permaculture

["Guy Clark" <guyclark@socket.net>]

OK this is the last one.  If you don't like this discussion, the delete
button is easy and painless to use.
Namaste',
Guy Clark
Community Garden Coalition
Fertile Crescent Farm
Missouri Organic Association
Columbia Farmers' Market
Heart of Missouri Master Gardeners
Columbia Area Food Circle
Callaway Food Circle
310 Hartley Court
Columbia, MO  65201
573.449.GROW
guyclark@socket.net


----------
From: Erorganic@aol.com
To: jriddle@luminet.net; EmilyBrown@aol.com
Subject: Re: Report on NOSB meeting Oct 27-79, 1998
Date: Sunday, November 08, 1998 10:55 PM

In a message dated 11/4/98 9:53:33 AM Central Standard Time,
jriddle@luminet.net writes:

> Subj:  Re: Report on NOSB meeting Oct 27-79, 1998
>  Date:        11/4/98 9:53:33 AM Central Standard Time
>  From:        jriddle@luminet.net (Jim Riddle)
>  Reply-to:    jriddle@luminet.net (Jim Riddle)
>  To:  EmilyBrown@aol.com, Erorganic@aol.com
>  
>  Dear Emily and Eric,
>  
>  Thanks for copying me on this discussion.  You are both right on!  One
of
>  the most revealing statements came from Emily: "Basically they (NOSB)
are
>  there as a sounding board or window dressing for Keith to use to
validate
>  his re-write."  I agree!  I am so tired of the NOSB's dysfunctionalism.
>  
>  One thing that needs to be done in the short term is to involve the
States
>  (both the certifiers and non-certifier programs) in defense of private
>  certifiers' rights to suspend and/or terminate certifications.  We have
good
>  relationships with the States, and we need to motivate them to comment
on
>  this issue.  This is fundamental!  I will do my part.

Eric:
I agree the states are fundamental and essential to respected future
national
organic standards.  We, the unified organic community need to agree on what
we, the organic community wants individual states to do regarding their
roles
in the organic community.  Although there are differences in State laws
now,
we need to unify as much as possible the role that States play in
enforcement
nationwide.  Organic farmers and handlers in every state need guidelines to
follow that farmers and handlers can petition their respective states to
implement.  Back to the organic unity meeting.


>  
>  We will move forward with an Organic Congress, as Eric has advocated.  
It
>  must be well planned, with a lot of groundwork done in advance, in order
to
>  be truly effective.  6 months from now is a realistic goal.  8 months
may
be
>  needed.  It should be centrally located, and not attached to another
>  conference or trade show, in my opinion.  What do you think?  

Eric:
Agreed it should be well organized.  Agreed it should be completely
independent of any other conference or trade show.  It should also be in
December, January or February only to involve as many organic farmers as
possible.  Can we afford to wait until 2000?


We should come
>  with draft standards and accreditation procedures, and allow at least 3
days
>  for education, debate and ratification.  We need to decide if the
program
>  will be presented as moving towards IFOAM regional recognition.

Eric:
In my opinion: organic farm and handling operation standards do not need
IFOAM
recognition.  The NOSB recommendations for implementing a national
accreditation program are the best I am aware of and far outdistance IFOAM.
Furthermore, WE citizens developed them over a period of 3 years.  I do
agree
that draft recommendations to the organic unity meeting should be developed
and circulated well in advance, 30 days will work.  It is worth noting
though
that on each of the relevant areas we have strong documents to build on
centering around the OFPA itself and the NOSB recommendations that are
consistent with OFPA or enhance OFPA.  We understand ISO guidelines and can
easily conform to them.  We do not have to conform to CODEX organic
guidelines, but should certainly consider them and be as consistent as
possible by selecting to incorporate CODEX guidelines that enhance our
basic
documents of OFPA and the NOSB Final Recommendations with amendments.  At
this
point in the game, any sectional interest may have developed innovative and
quality amendments that should be considered in open debate at the unity
meeting. 



  We also
>  need to continue to lay the groundwork for USDA recognition.  The
AMS/NOP
>  does not speak for the entire USDA, that much is clear!

Eric:
The USDA has said over and over again in every agency at every level that
they
are there to assist the private sector markets to develop.


>  
>  We have a training coming up next week, so I need to focus on that, or
else
>  I may be sleeping in the barn!
>  
>  Jim