrow tips by some Native American
groups to more quickly bring down game when hunting. Some species have also
been used as rat poison. Consumption can lead to serious heart problems due to
disruption of the calcium gradient across cell membranes.

~~~
Alex3917
Fair enough, I only meant common milkweed. But even for the edible species
only certain parts are edible, and only at certain times of year anyway. (As
with many/most of the plants we eat.)

~~~
whyenot
Aha, but here's the problem: if you live on the east coast (or just east of
the Rockies) in the USA, you probably are referring to _Asclepias syriaca_ ,
but "common milkweed" on the west coast could be a different species, perhaps
_Asclepias californica_. If you live in Asia or South America, it would be
other species.

I guess all I'm saying is be careful :) The majority of milkweeds, heck, the
majority of "common milkweeds" are poisonous.

------
callmeed
I live a mile from one of CA's largest monarch groves in Pismo Beach (also
grew up here) [0]. As a child, we'd go to the grove throughout the winter
(that's when they migrate here). There were so many monarchs entire trees were
orange and you literally had to watch every step so you didn't step on them.

Since moving back here in 2010, it's pretty sad. You have to actually look
hard to find them. Looking at the historical numbers [1], it seems to be
1/10th of what it was in the 80s/90s. I always assumed there was some
environmental cause–haven't heard the GM theory before.

[0] [http://www.monarchbutterfly.org](http://www.monarchbutterfly.org)

[1] [http://www.monarchbutterfly.org/historical-
counts/](http://www.monarchbutterfly.org/historical-counts/)

------
JacobEdelman
The suggestion that GM crops are causing the problem is absurd. The crop is
simply a tool that we are using to allow us to kill off milkweed. Although I
am against giving GMO suppliers too much power over farmers the idea that this
makes GMOs dangerous or evil is just sensationalism.

------
jrkelly
If you want to read good-faith reporting on GM crops, this is by far the best
stuff out there: [http://grist.org/series/panic-free-
gmos/](http://grist.org/series/panic-free-gmos/)

------
JoeAltmaier
Creatures that visit many plants are acutely sensitive to chemical
applications. There is no reason save fearmongering to blame GMOs for a
decline in a migratory, multiple-plant-visiting insect. Might as well hang it
on global warming (which actually has some chance of being the true cause).

