SUPPORT OUR
SPONSORS
Consumers, Tell USDA to Protect Organic Food Standards
-
By Merrill Clark
South Bend Tribune - IN, Aug 21, 2007
Straight to the Source
In 1992 when I first sat down around the massive oval economic summit table as a member of the charter National Organic Standards Board, I think I had in the back of my mind a concern that the "organic" production concepts I had grown up with were not the ones that this NOSB was going to truly embrace.
And I was right. Four years later when I left the board, dozens of synthetic ingredients had been deemed "necessary" for various processed organic products. Some synthetics were allowed for use in a "made with organic ingredients"-labeled organic food product, but not in the 90-100 percent organic products.
Here we are 15 years later, and a second group of non-organic colorants and flavorings is being lobbied for use in 90-100 percent organic food products, from pies, to salad dressings, to soups and yellow coloring in a macaroni product! And again the major U.S. organic food manufacturers and international traders are lobbying for 38 additional allowances for non-organically grown hops, beets for coloring, dill for flavoring and on and on.
In the 15 years since the passage of the final rules related to the growing and processing of this country's organic-labeled foods, what have the Organic Trade Association manufacturer members been doing? Every item on the list of 38 items "non-commercially available" as organic (i.e. hops, annatto, elderberry, carrot juice, beet juice, dill weed, etc.) could have been raised organically for the past 10 years if processors had simply worked with organic growers across the country with that mission in mind. Now, they would rather water down the standards than stay true to what organic food really means ... to the consumer and to the earth.
The allowance for non-organic casings from the intestines of non-organically raised animals is really disturbing ... even for conventional sausage casing, let alone organic. We all know certified organic beef is being raised in greater and greater quantities across the country. Roseland Organic Farms has organic intestine casings at our organic processor, which are probably being destroyed as we are not in the sausage business. No one has called us for that ingredient, readily available. Instead, they have contacted the USDA organic office for a "break," for an allowance for the use of a "non-commercially" available product, for the use of what I would call an illegal substance for organic food production.
The use of any material from a conventionally raised animal in an organic food product is highly questionable, given the use of antibiotics, parasiticides and pesticides and genetically modified feed in that production.
When I attended my first NOSB meeting in Washington, D.C., we all were assigned to committees. I ended up being the chair of the livestock committee and a member of the processing committee. I knew something was wrong when the chair of that processing committee (from Checkerboard Square/Purina, making Earth's best organic baby food) asked, "How many of you think it's OK to add some synthetics to 90-100 percent organic foods?" And all the hands went up ... but mine! What meeting was this?
Apparently, many more agree on this issue and have lobbied the National Organic Program office of the U.S. Department of Agriculture for an extension on the comment period, from an amazingly short seven days to Aug. 27. I am urging that everyone reading this article and who agrees that organic standards should be kept in tune with the organic rules, write:
Robert Pooler,
Ag marketing specialist,
National Organic Program,
1400 Independence Ave., SW,
Room 4008 South,
Ag Stop 0268,
Washington, D.C. 20250.
Organic food production has been taking off in the last dozen years. We do not need the processing of this fantastic food to poison the original organic concepts. Many good-food buyers have decided to just bypass the organic-labeled processed and manufactured products for the raw foods, grown organically, at an open market straight from the organic farm and not handled/packaged later by a food processor. That shouldn't be necessary at this point in time. Tell the USDA just that.
Merrill Clark lives in Cassopolis
And I was right. Four years later when I left the board, dozens of synthetic ingredients had been deemed "necessary" for various processed organic products. Some synthetics were allowed for use in a "made with organic ingredients"-labeled organic food product, but not in the 90-100 percent organic products.
Here we are 15 years later, and a second group of non-organic colorants and flavorings is being lobbied for use in 90-100 percent organic food products, from pies, to salad dressings, to soups and yellow coloring in a macaroni product! And again the major U.S. organic food manufacturers and international traders are lobbying for 38 additional allowances for non-organically grown hops, beets for coloring, dill for flavoring and on and on.
In the 15 years since the passage of the final rules related to the growing and processing of this country's organic-labeled foods, what have the Organic Trade Association manufacturer members been doing? Every item on the list of 38 items "non-commercially available" as organic (i.e. hops, annatto, elderberry, carrot juice, beet juice, dill weed, etc.) could have been raised organically for the past 10 years if processors had simply worked with organic growers across the country with that mission in mind. Now, they would rather water down the standards than stay true to what organic food really means ... to the consumer and to the earth.
The allowance for non-organic casings from the intestines of non-organically raised animals is really disturbing ... even for conventional sausage casing, let alone organic. We all know certified organic beef is being raised in greater and greater quantities across the country. Roseland Organic Farms has organic intestine casings at our organic processor, which are probably being destroyed as we are not in the sausage business. No one has called us for that ingredient, readily available. Instead, they have contacted the USDA organic office for a "break," for an allowance for the use of a "non-commercially" available product, for the use of what I would call an illegal substance for organic food production.
The use of any material from a conventionally raised animal in an organic food product is highly questionable, given the use of antibiotics, parasiticides and pesticides and genetically modified feed in that production.
When I attended my first NOSB meeting in Washington, D.C., we all were assigned to committees. I ended up being the chair of the livestock committee and a member of the processing committee. I knew something was wrong when the chair of that processing committee (from Checkerboard Square/Purina, making Earth's best organic baby food) asked, "How many of you think it's OK to add some synthetics to 90-100 percent organic foods?" And all the hands went up ... but mine! What meeting was this?
Apparently, many more agree on this issue and have lobbied the National Organic Program office of the U.S. Department of Agriculture for an extension on the comment period, from an amazingly short seven days to Aug. 27. I am urging that everyone reading this article and who agrees that organic standards should be kept in tune with the organic rules, write:
Robert Pooler,
Ag marketing specialist,
National Organic Program,
1400 Independence Ave., SW,
Room 4008 South,
Ag Stop 0268,
Washington, D.C. 20250.
Organic food production has been taking off in the last dozen years. We do not need the processing of this fantastic food to poison the original organic concepts. Many good-food buyers have decided to just bypass the organic-labeled processed and manufactured products for the raw foods, grown organically, at an open market straight from the organic farm and not handled/packaged later by a food processor. That shouldn't be necessary at this point in time. Tell the USDA just that.
Merrill Clark lives in Cassopolis







