ABDUL QAYAM AND KIRAN SAKKHARI Farmers in Warangal district in Andhra Pradesh were excited about planting Bt cotton, which they saw as a way out of the trap of pests, pesticides and debt they were stuck in. At the start of the season in 2002, many were optimistic and hopeful about the new crop, but as the season progressed their enthusiasm was transformed into disappointment and, for some, despair. Meanwhile, many women already disillusioned with Green Revolution agriculture, are rediscovering the virtues of biodiverse cropping systems and sharing their results with their neighbours. Cotton is an important commercial crop in India. It ranks second among cotton-producing countries, with around 8.9 million hectares of land under cotton cultivation. Cotton is a big money-spinner for the corporations selling seeds, pesticides and non-formal credit supplies, which are often bundled together under the term “input dealer”. Cotton cultivation has rapidly expanded in Warangal District in Andhra Pradesh over the past two decades, and this has coincided with a marked increase in the frequency and intensity of insect pest incidence, characterised by high levels of pest resistance to even the latest pesticides. Two recent bollworm (Helicoverpa sp.) epidemics in 1997 and 2000 broke the backbone of the farming community in the district. More than 200 cotton farmers, trapped in the vicious cycle of pests, pesticides and debt, committed suicide. This crisis drew a lot of attention to the region, both from NGOs and corporations. For Mayhco-Monsanto [1], it provided an ideal opportunity to promote its bollworm-resistant, genetically modified (GM) Bt cotton. Following approval from India's Genetic Engineering Approval Committee, the company released two Bt cotton hybrids in the state of Andhra Pradesh in 2002, where it was sown on approximately 3,800 ha. Andhra Pradesh is the third biggest cotton-producing state in India, but tops the ranks with respect to pesticide use in cotton production. When the cotton was planted in Warangal district, a study was initiated by two local NGOs to monitor the progress of the GM crop and to compare all aspects of its production with popular hybrids. [2] A season-long study (August 2002 - April 2003) was initiated in two villages in the district where 22 farmers had planted Bt cotton. Two farmers were selected randomly from the villages and were interviewed each month and were captured on video. A mid-season study involving 21 farmers spread across 11 villages in the district was also conducted in November 2002. While these 21 farmers were the primary respondents, more than 200 were consulted altogether. Other stakeholders (such as scientists and the manager of the ginning mill) were also included. At the end of the cropping season, a survey was conducted of 225 out of the 12,000 farmers (ie 20%) who took up Bt cotton production in Warangal district. All the farmers in the study that chose to plant Bt cotton had been cultivating all the important crops including cotton for the last 15-20 years. They were well aware of popular varieties and hybrids of cotton, its pests and diseases, and had access to print and electronic media. The findings Table 1 outlines the different qualitative charact-eristics of the Bt and non-Bt cotton grown in Warangal district. The Bt hybrid was most affected by the prevailing weather conditions (hot and dry). It was also evident that though the Bt cotton plants produced more bolls, these suffered from heavy premature drying as well as boll shedding. MECH Bt 162, which constituted 98% of the Bt cotton grown, appears to be characterised by small boll size and short staple length, which affected market preference as well as the price of seed cotton. Another important finding was Bt cotton contained more seeds than non-Bt hybrids, which affected the lint to seed ratio as well as its price. In addition, pickings from the non-Bt crop extended till March, as compared with late December/early January for the Bt cotton in most areas, which reduced the yield of the Bt cotton crop. Early sucking pests like aphids and jassids were absent in both the Bt and non-Bt plants during the first 30 to 35 days after germination, as all the hybrid seed sold in the market is pretreated with the pesticide Imidachloprid. But, from early October, when the crop was 80 to 90 days old, moderate to heavy infestation of aphids and white flies was reported throughout the area, more prominently on Bt than on non Bt crop. There was unanimous agreement amongst all the group meetings and individual interviews that the pest load was lower than usual until the end of September. Even the much dreaded pink bollworm pest (Helicoverpa armigera) was at the lowest level till that time. Scientists