Welcome to iGrow News, Your Source for the World of Indoor Vertical Farming
Michigan State University’s Specialty Crop Research Initiative Grant Funded by The USDA
The initiative, OptimIA, which stands for Optimizing Indoor Agriculture, aims to improve the profitability and sustainability of indoor leafy-greens production
The initiative, OptimIA, which stands for Optimizing Indoor Agriculture, aims to improve the profitability and sustainability of indoor leafy-greens production.
February 11, 2020
A multi-university team of horticulturists, engineers and agricultural economists led by Michigan State University (MSU) has received a four-year, $2.7 million grant from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to study indoor production of leafy greens. Industry partners have matched funding, bringing the project total to $5.4 million. The investigators on the grant include Erik Runkle, Roberto Lopez and Simone Valle de Souza of Michigan State University; Chieri Kubota of Ohio State University; Cary Mitchell of Purdue University and Murat Kacira of University of Arizona.
Leafy greens include commonly consumed vegetables such as lettuce, kale, and microgreens. Production challenges outdoors have led to interest in growing these specialty crops hydroponically in controlled environments, such as indoor farms. However, there is little information on whether this is economically viable. Capital and operating costs can be significant for startups, especially as it relates to light-emitting diodes (LEDs) and cooling systems. Leafy greens are a good candidate for indoor farming because they can be grown rapidly and in relatively small spaces. Indoor environments are heavily controlled, so growers aren’t constrained to a small geographic area within the U.S. There are, however, other geographic concerns.
The team and its collaborators have three major goals:
Defining optimal profitability based on yield and other high-value attributes of the plants, such as nutrition content.
Optimizing indoor environmental conditions, such as humidity, air movement, temperature, light and carbon dioxide concentration, to increase yield and high-value attributes.
Encouraging indoor farming stakeholders to collaborate with academic and industry groups that are working in controlled-environment agriculture.
The long-term project goals are to help integrate indoor farming into the specialty-crop segment of agriculture in the U.S.; to increase the sustainability and hence profitability of this rapidly emerging sector; and to locally produce leafy greens that have higher quality attributes.
To this end, economists will better understand operating and capital expenditures (capex), and define risk and production scenarios that are most profitable. Horticulturists and engineers will improve production efficiency, product quality and value-added attributes of leafy greens for reliable, consistent, year-round production. In addition, the team will design and test more effective localized air-distribution methods suitable for indoor production systems, as well as develop strategies to better manage humidity around plants to reduce tip burn.
While the project focuses on leafy greens, the results will also inform a wide range of controlled-environment growers through the development of growth recipes, strategies for nutritional content and anthocyanin enhancement, environmental management recommendations, and insights for economic sustainability as well as market and consumer perception of locally produced crops.
For more information, visit the project website here.
Leafy greens Sustainability USDA Microgreens Controlled Environment Agriculture
USDA Grants Call For Aquaponics
USDA AFRI Grants will disburse $192 Million across several different programs and specifically call for aquaponics and hydroponics projects
Federal Grants have recently been published that can apply to aquaponics growers. USDA AFRI Grants will disburse $192 Million across several different programs and specifically call for aquaponics and hydroponics projects.
The USDA Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI) will award $192 Million for FY2020. Due dates for grant applications range from March 12 to May 28, 2020, depending on the project. The AFRI program is to invest in research, education, and extension projects that support more sustainable, productive, and economically viable agricultural systems. Click here for AFRI Request for Applications.
Kentucky State University, 2019 Aquaponics Conference
Aquaponics Projects Can Fit Into
Multiple Programs Within The Grant, Including:
Foundational Knowledge of Agricultural Production Systems
Pests and Beneficial Species in Agricultural Production Systems
Small- and Medium-Sized Farms
Water Quantity and Quality
Separately, USDA Aquaculture Research Grants have also been published. These grants total $1.2 Million. The due date is April 22, 2020.
Click here for Aquaculture Request for Application
For more information:
Aquaponics Association
4531 Airlie Way, Annandale VA 22003
info@aquaponicsassociation.org
aquaponicsassociation.org
Publication date: Mon 17 Feb 2020
Cut Produce Recalled Because of Salmonella Risk
Tailor Cut Produce of New Jersey, is recalling its Fruit luau, cut honeydew, cut cantaloupe and cut pineapple products because they have the potential to be contaminated with Salmonella
DECEMBER 09, 2019
Tailor Cut Produce of New Jersey, is recalling its Fruit luau, cut honeydew, cut cantaloupe, and cut pineapple products because they have the potential to be contaminated with Salmonella. The recalled fruit products were distributed in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York and Delaware between Nov. 15 and Dec.
The product comes in two/one-gallon cases with a date of production stamped on the side. The potential for contamination was noted after several patients fell ill in four hospitals in Pennsylvania. Production of the product has been suspended while FDA and the company continue their investigation as to the source of the problem.
Distributors who have purchased the cut fruit products dated Nov. 15–Dec. 1 are urged to quarantine them and to call for further instructions.
The Pennsylvania Department of Health is investigating 31 laboratory-confirmed illnesses of Salmonella at four healthcare facilities in southeast Pennsylvania. Salmonella Javiana has been identified among the cases at three of four facilities. According to the Pennsylvania DOH, the epidemiologic evidence collected thus far indicates that this fruit mix is a potential source of the illnesses. The state’s review of invoices shows that a common food eaten by many case-patients was the fruit mix with cantaloupe, honeydew, pineapple and grapes from Tailor Cut Produce.
Salmonella can cause serious and sometimes fatal infections in young children, frail or elderly people, and others with weakened immune systems. Healthy persons infected with Salmonella often experience fever, diarrhea (which may be bloody), nausea, vomiting, and abdominal pain. In rare circumstances, infection with Salmonella can result in the organism getting into the bloodstream and producing more severe illnesses such as arterial infections (i.e., infected aneurysms), endocarditis and arthritis.
E. coli Outbreak Numbers Climb; Canada Adds Romaine Import Rules
Federal agencies have increased the number of cases in the E. coli outbreak linked to Salinas, Calif., romaine, and investigators continue to seek the exact source of the lettuce
Chris Koger November 26, 2019
A note to consumers at a Kansas City-area store lets them know the store is not stocking romaine from the Salinas, Calif., region. ( Amelia Freidline )
Federal agencies have increased the number of cases in the E. coli outbreak linked to Salinas, Calif., romaine, and investigators continue to seek the exact source of the lettuce.
The Food and Drug Administration continue to advise consumers to avoid all romaine products, including whole heads, hearts of romaine, and salad kits or mixes that include the lettuce from Salinas. A test on an unopened Ready Pac Foods Bistro Chicken Raised Without Antibiotics Caesar Salad obtained from a Maryland patient included romaine that tested positive for the same strain from patients in other states. But people with E. coli in other states don’t recall eating that salad.
Epidemiologic, laboratory and traceback information indicates the lettuce came from Salinas, according to the FDA.
“No common grower, supplier, distributor, or brand of romaine lettuce has been identified,” according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Nov. 26 updates from the FDA and CDC increased the number of patients in the outbreak from 40 to 67, and added three states to the list of where they live. The number of hospitalized patients went from 28 to 39 in the update. The previous update was Nov. 22. The most recent case was reported Nov. 21.
The FDA again reported that hydroponic- and greenhouse-grown lettuce is safe to eat, as well as any romaine grown outside of the Salinas area, which includes Santa Cruz, Santa Clara, San Benito and Monterey counties. The FDA advises consumers to check romaine labels, which should have the harvest region listed, a voluntary addition following a similar outbreak just before Thanksgiving 2018.
Health officials in states that have patients in the outbreak are testing lettuce samples purchased by the patients, if those samples are still available.
Canada mandates proof of origin
As with the 2018 fall E. coli outbreak linked to romaine, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency is requiring a proof of origin for imports of romaine from the U.S.
According to Canada’s Fruit and Vegetable Dispute Resolution Corp., the CFIA requires a new declaration process in the import procedure.
“Their website states: Shipments of romaine lettuce from California must be accompanied by a letterhead, on a separate page, showing a Proof of Origin with the date of signing and the signature of the exporter declaring that the lettuce was not harvested in the Salinas, California, growing region,” DRC President and CEO Fred Webber wrote in an e-mail to industry members.
Webber said the DRC has been contacted numerous times by importers who have paid for romaine that they cannot sell.
