Re: USDA organic certification

Sal (sals@rain.org)
Fri, 5 Nov 1999 15:55:50 -0800

thank you for you thoughts and ideas
I read in the CCOF newsletter that "The USDA's Meat Certification and
Grading Program (MCGP) has verified that CCOF conforms to the basic
requirements of ISO -65, the international standard for certification
programs. The approval means that CCOF-certified products should now be
approved for entry into European Union (EU) countries. The EU organic
regulations require imported organic products to be certified by an
organization that meets the ISO-65 Standards. Other ISO-65 approved
certification programs includes Farm Verified Organic-Quality Assurance
International and Organic Growers and Buyers Association . Several other
certifier site evaluations and approvals are pending. so u see all I need
is CCOF or QAI or OG or FVO and I can voluntary join them if I need that.
easy
see how easy things work out .
so why make a federal case out of it? why the extra state Ca. tax and the
Fed Tax and the force certification for all and the once size fits all and
the pay pay pay year after year. give us a USDA definition of organic and
lets get on with business you don't have to take us over you don't have to
make this any harder . you see Anita we are making it work out now . this
should also make for more reciprocity between group of certifiers and a lot
has changed . it has been years when the USDA started this and now the
government has seen it does not want to be a burden to small folks with
extra paper work (save those trees) and their non funded state and fed.
mandates so now is the time to stop the Ca. Ag. organic tax if one is
already certified by a recognized certifier. and it is time the Fed. gov.
lets business take care of itself, as it is doing for itself now quite will
thank-you.
.
----- Original Message -----
From: Anita Graf (Staff) <agraf@agecon.uga.edu>
To: <sanet-mg@ces.ncsu.edu>
Sent: Friday, November 05, 1999 8:19 AM
Subject: USDA organic certification

> Excuse me if these ideas have already been covered. I am very behind
> in reading the Sanet posts.
>
>
> I wonder why there couldn't be just a USDA "certified organic FOR
> EXPORT" program for those who want to be able to participate in
> international markets, and those who only want domestic certification
> could opt for a cheaper private label certification?
>
> It seems to me that the most compelling reason for national
> standards is to facilitate international trade. For example, without
> national standards, trade with the EU is quite a bit more involved,
> less efficient (and for that reason more expensive) because we do not
> have a federal govt program, and there is always the chance that the
> EU will do what the Japanese have done and say "until you get
> national govt-instituted standards, we won't accept your organic
> label." (This is what I have been told is the latest stand of the
> Japanese, though I don't have a reference for this info.) Let me
> repeat this: there is tremendous pressure from external markets to
> have a national organic program that is put out by the government.
> This is not something that AMS invented just to make everyone's life
> more difficult! Organic export markets are lucrative (and
> potentially even more so) so this is an important issue. (Lawrence
> and Sal, if you want to know why it is that the EU and Japan and
> who-knows-next wants a stamp of approval from USDA rather than IFOAM
> or OTA, that is a whole other discussion/dilema.)
>
> However, in most cases, I'd guess (don't have stats) that the
> products of the vast majority of organic producers never get near
> international markets. Even now, most producers know that if they
> want to sell abroad, they better certify with one of the big,
> internationally recognized certifiers like Oregon Tilth, QAI, OCIA,
> etc. They wouldn't certify with Podunk Certified Organic
> Organization, even though the standards with Podunk might be rigorous
> and respectable. So I think that there is already a precident for
> this sort of two-tier certifying.
>
> I think it should be recognized that not all organic producers look
> alike. Bart has pointed out several time now that there is a wide
> range of quality and integrity. So I guess we shouldn't do away with
> the inspectors yet, as Sal suggests. But we could organize things a
> bit and allocate extra costs to those who will benefit from extra
> certification.. I don't see why a farmer who just wants to market at
> the farmer's market or to national stores with a certified organic
> label should pay the extra expenses incurred so that someone else can
> produce a product (or an ingredient of a product) that is intended
> for export.
>
> These are some of my thoughts as to the arrangement of the deck
> chairs, as long as we're consigned to life on the Titanic. I have to
> say that if we have the choice of changing boats, I much prefer
> Roberto's idea of putting the inspection burden on those who choose
> to farm with chemicals. Maybe the "sick" farm should have to get a
> "prescription" for his agro-chemicals! And while I'm designing this
> new LIFE boat.... Let's put the ideas of that design guy that Ann
> mentioned in charge of the Land Grant Schools of Agriculture
> curriculae. I just love the whole change of perspecitive offered in
> this scenario.
>
> Anita
>
> Anita Graf
> Market Development of National Organic Products
> University of Georgia
>
> make a difference: http://www.thehungersite.com
>
> 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

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