|
Press
Releases:
|
||
|
|
|
|
Note: Newest Stories are posted at the top of the list.
US Farm Bill 08 Appropriations Keeps Key Programs Funded
Synthetic substances used in organic production set to expire
Flood Impacts on Organic Farms, Upper Midwest Region, MSdoc, by Jim Riddle. [with thanks to the following people for their valuable input: Bonnie Wideman, Midwest Organic Services Association; Sam Welsch, OneCert; anonymous State certifier; Emily Brown Rosen, Organic Research Associates; Harriet Behar, Midwest Organic and Sustainable Education Services; Francisco Diez, University of Minnesota; Erin Silva, University of Wisconsin; Meg Moynihan, Minnesota Department of Agriculture; and Kevin Elfering, Minnesota Department of Agriculture (retired).]
Still Noteworthy
NOP and Community Grower Group Inspection - IOIA letter to Mark Bradley February 8, 2007 [pdf] [MsDoc]
IOIA Forum Discussion: NOP and Community Grower Group Inspection
http://www.ams.usda.gov/nop/CertifyingAgents/ANSIReportInfo.html
IOIA Response to the NOP Final Rule [evolved from Strengthening the Organic Certification System]
US Farm Bill 08 Appropriations Keeps Key Programs Funded
The U.S. House of Representatives has signed off on a compromise omnibus appropriations bill for FY08 federal spending.
If you didn't happen to be in a state with a key agricultural appropriator, you can't imagine just hard your brethren in those states really poured on the action this year, with phone calls, letters and congressional visits. It made all the difference in the world. In a year with extremely tight budgets, several top priority programs got increases.
For example, the Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education (SARE) program finally got the increase that's been so long overdue, from $16.3 million in Fiscal Year 2007 to $19.0 million in FY08.
The Appropriate Technology Transfer for Rural Areas (ATTRA) program had been wrongly treated as an earmark and slashed by 63% in FY07. For FY08 it will be funded at $2.6 million, which is a slight increase over the $2.5 million at which it had been funded for the six previous fiscal years before its funding was cut last year.
The Outreach and Technical Assistance Program for Socially Disadvantaged Farmers and Ranchers (the "2501" program) will be funded at $6.4 million, up from $5.9 million last year.
And the funding caps that had been placed on the Conservation Security Program for so long were removed for FY08!
You know that the federal budget is under tremendous pressure. The sustainable agriculture movement is fortunate to have superb lobbyists in Washington. But they would be the first to say that the only way we could achieve gains like these in this budget climate is thanks to your contacting key members of Congress when we ask you to.
Synthetic
substances used in organic production set to expire
Sunset review process starts for ozone gas, copper sulfate
by Sustainable
Food News
December 28, 2007
The National Organic Program (NOP) Friday said several substances used in organic crop production as algicide, disinfectants and sanitizer will no longer be allowed by the end of next year, unless renewed by the Secretary of Agriculture.
The NOP, part of the USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS), said in a Federal Register notice that the sunset review and renewal process of 11 exempted substances and one prohibited substance - including animal enzymes, ozone gas, and cellulose - added to the National List in 2003 must be concluded by Nov. 3.
The agency is asking for public comments by Jan. 28 on its advance notice of proposed rule-making regarding continuing the exemptions and prohibitions for the substances.
The National List identifies synthetic substances (synthetics) that are exempted (allowed) and non-synthetic substances (non-synthetics) that are prohibited in organic crop and livestock production. It also identifies non-synthetics and synthetics that are exempted for use in organic handling.
Exempted and prohibited substances are required to be reviewed every five years by the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB), which recommends organic policy to the NOP.
The synthetic substances set to expire next year include copper sulfate, Ozone gas, Peracetic acid, and EPA List 3 Inerts.
The notice also said that the non-synthetic substance calcium chloride - currently prohibited from use in organic crop production, except as a foliar spray to treat a physiological disorder associated with calcium uptake - will be allowed after Nov. 3.
“This also means that agar-agar, carageenan, and tartaric acid, currently allowed for use in organic handling, will be prohibited after [Nov. 3],” the notice read.
An emailed request for clarification from the NOP was not immediately returned.
Tartaric acid was
inadvertently included in the 2007 sunset process and recommended for renewal
by the NOSB. However, because the substance was not scheduled to sunset until
Oct. 31, 2008, it was not included in the
2007 sunset proposed rule.
