Originally posted by DeepThought
No it's not irrational. What you are missing is that the genes put into crops or animals are designed to maximize profits for the GM company. They are not designed for the survival of the species, humans can force that with domesticated crops or livestock. So if genes designed by humans for a particular purpose such as maximizing yield get into wild s lose a near apex predator like wild salmon this has repercussions up and down the food chain.
I am afraid your argument is seriously flawed because it doesn't take into account the fact that natural selection in the wild is constantly weeding out any genes that make a wild species less adapted to their environment.
Certainly if such a deleterious gene from, say, a pea crop (whether it is a “GM” crop and the gene is “GM” or the crop was just selectively breed is totally irrelevant!) gets into same of the seeds of some wild peas and, lets say, actually causes the plants from those seeds to, lets say, become either totally sterile or fail to reach maturity due to deleterious effects from the gene, then, within each generation of wild pea plants, those few wild pea plants that have that gene would not pass on that gene onto the next generation and thus the gene would not spread to the whole pea population but would always remain pretty rare within the pea population and probably with less than one in a million wild pea plants having that gene in any one point of time.
Even if the gene is not so deleterious as to make it impossible for the wild pea plant to both mature and reproduce, there is always an extremely competitive situation in the wild and those pea plants that do not have that gene would rapidly out compete those with it and thus natural selection would do a good job of constantly maintaining a low incidence of wild pea plants with that gene within the gene pool thus the gene could never credibly “mal-adapt” the wild population and eliminate the wild peas as a result!
The same argument applies to any deleterious gene in any non-wild species that occasionally is accidentally transported to a wild species.
Also, no doubt there are genes already present in selectively bread peas that would make a wild pea plant less adapted to its environment -so why hasn't those genes “mal-adapted” the wild species of peas and eliminated them?
And why would it make any difference whether that deleterious gene (deleterious to wild peas), with the exact DNA code that it has, was made completely artificially in the lab or was selected to be there by selective breading?