[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: What a rip off don't let this happen




Dear Ava,

Thanks for your clear explanation of the current 'organic' state of play in
US. Your final para is absolutely right -- changing the overall system
means working within it, including making available the resources for the
'organic standards' body to sustain its work.

Judith



At 12:34 24/04/00, you wrote:
>Sal:
>
>I have to state that I honestly believe we have gotten what we asked for.  
>But there is an Action Alert as the new proposed organic standards will not 
>be final until after June 12.  Everyone has been urged to state their 
>support of the revised standards to the USDA to counteract any efforts that 
>may be made to undermine the standards we have so valiantly fought for.
>
>The new organic standards guarantee:  1. no genetically engineered 
>organisms 2. no use of toxic synthetic pesticides and fertilizers 3. no 
>food irradiation 4. no sewage sludge 5. no growth hormones or overuse of 
>antibiotics in animal production 6. strict requirements for safe use of 
>manure 7. more humane animal-confinement provisions 8. an exemption to 
>allow small-scale growers to sell up to $5,000.00 of organic produce per 
>year without completeing the certification process.
>
>This is the first time USDA has responded to the wishes of consumers and 
>supported an alternative that was opposed by USDA's "traditional" 
>constituency which was the large food producers and agribusiness.  
>Additional steps are being taken to promote organic agriculture, 5 million 
>dollars will be added for research and development of new markets and 
>improved production, and federal crop-insurance rules will change so that 
>organic farmers can qualify now for the crop-insurance just as the chemical 
>growers do now.
>
>In 1997 the USDA proposed national organic standards that could have 
>allowed food to be labelled 'Organic' even if they had been grown using 
>genetically modified organisms, sewage sludge, chemical pesticides and 
>fertilizers, etc. etc.  Those standards are much more objectionable the the 
>standards we fought for and now, have, as long as we stay on top of it, so 
>that the chemical-agriculture industry does not change the influence before 
>June 12.
>
>Yes, if you want the standards of organic farming to stay pure, you must 
>get certified, you must be tested, if the stamp isn't there, you could be 
>purchasing genetically modified product.  Unfortunately, there are many out 
>there who would do exactly that and try to pass it off, succeed at it, 
>which in turn would only hurt the true organic farmer, again!
>
>But, if we ask for our standards to be kept pure, and we fight to get it, 
>do you really believe it wouldn't come with a price?  They're not going to 
>do all the testing, certification, etc. without someone paying for it.  
>That would just be a pipe dream.  What we need to do now is work together, 
>become a unit so that no one adulterates what we've gained.  Stay on top of 
>the issue and IMPROVE upon it.  The only way I've ever seen anything truly 
>work, is to work WITHIN the system, not from the outside.  Within is where 
>we can make the difference, the only way we'll be able to monitor and 
>improve.  But if you get labelled a 'radical outsider' rather than someone 
>with a 'conviction', you won't be heard, as the majority will turn a deaf 
>ear toward you.  We just have to keep working and make our intentions and 
>our commitments pure and concise.
>
>Blessings,
>Ava 
>
>---
>You are currently subscribed to permaculture as: jehanna@gn.apc.org
>To unsubscribe send a blank email to
$subst('Email.Unsub')
>To subscribe send email to lyris@franklin.oit.unc.edu 
>with message text containing: subscribe permaculture
>
>
Judith Hanna
jehanna@gn.apc.org
15 Jansons Rd, Tottenham, London N15 4JU