In Australia the major certification organisations (who have their own
standards) sit on a government advisory committee which has amongst
other things recently ratified a revised set of National Standards for
Organic and Biodynamic Production for Australia.
These standards clearly
* do not allow genetically modified organisms
* do not allow radiation
* have a very comprehensive list of allowed food additives
* have a minimum 2-3 year conversion period before a product can
be classed as organic
* do not allow antibiotics or hormones in animal production unless
required for the necessary health of the animal (standards then
stipulate either animals cease to be organic or their food products may
cease to be organic).
* do not allow for sewage sludge although some organisations do
allow it but only after comprehensive analysis indicating that the
product is free from heavy metals, chemical contaminants and human
pathogens.
* all off farm manures, slurry, organic matter to be composted
before use on farm and only after analysis indicates non contamination
by heavy metals, etc.
There are many other key points but these are perhaps areas where
Australia's standards may differ from the proposed USDA standards.
Australia recognises certification schemes from accredited certifiers
around the world that parallel Australia's standards. However any
deviation from our own strict standards such as the inclusion of some of
the items referred to above would not be looked on favorably and the
importation of such produce would certainly invoke a response from the
Australian organic industry.
Hope this is of some interest to you.
Chris Alenson Technical Adviser
Organic Advisory Service
Organic Retailers & Growers Association of Australia
----------
From: Rob Fetter[SMTP:trf@student.umass.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, 17 February 1998 12:54:pm
To: sanet-mg@shasta.ces.ncsu.edu
Subject: organic rule - foreign response?
Hello,
I am curious about the foreign response to the USDA's
proposed organic
rules. I am writing an article for the Northeast Organic Farming
Association newsletter about this particular aspect; I'm also
involved in
an independent study project about the foreign response (and
other
aspects) for school.
I would love to hear comments from anyone involved in the
international
organic farming community: representatives of foreign
certification
agencies; producers and marketers who are involved in importing
or
exporting organic foods with the US; farmers, consumers, or even
simply residents of other countries who are concerned about the
issue and
have heard comments from groups in your country.
I am particularly interested in answering the following
questions: what
is the foreign response to the US proposed rules? What do you
think might
happen if the US rules are passed as proposed (assume whatever
you want
about the issues they left "up for comment")? Would IFOAM or its
member-certifiers continue to accept US certification agencies
as members,
given the constraints the USDA would place on US certifiers?
What parts of
the rule do foreign representatives and consumers find most
objectionable?
Whew. Any comment, really, would be most appreciated.
Unfortunately, my
deadline for the article is Wednesday, the 18th (so write
soon!). But I am
also interested in this discussion in the longer term, of
course.
Thank you!
Sincerely,
Rob Fetter
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------
+
T. Robert Fetter trf@student.umass.edu
Ag. & Resource Economics
U. of Mass - Amherst "We are each poets and
painters,
Class of '99 bricklayers and
revolutionaries.
But we are all
mapmakers..."
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------
+
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".
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".