Destruction of public and governmental experiments of GMO in Europe

Marcel Kuntz* Laboratory Physiologie Cellulaire Végétale (CEA / CNRS / INRA / Université Joseph Fourier, Grenoble) 17 rue des Martyrs F-38054 Grenoble cedex 9 - France *the author is Director of Research at CNRS but is not the spokesman of the institutions for which he works

Conflict of interest: the author declares no financial conflict of interest. Being a scientist from a public institution, the author has an obvious interest in freedom of research.

Running title : GMO destruction

Introduction

Field trial vandalism was sporadic before the end of the 90s but became a phenomenon with important consequences at the end of this decade. Strategically planned GMO field trial destruction in Europe was initiated June 7th 1997 at Saint Georges d’Espéranches (Isère, France), where a group of radical farmers’ Union and “Green” activists cut down an experimental rapeseed trial belonging to Monsanto. However, GMO destruction has not been limited to trials implemented by private companies, nor to outdoor experiments. To the best of my knowledge, no official compilation of destructions of GMO trials from academic or governmental research institutes in Europe is available. The purpose of this article is to list them in a factual manner and to highlight their main characteristics. About 80 acts of vandalism against academic or governmental research on GMOs are identified, mainly for 4 countries, namely Germany, France, the and Switzerland, and examples are also provided for Italy and Belgium. The general conclusions that can be drawn from these acts are also discussed.

Academic and governmental research on GMOs has been the target of numerous acts of vandalism in Europe: An overview

France

Field trials of two teams from the Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), implemented at Gaudiès (Ariège) were destroyed on 2nd June 1999 and on 13th April 2000. These field trials were intended to estimate the possibility of outcrossing between rapeseed and related wild species. CIRAD (Centre for international cooperation in agronomic research and development) was attacked on 5th June 1999: a group led by the anti-globalization activist José Bové penetrated a glasshouse in Montpellier and destroyed cultures of rice and also computers. Posters stating « Let’s unmask the researchers. Let’s empty laboratories » were displayed (Figure 1). A group calling itself “Researchers in the night” proceeded, in the night of 25th-26th June 2000, to destroy experiments of diverse transgenic plants (tomatoes, bananas, tobacco, arabidopsis) in a glasshouse of INRA near Toulouse. CIRAD’s only experimental culture of GM coffee, planted at Sinnamary (French Guyana), was destroyed on 30th August 2004. This trial had the objective to study the resistance to a leaf borer parasite and also the possible impacts on the environment of these plants. Guyana had been chosen because of the absence of surrounding cultures of coffee trees. During the weekend of 5th September 2009, a field trial of GM grapevine, intended to fight against the grapevine fanleaf virus, was plundered by an individual at the INRA centre of Colmar (Alsace), despite an on-going process of dialogue with stakeholders (including environmental organisations), which was meant to « co-construct » this experiment.1 The same trial was implemented again in Colmar, but on Sunday 15th August, 2010, 62 persons, after having cut the fence, entered the experimental plot and tore away the 70 vines. The damage was estimated at € 1,200,000.2 It should be noted that the trial involved an obsolete virus-resistant technology and had no commercial purposes. It was considered (even by some GMO opponents) as a « confined outdoor » experiment since several measures rendered transgene dissemination impossible (e.g., only stocks were transgenic, flowers were cut, etc.). One can add to this list of destroyed public interest research: -The GEVES (a joint centre for studies and controls of plant varieties and seeds), a public interest organisation: In the evening of 22nd July 2003, in Guyancourt (Yvelines, near Paris), an anti-GMO group plundered a plot of land intended to check transgenic corn varieties. Similar acts were perpetrated on 16th July 2001 on a maize plot. -Two field trials run by Arvalis (an applied research organism financed and managed by producers) in collaboration with State Offices, INRA, CETIOM and environmentalist organisations, within the frame of the “Biovigilance Committee” implemented by the Ministries of Agriculture and of Environment: 6,000 m2 of GM maize were destroyed on the night of 3-4 October 2004 by unknown perpetrators near Dijon.

