Today, the Canola Council of Canada, the Canada Grains Council and Cereals Canada “applauded” the CFIA for its new guidance on gene editing.

“This is a ground-breaking day for Canadian agriculture as the (CFIA) confirms its livestock feed guidance, marking the final piece in a series of vital policy updates that began in 2018,” said Krista Thomas, vice-president for trade policy and seed innovation with the Canada Grains Council.

“With this final piece in place, Health Canada and the CFIA have now answered longstanding calls from the seed and grain sectors for predictable, clear and consistent policies for gene edited crops.”

Krista Zuzak, director of crop protection and production at Cereals Canada, made a similar comment.

“Cereals Canada views the final piece of updated Canadian policy clarifying the regulatory pathway for gene edited plants as a positive advancement in plant breeding innovation,” she said.

“The finalized CFIA guidance on livestock feed will support research and development of new varieties that use gene editing to enhance traits such as drought, pest and disease resistance and input use efficiency, among others.”

The CFIA decision can be found online at the Government of Canada website.

The key wording is in Section 1.9 of the document, in which the CFIA states that crops developed with gene editing technology are safe for livestock.

“The CFIA’s opinion of the scientific literature is that gene editing technologies do not pose unique risks of harm to human or animal health or the environment compared to other plant breeding technologies,” the document says.

“As a result, feed ingredients derived from gene-edited plants are regulated like all other products of plant breeding under the Feeds Act and Feeds Regulations, with regulation based on the traits or characteristics of the product, regardless of its development method.”

That paragraph will help clear the way for public and private plant breeders to use gene editing in their crop and trait development programs.

Genome editing, or gene editing, involves changing the genetic code of a plant with technology such as CRISPR-Cas9, a technique used to cut sections of DNA. Scientists from California and France won the 2020 Nobel Prize in Chemistry for their discovery of CRISPR.

It allows scientists to precisely change a plant’s DNA to achieved desired traits, such as improved disease resistance or healthier oils in the kernel.

It is also being employed in medicine.

In December the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved gene editing to treat sickle cell disease, a rare, genetic mutation that causes red blood cells to develop a crescent or “sickle” shape.

The misshapen cells restrict flow in blood vessels and limit oxygen delivery to the body’s tissues, causing severe pain and damage to organs.

“Gene therapy holds the promise of delivering more targeted and effective treatments, especially for individuals with rare diseases where the current treatment options are limited,” Nicole Verdun of the FDA said in a news release.

Most plant breeders and plant scientists say that gene editing is a new tool in the toolbox, which could lead to faster development of new crops and traits.

Health Canada decided a couple of years ago that gene edited crops are safe. So, in most cases they will be treated the same as crops developed through traditional plant breeding methods. The exception is when foreign DNA is introduced using gene editing. In those cases, gene edited crops would be regulated more like transgenic plants.

Commodity groups and value chain organizations in Canada’s grain industry have been waiting for the CFIA to make its final ruling on livestock feed and gene editing crops.

“In recent years, the grain sector has faced punishing drought conditions and we have too many examples of crop diseases that lack adequate control. Gene editing can help develop solutions faster and more efficiently than traditional plant breeding methods allow,” said Thomas of the Canada Grains Council.

“This news opens up incredible opportunities for innovation within the grain sector…. (It) directly translates to stability in food supply and prices, which is crucial for both our economy and food security.”

– Robert Arnason is a reporter with the Western Producer.

The post CFIA declares gene editing safe for livestock feed appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

Rob Stewart, Canada’s deputy minister for international trade, wrote Friday to U.S. and Mexican trade officials, formally announcing Canada’s intent to take part in the CUSMA dispute settlement consultations U.S. officials requested earlier this month.

“Canada shares the concerns of the U.S. that Mexico’s measures are not scientifically supported and have the potential to unnecessarily disrupt trade in the North American market,” federal Agriculture Minister Marie-Claude Bibeau and Trade Minister Mary Ng said in a joint statement Friday.

U.S. Ag Secretary Tom Vilsack and Trade Representative Katherine Tai on June 2 announced that Washington would seek dispute settlement consultations, following a round of technical consultations with Mexico in March under the sanitary and phytosanitary measures (SPS) chapter of the CUSMA pact.

Those technical consultations “did not resolve the matter,” Tai said in a statement June 2.

Bibeau and Ng said the dispute settlement consultations cover measures laid out in a presidential decree published by Mexico in February — “namely the ban on use of biotechnology corn in tortillas and dough, the intention to gradually substitute the use of biotechnology corn in all products for human consumption and animal feed.”

