Its time to allow technology to transform agriculture

“BT cotton has changed my economic status. I was able to educate my children,” said KB Banakar, a farmer from Ranebennur’s Billahalli. “At first, I was sceptical about growing BT cotton. But now, I am glad I did. It helped me repay my debts and provide for my family,” said Chandraiah N, a farmer from Konkal village in Shapur Taluk of Yadgiri.

NR Marigoudar from Kudapalli village in Hirekur Taluk Haveri, too, had a similar experience, and so did Basavanagowda Patil from Nelahala in Raichur.

The farmers were in the city to share their side of the story as the Biotechnology Regulatory Authority of India (BRAI) Bill gets ready to be tabled in the Parliament’s monsoon session. It’s time to acknowledge its merits and allow technology to transform agriculture, they said at an event organised by Association of Biotechnology Led Enterprises.

Switching to the new version of cotton had benefited them in multiple ways, they asserted. “People said cows that fed on these crops would die; that people exposed to them would die; and that the wood that were the product of genetically-modified technology trees cannot be used for firewood. Nothing of this sort happened,” Banakar said.

Also, the crops needs less pesticide than regular varieties and this brought down costs and minimised human exposure to chemicals, he added.

“Owners of cattle pay us good money to allow cattle to graze on our fields when idle. Why would they do that if the fodder is harmful,”Chandraiah said. Costs of pesticides is minimal now. The crops are rainfed, and there’s no expense on pumping water either, he said.

“The 40 acres where I grow other crops require more effort than the 20 acres where BT cotton is grown. Although I was against BT cotton in the initial years and protested its introduction, I am now a firm believer in its prowess,” Marigoudar said.

The crop opened up a stable career option for many people. If not for the bounteous BT cotton, many farmers would wind up as peons in Bangalore’s software companies, he said, narrating the experiences of peers.

Given the “success” of BT cotton, the technology should be allowed for many more crops, they argued.
“Technology is most needed in the agriculture sector,” Marigoudar said. The requirement now is a way to keep out weeds that eat up most of the fertilizer, he said.
Blaming lobbies for presenting a negative picture of the BT industry, the farmers said that reality is far
from what is commonly perceived.

Prof K Kameshwara Rao, an agri-biotech scientist and founder of Foundation for Biotechnology Awareness and Education, blamed vested interests for giving genetically-modified food a bad name.
Government handling of the issue is also not satisfactory, he noted. The “success story” of BT cotton can be repeated by BT brinjal if only politics gets out of science’s way, he said.

The BRAI Bill is a step in the right direction. It is well thought-out, said K Narayanan, managing director of Meta-helix and
ABLE-AG managing committee member. “All sides of the story should be brought out. Like the Lokpal Bill, differences can exist.

Also, the National Biotechnology Advisory Council should consist of scientists. Keep science and politics separate,” he said.

Cotton production has doubled since farmers took to growing BT cotton, he added.