In the May 23 Advertiser article "UH seeds still GMO tainted," Stephanie Whalen of the Hawai'i Agricultural Research Center has raised points that are worthy of discussion within the agricultural community and the Collage of Tropical Agriculture.

The article reported on a continuing GMO study conducted by Hawai'i SEED, a coalition of grass-roots groups throughout the Hawaiian Islands. They had tested UH's papaya seed varieties at Genetic ID in Fairfield, Iowa, and found two varieties, the Solo Sunset and the Solo Sunrise, were free of GMO seed in the 10,000-seed sample.

But the Solo Waimanalo had a contamination of "greater than 0.01 percent and less than 0.1 percent," indicating that there were "between one and 10 GMO seeds in the Solo Waimanalo 10,000-seed sample." (The report is available at www.gmofreehawaii.org.)

Farmers and home gardeners may not be aware of the "industry-accepted standards" for seed that Ms. Whalen refers to, which do not "guarantee" genetic purity of seed. When farmers or gardeners purchase non-GMO papaya seed from the University of Hawai'i, I believe most of them would assume that there are no GMO seeds in the packet. Between one and 10 in 10,000 that the study quotes is not acceptable "industry standards," in my opinion.

If the industry has standards, it should inform the public of the percentage of GMO seeds per packet. Let the farmers and gardeners decide for themselves. Can UH legally sell GMO seed without a signed contractual agreement with the buyer?

Ms. Whalen states that "organic growers have been told how to produce their own seed" and that this is "a very inexpensive and reliable method for the farmer." The protocol she is suggesting would first require a genetic test of the tree and then bagging the unopened flower of a non-GMO hermaphrodite.

At a farmer/gardener workshop in Puna recently, few of the 50 folks in attendance understood that process and all wondered where they could obtain a genetic test kit.

It should also be acknowledged that backyard gardeners all over Hawai'i also grow papaya for their families, not just organic farmers.

Her suggestion of a "third-party lab to do testing" is interesting. The University of Hawai'i could possibly then use the data to begin to chart GMO contamination and seed movement in geographical areas, which at present is unknown. Or could farmers and gardeners then be liable for unknowingly growing UH's patented genes? Testing is a short-term solution but not the answer to genetic pollution in the environment.

Hawai'i Seed and Greenpeace joined together in Puna the other day to make a point. GMO pollens can and do cross with non-GMO varieties. No amount of regulation can control pollens and seed movement within a local ecosystem; it's just not possible. Some folks just don't want genes from the Sun-Up or the Rainbow papayas crossing with the wonderful varieties they grow.

Some of the unwanted genes include three antibiotic-resistant markers, neomycin, tetracycline and gentamycin. Antibiotics should be used to treat disease, not to be eaten daily.

It is time for the University of Hawai'i to consider its responsibility to the public in spreading unwanted genetic material throughout the Hawaiian Islands. What did it think would happen? It must have discussed this possibility.

So, what can UH do now? First, it could provide a simple GUS test kit for anyone who is interested in the genetic ID of his papaya tree. It could begin to consider the consequences of genetically engineered agricultural crops interacting with the Hawaiian ecosystem, agriculture, human health and the culture and life of the community. It could instead take up the real work of creating a new ecologically sustainable agriculture for the future that our keiki will need.

Our Islands are fragile, precious, unique, pristine and isolated. It is important to be prudent and act on the conservative side as to introduction of new, potentially invasive species. We do this for the generations that are to follow.

Nancy Redfeather is a Kona resident. She wrote this commentary for The Advertiser.