[compost_tea] Re: Re: Organic Certification

From: Kirk Leonard <kirk_at_oregonatural.com>
Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2004 15:31:04 -0800

Eric and all -- Some replies.

> Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2004 02:28:12 -0000
> From: "ericgoodenough" <sfo_at_gwi.net>
> Subject: Re: Organic Certification

> So, the USDA/NOP is recommending that additional carbon
> sources (eg: sugars and molasses, for example) would not
> be allowed?
That's what NOSB's Compost Task Force recommended, not USDA/NOP. Quoting
from the transcript of 10/19/02 NOSB meeting, Richard Matthews, NOP Program
Manager at USDA said: "We have said no to compost tea."

And when pressed, USDA/NOP has said ANY compost tea is "raw manure," no
matter what it's made from. NOSB disagrees, thankfully. I think they even
trust manure is ultimately ok, too.:-)

The info LC got about compost tea not being eligible to satisfy 205.203,
which is the compost/soil fertility section of NOP's Final Rule, is what
USDA/NOP would recommend today -- i.e., no compost tea is acceptable.

It's real interesting that USDA would try and represent that as an NOSB
position. Liars, they are. "Not eligible" was an invention of USDA/NOP
staff.

> I think I have read here that compost (using Dr. E's definition)
> combined with some molasses (not too much) and adequate
> aeration can result in beneficial CT. [and]...that compost and
> high levels of molasses...and plenty of oxygen can also result in
> beneficial CT. That makes sense, too.
Yup, can be done. Doc's shown that molasses concentrations between 1% - 5%
can cause bacterial blooms that pull oxygen down to levels where anaerobic
pathogens can emerge -- IF they're present in sufficient numbers AND other
organism numbers and diversity are low. Please correct me Doc if I've
misspoken.

But bacterial activity in compost tea is not a problem -- they're the
fastest and mostest on the planet and the only organisms that reproduce in
compost tea, I believe, so you don't need molasses. If you're seeking a
fungal tea and don't have massive air capacity I think you can do better
without it, actually.

> Where is the disconnect? Is the USDA/NOP lacking the science,
> or the willingness to acknowledge the science to back up the safety
> of AACT? <
Yup. Not only that, the "science" they've sought has been skewed in the
seeking, poor in execution, unreported, unreviewed and unreplicated. The
only information they seek or accept is reports that say compost tea is bad
and unsafe, and so far, the data of those few reports has not been available
publicly -- and per NOSB transcripts, not even NOSB members have seen them!!
Outrageous! The "disconnect" here is being nefariously managed by USDA/NOP,
by muddling and secrecy and deceit.

> Are we dealing with a government agency (USDA) with an axe to
> grind? Are we dealing with scientists with personality conflicts?
> Are we dealing with a litigious society afraid of anything that
> moves?
Yes to all, it seems. Bob's "influence" suggestions are correct, too, I
believe. Uh-ugh-ly politics are happening.

> Is there anyone on the CTTF or NOP that is ready to come out and tell
> us (at least tell me, offline) what's up and how we can protect this
> tool before it's too late? (I have done, and will continue to do,
> the letter writing and contacting of officialdom.)
Good to hear you're speaking up. It's necessary.

Answer to your question is nope, so far, no info. The CTTF is sworn to
secrecy and there is no record of how Matthews got to his "no compost tea"
conclusion. Hopefully, when CTTF forwards something to NOSB, we will be
able to see and address their recommendations. Getting compost tea
supported by NOP will likely require some congressional pressure on USDA,
also. A FOIA action on USDA would be interesting, too.

For everyone here who cares about the future of compost tea, please get a
dialog going with your congresspeople. Easy to do with a local phone call.
I'm actually enjoying the banter with my Rep's staff. May 2004 NOSB meeting
may afford us an opportunity to bash USDA on compost tea instead of the
other way around...

> Or, perhaps, is the ORGANIC label not what it used to be? There are
> many who are already feeling that ORGANIC is a marketing tool and not
> much more, and that a higher standard might be warranted. <
There is truth here. To a great extent NOP is about getting "USDA Organic"
labeling for agribusiness, which is sad, but there are also important values
there, and under US law it's the primary game in town now... You can
establish all the higher standards you like but if USNOP doesn't accept
them, they can't legally be used or sold in US as organic anymore.

Competing with national laws seems counter-productive. Not necessary
either. In this instance, NOP's "Final Rule" is the issue. The OFPA 1990
law which established all this seems ok to me. The problem is USDA rules
and what they are doing with the law, behind closed doors. Trying to trump
the law doesn't make as much sense as doing something to change wrong
administrative rules, as in opening the doors. Seems more practical, too.

Please call your congressperson and ask about this, especially if they're on
an agriculture committee or among the organic caucus. Be ready to go after
NOP when there is something on the NOSB table about compost tea, hmm?

-- Kirk










------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark
Printer at MyInks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada.
http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511
http://us.click.yahoo.com/mOAaAA/3exGAA/qnsNAA/0PSxlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/compost_tea/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
     compost_tea-unsubscribe_at_yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
     http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 



Received on Sat Feb 07 2004 - 21:13:32 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Feb 07 2012 - 14:15:03 EST