Leduc, a fourth-generation producer who grows more than 10,000 acres of wheat, durum, mustard, canola, peas and lentils in an area dominated by grazing cattle, thinks that the long-awaited technological improvement, a plant that produces canola-like oil, could help him eke out a few more dollars per acre.

“All I’m trying to do is improve the bottom line of our farm,” he said.

WHY IT MATTERS: Mustard growers worry BASF’s InVigor Gold hybrid will destroy Canada’s condiment mustard industry. BASF says the oilseed could be grown safely in arid regions where canola routinely fails.

But Trent Dewar, who farms elsewhere in the Canadian semi-desert known as Palliser’s Triangle, fears the new GMO mustard plant will ruin the pure mustard he grows for the premium Dijon bottlers in France, the United States and Japan, as well as other specialty mustards. The industry is worth about $150 million (C$209 million) in exports annually — only a fraction of the $8.9 billion (C$12.4 billion) canola exports market. But in a geography where canola fails more often than it flourishes, mustard has been the lifeblood of many farms since growers started planting it 90 years ago.

“Everybody I’ve talked to personally is quite shell-shocked that this would even be considered,” he said.

Mustard is a tiny crop in Canada, with usually less than 200,000 metric tons of mustard produced by a few hundred farmers. Mustard production soars and sags with volatile world prices and local weather, like other specialty crops. Canadian canola growers, by contrast, usually plant more than 20 million acres of their crop, which produces upwards of 19 million metric tons. That makes canola Canada’s biggest source of crop income by far.

That’s why so many are excited about the drought-resistant GMO mustard plant. Global agricultural giant BASF hopes to win approval from Canadian and U.S. agencies for commercialization as soon as next year in the U.S. and a couple of years later in Canada.

It’s not without risk, however. The GMO plant looks nearly identical to a traditional mustard plant. Neighboring fields could be contaminated with seeds and pollen carried on the wind or by bees. Both traditional brown and oriental mustards and the new mustard canola are brassica junceas, so they can breed, with pollen from one type fertilizing the other.

“It has the potential of wrecking a whole industry,” said farmer Norm Hall, the chair of SaskMustard, which represents Saskatchewan’s mustard growers. The group is lobbying the government in Ottawa to keep the crop out of Canada.

Brent Collins, head of BASF’s seeds and traits division in Canada, said the crop was an “innovation” that would “truly unlock new canola acres, helping meet market demand.”

The French connection

France, which sources about half its mustard supplies from Canada, has a strict non-GMO standard. Other large global buyers are similarly stringent. Many Canadian mustard growers and sellers fear the door could slam shut if traces of the hybrid mustard-canola were detected.

“They look at it like a razor blade that shows up in a bag of rice,” said Peter Gorski of Broadgrain, a company that sells Canadian specialty crops like mustard to buyers around the world.

Foreign buyers have not said how they will respond if GMO traces appear. Most contracts contain a commitment to be non-GMO, and two contracts shared with Reuters contained that specification. A French law limits the presence of GMOs in the food supply, but the threshold of acceptable traces is mostly left to the buyer.

Christophe Planes, sales and marketing director for French mustard processor Reine de Dijon, said the GMO plant could spell trouble for Canadian exports.

About half of the company’s seeds are sourced from Canada, he said, adding: “We’re clearly committed to a non-GMO policy.”

“Since France is quite strict regarding GMOs we systematically check all our supplies to ensure that there are no traces, or very few traces,” Planes said.

Since Canada’s crippling drought of 2021, which hampered mustard production and triggered panic in French shoppers finding grocery store shelves bare of the condiment, France has boosted its own domestic supplies. There are other sources for mustard seed, such as Argentina, Germany and Ukraine, but Canadian mustard is both high quality and cheap, Planes said. Switching could affect quality and raise prices.

A flax grower’s nightmare, revisited

Canadian mustard growers are haunted by a historical precedent: tainted flax. Canada lost a well-paying and steady European market for flax when traces of a GMO variety called Triffid were found in European food products in 2009. Exports plunged and never recovered.

Mustard is an ancient crop, its seeds found in stone-age settlements of the Near East, in ancient Sumerian texts, and even in the tomb of Egypt’s Pharaoh Tutankhamun. In the Bible, Jesus of Nazareth told a parable about the mustard seed.