The consultations are also meant to address Mexico’s plans for “rejection of applications for authorizations covering the importation and sale of certain biotechnology products,” the ministers said.

Mexico has been discussing such a ban since 2020, citing sustainability, self-sufficiency and the protection of native corn varieties, with the stated aim of ultimately replacing its imports of U.S. yellow corn with domestic non-GMO production and halting the use of glyphosate herbicide.

“We have always been clear that Canada expects our partners to uphold their commitments under CUSMA — including sanitary and phytosanitary measures,” the Canadian ministers said in Friday’s statement.

The federal government, they said, is “committed to science-based decision-making and keeping food, feed and the environment safe, while supporting the ability of our farmers, workers and exporters to succeed in an innovative and sustainable agricultural sector.”

In these consultations, they said, Canada will work toward “an outcome that preserves trade predictability and market access for our farmers and exporters.”

“When a key trading partner such as Mexico does not authorize biotechnology applications for Canadian agricultural exports, this creates an asymmetry in North American regulatory conditions that can lead to trade disruptions,” Stewart said in Friday’s letter to U.S. and Mexican officials.

Mexico’s approach in its decisions “may have a significant economic impact on Canadian producers, developers of innovative agricultural technologies, as well as consequences for trade flows into and out of Canada,” he wrote.

Canada, he added, has “an important systemic interest in ensuring the correct interpretation of the sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) obligations of CUSMA, namely that SPS measures are based on scientific principles, relevant international standards, guidelines and recommendations, or appropriate risk assessments.”

Also, he wrote, Canada maintains that “SPS measures shall not be more trade-restrictive than required to achieve a party’s appropriate level of protection and shall be applied only to the extent necessary to protect human, animal, or plant life or health.”

The Canada Grains Council, in a separate release Friday, hailed Ottawa’s decision, saying “Mexico’s decision to ban products with a proven record of safety has far-reaching consequences.”

The introduction of Mexico’s decree has “injected uncertainty into North American markets,” CGC vice-president Krista Thomas said, and if the measure is not withdrawn, “it has the potential to trigger food price inflation and undermine food security within the intricate supply chains of North America.”

There have been “some positive signals from Mexico recently” on the matter, the Canola Council of Canada said Friday in a separate statement, but “more formal and substantive assurance is required to provide clarity and certainty about the regulatory approach moving forward.

“Without that, there is concern that similar issues could arise in the future and precedence established for approaches not based on science.”

For its part, the U.S. government “has been clear that it would consider all options, including further steps to enforce U.S. rights under (CUSMA), if Mexico did not return to science- and risk-based biotechnology policies that are in compliance with (CUSMA) commitments,” the USTR said June 2. — Glacier FarmMedia Network

The post Canada gets in on U.S. trade challenge of Mexico’s GM corn ban appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

The North American neighbours are inching closer to a full-blown trade dispute under the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) on trade over Mexico’s policies to limit the use of GM corn, which it imports from the U.S.

If the consultations announced on Friday fail to resolve disagreements within 75 days, Washington can request a dispute settlement panel to decide the case.

Asked if Canada would take similar action to the U.S., a spokesperson for the trade ministry said Canada is “considering its next steps” and would be “guided by what is in the best interest of our farmers and the Canadian agriculture sector.”

The U.S. requested formal trade consultations in March over objections to Mexico’s plans to limit imports of GM corn and other agricultural biotechnology products. Those consultations took place, but failed to resolve the matter, the senior USTR officials said.

A spokesperson for Mexico’s economy ministry did not immediately comment on the move. The agriculture ministry declined to comment.

Earlier this week, Mexico’s agriculture minister expressed confidence in an interview that the dispute with the U.S. would not escalate to a dispute settlement panel.

The conflict comes amid other disagreements between the U.S. and Mexico, most notably over energy in which the U.S. has argued that Mexico’s nationalist policy prejudices foreign companies.

Despite changes to Mexico’s decree on GM corn, which it modified in February, the U.S. said the Latin American country’s policies are not based on science and appear inconsistent with its commitment under CUSMA.

The new decree eliminated the deadline to ban GM corn for animal feed and industrial use, by far the bulk of its US$5 billion worth of U.S. corn imports, but maintained a ban on GM corn used in dough or tortillas.

Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador has said GM seeds can contaminate Mexico’s age-old native varieties and has questioned their impact on human health.

