[compost_tea] NOP Update

From: Kirk Leonard <kirk_at_oregonatural.com>
Date: Sun, 23 May 2004 10:39:18 -0700
Hi all -- Got the following today from OG Cert list serve, so I'm cross
posting.  This is a clear illustration of why we need to be asking our
congresspeople what's going on with compost tea (and non-US folks to ask
your own gov's what's going on with these NOP bozos in US).  Has anyone
heard of public comment plans for the CTTF report accepted by NOSB at their
last meeting?  I've asked my US Rep and USDA, and will ask NCSA. but have no
info yet... and of course there's nothing on NOP site.  They seem to live in
some kind of time warp, too.  (Anyone else notice they've largely taken
email contact info off the site?;)

-- Kirk

> Date: Sat, 22 May 2004
> From: "Mike Levine" <mlevine30_at_comcast.net>
> Subject: Bush Officials Weaken Organic Food Standards: Public Shut Out
> To: "USDA Organic Certification" <organic-certification_at_lists.ibiblio.org>

> May 21, 2004 | Back Issues

Bush Officials Weaken Organic Food Standards: Public Shut Out

The Bush Administration is giving Americans new reason to watch what they
eat. Over the course of 10 days last month, the U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA) issued three "guidances" and one directive -- all legally
binding interpretations of law -- that threaten to seriously dilute the
meaning of the word organic and discredit the department's National Organic
Program.

The changes -- which would allow the use of antibiotics on organic dairy
cows, as well as synthetic pesticides on organic farms, and more -- were
made with zero input from the public or the National Organic Standards Board
(NOSB), the advisory group that worked for more than a decade to help craft
the first federal organic standards, put in place in October 2002.

The USDA insists the changes are harmless: "The directives have not changed
anything. They are just clarifications of what is in the regulations that
were written by the National Organic Standards Board," stated USDA
spokesperson Joan Shaffer. "They just explain what's enforceable. There is
no difference [between the clarifications and the original regulations] --
it's just another way of explaining it."

But Jim Riddle, vice chair of the NOSB and endowed chair in agricultural
systems at the University of Minnesota, argues that what the USDA is trying
to pass off as a clarification of regulations is in fact a substantial
change: "These are the sorts of changes for which the department is supposed
to do a formal new rulemaking process, with posting in the federal register,
feedback from our advisory board, and a public-comment period. And yet there
is no such process denoted anywhere."

Organic activists suspect that industry pressure drove the policy shifts.
They point out that the USDA leadership has long-standing industry
sympathies: Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman served on the board of
directors of a biotech company; both her chief of staff and her director of
communications were plucked right out of the National Cattlemen's Beef
Association.

One practice favored by large agribusiness is the use of antibiotics on
cows. A USDA guidance issued on April 14 will allow just that on organic
dairy farms -- a dramatic reversal of 2002 rules. Under the new
guidelines, sickly dairy cows can be treated not just with antibiotics but
with numerous others drugs and still have their milk qualify as organic, so
long as 12 months pass between the time the treatments are administered and
the time the milk is sold.

"This new directive makes a mockery of organic standards," said Richard
Wood, a recent member of the FDA's Veterinary Medicine Advisory Committee
and executive director of Food Animal Concerns Trust.

Another new guidance put out on the same day would allow cattle farmers to
feed their heifers non-organic fishmeal that could be riddled with synthetic
preservatives, mercury, and PCBs, and still sell their beef as organic.

And the following week, on April 23, the USDA took the startling step of
issuing a legal directive that opens the door for use of some synthetic
pesticides on organic farms.

Last but certainly not least, another guidance released on April 14 narrows
the scope of the federal organic certification program to crops, livestock,
and the products derived from them, meaning that national organic standards
will not be developed for fish, nutritional supplements, pet food,
fertilizers, cosmetics, or personal-care products.

Despite the USDA's demurrals, activists view the department's changes as a
serious threat to hard-won standards for organic products. The National
Campaign for Sustainable Agriculture and other groups are investigating
possible industry influence into the USDA's process, and some environmental
groups are preparing to take legal action. <




Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
click here


Yahoo! Groups Links

Received on Sun May 23 2004 - 14:31:59 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Feb 07 2012 - 14:15:20 EST