By contrast, the mustard-canola hybrid is a 21st-century scientific marvel, employing decades of traditional plant breeding and later GMO methods to produce a mustard plant that produces a version of canola oil, and that survives a herbicide controlling the plague of tumbleweeds in western North America. Many farmers in the mustard-growing region have been eagerly awaiting this new crop since the 1990s, but it has been a tortuous scientific development process. Canola is a cool-weather crop that thrives in northern latitudes like Canada, but climate change’s bouts of extreme heat and drought are expected to make it more challenging to grow.

Some of the original research into using a mustard plant to produce canola-like seed was done by scientists working for a farmers’ cooperative in the 1990s, as well as by university researchers. Now global agriculture giant BASF has brought what it calls InVigor Gold to the cusp of commercialization.

Traditional clashes with bold and new

From discussions with mustard and canola industry key players, it is clear that the two camps have sharply different assessments of whether the GMO mustard can flourish alongside traditional mustard.

“We know we can’t co-exist,” said Rick Mitzel, executive director of Sask Mustard.

BASF, however, thinks two million acres of its mustard-canola could be grown in arid areas of Canada and the U.S., with safeguards against pollen flow and seed spread between mustard and canola fields.

“We understand the areas that mustard growers are concerned about and it’s our responsibility to be able to explain what exactly we’re doing to be able to appease some of these concerns,” said Collins.

The two sides have sporadically met in recent years, but as the widespread release of the crop approaches, mustard growers and the mustard industry have grown desperate.

At an industry meeting this winter, mustard growers and merchants called for their representatives to take legal and political action to block the introduction of InVigor Gold. But Hall told them it would be an “uphill battle” because BASF is following the usual crop development protocols, and market impact is not considered during the Canadian crop approval processes.

Kacy Gehring of Mountain States Oilseeds, a U.S. mustard merchant in American Falls, Idaho, said the concern about GMO contamination destroying markets could trigger farmers to just stop growing mustard. That wouldn’t just be a problem for companies like hers, but also bad for world culinary culture, she said.

Farmer Leduc understands the worries of his mustard-growing neighbors, but doesn’t apologize for wanting to get InVigor Gold into his fields as soon as possible. Farming in an arid region isn’t easy, but it’s where his great-grandfather settled. He needs every survival tool he can get.

“I wish I was in a wetter part of the province,” he said.

— Additional reporting by Sybille de la Hamaide and Gus Trompiz in France.

The post The Canadian GMO mustard wars: Dijon vs canola appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

“We know domestic and international consumers will want to educate themselves on this technology, but it is important to note there is no mechanism to track or segregate this product through supply chains,” the Canadian Pork Council said in a March 3 statement.

Given the challenges of labelling, the council said it supports work to gain public acceptance for pork from these gene edited pigs.

In January, Health Canada and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency gave the green light to pigs developed by U.K.-based Genus PLC and PIC (Pig Improvement Company), ruling them safe for food and feed. The pigs have been gene edited to resist porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome (PRRS).

Environment and Climate Change Canada and Health Canada also said that environmental and human health risks were no different than with pigs currently available. The CFIA and Health Canada also found no difference in nutritional value, according to a Jan. 23 news release.

Pork from gene edited pigs won’t require special labelling because Health Canada found no health and safety concerns.

Calls for mandatory labelling

However, some agriculture and consumer groups are calling for mandatory labelling of foods produced through gene editing and genetic engineering — including pork from the PRRS-resistant pigs and genetically engineered tomatoes recently approved in Canada.

In a letter to Health Minister Marjorie Michel, a group of organizations including the National Farmers Union and the Canadian Biotechnology Action Network (CBAN) said mandatory labelling should be “urgently” implemented. It cited the recent approval of the pigs and tomatoes, and the imminent closure of the Canadian General Standards Board (CGSB).

“Health Canada has committed ‘to the highest level of transparency’ relating to the genetically engineered pig. We support this goal but require clarification on how you will accomplish this promised transparency,” the letter says.

Health Canada has been working with that board since November on a public review of the National Standard for labelling and advertising regarding foods produced with genetic engineering. However, it was announced in the 2025 federal budget that the board would wind down activities.

