Splice, the only magazine to give an honest and intelligent critique of the biotech industry. For details please contact: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. www.geneticsforum.org.uk 01865 716498 or: 94 White Lion Street, London, N1 9PF ......

Stereotypes undermined

In an exclusive interview, covert crop-puller Robert Smith explains the great thought that goes into the secretive work of combatting the GM trials. Far from the stereotypic image we may have of an activist, he is a very respectable and caring member of society.   

Splice - So you are a covert crop-puller? Does that make you a scruffy unemployed anarchist?

Bob - Actually I’m a care-worker in my mid-twenties. I first got involved in anti-GE activism through my local group, which mostly did public information activities at supermarkets and in the street. But that did not seem to be making quite the difference I wanted.

Splice - There has been very little coverage in the press recently about  GM trial sites being destroyed by campaigners. What is the scale of the protest?  

Bob - All of the National Seed List trials in England have been decontaminated this year, but there are a much larger number of farm-scale trials, of which only a few have been destroyed. This has been happening  in Britain quite consistently for the last couple of years, but recently we have heard more reports from other European countries, and so hopefully it is growing...  

Splice - What is an action like - aren’t you scared that you will get caught? How do you go about getting rid of a GM-crop?

Bob - As for the events themselves, they are very calm and organised affairs. The oddest thing for me is to hear people talking of eco-vandals, conjuring up pictures of lairy teenagers running amok with big sticks in fields. Nothing could be further from the truth. People take it very seriously, working safely and methodically. The number of people involved depends on the size of the trial, and we try to clear as much of the GM crop as possible. If we know which side is GM then we only go for that, because we are trying to prevent the spread of GM pollen. It is scary, and some sites more so than others, but we are quite lucky in this country in that the worst that is likely to happen is arrest.

Splice - Who is responsible for the destruction of the trial sites? Are there local people taking part or is it a rent-a-mob shipped in from outside by a shady organising body of anarchists?

Bob - A large proportion of people are locals, but it would be a lie to  say all of them are. There are local groups opposing trials all round the country and from these groups there are usually at least some people willing to risk arrest to decontaminate the site. However, it’s a lot of work, and local people are able to use the experience of those of us who have done similar actions around the country.

Splice - These actions are outside of the democratic process so what gives anyone the right to utterly disregard the will of the elected government?  

Bob - One could ask what gives the government the right to so utterly disregard the will of the majority of the population. The government is scarcely elected, having attracted such a low voter turnout, and biotechnology companies are even less elected, yet consistently enjoy the ear of government. I think that in the great scheme of things, the idea of not doing something because it is illegal is pretty lame compared with the importance of stopping the genetic experiment with the world’s food  supply. Few people seriously believe that the government knows best, especially after BSE, rail privatization and the Foot and Mouth debacle, yet still  the idea persists that it is wrong to take action against ill-thought out policies. These experiments are part of something much bigger than British law.

Splice - The purpose of these trials is to see whether there is an impact on the environment ... but by destroying the trials, this data is lost. If an honest decision is to be made from the facts, then we need this data otherwise a decision can only be made from prejudice.  

Bob - These trials follow the bizarre logic of seeing whether it is safe  to release something into the environment by releasing it into the environment. I personally believe that there is no need for genetically engineered crops at all because they can only ever be controlled by corporations and not by ordinary people. But if they are to be tested then it should be done for many years in greenhouses before releasing them is even considered. The separation distances are a joke and the plants do cross-pollinate with related ones nearby. There are already problems with the predicted superweeds in the US, which have been genetically modified by  cross-pollination. The experiments are in any case flawed, failing to take account of soil-dwelling creatures and a number of other vitally important factors. Whether they are completed or not, the results would be based on prejudice, the only difference being that successful completion would give the crops a legitimacy they do not deserve.

Splice - What sanctions do people risk in doing this sort of action?

Bob - The two main charges which people face are criminal damage and aggravated trespass, but people have rarely been caught, and those who have, have sometimes had their charges dropped. Cases have also been won  or thrown out of court, and the court experience can be a useful publicity tool. Many people think that covert crop actions are done by cowards who won’t stand up and be counted, but it is really a matter of effectiveness.