Germany

On the night of the 21st-22nd March 2002, unknown persons destroyed test fields sown with GM rapeseed in Dahnsdorf (Brandenburg). Several trials of the Kleinmachnow Federal agency for Biology have been affected, some of which were part of the safety research programme.3 On the night of 23rd June 2003, a trial field of the Department of Plant Breeding of the Technische Universität München (TUM), planted with GM potatoes on the Roggenstein estate near Munich was destroyed. The field was to be used to propagate potatoes with a higher carotenoid content as part of a project funded by the Federal Ministry of Research (BMBF).4 In the early hours of 22nd June 2004, unknown perpetrators destroyed completely a trial field of GM potatoes. The Max Planck Institute for Molecular Plant Physiology in Golm near Potsdam had been conducting basic trials of starch formation in potatoes.5 In June 2006, activists partially destroyed a field trial (10 m2) with genetically modified barley being conducted by the University of Giessen as part of safety research. Two days later, a trial field of GM maize was destroyed in Nürtingen (Baden-Württemberg). Nürtingen-Geislingen University (HfWU) was conducting a field trial in collaboration with the Bundessortenamt (Federal Office of Plant Varieties) on a one-hectare plot.6 In July 2006, opponents of genetic engineering destroyed parts of a trial field of GM maize near Forchheim (Karlsruhe district). The site, which includes a plot of GM maize measuring about three hectares, was part of the coexistence research programme of the Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Consumer Protection (BMELV).7 Several Bt maize fields had already been destroyed earlier in the year, including cultivar trials being conducted by the Federal Office of Plant Varieties in Dachwig (Thüringen) and Ladenburg (Baden- Württemberg) and trial fields that were part of biosafety research. On the night of 12th June 2007, unknown perpetrators forced their way onto the trial field and systematically destroyed some of the barley plants belonging to the University of Giessen. They had been planted on the research station site belonging to the Institute for Phytopathology and Applied Zoology at the end of April. They had been produced from two barley lines developed in the USA, one of which contains an active chitinase gene from a soil fungus. Chitinases break down chitin, which is also a component of fungal cell walls. The second line contains a gene from a soil bacterium producing glucanase. The gene was transferred to barley to improve its brewing properties and to make it more easily digestible as animal feed. However, glucanase also has fungus-resistant properties. Trial fields belonging to the University of Giessen had already been destroyed at the end of May 2007. In these fields the Institute for Plant Breeding was conducting value tests on behalf of the Federal Office of Plant Varieties with numerous maize varieties, including varieties of GM maize MON810.8 In a repeat of the previous year’s events, parts of a trial field with GM maize in Forchheim (Baden- Württemberg) were once again destroyed. The field was part of the coexistence research programme funded by the BMELV, which is investigating practical questions of coexistence between GM and conventional maize farming. During the night of Friday 22nd June 2007, anti-biotechnology activists forced their way into the field and trampled some of the maize plants.9 On 21st April 2008, in Gatersleben, radical opponents of genetic engineering destroyed a GM wheat field trial from the Leibniz Institute for Crop Research (IPK). This experimentation was planned to test various approaches to increase the protein content of wheat grains and to improve the feed quality. On 23rd – 24th June 2008, in Mariensee (Niedersachsen): Destruction of a field trial of the Julius Kühn Institute (JKI) devoted to coexistence studies. Unknown offenders with hand scythes destroyed the entire trial (2 hectares), so that is no longer possible to perform the test. The damage was estimated at 20,000 - 30,000 Euro. On 4th July 2008, in Rheinstetten (Baden Württemberg), unknown perpetrators destroyed a fenced trial of the Landwirtschaftlichen Technologiezentrums Augustenberg (Agricultural Technology Centre). The official coexistence