Kate Mendenhall

Fall 2022 OFA Oral Comments to NOSB

October 18, 2022
Kate Mendenhall, Executive Director

RE: General Comments to the NOSB via Webinar Testimony

Thank you, NOSB members, for the opportunity to speak before you today.  My name is Kate Mendenhall, I am the Executive Director of the Organic Farmers Association.  OFA represents a strong national voice for domestic certified organic farmers.

Today I will be addressing Compliance, Accreditation, & Certification topics.

Proposal: NOSB Technical Support:  We have spoken to this point before and support research assistants for NOSB members.  We have concerns about these assistants being USDA employees for both the potential conflict of interest and the pervasive lack of organic knowledge within the USDA.  The board functions well currently, and research assistants should not interfere but support individual members’ research needs as directed by the board member.  We also urge the NOP to consider expanding the approved reimbursable expenses to help farmers on the board cover costs they incur to participate in the meetings, such as the cost of hired help for their farm while performing board duties.

Fraud Prevention:  OFA appreciates the Board’s work on deterring fraud, it continually ranks as a high priority for farmers.  We support the subcommittee’s proposal requiring acreage reporting and their recommendations to the NOP regarding small-diversified growers. The reporting should account for succession planting where total acres/crop may exceed total farm acres.  Organic paperwork is already burdensome for farmers, so streamlining this requirement and making sure it aligns with farms using paper records is important.

Traceability requirements must consider the different marketing structures of various commodities; tracing sales data for commodity corn is very different from tracing sales data for highly perishable wholesale market vegetables with many buyers.

In addition to oversight of certifiers, NOP must provide clear guidance when there is a discrepancy or questions on how organic standards should be interpreted.  Any guidance should be transparent and distributed to all accredited certifiers. Regarding standardized forms, we encourage a pilot project focusing on areas of high fraud risk like grains to identify how it affects certifiers, inspectors, and farmers.  We support exploring common forms for consistency and encourage collaboration with certifiers to identify the best existing models for replication and trial as well as assess what forms farmers currently use.  Common forms do have a positive ability to create more consistency among certifiers and expand the opportunity for translation.

Finally, I’d like to support more board and NOP attention to racial equity within the organic community and efforts to actively address barriers to organic certification and success.  While organic certification is understandably rigid as a regulatory system and at times that is incredibly important, at times prioritizing our humanity and our commitment to the principles of care and fairness is equally if not more important.  Understanding our cultural differences, barriers to entering agriculture, and additional societal weight that people of color unfairly carry is important to expand who gets and stays certified organic.  As forms are created and systems refined, ensuring a racial equity lens is applied must be a top priority.

----------------------------------

October 20, 2022
Lily Hawkins, Policy Director

RE: General Comments to the NOSB via Webinar Testimony

Thank you, NOSB members, for the opportunity to speak before you today.  My name is Lily Hawkins, I am the Policy Director of the Organic Farmers Association.  OFA was created to be a strong national voice and advocate for domestic certified organic farmers.  

Today I will be addressing the issues of climate-smart agriculture and contamination.

OFA members agree with the NOSB that certified organic production should be automatically considered “climate-smart” and therefore eligible for any and all funding opportunities and support through relevant USDA programs. 

Organic agriculture has tremendous potential to address climate change while making sure that family farms flourish. But to meet its full potential, we need the USDA to take several steps to protect the integrity of the USDA-certified organic label. This is needed to maintain the standing of the organic label with consumers, ensure a level playing field for organic farmers, and make sure that organic methods provide the maximum benefit in addressing the climate crisis. 

There are several critical areas of NOP rulemaking and enforcement necessary to ensure that organic agriculture is truly climate-smart: 

First, the NOP must finalize the long-overdue Organic Livestock and Poultry Standards Rule as quickly as possible to strengthen standards that ensure outdoor access and prioritize pasture-based systems. 