“In our previous notes to you, we urged all stakeholders to be calm,” Webber said in the e-mail. “It seems many of you have, but we are seeing indications that others are seeking to recover losses from their trading partners.”
Most disputes arising from the question of who accepts the loss in such cases will be “decided based on who owned the product when it became unmerchantable,” according to the DRC e-mail.
In simple terms, Webber said, in an F.O.B. sale, the shipper owns the loss before it’s loaded on a truck, but the buy owns the loss after the truck is loaded.
“It is understandable that companies do not want to accept a loss they did not cause,” Webber said. “But in a case like this where neither party to the transaction may be at fault, the decision must be made based on long-standing principles like the warranty of merchantability, Acts of God or force majeure.”
Related Topics: Romaine Outbreak E. coli FDA CDC Canada
BREAKING NEWS: Another Multistate E. coli Outbreak is Linked To Lettuce
The FDA is warning consumers against eating any romaine lettuce harvested from Salinas, California. The CDC is now reporting 40 people infected with the outbreak strain from 16 states, hospitalizing 28 of them
AUTHOR Cathy Siegner
Nov. 22, 2019
UPDATE: Nov. 22, 2019: The FDA is warning consumers against eating any romaine lettuce harvested from Salinas, California. The CDC is now reporting 40 people infected with the outbreak strain from 16 states, hospitalizing 28 of them.
Dive Brief:
Another E. coli outbreak linked to lettuce has sickened 17 people in eight states, hospitalizing seven of them, according to a Nov. 21 Investigation Notice from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
The CDC said Maryland Department of Health officials found E. coli O157 in an unopened package of Ready Pac Foods Bistro Chicken Caesar Salad taken from a sick person’s home. Some of the sickened people in Maryland reported eating that product, while those in other states have not, the agency said.
On Nov. 21, Missa Bay, LLC, of Swedesboro, New Jersey, recalled 75,233 pounds of salad products sold under various brand names due to possible E. coli O157:H7 contamination. The CDC said the recalled products, which have "Use By" dates ranging from Oct. 29, 2019, to Nov. 1, 2019, contained lettuce from the same lot used to make the contaminated salad found in Maryland.
Higher education is a great way to enhance your skills, earn more money and stay competitive in the business world. Discover five reasons why pursuing an advanced degree can help you launch forward and boost your career at any level.
Dive Insight:
The CDC announced this latest outbreak more quickly than the last major incident — an E. coli outbreak associated with romaine lettuce that sickened 23 people in 12 states between July 12 and Sept. 8. Illnesses were reported from Sept. 24 to Nov. 8, the CDC said, and the agency's announcement came Oct. 31.
The FDA posted its own announcement Nov. 21, noting it was tracing back the supply of romaine lettuce in the Caesar salad product and had identified possible farm sources in Salinas, California. The agency also said it was sending investigators to determine the source and extent of contamination and would provide more information as it is uncovered.
Most of the recalled salad products were made with romaine, but a few also contained iceberg lettuce. The contaminated Ready Pac Foods Bistro Chicken Caesar Salad in Maryland only contained romaine. The CDC said Maryland health officials are using whole-genome sequencing to determine whether the pathogen they found is closely related genetically to the one that has sickened people.
Bonduelle Fresh Americas, which owns the Ready Pac brand, said in a Nov. 21 statement posted on its website the recalled salad products are already significantly past their use-by dates, and the company is working with retailers to make sure they're no longer on store shelves. Bonduelle also said it had taken immediate action to trace the origin of the problem.
"We test all of our leafy greens (including romaine) in the fields prior to harvest, including screening for E. coli O157:H7. During the relevant time frame, we did not have any positive test results for E. coli O157:H7," the company said.
As federal and state health officials conduct this outbreak investigation, they would be wise to keep the public fully informed, and quickly. Romaine lettuce has now been linked to five E. coli outbreaks in the past two years, including this latest one and the one announced in late October. If regulators and producers don't get a handle on the problem soon, romaine could become an unwanted commodity. The industry has already been hit by decreased sales following previous outbreaks, so this development is likely to bring further scrutiny to their operations.
The FDA recently said it will start sampling romaine for E. coli and salmonella bacteria this month in the California and Arizona growing regions and during the next year. Since the agency said contaminated lettuce in the most recent outbreak could have come from farms in the Salinas, California, area, that region could see additional sampling and testing as the investigation proceeds.
Previous romaine testing by the FDA — which collected 118 samples starting last December in the Yuma area and tested them for E. coli and salmonella — found a non-pathogenic type of E. coli in one, but no salmonella, the agency reported.
The leafy greens industry has recently taken steps to improve production processes. Producers have tightened up grower requirements and recently embarked on a multi-year food safety initiative involving government, academia, and industry to better understand the impact of pathogens on leafy greens in areas including Yuma County, Arizona, and the Imperial Valley in California.
While these steps may help narrow down the problem's source, they clearly haven't been enough to keep E. coli outbreaks linked to lettuce from happening. Until that occurs, consumers are likely to avoid romaine — and possibly other lettuce types — in stores or restaurants until they can be sure the product is safe.
Photo Credit: U.S. Department of Agriculture
Recommended Reading:
U.S. CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION Investigation Notice
Pressure To Revoke Certification of Containers Continues At Fall NOSB Meeting
Multiple groups push USDA to revoke certification for organic production systems with containers during most recent National Organic Standards Board meeting cycle
Multiple groups push USDA to revoke certification for organic production systems with containers during most recent National Organic Standards Board meeting cycle
The June 3 USDA memo summarizing the land-use history requirements has not slowed down the efforts of opponents to organic production systems incorporating containers into their farms. Several organizations including retail organizations belonging to the National Organic Coalition in their written and verbal comments for the Fall NOSB meeting continued to call for revocation of certifications of operations using containers. Multiple members of the NOSB went so far as to call for the decertification of seedling facilities that produce transplants for vegetable growers if those facilities rotate greenhouses where raised tables are located during the course of the year between organic and non-organic potting soils in the containers. However, USDA continues to stand firm on the June 3 memo and has not placed the issue of containers on the work agenda of the NOSB nor USDA staff.
CSO reaffirms sensible application of USDA organic standards in Washington and at the NOSB meetings
Members of the CSO met with members of Congress and the USDA as well as testified in front of the NOSB over the last few weeks to reiterate the importance of containers to help meet their obligations as growers under the organic requirements of conserving natural resources. CSO members and staff reminded officials on the importance of organic containers in conserving wildlands by reducing the footprint of fruit and vegetable production, minimizing nutrient runoff from farming operations, increasing the efficiency of water use, enhancing the effectiveness of beneficial insects and generally helping growers properly respond to the site-specific conditions on their farms.
Frankel urged USDA and the NOSB to avoid making false statements regarding the production practices of container growers, especially when making policy decisions. Frankel also presented data showing that the June 3 memo was not raising prices yet was stifling supply increases as growers and marketers are withdrawing investment, promotion, and research necessary to build fresh produce categories as a result of uncertainty surrounding how policy is interpreted and made.
Indoor Ag Seen As Key To Feeding Planet
Sponsored by the Department of Agriculture; its subsidiary NIFA (National Institute of Food and Agriculture), and the University of Arizona Controlled Environment Agriculture Center, over 100 attendees of all stripes --- from growers and governmental entities to students and researchers --- met for 4 days to come up with a master plan designed to help in the goal of feeding a hungry planet
A prototype greenhouse for use on lunar or Mars missions is displayed at a recent conference on food production at Southern Arizona’s famous Biosphere2 research laboratory.
Open-field production faces limitations in land, labor, and resources
Lee Allen | Sep 25, 2019
It’s been said that a camel is really a horse that has been assembled by a committee after much discussion and lots of diverse input.
But sometimes great minds do think alike as in the case of the recent Controlled Environment Indoor and Vertical Food Production Coordinated Research Conference held at Southern Arizona’s world-famous Biosphere2 research laboratory.
Sponsored by the Department of Agriculture; its subsidiary NIFA (National Institute of Food and Agriculture), and the University of Arizona Controlled Environment Agriculture Center, over 100 attendees of all stripes --- from growers and governmental entities to students and researchers --- met for 4 days to come up with a master plan designed to help in the goal of feeding a hungry planet.
“Open field agriculture in the U.S. is the largest in the world aimed at feeding the largest number of people, but there are limitations in land, labor, and resources,” said co-coordinator Gene Giacomelli, estimating that the current greenhouse-grown vegetable effort represents slightly more than 1.3 million acres under glass.
