Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

market-farming - Re: [Market-farming] clarification of use of "organic"

market-farming AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Market Farming

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Road's End Farm <organic87 AT frontiernet.net>
  • To: Market Farming <market-farming AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [Market-farming] clarification of use of "organic"
  • Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2011 14:58:42 -0400

Very good post, Kathryn.

Years ago, I joined a market that, at the time I joined it, had local-only rules. When I got to market, I discovered stuff being sold that couldn't possibly be local. When I commented to the market manager, I discovered a) that the original manager wasn't involved with the market any longer and b) the actual manager appeared to have thrown the rules out the window and denied that they'd ever existed. I was unable to get support from other vendors at the market to change anything. I tried living with the existing situation for a couple of years, then gave up on that market.

At one of the markets I currently go to, one long-term vendor showed up, one week, with items that couldn't possibly be local. I went to the manager. The manager went right down there, at high speed, and spoke to the vendor, and told the vendor that those items had to be removed from the stand. In that case, the vendor in violation chose to quit the market, although she hadn't been evicted, only told she had to stop selling the out-of-area items.

I later found out that, in that second case, the vendor had also brought suspicious items the week before, when I hadn't been at market. The vendors at some of the nearer stands told me they had discussed it a little with each other, but hadn't been able to bring themselves to call the attention of the manager, who had been busy at the other end of market and hadn't noticed. They were relieved, however, that I had done so.

So speaking up is rewarded at some markets, and not at others: depends not only on how the rules are written, but on the actual management at the time.

I agree that before reporting, it's necessary to consider how likely you think it is that there's actually a violation; and that this should never be used for vengeance or because of personal problems having nothing to do with whether a violation exists. There also needs to be a clear written procedure for dealing with complaints, and an equally clear appeals process.

And I do want to comment that, on some crops, it may well be possible to produce uniform, "perfect" looking organically grown produce; especially if the producer culls the crop at the farm when packing, and doesn't bring anything not up to their standards. Also, crops apparently out of season may, these days, have been grown in a greenhouse. However, if so, the grower should be able to show the greenhouse to the manager. Properly written market rules include that the vendor, by applying, grants the manager (or other properly appointed person) the right to inspect the operation to tell whether items for sale are actually being produced there -- presuming, of course, that the market has a rule requiring vendors bring their own production.

If the rules matter, then those who chose to be governed by them are also responsible for helping to enforce them. If one thinks that the rules don't matter, growing organically, or buying organic food because it's organic, or selling at a producer-only market, are voluntary choices; those who think the rules don't matter don't need to sign onto them (at least, unless that's the only kind of market around). I don't think it's necessary to believe that every detail matters equally -- I'm not going to go around adding up the value of the next stall's own grown versus the value of their locally sourced from another farm, in order to find out if they brought 22% instead if 20% of someone else's; nor will I throw a fit if somebody brings something from half a mile the wrong side of what's by necessity an arbitrary line; but if one voluntarily signs up for a set of rules because one thinks the rules are necessary, I think that carries an obligation to report major violations.


-- Rivka; Finger Lakes NY, Zone 5 mostly
Fresh-market organic produce, small scale



On Sep 10, 2011, at 11:41 AM, KAKerby AT aol.com wrote:

Sometimes I wonder if the system is in part geared to rely on peer pressure as one form of passive (or active) enforcement, and here we are talking about all these rule-breakers and no one is doing anything about it.  Not that I'm any less guilty than anyone else in this regard.  At one of our markets this year we had a suspected reseller where reselling isn't allowed, and another vendor was supposedly certified organic when their produce was suspiciously uniform and perfect and out of season.  Most of the folks at market noticed and whispered and cast dark glances in their direction.  No one did anything about it.  The market manager may or may not have been aware of either issue, but they didn't qualify in the manager's mind as a three-alarm fire alongside the other three-alarm fires which had to be attended to.  Now at the tail end of another market season, I'm not sure anyone even spoke to them to follow up.  That's not the vendors' failing.  That's ours.
 
On the one hand, I strongly dislike the general philosophy of "spying on the neighbors" and using regulatory code to exact vengeance.  We've had a dispute with a neighbor this year mushroom out of control with that neighbor calling Animal Control, the county Health District and the Planning Dept out to our farm to do surprise inspections for supposed breaches of county code.  We passed all those inspections with flying colors.  But the wear and tear on our energies, our schedule and our faith in our little community took a real beating.  And we have no way of knowing whether we're done.  On the other hand, I think it's absurd to expect any agency to be the eyes and ears in every circumstance to do our dirty work for us.  If we believe the rules are fundamentally sound, and we see folks breaking those rules (particularly when it's deliberate), I think the burden falls on us to at least get that ball rolling.  A simple phone call may be all that's required (that was apparently all that was required to sic all those gov't agencies on us this year). 
 
If that sounds uncomfortable, yea, I think it probably should be something that makes us squirm a little.  But allowing rule-breakers to persist is, perhaps, worse.  I was talking to one of the inspectors about this "turn in your neighbor" aspect of code enforcement, and gee how it would be nice to have the person require proof before disrupting everyone's day with unfounded allegations.  He said well, sometimes the ability to just pick up the phone and complain is definitely abused, and yes sometimes everyone's time is wasted.  Other times, a vague concern about things "not being right" has become "tip of the iceberg" stuff which the agency never would have known about otherwise.  So it's a mixed bag.  But I think there's room in that bag, squirm factor notwithstanding, to put some heat on rulebreakers and let them know they're not going to get away with it.  At least not for free.
Kathryn Kerby
frogchorusfarm.com
Snohomish, WA
 





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page