Since it will be considered during the current review process, the NOSB said it will consider comments previously submitted in response to the 2007 sunset ANPR for tartaric acid.
The NOP also said that animal enzymes, calcium sulfate, glucono delta lactone, and cellulose, currently allowed for use in organic handling, will no longer be allowed for use after next November, unless renewed for use by the agency. Animal enzymes include: rennet--animals derived; catalase--bovine liver; animal lipase; pancreatin; pepsin; and trypsin.
USDA Publishes
Final Rule to Revise NOP Regulations
The U.S.
Department of Agriculture published the final rule in the Federal Register of
June 7, that revises the National Organic Program (NOP) regulations to comply
with the final court order in the Harvey v. Johanns lawsuit and implement
the 2005 amendments to the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990 (the Act or
OFPA).
The final rule restores the National List of synthetics used in products labeled
as “organic” to the pre-lawsuit status made by the 2005 amendments
to the Act. The effective date of this final rule revision is June 7, 2006,
the date of the final rule’s publication in the Federal Register. The final
rule revises the NOP regulations to clarify that non-organically produced products
listed in section 205.606 of the regulations may be used as ingredients in or
on processed products labeled as “organic” only when such organic
products are not commercially available. The effective date of this final rule
revision for section 205.606 is June 9, 2007.
The final rule also revises section 205.236 of the NOP regulations to eliminate
what is commonly known as the “80/20” feed provision, and no milk
may be labeled as organic and enter the stream of commerce after June 9, 2007,
as a result of the 80/20 feed provision. Thereafter, transitioning dairy producers
will no longer be able to use 20 percent non-organic feed during the first nine
months of whole herd conversion from conventional to organic production.
The final rule further addresses dairy herd conversion by allowing crops and
forage from land, included in the organic dairy system plan, of a dairy farm
that is in its third year of organic management to be fed to the converting
animals. The effective date of this revision is June 7, 2006, the date of the
final rule’s publication in the /Federal Register/.
Many commenters asked USDA to address the current two-track system for converting
dairy replacement animals. USDA intends to engage in further rulemaking to address
this issue.
Q&A’s on _Harvey v. Johanns_ (Harvey) Final Regulation
1. What does this final regulation do?
This final regulation
does the following:
a. Eliminates the so-called “80-20” feed exemption for dairy animal
conversion to organic; but any farmer who is using this exemption up to the
date before this regulation is published in the Federal Register may continue
to complete the remainder of the 12 months of conversion under this old rule,
provided that no milk may be labeled as organic after June 9, 2007;
b. Provides an alternative means of converting to organic dairy production by
allowing dairy animals to be fed forage and feed from land, included in an organic
systems plan, that is in its 3rd year of transition to organic;
c. Restores to the pre-lawsuit status the synthetics on the National List and
criteria by which those synthetics are evaluated for use in processed products
labeled as “organic;” and
d. Makes it clear that - only - the listed agricultural materials on 205.606
are commercially unavailable in organic form; and that National List procedures
must be used to have an agricultural product listed on 205.606 as commercially
unavailable in order to substitute a nonorganic form of the agricultural product
in a final product if it is to be labeled as “organic.”
2. How did the Congressional amendment to the OFPA restore the National List?
Congress made two
changes to the OFPA that restored the National List to its pre-lawsuit status:
a. The phrase “not appearing on the National List” was added after
the word “ingredient” in the subparagraph of section 2111 (6510) which
now provides that operations may not “add any synthetic ingredient not
appearing on the National List”; and
b. The phrase “in organic production and handling operations” was
added after “substances” in the subheading of section 2118 (6517)
which now provides for an “Exemption for prohibited substances in organic
production and handling operations.”
Together, these two amendments, along with the existing language in the Act
allows the current National List of synthetics to be used in processed products
that are labeled as “organic,” as they had been prior to the lawsuit.
It was not necessary to “re-activate” the criteria in 205.600(b),
either by statutory or regulatory action, since the National List was re-activated
by Congress’ amendments to the OFPA.
This is also why Congress did not need to enumerate each material allowed on
the National List. The amendments were sufficient to address the concerns over
the loss of the 38 synthetics on the National List.
3. Why are there different effective dates for some parts of the regulation?
The court final
order and judgment provided that “in order to minimize consumer confusion
and market disruption,” some products could continue to enter the stream
of commerce until June 9, 2007. Thus, the effective date for products labeled
as organic that could contain nonorganic agricultural products that do not appear
on 205.606 is delayed until June 9, 2007.
