Finnish bioindustry has been keen on genetically engineered trees. The research has been seeking for methods to maintain transgenes in function, so the production of cloned and sterile ge-trees could begin. Unfortunately, this has been kept out of the public debate until now. A decrease in lignin amount of trees in order to cut down the costs of pulp industry has been mentioned as one key factor for the ge-tree research. However, wind fallen trees are already a major problem in Finland and fibres with low lignin content can be produced in fieldcrops. Finnish-based multinational forest company Stora Enso has announced to avoid ge-trees and their research.

Peoples' Biosafety Association has asked the finnish Board of Gene Technology to give exact locations of all ge-field trials on the spring 2000. The Board of Gene Technology refused, even though the information was legally public. Biosafety Association took the case for the administrative court of Hameenlinna, which decided that the information should be public. The board of Gene Technology still refused to give the information, explaining that scientists need to have privacy on test-sites. The case is now proceeding in the Supreme Administrative Court of Finland, where the Board has given a statement signed by Pirjo Makela. This statement explains that any unauthorized visit on ge-field trials might cause danger to environment and people's health and the sites should therefore be kept hidden.

However, the Peoples' Biosafety Association in Finland went on for a search and found the field trials of genetically engineered birches from Punkaharju and Viikki. Referring to the statement of the Board of Gene Technology, the sites were marked with warning signs reminding of the hazards from gene technology. It is also important to notice that the risk assesments for both field trials ignored the risk of horizontal genetransfer. The year and a half long discussion about publicity has so been concluded and the real question about the future of these risky experiments can come in for a public debate. So far only magazines with censorship on subject have been "Helsingin Sanomat" and "Vihrea Lanka" (finnish green magazine!). In any case, the Peoples' Biosafety Association considers genetically engineered tree-clones to be unnecessary for the development of ecological forestry.

More info: bioturva@bioturva.org