Sir, - Prof Peter Whittaker claims organic farming is the greatest threat to biodiversity, because organic farming is less productive (The Irish Times, June 4th). This means that more land will have to be used for agriculture to make up for the loss of food production, thus increasing pressure on wildlife habitats.
Prof Whittaker seems to have overlooked the fact that the main problem with agriculture at present is over-production of poor-quality food which consumers don't want or, in the case of Third World countries, can't afford. For this reason, the EU obliges tillage farmers to set aside at least 10 per cent of fertile land and leave it idle. These farmers receive £347 per hectare subsidy for this, and they may set aside a further 10 per cent of their tillage area. Thus, while wildlife habitats are being reclaimed for conventional agriculture at an alarming rate, the finest of land is left uncultivated at the same time.
Organic farmers reject this approach, and voluntarily sign a contract which obliges them to retain wildlife habitats. Were it the case that organic farming caused a major fall in output, this could be offset by bringing setaside land back into production. However, it is not my experience that organic farming is less productive. By not dumping soluble phosphates and nitrates in the environment, by not abusing antibiotics, by keeping a strict control over what gets into the food chain, the organic farmer's task is made more challenging. Quality of production takes precedence over quantity.
On the general question of GM food, it is quite wrong to claim that cross-breeding has always been an intrinsic part of farming. By crossing a French Charollais ram with Galway ewes, it is true that the resulting lambs I get will be genetically unique and may be the start of a new breed, but they will be sheep. On the other hand, if I let out a big Cheshire tomcat with the ewes next October, I hope nobody is expecting tabby coloured lambs with cat's whiskers the following spring. Only genetic engineering techniques enable such a breakdown of the natural barriers between species.
It is impossible to be sure what the results of this will be, but we already know many new substances will be introduced into the food chain and the environment. Thirty years ago, before Sellafield, Chernobyl and Harrisburg became infamous, I recall listening to nuclear engineers assuring us that their technology was absolutely safe. The lesson is that we cannot rely on experts to get things right. - Yours, etc., Kevin Mannerings,
Taughmaconnell, Co Roscommon.