“They did make some modifications such as removing the specific timeline for banning biotech products, but the decree does call for a gradual substitution and eventual banning of biotech corn, and this part of the measure itself is not science-based,” said a senior USTR official.

The consultations will also address Mexico’s rejection of new biotech seeds for products like soybeans, cotton and canola, U.S. officials said.

U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said in a statement, “We fundamentally disagree with the position Mexico has taken on the issue of biotechnology, which has been proven to be safe for decades.”

The National Corn Growers Association (NCGA), which represents U.S. farmers, praised the U.S. move.

“Mexico’s actions, which are not based on sound science, have threatened the financial wellbeing of corn growers and our nation’s rural communities,” said NCGA President Tom Haag in a statement

— Reporting for Reuters by Cassandra Garrison; additonal reporting by Adriana Barrera in Mexico City and Ismail Shakil in Ottawa.

The post U.S. escalates dispute with Mexico over GM corn appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

Federal Agriculture Minister Marie-Claude Bibeau on Wednesday announced updated guidance from the Canadian Food Inspection Agency that sets gene-edited seeds on the same regulatory level as conventionally-bred seed varieties.

Taken with last year’s related updates by the federal health department to Canada’s Novel Food Regulations, CFIA’s new opinion opens the door for gene-edited seeds’ unregulated use in Canadian fields.

Grower groups whose members have waited years for gene-edited seed to come to Canada lined up Wednesday to hail CFIA’s decision as a potential watershed moment for the domestic ag industry.

But advocates for Canadian organic growers, whose buyers consider gene-edited to also be genetically modified, say the decision will leave the organic sector dependent on seed and biotech firms’ willingness to disclose their handiwork.

Risks not ‘unique or identifiable’

In its updated directive, CFIA said it’s the “scientific opinion of (the agency) that gene-editing technologies do not present any unique or specifically identifiable environmental or human health safety concerns as compared to other technologies of plant development.”

With that in mind, CFIA said it “does not foresee an outcome of conventional breeding where an authorization for environmental release would be required, other than in the case of herbicide-tolerant plants.”

In other words, a company wanting to release a plant with novel traits (PNT) will still need to apply for, and receive, CFIA authorization before that plant is released into the environment — that is, if the PNT still has any DNA from foreign organisms, and/or a new commercially-viable herbicide tolerance trait.

That would also apply to any gene-edited PNT in which any foreign DNA used to encode “gene-editing machinery” — such as in the CRISPR process — remains in the final product and hasn’t been removed through rounds of breeding and selection.

In cases where a plant isn’t a PNT, CFIA said, a plant’s proponents are “expected to fully participate in mechanisms that provide transparency about non-novel products” — such as the Health Canada Transparency Initiative and the Canadian Variety Transparency Database.

It also “remains the proponent’s responsibility to notify the CFIA if the plant could have significant negative environmental impacts and be considered a PNT.”

CFIA said its decision follows consultations with plant breeding, industry and regulatory experts and stakeholders, as well as a public consultation that ran from May through September 2021.

In its release Wednesday, the federal ag department noted the U.S., Japan, Australia, Argentina and Brazil have already “clarified the pathway” for gene-edited products, while New Zealand, the U.K. and the European Union (EU) “are in the process of doing so.”

‘Trusted and safe’

Canada’s competitiveness in world ag markets — and its crops’ resilience against environmental and climate stresses — were common themes among the groups hailing CFIA’s decision Wednesday.

“The CFIA’s updated guidance helps Canada stay competitive on the global stage,” Krista Thomas, vice-president of seed innovation for the Canada Grains Council, said in a separate release.

“Many of our trading partners have already adopted similar science-based policies, and farmers outside of Canada have been growing gene edited crops since 2015. When we let the science be the core of regulatory decision making, we know that the end result can be trusted and is safe.”

Keith Currie, president of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture, said in the government’s release that CFIA’s new guidance “will ultimately help Canadian farmers access new plant varieties that are more resilient to pests and extreme weather events and support our food security and sustainability objectives.”

Greg Sears of the Alberta Wheat Commission said seeds gene-edited for efficient use of resources give farmers “another opportunity to manage inputs more effectively, while sustaining ecosystems and reducing greenhouse gas” — an important development after another year in which Alberta growers “seeded the most expensive crop in recent history.”

Canola Council of Canada president Jim Everson said the guidance will also “encourage new and additional research and development investment in Canada.”

