Germany, Corn, Catangui, Monsanto... Mercenaries?

This is my black helicopter post for the week. Consider it just a reminder for the file cabinet rather than an official brief for the court.

Some Twitter-wandering informs me that Germany banned MON 810, Monsanto's genetically modified Bt corn, in April, 2009. As I understand it, this is the same corn that Dr. Mike Catangui's research connects with pest replacement, specifically the recent spread of western bean cutworm and corn leaf aphids. Dr. Catangui was fired this year by SDSU, which is run by a Monsanto executive board member, for using his research as the basis for his advice to farmers.

The German ban has caught heck from various boards and researchers. Germany's own Central Commission for Biological Safety said the Germany's MON 810 ban is not scientifically grounded. Three French researchers published a pretty hefty meta-study in 2009 coming to the same conclusion. But I see no mention of Catangui's research in either of those critiques.

Would Monsanto squelch research that demonstrates negative impacts from its products? Would they go so far as to persuade a university to violate academic freedom to do so?

Well, remember: we're talking about Monsanto, a corporation that hires Blackwater/Xe to spy on activists who oppose its GM products. Monsanto enlisted operatives from the mercenary company to infiltrate activist groups for the purpose of "protecting the Monsanto name."

I'll keep looking for puzzle pieces....

Catangui Firing Threatens Academic Freedom, May Earn Censure for All SD Universities

The SDSU Collegian reports that the university's possibly improper firing of tenured professor and Extension Service entomologist Mike Catangui could have repercussions for the entire South Dakota public university system:

Political science professor Delmer Lonowski, SDSU's AAUP representative said the AAUP is waiting for the grievance process to conclude before deciding whether or not to investigate a possible censure.

However, [SDSU labor union COHE president Bill] Adamson said an investigation is very likely.

"If you read between the lines, the AAUP will probably conduct an investigation," he said. "They won't censure just SDSU. They'll censure all the universities in the entire BOR system" [Emma DeJong, "Faculty Reviews Dismissal," SDSU Collegian, 2010.09.15].

According to DeJong, Catangui is asking the Board of Regents to review SDSU's decision to dismiss him. So if the Board of Regents gets it wrong, the AAUP could well drop the hammer on the whole system.

Upholding SDSU's decision looks more and more like the wrong decision. DeJong reports that the university is confirming that Catangui's research was part of the reason for his firing:

SDSU officials have declined to comment about personnel matters, but Rich Helsper, SDSU's attorney, made a general statement that SDSU "follows the COHE agreement to the letter," and "every faculty member is afforded all due process rights, not only under general law, but under the COHE agreement."

The BOR fired Catangui June 21 for reasons that have not been completely made public. Helsper confirmed that part of the reason for Catangui's termination is that he followed his own research, instead of a mandated requirement, in deciding when to spray for the removal of soybean aphids.

"Really it's becoming a public issue at this point because there is a serious threat that the university is going to get a censure from AAUP," said Bill Adamson, president of the SDSU chapter of COHE [DeJong, 2010.09.15].

Yikes. A professor gets fired for following the results of his research. That's a textbook definition of violation of academic freedom.

DeJong reports that Catangui had an opportunity to address the SDSU Acaademic Senate at its regular meeting yesterday. No word yet on the outcome of that meeting. The professors' governing body is waiting until its September 28 to make a decision as to what if anything it will do concerning Catangui's dismissal. The profs are waiting to act because they think there's more to this case than the university is letting on... and they're saying it publicly:

Senators Sandy Smart, animal and range sciences associate professor, and Patty Hacker, a health, physical education and recreations professor, said they think there is information that they likely won't be able to know.

"There's something darker under the surface," Smart said. "Somebody's out to get somebody." Hacker agreed.

"There is a distinct possibility that there is something under the surface we will never be privy to because it's a personnel issue," Patty Hacker said. "…I would hesitate to push something forward for immediacy knowing what the ramifications are going to be down the road" [DeJong, 2010.09.15].