The court also provided for a stream of commerce and delayed implementation
for products labeled as organic containing synthetic substances. However, it
is not necessary to provide a delayed effective date for products containing
synthetics, since the National List was restored to its pre-lawsuit status.
This part of the final regulation is effective immediately.
Last, the amendment by Congress permitting an alternative means for transitioning
dairy animals also is effective immediately, to offer producers this opportunity
as soon as possible.
4. Are there still two different methods for the replacement of dairy animals?
Yes. For producers
who convert an entire distinct herd, the final regulation requires all dairy
replacement animals to be organic from the last third of gestation. But producers
who convert less than an entire herd are required to manage dairy animals for
not less than 12 months.
USDA recognizes this is a concern for many in the organic community and will
introduce an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to address this issue.
5. Does this complete the rulemaking needed to address the court final order and judgment as a result of Harvey v. Johanns?
Yes. This completes the rulemaking needed to comply with the Circuit court final order and judgment.
6. Why didn’t USDA include the emergency petition procedures in this rulemaking?
The emergency petition procedures were part of the November 10, 2005 amendment to the OFPA. They were not required to be completed by June 4, 2006—the date of the court final order and judgment. These procedures will take more time to develop, along with consultation with the NOSB, and were not considered part of the rulemaking needed to comply with court final order and judgment.
7. How will USDA address the emergency petition procedures for commercially unavailable organic agricultural products?
USDA will engage in notice and comment rulemaking and consult with the National Organic Standards Board.
New Study Confirms the Ecological Virtures of Organic Farming Organic farming has long been touted as an environmentally friendly alternative to conventional agriculture. A new study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) provides strong evidence to support that claim. http://www.pollutiononline.com/content/news/article.asp?docid={14544933-625C-466C-A580-7D910CA0A055}
Reports Link
Dietary Changes to Rise in Mental Illness
Evidence released in January by the Mental Health Foundation in the United Kingdom
and the UK group Sustain reveals that changes to the human diet in the last
fifty years or so could be an important factor behind the major rise of mental
illness in the country. According to the organizations, significant changes
in the way food is produced and manufactured have not only reduced the amounts
of essential fats, vitamins and minerals consumed, but have also disturbed the
balance of nutrients in the foods eaten. http://www.mentalhealth.org.uk/page.cfm?pageurl=press_2006_01_16.cfm
The Nova Scotia
Agricultural College offers a Certificate of Specialization in Organic Agriculture
through its Continuing & Distance Education Centre. Five web-based courses
are offered: Transition to Organic Agriculture, Organic Field Crop Management,
Organic Livestock Production, Principles of Organic Horticulture, and Basic
Composting Skills. These courses can also be taken for non-credit study.www.nsac.ns.ca/cde/courses/de/organic-certificate.asp
will link to the description of the program and the courses.
A brief bio:
the Nova Scotia Agricultural College, founded in 1905, is an internationally
respected university and research institution, providing superior education
in life sciences, the management of agriculture, and related disciplines.
Global
organic agriculture crop area reaches 26 million hectares
Organic
farming, the systematic conversion of land to certified practices that ensure
food safety and security from the farm to the table, a comprehensive and fully
traceable system, is developing rapidly throughout the world. According to the
International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movement¹s study The World
of Organic Agriculture: Statistics and Emerging Trends 2005, 36 countries achieved
organic mega-country status in 2004, meaning that over 50,000 hectares of certified
organic land are currently being cultivated. In total, over 26 million hectares
of land are currently certified worldwide, generating over $25 billion in revenue
in 2003. 558,449 farms in 108 countries are currently certified, and many millions
of people are involved in the production, marketing, processing and distribution
of organic products, generating immense inco! me for a great number of people
while simultaneously enhancing biodiversity and protecting the environment for
future generations. www.ifoam.org
USDA provides info on organic farmgate and wholesale prices USDA has prepared a data set of farmgate and wholesale prices for select organic and conventional produce items for the Boston and San Francisco markets. Go to www.ers.usda.gov/Data/OrganicPrices/.
newsletter | resources/job
board | inspectors
only |
en
español
| ethics | photo
gallery
member directory | books
& goods | links
| join! renew! | organic
standards