“The CGSB is currently developing a transition plan to ensure reliable continuity and minimize disruption for partners and interested parties,” the government’s website says.

The letter does not specify what the groups’ concerns are about gene edited and genetically engineered foods. CBAN’s website says that GM foods are “approved for human consumption based on company-produced science” and that “there are very few long-term independent tests on GM foods.”

Organic groups have also called for mandatory labelling of gene edited crops, due to concerns about cross contamination. Canadian organic standards don’t allow for crops or animals bred with forms of genetic engineering.

The post No way to segregate gene edited pigs Canadian Pork Council says as groups call for labeling appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

“Selling genetically engineered seeds to home gardeners is reckless and could jeopardize our ability to provide customers with organic and other non-GE choices,” said Mel Sylvestre, an organic farmer from Gibsons, B.C., in a statement from the Canadian Biotechnology Action Network (CBAN).

CBAN has been vocally critical against GMOs and gene editing in foods.

This August, U.S.-based Norfolk Healthy Produce received Health Canada’s approval to bring The Purple Tomato to Canada. The tomato has had traits from snapdragons added to its genetic makeup. This causes its deep purple colour and increases the amount of an antioxidant called anthocyanin.

Contamination fears

CBAN coordinator Lucy Sharrat said that as of Dec. 2, seeds for the purple tomato were listed in Norfolk’s online seed store but were marked as sold out. On Dec. 18, the seeds appeared to no longer be listed.

The fear is that if genetically modified produce is widely grown across Canada, this will raise the risk of contaminating other varieties. This is a problem for organic farmers, who cannot grow genetically-modified crops under the Canadian Organic Standards.

Organic groups have also said cross-contamination concerns could lessen the standards’ credibility and hamper export opportunities.

CBAN is calling for mandatory labelling of genetically-engineered seeds as is the Canadian Organic Trade Association.

“With no GE garden seeds previously on the market in Canada, gardeners may not expect these seeds to be GE and would not have clear indications that identify them as GE at the point of purchase,” said the association’s executive director Tia Loftsgard in a statement.

On its website, Norfolk Healthy Produce frequently calls its plants “bioengineered,” which is in keeping with U.S. labelling conventions according to a ‘frequently asked questions’ page. Its seeds are currently only for sale on its website, it said.

Seed sovereignty

CBAN said the introduction of genetically-engineered seeds could also threaten the ability of growers to save seeds and cultivate heritage varieties.

“Our customers want to buy the seeds we’ve nurtured on our farm, not patented seeds from corporate laboratories,” said Kim Delaney, founder of Hawthorn Farm Organic Seeds in Mount Forest, Ontario.

“We should reinforce our local seed systems and reject genetically engineered seeds from U.S. and multinational biotechnology companies. Canadian seed sovereignty should be a priority for all levels of government.”

“We don’t need or want genetic engineering in our gardens,” Delaney added. “We already have many good varieties of purple tomatoes.”

A group of 163 farmers signed a statement in opposition to the sale of genetically-engineered or gene-edited seeds to Canadian gardeners and small growers.

The post Selling GMO tomato seeds to Canadian gardeners ‘reckless’ say advocates appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

On Sept. 23, the Argentine company that owns the technology signed a deal with the Colorado Wheat Research Foundation (CWRF) to commercialize the drought tolerant wheat in the U.S.

“The agreement combines Bioceres’ proprietary HB4 technology with CWRF’s leadership in U.S. wheat innovation to create a next generation wheat production system,” says a press release announcing the agreement.

“Bioceres will grant CWRF exclusive, sublicensable rights to the HB4 trait in the U.S. territory.”

Bioceres Crop Solutions was created in Argentina in 2019 to commercialize its HB4 trait for wheat and soybeans.

The transgenic wheat has a drought-tolerant gene that comes from sunflowers and is also tolerant of glufosinate.

Argentina, Brazil and Paraguay have approved the cultivation of HB4 wheat, says ISAAA.org. Other countries, including Australia and New Zealand, have authorized its use in food and feed products.

In August of 2024, the U.S. Department of Agriculture approved the cultivation of HB4 wheat.

However, American farmers won’t be planting a GM wheat for a while, probably not until 2029, 2030 or later.

“Cultivation approval is different from commercialization,” says a post from Peter Laudeman, director of trade policy with the U.S. Wheat Associates.