Somebody's out to get somebody—that's a pretty serious statement to put on the record. But one can perhaps understand strong feelings from professors who look at a colleague's dismissal and see no reason given other than a pretty clear statement that speaking and acting on the basis of freely and fairly conducted research can get you fired.

What is the deep dark something under the surface? Is it manipulation or suppression of research unfavorable to Monsanto, whose executive board member David Chicoine also serves as SDSU president? Is it something else? Is there some other ethical, financial, oor political issue afoot?

Lest our state's entire university system suffer AAUP sanction, SDSU and the Board of Regents had better lay out the full story and either make clear they have done the right thing or quickly rectify any errors they have made.

SDSU Charging Catangui $908 for Hearing Transcript

The American Association of University Professors remains concerned over what they see as South Dakota State University's denial of full due process to fired entomology professor Mike Cantangui. In a September 10 letter to SDSU president David Chicoine, the AAUP notes that SDSU has asked Dr. Catangui to pay $908 to obtain a copy of the transcript of his hearing before the faculty members empaneled by the university to address Catangui's termination.

$908. For a transcript. Uff da!

Now I know documents like this can get hefty. I have a good ream-and-a-half worth of paper recording my own eight hours of fun and excitement with the Madison school board a few years back. But transcripts do come in electronic form nowadays. Providing Dr. Catangui with his hearing transcript probably requires 15 seconds of mouseclicks and keystrokes (new e-mail, address, attach, send). That's $60 a second.

The AAUP recommends standards and regulations for faculty dismissals, including a recommendation that transcripts of formal dismissal hearings be made available to dismissed faculty without cost. Charging a fired employee $908 for the single most important document that employee needs to pursue any further due process is unnecessary and unfair.
-----------------------
On the good side, the university does appear to have acquiesced in restoring Catangui's salary through August, to the point where he actually received something resembling due process. It's too bad SDSU seems inlcined to use the transcript charge to nickel-and-C-note Catangui to claw back some of that money.

Catangui Research Shows Monsanto Corn Helps Spread Pests

South Dakota State University's firing of entomologist Mike Catangui has struck me as odd from the beginning. The Extension Service advocates a regional standard for spraying soybeans for aphids. Dr. Catangui declines to advocate that standard, pointing to his research that suggests South Dakota farmers should follow a different standard. SDSU and the Board of Regents decline to continue Dr. Catangui's employment.

Monsanto executive board member and SDSU president David Chicoine has provided no explanation for Catangui's firing or for the university's apparent violation of due process that could get the university in hot water again with the American Association of University Professors.

A professor is fired for expressing views based on his peer-reviewed, published research. It just doesn't add up. That's why I've kept wondering if this case is revealing the fruits of Monsanto's corporate control over our land-grant university. Is there some way in which Catangui's research could be damaging to Monsanto?

Stop right there. I rail against other conspiracy theorists for seeing plots and cabals (and liberal media monsters) where there are none. But we all see what we want. I may be looking for a grand design where there is none. Cantangui's dismissal could well be just what the university said it was: "performance deficiencies" and insubordination. For all we know, Catangui may have mooned the boss.

So let me be clear: I have no documents to prove that Monsanto ordered Catangui's dismissal. I only have some casual Googling and reading well out of my field that establish that Catangui's research includes some findings relevant to a Monsanto product. I have pieces, but no finished puzzle... and not even evidence that there is a puzzle to finish.

But there are pieces. It's a lot of science, so I'll boil it down and then provide you with the bibliography.

Dr. Catangui has done research on the spread of western bean cutworm. This pest used to be no big deal. But since the introduction and widespread planting of Monsanto's genetically engineered Bt corn, western bean cutworm has been cropping up in higher numbers and in new places. Bt corn also appears to be an inviting home for corn leaf aphids. The western bean cutworms and corn leaf aphids appear to be benefiting from pest replacement: the toxins in Bt corn wipe out targeted competitor species, allowing previously minor pests to pig out and flourish. Monsanto and other corporations then trap farmers on a treadmill of new pesticides and seeds engineered to tackle the new pests... and all the while we dine on a revolving smorgasbord of tasty toxins.

