Iowa Farmer Today

AMES -- The organic agriculture community faces many challenges, not the least of which is division over language included in the recently passed ag appropriations bill.

The controversy bubbled briefly to the surface during the question-and-answer period after a talk by an industry leader at an annual organic conference here Monday.

Katherine De Matteo, executive director of the Organic Trade Association (OTA), was keynote speaker at the Fifth Annual Iowa Organic Conference Monday.

Her talk focused on the broad prospects for the organic industry and organic farmers.

However, the first and most pointed question she fielded was about the congressional bill language the OTA had supported regarding allowances for some synthetic substances in processed organic-labeled food.

“We don’t believe the OTA spin on this,” says Fairfield organic farmer Francis Thicke.

He and other farmers at the conference say they are disappointed by the OTA’s support for changes in the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990.

But, De Matteo said the changes are not as dramatic as Thicke and other farmers contend.

She says they were necessary to help the USDA and the organic industry respond after court ruling struck down some parts of the law this past year.

Although De Matteo talked about many trends in the organic industry and about the phenomenal growth it has seen in recent years, many farmers were more interested in the recent legal and legislative moves.

De Matteo says the organic act was a good piece of legislation, but when it was written in 1990, organic farmers were more experienced in fruit, vegetable and grain production than in processing or organic livestock production.

As a result, some of the language regarding processing or livestock probably needed to be updated and improved, she said.

That need was brought to a head by a lawsuit, filed by Maine blueberry farmer Arthur Harvey against the USDA.

Harvey contended USDA rules governing organic foods went against several items included in the original organic act. In January, a court agreed with him on several issues, and in June his argument was upheld on appeal.

The Harvey lawsuit essentially argued:

= Synthetic substances are not permitted in the processing of organic-labeled items;

=provisions allowing up to 20 percent non-organic feed in the first nine months of a dairy herd’s one-year conversion to organic were not permitted; and

=all exemptions for the use of non-organic products not commercially available in organic form must be reviewed by the National Organic Standards Board.

De Matteo said the issues are technical and were related to problems in the original law’s language.

She said the changes essentially allow the organic program to continue as it had according to the rules announced by the USDA after the passage of the act, and they would not hurt organic producers.

The OTA considered the appropriations bill to be the best vehicle for making those changes because it would not require the re-opening of the debate on the entire organic bill, De Matteo said.

“We worked with USDA and with the court (on the changes).”

She also stressed language in the appropriations bill allowing the USDA secretary to allow some non-organic substitutes if no organic products are available does not consider price.

“Cost is not a part of that,” De Matteo said, arguing the secretary can’t let processors or growers use the high cost of an organic input as a reason for a substitution.

Thicke and other farmers at the meeting were not completely convinced, saying they were very disappointed the OTA backed the new language.

They agreed on some issues, however.

Organic products are becoming more popular. The number of organic farmers and acres devoted to organic production has been growing in the United States and worldwide in recent years, De Matteo said.

But, she conceded the industry may be at a crossroads.

First, it has grown enough and become profitable enough that larger agribusinesses are getting into the business, competing with smaller processors and producers.

It also appears China and India are on the cusp of huge increases in organic production, laying the groundwork for them becoming competitors for U.S. organic farmers in the near future, De Matteo noted.

Finally, she said U.S. producers have gotten into organic production over the years for a broad range of reasons: social or cultural, economic and health related.

Those diverse reasons may make it difficult for the industry to operate with one voice in the future.

The OTA, for example, does not necessarily aim to help small farmers or direct marketers, she explained. It works to help organic farmers of all sizes and ideologies.

That may not always sit well with long-time organic leaders, who may be more interested in small farms or health claims.

De Matteo said the industry needs to conduct reputable research on a variety of issues.

That research needs to address health issues relating to organic food or products. It needs to address environmental issues. It needs to address economic issues.

In other words, if organic producers are going to claim their products are healthier or better for the land, they need to get the research to back those claims, she added.

As the industry grows, it probably needs to pay more attention to issues, such as contract law, to ensure new or small producers aren’t taken advantage of by large companies.

Organic farmers also need to be thinking about the 2007 farm bill and trying to figure out “where organics fit in” to larger national agricultural policy.

Still, De Matteo reminds farmers the outlook for organic production is still very good, and demand for their products is growing at a phenomenal rate.

The problems they face are ones of growth and structure.

Comments »

ravindra anant sathe wrote on Nov 17, 2005 1:37 AM:

" The last page of the article xlearly points out the lacunae in organic agriculture movement.Health issues, environmental issues, and economic issues need to be adressed properly thr' a scientific research. Quote regarding Indian scenario mentioned indicates asian scenario. There are several problems for farmers with marginal and small holdings. My opinion is that the Govt of India is pushing us to corporate farming or contract farming by many ways. Why not to have a universal standard for certification for organic produce? This may become hurdle in marketing the product domestically as well as internationally. In coming WTO regime we need to look into this matter where certifiction norms from different groups such as usda, eurepgap, jas anz etc. vary from each groups. ravisathe@yahoo.com "

Comment on this story
Comments will be approved within 48 hours