Bioceres has to partner with U.S. breeding companies, do field trials and performance verification in U.S. wheat varieties, Laudeman said.

“And perhaps most importantly, export market approvals. This process is likely to take three to five years or more.”

That piece of the puzzle, export market approvals, is a major concern for a country such as Canada. In recent years, Canada has been the third largest exporter of wheat in the world, after Russia and the European Union.

As a result, Canada needs to move carefully on GM wheat.

“Market access is a critical factor for any of those new technologies and especially in Canada. We do have such a high export volume for wheat production that it’s something we’re carefully watching,” Krista Zuzak, director of crop protection and production at Cereals Canada, said last August.

As part of the deal between Bioceres and the Colorado Wheat Research Foundation, the HB4 trait will be made available to public and private wheat breeding programs in the U.S. through an open licensing model.

“This is an important milestone for the wheat industry and sets the stage for long-term innovation in this important crop,” said Brad Erker, executive director of the Colorado Wheat Research Foundation.

“We are proud to support open and inclusive access to HB4 technology and to lead U.S. stakeholder engagement to ensure its responsible rollout.”

The post GM wheat gets closer to reality in U.S. appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

She was farming genetically-modified corn in Iowa in 2017, she says, when a tornado hit. Now a social media influencer who goes by the name the “Farm Babe,” Miller says the wind knocked her corn flat on the ground. But in a feat of botanical fortitude, the plants bounced back.

“So when you ask farmers: why are they growing these GMO seeds?” she says in the video, “it’s because the genetics hold up.”

Miller has starred in hundreds of videos, often set in fields and on farms, since she began her influencing career. She aims to debunk what she sees as misperceptions around farming perpetuated by another universe of influencers, many of whom are now closely aligned with Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., and his Make America Healthy Again, or MAHA, campaign.

But unlike Miller’s GMO corn, arguments in favor of the status quo in U.S. food and agriculture are increasingly falling flat, especially on social media.

An uneven rivalry

Among the most prominent of those MAHA influencers is Vani Hari, who blogs as “The Food Babe” — Miller says her own name is a self-conscious spin-off. Hari has gained millions of followers by railing against processed food, GMOs, pesticides and other mainstays of the U.S. food system.

Although Miller partners with powerful interests in the food and agriculture industry with huge marketing budgets, her message is not gaining as much traction as Hari’s. Her Instagram account, for example, had just over 43,000 followers in early August, to Hari’s 2.3 million. The bloggers’ uneven rivalry speaks to the ascendance of a movement that has put conventional food and farming in its crosshairs, and Big Agriculture’s struggle to respond.

Hari and Miller, both in their 40s, emerged as food commentators in the 2010s amid a boom in social media influencing, when a single post going viral could help rocket its author to fame and fortune.

Their rise also coincided with growing national attention on the relationship between food, obesity and chronic illness, with then-First Lady Michelle Obama spearheading new regulations on school nutrition and promoting vegetable gardening and exercise through her “Let’s Move!” campaign.

Hari grew up in Charlotte, North Carolina, where she said she was largely raised on ultra-processed foods, to which she attributes later chronic health conditions, from eczema to endometriosis.

An appendectomy in 2002 launched her on a quest to understand the source of her health issues. She pored over books on nutrition at the library, from which she concluded that her diet was at the root of her diseases, and those of many other Americans.

“I wanted to investigate: what was it about these foods that made me feel so bad?” Hari said.

Hari began writing a blog in 2011 as The Food Babe, a name suggested by her husband, with the aim of educating her friends and family. The blog reached well beyond her immediate circle and led to book deals and the creation of Truvani, a line of supplements now sold at Target and Walmart.

More recently, she has become a sort of mascot of the MAHA movement, though she is a registered Democrat, according to public voter registration records.

At a press conference in April, at which Kennedy announced the administration’s intention to phase out synthetic food dyes, Hari was an opening act, appearing in a bejeweled white suit before a room of press and MAHA supporters. When Kennedy took the stage, he called her an “extraordinary leader.” She said she does not have a formal role in the administration.

“Myth buster for the industry”

Miller wanted her own pulpit after she began noticing Hari’s content in 2014. A commercial farmer of soybeans, corn and livestock in Iowa at the time, Miller said she posted a comment on Hari’s Facebook page taking issue with her claims about the toxicity of GMO crops. After that, Miller said, she was blocked.