Soy Canada, in a separate statement, noted the country’s soy industry has “excelled at meeting diverse customer needs” including organic, non-genetically modified, genetically modified and identity-preserved soybeans — and meeting any such specific needs “remains an important priority for the industry.”

“Our customers know that we excel at providing a diverse range of products,” Soy Canada’s executive director Brian Innes said in a release. “We’re committed to continue providing customers what they want once we commercialize soybeans created using gene editing.”

‘Shocking’

Other groups, however, don’t expect the new guidance will assure buyers looking for non-GMO or organic crops from Canadian growers.

In a joint release Wednesday, several such groups said CFIA’s guidance means gene-edited crops that have no foreign DNA — and any foods produced from those crops — “will not go through any government approval process at Health Canada or the CFIA, but can be released onto the market by companies without any safety data submitted to the government.”

Given that organic standards allow only for conventionally-bred crops and not for gene-edited or genetically modified plants, the result will be “unknown (genetically modified) foods and seeds on the market that have not been subject to any independent safety assessment,” they said.

Lucy Sharratt, co-ordinator of the Canadian Biotechnology Action Network, called CFIA’s guidance “a shocking abdication of responsibility by our regulators” that “asks Canadian farmers and consumers to trust unseen corporate science.”

Allowing gene-edited seed to enter Canadian agriculture unchallenged could “ultimately destroy the systems that farmers and many food companies have set up to deliver non-GM choices to consumers,” National Farmers Union president Jenn Pfenning said in the same release.

“This decision needs to be reversed, or over time, it will eliminate our ability to offer reliable non-GM food choices, including organic food.”

Garry Johnson, president of SaskOrganics, said “not ensuring full disclosure of all GM seeds through a mandatory public registry, will make it challenging for organic farmers to meet the requirements of the Canadian Organic Standards.”

‘Informed decisions’

In her release Wednesday, Bibeau said that “in light of discussions with the government-industry committee, we will protect the integrity of organic certification.”

Her announcement Wednesday included plans for creation of a “government-industry steering committee on plant breeding innovations transparency, to facilitate ongoing discussions as gene-edited products are introduced in the marketplace.”

Bibeau also said an expansion of the Seeds Canada Canadian Variety Transparency Database will provide transparency around individual seed varieties — and new federal oversight of that database “will ensure (its) completeness and robustness.”

Bibeau also committed Ottawa to “again provide funding to support the review of Canada’s organic standards.” Those standards, updated every five years, are next due for renewal in 2025.

CFA’s Currie, in the government’s release, said those commitments “will help ensure farmers can continue to make informed decisions on what they produce.” — Glacier FarmMedia Network

The post Gene-edited crops clear CFIA’s regulatory bar appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

In a statement, the ministry said talks would continue in the meantime as the two sides worked to reach a “mutual understanding” that gives “legal certainty to all parties.”

Mexico has a controversial presidential decree that is set to ban GM corn and the herbicide glyphosate in 2024.

U.S. officials have threatened to take action under the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA), arguing that the decree will harm U.S. farmers.

“The Mexican delegation presented some potential amendments to the decree in an effort to address our concerns,” U.S. Department of Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack and U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai said in a joint statement released on Friday afternoon.

“We agreed to review their proposal closely and follow up with questions or concerns in short order,” they said.

Mexican Foreign Minister Marcelo Ebrard told reporters the two sides were aiming to reach an agreement by the end of January.

Mexico, which imports about 17 million tonnes of U.S. corn a year, has said the decree focuses on corn for human consumption and that GM yellow corn for animal feed would be permitted.

Mexican officials, however, have yet to announce formal modifications to the decree.

Mexico’s health regulator COFEPRIS has not authorized new strains of glyphosate-resistant GM corn seeds for import since 2018.

Biotechnology Innovation Organization (BIO), an industry group representing biotech companies including Bayer, said Friday it would urge the U.S. government to begin taking enforcement action over Mexico’s treatment of agricultural biotechnology should the country fall short of meeting “the commitments under (CUSMA).”

— Reporting for Reuters by Valentine Hilaire; additional reporting by Tom Polansek and Kylie Madry; writing by Cassandra Garrison and P.J. Huffstutter.

The post Mexico says it aims for agreement with U.S. on GM corn in January appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

The letter signed by 24 members of Congress and led by Republican Representative Adrian Smith and Democratic Representative Daniel Kildee of the Ways and Means Committee, both of whom represent corn-producing states. They requested dispute settlement consultations with Mexico over policies they said are “not based on science.”

