Note: Instead of a complete second round of organic standards it appears
that the USDA plans to publish a series of "issue papers" that the
public
can comment on, here is the first.
USDA Is At It Again! Urgent Action Needed To Keep Factory Farming Out
Of
Organic Food Production And Ensure Consumer Protection Against Organic
Fraud!
Early last year, an outraged public flooded the USDA with nearly 280,000
comments opposing the agency's proposal to allow factory farming, sewage
sludge, genetic engineering, and irradiation in organic food production.
Despite this outpouring of public outrage, the USDA is again thinking of
diluting organic standards. We need your input now on three critical
issues:
* USDA is still considering loopholes that would allow for the
continuous
indoor confinement in organic animal production;
* USDA is considering the use of animal medications including
antibiotics in organic production ; and
* UDA is considering eliminating the ability of organic certifiers
to prevent the sale of mishandled or fraudulent organic products.
Your help is urgently needed. USDA has opened these three questions for
public comment. But we only have until December 14, 1998 to respond.
We
need to send a clear message to the USDA:
(1). ORGANIC STANDARDS MUST MANDATE ACCESS TO THE OUTDOORS AND PASTURE
FOR
ALL ANIMALS;
(2). ORGANIC STANDARDS MUST BAN THE USE OF ANTIBIOTICS AND THE MISUSE
OF
OTHER ANIMAL MEDICATIONS IN ORGANIC PRODUCTION;
(3). ORGANIC STANDARDS MUST ALLOW CERTIFIERS (ORGANIZATIONS THAT VERIFY
ORGANIC STANDARDS ARE BEING FOLLOWED) TO MAINTAIN THEIR CURRENT RIGHT TO
IMMEDIATELY PREVENT THE SALE OF FRAUDULENT OR MISHANDLED ORGANIC
PRODUCTS.
It is important that you again comment and make it very clear that the
USDA
cannot ignore the 280,000 public comments it received early this year.
Here's how to make your voice heard. Just respond to the questions
below
and follow the instructions for sending or e-mailing your comments.
Your
Name: Samuel Kaymen
E-mail kaymen@worldnet.att.net
Street: 266 Old Mountain Road
City: Lyndeborough State: NH Zip: 03082
Phone:(H) 603 487 2057 (W)
(Fax) 603 487 5524
USDA ISSUE #1. Livestock Confinement in Organic Production Systems.
The
National Organic Standards Board (NOSB - the citizens board given legal
authority to provide the Secretary of Agriculture with recommendations)
has
made recommendations that livestock must have access to the outdoors.
The
USDA is considering policies that would allow loopholes whereby a
producer
could avoid providing animals with access to the outdoors .
Furthermore,
the USDA may not require "access to the outdoors" to include access to
pasture. Under this scenario, dairy cows on dirt feedlots would be
considered as organic milk production! Should organic livestock have
access
to the outdoors including pasture?
What is your official comment to the USDA on this
issue?
For animals to be considered "Organic" they MUST have access to fresh
air, sunshine and green pasture when available. NO way should confined
animals ever be able to be certified "Organic".
USDA ISSUE #2. The Use of Antibiotics and Parasiticides in Organic
Livestock Production. The NOSB has made explicit recommendations to the
USDA concerning the use of animal medications, including a ban on the
use
of antibiotics, in organic production. Should organic livestock
standards
be based on the NOSB recommendations which prevent loopholes allowing
for
the misuse of animal medications?
What is your official comment to the USDA on this issue?
Any animals receiving drugs, antibiotics, or any medicine other than
Homeopathic remidies should ABSOLUTLY NOT be considered "Organic"
USDA ISSUE # 3. Termination of Certification By Private Certifiers.
Certifiers are the organizations that ensure that an organic food
producer
is actually following established organic farming practices. The USDA
is
considering eliminating the ability of private certifiers to swiftly
prevent the sale of mishandled or fraudulent organic products. This is
inconsistent with the intent of the Organic Foods Production Act (the
law
establishing a national organic food program) and the NOSB's
recommendations. Should private certifiers retain the right to protect
the
public by swiftly preventing the sale of fraudulent or mishandled
organic
food?
What is your official comment to the USDA on this issue?
The USDA should follow the recomendations of the NOSB. I agree that
private Certifiers should be able to continue their work and have the
authority to restrict any product not conforming to the agreed upon
Organic standards from the market.
Please send your comments into USDA Docket #TM-98-00-7. The comment
period
ends December 14, 1998, so please contact USDA immediately: Eileen
Stommes,
Deputy Administrator, USDA-AMS-TM-NOP, Room 4007-S, AG Stop 0275, P.O.
Box
96456, Washington, D.C. 20090-6456; fax 202/690-4632;
e-mail: NOPIssue_Papers@usda.gov and owatch@icta.org
WARNING! If you visit the USDA's National Organic Program web site or
obtain printed copies of the Federal Register notice, please be aware
that
the issue papers posted there contain inaccurate information about the
current NOSB recommendations as well as misleading information about the
legal rights of private certification agencies to suspend or terminate
certification. DO NOT rely on the information in these papers to frame
your
comments!
Send our Campaign office in Washington a copy of your comments to the
USDA
as well:
e-mail: owatch@icta.org
regular mail:
Campaign for Food Safety/Organic Watch
310 D Street NE
Washington, D.C. 20002
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_
Ronnie Cummins
Campaign for Food Safety/Organic Consumers Action
860 Hwy 61
Little Marais, Mn. 55614
Tel. 218-226-4164
Fax 218-226-4157
email alliance@mr.net
http://www.purefood.org
To subscribe to the free electronic newsletter, Food Bytes, send an
email to:
majordomo@mr.net
with the simple message:
subscribe pure-food-action