“We want to compliment that food production capability by solving some of the problems of indoor growing to produce greater yield and enhanced nutrition.”
Plenty Inc. of San Francisco was one example in the form of keynote speaker Nate Story, Chief Science Officer and co-founder of the 2013 start-up funded in part by $200 million in backing from investors like Amazon’s Jeff Bezos.
EMERGING INDUSTRY
Already touting that Plenty is “Where Nature Meets Nurture” and promising to close the global nutrition gap, Story said his indoor grow efforts represented “an emerging industry trying to control costs while bringing high-quality product to market --- a difficult thing to do. We need to focus on research in order to help the industry drive value up and cost down by being both systems- and crop-specific.”
Story called plants “the smartest creatures on the planet because they have figured out how to make humans their slaves by domesticating them and spreading them all over the world. Once we understand the economics of indoor agriculture, this industry is going to be a boon for humanity.”
Over the course of the conference, 33 speakers told of their research successes and remaining problems in trying to grow things better, faster, and cheaper with discussions ranging from nutrition and post-harvest concerns to production systems and pest and disease management.
Audience interest was piqued with presentations on new technologies in plant breeding and how feeding folks in outer space may provide some suggestions on how to better accomplish that mission on the ground.
Noting that plant breeding has been around since the early days of crop domestication, Gail Taylor, Plant Sciences Chair at the University of California, Davis campus said the process took a quantum leap once DNA was explained.
“Today, generally involving big crops in outdoor environments and refinements in programs involving disease, pest management, stress tolerance, and increased yield, there’s a lot going on there, and by snipping away at plant DNA, adding to or taking away from, we can make new products that both outdoor field and indoor vertical farming can take advantage of.”
BREEDING SUCCESSES
Citing breeding program research successes like uncovering a gene that allows peppers to be more easily harvested mechanically to extending the shelf life and increasing the antioxidant properties of lettuce, Taylor said that modern breeding techniques allowed a new start to improving nutrition, flavor, and yield.
While some breeding successes have been noted in dwarf or super-dwarf crops as well as those that are more robotics-ready for mechanical management, the search continues for more vigorous, rapid, high-yielding traits that are faster flowering with a shorter life cycle and more efficient use of nutrients and depleted carbon dioxide.
Genetics research is on-going to produce plants with more appropriate architectures that will lend themselves to more efficient mechanical supervision and harvesting, produce that will maintain a longer shelf life, as well as crops that are cleaner because of less chemicals and healthier because of secondary phytochemicals.
“We struggle with the same issues that greenhouse growers and indoor vertical farms do in looking at food security, keeping astronauts operating at peak performance on long-duration missions,” said Ralph Fritsche, Senior Crop Project Manager in NASA’s Life Sciences Office.
Earlier space missions where crews were kept busy at work stations on their way to the moon didn’t have much time to plant something and grow it to harvest, but longer duration flights like those to Mars will allow the growing of plants, much of it done by automation as is happening in today’s terrestrial indoor and vertical grow efforts.
“Right now, NASA is taking from current CEA knowledge and technology with a pay-if-forward mentality. Once we find solutions to similar problems in space, light bulbs will light up in the CEA industry on how these answers can be applied on earth.”
HURDLES FOR FRUIT
Based on the presentations, nearly half of the attendees contributed concepts to a grant application workshop involving funding opportunities to support further research.
“Most of the currently-funded projects deal with leafy greens, but there are still major hurdles for profitable production of fruiting crops,” said Dr. Kai-Shu Ling of the USDA Vegetable Laboratory.
“We will work together to prepare, hopefully before the end of the year, a proposal for submittal to the USDA/NIFA Specialty Crop Initiative Research program to establish a coordinated agricultural project for controlled environment agriculture research, a roadmap for indoor food production agriculture in the United States,” said Ling.
To which Giacomelli added: “This report, interfacing all seven themes of the conference, will not be a report that gathers dust.”
USDA - NIFA Conference Sept. 9 - 12, 2019
Developing sustainable and strategic plans to feed the future in the face of growing global challenges will demand interdisciplinary vision, collaboration and innovation
USDA - NIFA Conference At Biosphere 2
September 9 - 12, 2019
Developing sustainable and strategic plans to feed the future in the face of growing global challenges will demand interdisciplinary vision, collaboration and innovation. Controlled environment agriculture (CEA) implemented as fully enclosed, multi-level indoor agricultural food production systems, Vertical Farms (VF), will complement future greenhouse (GH) plant production systems and will offer innovative technological solutions for issues at the food-energy-water nexus.
The purpose of the conference is to Plan an Interdisciplinary Controlled Environment Indoor Agriculture R&D Roadmap and Coordinated Research Plan. It is supported by USDA/NIFA-AFRI program and is hosted by the Controlled Environment Agriculture Center at the University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ and Biosphere 2, Oracle, AZ
This conference (September 9 – 12) will facilitate interdisciplinary discussions centered on several major thematic R&D areas for CEA/VF/GH, each of which will interface with the others to identify cross-disciplinary areas of synergy, opportunity and need. Thematic areas include:
Economics: focus questions and discussions will include: what are good metrics of success in these systems from both industry and community perspectives? Can we develop a pipeline to quantify environmental and social benefits of these systems in a Benefit-Cost Analysis framework? How scalable are these systems? What are environmental impacts, life cycle analyses?
Engineering: focus questions and discussions will include: how to increase lighting efficacy, light use efficiency, and reduce cost? How to control and modulate CO2? How to design and enhance air circulation and to optimize HVAC? How to minimize labor input and integrate innovative automation and robotic systems? How to improve water use efficiency and cycling?
Production Systems: focus questions and discussions will include: how to manage crops to integrate with improve environmental controls, nutrient delivery and automation. How to improve plant architecture to enhance crop productivity and reduce waste? How to improve logistics and enhance labor efficiency?
Plant Breeding: focus questions and discussions will include: what makes a crop a good candidate for indoor farming/what are priority candidate crops for these systems beyond what is currently grown? What traits should be privileged in breeding programs for indoor farming? How can gene editing and genomic techniques be leveraged to integrate novel financial opportunities into these growing systems, such as increased nutritional content, enhanced water, nutrients and light use efficiencies, or pharmaceutical production? How CEA production systems can alter the structure of microbial communities associated with plants, growing media, and determine how the alterations affect plant nutrient and water uptake and utilization?
Pest and Disease Management: focus questions and discussions will include: what are the major viral, fungal, and insect pathogens in these systems and how are they best addressed? Integrate Pest Management for reduced chemical control? How to develop and implement a rapid and simple digital imaging system for pest and disease diagnosis? How to improve the efficiency of pest and disease management while not harming beneficial insects and pollinators?
Food Nutrition and Safety: focus questions and discussions will include: how alterations to growing media and environment will impact food quality, flavor, nutrition content and food safety? How do indoor growing conditions alter the microbial communities of plants? How do they impact product quality and shelf life?
Industrial Ecology in Closed Systems: focus questions will include: how can we better design more energy and resource efficient systems? Can we build holistic energy models? Can we create industrial ecosystems where one industry’s effluent is another’s intake? How would we model/quantify the ecosystem services provided by a functioning ‘closed loop industrial ecosystem’?
Conference participants are additionally welcome to join writing teams and collaborate on a proposal for a coordinated agricultural project (CAP) grant on VF that builds off of conference discussions. Writing teams may also choose to develop proposals for relevant funding programs at USDA-NIFA SAS, SCRI, NSF/USDA/DOE INFEWS, and NSF
Deadlines
Pre-registration ends June 30th
invitation to attend conference July 15th
Final registration, room reservations and payment due August 1st;
Conference events begin Monday September 9th
For more information about the conference please read the Project Summary.
For more information about conference activities please read the Conference Program Schedule and Format.
Conference Program Schedule & Format.pdf
For more information about Biosphere 2 please read the following document.
Want to make the most of your time in Tucson? Go to Visit Tucson to discover things to do during your visit!
The Hydroponic Threat To Organic Food
USDA’s organic certification of hydroponically grown produce is an example of conquest and colonization
USDA’s organic certification of hydroponically grown produce is an example of conquest and colonization.
DAVE CHAPMAN
July 5, 2019
In the last seven years there has been a quiet redefinition taking place in the USDA National Organic Program that oversees organic standards. Large scale industrial producers have insinuated themselves into organic certification to transform what the green and white label stands for.