Mexico’s presidential decree bans GM corn and glyphosate in 2024, though government officials have recently said they are working on a proposal to overhaul the plan, including an extension on the timeline.

“We urge USTR to promptly request dispute settlement consultations with Mexico on these issues,” the U.S. lawmakers said. “Ignoring Mexico’s disregard for its (CUSMA) commitments sends a signal to our other trading partners that they may take similar actions without repercussions.”

The lawmakers said Mexico’s government has not lived up to its “biotech-related commitments” in CUSMA and that the USTR must enforce the agriculture provisions of the trade pact.

A spokesperson for Mexico’s economy ministry did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment.

A spokesperson for the USTR did not immediately have a comment.

Mexico imports about 17 million tonnes of corn from the United States, of which about 18-20 per cent is white corn, used in food products like tortillas. President Andres Manual Lopez Obrador has said the ban focuses on corn for human consumption and that GM yellow corn for animal feed would still be allowed for another two years.

Lopez Obrador has said the effects of GM corn on human health are unknown. “It is not just a question of commerce, no, (but) taking care of the health of our people,” he said at a regular news conference in October.

Mexican officials, however, have not clarified whether they will reduce imports of yellow corn.

Supporters of the ban say GM seeds can contaminate Mexico’s age-old native varieties, and legal battles alleging glyphosate-based herbicides cause cancer have been fought in U.S. courts for years.

The decree’s critics insist it will threaten food security and lead to major disruptions for U.S. farmers.

The letter from U.S. lawmakers is the latest pressure from Mexico’s main trading partner as the clock ticks on its 2024 ban.

Tom Haag, president of the National Corn Growers Association, which represents U.S. farmers said the group had been working closely with Congress on the issue.

— Reporting for Reuters by Cassandra Garrison in Mexico City.

The post U.S. lawmakers call for action over Mexico’s GM corn ban appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

Vilsack said limiting the ban to food products makes a big difference to U.S. farmers, who have long relied on Mexico as a top export market.

“It’s not going to have as great an impact as it would if it was everything all at once all now,” he said at a virtual event hosted by the National Press Club.

Vilsack said U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai has also addressed the plan with Mexico and that there is a process under the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) for raising such issues.

“I am confident that these conversations will continue to be raised and concerns will be voiced,” Vilsack said. “As they are, there are processes that could potentially be used.”

Mexico’s agriculture ministry did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Mexico late last year published an executive order that seeks to ban in three years the use of GMO corn for human consumption, but did not define what products would be included. The government has pledged to substitute imports with local production by 2024.

Victor Suarez, Mexico’s deputy agriculture minister, told Reuters last month the plan covers all food that “will eventually reach human consumption.”

He alleged that GMO corn contaminates Mexico’s native strains of the grain.

Last year, Mexican feed companies used about 11.1 million tonnes of imported corn, the vast majority of it sourced from U.S. farmers, which represented nearly 70 per cent of the sector’s total corn purchases for the year, according to data from national feed association CONAFAB.

Mexico imported around 16 million tonnes of mostly GMO corn in 2020.

— Reporting for Reuters by Tom Polansek in Chicago and David Alire Garcia in Mexico City.

The post Mexico’s ban on GMO corn imports won’t apply to feed, U.S. says appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

The statement comes after Argentine authorities approved a new genetically modified wheat that can resist drought and tolerates the herbicide glufosinate sodium.

Argentina is a major supplier of wheat to Brazil, accounting for about 60 per cent of Brazilian imports. Another 10 per cent comes from other destinations while Brazil’s own domestic production caters to 30 per cent of the market, according to Abitrigo.

Argentina’s genetically modified wheat seed is called HB4 and was developed by Bioceres and France’s Florimond Desprez.

A Bioceres source said it has scheduled a series of meetings with Abitrigo directors to understand their doubts and concerns, without elaborating.

The Brazilian government has not replied to emails and phone calls regarding the process of approval for GMO wheat sales and imports.

Abitrigo said that for about 30 years, GMO wheat has been analyzed by the international scientific community, as well as governments and consumer groups in Canada, the U.S., Australia and the EU, where per-capita consumption of wheat is twice as high as in Brazil.

Abitrigo contends GMO wheat lacks any obvious benefits to people, adding that the purpose of cultivating it is merely to increase yields in growing fields.

— Reporting for Reuters by Ana Mano in Sao Paulo and Maximilian Heath in Buenos Aires.

