Spencer Aitel grows corn, grains and alfalfa on his 275-acre organic farm in China. He stakes his reputation, and his family's livelihood, on the fact that his crops are free of pesticides and added ingredients.

Galen Larrabee also grows corn, about 400 acres worth, on his farm in Knox. He uses a genetically engineered variety of the grain that he says has increased yields.

The two farmers soon may find themselves on opposite sides of a growing agricultural divide in the state over the use of genetically modified foods. It's a debate that appears headed to the Legislature.

Organic farmers like Aitel fear operations such as Larrabee's could ruin them economically if, for example, a genetically modified corn crop pollinates an organic one, a process known as genetic drift.

Such contamination typically occurs by wind, on workers' clothing or through use of shared farm equipment.

"The technology is not easily controlled," Aitel said, "so it has a lot of potential for spreading to adjacent farmers and that makes it difficult for us."

Logan Perkins, campaign coordinator for Food for Maine's Future, a statewide coalition that opposes genetic engineering, said farmers who grow genetically modified crops could face lawsuits from their organic neighbors if genetic drift occurs.

Food for Maine's Future has submitted a bill for legislative consideration titled an Act to Insure the Long-term Liability of Traditional Farming in Maine, Perkins said. The bill addresses the issues of liability and pollen drift.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has not found and does not believe that the new plant varieties under development for food pose any safety concerns. Major agribusinesses have been genetically altering food crops to develop desirable traits. Soybeans are modified to be herbicide-tolerant, for example; tomatoes are made more resistant to rot.

But the USDA acknowledged that as the number of field tests for bioengineered plants increased, so did the likelihood of cross-pollination. This could result in the presence of bioengineered material in traditional crops from new plant varieties that have not been evaluated by FDA.

It already has occurred in Maine.

LIABILITY AN ISSUE

John Jemison, a Cooperative Extension professor at the University of Maine, said farmers in this state cannot be sure that the canola seeds they purchased to grow are free of engineered traits.

He said tests conducted last year on research crops in Maine and Vermont indicated that conventional crops and seeds contained genetically modified DNA even though they were separated from genetically engineered crops.

Jemison's findings mirror a 2004 Union of Concerned Scientists study that found genetically modified DNA is contaminating three major U.S. crops -- corn, soybeans and canola.

"We found contamination, or genetic resistance to herbicides, in five out of the six (genetic) lines," Jemison said, a condition not caused by current-season drift from genetically modified crops.

The clash between genetically modified and organic foods takes place at a time of increasing interest for both segments of Maine agriculture.

Maine's organic industry earns more than $10 million annually and is the state's fastest-growing agricultural segment, according to the Maine Organic Farmers and Growers Association.

While Maine has yet to see any lawsuits, Jemison said, it's inevitable liability issues will arise.

"The number of acreage (genetically modified) crops use is increasing in the state," Jemison said. "I do programs at the trades shows -- and every year I ask farmers how many of them are growing modified corn, and every year more hands go up."

The top three genetically modified crops in Maine are corn, canola seed and soybeans, he said.

Lauchlin Titus, a certified professional agronomist who works with farmers to provide them with technical advice and information regarding crops, said there are 26,000 acres of corn being grown in the state, and only about 1,000 acres of that is organic corn.

"Of the conventional corn grown, the amount using herbicide-tolerant technology is probably about 40 percent," Titus said. "Any of these genetically engineered traits (in the corn) lowers the cost per acre, it lowers the environmental impact of leachable herbicides and it provides enhanced weed control, which should provide optimal yields."

CAN FARMERS CO-EXIST?

Maine Department of Agriculture Deputy Commissioner Ned Porter said genetic engineering is a technology that has been around for decades. And that it has become an important tool for different segments of agriculture.

Although the state doesn't have specific information on the sale of genetically modified crops, Porter said Maine crops as a whole -- conventional, organic and genetically modified -- sold commercially this year for $500 million.

"And we want to make sure they have options and are free to choose the tools and technology that suits their operation in a manner that allows for coexistence," Porter said.

But organic farmers are not certain coexistence can happen when contamination to their crops is an issue.

Sharon Tisher, chairwoman of the Maine Organic Farmers and Growers Association's public policy committee, said that no level of contamination is appropriate for organic farmers or organic consumers.

Everyone recognizes the potential for conflict from cross-contamination and that the federal government is pushing a policy of coexistence, MOFGA Executive Director Russell Libby said.

Essentially, that means if your neighbor wants to plant genetically modified crops, it's up to you and he or she to find a solution, he said.

Still, "If your goal as an organic farmer is to have uncontaminated seed to plant next year, coexistence might mean nonexistence," Libby, of Mount Vernon, said.

Mechele Cooper -- 623-3811, Ext. 408

mcooper@centralmaine.com