Original organic was based on a simple equation:
Healthy soil = healthy plants = healthy animals = healthy planet.
Hydroponics is a system that relies entirely upon processed inputs to feed the plants. The old organic adage is, “Feed the soil, not the plant.” The guiding principle of conventional agriculture is: “Feed the plant, not the soil.” Obviously, hydroponic production is the most extreme example of this philosophy. Photo by ACME/Flickr
This equation leaves out the discussion of WHY these things are true, but it is a good roadmap for what organic agriculture is all about. The first given is always “healthy soil.” As we look deeper, we cannot study these parts separately, because plants and animals are integral parts of healthy soil system. No plants means no healthy soil. The same is true with animals. Soil and plants coevolved for 350 million years, and neither can be healthy in isolation from the other. The dance between plants, microbial life, and animal life in the soil is necessary for all.
Western soil science got started with the work of German chemist Justus von Liebig (1803-1873). From Liebig’s perspective, soil was a passive storage bin for plant nutrients. However, in Charles Darwin’s 1881 book The Formation of Vegetable Mould through the Action of Worms, these ideas were challenged by a vision of the soil as a living ecosystem. But Liebig’s viewpoint dominated Western soil science until the 1980’s when the role of organisms in soil formation became better understood. Liebig himself turned away from his “storage bin” paradigm in the later part of his life, but our agricultural sciences continued to follow his earlier writings.
If we take away plants, soil can no longer be living. Plants provide the energy via photosynthesis for all animal and microbial life in the soil. These photosynthates are provided first as root exudates that feed the fungi and bacteria in exchange for which they gain the minerals that in turn feed the plants. The visible life forms are as important as the invisible microbial community. Soil animals go from burrowing woodchucks and gophers to snails, slugs, and elongate animals such as earthworms, flatworms, nematodes, soil mites, springtails, ants, termites, beetles and flies. All of these species together create a community that is often called the soil food web.
Organic farming is based on protecting and enhancing this web of life. By cultivating the diversity of life, we create a stable ecosystem in the soil. Diseases or pestilence are symptoms of a loss of balance. So the organic farmer’s first job is to enhance the diversity of life in the soil community. This is done by providing materials and techniques to help build a soil carbon sponge.
Conventional agriculture is based on a very different strategy of control and simplification. By making systems that are as simple as possible, it becomes easy to control the inputs and outputs. The inputs are processed offsite to provide plant available nutrients. “Soil” becomes a device for holding roots. It is thus easier to make these systems replicable, much like the model of a McDonald's restaurant. McDonald’s simplifies their systems as much as possible to serve the same hamburger to every customer around the world. In such a system the expertise is contained in the corporate staff who design the processes and provides the raw materials. The problem is a loss of nutrition in the final product. McDonald’s serves lots of calories that soothe customers’ cravings, but they fail at providing a healthy diet. The end result is the phenomena of customers who are simultaneously malnourished and obese.
Similarly, in a conventional agriculture system, the yields are high per acre, but, as Vandana Shiva has said, the yield of health per acre is low. As it turns out, we are part of that co-evolution of soil and plants and animals. Human nutritional needs are complex and beyond our full understanding at this point. But organic farmers believe that by embracing those natural systems, we can feed ourselves well, even if we never fully understand why.
As Einstein once said, there is a simplicity that comes before complexity that is worthless, but there is a simplicity beyond complexity that is priceless.
These simplified conventional systems have been promoted by an industry that profits by selling remedies to the unintended consequences of such crude simplicity. Their high yields are unsustainable without the liberal use of poisons. Plants grown in a soil devoid of biological complexity are very vulnerable to disease and insect attack. And of course, the more we use such poisons, the less healthy the soil becomes, so more pesticides are needed, and on and on.
In livestock production, the epitome of conventional agriculture is a Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation (CAFO) where animals are isolated from the land. Their food is grown far from where they live, so their manure is lost to the production system. There is no honoring of Albert Howard’s Law Of Return: “what comes from the soil must be returned to the soil.”
In vegetables and berries, the epitome of conventional agriculture is hydroponic production. Hydroponics is a system that relies entirely upon processed inputs to feed the plants. The old organic adage is, “Feed the soil, not the plant.” The guiding principle of conventional agriculture is: “Feed the plant, not the soil.” Obviously, hydroponic production is the most extreme example of this philosophy.
The practices of organic farming are ancient, but not all traditional farming systems could be called organic by the definition of such pioneers as Albert Howard. Some traditional agriculture was not sustainable and ultimately led to the downfall of civilizations. But organic principles have been practiced in the intensive farming of southeast Asia for over 4000 years. They were learned by Howard in India and subsequently taught in the West. Since then, soil science has confirmed Howard’s ideas to an astonishing degree. Every day we learn more and more about how soil communities function and about why such a system need not depend on pesticides to thrive. Every day we learn more about the connections between the soil microbiome and our own microbiome.
From this logic we derive a conclusion that is important to remember: that the absence of pesticides in a successful organic system is the result of how we farm, not the definition of it.
The organic movement has long believed that food grown in a healthy soil is the foundation of human health. In recent years it has become clear that agriculture is also deeply involved in the climate crisis, both as the problem and as the solution. Conventional agriculture contributes directly to the destruction of the living soil, leading to the spread of deserts and the warming of the planet. We have the skills and understanding to farm without chemicals in a way that will build a soil carbon sponge that can cool our warming planet. Our impediment to achieving this is social and political, not technical.
The inclusion of hydroponics in organic certification is thus not an example of innovation and improvement. It is an example of conquest and colonization. It is simply a hostile takeover of organic by economic forces. It has been widely resisted by the organic community, but the USDA continues to embrace hydroponics as organic just as they embrace CAFOs as organic. Their redefinition of organic is in opposition to the law and to international norms. The US once again becomes the rogue nation throwing away our mutual future so somebody can make a buck.
At this time, huge quantities of hydroponic berries, tomatoes, peppers, cucumbers, and greens are being marketed as “Certified Organic” in partnership with the USDA. And there is no way of identifying what is hydroponic in the organic label.
The Real Organic Project was created to challenge this process. Our efforts include the creation of an add-on label so that real organic farmers and eaters might be able to find one another in a deceptive marketplace. To learn more, please visit us at realorganicproject.org.
Dave Chapman
Dave Chapman runs Long Wind Farm in Vermont and is the Executive Director of the Real Organic Project. He is a founding member of the Vermont Organic Farmers. He has been active in the movement to Keep The Soil In Organic. He is proud to be a current member of the Policy Committee of the Organic Farmers Association. He served on the USDA Hydroponic Task Force.
Secretary Perdue Praises Farming Innovations at Forbes AgTech Summit
At the fifth-annual Forbes AgTech Summit in Salinas, U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue noted his admiration for the level of innovation that continues to be developed in the agricultural sector
JULY 2, 2019 AGRI-BUSINESS, USDA-NRCS
At the fifth-annual Forbes AgTech Summit in Salinas, U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue noted his admiration for the level of innovation that continues to be developed in the agricultural sector. During his discussion with Forbes CEO Mike Federle, the Secretary described the agtech environment as being “on the cusp” of making revolutionary improvements to the field of agriculture and noted that USDA wants to help facilitate those advancements.
“We want to help form a regulatory framework that works with our innovators, and creators, and entrepreneurs rather than against them,” said Secretary Perdue. “We have the ability here at USDA, through our land grant universities and our extension service, to get that to the ground floor of producers, to understand the new technology here.”
Many of the technologies being developed for agricultural application are going to rely on consistent internet access. The issue of broadband internet, which the Secretary described as having a “transformational capacity,” will need to be addressed with improvements to infrastructure. “As we move as a society to the internet of things, agriculture is going to be one of the beneficiaries, but it’s going to rely on connectivity,” Secretary Perdue noted. “We’ve got some gee-whiz kind of productivity increases out there in precision agriculture that could be utilized today but they’re dependent upon connectivity.”
Along with agricultural innovations, the Secretary also addressed trade concerns as they relate to China. While the troubling trade market is not likely to remain the status quo, Secretary Perdue noted that it is because of American farmers success that they carry much of the burden when trade tensions run high. “We’re blessed to be in a nation where we can produce more than we can consume domestically,” said Secretary Perdue. “Farmers, because of the trade surplus that they enjoy in agriculture, they’re the tip of the spear. When people are going to retaliate then that’s where they go.”
