<html><head></head><body><div class="ydpd07eeb0byahoo-style-wrap" style="font-family:garamond, new york, times, serif;font-size:16px;"><div dir="ltr" data-setdir="false"> <div><h2 style="margin:0in;vertical-align:baseline;"><span style="font-size:13.5pt;color:#407879;text-transform:uppercase;">FISHERIES</span></h2><h1 style="margin:0in;vertical-align:baseline;outline:0px;"><span style="font-size:22.5pt;color:black;">Court rejects FDA's OK of genetically engineered salmon</span></h1><p class="ydp98c07d11yiv9944289719MsoNormal"><span class="ydp98c07d11yiv9944289719authors"><span style="font-size: 9pt; border-color: windowtext; border-style: none; border-width: 1pt; padding: 0in;"><a href="https://www.eenews.net/staff/Michael_Doyle" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color:#555555;">Michael Doyle</span></a>, E&E News reporter</span></span>Published: Thursday, November 5, 2020</p><div class="ydp98c07d11img-preview-wrapper"><img style="width: 100%; max-width: 800px;" id="ydp98c07d11yiv9944289719Picture_x0020_1" src="cid:4KzWdsuJs2wZbb3M38c9" alt="Bioengineered Atlantic Salmon.  Photo credit: AquaBounty " class="ydp98c07d11preview" border="0"><span class="ydp98c07d11img-dl-btn"></span></div><p class="ydp98c07d11yiv9944289719caption" style="margin-right:3.75pt;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:3.75pt;vertical-align:baseline;"><span style="font-size: 9pt; color: rgb(102, 102, 102); border-color: windowtext; border-style: none; border-width: 1pt; padding: 0in;">AquaBounty
 Technologies Inc.'s bioengineered Atlantic salmon (above) grows twice 
as fast as its similarly aged conventional counterpart. </span><span class="ydp98c07d11yiv9944289719credit"><span style="font-size: 8.5pt; color: rgb(153, 153, 153); border-color: windowtext; border-style: none; border-width: 1pt; padding: 0in;">AquaBounty</span></span><span style="font-size:9.0pt;color:#666666;"></span></p><p style="margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:0in;vertical-align:baseline;outline:0px;"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;">A
 federal judge today cast back as inadequate a Food and Drug 
Administration review of the environmental consequences of unleashing 
genetically engineered salmon.</span></p><p style="margin:0in;vertical-align:baseline;outline:0px;"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;">In a closely watched case, a judge for the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California <a href="https://www.eenews.net/assets/2020/11/05/document_pm_02.pdf" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><b><span style="color:#990000;">ruled</span></b></a> that the FDA's action violated the National Environmental Policy Act and Endangered Species Act.</span></p><p style="margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:0in;vertical-align:baseline;outline:0px;"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;">The
 agency had concluded that the engineered salmon were highly unlikely to
 escape from the two facilities where a company planned to raise them 
and that even if the salmon escaped, they were unlikely to survive in 
the wild.</span></p><p style="margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:0in;vertical-align:baseline;outline:0px;"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;">"The
 FDA did not, however, meaningfully analyze what might happen to normal 
salmon in the event the engineered salmon did survive and establish 
themselves in the wild," Judge Vince Chhabria wrote. "Even if this 
scenario was unlikely, the FDA was still required to assess the 
consequences of it coming to pass."</span></p><p style="margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:0in;vertical-align:baseline;outline:0px;"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;">Chhabria,
 an Obama appointee, ordered the FDA to more thoroughly analyze the 
environmental consequences of an escape of genetically engineered salmon
 into the wild.</span></p><p style="margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:0in;vertical-align:baseline;outline:0px;"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;">"Today's
 decision is a vital victory for endangered salmon and our oceans," said
 George Kimbrell, Center for Food Safety legal director. "Genetically 
engineered animals create novel risks, and regulators must rigorously 
analyze them using sound science, not stick their head in the sand as 
officials did here."</span></p><p style="margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:0in;vertical-align:baseline;outline:0px;"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;">In
 2016, the Center for Food Safety and Earthjustice, representing a 
coalition of environmental, consumer and other interests, sued the FDA 
for approving the first-ever commercial genetically engineered animal, 
an Atlantic salmon engineered to grow fast.</span></p><p style="margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:0in;vertical-align:baseline;outline:0px;"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;">The
 genetically engineered salmon was produced by AquaBounty Technologies 
Inc. with DNA from Atlantic salmon, Pacific king salmon and Arctic Ocean
 eelpout.</span></p><p style="margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:0in;vertical-align:baseline;outline:0px;"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;">"Before
 starting the country down a road that could well lead to commercial 
production of genetically engineered fish on a large scale, the FDA 
should have developed a full understanding — and provided a full 
explanation — of the potential environmental consequences," Chhabria 
wrote.</span></p><p class="ydp98c07d11yiv9944289719MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt; border-color: windowtext; border-style: none; border-width: 1pt; padding: 0in;">Twitter: <a href="https://twitter.com/MichaelDoyle10" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><b><span style="color:#407879;">@MichaelDoyle10</span></b></a>Email: <a href="mailto:mdoyle@eenews.net" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><b><span style="color:#407879;">mdoyle@eenews.net</span></b></a></span></p></div><div><br></div></div></div></body></html>