Washington Post on New Organic Standards

Web Note: Although the new federal regulations on Organic Food and Crops
put out by the USDA on December 20 basically meet the demands of the
organic community, the USDA's so-callled National Organic Program (NOP) is
a joke. The NOP is designed to withhold necessary funds from the organic
sector so that organic agriculture remains a small niche market, posing no
real threat to the business as usual of corporate agribusiness and genetic
engineering. The USDA will hand out $30 billion dollars in taxpayers money
to conventional (non-organic) agribusiness over the next 12 months--while
investing a tiny sum, less than $10 million dollars, in organic. A full $17
billion of our tax money will be handed over in the form of corporate
welfare to the nation's largest (the top10%) factory farms this year. Until
billions, not millions are allocated for helping hundreds of thousands (not
just a few thousand) of US family farmers convert to organic, the organic
food system will remain a small niche market in the USA. While current
rates of growth in the US indicate that 10% of our agriculture will be
organic by 2010, a number of European nations are expecting 30-50% of their
farms to be organic by 2010.

Obviously the so-called Organic Trade Association does not speak on behalf
of organic consumers and family farmers. Of course organic food is safer
and more nutritious than chemical-intensive and genetically engineered
agriculture's "industrial food." Not only does organic food contain more
trace minerals and other valuable nutrients, but of course it's not laced
with pesticide and drug residues, nor is it generally engineered. And of
course it's not riddled with e-Coli 0157, salmonella, listeria,
campylobachter, or any of the other filth and pathogens which are routinely
found in factory farm meat and animal products. Health and safety
considerations are the major reason whhy 10 million organic consumers are
buying organic food. It's a cop-out and an insult to America's organic
consumers for Katherine DiMatteo of the OTA to say that organic is better
for the environment but not necessarily for public health.

U.S. Sets 'Organic' Standard

By Marc Kaufman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, December 21, 2000; Page A01

The federal government yesterday established the country's first
official definition of "organic," giving consumers a reliable way to buy
fruits, vegetables, meat and dairy products produced without the use of
pesticides, genetic engineering, growth hormones or irradiation.

The Department of Agriculture unveiled the standards after a
contentious decade-long debate between proponents of organic farming and
the conventional food industry, which feared that an official government
"organic" label would unfairly stigmatize their products.

The final version endorses many of the positions promoted by the
organic food industry and acknowledges the growing popularity of organic
foods, which are promoted as less damaging to the environment and
perhaps of higher quality. The U.S. organic food industry sold $6
billion in products last year – only 2 percent of the nation's food
sales – but is growing much faster than the conventional food industry.

The "USDA Organic" seal will begin showing up on products by next
summer, replacing the hodgepodge of unofficial and state definitions of
"organic." The next administration could challenge or try to modify the
new rule, but that is considered unlikely because it has gone through an
extensive, public rulemaking process.

An earlier version allowed conventional farming practices such as
spreading sewage sludge as a fertilizer and using pesticides and
biotechnology to control weeds and pests, but it was met with
unprecedented protests from organic producers and consumers.

"I am proud to say these are the strictest, most comprehensive organic
standards in the world," Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman said.

Although Glickman embraced organic foods yesterday – saying he
sometimes buys organic frozen foods – he made clear that the new organic
seal does not imply that foods are either safer or more nutritious.

"The organic label is a marketing tool," he said. "USDA is not in the
business of choosing sides, of stating preferences for one kind of food,
one set of ingredients or one means of production over any other."

The conventional food industry has fought many provisions of the
organic proposal since legislation mandating a national organic standard
was passed by Congress in 1990. Just recently, the National Food
Processors Association asked the USDA to require that the organic labels
include a statement saying the products are no more safe or nutritious
than conventional foods. In the end, the USDA did not require the
disclaimer but did modify the label design by dropping the traditional
USDA shield and eliminating "certified" from the seal.

Yesterday, the Grocery Manufacturers of America said it still opposes
many aspects of the organic rule and wants the department to monitor how
consumers understand the new label.

"If there is evidence that consumers believe it means they are buying a
safer product, then we want the USDA to pull the seal because the seal
has nothing to do with food safety," said Susan Ferenc, the group's vice
president for science and regulatory policy.

Katherine DiMatteo, executive director of the Organic Trade
Association, agreed that an organic label does not promise a necessarily
safer product, although consumers often believe that it does. But she
said that because of the specific practices that organic farming
employs, it can fairly claim to produce food in a way that is safer for
the environment.

"There are no pesticides or low-level antibiotics in organic farming,
and you don't see the vast fields of one single crop with organic,
either," she said. "Organic farming does not harm the environment like
some conventional farming, and we think there is a safety and health
benefit to that."

To qualify for the organic seal, a farmer must follow a detailed
blueprint for how crops are planted and grown, how animals are raised
and how waste is treated. The approach emphasizes the raising of crops
in a "sustainable" way that conserves soil and encourages biodiversity;
and animals are to be raised outdoors as much as possible and with
access to pastures to ensure their welfare.

The National Organic Program will not include inspectors to examine
apples or cheeses to determine whether they are organic but will rely
instead on certifying agencies that the USDA will accredit.

Most of the 12,200 organic farmers nationwide are small-scale
producers. The new label is expected to be a particular boon to organic
farmers who want to export their products. There is fast-growing demand
for organic food in Europe, but the absence of a single national
standard has kept the export level low.

Glickman announced the new standard at a recently opened Fresh Fields
supermarket near 15th and P streets NW, the second Fresh Fields to open
in the Washington area since summer. The stores are owned by Whole Foods
Market Inc., which specializes in organic and health foods nationally.
Despite its premium prices, the chain has grown dramatically in recent
years, and its stock price has remained high despite the recent Wall
Street downturn.

"A lot of boomer moms are willing to pay the extra for organic
products, and so it's gaining market share," said Mark Husson, who
analyzes the food industry for Merrill Lynch in New York. He said Whole
Foods sales have grown 8 percent over the past year, "and no other food
retailer is growing like that." He speculated, however, that consumers
might be less likely to buy more costly organic foods if the economy
weakens.

About 0.2 percent of U.S. cropland was certified as organic in 1997.
(In Europe, where farmers can get government help converting to organic
agriculture, 1.5 percent of farmland is organic.)

DiMatteo said she expects that organic food sales will increase from
their current 2 percent of sales to 5 percent within 10 years,
especially now that many large food companies are buying organic
producers and encouraging more organic farming.

"This whole movement is being driven by consumers, who like the way
that we produce our foods," she said. "With this national standard,
we're on a sound base to grow a lot more."

© 2000 The Washington Post Company