The Forbes AgTech Summit was one of several stops the Secretary made on his most recent trip to California. Secretary Perdue visited the indoor vertical farming company Plenty to review the techniques being used to grow food in an urban environment. The Secretary also toured Driscoll’s Berries, as well as the C.W. Bill Jones Pumping Plant, a key component of the Central Valley Project. During his California visit, Secretary Perdue also met with local politicians and community members at several town hall events that took place in Clarksburg, Watsonville, Los Banos, and Yolo County.
Listen to Secretary Perdue’s discussion at the Forbes AgTech Summit below.
USDA National Organic Program Holds Firm Against Efforts to Impose Special Restrictions Against Growers Using Container and Hydroponic Methods
Groups opposed to certification of production systems incorporating containers and hydroponics failed in their most recent attempts in the last few weeks to convince the USDA and the National Organic Standards Board to initiate the process for new standards for those production systems.
Several groups including the Real Organic Project, the Organic Farmers Association, the National Organic Coalition and others presented testimony at the recent National Organic Standards Board meeting in Seattle and in recent press campaigns to call for a moratorium on certifications for organic production systems using containers and hydroponics. The moratorium would be followed by the revocation of certification for existing operations. However, if the USDA does not agree to those terms, the groups insist that new more restrictive regulations must be drafted, implemented and then applied to container and hydroponic organic production systems.
Those groups have begun the tactic of inventing hypothetical scenarios about production practices, and they then ask for clarification from USDA regarding the legality of such an approach. USDA indicated that they would not likely give opinions regarding hypothetical situations, but USDA will look at specific cases and instances of operations performing actual activities to review for compliance. The CSO expects that opponents of certifications for containers will refer operations for review, and USDA will respond regarding those practices.
However, this activity will not be unofficial rule making or regulations that are created without any opportunity for public input. USDA does not have the authority to implement standards through the guidance process that would create special restrictions for container operations. Any new restrictions would have to go through the formal rule making process.
Organic producers must follow all applicable USDA standards for organic production systems. Specifically, growers need to show that their production system is managed to respond to site-specific conditions by integrating cultural, biological, and mechanical practices that foster cycling of resources, promote ecological balance, and conserve biodiversity.
Here are the requirements copied from 7 CFR 205.201 that lay out the elements required to be included in the organic production and handling systems plan.
§205.201 Organic production and handling system plan.
(a) The producer or handler of a production or handling operation, except as exempt or excluded under §205.101, intending to sell, label, or represent agricultural products as “100 percent organic,” “organic,” or “made with organic (specified ingredients or food group(s))” must develop an organic production or handling system plan that is agreed to by the producer or handler and an accredited certifying agent. An organic system plan must meet the requirements set forth in this section for organic production or handling. An organic production or handling system plan must include:
(1) A description of practices and procedures to be performed and maintained, including the frequency with which they will be performed;
(2) A list of each substance to be used as a production or handling input, indicating its composition, source, location(s) where it will be used, and documentation of commercial availability, as applicable;
(3) A description of the monitoring practices and procedures to be performed and maintained, including the frequency with which they will be performed, to verify that the plan is effectively implemented;
(4) A description of the recordkeeping system implemented to comply with the requirements established in §205.103;
(5) A description of the management practices and physical barriers established to prevent commingling of organic and non organic products on a split operation and to prevent contact of organic production and handling operations and products with prohibited substances; and
(6) Additional information deemed necessary by the certifying agent to evaluate compliance with the regulations.
(b) A producer may substitute a plan prepared to meet the requirements of another Federal, State, or local government regulatory program for the organic system plan: Provided, That, the submitted plan meets all the requirements of this subpart.
Your Membership and Activity Still Needed
The efforts of growers and other members of the organic community like yourself helped to create more regulatory certainty and to safeguard your rights to select the most appropriate growing methods in your organic operations continues.
Join the CSO if you have not done so already. Our sustained efforts on behalf of the hydroponic, aquaponics and container industry around the country and in Washington, DC rely on dues from farming operations like yours.
Agriculture and Food Research Initiative - Sustainable Agricultural Systems
Program:
Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI) | AFRI Sustainable Agricultural Systems
Applications to the FY 2019 Agriculture and Food Research Initiative - Sustainable Agricultural Systems (SAS) Request for Applications (RFA) must focus on approaches that promote transformational changes in the U.S. food and agriculture system within the next 25 years.
NIFA seeks creative and visionary applications that take a systems approach, and that will significantly improve the supply of abundant, affordable, safe, nutritious, and accessible food, while providing sustainable opportunities for expansion of the bioeconomy through novel animal, crop, and forest products and supporting technologies.
These approaches must demonstrate current and future social, behavioral, economic, health, and environmental impacts.
Additionally, the outcomes of the work being proposed must result in societal benefits, including promotion of rural prosperity and enhancement of quality of life for those involved in food and agricultural value chains from production to utilization and consumption. See AFRI SAS RFA for details.
APPLY FOR GRANT(LINK IS EXTERNAL)VIEW RFA
ELIGIBILITY DETAILS
Who Is Eligible to Apply:
1862 Land-Grant Institutions, 1890 Land-Grant Institutions, 1994 Land-Grant Institutions, Other or Additional Information (See below), Private Institutions of Higher Ed, State Controlled Institutions of Higher Ed
More on Eligibility:
Note: This RFA invites only integrated project (must include research, education, and extension) applications. Please see Part III, A. of the this AFRI SAS RFA for more specific eligibility requirements for integrated projects. Applications from ineligible institutions will not be reviewed.
IMPORTANT DATES
Posted Date:
Friday, March 29, 2019
Closing Date:
Thursday, September 26, 2019
Other Due Date:
Letter of Intent Due:
Tuesday, June 4, 2019
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
For More Information Contact:
AFRI Sustainable Agricultural Systems Team
Contact for Electronic Access Problems:
electronic@nifa.usda.gov(link sends e-mail)
Funding Opportunity Number:
USDA-NIFA-AFRI-006739
CFDA number:
10.310
Previous fiscal year(s) RFA:
FY 2018 AFRI SAS FINAL RFA (431.48 KB)
Estimated Total Program Funding:
$90,000,000
Percent of Applications Funded:
10%
Cost Sharing or Matching Requirement:
See RFA
Range of Awards:
$5,000,000 - $10,000,000
Cornucopia Institute Takes Aim Against Certification Companies Over Organic Production Systems Incorporating Containers
The Cornucopia Institute released late last week a Guide to Organic Certifiers. The apparent point of the document is to encourage growers opposed to certification of organic production systems that include containers to switch their certification companies
The Cornucopia Institute released late last week a Guide to Organic Certifiers. The apparent point of the document is to encourage growers opposed to certification of organic production systems that include containers to switch their certification companies.
As efforts supported by Cornucopia to pass a National Organic Standards Board recommendation to modify USDA Organic Regulations in order to prohibit hydroponic systems failed, a new avenue to achieve their goals is to economically damage USDA approved and regulated certification companies to the point where those certifiers would drop growers that produce some portion of their crops in containerized production systems.
The Washington Post did publish a story on Friday on the subject (a repost of the story can be found here). The article states that the purpose of the certifier scorecard "is mostly a mechanism for shaming certifiers and the organic businesses that employ them."
CCOF Chief Executive Kelly Damewood responded in the article by saying "We are a federally accredited certifier and cannot deny certification based on philosophy or values alone. The scorecard is showing that they have an issue with the National Organic Programs allowance of hydroponics, not with CCOF."
Your Membership and Activity Still Needed
The efforts of growers and other members of the organic community like yourself helped to create more regulatory certainty and to safeguard your rights to select the most appropriate growing methods in your organic operations continues.
Join the CSO if you have not done so already. Our sustained efforts on behalf of the hydroponic, aquaponics and container industry around the country and in Washington, DC rely on dues from farming operations like yours.
USDA Vertical Ag Workshop Report
On June 27 and 28, 2018 the U.S. Departments of Agriculture and Energy co-hosted a workshop in Washington, D.C.
By urbanagnews
March 1, 2019
On June 27 and 28, 2018 the U.S. Departments of Agriculture and Energy co-hosted a workshop in Washington, D.C. The workshop engaged stakeholders, experts, and researchers from across the United States in interdisciplinary discussions on the potential for indoor agriculture (IA), in the context of sustainable urban ecosystems, to address global environmental challenges. Participants collaborated to identify Research and Development (R&D) challenges, opportunities, and needs relating to six major areas:
Community Services
Economics 5.