The NOP must also prioritize enforcement of the existing pasture standard to guarantee that organic animals are raised in climate-friendly pasture-based systems.

Second, the NOP must ensure that Organic Farming is Soil-Based. The NOP’s decision to allow hydroponic operations to be certified organic, as well as inconsistent interpretation of the NOP’s guidance for how container operations transition to organic, could undermine consumer confidence in the organic label overall and reduce the potential for organic agriculture to sequester carbon. For organic agriculture to maximize its potential as climate-friendly agriculture, soil must be recognized as the cornerstone of organic production. 

Contamination:

Another area where NOP can support farmers in their efforts to ensure organic integrity is in providing support and guidance to farmers dealing with contamination from outside sources. 

This comes in the form of genetic contamination from GMOs, and pesticide drift like what’s being caused by Dicamba, which can travel great distances. And more recently - legacy contamination from per-and poly-fluoroalkyl chemicals (PFAS) or “forever” chemicals is coming to light. This PFAS contamination comes from municipal and industrial sludge applications that took place decades ago, but is only recently being tested for. The problem isn’t limited to organic producers, but organic farmers have bravely led the way in pulling products once contamination has been discovered.

Farmers need help from state and federal agencies to cope with contamination, including assistance with soil and water testing, technical assistance for determining whether farm operations can safely continue, and compensation for lost production and lost farm value due to contamination. 

NOP can help by advocating on this issue at higher levels of the USDA, APHIS, RMA, and the EPA. and by providing certifiers with specific guidance on what to do when organic operations experience drift/contamination.  We encourage this guidance to be developed with farmer input.

Farmers’ investment in organic needs to be protected from these sources of contamination. 

by Kate Mendenhall

TAKE ACTION! Tell USDA to finalize and enforce strong organic animal welfare standards ASAP

by Kate Mendenhall

Organic Farmers will benefit from USDA $300 Million Plan to Support Growth of U.S. Organic Agriculture

August 22, 2022 (Washington, D.C.) — Today, Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack announced the details of The Organic Transition Initiative, a $300 million investment to support organic and transitioning farmers, and to address targeted organic market challenges. This program will support farmer priorities that Organic Farmers Association has shared with the USDA program and Congress to better support farmers interested in transitioning to organic and building a more robust organic agriculture infrastructure and market for certified organic farmers.

“We are pleased to see the details of this investment in organic and transitioning organic farmers from the USDA and are excited for the program to be implemented, said Kate Mendenhall, Executive Director.  “There are some important fixes and expanded programs to crop insurance in this program, expanded support for organic producers through NRCS, support for technical assistance and mentoring for farmers interested in transitioning to organic, and support for building better infrastructure.  Organic Farmers Association is pleased to see USDA identify the important role organic farmers play in a growing 60-billion-dollar domestic organic market and in curtailing climate change.”

The USDA Organic Transition Initiative will bring together multiple agencies to better serve organic and transitioning farmers including USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS), the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), and the Risk Management Agency (RMA). The plan includes:

$100 million for farmer education support.  The new Transition to Organic Partnership Program aims to ensure that farmers transitioning to organic have the support they need to successfully navigate the 3-year transition, including a full supply chain to domestic consumers who continue to build domestic demand for organic food.  AMS will administer this program through regional partnership networks in six regions across the United States with local organizations serving direct farmer training, education, and outreach activities.

$100 million in direct farmer assistance through NRCS and RMA.  $75 million be administered by Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) to develop a new organic management conservation practice standard and offer financial and technical assistance to producers who implement the practice, with a focus on using existing nutrient management and pest management conservation practice standards in a more targeted way to relate to organic production. This NRCS funding will also be used to increase organic expertise within USDA and to hire organic experts in each NRCS regional technology support center to train NRCS state and field staff to better service organic farmers. The Risk Management Agency (RMA) will use $25 million to create a new Transitional and Organic Grower Assistance (TOGA) Program to provide crop insurance premium subsidies for current and transitioning organic farmers.

