Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

market-farming - Re: [Market-farming] unsustainable organic farming/ was organic seeds

market-farming AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Market Farming

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Tradingpost" <tradingpost AT gilanet.com>
  • To: market-farming AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [Market-farming] unsustainable organic farming/ was organic seeds
  • Date: Thu, 06 May 2004 08:52:04 -0600


Those who believe that can be forgiven for it, however it takes further
reading and observation to learn that the Feds' CLAIMING to require certain
practices, and actually taking steps to verify those practices are two very
different things. Of course we've read those "requirements". This
particular section makes the following claims:

ยง 205.203 Soil fertility and crop nutrient management practice standard.
(a) The producer must select and implement tillage and cultivation practices
that maintain
or improve the physical, chemical, and biological condition of soil and
minimize soil erosion.
(b) The producer must manage crop nutrients and soil fertility through
rotations, cover
crops, and the application of plant and animal materials.
(c) The producer must manage plant and animal materials to maintain or
improve soil
organic matter content in a manner that does not contribute to contamination
of crops, soil, or
water by plant nutrients, pathogenic organisms, heavy metals, or residues of
prohibited
substances.

Nice words, but it's far more important for what it does NOT say. It does not
(and cannot) specify HOW MUCH "rotations, cover crops, and the application of
plant and animal materials" or what kind of rotations or cover crops, for
what crops or how often these practices "must" be carried out. It does NOT
include testing by agents to verify those practices. How could they? It does
NOT include actual soil testing to verify that you really "maintain or
improve the physical, chemical, and biological condition of soil". How could
they verify soil improvement? As others have explained, the standards are
"process based", not based on testing actual produce, soil, or inputs. Too
much relies on the honor system.

And how hard can it be to simply claim that you've met these "requirements".

"Oh yes, I added composted manure (how much per acre?), I rotate some crops
(which crops, how often?), I tried cover crops (what kinds, for which fields,
and how often?), I've done all these things." Really?

No, realistically to verify soil improvement and sustainable practices the
standards would be forced to arbitrarily set out certain levels and types of
"rotations, cover crops, and the application of plant and animal materials"
and then keep agents on the spot to physically observe these practices on
every "organic" farm. But there are no scientifically agreed standards for
all these practices, so how could the government set standards even if they
tried? They can't. And we're not even discussing the GMO problem in this. In
the end, government regulation of many, many industries is spotty,
underfunded, subject to corruption, or simply nonexistent.

All this to say what many perceptive organic farmers have already said, that
the federal standards are flawed and cannot be expected to guarantee
sustainable farming at all. Those who believe organic standards are enforcing
sustainable farming are reading something into it that just isn't there. And
it's not a "petty debate" to those of us concerned with the broader picture
of sustainable farming. The government stats on loss of food nutrients (raw
produce) over the last quarter century (largely due to unsustainable farming)
should concern us all.

paul tradingpost AT gilanet.com

*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********

On 5/6/2004 at 9:00 AM IdleThymeFarm AT aol.com wrote:

>In a message dated 5/6/2004 1:19:06 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
>tradingpost AT gilanet.com writes:
>My crime apparently is simply pointing out that the federal standards do
>NOT
>require any "soil fertility program" or crop rotation, and do NOT require
>sustainable practices to build soil health. When people claim they are
>"required"
>to do that, they are not required by the federal organic standards, only
>by
>the need to rebuild their soil (or possibly by state organic standards),
>which
>is simply not the same thing as a federal requirement, and this shows a
>basic
>flaw in the federal organic program.
>I am done with this petty debate. Read the standards for yourself. Here is
>the link. http://www.ams.usda.gov/nop/NOP/standards/FullText.pdf Check
>page
>45-47. The NOP is not flawless however the flaws that Paul points out are
>addressed in the final rule. I need to get back to the business of farming.
>
>Shelly Elliott
>Idle Thyme Farm
>www.IdleThymeFarms.com
>
>A place where time stands still, where back to nature is simply a way of
>life!
>
>_______________________________________________
>Market-farming mailing list
>Market-farming AT lists.ibiblio.org
>http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/market-farming
>
>Get the list FAQ at: http://www.marketfarming.net/mflistfaq.htm







Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page