experiment should have provided new data on outcrossing behaviour. Conventional maize plants on an area of 1,600 m² were trampled or cut down. The damage was estimated at 30,500 Euro. Also to be noted in 2008: -Seven fields were occupied that year (4 planned for academic research). -31st March – 10th April 2008, in Gießen (Hessen): A GM barley field trial at the University of Giessen, occupied in 2006 and 2007, was set free. There was property damage to fences and implements, verbal attacks against members of the Institute and destruction of bee-hives. -Early April 2008, GM opponents occupied a trial field at HfWU. The Nürtingen-Geislingen university management bowed to pressure from the protest groups and announced that all trials of GM plants would be stopped for the next five years. The HfWU had been studying GM plants since 1996, and agronomists have had to contend with the partial destruction of their research projects almost every year since.10 -As in 2007, in 2008 GM opponents bound objects (metal bars and bottles filled with concrete and metal parts) to maize plants to prevent their harvest. In two incidents of this kind, extensive damage was caused to a combine harvester. On 1st June 2009, 270 apple trees on a trial site owned by the Institute for Breeding Research on Horticultural and Fruit Crops of the JKI in Dresden-Pillnitz were destroyed by unknown intruders. Most of the trees were GM plants being grown in tubs in a special safety tent under field-like conditions. It is the first time in Germany that protesters have destroyed plants that were not being grown in a field.11 On 17th May 2009, in Groß Lüsewitz (Mecklenburg-Vorpommern), opponents destroyed large field trials with GM plants on the experimental site of the AgroBioTechnikum. These are apparently the same activists who occupied the experimental plots in April. This field trial concerned biosecurity research on GM potatoes, barley and wheat. On 2nd July 2009, in Groß Lüsewitz (Mecklenburg-Vorpommern), unknown perpetrators attacked officially approved field trials of the Biovativ GmbH in Groß Lüsewitz. By spraying an unknown liquid, they partially destroyed a GM barley experiment and fully destroyed GM potato and GM wheat experiments. A security guard was injured in the attack. Also to be noted in 2009: -Four fields were occupied (one planned for academic research). -GM opponents sent threat mails to leading scientists with defamatory content. -GM opponents hindered the sowing of improved Amflora potatoes in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern by catapulting organic potatoes onto the field. -GM opponents beat and injured a security guard in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern during his attempt to discourage them to proceed to further destruction. To be noted in 2010: -The number of field destructions has dropped in Germany in 2010 and no public GM trial was affected. This is explained by the fact that i) many companies as well as public institutions have reduced or even stopped their projects (voluntarily or because of political pressure), ii) when carried through, the trials were guarded with an extremely high cost input. The number of GM field trials (public and private) decreased to 25, compared to 80 trials performed in 2007. -For the first time in Germany a GMO opponent was sentenced to jail for field destruction (a barley trial of the University of Gießen in 2006). During the night of 8th-9th July 2011, at Gross Lüsewitz, near Rostock, on a Biovativ site, a company implementing field trials, half a dozen masked activists armed with bats forced their way into the field and brutally overpowered the guard. The destroyed potatoes produced cyanophicin, a raw material for plastic manufacture. The destroyed wheat was developed by the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETHZ) in Zurich and is resistant to certain fungal diseases. Part of the destroyed trials belonged to a joint project involving SMEs and universities and were funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF).12 During the night of 10th July 2011, during a similar attack, a dozen masked and armed activists destroyed potato and wheat field plots at an exhibition garden founded by the Government and companies, at the Biotechfarm in Üplingen (Saxe-Anhalt).