$100 million to improve organic supply chains in “pinpointed markets.” This portion of the program will focus on key organic markets where the need for domestic supply is high, or where additional processing and distribution capacity is needed for more robust organic supply chains. Examples of markets seeking support include organic grain and feed; legumes and other edible rotational crops; and livestock and dairy. USDA will seek stakeholder input on these pinpointed initiatives in September of this year and make final decisions about the specific policy initiatives later this year.

Organic Farmers Association will continue to keep farmers informed on how these programs will be implemented to better serve their on-farm needs.  Farmers can start by contacting their local USDA service center to access the expanded NRCS and crop insurance programs.

About the Organic Farmers Association:  The mission of the Organic Farmers Association is to provide a strong and unified national voice for domestic certified organic producers. With the purpose to build and support a farmer-led national organic farmer movement and national policy platform by developing and advocating policies that benefit organic farmers; strengthening and supporting the capacity of organic farmers and farm organizations; and supporting collaboration and leadership among state, regional and national organic farmer organizations.  Learn more at  OrganicFarmersAssociation.org.

Media Contact:
Kate Mendenhall, Executive Director
Email: kate@OrganicFarmersAssociation.org
Phone: 202-643-5363
Cell: 585-944-2503

by Kate Mendenhall

One Year after Danone Dropped 89 Organic Dairy Farmers, Danone Needs to Do More to Help.

August 22, 2022.  A year ago, Danone North America, which owns the organic dairy brand Horizon Organic, notified 89 organic dairy farm families in Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, and New York they were terminating their dairy contracts in 12 months’ time and stopping all sourcing of milk in New England.  Danone’s swift regional exit marked the largest simultaneous contract termination organic dairy has ever seen.  The organic dairy market is relatively small with only a few buyers left after years of mergers and acquisitions, so when a major buyer like Horizon leaves, there are few options for farmers.  The news was devastating to these farm families, many of whom have provided organic milk to Horizon Organic for decades and were instrumental in building Horizon’s successful brand.

In the year since Horizon’s announcement, some of the farms have gone out of business, some have been lucky to find another dairy buyer, many have had to make significant, costly upgrades to their farms, and all dairies have suffered from inflation, skyrocketing feed prices, and summer drought.  Danone owes these farmers a future because their healthy, organic milk has helped make Danone one of the largest multinational dairy companies in the world.

In the past year, Northeast organic producer groups representing the affected farmers have asked Danone to support these farmers before they leave the region by 1) giving farmers another 6 months on their contracts, 2) making a significant investment in organic dairy processing infrastructure in the region, and 3) providing farmers with severance pay.  Danone responded in December agreeing to give farmers the extra 6 months on their contracts, a minor severance payment, and to invest in the region.  To date, all farms were offered the contract extension, very few farmers say they have received their severance payments, and Danone still has not made any financial investment in the region’s organic dairy industry.

In contrast, these same Northeast organic producer groups along with other regional stakeholders met with the USDA last fall to identify the responses needed to protect the farms and the rural communities that rely on the thriving and longstanding organic dairy industry.  Agriculture Secretary Vilsack took these recommendations seriously, announcing a $20 million investment in the region in March 2022 to support organic dairy farmers during this crisis.  Surely Danone can match this.

Danone simply has not done enough, and U.S. taxpayers should not be picking up the tab to clean up Danone’s economic mess left behind as they exit the Northeast.  Danone must, at a minimum, match the $20 million taxpayer investment for northeast organic dairy.  Danone’s 2021 year-end sales were €24.3 billion. Danone CEO Antoine de Saint-Affrique stated, “we ended the year on a strong note…We delivered on our commitment to return to profitable growth…with recurring operating margin at 13.7% in 2021. This was enabled by a strong focus on execution and a step-up in productivity, a pro-active approach to pricing and the disciplined implementation of Local First.”^[1]  But to farmers in the Northeast, Danone achieved these profits by putting Local Last.

