>Hello Sal,
>
>Who is going to pay for the USDA National Organic Program? Is that
your
>question? The only people that pay for anything, the consumer.
<bigger> buzz Wrong you loose . </bigger> I get the bills I have to pay
them. They have my name on them. If you are going to post to sanet-mg
please do some research. I pay the cost me. the bills come to me not the
consumers. They have a choice I do not if I want to sell organic I pay
. lets deal with the facts. if you are going to post on sanet deal with
the facts
The consumer
>could stop at the certifiers, but they only make their expenses and
profits
>from the farmer and handler,=20
and the farm and handling operation applicant
>only make money from the consumer. And the consumers only make money
working
>their jobs. The issue is not who pays, but the distribution of net
profits.
I disagree those are my profits you are cutting up and distributing and=20
the issue is trying to keep some of my money and having the money to pay
for farming and a good life of living.Everytime you add to that margin of
cost of production my keeping money gets smaller. It is the old squeeze
play the big fish eat the little fish. Cut the margin down so low and
raise the cost up high and make it so.that only the big fish live.You are
lucky you are one of the big fish. So paying 5 parties to say I am
honest is ok for the big players but there .are a lot of people that
cannot afford to pay all these good folks and to them you say get out of
the organic bussiness. well maybe you are right there is no longer any
room for the small farmer to be organic. Thanks for pointing that out.
> If being certified organic does not work out to an increased net profit
or
>benefit to an applicant in some way, they should exclude the use of the
word
>"organic" from their business plan.
.
. =20
<bigger>Ok now I understand if you are not making money you are not
organic . ok I see it is how much money you make that makes one be
organic thanks for pointing that out here I thought it was how we raise
food.
</bigger>
If one does not have a business plan,
>one probably should limit investing in businesses for which quality
assurance
>to the consumer is not necessary or is very simple
<bigger>oh I thought by farming organic I was adding quality assurance
guess it is the paper that adds assurance not the real act of farming
organic. Well eat the paper then !
</bigger> Organic farming is not
>simple in comparison with conventional (at least we keep telling
potential
>farmers that, though we know the opposite is true). Certainly selling
cattle
>at a livestock barn or taking soybeans to the elevator, or supplying
lettuce
>to the Ventura dock all take quality assurance too. All those that feel
more
>comfortable with the conventional farming approach should continue.
Organic
>farmers charge at least 25% more at the farm gate for organic products
than
>conventional, and know very well it takes, on average, running an
efficient
>operation, less cost to produce an organic than a conventional=20
product.
I do not get 25% more and most the time I take less and don't even know
what farm gate is but I know a rip off when I see one. does this
USDA/NOP guarantee me 25% more or are you just making up numbers like
that $5000 is a small farm number you got out of your imagation. I think
you should only use facts when posting to sanet instead of fooling the
folks into think every organic grower is a rip off and charges 25% more I
don't and have the paper work to show it. you are taking from the 25%
extra I never got.
What
>are we being paid for? Quality farming, quality post harvest=20
handling,
>healthiest of foods, enhancing the quality of the environment, quality
>assurance to our customers. When a customer buys my organic product, I
even
>add quality harvesting and pay conditions for my workers and food and
fiber
>produced without toxic chemicals for my customers, plus no chemical
pollution
>of the water and air for my neighbors and land that is vastly better for
the
>next generation. I am satisfied. I believe most organic customers are
too.
> What it cost to pay my part to USDA for a new generation of farmers,
small
>businesses and consumers to have high quality standards of food, fiber
and
>even cosmetics, those being National Organic Standards, is cheap
insurance
>for us all, my friends.=20
=20
<bigger>Please to a small grower this is not cheap insurance it is
robbery. The USDA is into cheep food we are into clean food .</bigger>you
hitch your horse to the wrong post come over here with us.
