In the beginning everything was simple. Bt maize was supposed to be just on the field, and nothing else would be affected: No organism that wasn't on the field, no organisms that would prey on maize pests. But over the years things became more complicated and now it's common knowledge that parts of the Bt plants make it off the field themselves, that predators can be affected indirectly in the food web. And still the question whether the field crop maize could also water organisms seems to be one step too far for most risk assessments.

[img_assist|nid=104|title=|desc=|link=none|align=left|width=100|height=43]Rosi-Marshal et al. (2007) just published a long overdue study about whether Bt plant residues got into headwaters during or after cultivation, and whether the Bt-toxin would have adverse effects on water insects like caddies flies, close relatives to butterflies. In both cases the answer was yes. This laboratory study gives enough indication to at least include water insects in the monitoring of Bt crops.

[img_assist|nid=107|title=|desc=|link=none|align=left|width=100|height=43]For the first time the EU Environmental Commissioner Dimas proposed to reject applications for the cultivation of GMOs. The crops in question are the two Bt maize events Bt11 (Syngenta) and 1507 maize (Pioneer HiBred/Dow).

[img_assist|nid=107|title=|desc=|link=none|align=left|width=100|height=43]After years of arguments the German government finally decided on changes on a number of regulations for GM crops. What's hailed as an improvement in fact makes matters worse and some of the pressing issues have still not been tackled. What made it to the main TV news was that GM maize now should be planted 150 m away from conventional maize, or 300 m from organic maize. Or less if the GM farmer makes an agreement with his neighbours.