So, she launched a rival blog.

“I really took it upon myself to be a myth buster for the industry,” she said.

Hari did not respond to questions about blocking Miller or others who make critical comments.

Hari has published books blasting corruption in the food industry as well as her own cookbooks, and sells subscriptions to her blog. The supplements, however, are her main business, Hari said. She declined to disclose the company’s value.

Miller, who said she is not registered with either political party, travels about 300 days a year, doing paid speaking engagements, farm visits and branded partnerships with companies like Tyson Foods, Domino’s Pizza and the California Beef Council. She also writes a column for an agriculture industry trade publication.

She declined to say exactly how much she earns, but her published fee for speeches ranges from $2,500 to $15,000.

Mariah Wellman, a professor of advertising and public relations at Michigan State University who focuses on social media and wellness, said both women likely earn in the high six figures for their work.

But they speak to different audiences. And the constraints of traditional public relations may hinder pro-agriculture messaging, while the MAHA crowd’s comfort with social media helps propel its narrative.

“When you think about large brands and large agricultural companies, they are headed by a demographic that’s not super comfortable with influencer culture,” said Wellman.

She said that such companies often find it hard to keep up with fast-moving social media trends as they like to vet their partnerships carefully.

Agriculture often “preaching to the choir”

Miller, for her part, is sometimes frustrated by the challenges of working with an industry that is less nimble on social media, noting that it skews older and male, and saying it is often “preaching to the choir.” But she sees it as part of her mission to help agriculture better communicate about itself.

Hari has gained traction as public skepticism of U.S. public health institutions grew during the Covid-19 crisis. And her profile exploded when Kennedy, a longtime vaccine skeptic and environmental lawyer who was involved in suing companies like Bayer Monsanto over its pesticides, joined President Donald Trump’s administration.

Kennedy’s MAHA zeal has already inspired corporate action and state legislation on food.

In June, Kraft Heinz and General Mills announced they would phase out synthetic food dyes, which MAHA adherents believe cause problems ranging from hyperactivity in children to cancer, by 2027. Scientists say there is not yet a large enough body of evidence to show whether synthetic food dyes cause these problems.

West Virginia in March banned some synthetic food dyes from being sold in the state, and Arizona and Utah have recently banned a list of synthetic food dyes in school meals.

Communications firm Edelman found in a large, global public opinion survey taken in 2024 that people, especially those aged 18-34, are increasingly disregarding the advice of credentialed medical providers in favor of recommendations from friends, family and social media.

As Lauri Baker, a professor of agricultural communication at the University of Florida, says: “In almost any study we’ve conducted, people are more likely to trust someone who looks like them, thinks like them, who they believe is like them.”

The post A ‘Farm Babe’ fights for GMOs and Big Ag, pushing back on MAHA influencers appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

The initiative by President Claudia Sheinbaum comes after a trade-dispute panel ruled in December that Mexico’s restrictions on GM corn, mostly imported from the United States, violate the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA).

As a result of the CUSMA panel ruling, Mexico repealed its import restrictions on GM corn for human, livestock and industrial uses.

Mexico, the birthplace of modern corn, had already prohibited the commercial planting of GM corn strains, arguing they will contaminate native strains of the grain, but Sheinbaum pledged to officially prohibit the planting of GM corn within its territory via the Constitution.

With Sheinbaum’s reform approved with 409 votes in favor and 69 against, native corn is branded as an “element of national identity” and GM corn is officially banned from being planted in Mexico.

“Any other use of genetically modified corn must be evaluated … to be free of threats to the biosecurity, health and biocultural heritage of Mexico and its population,” the text of the reform states.

The reform will now go to the Senate for final approval.

Mexico buys about US$5 billion of U.S. GM corn each year, mostly for livestock feed.

Some analysts said the reform could spark a new controversy with the U.S. because it also refers to the use of GM corn, and not just the planting of the grain.

The Agricultural Markets Consulting Group (GCMA), a major consultancy in Mexico said the government’s decision to strengthen its position against GM corn generates “uncertainty” in the relationship with the United States, its primary source of yellow corn imports, which are mainly dedicated to livestock feed.

