USDA Seeks to Undermine Organic Agriculture

by Garth Kahl

While all agricultural production has impacts on natural ecosystems and biological diversity, consuming certified organic products is currently the only way to ensure that one's consumption has the least possible impact, short of growing your own food and fiber. On Dec. 16, 1997, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) proposed legislation that could seriously undermine current organic practices in the US and lead to the use of materials like a rodenticide with a long history of poisoning wildlife, toxic municipal sewage sludge, and Genetically Modified Organisms (GEOs) [GMO?] in the production of "organic" crops.

In response to the huge national and international demand for organic food sparked by environmental as well as human health concerns, the government is attempting to define and control organic farming. While the idea of a national definition of the term "organic" has merit, there are any number of organizations (some with relatively low standards) "certifying" the authenticity of organic food the legislation in its current form appears to have been heavily influenced by large-scale agribusiness and biotech interests, who would like nothing more than to cash in on the higher prices garnered by organic products. Among the elements in the new "National Organic Standards" rule are provisions opening the door for GEOs to be used in organic farming and processing, allowing factory farming and permitting the use of "inert" ingredients (including fungicides in some applications). The rule would also allow the use of the rodenticide strychnine, which is especially hazardous to hawks, owls and other "non-target" predators that eat poisoned rodents and die.

In crafting this legislation, the USDA solicited input from thousands of activists, farmers and consumers across the country. In addition, the agency recruited a number of well-respected organic growers, processors, scientists and activists to serve on what it called the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB). The NOSB prepared a set of recommendations that were generally quite thorough and would have allowed the continued expansion of organic agriculture without compromising its environmental integrity. In the currently proposed rules however, the USDA ignores the recommendations of the NOSB in many areas, most notably by foregoing a total ban on the use of GEOs. Among the widely planted genetically modified crops by conventional growers are: insecticide-producing corn, potatoes, cotton, canola (rape seed) and herbicide-resistant soybeans. According to industry sources, nearly 25 percent of both the soybean and canola crops in 1997 were genetically modified, and the 1998 GEO planting is expected to be much larger. These human-made organisms pose incalculable threats to the stability of natural ecosystems, not to mention unknown human health risks, as genes for insecticide production or other unnatural traits may be transferred from the cultivated plants to adjacent wild species via insects or other vectors. Imagine a host plant like milkweed, for instance, suddenly becoming toxic to the monarch butterflies that feed on it. Currently there is a nearly universal prohibition against the use of GEOs in organic agriculture, and the NOSB recommended that they be prohibited wholesale from organic farming and handling. Despite this strong sentiment from the NOSB and widespread public resistance to GEOs as a whole, the USDA proposes to allow the use of pesticides and food additives derived from GEOs and consider the permissibility of other GEOs on a case by case basis.

Another troubling aspect of this document, and there are many, is a provision allowing livestock to "be maintained under conditions that restrict the available space for movement or their access to the outside."

The USDA took nearly a decade to craft these rules but is allowing the public only 90 days to comment. Once the comment period closes on March 16, 1998, the document will be passed to Congress, where reforming it will be even more difficult. There is a general sentiment within the organic agriculture community that the USDA knows it is going out on a limb by ignoring so many of the NOSB's recommendations and may be responsive to public outcry. The agency is accepting written comments as well as faxes and e-mail until March 16. Please contact them and tell them to accept all of the NOSB's recommendations without change, especially the ban on genetically engineered organisms, and to only allow NOSB's list of substances approved for use in organic farming and processing. Better yet, obtain a copy of the rule and contact the organizations below for more information on problems and loopholes found in the document.

Comments should be submitted before March 16 to:

Eileen S. Stommes, Deputy Administrator, USDA National Organic Standards, Docket # TMD-94-00-2, USDA-AMS-TM-NOP, Room 4007-So., Ag Stop 0275, POB 96456, Washington, DC 20090-6456; 202-690-4632 (fax)

Additionally, comments may be sent via the Internet through the National Organic Program's homepage at: http://www.ams.usda.gov/nop.

To obtain a copy of the rule contact Michael I. Hankin, Senior Agricultural Marketing Specialist, USDA-AMS-TM-NOP, Room 2510-So., POB 96456, Washington, DC 20090-6456; (202) 720-3252; (202) 690-3924 (fax). There is a charge of $8 for the document. The rule may also be downloaded from the web site above.

For additional information on opposition to the rule contact Organic Farmers Marketing Association, 8364 S SR 39, Clayton, IN 46118; (317) 539-4317, (fax) (317) 539-6935, cvof@iquest.net National Coalition Against the Misuse of Pesticides, 701 E Street, Washington, DC 20003; (202) 543-5450, (fax) (202) 543-4791; ncamp@igc.apc.org