Article

by Carey Gillam

• Judge says Oct 4. deadline for proposed remedies
• Says USDA seems to have been trying to circumvent law
• Judge in Aug. banned commercial beet planting
• USDA in September issued planting permits for seedlings

KANSAS CITY, Sept 29 (Reuters) - A federal court has ruled that U.S. agricultural regulators again appear to have acted illegally in allowing planting of a biotech sugar beet crop tied to Monsanto Co MON.N

U.S. District Judge Jeffrey White for the Northern District of California said in his ruling Tuesday that a group of consumers and environmentalists were likely to prevail on their complaints that the U.S. Agriculture Department was trying to circumvent the law by allowing limited continued planting of seed stock for a biotech beet crop without conducting a required environmental review.

Judge White instructed plaintiffs, led by the Center for Food Safety and EarthJustice, to file proposed remedies by Oct. 4.

“Once again, USDA has bypassed environmental review and public comment to cater to industry preferences,” said Paige Tomaselli, staff attorney for the Center for Food Safety, “We cannot allow USDA to abdicate its responsibility to protect public health and the environment.”

USDA had no immediate comment.

The groups filed suit on Sept. 9 to try to stop the planting or remove the recent plantings of the genetically altered sugar beet seedlings. The groups alleged that USDA was flaunting an earlier court ruling that vacated government approval of the beets, which are genetically altered so they can withstand Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide and make it easier for farmers to treat fields for weeds.

Monsanto, which owns the intellectual property rights for the technology that is used to produce the “Roundup Ready” sugar beets, sought to intervene in the case, and was granted limited standing.

The company declined to comment, however, on the recent ruling.

Judge White ruled last month that the sugarbeets were never properly approved by USDA’s Animal, Plant Inspection Service (APHIS) and said the government must conduct a thorough environmental review before approving them.

Opponents claim their commercial use will harm the environment and contaminate conventional beet supplies.

The defendants, including Monsanto and other industry players who sought to intervene argued that they needed to issue limited planting permits for research and development, basic seed production and to preserve the seed companies’ ability to create genetically engineered commercial seed varieties to meet potential future market demand in a timely manner if subsequent APHIS does ultimately authorize production.

But the judge discounted that argument and reiterated that he had vacated the government’s approval of the biotech sugarbeets and denied a government request for a delay.

The ruling is the latest in a string of adverse actions against USDA for failing to properly evaluate biotech crops. It also follows internal government reports critical of the agency’s actions with biotech crops.

A separate federal court ruling has similarly banned Monsanto’s Roundup Ready alfalfa. And an alliance of conservation organizations have sued USDA over approval of GMO eucalyptus trees, similarly arguing the approvals ignored expert warnings about potential environmental harm.

(Reporting by Carey Gillam; Editing by Marguerita Choy)