opined that the dry and hot season suppressed this pest. But from November, the bollworm infestation increased in both the Bt and non-Bt crops, with 81% of non-Bt and 71% of Bt farmers pointing the finger at the bollworm as the pest that did the most damage to their crop. Most farmers concurred that sucking pests attacked the Bt crop more than the non-Bt crop. So even though there was some reduction in the incidence of the bollworm in Bt cotton, there was a simultaneous increase in the incidence of sucking pests on Bt crop. This meant that the level of pesticide use was almost identical for Bt and non-Bt farmers. Table 1: Qualitative differences in Bt and non-Bt cotton crops Characteristic Bt cotton Conventional hybrid Flowering 15-20 days earlier 15-20 days later Plant height 90-110cm 115-130 cm Boll size Smaller Larger Number of bolls/plant  40-45 more 40-45 less Premature drying and shedding of bolls More Less Tolerance to abiotic stress Poor Moderate Staple length Short Long Number seeds/boll 30-35 16-20 Pest incidence -Bollworm 71% 81% Pest incidence -Sucking pests 29% 19% Number of pickings Less More A hard look at the economics The economics of Bt and non-Bt production are presented in Table 2 (over page). Bt cotton cultivation cost $10/ha more than non-Bt cultivation. Farmers who cultivated Bt cotton spent 15% of the total cost of cultivation on the seed as against 5% in case of non-Bt farmers, in the hope that it would reduce their spending on pesticide sprays and improve their yields substantially. But in reality, expenditure on plant protection was only $1/ha less for Bt cotton farmers. Non-Bt cotton farmers averaged a yield of 276 kg/ha compared with 180 kg/ha for Bt cotton farmers, which represents a net 35% decrease in yield. So, in spite of spending 3.5 times more on pesticide-resistant seed, a Bt farmer had only a 4% reduction in pesticide costs, and ended up with a 35 % loss in final yield. These losses were compounded by the fact that the market value of Bt cotton was lower than non-Bt. To offset the reduction in the price of Bt seed cotton, almost all farmers resorted to mixing both Bt and non-Bt cotton before marketing, but they still only received $45/100kg for the mixed seed versus $47/100kg for the non-Bt cotton. In the end, non-Bt cotton farmers netted four times as much as Bt farmers from their 2002-2003 cotton crop. Some 71% of Bt cotton farmers experienced losses, compared with 18% of non-Bt farmers. Rescuing the crops of truth After some disappointing experiences with Green Revolution-style farming, many women farmers in Medak district in Andhra Pradesh returned to their satyam pantalu (crops of truth), a rich array of traditional crops that are ideally adapted to the climatic and geological conditions of the arid region in which they live. These remarkable crops include a millet that grows on dew and sorghum that “lives off the moisture in the air”. Over the last 20 years, many of the crops making up the satyam pantalu have disappeared (or “drowned” as local farmers put it) and replaced with what the women refer to as “government seed.” These hybrids of sorghum, wheat and rice distributed by state agricultural advisors make the soil “lifeless”, according to the women. Moreover, white rice does not give you enough strength to work in the fields and wheat flour causes itchy skin and rashes, they say. The women's disillusionment with the new seeds prompted a renewed interest in the pannendu pantalu, a well-developed mixed cultivation system, which combines risk reduction with the optimum use of scarce resources. Turning the almost barren soil into fertile fields was a considerable challenge given that the poor soils of the region had turned into some of the most degraded agricultural lands in the country. In the pannendu pantalu, at least twelve different crops, including forage crops, oilseeds and pulses, ensure a balanced, diverse diet and improve the quality of the soil. In this way, even poor soils yield something and there is always an emergency harvest even with little rainfall. Added to the crops are numerous wild vegetables, medicinal herbs, fruit trees and forage grasses. A proportion of every harvest is stored for the next sowing, in a natural breeding process in which varieties with special properties selected and developed further. Food security is the primary objective, not high yields or income. In Humnapur village, Laxmamma and her mother treasure the seeds of more than 85 varieties in an array of small, brightly painted clay pots, stored carefully in a wooden box. Laxmamma recalls how five or six years ago she got a particular variety of green gram which doesn't need much water from a neighbouring district. She and other women started to