>Guy Clark wrote:
>
>> Hello all-
>> ...I knew the minute the central government got involved that they would make
>> the standard less and less stringent and more and more expensive until they
>> drove all us small time, independent operators out ... I am thankful to
OFMA for....
>
>Aside from the Organic Rule's glaring anti-organic inclusions, OFPA as
written will
>NOT LET you use that term, once OFPA is implemented. As I stated earlier,
OFMA may
>be good at pointing out the inconsistencies between OFPA and the Rule - but
OFMA
>supports OFPA as written and claims that implementing OFPA is the only
solution to
>the rules inconsistencies. *I* say that the Rules inconsistencies with OFPA and
>OPFA's prohibiting YOU from doing what you say you WILL do, are part of the
same
>pattern, and that OFMA is deliberating deemphasing that. I hope I am
making myself
>clear. OFPA is NOT the solution, unless certification is NOT obligatory
and the word
>organic is NOT restricted to OFPA certified products. OFMA says something
quite
>different. And you will lose the freedom to do as you say you will do (and
have
>done) under it......(remainder of message cut for brevity here)
I want to confirm that I agree with Mr. Hinds in his statements here.
OFMA may indeed be doing a great service by puttin gup the side by side
comparison. But their basic position is that the law (OFPA) as written, is
a good law. All they want is for the USDA to comply with the law. And they
are correct. The USDA has not complied with the law in their proposed rule.
They have essentially ignored it and written the proposed rules as they wish
it were, along with all the chemical companies, heavy iron sellers, and GE
seed salesmen who have apparently bought out the entire department.
The primary problem as we see it is the law was not written the way it
should have been. It ignores basic contstitutional rights of all citizens
in parts of its sections and makes a mockery of organic farming in the rest
of its sections. The law MUST be changed.
But...we are not going to get the law changed in time to do anything about
this proposed rule. So we do all need to concentrate on writing a clear,
concise, point by point comment on the proposed rule and send it in before
the deadline.
--Dan in Sunny Puerto Rico--
--dan.worley@icepr.com--
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".