“Farmers in Vermont have experienced an excruciating year, facing mental health strain and huge financial investment on their farms to maintain organic management.  Danone needs to step in to give farmers a fighting chance to keep Vermont organic dairy a viable industry for the next generation,” says Grace Oedel, Executive Director of NOFA-VT.

In Maine, Sarah Alexander, Executive Director of MOFGA comments, “We have lost dairy farms in Maine and fear we could lose more.  There is local motivation to rebuild our local dairy infrastructure, but we need Danone to at least match the taxpayer investment of $20 million that the USDA made in the wake of Danone’s decision to leave the region.  They owe the region’s organic dairy farmers and consumers at least that much.”

“Recently Northeast organic producer groups met with Danone to request the much-needed regional investment the company committed to provide,” says Kate Mendenhall, Organic Farmers Association. “They acknowledged their commitment but then kicked the can down the road.  It’s time they pay up to support a viable future for the 89 farmers they have left behind.”

Bethany Wallis, Executive Director of NOFA-NY adds, “New York has the most farms losing contracts and many are in bad shape with an unclear future.  Danone’s B-Corp social commitment and claims of putting local first needs to be realized in the Northeast.”

“An investment of $20 million to match the USDA contribution would make a huge impact towards repairing the damage Danone has caused in the region,” says Ed Maltby, NODPA.  “The most recent economic downturn coupled with drought conditions have turned a crisis into a near emergency and Danone has the resources to live up to their commitment to invest in the region.  It’s time they embody their social mission and do right by the Northeast rural communities they have impacted, giving these farmers a future.”

Northeast Organic Farming Association of Vermont, Northeast Organic Farming Association of New York, Inc., Maine Organic Farmers and Gardeners Association, Northeast Organic Farming Association of New Hampshire, Northeast Organic Dairy Producers Alliance, Organic Farmers Association, together ask Danone North America to invest a minimum of $20 million in the northeast organic dairy industry.  These groups have submitted proposals for how a Danone North America investment can make the greatest impact where it’s needed most.

###

Media Contact:
Ed Maltby, Executive Director, Northeast Organic Dairy Producers Alliance
emaltby@comcast.net; 413-427-7323

^[1] https://www.danone.com/content/dam/danone-corp/danone-com/medias/medias-en/2022/corporatepressreleases/pr-danone-fy-2021.pdf

by Kate Mendenhall

OFA testifies to USDA on Animal Welfare Stds

Friday, August 19, 2022
Kate Mendenhall, Executive Director
Organic Farmers Association

RE: USDA NOP Public Listening Session on regulatory requirements for organic livestock and poultry standards via Webinar Testimony
Thank you, National Organic Program for the opportunity to share our initial input on the proposed Organic Livestock and Poultry Standards rule.  My name is Kate Mendenhall, I am the Executive Director of the Organic Farmers Association.  OFA was created to be a strong national voice and advocate for domestic certified organic farmers.  We are farmer-run and controlled.

In 2018 OFA organic farmer members voted to support animal welfare requirements in the OLPP Rule and animal welfare standards have continued to be a top priority.  We are pleased to see it re-enter the public comment arena and hope for swift finalization and implementation.

Organic standards already require livestock have the ability to express natural behaviors and outdoor access. OLPS needs clear standards that close loopholes and provide certifiers and farms with regulations that allow for consistent interpretation, implementation, and enforcement.

Nationally, farmers want organic standards to cover animal welfare so they are not burdened by the need for additional labels or certifications.  In a recent national survey of 150 certified organic farms, we saw high support (over 75%) for addressing additional standards and claims within the organic label.