sow these rare crops in their fields and today they have retrieved 50-60 varieties that had almost been lost forever. Laxmamma's collection has grown from 6 to 85 varieties. Now gene banks have been established and seeds are given out to other people from their own or neighbouring villages. The work has drastically improved the status of these ‘poorest of the poor' women, and people of all castes come and ask for advice and to share in the seed bounty. A new ‘seed economy' has sprung up in which farmers pay for the seeds they receive with seeds from their harvest – to the tune of one and a half or two times as much as they received in the first place. The communities are also working on developing processing facilities and local markets. Everyone recognises that the cash economy is hard to ignore. Cash is needed for school, salt, soap and saris. Some traders are willing to give the local fare a spot in their stores, but it is hard for it to compete with pizzas and potato chips given the “fast food” mood that now prevails throughout much of India. But the vision of these women farmers is strong and offers the potential for safer and healthier food, greater economic dependence, and a solid, biodiverse agricultural base for the future. Source: Meena Menon, The crops of truth, www.ddsindia.com/cropstruth.htm; EED, Fruits of Diversity: Global Justice and Traditional Knowledge, Church Development Service, 2002, www.eed.de/en.home/en.publications/; Carinne Pionetti and Suresh Reddy, “Diversity on the Deccan Plateau, Seedling, April 2002, www.grain.org/seedling/ seed-02-04-en.cfm Biosafety issues All farmers professed compliance to Mahyco-Monsanto's refuge guidelines, which required planting border rows of non-Bt hybrids in 3 to 5 lines. This was conveyed to them through audiocassettes and product literature supplied with the seed packets. But farmers were not clear about what the purpose of the refuge was. Most thought it was to serve as a barrier or trap for the migrating moths and caterpillars or to prevent the transfer of pollen to other plants and varieties. The real purpose of the refuge is to serve as a host for susceptible bollworms to mate with resistant insects to delay the development of resistance. Mayhco-Monsanto abdicated any responsibility for monitoring the enforcement of refuges. The study team could not easily identify the refuge crop from the main crop. This mixing of seed that occurred when farmers resorted to mixing their non-Bt and Bt cotton crop in order to get a better price for the Bt cotton paved the way for GM crops to enter the food chain. Cotton seed oil is used in cooking in India and the seed is used to make cattle fodder, which enters the human food chain through dairy products. This is an extremely critical biosafety concern, and it indicates the total failure of regulatory mechanisms. Table 2: The economics of cultivating Bt and non-Bt cotton Characteristic Bt Popular hybrids Total cost of cultivation/ha Rs 4,262 ($92) Rs 3,825 ($82) Cost of seed/ha Rs 640 ($14) Rs 180-200 ($3.8-4.3) Expenditure on pesticides/ha Rs. 1,164 ($25) Rs. 1,188 ($26) % of total expenditure spent on plant protection 27 % 31 % Average yields/ha 180 kg 276 kg Market price/100 kg seed cotton Rs 2,080 ($45) Rs 2,164 ($47) Net returns/ha at the end of cropping season Rs 518 ($11) Rs 2147 ($46) No of farmers who profited 65 (29%) 185 (82%) * Up to Rs 5,000 ($108) 39 (17%) 67 (30%) * Rs 5,000-7,500 ($108-162) 4 (2%) 28 (12%) * Rs 7,500-10,000 ($162-216) 9 (4%) 20 (9%) * Rs >10,000 (>$216) 13 (6%) 70 (31%) Does Bt cotton have a future in Warangal? When asked about what their future preference would be for their cotton crop, farmers offered a variety of answers: 51% said categorically that they would not plant Bt cotton again. 13 % said they will not grow Bt again because of the reduced yield. 11% said they would not grow Bt in the next year because of the higher cost of cultivation. 4% would grow the Bt crop again without hesitation. 8% said that they would see how Bt cotton. performs in a “normal” season. 