One thing I don't understand Dale is that they regulate me where as GMO
stuff can contaminate mine and mine will not contaminate gmos. they
regulate the contaminated and let the contaminator skate. what's with that.
gmo can cross over and infect me I have to give up land because GMO move .
If I ship something with GMO in the truck those products can contaminate
mine not the other way around. we should regulate the polluters not the
folks getting polluted. I don't understand this. if there is drift of
pesticides or herbicides or Gmo we loose I will never drift into your
fields and contaminate them . the government wants to make us suffer
because u release GMOs and can't control them. whats with that. . if
just a little bit of your GMO s floor gets mixed with mine I am no longer
NON GMO or organic yet we are the ones regulated. what is with that. if
just a few grains of GMO corn get mix with my corn I lose my load and it is
no longer organic yet what kind of law is that and the USDA burdens us
while GMOs are contaminating every thing they touch. it is a rip off of the
organic farmer to justify your no label no control no regulations of GMOs .
the USDA wants to say if you don't want GMOs buy organic instead of making
the Gene jockeys keep their thing strait. I think if u don't want GMO check
the label . if the poor organic grower can label so can the gene jockeys.
the regulation is going on the wrong folks. we need to just move this
organic standard over to the GMO standard. you take the inspections you
take the extra paper work you and yours take the tracking for 5 or 10 years.
follow those GMOs . more regulations on the GMO s lets do this right lets
make all those that grow food make a farm plan not just the few organic
growers and have a inspector check them out and residue test all farmers if
I can't be trusted why should I trust any farmer. look at the chemicals in
our drinking water that is enough reason for forced inspection and checking
all farmers books and state and federal regulations on all farms every get
to get standardized and should be certified inspected and etc. why should
any one trust any farmer or is it just the organic grower u don't trust. run
that by me again whole countries want to label GMO whole lost of folks don't
trust it so how do u get away with what u are doing. where is the USDA our
protectors checking the organic growers. the organic growers don't have the
money behind them and are a easy targets how can they get away with this rip
off when the USDA say organic is not safer. is it just a rip off Why if it
is no better WHY
I say it is safer. they say they are doing it to make a level playing
field I do't see a level playing field here. look the cost is not level
every state is different the certification is not level because we can still
certify to higher levels and charge what they want the folk that export
already need certification folks that sell wholesale already need to be
certified why they doing this to us they are killing of the small grower.
for what? taxing the organic grower and letting the chemical grower and
gmo grower skate. no way. what you make me do you have to make all farmers
do thats a level playing field. . I have a right to farm also. we will
let those same inspectors and labs check gmos out and all farmers out that
is a level playing field. we always get the short end because we are small
players but this is not fair and a extra burden on the organic grower just
because he does not use synthetics and lab made dna changed gmos or
irratation or what ever does not sound right to me. why should I who has
not use anything for years go through all this when the chemical farmer uses
everything and does not have the extra burden. why
check out an organic farmers homepage
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wilson, Dale" <WILSONDO@phibred.com>
To: "sanet" <email@example.com>
Cc: "'sal'" <firstname.lastname@example.org>; "'wytze'" <email@example.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2000 6:40 AM
Subject: RE: "Organic" rip-off
> Sal and Wytze,
> Sal wrote:
> >> then u got your certifier and the local chapter and the
> >> inspector and the state and their cars and their computer
> >> and their kids need their teeth fix and on and on. you get
> >> the idea. a big hole a bottomless pit needs feeding and the
> >> organic farmer will pay and pay and pay and for what to be
> >> known as no safer or no better for the earth than conventional
> >> farmer.
> Don't you think the certifier and inspector have a right to earn a living
> doing their job? This doesn't really have anything to do with protecting
> the earth, it is a truth-in-labeling issue, and inspection is legitimate
> Wytze wrote:
> > As an "organic consumer" I like to know that the products I
> > buy are indeed organic.
> How are you going to know that without some kind of publicly verifiable
> defined certification?
> > That does not mean the farmers should have to bleed to death in
> > order to show that they are organic.
> Well, someone has to pay, right? The grower will pass these increased
> on to the consumer. Consumers of "organic" food (including you) want some
> sort of certification, and they will have to pay for it.
> IMO the real irritating problems include:
> 1. Inefficiency of public sector (hopefully inspection can be a private,
> competitive enterprise)
> 2. Regressive nature of certification. Do farmers who gross, say,
> have to pay the same fees as farmers who gross $5,000,000? If that is the
> case, then the certification cost per production unit is way higher for
> small farmer. Maybe there should be a sliding fee scale to make this more
> equitable. For example, in US SEED certification systems, seed producers
> pay a fee by-the-bag for certification. This makes the cost
> > The same thing more or less happens here in my own country.
> > The fees just make it impossible for small organic producers
> > to get their businesses from the ground. I really hope you
> > manage to stop this fee madness.
> This is the complaint of all small business owners regarding government
> regulation of all sorts. IMO, this is the dark side of the
> liberal-progressive vision of government involved in the details of
> life. I would always rather see industry self-regulation, than government
> regulatory systems. Yet, there may be a role for government in overseeing
> the self-regulatory process. Isn't that what is going on with this
> definition thing? Isn't it just the government trying to standardize
> vocabulary and regulatory procedures? Won't inspection continue to be
> by private certifiers? (please forgive my ignorance about this)
> Is this a case of a clique of large growers trying to ram through a
> regressive fee structure in order to enhance their competitiveness?
> To Unsubscribe: Email firstname.lastname@example.org with the command
> "unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
> "unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
> To Subscribe to Digest: Email email@example.com with the command
> "subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
> All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
To Unsubscribe: Email firstname.lastname@example.org with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
To Subscribe to Digest: Email email@example.com with the command
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu May 11 2000 - 22:02:12 EDT