Implementation:  Our first comment focuses on the implementation timeline.  The majority of organic poultry and livestock farmers already comply with OLPS standards.  A 15-year implementation proposed in Option 2 will cause continued undue economic harm to these farms as they are already burdened by competition from unequal standards and enforcement.  Large-scale poultry operations have been aware of OLPP requirements for more than five years and have had time to plan implementation. Standard depreciation on poultry buildings is 10 years, so the past five years since OLPP plus the additional 5 years of implementation in OLPS is more than sufficient.  Option 1 or a more aggressive implementation timeline should be enacted.  Option 2 is not viable.

For poultry outdoor space requirements:  we feel that poultry should ALWAYS have access to outdoor space (as required in 205.239(a)(1)) with vegetation coverage because this makes them healthier birds and allows them to express their natural instincts.  To maintain this, facilities must have enough pasture for rotation and sufficient rejuvenation of pasture with a specific door size per density or building size that encourages daily outdoor activity.

For poultry indoor space requirements, we feel that stocking density is appropriate for layer and broiler mobile housing but could be increased for other indoor housing.

Mammalian housing seems sufficient except that swine stocking density and outdoor access is left without guidance.  This is an area where OLPS standards are much weaker than other animal welfare standards, and could cause farmers to seek additional certifications.

In preventative healthcare, the standards allow for swine needle teeth clipping and tail docking if undefined alternatives fail.^[1]  These practices indicate a management problem and leave ambiguity for certifiers and farmers.  They do not align with other 3rd party animal welfare certification programs, which prohibit or strictly limit both practices.

Overall, clarity of standards is crucial, and leaving vague references without guidance will lead to inconsistent implementation by certifiers and farms.   We encourage you to keep standards high, specific, and implement them quickly.

^[1] Tail Docking:
Animal Welfare Approved: Tail docking is prohibited.
Animal Welfare Certified (Whole Foods): prohibited at all levels.
Certified Humane: Tail docking is not permitted except in exceptional circumstances and even then, only the minimum amount of tail necessary may be routine. If the risk of tail-biting exists, other measures should be taken to prevent tail biting such as environmental enrichment or reducing stocking densities. If by veterinary recommendation tail docking should be done, HFAC must be notified before tail-docking is permitted. The method and age of the animals, as well as the justification for the procedure, will be reviewed. Following review, the producer will be notified of the decision from HFAC.
American Humane Certified: Tail docking is permitted to avoid the pain and suffering caused by tail biting. If performed, it must be carried out as early as possible and not later than 7 days of age. Under the direction of the herd veterinarian, the use of pain mitigation should be employed when effective and appropriate options exist. Producers should also be encouraged to use genetic lines less prone to tail biting. American Humane will continue to revisit this issue as pain mitigation and tail-biting intervention strategies develop.

Needle teeth adulteration:
Animal Welfare Approved: Clipping, grinding or filing of the needle teeth of piglets is prohibited.
Animal Welfare Certified (Whole Foods): prohibited at all levels.
Certified Humane: The removal of the points of needle teeth of newborn pigs must not be carried out routinely. Requests for permission to undertake this procedure, together with welfare-related reasons must be submitted in writing to the HFAC staff, who will consider the information and, if necessary may visit the unit. This must include the number of instances of: Facial scarring Udder damage Including the number of pigs included. 1. If the procedure is permitted, the points of the needle teeth of newborn pigs may only be removed as early as possible within the first 4 hours of life. In the case of sick or weak piglets, within 3 days of birth. This procedure must leave an intact smooth surface to the teeth. a) Tooth trimming must only be carried out by a trained and competent person. b) No more than the first third of the tooth may be removed. c) The procedure must leave an intact smooth surface to the teeth. d) Grinding of the sharp point of the teeth is preferable to clipping, as this is less likely to break the tooth or remove too much of the tooth.
American Humane Certified:  Only where necessary to prevent injury to the sow during milking or to other piglets, needle teeth of newborn piglets may be trimmed within the first 24 hours of life, or in the case of weak or sick piglets, within 3 days of birth.  No more than the first third of the tooth may be removed and care must be taken to avoid damage to the gums and splintering of the teeth.