9% said that they would try Bt again if a better hybrid with good boll size were available. The study team concluded that the GM hybrids are not a desirable proposition at present. The faltering toxin content of the plant and seed during the crop period is likely to encourage the development of resistance among Helicoverpa and other Lepidopteran pests. Indeed, it has already been reported in some countries that the toxin is not effective against the 3rd and 4th generation of Helicoverpa. This should be a warning signal. The development of resistance would create a more serious problem than the pesticides currently used, and will lead to an unavoidable war between GM hybrids and the pest complex. As in the case of pesticides, wherein pests have been successful in developing resistance to the most toxic of pesticides, they are also likely to succeed in overcoming the toxins produced by the genes, warranting ever more aggressive toxins to achieve the kill. This is a dangerous trend fraught with dreadful environmental consequences, including the devastation of natural predators and soil-borne pest pathogens by the toxins produced by the GM cotton plant. The farmer will have no security of seed and will also lose control over her/his own seed because of the restrictions placed on seed saving, breeding and seed sharing by the corporations. The indebtedness of farmers will also increase because of the greater dependence on external resources needed for the cultivation of the GM crop. This study emphasises the need for a wholesome review and critical examination of the policy of encouraging genetically modified cotton from the point of view of the environment, diversity and health. Anjamma's story Anjamma, a Dalit woman (of the ‘untouchable' caste), has achieved what seemed the impossible. Married at the age of nine, her life was one of relentless hard work. She raised four children as a sharecropper and now is devoted to popularising traditional crops, acting as a permaculture consultant to other villagers. “The upper castes lost all the traditional crops because they switched to sugarcane”, she says. “Now they come to me for seeds of millet, sorghum and black gram.” On her four-acre plot, Anjamma has planted more than 30 varieties of crops. These include four different varieties of millet, two varieties of red gram, lentils, beans and two oilseed varieties. “This means that even if I lose 10 crops, I get the produce of 20”, she says. Anjamma and her husband have worked hard for a long time. When they got married they only owned a sickle. First they worked as day labourers and then as sharecroppers who had to hand over half the yield to the landowner. After a while they had their own team of oxen that they hired out. Finally they bought this plot, some of it even with fertile black earth. Anjamma has her own seed store, comprising more than 60 varieties and species. She makes up her own “plant cocktail” depending on how good the first rain is, for different soil types and changing according to the seasons, for food, animal feed and cooking oil. Her collection includes some plants that provide a yield even when there is little rain and one variety that “not even the crows touch.” She grows mung bean and green gram for sale. Sources: Meena Menon, The Crops of Truth, www.ddsindia.com/cropstruth.htm; EED, Fruits of Diversity: Global Justice and Traditional Knowledge, Church Development Service, 2002, www.eed.de/en.home/en.publications/ The study report, Did Bt Cotton Save Farmers in Warangal? was written by two local scientists. Mohammed Abdul Qayum (top) is a retired agricultural scientist trained in soil, water and fertiliser analysis and who worked for many years for the Government of Andhra Pradesh. Sakkhari Kiran (bottom) is an agricultural scientist has who worked with the International Crop Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics studying seed production storage techniques with tribal farmers, and is now Project Co-ordinator for the Permaculture Association of India. The study was commissioned by the Andhra Pradesh Coalition in Defence of Diversity, a four-year old network of more than 140 civil society groups in Andhra Pradesh that promotes agrobiodiversity and ecological agriculture, and the Deccan Development Society (DDS), which works with more than 5,000 women farmers in Andhra Pradesh to support their communities and their farming systems. The full report is available in PDF form from www.ddsindia.com and in print from DDS: Flat 1, Kishan Residency, 1-11-242/1, Street No.5, Shyamlal Building, Begumpet, Hyderabad – 500 016, Andhra Pradesh, India. Tel : +91 40 277 64577, +91 40 277 64744. Email: A 23-minute film following the trials and tribulations of the farmers in the study, made by local women from the Community Media Project in Pastapur is available from the same sources. [1] A joint venture of the Indian seed company Mahyco and Monsanto, the multinational seed and agrochemical company. [2] See end for more details of the study. Reference for this article: ABDUL QAYAM AND KIRAN SAKKHARI, 2003, The Bt gene fails in India, Seedling, July 2003, GRAIN Website link: www.grain.org/seedling/seed-03-07-3-en.cfm What is Seedling? Seedling is the quarterly magazine of GRAIN. It provides thought-provoking articles on all aspects of GRAIN’s work and more. To receive Seedling in paper or electronic format (on a CD Rom), or to inform us of a change of address, please