TASMANIA's reputation as clean and green is a powerful marketing tool for the state's food and wine producers and adds to the point of difference provided by our island status.
Bass Strait also reduces the risk of pests and diseases being introduced that damage the natural environment and agricultural activities.
Despite pressure over the years to relax restrictions on fish, fruit and some other imports, the state has stood firm on biosecurity issues.
The risks are well understood. The risks with genetically modified plant material are not so clear.
Tasmania has been "GMO-free" since 2001 and it is one policy that enjoys the support of all major political parties.
After the state government announced an indefinitely GMO ban last week, the reaction was fairly predictable.
Businesses such as Smithton beef producer H.W. Greenham and Sons, where Primary Industries Minister Bryan Green made the announcement, enthusiastically endorsed the decision.
Greenham markets its products on Tasmania's pristine environment. Being GMO-free is a part of that.
For the state's poppy producers and dairy farmers, where GMOs offer the promise of improved yields in increasingly competitive markets, there was disappointment and some anger.
The impact of GMOs on Tasmanian agriculture was first assessed by a parliamentary committee following federal gene technology legislation in 2000.
It was decided then that it would have an adverse effect on the state's clean and green image.
The policy was reviewed in 2003 and again in 2007.
There is clearly an emotive element to the GMO debate, but based on the current science there seems to be good economic sense for Tasmania to continue its ban.
Sensibly, the door has been kept open should advances in gene technology provide overriding benefits in the future.
- JULIAN BURGESS, associate editor.