The American Corn Growers Association (ACGA) appreciates this opportunity to share our comments before the USDA Advisory Committee for Agricultural Biotechnology. The ACGA represents over 14,000 corn growers from all across the United States. We are the nation's largest progressive commodity association that prides itself on our ability to represent the voices of the nation's corn producers. We will express our concerns and reservations over the so-called Terminator technology and also continue to express our disappointment in the involvement and investment of the United States Department of Agriculture in this technology and point out the inappropriateness of such investments.

To the ACGA, the question that needs to be addressed before USDA moves forward on research and technology is - Is it good and beneficial for U.S. farmers? We have found no area in this technology that we can say would be good or beneficial to American farmers. The ability for farmers to retain seed for the next growing season has been a fundamental right passed on for hundreds of years. This ability has allowed farmers to save money while guaranteeing the availability of seed for the next year.

While corn does not fit into the mix of seeds that can be retained, every member of the ACGA plants an additional crop, usually soybeans, cotton, wheat or rice. For these crops, seed can be retained and should be allowed to do so. However, the "terminator" technology or GURTs (Genetic Use Restriction Technologies) takes seed retention options away.

Why would the USDA invest taxpayer dollars in such a technology? That's a question the ACGA has asked from day one. Sterile seeds hold no advantage to production agriculture but certainly hold advantages for agribusiness entities. After all, the sole purpose for the development of terminator was an economic one, whereas seed companies can force farmers to purchase new seed every year. Is it appropriate for USDA to use public dollars to help the economic well-being of seed, chemical or biotechnology companies at the expense of production agriculture? The answer is a simple and resounding NO.

While there is a legitimate debate going on within many agricultural associations about the benefits versus risks of genetically modified crops and the uncertainty over marketability. segregation and legal liability, there is mostly unanimity among these same groups over their opposition to the Terminator. The motives of the biotechnology companies are transparent when it comes to GURTs, with economics being the only motive involved with no benefit for the American farmer or the rest of the world.

Research dollars must be used in a wise fashion. They must show a genuine public good that will result. It is clear that Terminator/GURT technology doesn't hold that same high standard of what is in the public's best interest. Therefore, the American Corn Growers Association strongly recommends the following measures that should be undertaken immediately.

• The USDA should abandon all research on genetic seed sterilization, including research grants to University scientists.
• USDA should adopt a strict policy of prohibiting the use of taxpayer dollars to support genetic seed sterilization.
• USDA should use public research dollars to re-invigorate public plant breeding for family farmers and sustainable agriculture.
• USDA should insure that farmers and citizens are involved in determining research priorities.