United Kingdom

Among other destructions, on 7th July 2007, a field trial of the National Institute for Agriculture and Botany concerning GM potatoes developed by BASF to resist a fungus called late potato blight (estimated to cost the global industry £3bn/year) was destroyed in Cambridgeshire. On 5th June 2008, a field trial of the Centre for Plant Sciences, University of Leeds, concerning potatoes developed to control nematodes (a pest that costs British farmers around £65 million a year) was destroyed. The farm-scale evaluations (FSE) involved 256 plantings of GM crops in after January 2000, in addition to the first three sites planted in the autumn of 1999.13 During the 2000-2005 period, 41 plantings were vandalised and, of these, just eight were terminated while 33 continued. The list of vandalised sites is presented in Table 1.

Switzerland

During the night of 23rd- 24th June 2010, at Pully, an experimental transgenic wheat field underwent an act of sabotage (herbicide spraying). Furthermore, a renowned plant scientist, on the night of 28th- 29th June 2010 suffered damage to possessions at his private residence near Zurich, an act of vandalism claimed by an anti-GMO group who declared itself « inspired by the Pully sabotage ». These acts followed attacks in previous years against transgenic wheat fields, on 13th June 2008 at the Federal Station for Agronomic Research (Agroscope Reckenholz-Tänikon), and on 23rd June 2009 at the Federal Station for Agronomic Research (Agroscope Pully-Candaux near Lausanne).15

Destruction in other countries

It is beyond the scope of this review to list all acts of vandalism perpetrated in all EU countries. In some countries, few (or no) destructions occurred simply because few (or no) trials were implemented. This is the case for Italy, for example, where no new outdoor trials were approved since 2002. Nevertheless, on 7th April 2009, a research station located at Cà Tron di Roncade, near Treviso, was attacked by a group of around fifty masked people. They wrote slogans on some greenhouse windows and smashed others, and placed minor explosives in the adjacent electrical boxes.16 This Italian Biosafety Outstation of the International Centre for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology (ICGEB; http://www.icgeb.org/) was set up to study potential risks concerning GM crops and plant pathogens of importance to the developing world. It opened in 2003 with the financial support of a private foundation and involved academic researchers from several countries. The Station recently closed, officially because of financial difficulties of the funding organism.17

In Belgium, at Wetteren, on Sunday 29th May 2011, a movement calling themself Belgian Field Liberation Movement, helped by French activists, damaged an experimental field of GM potato resistant to late blight (caused by Phytophthora infestans) and implemented by a consortium consisting of the University of Gent, ILVO, VIB (Flemish Institute for Biotechnology) and the University College of Gent.18 Consortium scientists had attempted to dialogue with the activists on their 7th of May ‘gene spotting’ activity. A broad group of scientists then organized themselves, using the motto « Save Our Science » in an attempt to call upon the protection of this field research. On the 29th May about 300 people gathered to protect the field trial site, while about 350 people joined the Belgian Field Liberation Movement meeting. A police force of 86 people was present. It was agreed with the activists that about 30 people would try to destroy the trial, but be non-violent and would offer no resistance to arrest. But after the arrest of some individuals, almost all others went onto the premises of the trial. A number of police officers got wounded in the subsequent violence. Finally, 18 people succeeded to get through the fences, of which 7 were able to reach the potatoes and destroy 15% of the trial.

What are the lessons?

In this article, about 80 acts of vandalism against academic or governmental research on GMOs are presented, mainly involving 4 countries, namely Germany, France, the United Kingdom and Switzerland, but also Belgium and Italy. This is a vast under representation of the total number of GMO field destructions that have taken place across the EU since destructions of trials implemented by private companies are not listed here. Germany alone has had more than 100 acts of vandalism.19 The vast majority of destroyed academic or governmental experiments were field evaluations designed to assess the safety of GMOs. Although GMO opponents often use an anti-corporate stance, as this article demonstrates all GMO research is obviously targeted, including experiments dedicated to risk assessment. Therefore, one has to conclude that GMO opponents want to stop research itself (see Figure 1), whatever its aim. It can be noted that in Germany for example these acts were mainly perpetrated by unknown persons, often during the night, while in France, in most cases, responsibility was openly claimed in front of the press which was convened. Destructions are not limited to field experiments since in some instances vandalism of confined experiments occurred. It seems possible that outdoor experiments are more frequently hit simply because they attract more attention since their location is specifically published each year. Thus, this openness (imposed by law) has not been accompanied by any measures from the political authorities to prevent acts of vandalism that are facilitated by this openness. Data obtained in Switzerland indicate that for each euro spent on GMO field research, an additional 78 cents were spent on security, 31 cents on biosafety and 17 cents on government regulatory supervision.20 The authors concluded that further trials are unlikely in such a context. In the UK, the recently planted GM wheat trial is part of a five-year project funded by the BBSRC. The value of the whole project is £732,000 and an additional £180,000 was provided by the BBSRC for security measures. During the inquiries which lead to this compilation, no evidence was obtained that destruction can be prevented by a dialog initiated by scientists. This is illustrated by the above-mentioned destruction in Belgium. It is also noteworthy that the destructions of the Colmar grapevine trial was preceded and accompanied by a « public engagement » process.1,2 Field trial of GMOs is now virtually impossible in many European countries.19 For example, in France, which hosted the highest number of trials in Europe (a total of 590), no request for any new trial has been submitted by academic laboratories nor private companies since 2008. When interviewed by the newspaper Le Figaro on March 23rd 2010 (see ref. 21), in answer to the question: « GMO research is flourishing in the United States, China… In France, INRA [Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique] researchers are discouraged. Is it wise to leave this research field to non-European countries? », Mrs. Valérie Pécresse, French Minister of Research until 2011, answered: « We have a duty of research on GMOs. It is a matter of national sovereignty. Unfortunately, most researchers have been discouraged by anti-GMO activists destroying field trials ». Mrs. Pécresse is certainly right as to the negative effect that field trial vandalism has had on European research, but it is also quite often the national or local government attitude which has discouraged researchers in the EU (see ref. 22), without forgetting the ban on GMO cultivation imposed by several governments (including the one of France) on the ground of controversial use of scientific reports.23,24 In a few cases, the destruction of an experiment was accompanied by other damage to property, threats or violence against individuals. This seems in line with the opponents’ goal to stop research proceeding on GMOs and also with a possible aim to discourage researchers to intervene in the GM debate. This was, for example, also the most likely goal of the harassment and threats against the coordinator of a report commissioned by the French Academy of Science on GMOs published on the end of 2002.25 In the absence of adequate measures by political authorities, this fear strategy appears highly successful since, concerning the previous fact, the French Academy has not written another report on GMOs since. The perpetrators of violence against GMO research share a common ideology and may be either small groups or linked to larger organisations that often benefit, directly or indirectly, from funding by the EU, national governments or local authorities. This way, Europe contributes financially to a major impediment to its own research strategy on green biotechnology and its « knowledge based bio- economy » concept.