<bigger>
</bigger>>There are problems with any institution, with any bureaucracy.=20
The major
>problem being its distance from the people who pay for it and who it
>effects. But that is what democracy is all about. Organizing and
making our
>thoughts and needs responded to. I don't begrudge the bureaucracy,=20
the
>universities, the researchers for there roles, for there continual
>reductionist rather then looking at what they do as part of the whole.=20
To
>make the system organic, whole is the job of all having an intimate
>connection with the long range environmental values and healthy use of
the
>earth that makes the next generation as healthy as possible. We
inherited
>that job when we were hippies and against the spread of war, nuclear
>proliferation, racism, sexism, homo phobia and hate in general. We
undertook
>to make it real in the 60s and kept going as responsible farmers,
forest
>harvesters and fishermen in the 70s, 80s and 90s. We now know that we
are
>tremendously appreciated for our skills and willingness to look way out
ahead
>and see and shape the next and following generations' healthy world. We
are
>so far ahead that the USDA, the governments themselves, are only
beginning to
>recognize the change is in their interest, in the interest of all of us.
For
>me the expense has been and will continue to be pure pleasure.=20
Implementing
>a USDA run National Organic Program is only a cog in the gear
representing
>society that continues with momentum beyond the capacity of any
government or
>leader to control. Contrary to the media, the existing governments,
the
>celebrities present viewpoint, the real momentum of the world is for
everyone
>to lead a productive and potential fulfilling life. We have profound
>problems, created by a number of forces, some being our fore parents
allowing
>terrible conditions of democracy, economy, social life and health to
continue
>or develop. And yet they did their part to improve life for everyone.=20
As
>young people of the 60s, we eventually grasped for the one thing we
could
>control--what we eat. With leadership from survivors from the past,=20
we
>rebirthed the simple skills of healthy food and fiber--organic=20
farming.
<bigger>ok that is what you think. I think you took a grass roots dream
and turned it into a bureaucratic nightmare Thankyou
</bigger>
> Thirty years later organic still is minute in the totality of farming,
but
>its impact is as dramatic as chemical fertilizer and pesticides. The
most
>difficult person to change in a society is an opinionated farmer. And
yet
>once the farmer changes, the entire nation changes. Watch. What are
the
>next steps--to institute quality organic standards at a reasonable
cost--to
>control those standards through democratic procedures. We, as in any
>revolution,<bigger> will always lose some of our own
freedoms</bigger>--the creators are
>always freer than the duplicators--but our loss of freedom is nothing
besides
>what the entire US community and even world community has a possibility
of
>gaining--health. From healthy children will come healthy communities,
>healthy governance, healthy social life and maybe even if we try real
hard a
>healthy economy. I still have another 50 years left to work cooperative
with
>others on creating these other needed changes. No since stopping now.=20
I
>and every generation has nothing to lose by bettering the life for
others. =20
<bigger>my freedoms are too important to just give them up like you say
</bigger>.this act will <bigger>stop</bigger> the same progress you are
talking about. it will write organic law in stone and it will take an
act of congress to change it. we have been growing and evolving but this
law will stop all that. Already CCOF is putting off talking about
organic growing because we have to do what the USDA law says. IFOAM wants
us to go on word and up word but CCOF has their hands tied .=20
<bigger>con</bigger>gress is the other side of <bigger>pro</bigger>gress
and certifiers will no longer decide what organic is only as the
Secretary has power now and the word organic is now a political football.
left to the whims and soft money and hard money and the under the table
money of those that play that game.. No room for the small grower any
more. Can't you see that. I want to thank all the good folks that
have worked so hard with their certifiers but we will not be needing you
any more the USDA is taking over because all the certifiers were not to
be trusted and all the growers are not to be trusted only the state and
the USDA can be trusted to see to it we are organic. IFOAM I would like
to come out and play with you but you know we have to go by what the=20
USDA says as they own the word organic now not us. We can not even use
that word unless we pay Big Brother and all the little brothers.1980 came
a little late but it is here now.=20
>That is all I know, based on what little experience I have in running
organic
>farms for 24 years of my life. If anyone sees any shortcuts to life,
feel
>free to suggest them.
yes I suggest you get a little more experience as it is not the piece of
paper that makes one organic. but you can eat the paper . .
>Best Regards, Eric Kindberg
>
Organic growers should not have to pay one cent extra to grow and sell
their organic crop as organic. When it come right down to it you will
have to chop down more trees . How many trees do we have to chop down to
get the paper necessary to prove I am organic. =20
To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with "unsubscribe sanet-mg".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".