The post Brazil millers oppose sale of GMO wheat appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

“This is the first approval in the world for drought-tolerant genetic transformation in wheat,” CONICET said in a statement.

Argentina is the world’s fourth-largest wheat exporter, and CONICET noted that the GM wheat will need to be approved in Brazil, Argentina’s largest market, before being considered commercially viable.

The drought-resistant HB4 wheat variety was developed by Bioceres, an Argentine biotech company, alongside the National University and CONICET.

“Approval of our HB4 wheat in Argentina represents a groundbreaking milestone for the entire global value chain of this important crop, given the substantial yield increases and significant environmental benefits that our technology offers,” Bioceres CEO Federico Trucco said in a release.

“Now we must go out into the world and convince people that this is super good and be able to generate markets for this wheat, which represents an evolutionary leap.”

Trucco admitted in news reports that winning approval from Brazil, the country’s key export market, could prove difficult. “The first country we have to convince is Brazil, and it may be hard work,” he said.

Numerous world experts have also expressed concern, given the fact that GM wheat has faced stiff resistance from both local and foreign consumers in the past.

HB4 wheat varieties have undergone field trials for the past decade. The trait is already approved for use in soybeans in a number of countries, including Brazil and the United States.

During trials, HB4 seed varieties increased wheat yields by 20 per cent, on average, during growing seasons impacted by droughts, according to Bioceres data.

The company noted the GMO trait would help mitigate production losses amid increased incidences of drought as climate change worsens. HB4 also facilitates double cropping of soybeans and wheat.

The deregulatory process for HB4 wheat has already started in the U.S., Uruguay, Paraguay and Bolivia. Bioceres is also preparing presentations for Australia and Russia, as well as other countries in Asia and Africa.

The post Argentina approves drought-tolerant GM wheat appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

Earlier this month, Beijing and Washington announced a Phase 1 trade deal, under which China has agreed to import more farm goods from the United States.

The United States has demanded that China change its GM crop import application process, saying they want it to be more transparent, timely and based on scientific methods.

The two new GM crops approved were Corteva Agriscience’s DAS-81419-2 soybean and 55-1 papaya, jointly developed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and Hawaii University.

Corteva said it was pleased Chinese authorities had authorized imports of the Conkesta soybean trait, which controls insects. Conkesta will be stacked with another GM soybean trait, Enlist E3, which confers herbicide resistance.

Corteva was the agricultural unit of DowDuPont, prior to being spun off as an independent company. It is still waiting for Chinese regulators to review a canola trait, which has been approved for years in the U.S., Canada and other markets.

The DAS-81419-2 trait picked up Canadian approvals for food and feed use and unconfined release back in 2014 but no varieties with that trait are currently registered in Canada.

Monday’s approvals were seen “as more evidence of progress as a result of the trade talks,” said Arlan Suderman, chief commodities economist for U.S. broker INTL FCStone.

“Dealing with a quicker and more transparent process of approvals was certainly something the U.S. was pushing for,” he said.

The United States is the world’s biggest producer of GM crops, while China is the top importer of GM soybeans and canola.

U.S. farmers and global seed companies have long complained about Beijing’s slow and unpredictable process for approving GM crops for import.

“This further expands channels for imports of U.S. agricultural products, and helps pave the way for buying more U.S. soybeans,” said Li Qiang, chief analyst with Shanghai JC Intelligence Co. Ltd.

“Approval of the papaya variety could help promote more fruit imports from the U.S.,” Li added.

China also renewed permission for imports of 10 other GM products, including BASF developed T25 corn, A5547-127 soybean, T45 canola, Oxy-235 canola, and Ms8Rf3 canola.

Bayer-owned Monsanto Far East Ltd.’s MON89788 soybean, 15985 cotton and H7-1 beet were also reapproved, along with DuPont subsidiary Pioneer’s 305423 soybean and 305423×GTS40-3-2 soybean.

The canola, soy, corn and beet traits for which China has now granted renewals have long since picked up approvals for food, feed and unconfined release in Canada. While 15985 cotton is not grown in Canada the trait has Canadian food and feed use approvals.

All approvals took effect from Dec. 2, 2019 and will last for three years, according to a statement on the agriculture ministry’s website.

Bayer and BASF had no immediate comments.

— Reporting for Reuters by Shivani Singh and Hallie Gu in Beijing; additional reporting by Tom Polansek in Chicago. Includes files from Glacier FarmMedia Network staff.

The post China approves two new GM crops from U.S. for import appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.