BISMARCK, N.D. (AP) In a debate that split the North Dakota Senate's farmers, senators on Monday rejected proposals for a two-year ban on plantings of genetically modified wheat seed. Instead, they supported a study of the implications of gene research.

"We're concerned about our customer, and our customers are telling us, 'We do not want genetically modified wheat.' It's plain and simple," said Sen. Ken Kroeplin, D-Hope.

Opponents of the ban said it would send an anti-technology message. It would prohibit North Dakota plantings of a seed variety that won't be available within two years anyway, said Sen. Terry Wanzek, R-Cleveland.

"I don't believe we can build a wall around ourselves, and expect to compete in the global market, and be isolated on this issue," Wanzek said. "This is an international issue that requires a coordinated effort on behalf of the whole country."

Wanzek and Kroeplin are farmers, as are the Senate's floor leaders, Republican Gary Nelson of Casselton and Democrat Aaron Krauter of Regent. Another farmer, Rep. Phillip Mueller, D-Wimbledon, sponsored the moratorium legislation.

It originally ordered a two-year ban on North Dakota farmers' use of genetically modified wheat seed. It was changed in the House to allow the planting of biotech wheat only if Canadian farmers began to produce it.

On Monday, references to a ban were removed in favor of a proposed interim legislative study of genetic research issues. The study was approved 48-0, and the legislation now returns to the House to see if representatives agree with the changes.

North Dakota and Canada's western prairie provinces both grow and export hard red spring wheat, which is used to make bakery flour, and durum, the principal ingredient in pasta.

Supporters of a ban on biotech wheat plantings said it would reassure North Dakota's major export customers, most of whom have indicated they do not want to buy genetically modified wheat.

"It's the message we need to send to the world, that North Dakota is the producer of high quality," Krauter said.

Monsanto Co. of St. Louis is developing a variety of hard red spring wheat that is immune to the effects of a Monsanto weed killer called Roundup. It would allow farmers to spray Roundup on their fields without killing wheat plants.

The company, which has been lobbying against the biotech wheat ban, has already developed Roundup-resistant varieties of canola and soybeans that are popular among North Dakota farmers.

Krauter and other Democratic senators believe pressure from Monsanto has turned Republicans against the moratorium, an allegation they deny.

"We are not voting for big business," Wanzek said. "We are voting for the future. This issue is larger than us and our feelings."

Senators voted 30-18 to remove the moratorium from the legislation, and voted 27-21 to reject a separate amendment that would have allowed biotech wheat plantings if a committee of state farm groups agreed to end the moratorium.

Republicans control the Senate, 32-17, and both votes mostly went along party lines. Two Republicans supported keeping the moratorium, and five backed the proposal to give state farm groups control of whether to end any biotech wheat ban.

Krauter, who raises durum and other small grains on his southwestern North Dakota farm, said that rejecting a moratorium would help Monsanto and other large agribusinesses keep control over the state's farming industry.

"They're producing the seed. They're producing the chemical. They're producing the genetics," Krauter said. "And who is going to suffer in that? It's the farmer of North Dakota."

Nelson, the Senate Republican majority leader, said other types of biotech seed have helped to cut farmers' production costs. Nelson is a farmer himself, and said he has cut his herbicide costs almost in half by planting Monsanto's Roundup-ready soybeans.

"That's the bottom line. That is what makes it profitable to raise that crop," Nelson said. "I think that also is what we can look forward to if, in the future, we have genetically modified wheat."

The bill is HB1338.

** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed for research and educational purposes only. **