by Kate Mendenhall

2022 OFA Annual Meeting and Reception-View

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 22

OFA held its Annual Meeting and Reception on June 22 at 7:00 pm ET/4:00 pm PT via Zoom.  The annual meeting included a short review of OFA’s work in 2021 and what we are looking forward to in 2022.  The reception featured a presentation and discussion with ORGANIC FARMER and USDA Under Secretary of Agriculture for Marketing and Regulatory Programs, Jenny Lester Moffitt, for a lively conversation about her family’s California organic farm, how she got involved in government, and why it is important for organic farmers to get involved in policy!

Watch the OFA Annual Meeting!

---

OFA ANNUAL MEETING

7:00 PM Eastern/4:00 PM Pacific: Welcome by David Colson, President
– Introduction of our new Governing Council & Policy Committee members.
– Thank you to outgoing members.
7:15 PM: Overview of 2021 -Kate Mendenhall, Executive Director

RECEPTION
7:30 PM: Introduction of USDA Under Secretary Jenny Lester Moffitt
7:35 PM: USDA Under Secretary Jenny Lester Moffitt
7:50 PM: Q&A with Under Secretary Lester Moffitt
8:00 PM: Adjourn

Under Secretary Jenny Lester Moffitt

Jenny Lester Moffitt has roots in organic farming, which she brought to her work in California and now in Washington, D.C.

Jenny Lester Moffitt was confirmed as Under Secretary of Agriculture for Marketing and Regulatory Programs at the USDA last fall and is responsible for facilitating trade and setting national and international agricultural standards, including the National Organic Program (NOP).

Jenny is a 5th generation farmer, who has established a successful career in agricultural policy.  She managed her family’s organic walnut farm for ten years and then served as Undersecretary and Deputy Secretary at the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) for six years before being asked to come to Washington, D.C. and work for the current administration.  Her experience and roots in organic allow her to understand the needs of both farmers and consumers and how both are essential to a strong organic movement.

Jenny’s father transitioned the family’s walnut farm to organic in 1989 and became certified organic in 1992. She says, “Growing up and helping run my family’s walnut farm showed me just how valuable the USDA is to farmers, processors, and consumers. I developed a passion for agriculture, farmers, and the food system, so I’ve always wanted to work in agriculture.”

by Kate Mendenhall

OFA Oral Comments to NOSB

Click here for OFA Submitted Written Comments:  Spring 2022

Below: OFA Oral Comments to the NOSB via Webinar Testimony:  Spring 2022

National Organic Standards Board
Oral Testimony:   April 19, 2022
Patty Lovera, Policy Director

My name is Patty Lovera, and I am the policy director for the Organic Farmers Association.
Discussion Document: Oversight improvements to deter fraud: Modernization of organic traceability infrastructure

Dealing with fraud has been a top priority for OFA members since the organization’s founding.

1. OFA supports including acreage per crop on the organic certificate.

But we will need flexibility in how this data is collected to avoid creating a burden for farmers. For example, producers who grow many varieties every year on small parcels of land need a streamlined way to estimate acreage. We also heard concerns about farms that use succession planting and how they would calculate acres per crop per year in a way that is useful for the traceability function of this reporting.

2. OFA supports including acres per crop on the organic certificate as well as making that information public-facing in the Organic Integrity Database.

Many farmers work with certifiers who already put this information on their certificate, and see the benefit in making this a standardized requirement for all certifiers.

We learned that some large food processors require farmers to sign non-disclosure agreements that forbid them from disclosing this type of information. It would be useful for this disclosure to be a uniform practice across the industry because the NOP requires it, then buyers would have to drop these non-disclosure agreements.