Now Catangui isn't the only guy saying these things, so one could argue that Monsanto wouldn't benefit by targeting one professor in South Dakota. But Monsanto does have a history of going after small operators, and corporations do profit by maximizing every marginal percentage. When Monsanto wants 100% control and zero competition, even one less set of critical scientific eyes on their products may be worth the effort. And hey, you don't buy control of a major land-grant university for nothing.
-----------------------------------------
Read more:

• Catangui, M.A., and Berg, R.K. (2006). "Western Bean Cutworm, Striacosta albicosta (Smith (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae), as a Potential Pest of Transgenic Cry1Ab Bacillus thuringiensis Corn Hybrids in South Dakota," Environmental Entomology, 35(5): 1439–1452.
• Collins, S. (2003 Aug 3). "Bt Doesn't Control Me," Corn & Soybean Digest.
• Faria, C.A., Wäckers, F.L., Pritchard, J., Barrett, D.A., Turlings, T.C. (2007) "High Susceptibility of Bt Maize to Aphids Enhances the Performance of Parasitoids of Lepidopteran Pests," PLoS ONE, 2(7): e600. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0000600
• Schafer, S. (2010 Mar 27). "Insect Outlook," Farm Journal:AgWeb.
• SDSU (2008 Jul 21). "Corn Producers Now Should Scout for Leaf Aphids," Plant Management Network: Plant Health Progress.
• Then, C. (2010 Mar). "New Plant Pest Caused by Genetically Engineered Corn," TestBiotech report.
• Tonneson, L. (2009 Feb). "Corn Leaf Aphids Threaten Corn," DakotaFarmer.com.

Chicoine Cold-Shoulders AAUP on Cantangui

The American Association of University Professors remains unsatisfied with Monsanto executive board member and SDSU President David Chicoine's response to their concerns about the firing of entomologist Mike Catangui.

Actually, AAUP is saying, what response? In an August 24 letter to President Chicoine, the AAUP says they are still waiting for a response from Chicoine to their July 8 letter protesting the apparent lack of due process in Catangui's dismissal. They acknowledge that the university subsequently granted Catangui a closed-door August 9 hearing before a faculty committee. However, according to AAUP's letter, the Board of Regents officially terminated Catangui's employment August 14, well before the anticipated release of the faculty committee's report on August 30.

AAUP isn't fighting now for Catangui to remain at SDSU; they're simply saying that if you're going to fire a professor, you've still got to accord him due process. Their position: Catangui should remain on staff and receive salary at least until the formal hearing process has concluded and the faculty committee has issued its report.

Whether Chicoine deigns to offer AAUP the courtesy of a response remains to be seen.
--------------------------
Archive update 2010.09.01: see also coverage in the Brookings Register. Getting fired twice in one summer—that just stinks!

Catangui Dismissal Raises Academic Freedom Questions

I continue to read up on the science and politics surrounding the contested dismissal of entomologist Dr. Mike Catangui from South Dakota State University.

Catangui's predecessor at the Cooperative Extension Service, Professor Emeritus Ben Kantack, says SDSU gave Catangui the boot for refusing to advocate soybean-aphid-spraying guidelines from other states for South Dakota. Catangui's research indicates that following different spraying guidelines in South Dakota will increase South Dakota farmers' yields and income.

Kantack says Catangui's dismissal violates academic freedom. Readers may wish to review the statement on academic freedom in the collective bargaining agreement our profs sign:

The parties to this agreement recognize and accept the importance of academic freedom to teaching and learning. Academic freedom includes the right to study, discuss, investigate, teach and publish. Academic freedom applies to both teaching and research. Freedom in research is fundamental to the advancement of truth. Academic freedom in its teaching aspect is fundamental for the protection of the rights of the teacher in teaching and of students to freedom in learning. It includes the freedom to perform one's professional duties and to present differing and sometimes controversial points of view, free from reprisal. The faculty unit member is entitled to freedom in research and in the publication of the results, subject to the performing of other assigned academic duties [2008-2011 South Dakota University Faculty Collective Bargaining Agreement, 14.1.1].