Ecosystem Services
Plant Breeding
Pest Management
Systems Engineering
Discussions relating to each of these six major themes are summarized in the body of this report.
USDA Vertical Ag workshop report Download
Anti-GMO Groups Petition USDA To Exclude Hydroponic Farming From Organic Certification
Cathy Siegner | Food Dive | February 13, 2019
Organic movement schism? Fight over hydroponics puts $50 billion industry in limbo
The Center for Food Safety filed a petition with the Department of Agriculture Jan. 16 urging the agency to exclude hydroponically grown produce from eligibility for the USDA Organic label. The group wants the USDA to make sure “ecologically integrated organic production practices” are required for organic certification and revoke existing organic certifications previously issued to hydroponic operations.
The petition, endorsed by 13 consumer groups, organic growers and an organic retailer, stated growing food without soil doesn’t meet federal organic standards and violates federal law requiring soil improvement and biodiversity conservation….
[T]he National Organic Standards Board recommended in 2010 that hydroponic not be considered a certified organic growing method….However, board members narrowly voted in November 2017 not to exclude hydroponic crops from organic certification.
Hydroponic growers see themselves as responding to the demand for local organic food. Plenty, a San Francisco-based vertical farming company that grows leafy greens and herbs indoors without soil, wrote to the [USDA’s] NOSB [National Organic Standards Board] in 2017 saying all available innovative solutions must be explored, particularly those that can save resources.
“For example, Plenty’s organic growing system yields up to 350 times that of traditional systems and can be located close to consumers, regardless of climate, geography or economic status….” the company’s testimony said.
Read full, original article: Petition asks USDA to exclude hydroponics from organic certification
Inside The GMO Law: What Needs To Be Labeled And Why It Matters
The regulations state that manufacturers can voluntarily disclose GMOs if a product contains some of these highly refined ingredients or has a lower concentration of biologically engineered material, which GMO advocates cheer and consumer organizations caution
Highly refined ingredients and the "BE" acronym are out, according to regulations issued in December. The food industry and consumer groups are split on how effective the new measure will be.
AUTHOR Megan Poinski@meganpoinski
Now that the final GMO labeling regulations have been rolled out, what is going to bear the new seal that certifies a product is derived from bioengineering?
The answer: Not as many products as advocates for the labeling might have thought. It's been estimated that up to 75% of the products in a grocery store are made with ingredients derived from crops that were genetically modified. According to the regulations, items that contain highly refined ingredients don't have to be labeled.
Additionally, to require a label, a product needs to have at least 5% bioengineered material, which is a higher concentration amount than most other countries that have GMO labels.
The regulations state that manufacturers can voluntarily disclose GMOs if a product contains some of these highly refined ingredients or has a lower concentration of biologically engineered material, which GMO advocates cheer and consumer organizations caution.
The new labeling requirements, which most manufacturers must implement starting in 2020, were viewed by some analysts as fair.
"They balance consumers' request for more information with a labeling approach that is based on facts, practicality and common sense, rather than politics and fear," Sean McBride of DSM Strategic Communication told Food Dive in an email. "No one side got everything it wanted, and there will be special interest skirmishes in the 116th Congress and beyond over this, but for now, we have a clear flight path to providing consumers with the transparency they want and deserve.”
There are many other aspects of the regulations those in the industry appreciate and despise. But the time for changes has passed. Manufacturers now need to work on ensuring that their labels comply with the new guidelines. According to the regulations, manufacturers may put their labels to the test as soon as this month.
Credit: Okanagan Specialty Fruits
What needs to be labeled?
While the new regulations outlined the symbols and terms that will be used, what needs to be labeled did not change during the rulemaking process. Meat, poultry and egg products by themselves are not included in the disclosure, which is stated clearly in the law. Neither are multi-ingredient products that have these items as their first ingredients, such as a canned stew with beef broth.
The final rule lays out a much more nuanced — and consequential — point. Many crops that become food ingredients are GMO, but they go through a refining process to become useful ingredients. That process often destroys the genetic material in the ingredients. One of the largest questions for the final rulemaking was whether these ingredients needed to be labeled as GMOs.
Companies and trade organizations were split on the issue. In its comments on the rule, the Grocery Manufacturers Association said about 90% of the nation's corn, soybean and sugar beet crops are genetically modified. If the products using refined versions of those crops do not have to be labeled as GMO, it estimated 78% fewer products would have to be disclosed under federal law.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture decided not to require the disclosure because the initial law said GMO food needs to contain modified genetic material. If it cannot be detected, it is not there. And because the initial law also does not say anything about classifying some of these ingredients from GMO crops as "highly refined," the final rule does not take on this classification of definition.
Consumer advocates who oppose GMOs were strident in their disapproval of the ruling.
"The USDA has betrayed the public trust by denying Americans the right to know how their food is produce," Andrew Kimbrell, executive director at Center for Food Safety, said in a written statement. "Instead of providing clarity and transparency, they have created large scale confusion and uncertainty for consumers, food producers, and retailers."
The Consumer Federation of America said in a statement that exempting refined products from disclosure is "inadequate."
However, many major food manufacturers — including Campbell Soup, Mars, Danone, Kellogg, Coca-Cola and Unilever — have been voluntarily disclosing GMOs, heavily refined or not, since the mandatory labeling issue was first debated several years ago.
The USDA also will maintain a list of crops that are definitively GMO that are produced anywhere in the world. This list helps food manufacturers know which ingredients they need to disclose, but it is not exhaustive and will be updated periodically. The regulation gives manufacturers 18 months to update their labels after an ingredient is added to the list.
Currently, the following crops are defined as GMO: alfalfa, Arctic apple, canola, corn, cotton, Bt-Begun eggplant, ringspot virus-resistant varieties of papaya, pink pineapple, potato, AquAdvantage salmon, soybean, summer squash and sugarbeet.
The regulation also indicates where and how on-package disclosure is required. It needs to be seen under ordinary shopping conditions, and must be located near other information on the label that features the manufacturer's name and location. The disclosure can be through text, smartphone-scannable digital links, URLs, a telephone number, text messages or the "BE" symbol. If a digital link is used, it needs to have the words "scan here for more food information" next to it.
While there were several options for the BE symbol in the preliminary framework, the final rules set one that has a round picture of a plant growing in a sunny farm field. A green circle around the picture features the word "BIOENGINEERED" or "DERIVED FROM BIOENGINEERING." There is no BE acronym — the regulations say many consumers did not know what it stood for — and an earlier logo with a smiley face was abandoned.
Credit: Flickr, Dave Herholz
Will it be useful for consumers?
Since it's been known that scientists and food companies were working with ingredients from lab-modified plants, many consumers have wanted to know if they are eating them. While the predominant scientific consensus is GMO food is safe and items made with these ingredients are just as nutritious as their counterparts, consumers value transparency.
Are they getting it from this labeling law? Reactions are mixed.
"No one should be surprised that the most anti-consumer, anti-transparency administration in modern times is denying Americans basic information about what’s in their food and how it’s grown," the Environmental Working Group said in a written statement. The organization takes issue with several aspects of the law, mainly the ruling on not having to label highly refined ingredients as GMOs. EWG has added "Certrified GMO-free" — using verifications from the Non-GMO Project — as a category on its food information website.
The Grocery Manufacturers Association focused on the cohesiveness of the labeling regulations. The federal law requiring labeling was quickly passed — partially to preempt a Vermont state law requiring its own labeling scheme for GMO products sold there. With the regulations in place, consumers are closer to getting the information they seek on food products, the trade group said.
"Disclosure is imperative to increasing transparency, educating consumers and building trust of brands, the food industry and government," Karin Moore, GMA's senior vice president and general counsel, said in a written statement. "We are pleased that the USDA has now provided a structure for our companies to share this information voluntarily, building a foundation for government to more quickly respond to innovation in food and agriculture in the future."
Food Marketing Institute President and CEO Leslie Sarasin agreed, hailing the "more precise vocabulary into the public discourse regarding biotechnology in food production" represented by the new labeling requirements.