4. Universal Bill of Lading - During OFA discussions, ideas that generated enthusiasm from grain producers caused anxiety for other types of producers whose markets are very different, like leafy green producers. It may be necessary to create common forms for different sectors of products – grains that are shipped in bulk, livestock, milk, fruits and vegetables, etc.

We also urge the Board and NOP to consider the potential to provide sample or common forms in multiple languages. Making forms more accessible to non-English speakers could remove one of the obstacles for more diverse producers who are considering organic certification.

Proposal: Excluded Methods Spring 2022

OFA supports the NOSB proposal to recommend that the NOP develop a formal Guidance document to include the Definitions,  Criteria, Excluded and Allowed Methods tables as developed by previous Board Proposals in 2016.

We agree with the addition of cell fusion and protoplast fusion as outlined, but suggest that “recombinant DNA” be changed to “in vitro nucleic acid technologies” to provide a more comprehensive definition. Because it is not only DNA that can be manipulated, but also RNA and other materials, we find this definition to be more comprehensive and it aligns with global standards used by Codex.

And with the National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard now in effect, it is important to help consumers understand how “bioengineered” relates to methods that are excluded from organic. The USDA’s definition of “bioengineered” for the new rule is much narrower than what we would consider as bioengineered within the organic standards, so it is important to show that the organic standards are stronger and make clear to consumers what is and is not allowed in organic.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

National Organic Standards Board
Oral Testimony:   April 19, 2022
Kate Mendenhall, Executive Director

RE: General Comments to the NOSB via Webinar Testimony
Thank you, NOSB members, for the opportunity to speak before you today.  Welcome new members.  My name is Kate Mendenhall, I am the Executive Director of the Organic Farmers Association.  OFA was created to be a strong national voice and advocate for domestic certified organic farmers.

Today I will be addressing Highly Soluble Fertilizers, Human Capital, and Climate Smart Agriculture.

Crops Subcommittee: Highly Soluble Nitrogen Fertilizers
OFA strongly supports the concept of feeding the soil, not the plant.  We support limiting the use of highly soluble nutrients for use in organic production because such use is incompatible with OFPA and good soil health practices.  Our farmers have voted to prohibit Ammonia Extract and Sodium Nitrate.

Discussion Document: Human Capital Management: Supporting the Work of the NOSB

OFA strongly supports human capital management efforts to better support the work of the board and its members. It is vital the NOSB be fully representative of the organic community.  Farmers and other members of the organic community who are self-employed, often have large out of pocket expenses to cover their time spent fulfilling NOSB responsibilities.  We support the NOP hiring research assistants to support board-member-driven research needs restricted to summarizing literature reviews, technical reports and summaries of public comments.  Managing conflict of interest and confidentiality commitments, and ensuring these assistants have organic knowledge is essential.

We also encourage the NOP to consider expanding the allowable expenses for board members to cover on-farm replacement labor, childcare, etc. so that the self-employed are not facing economic hardship by volunteering their expertise to the NOSB.

NOSB Memo on Climate Smart Agriculture

In response to the NOP memo on February 23rd requesting the NOSB facilitate public discussion and “explore how organic can advance in tandem with climate-smart agriculture to support our planet and our farmers,” I would like to emphasize the contradiction that allowing certified organic hydroponic production poses to this effort.  The NOP asks the NOSB to “help reinforce and capture the connections between climate-smart agriculture and what many certified organic farmers are already doing.”  We support this and highlight that organic soil farming sequesters carbon and hydroponic farming does not, yet all the questions NOP asks around climate smart farming and organic assume soil-based production systems.

Avoiding the issue of organic hydro is creating a huge mess in the marketplace that contradicts the value of organic.  Organic hydroponic production is undefined, lacks standards, and is growing at a rapid pace.  The NOSB recommendations on greenhouse production are now a decade outdated as technology in this industry has changed dramatically.  The NOSB has tools to restore organic’s place as a climate-smart leader and it must use its authority to do so by addressing greenhouse production and hydroponics.

by Kate Mendenhall