Acknowledgments The author wish to thank Kerstin Mönch, Jean-Pierre Zrÿd, Jeremy R. Thompson, Owen Bethell, Roberto Defez, Franz Bigler and Penelope Sparrow for sharing information.

References 1. INRA, document, 2010. http://www.international.inra.fr/content/download/2962/54804/version/1/file/dPresse+COLMAR+anglais.pdf 2. INRA, press statement, 2010. http://www.international.inra.fr/press/destruction_of_a_gmo_trial 3. http://www.gmo-safety.eu/archive/145.dahnsdorf-trial-laid-waste.html 4.http://www.gmo-safety.eu/archive/188.potato-field-destroyed.html 5.http://www.gmo-safety.eu/archive/223.potatoes-destroyed.html 6.http://www.gmo-safety.eu/archive/433.planned-concerted-attack.html 7.http://www.gmo-safety.eu/archive/442.alternative-transparency-neutrality-experimental-planting.html 8. http://www.gmo-safety.eu/news/505.destruction-barley-trial-field.html 9. http://www.gmo-safety.eu/news/507.attacks-coexistence-trial-field.html 10. http://www.gmo-safety.eu/news/567.cultivation-trial-hands-science.html 11. http://www.gmo-safety.eu/news/620.apple-trees-destroyed.html 12. http://www.gmo-safety.eu/news/1335.genetic-engineering-field-trials-destroyed.html 13. National Archives (UK), 2008 http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20080306073937/http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/gm/fse/ 14. Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and UK Parliament, 2008. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmhansrd/cm081217/text/81217w0010.htm 15. ETH Zürich, website release, 2009. http://www.ethlife.ethz.ch/archive_articles/090626_gentech_sabotage/index 16. anonymous. Oggi Treviso 2009. http://www.oggitreviso.it/assalto-ca-tron-14487 17. Laursen L. GM crop biosafety lab folds. Nature Biotechnol 2010; 28:10. http://www.nature.com/nbt/journal/v28/n1/full/nbt0110-10a.html 18. http://www.ogms.be/actualites/wetteren-135-000-euros-de-dommages 19. Gomez-Galera S, Twyman RM, Sparrow PAC, Van Droogenbroeck B, Custers R, Capell T, Christou P. (2012) Field trials and tribulations—making sense of the regulations for experimental field trials of transgenic crops in Europe. Plant Biotechnol J 2012; 1–13. 20. Bernauer T, Tribaldos T, Luginbühl C, Winzeler M. Government regulation and public opposition create high additional costs for field trials with GM crops in Switzerland. Transgenic Res 2011; 20:1227-1234. 21. Mennessier M. Le Figaro April 23rd 2010. http://www.lefigaro.fr/sciences-technologies/2010/04/23/01030- 20100423ARTFIG00513-les-chercheurs-ne-sont-pas-des-apprentis-sorciers-.php 22. Rauschen S. German GM research—a personal account. Nature Biotechnol 2009; 27: 318-319. 23. Ricroch A, Bergé JB, Kuntz M. Is the German suspension of MON810 maize cultivation scientifically justified? Transgenic Res 2010; 19:1–12 (http://www.springerlink.com/content/r6052757667ng364/fulltext.pdf). 24. Ricroch A, Bergé JB, Kuntz M. Is the Suspension of MON810 Maize Cultivation by Some European Countries Scientifically Justified? ISB News Report April 2010; pp.8-11. (http://www.isb.vt.edu/news/2010/Apr10.pdf). 25. Butler D. Ministers back gene-crop advisers. Nature (News) 2003; 421:775.