This academic freedom statement makes it pretty clear that SDSU can't fire a professor for publishing and discussing the results of his or her research. But I wonder: does work in the field for the Extension Service fall under "other assigned academic duties"? Is there some clause that excludes those public outreach activities from the academic freedom clause?

Worth noting: SDSU Extension entomologist Kelley Tilmon quite firmly advocates the 250-threshold and regional aphid guidelines in this July 27 Extension Service article. Tilmon and Catangui have disagreed on aphid recommendations previously and publicly. Catangui has recommended treatment at one to five aphids per plant, a threshold challenged by other researchers. Some questions about Cantangui's research center on caging soybeans, which prevents beneficial insects from helping control aphids. But cage studies are used regularly in entomology, and subsequent field research seems to show better yields under the lower aphid thresholds.

Scientists have honest disagreements. They deal with complicated questions like when to spray soybeans for aphids—at least it seems complicated to me, what with a range of variables like soybean growth stage, yield potential, spraying cost, soybean market value to consider. They come up with different answers. That's why we have academic freedom: to protect professors' right to challenge the prevailing wisdom when their research (not to mention their conscience) says a challenge is warranted.

(Hmm... Dr. Blanchard, care to offer a turn on this topic on climate change?)

Meanwhile, outside the halls of academia, what are you farmers up to? Are you spraying for aphids? Do you follow the Extension guidelines? Are they working in South Dakota?

SDSU Cans Catangui for Defending SD-Specific Science?

Professor of Plant Science and Extension Entomologist Mike Catangui has been dismissed by South Dakota State University. South Dakota farmers and gardeners may recognize Dr. Catangui as a regular panelist on Garden Line on SDPB.

Professor Catangui's dismissal may have an interesting states-rights twist. Catangui has done research on aphids and soybeans and finds that the regional recommendations made for spraying soybeans with insecticides to get rid of aphids don't work in South Dakota's climate. Dr. Benjamin Kantack, SDSU professor emeritus of plant and bug science, apparently agrees. Kantack is telling the press that Catangui's firing is a result of his resistance to those regional recommendations.

"He was told he would accept the recommendations from these other states, which do not fit South Dakota weather conditions or growing conditions and so forth, which his own research showed do not fit," said Kantack, a professor emeritus and retired Extension entomologist at SDSU. "He was told if he didn't accept them he would not keep his job.

"He has defended the ag interests of South Dakota and saved them a lot of money over the years. He's being discharged, in my opinion, unjustly" [Wayne Ortman, "SDSU Dismissal of Longtime Extension Insect Specialist under Fire," AP via Rapid City Journal, 2010.07.27].

I'm not up on my aphid science, and I'll appreciate any enlightenment my farm neighbors can offer. But I am curious as to whether there is some Monsanto angle to this story, since SDSU is run by a highly paid member of Monsanto's executive board. Monsanto does cite in its aphid-management literature the 250 aphid-soybean threshold that Catangui and Kantack appear to challenge, but Monsanto take its info cue from extension services in neighboring states. If anything, Catangui's science seems to recommend more aggressive use of pesticides against South Dakota aphids, something Monsanto shouldn't mind. If Kantack is correct, Catangui's dismissal appears to be politics within the Extension Service trumping science that makes sense for South Dakota's unique growing conditions.

Everyone else from Catangui to the SDSU president is keeping mum, since this is a personnel matter and legal wheels are a-turning. As a teacher who's been there, I do appreciate Professor Kantack's willingness to speak out on behalf of a colleague he feels is being mistreated. I hope Catangui can come out with a fair resolution of the situation and continue his research on behalf of South Dakota's farmers.