That cat is already out of the bag. There are people at Monsanto who belong in jail for slowly deactivating the best herbicide in 100 years, just because the patent had expired. In my opinion, Monsanto wants to sell one hell of a lot of RoundUp until it is no longer effective, then to sell its newly patented and far more expensive alternatives.
Meanwhile, weeds treated with any herbicide tend to become resistant to those that are applied to them, this is not something peculiar to biotech plants.
The two mechanisms are vastly different and represent a massive corresponding difference in the degree of that resistance.
And most sugar beets are grown nowhere near organic chard or red beets and so will have no chance to interbreed with them.
This may be true, at first. But those weeds in the vicinity that DO acquire glyphosate resistance will be fully capable of conducting that gene for vast distances. Those who doubt me there should look at what glyphosate resistant pigweed is doing to RoundUp Ready corn and soybeans.
Finally, to argue that the Sierra Club is acting on the behalf of big seed producers when it is Monsanto producing RoundUp Ready seed is one ballsy red herring. This looks more like a battle between giant seed companies with their respective surrogates posturing in court and in the media.
I have to leave for the day, so to those who respond, I'm not ignoring you.
It's not a red herring, merely the usual result of big-business-hating liberals. Their policies tend to make doing business so expensive that only very-big-business can afford them. Monsanto will have the wherewithal to wait out the interminable environmental impact statement and adjust its business model to the results.
What remaining small seed companies there are will be weakened and perhaps even go out of business.