Table 1. Vandalism against the Farm-Scale Evaluations in England

Reglementary (Part B) Vandalism Local Village / Town or Parish Crop type consent reference n° consequences

Norfolk - Great Moulton 01/R33/11 Oilseed rape (w) Trial terminated Dorset - Hilton 00/R33/09 Oilseed rape (s) Trial continued Norfolk -Bradenham 99/R22/16 Sugar beet Trial continued Norfolk -Raynham (East Raynham) 99/R22/16 Sugar beet Trial continued Dorset -Bincombe * Forage maize Trial terminated Dorset -Bincombe * Forage maize Trial terminated Essex -Weeley * Forage maize Trial continued Leeds-Bramham cum Oglethorpe * Forage maize Trial continued Norfolk -Horningtoft * Forage maize Trial continued Norfolk - Old Buckenham * Forage maize Trial continued Shropshire -Hinstock * Forage maize Trial continued - * Forage maize Trial continued Shropshire -Whitchurch * Forage maize Trial continued Norfolk -Winfarthing 01/R33/11 Oilseed rape (w) Trial continued Oxfordshire -Hinton Waldrist 01/R33/11 Oilseed rape (w) Trial continued Warwickshire -Long Marston 01/R33/11 Oilseed rape (w) Trial continued Durham -Hutton Magna 00/R33/9 Oilseed rape (s) Trial continued North Lincolnshire -Low Burnham 00/R33/9 Oilseed rape (s) Trial continued -Broomedge * Forage maize Trial continued Berkshire -Shinfieid * Forage maize Trial continued Dorset -Broadway * Forage maize Trial continued Essex -Wivenhoe * Forage maize Trial continued Essex -Alresford * Forage maize Trial continued Herefordshire -Preston Wynne * Forage maize Trial continued West Yorkshire - Bramham * Forage maize Trial continued Norfolk - North Tuddenham * Forage maize Trial continued Worcestershire - Crowle * Forage maize Trial continued Nottinghamshire - Meden Vale 00/R33/07 Oilseed rape (w) Trial continued Warwickshire -Harbury 00/R33/07 Oilseed rape (w) Trial continued Gloucestershire - Chipping Campden 98/R19/18 Oilseed rape (s) Trial continued Gloucestershire - Kempley 98/R19/18 Oilseed rape (s) Trial continued Hertfordshire - Piccots End 98/R19/18 Oilseed rape (s) Trial continued North Yorkshire - Hutton Magna, Durham 98/R19/18 Oilseed rape (s) Trial continued Norfolk - West Raynham 98/R22/12 Sugar beet Trial terminated Suffolk - Kenny Hill 98/R22/12 Sugar beet Trial terminated Dorset - Over Compton * Forage maize Trial continued Essex -Wivenhoe * Forage maize Trial continued Herefordshire -Preston Wynne (Rosem) * Forage maize Trial continued Hertfordshire -Harpenden * Forage maize Trial terminated North Yorkshire - Bramham * Forage maize Trial continued Hertfordshire -Piccots End 98/R19/18 Oilseed rape (w) Trial terminated * The forage maize crop had a Part C (for cultivation) consent, ref.C/F/95/12-07. w: winter; s: spring. Source: Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and UK Parliament; see ref. 14)

Legend to figure

Figure 1. Anti-science poster displayed in the CIRAD glasshouse vandalized on 5th June 1999.