by Winona LaDuke

Ponsford, Minnesota (Akiing)

Recently, Representative Frank Moe proposed a resolution which “…in the interest of protecting the genetic integrity of this unique natural resource, the State should take reasonable precautionary measures in the event of an application for a test plot of genetically engineered wild rice, including enacting a temporary, two-year moratorium that prohibits the release, planting, cultivation, harvest, importation, or sale of any genetically engineered wild rice in Minnesota until the environmental, social, and economic impacts can be fully assessed and understood in cooperation with interested parties…”

The resolution also urges the University to engage in an agreement with the Ojibwe to preserve wild rice from genetic engineering, recognizing the deep cultural significance of the grain to the Anishinaabeg. Such an agreement would be modeled on one signed in Hawaii regarding the protection of taro, and insuring that the University of Hawaii did not genetically alter the taro crop, considered sacred by the Native Hawaiians.

Wild rice, or manoomin, is about as Minnesotan as it gets. Many of our lakes teem with rice, and the grain, which is the only grain native to North America, is the cornerstone of an ecosystem and a food source for waterfowl throughout our region.

Today, wild rice finds itself in an unusual situation. That is to say that a debate nationally on genetic engineering is finding it’s way into Minnesota, and there has been genetic work on wild rice.

That genetic work – the mapping of the DNA sequence for wild rice – sets this unique grain up for possible genetic engineering. At hearings last month, the biotech industry came out in full force to oppose protection of wild rice.

Thus far, all the Minnesota Ojibwe bands have opposed genetic engineering of wild rice, including Red Lake which has cultivated wild rice paddies. Red Lake’s interest in protection of wild rice stems from it’s recognition that wild rice is a sacred food of the Ojibwe, and as well, lake rice represents the genetic motherlode for all plant cultivation.

Once genetically altered, it will never be the same. Wild rice is also protected under the l837 treaty, “…The privilege of hunting, fishing and gathering the wild rice upon the land, the rivers and the lakes included in the territory ceded...” Federal and Supreme Court cases, including the Mille Lacs case (l993) at the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the rights of the Ojibwe to traditional land use outside the reservation borders. Wild rice is the only grain explicitly recognized in a treaty, underscoring it’s unique nature.

The bio-technology industry is watching this case with a magnifying glass. At the Minnesota hearings, a number of bio-technology industry lobbyists testified, including Monsanto, calling this a “slippery slope” upon which the state of Minnesota did not want to embark, and suggesting that such a bill would “damage” Minnesota’s biotechnology future. Indeed, Beth Nelson, from the Minnesota Cultivated Wild Rice Council stated opposition to the bill on the grounds that it would damage potential genetic engineering in the future. Ms. Nelson also represents the Canola Council, and, I believe, is unfortunately merging the interests of what is a culturally and ecologically unique food with the canola industry.

The Ojibwe, Frank Moe, and others believe that wild rice is unique and should not be lumped into the larger debate on genetically modified seeds.

Minnesota is the only place in the country where natural lake stands of wild rice are proximate to wild rice paddies near Clearbrook, Aitken, Grand Rapids and other areas. It turns out that genetically engineered seeds are not sterile, and genetically engineered varieties of bent grass (grown for golf courses) have been known to cross pollinate with wild varieties. The cross pollination has a number of groups deeply concerned.

Seeking to clarify that the bill is not an anti-biotech bill, but, instead, involves solely wild rice – a unique, and irreplaceable part of the Minnesota ecosystem – Frank Moe reiterated that he does not oppose bio technology or genetically modified crops, but argued that wild rice is distinct. In terms of sheer economics, the Ojibwe have noted that it would be difficult for any entity which sells “wild rice” to sell “genetically engineered wild rice” in gourmet markets.

This challenge would be even greater in European markets, where many consumers are intolerant of genetically engineered foods. Since almost half of the paddy grown wild rice market is international, this challenge may be worthy of consideration by the paddy growers.

Supported by the Ojibwe bands of Minnesota, a wide number of church groups, and a number of Minnesota House and Senate leaders, as well as the Isaac Walton League and other entities, Moe’s resolution needs more support, including public officials, business owners, lakes associations and hunters to insure the lakes of Minnesota can retain their unique ecological integrity.