“Following the adverse ruling by the USMCA dispute panel, the insistence on these restrictions is likely to trigger retaliatory measures by the US government,” GCMA said in a recent report.

— Reporting by Adriana Barrera

The post After trade dispute, Mexico officially bans the planting of GM corn appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

The United States, which for decades has exported large volumes of GM yellow corn to Mexican buyers, had objected to restrictions put in place by Mexico’s previous government to gradually ban such corn supplies from its northern neighbour.

Mexico, the birthplace of modern corn, has for years prohibited the commercial-scale planting of strains of GM corn, arguing that such varieties would contaminate native strains of the grain. But a long-running dispute has played out over the imports of GM corn, nearly all from U.S. suppliers and mostly used for Mexico’s massive livestock sector as well as other industrial uses.

In December, a trade dispute panel ruled that the Mexican government’s previously enacted restrictions violate the USMCA North American trade accord.

Mexico is a top foreign market for U.S. corn farmers.

On Thursday, President Claudia Sheinbaum told reporters that her government is actively reviewing a possible reform that would enshrine the prohibition on planting GM corn into the constitution.

The post Mexico formally repeals restrictions on GM corn after trade panel ruling appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

The Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs awarded safety certificates to the 17 crop varieties, according to a document on its website on Tuesday.

The approved gene-edited crops include two soybean varieties, and one each of wheat, corn, and rice.

The approved varieties include seeds from Beijing-based feed group Dabeinong 002385.SZ and China National Seed Group, a subsidiary of seeds and pesticides maker Syngenta Group.

Unlike genetic modification, which involves inserting foreign genes into a plant, gene editing alters existing genes to enhance or improve the plant’s traits. Some scientists view gene editing as less risky than genetic modification.

China has also authorized the import of an insect-resistant and herbicide-tolerant GM soybean variety from the German chemicals firm BASF exclusively as a processing material, the ministry added.

Over the past year, the country has increased approvals for higher-yielding GM corn and soybean seeds to raise domestic production and reduce grain imports.

China mostly imports GM crops such as corn and soybeans for animal feed, while cultivating non-GM varieties for food consumption. Many Chinese consumers remain concerned about the safety of GM food crops.

The safety certificates for the newly-approved varieties are valid for five years, starting from December 25, according to the ministry document.

—Reporting by Ella Cao and Mei Mei Chu

The post China approves more GM crops to boost yields, ensure food security appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

The U.S. Trade Representative’s office said the USMCA dispute settlement panel ruled in favor of all seven U.S. legal claims in the long-running case. It said the panel found Mexico’s restrictions are not based on science and violate the USMCA’s chapters on sanitary and phytosanitary measures and on market access and national treatment.

The three-member panel’s final report recommended that Mexico bring its corn-trade policies into compliance with the trade agreement. It has 45 days to do so under the 2020 trade deal’s rules and failure to comply could result in punitive duties on some exports to the U.S.

Mexico’s economy and agriculture ministries said in a joint statement they disagreed with the ruling but would respect it, providing no details on what steps they would take.

“The Government of Mexico does not agree with the Panel’s decision, as it considers that the measures in question are aligned with the principles of public health protection and the rights of Indigenous peoples,” the agencies said.

Nonetheless, they said that dispute resolution was a key component of the USMCA trade deal, noting that Mexico and Canada prevailed over the U.S. in an automotive rules of origin dispute case last year.

The corn dispute began six months after USMCA came into force in July 2020 when then-President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador decreed that GM corn be banned by the end of 2024 — a move largely targeting U.S. corn exports. His successor, President Claudia Sheinbaum, has supported the policy.

After years of little movement in consultations, USTR requested arbitration to settle the dispute, challenging Mexico’s 2023 decree that immediately banned use of GM corn in tortillas and dough, and instructed government agencies to gradually eliminate its use in other foods and in animal feed.

The U.S. argued the Mexican government’s claims that GM corn is harmful to human health were not based on science.

“The panel’s ruling reaffirms the United States’ longstanding concerns about Mexico’s biotechnology policies and their detrimental impact on U.S. agricultural exports, U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai said in a statement.

U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said the decision ensured that U.S. farmers and exporters “will continue to have full and fair access to the Mexican market.”