While there has been some voluntary disclosure of GMOs — and certification of non-GMO products — Thomas Gremillion, director of the CFA's Food Policy Institute, mentioned the issue of terminology. Consumers have been using "GMO" and "genetically modified" to talk about these food products — not "bioengineered," which will appear on the label. "Bioengineered" is the term in the law — the acronym "GMO" only appears twice in the text, and each time to say certain products cannot be labeled "non-GMO."
Regardless of terminology, some say that having the law in place doesn't correct fearmongering over GMOs. Transparency group Peel Back the Label said it may actually make it worse.
"While the USDA’s new disclosure rule provides additional clarity for consumers regarding what is and what is not a bioengineered food, it does nothing to reign in the growing use of misleading food labels and meaningless absence claims that are designed to capitalize on consumer fears and confusion in order to boost sales," the group said in a statement emailed to Food Dive. "Consumers deserve both truth and transparency in food labeling, and Peel Back the Label urges the USDA and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to review current voluntary disclosure regulations to ensure food labeling is founded in science, not in fear.”
Follow Megan Poinski on Twitter
Filed Under: Ingredients Packaging / Labeling Policy
Top image credit: U.S. Department of Agriculture
Organic Industry Is Not Giving Hydroponic, Aquaponic Growers A Warm Embrace
The litigious Center for Food Safety two weeks ago filed a rule-making petition with U.S. Department of Agriculture, demanding new regulations prohibiting organic certification of hydroponic agriculture production
By Dan Flynn on February 8, 2019
Some fresh produce from hydroponic growers has been approved for and is being sold under USDA’s organic seal, but farmers who grow their organic crops in the soil don’t like the competition.
The litigious Center for Food Safety two weeks ago filed a rule-making petition with U.S. Department of Agriculture, demanding new regulations prohibiting organic certification of hydroponic agriculture production. The 22-page petition also asks USDA to revoke any existing organic certification previously issued to hydroponic operations.
Food safety comes into play in the petition in only one way. Hydroponics doesn’t have soil, so they come up a little short because they do not provide soil samples as a measure of testing compliance. The CFS points out that regulations implementing the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990 “consistently suggest soil samples as a measure for testing compliance.”
Agents who review operations as part of the USDA’s organic certification process “must conduct periodic residue testing of agricultural products,” with soil samples suggested as a method for testing, CFS’s petition says. “Many hydroponic systems would not contain soil for sampling, as suggested in the OFPA regulations.”
Hydroponic, aquaponic and aeroponic growers currently can earn organic certification. It is allowed by USDA so long as the certifier can show there is compliance with the organic standard. One industry supplier says hydroponics, by definition, is a method of growing plants in a water-based nutrient-rich solution that does not use soil. Instead of plants root in a nutrient solution with access to oxygen.
A year ago, USDA’s Agriculture Marketing Service (AMS) tried to settle some issues concerning organic certification of hydroponic and aeroponic growing operations. The AMS action came after USDA’s advisory National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) recommended banning the non-soil systems from being called organic production. USDA only briefly pondered that one before saying “thanks, but no thanks” to NOSB for the recommendation.
Aquaponics refers to growing crops in a system with farmed fish that supply nutrients for plants. Greenhouse growers and urban farmers using vertical growing systems use hydroponic and aeroponic methods — all without soil. The organic industry has been rocked with debate about these hydroponic methods for nearly a decade.
CFS wants a flat prohibition on hydroponic operations ever being allowed to use the USDA organic label. It claims hydroponic production systems that do not use soil do not meet federal organic standards and violate organic practices, which require that organic farming include soil improvement and biodiversity conservation.
Joining the CFS petition are more than a dozen other organic farmers, consumer, retailer, and certifying organizations, including the Organic Farmers Association, Northeast Organic Dairy Producers Alliance (NODPA), PCC Community Markets, and the Cornucopia Institute.
“Mislabeling mega-hydroponic operations as ‘organic’ is contrary to the text and basic principles of the organic standard. Right now there is a pitched battle for the future of organic, and we stand with organic farmers and consumers who believe the label must retain its integrity,” said George Kimbrell, CFS legal director.
The petitioners say consumers trust the organic label and pay extra for the assurance that it indicates a more healthful and environmentally-friendly way of producing the food they buy.
Since the federal Certified Organic label was introduced more than 20 years ago, CFS says the organic food market has grown exponentially and is now a $60 billion industry in which multinational corporations have bought organic brands and compete with small food producers who use environmentally-friendly methods.
“Allowing hydroponic systems to be certified as organic undercuts the livelihood of organic farmers that take great lengths to support healthy soil as the bedrock of their farms,” stated Kate Mendenhall of the Organic Farmers Association. “Hydroponic producers getting the benefit of the organic label without actually doing anything to benefit the soil undermines the standard and puts all soil-based organic farmers at an untenable economic disadvantage.”
The petition argues that organic agriculture has traditionally been defined as using soil requirements such as fostering soil fertility, improving soil quality, and using environmentally beneficial farming methods such as proper tillage and crop rotation.
USDA continues to allow hydroponics, which goes against the advisory NOSB’s recommendation that organic certification not be extended to the non-soil growing methods.
Canada and Mexico prohibit hydroponics for organics, and the European Parliament voted to end the organic certification of hydroponic products in April 2018.
“Corporate agribusiness lobbyists have been working to water down the organic standards for decades,” said Mark Kastel, executive director for the Cornucopia Institute. “In this case, the careful stewardship of soil fertility is not only a philosophical precept, but it’s also codified in federal law.”
And while CFS is often successful with its legal strategies, the current petition to USDA may not get too far. Jennifer Tucker, the deputy administrator of USDA’s National Organic Program, recently said organic certification of hydroponic operations is “a settled issue.”
“Last year we issued an Organic Insider (e-mail newsletter) that indicated that hydroponics had been allowed since the beginning of the program and that (they) are still allowed,” Tucker said. “We consider that a settled issue.”
The Packer, the produce industry publication, reported Tucker’s comments to the 2019 Global Organic Produce Expo.
“There are some certifiers that certify hydroponics, and there are some that do not; they are all bound by a common set of regulations,” Tucker added.
Tags: Center for Food Safety, hydroponic, Jennifer Tucker, NOP, NOSB, organic certification, organics, USDA Organic
Groups Take Legal Action To Prohibit Organic Hydroponics
Cornucopia Institute
Consumers And Organic Groups Say Hydroponic Systems Cannot Comply With USDA’s Organic Standards.
January 17, 2019
The Center for Food Safety (CFS) filed a new legal action demanding that the U.S. Department of Agriculture prohibit hydroponic operations from using the organic label.
CFS said hydroponic production systems — a catch-all term that applies to food production methods that do not use soil — do not meet federal organic standards and violate organic law, which requires that organic farming include soil improvement and biodiversity conservation; hydroponic systems cannot comply with the organic standard's vital soil standards because hydroponic crops do not use soil at all.
The CFS filing was endorsed by more than a dozen other organic farmer, consumer, retailer and certifying organizations, including the Organic Farmers Assn., Northwest Organic Dairy Producers Alliance, PCC Community Markets and The Cornucopia Institute.
"Mislabeling mega-hydroponic operations as 'organic' is contrary to the text and basic principles of the organic standard. Right now, there is a pitched battle for the future of organic, and we stand with organic farmers and consumers who believe the label must retain its integrity," CFS legal director George Kimbrell said.
The groups said consumers trust the organic label and pay extra for the assurance that it indicates a more healthful and environmentally friendly way of producing the food they buy. Since the federal Certified Organic label was introduced more than 20 years ago, the organic food market has grown exponentially and is now a $60 billion industry in which multinational corporations have bought organic brands and, thus, compete with small food producers growing food using environmentally friendly methods.
"Allowing hydroponic systems to be certified as organic undercuts the livelihood of organic farmers that take great lengths to support healthy soil as the bedrock of their farms," Kate Mendenhall, director of the Organic Farmers Assn., stated. "Hydroponic producers getting the benefit of the organic label without actually doing anything to benefit the soil undermines the standard and put all soil-based organic farmers at an untenable economic disadvantage."
Organic agriculture certification has always included soil requirements such as fostering soil fertility, improving soil quality and using environmentally beneficial farming methods like proper tillage and crop rotation. “The National Organic Standards Board, the expert body assigned by Congress to advise USDA on organic matters, recommended that the agency prohibit certification of hydroponic systems, but USDA instead continues to allow hydroponics. Canada and Mexico also prohibit hydroponics from organic, and the European Parliament voted to end the organic certification of hydroponic products in April 2018,” CFS said in a statement.
