With all due respect, your comments are strictly hypothetical and only
complicate a practical concrete situation that has existed for some
time between Sal and the buyers / consumers of his products. While
legal penalties and appropriate remedies for consumer fraud are
certainly subject to debate in a public forum, the relationship
between grower and his customers should NOT be open to such
Governmental intervention (or theoretical posturing) without a
demonstrably reasonable basis in fact.
What is at issue here is the proper role of government in the matter
of organic certification, which has failed to differentiate between
"organic" (as defined by law*, in terms of the materials and
procedures used), and "certified organic" which defines* the role of
certification organizations and their services (and thank you Larry
for reminding me of that important distinction that we had emphasized
back in 1997).
This is an important distinction and should NOT be glossed over.
* Once accomplished
As for the rest of the philosophical end of it, I've got a few
practical issues of my own to face and can't promise to engage in much
further discussion of this thread at present.
(Incidentally Klaus, I've agreed with many of your informative posts).
Douglas Hinds
Wednesday, November 03, 1999, 4:56:00 AM, you wrote:
KW> hello sal,
>>taking money from folks because they grow organic is a rip off
>>set the standards and fine those that break the law not the honest folks
>>if you come and inspect me and i am telling the truth u pay for the
>>inspection if I am lying I pay and get a fine . easy
>>calling a small farm $5000 is a rip off
>>taking money from folks because they grow organic is a rip off
>>set the standards and fine those that break the law not the
>>honest folks if you come and inspect me and i am telling the
>>truth u pay for the inspection if I am lying I pay and get a
>>fine. easy
KW> no, sal. it's not that easy ! let me speak as a consumer, not as
KW> a public consultant (yes, from time to time i also consume and
KW> stop analysing and consulting).
KW> you won't get away with that so simple. in case you acted against
KW> organic rules i believed your statements and you cheated me ! the
KW> usual result of a consumer would be: stay away from you FOREVER
KW> and try his luck elsewhere. your idea is: just pay a fine and
KW> then you are allowed a second try of cheating me. fool me once,
KW> shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. why do you think, you can
KW> get away with just a fine ? the system you imagine will work for you
KW> yourself, but never under a label, because you have competors, who
KW> will not accept, that they should stay honest and you only risk a
KW> fine 20 or even 80% of your net gain by cheating.
KW> so most important question:
KW> what's your idea of the fine ???? 1000 $, 10% of your annual
KW> income, 1/2 year of a selling ban (who will control the last
KW> two things?) ???. and to whom do you PAY the fine ??
>>the organic tax is a rip off.
KW> stay away from from it, but also don't use the advantage of the
KW> label as consumers understand it... every other thing is a free ride
KW> on a train the others pay for..
>> I know I am organic what did i get .....
KW> YOU know, but that's your personal business. eat your own food,
KW> be content with your own pure fruits, but don't expect me to
KW> believe, what you know... you certainly would convince some dear
KW> friends, who know you're an honest guy, but do not believe (or
KW> know), that i from the village nearby am going to trust you
KW> automatically.
KW> that's exactly the problem with the word "organic". to everyone
KW> it has a different meaning. 8 years ago we made an analysis on
KW> food bought a) under certified labels and b) bought under the
KW> non-regulated name "organic". while a) was almost! free of
KW> pesticide residues, b) had about one third the levels of chemical
KW> residues of conventional farmers. evidently one third of the
KW> uncertified "organics" cheated consumer's assumption of what they
KW> understood by "organic".
KW> so if you think, you can have your way without certification,
KW> that's ok (i'm against obligatory certification for anyone, who
KW> uses the name organic), but don't ride the same train, others pay
KW> for by certification. it's what i wrote long ago: if organic
KW> growers will not find an agreement on what "biologic", "organic",
KW> "natural", "bio-dynamic" really means for ALL, who use these
KW> labels, you will VERY SOON run into trouble of not being able to
KW> explain for what reasons i should prefer your products.
KW> time will show the wiser and in my opinion it
KW> will largely depend on how trustworthy you are on EVERY INDIVIDUAL
KW> consumer. but anonymously selling your products won't work....
KW> at least not here in europe. i checked it: for more than 10 years
KW> we had a MAJOR food scandal at least every 3 months !!
KW> trust from the consumers to an anonymous producer ? forget it !!!
KW> klaus
KW> To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
KW> "unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
KW> "unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
KW> To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
KW> "subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
KW> All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
KW> http://www.sare.org/htdocs/hypermail
To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
http://www.sare.org/htdocs/hypermail