“It is also a victory for the countries around the world growing and using products of agricultural biotechnology to feed their growing populations and adapt to a changing planet,” Vilsack added.

In February, Mexico’s government softened its initial ban on GM corn, explicitly allowing its use for livestock feed and industrialized products for human consumption, but maintained the ban for use in tortillas.

Mexican officials have defended restrictions on GM corn in tortillas and argued it is up to Washington to demonstrate its exports do not harm human health.

U.S. President-elect Donald Trump has threatened to impose a 25 per cent blanket tariff on all imports from Canada and Mexico when he takes office on Jan. 20 unless they stem the flow of illegal migrants and fentanyl to the U.S.

If implemented, those duties would appear to violate the USMCA’s rules, possibly spawning another dispute case.

Top buyer

Mexico, birthplace of modern corn, prohibits planting of GM corn due to fears it would contaminate native strains of the grain. Yet the country is the top foreign buyer of U.S.-grown yellow corn, nearly all of which is genetically modified.

Mexico’s government expects local buyers will import a record 22.3 million metric tons during the 2023/24 agricultural season.

In 2024 through October, the U.S. exported $4.8 billion (C$6.9 billion) worth of corn to Mexico, according to U.S. Census Bureau data.

Mexico boasts over 60 native varieties of corn, known as landraces, many coming in a kaleidoscope of colors and featuring distinct flavor profiles.

This month, Deputy Economy Minister Luis Rosendo Gutierrez stressed that the government was doing everything it could to protect the free trade pact amid Trump’s tariff threats. He added Mexico would comply with the panel’s ruling.

U.S. and international agriculture and biotechnology groups applauded the ruling.

“This is the clearest of signals that upholding free-trade agreements delivers the stability needed for innovation to flourish and to anchor our food security,” said Emily Rees, president of CropLife International, which represents the plant science industry.

— Reporting by David Lawder and Adriana Barrera; additional reporting by Brendan O’Boyle, David Alire Garcia and Cassandra Garrison in Mexico City, Tom Polansek in Chicago and Leah Douglas in Washington.

The post US wins Mexico GM corn dispute case as panel finds curbs not science-based appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

The three neighboring nations, and major partners in commerce, have entered a trade tussle after U.S. President-elect Donald Trump threatened to slap tariffs on the countries to the north and the south if they did not clamp down on drugs and migrants coming into the U.S.

Mexico is working on both issues in order to “come to the table” to negotiate without obstacles, Luis Rosendo Gutierrez told outlet Inside U.S. Trade.

Since Trump’s tariff threat, Mexico has launched an offense on contraband goods from Asia coming into the country, and officials seized a record amount of fentanyl. They have also detained thousands of migrants, vowing to prevent them from making it north.

Mexican officials have been in touch with Trump allies, Gutierrez added, though they have not met with incoming administration officials. The exception is Jamieson Greer, Trump’s tapped trade representative, with whom Gutierrez met before his nomination.

Trump, as well as some U.S. industry leaders, have accused Mexico of being a “backdoor” to Chinese goods and investment, which Mexico has denied.

Screening investments

Mexico is looking to take a cue from the U.S., however, in screening investments coming into the country, Gutierrez said. Mexico is looking to develop a process similar to the U.S.’ Committee on Foreign Investment, he explained.

When asked if that would affect Chinese automaker BYD’s plans to build a factory in the Latin American country, Gutierrez responded that Mexico wants “to play with the same rules” as its trade allies.

Trump had threatened to put a 100 per cent tariff “on every single car coming across the Mexican border” in response to BYD’s plans, though the carmaker has repeatedly said its plant would serve the local market and not the United States.

Mexico is considering doling out incentives to draw manufacturing investments, Gutierrez said, suggesting Mexico could produce batteries that the U.S. wants to be made regionally.

Corn complications

Mexico is also awaiting the result of a dispute panel under the USMCA trade deal regarding Mexico’s restrictions on imports of genetically-modified corn.

Mexico will comply with the panel’s ruling even if unfavorable toward the nation, Gutierrez said. And depending on the outcome, Mexico will weigh whether it must make changes to a proposed constitutional reform that would bar the use of GM corn for human consumption, the official added.

The post Mexico doing all it can to protect trade agreement with US, Canada, official says appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.