TAGS: POLICY
California Farm Linked To Romaine Lettuce E.coli Outbreak Recalls Additional Produce
To View The Video, Please Click Here
FDA believes market has been purged of contaminated romaine
A California farm that federal health officials traced to the recent E.coli outbreak from romaine lettuce has recalled additional produce “out of an abundance of caution,” the facility announced Thursday.
Adam Bros. Farming Inc. in Santa Maria has recalled red leaf lettuce, green leaf lettuce, and cauliflower that was harvest from Nov. 27 to Nov. 30.
Planning a trip to the sapphire seas of Aruba shouldn’t make you feel blue. Save time and money when you book air + hotel with JetBlue Vacations.
SOME ROMAINE LETTUCE SAFE TO EAT AGAIN, FDA SAYS
While none of the recalled products have tested positive for E. coli, and no illnesses associated with these produce items have been reported, the farm said: “Out of an abundance of caution, Adam Bros. Farming, Inc. is initiating this voluntary recall in cooperation with the FDA.”
“The recall was initiated after it was discovered that sediment from a reservoir near where the produce was grown tested positive for E. coli,” the farm explained.
Adam Bros. Farming Inc. added the recalled produce was “grown in particular fields” and does not involve all of its products.
“None of the filtered, treated water has tested positive for E. coli, all E. coli tests returning negative,” Adam Bros. Farming Inc. said, adding the bacteria “may cause a diarrheal illness from which most healthy adults can recover completely within a week. Some people can develop a form of kidney failure called Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome (HUS). HUS is most likely to occur in young children and the elderly. The condition can lead to serious kidney damage and even death.”
While Adam Bros. Farming Inc. has been linked to the food poisoning outbreak from romaine lettuce, federal health officials cautioned that other farms are likely involved in the E. coli outbreak and consumers should continue checking the label before purchasing romaine lettuce.
At least 59 people in 15 states have now been sickened by the tainted lettuce, the FDA said.
That said, regulators said they are fairly confident that the lettuce which first triggered the outbreak has been removed from the market. The FDA told consumers to avoid romaine lettuce just before Thanksgiving.
To learn more about the recent red leaf lettuce, green leaf lettuce and cauliflower recall -- like where these produce items were distributed -- click here.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Madeline Farber is a Reporter for Fox News. You can follow her on Twitter @MaddieFarberUDK.
Hydroponic Organic Produce: Year One
By Lee Allen| October 10, 2018
The final ruling to confirm hydroponic produce is eligibile to apply for organic certification took nearly 15 years.
We’re approaching the first anniversary of last year’s National Organics Standard Board (NOSB)/USDA clarification that cleared up any confusion about whether hydroponically grown produce is eligible for organic certification. It is.
The decision was not made lightly, nor in haste. The final ruling took nearly 15 years and, like the ongoing Hatfield and McCoy feud, verbal shots are still firing from both sides.
Technically, certifying hydroponic production has been allowed since 2002.
“At the Fall 2017 meeting, the NOSB reaffirmed certification for that system,” says a USDA spokesperson.
Actually, in 2010, NOSB recommended against allowing organic certification, writing, “Growing media shall contain sufficient organic matter capable of supporting natural and diverse soil ecology. For this reason, hydroponic and aeroponic systems are prohibited.”
The National Organic Program (NOP), however, determines what is allowed and what is not allowed. It ruled against NOSB’s recommendation.
With the 2017 decision, both bodies are finally in alignment.
Shortly after the decision, protests popped up around the country. The counterview was captured in a National Public Radio report.
“When the founding principles of organic go to soil health and regeneration rather than simply feeding plants nutrients, it goes to the foundation of what organic farming means.”
The Massachusetts chapter of Northeast Organic Farming Association (NOFA) and the National Organic Coalition are advocating for the NOP to halt certifying hydroponic producers until what the groups term, “more clear guidelines for what constitutes organic hydroponics are issued.”
So while the decision is made, some are hoping an appeal will overturn it.
Future Sales Likely to Attract More Organic Growers
We can complain till the cows come home. Now the central question is: Will the ruling have a transformative impact on the organic vegetable industry? Or will it ultimately be labeled as ‘no big deal’?
The number of certified organic hydroponic operations is still limited. Exact numbers are difficult to come by at this point, but the number is likely in the low two digits. Certification takes time and is infamous for its reams of paperwork. Numbers are likely to increase sharply over the next two to three years.
Organic food sales in the U.S. already post ongoing and off-the-chart revenue increases — from about $3 billion in 1997 to nearing the $50 billion mark in 2017. It’s a four-decade jump that represents a bit over 5% of total food sales in America.
“Consumers love organic. And while the market will see a steadier growth pace as it matures, it will continue to surpass the growth rate of the broader food market,” writes Laura Batcha, Executive Director of the Organic Trade Association, in her assessment of Nutrition Business Journal’s 2018 Organic Industry Survey.
That January 2018 Organic Industry Survey showed produce (with fresh produce accounting for 90% of the demonstrated rise) topping the 2017 category at $16.5 billion in sales, a 5.3% growth.
Global Players Will Play Major Role
The U.S. is late in joining the hydroponic and aquaponic game. Greenhouse vegetables are much more common in some countries, including Europe, Canada, and Mexico.
The global hydroponic vegetable market will likely double by 2025, a study by Transparency Market Research shows. It predicts lettuce will be the biggest winner, with a 33% share of the hydroponics market.
The 2017 International Trade Statistics Map (ITSM) shows the value of vegetables imported into the U.S. that year was $73.9 million, with the preponderance coming from North American Free Trade Association partners Mexico ($10 million) and Canada ($6 million).
“Europe is anticipated to dominate the global hydroponic vegetables market with a 41% share overall by the end of 2025,” ITSM writes.
Interestingly enough, two dozen European countries, as well as Mexico, Canada, and Japan, prohibit the selling of hydroponic vegetables as ‘organic,’ meaning that producers there frequently grow for an American market.
A European Parliament-approved resolution will prohibit importing hydroponically produced organic food from non-EU (European Union) nations beginning
January 2021. In essence, U.S. growers will no longer be able to ship hydroponically grown and organically certified food to the EU for sale as organic.
Industry Reactions
When you talk with growers and others invested in the hydroponics ruling, opinions vary on how important the ruling will ultimately be.
Arizona organic growers Wholesum Harvest and California’s Driscoll berries are the two big domestic names in the industry, and both say they are already delivering what consumers expect in an organic label — produce raised affordably, year-round, and without synthetic pesticides.
Theo Crisantes, Chief Operations Officer of Wholesum Harvest, USDA organically certified for the last 30 years, says he hasn’t seen any major shift in the organic vegetable industry as a result of the ruling.
“The status quo was maintained,” he says, “although it did spark some interest from different growers beyond the vegetable industry into a broader spectrum, like the berry industry. But we haven’t seen a real rush from other growers to join the industry because it takes both knowledge about how to grow as well as requiring a heavy capital investment.”
Because of the peak growing season at press time, Driscoll’s, an organic berry grower in 21 countries and a fourth-generation family business that controls roughly a third of the $6 billion U.S. berry market, wasn’t available for comment.
Agricultural/Biosystems Engineer Dr. Stacy Tollefson, University of Arizona’s Controlled Environment Agriculture Center, was part of the NOSB taskforce that made the recommendation to reclassify.
“I haven’t seen any real impact on the organic hydroponic industry since the certification confirmation decision was made,” she says. “It’s basically been business as usual, but with the knowledge that the threat no longer exists of losing that certification.
“I do think a lot of hydro growers who were starting to grow for the organic market slowed down production or put research and expansion on hold, and some new growers thinking of going that route might have held back because they didn’t know how the decision would go. But now they can call their product ‘organic.’ I think this will solidify their expansion plans.”
Francis Thicke, another NOSB member, farms in Iowa and has a different take on the matter. He is also a member of the Organic Farmers Association.
“The official allowance of organic certification of hydroponic production is having, and will continue to have, a big effect on organic vegetable production,” Thicke says.
“Although not labeled as hydroponic, some estimates are that about half of the certified organic tomatoes, peppers, and cucumbers are already hydroponically grown, with many growers wanting to begin or expand organic hydroponic production. With the USDA green light, I expect that soon most of the organic tomatoes, peppers, and cucumbers on the grocery store shelf will be hydroponically grown.”