Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

Organic Standards

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Dear Herbalists,

If you would like to retain the Organic Standards that we have

please read to the end of this post and make your voice known. We only

have about ten days to do this. Your letter is very important...

If you are not concerned about Organic Standards - then just delete

this post.............Best Wishes Penny

 

 

Standards!!

Date:

Tue, 30 May 2000 19:23:54 -0500

Debbie Ortman <debbie (by way of Debbie

Ortman <debbie)

To:

(Recipient list suppressed)

 

 

 

 

Organic Consumers Association: Suggested Comment Letter on Proposed

National Organic Standards

 

Must refer to the docket number (TMD-00-02-PR) that is listed in Federal

 

Register notice.

 

Note: If you wish to let the United States Department of Agriculture -

USDA

know by email what you think of their

March, 2000 proposed National Organic Standards, please send your

comments

to the Organic Consumers Association at <info and

we

will forward these on to the USDA. The USDA has chosen to not provide an

 

email address for submitting comments, so OCA will provide this service

for

those of you who do not have access to the internet.

 

To submit comments via the web site: See www.ams.usda.gov/nop

http://192.239.92.75/waiscomment.html

 

When faxing or mailing comments you must refer to: Docket number:

TMD-00-02-PR2

To send comments by fax to the USDA: 703-365-0760

To send comments by regular mail: Keith Jones, National Organic Program,

 

USDA-AMS-TMP-NOP, Room 2945-So., Ag Stop 0275, PO Box 96456, Washington,

 

D.C. 20090-6456

 

The 90 day comment period ends on June 12, 2000. Below is our basic

recommendation for what you should tell the USDA. Further information is

 

available in BioDemocracy News #25 posted along with other information

on

our website <http://www.purefood.org>

 

SAMPLE LETTER: NOTE: You must give name and complete address.

 

Dear USDA National Organic Program,

 

Although the USDA's March, 2000 proposed National Organic Standards are

a

vast improvement over the first proposed rules issued in December, 1997,

as

an organic consumer I am very concerned that the USDA adhere to the

following principles:

 

(1) Do not weaken or dilute any of the proposed organic rules published

in

the USDA's March 2000 document in any manner whatsoever.

 

(2) Private (i.e. non-governmental) and state organic certifiers must

have

the legal right to exercise their free speech and certify and label

products to higher or stricter standards than the minimum " USDA

Certified

Organic " standards and be able to state on their label that this product

 

" meets or exceeds " or " exceeds " USDA organic standards.

 

(3) So-called " natural foods " with less than 50% organic ingredients

should

not be allowed to use the word " organic " anywhere on their package or

product labels--given that the the non-organic ingredients of these

so-called " natural " products may be genetically engineered, irradiated,

derived from sewage sludge, or produced with pesticides, growth

hormones,

or antibiotics.

 

(4) Although the proposed regulations on organic animal husbandry

require

" access to outdoors, " no clear definition of what constitutes " pasture "

are

offered, nor does the USDA delineate exact space or spacing requirements

 

for humane housing and outdoor access for poultry, pigs, cattle, and

other

animals.

 

(5) Although the USDA claim they don't intend to impose economic

hardships

on organic certifiers and farmers, the added costs of USDA oversight

will

fall heavily on small certifiers and farmers. The USDA should provide

accreditation services to organic certifiers free of change as well as

subsidize 100% of the costs of any farmer who wishes to become certified

as

organic. Beyond this the USDA should allocate funds to pay farmers a

premium price for their products during their " transition to organic "

phase

as an added incentive for the majority of farmers to begin making the

transition to sustainable and organic farming practices.

 

(6) Although genetic contamination of organic crops by " genetic drift "

from

farms growing genetically engineered crops is one of the most serious

environmental threats to organic agriculture, no liability provisions

nor

residue limits for genetic contamination are delineated in the USDA's

proposed federal regulations. The USDA must hold biotechnology patent

holders and seed companies accountable and financially liable for the

environmental and economic damage inflicted on organic farmers and

producers caused by genetic drift.

 

Sincerely,

 

Your Name and Address

 

 

 

 

or this is another one put out by California SAWG

 

 

SEND YOUR COMMENTS ON ORGANIC STANDARDS

 

The USDA has released their latest draft National Organic Standards --

which

essentially defines what the term " organic " will mean. The rule is

greatly

improved over the previous proposal when over 280,000 people protested

GMOs,

irradiation, and sewage sludge in organics, among other issues. It is

crucial that those who care about organic products combat pressure to

weaken

this rule by backing up the USDA in areas in which they got it right,

and

also to let them know where improvements still need to be made. Be sure

to

include section numbers in your comments.

 

It's vital that you send your comments in by June 12, 2000 to: Keith

Jones,

Program Manager, National Organic Program, USDA-AMS-TMP-NOP, Room

2945-So,

Ag

Stop 0275, P.O. Box 96456, Washington DC 20090-6456; or Fax comments to

703-365-0760; or comment directly on the Internet at:

www.ams.usda.gov/nop.

Refer to Docket Number TMD-00-02-DR in all comments. You can review the

rule

in the 3/13/00 edition of the Federal Register (available at most

libraries)

or at www.ams.usda.gov/nop.

 

¸ FIX THE BIG 3! The new draft is much closer to prohibiting GMOs,

Irradiation, and Sewage Sludge, but USDA needs to close some

loopholes. Keep Organics GMO free -- Genetically Modified Organisms

are not completely excluded from all of organic -- there are

loopholes that could allow new GMO technologies, without any public

review.[205.2, 205.271, 205.290]; Define Irradiation -- without a

clear definition of ionizing radiation, a prohibition is ambiguous.

[205.2]; Don't allow toxic sewage sludge ash -- prohibit burned

sewage sludge that can contain heavy metals and other toxics not

appropriate for organic soil. [205.2]

 

¸ Keep Animal Factories out of organic! Eliminate exemptions and

loopholes and require pasture-based systems for ruminants and true

outdoor access for all farm animals. Define " pasture. " Physical

alterations of animals should not be allowed without formal National

Organic Standards Board (NOSB) review. [205.238, 205.239]

 

¸ Don't harm small farmers! Lower the fees and provide a cost-share

for farmers; current fee structures are excessively high for small

farmers. Meeting organic standards should be affordable for small

farmers. Keep the NOSB strong and farmer friendly. [205.640, 205.642]

 

¸ Don't backslide on high standards - Support USDA in the places they

got it right! Make sure that pressures from elsewhere don't weaken

high standards in the Final Rule: Labels will show percentage of

organic in product, including 100% organic; Certifiers' ability to

de-certify is recognized; " Eco-labels " other than the USDA organic

label are allowed; Provisions for 100% organic feed for animals with

no antibiotics or animal parts; Commitment to reduce costs for

farmers on the first round; No antibiotics allowed either in animal

feed or in fruit production.

 

To email comments, send this to info and we will

deliver it to the USDA!

 

 

Name______________________

 

 

 

Address_____________________

 

Phone_

 

Email_

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...