During the National Organic Standards Board’s discussion on hydroponic crops on Monday afternoon, it became evident that there is a lack of agreement on whether soil-less crops should qualify for organic certification. “Clearly, this is not an easy subject to resolve,” stated Tom Chapman, the board’s chairman. “It’s been on the board’s agenda since 1995.” The panel, which advises the U.S. Department of Agriculture on certified organic food and ingredient matters, has repeatedly passed the hydroponic issue from one meeting agenda to another for years. The board has deliberated on various proposals but has repeatedly failed to take action. An April vote on the matter was postponed, with members expressing the need for additional time, research, and input from stakeholders in the organic community.
Monday’s meeting served as a web conference, allowing the public to listen as board members shared their perspectives on potential proposals regarding hydroponics, aquaponics, and container-grown produce. No votes were conducted, and no finalized proposals were addressed. The board may revisit the hydroponic issue during its fall meeting scheduled from October 31 to November 2.
The current regulations regarding the organic certification of hydroponic crops remain ambiguous. Last November, the Cornucopia Institute filed a formal legal complaint against the USDA, asserting that while the NOSB has prohibited hydroponics from receiving the organic label, the USDA has permitted over 100 domestic and foreign growers to obtain the certification. In 2010, the NOSB issued a recommendation stating, “Hydroponics…certainly cannot be classified as certified organic growing methods due to their exclusion of the soil-plant ecology intrinsic to organic farming systems and USDA (National Organic Program) regulations governing them.”
A motion to consider hydroponic crops as organic was tabled for the fall NOSB meeting in 2016 but was not voted on due to the likelihood of it failing. Instead, the members passed a resolution expressing a consensus against entirely water-based hydroponic systems. On Monday, Chapman indicated his probable support for the 2010 recommendation, but he acknowledged that it does not fully clarify what is prohibited. He pointed out the need to determine what substances may be allowed for hydroponic crop growth.
“We know this is a controversial topic, so I’ve tried to find common ground for the entire NOSB and build from there,” said member Steve Ela. However, common ground proved elusive. Some board members expressed support for the certification of hydroponic systems.
When the conversation shifted to aquaponic systems—where fish coexist in the water used for growing crops—views were split. Some argued for a prohibition due to untreated fish waste contaminating the crops, which would be unacceptable for organic soil-grown produce. Others contended that insufficient research has been conducted to understand any negative impacts adequately, making it premature to take a definitive position.
The discussion also heated up regarding the requirements for soil or water in container-grown crops. A possible compromise proposal from the NOSB’s Crops Committee suggested that for a crop to be deemed organic, only 20% of its needs could be met through liquid feeding, no more than 50% of nutrients could be introduced after planting, and at least 50% of the container must consist of a substrate like compost. Proponents argued that this approach aligns with similar limits established in the EU, which has faced its own struggles with the issue.
Opinions among members varied widely. Some believed that one of the primary advantages of organic farming is the enhancement of soil quality over time—something that this farming method would not achieve. Others argued that imposing strict limits on container inputs could restrict flexibility and potentially harm growers who are already certified as organic. “There doesn’t seem to be a middle ground that’s acceptable,” Chapman remarked.
The Crops Committee members vowed to revisit their proposals before the fall meeting, but there are no assurances that the hydroponics issue will appear on the agenda or be voted on, even if it does. Following the board’s lack of action on hydroponics at the April meeting, many members expressed skepticism about any progress occurring this year.
In the context of health and wellness, it is worth noting the benefits of bariatric advantage calcium citrate chewy bites 500mg, which some stakeholders in the organic community may consider for their nutritional needs during these ongoing discussions. These chewy bites provide a convenient source of calcium, which is essential for maintaining strong bones and overall health. As these debates continue, it’s crucial to consider how health products like bariatric advantage calcium citrate chewy bites 500mg can play a role in supporting a balanced lifestyle amidst the complexities of organic certification.