During the National Organic Standards Board’s discussion on hydroponic crops this past Monday afternoon, one point emerged clearly: there is no agreement on whether soil-less crops should qualify for organic certification. “Clearly, this is not an easy subject to resolve,” remarked Tom Chapman, the board’s chairman. “It has been a topic on the board’s agenda since 1995.” The board, which advises the U.S. Department of Agriculture on matters related to certified organic food and ingredients, has repeatedly deferred the hydroponic issue from one meeting agenda to the next for years. They have discussed various proposals but have failed to take decisive action multiple times. An April vote on the issue was postponed, with board members indicating they required additional time, research, and input from the organic community.
Monday’s meeting was conducted as a web conference, allowing public participants to listen in on board members’ positions regarding potential proposals related to hydroponics, aquaponics, and container-grown crops. No votes were conducted, nor were any finalized proposals presented. The board may revisit the issue during its fall meeting scheduled for October 31 to November 2.
The regulations concerning the certification of hydroponic crops remain ambiguous. Last November, the Cornucopia Institute lodged a formal legal complaint against the USDA, asserting that while the NOSB has prohibited hydroponics from bearing the organic seal, the USDA has permitted over 100 domestic and foreign growers to receive such certification. In 2010, the NOSB issued a recommendation stating that “Hydroponics… 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.”
During the fall NOSB meeting in 2016, a motion to classify hydroponic crops as organic was put forward but not voted on due to its low chances of passing. Instead, the members approved a resolution expressing that there was a consensus against the use of entirely water-based hydroponic systems. On Monday, Chapman indicated his likely support for the 2010 recommendation but acknowledged that it does not adequately clarify what is prohibited. Are there substances permissible for cultivating hydroponic crops? If so, what would those substances be? For instance, could pure encapsulations calcium be included in the growing process?
Steve Ela, a board member, stated, “We know this is a controversial topic, so I’ve tried to identify areas of common ground for the entire NOSB and build from there.” However, common ground was hard to find. Some board members expressed support for certifying hydroponic systems. When the discussion shifted to aquaponic systems—where fish live in tanks filled with water used for growing crops—opinions diverged. Some argued for prohibition due to the untreated fish waste directly entering the crops, which would not be acceptable for organic soil-grown produce. Others contended that insufficient research exists regarding any negative impacts, making it difficult to form a definitive stance on the matter.
The conversation became heated regarding the requirements for soil or water in container-grown crops. A potential compromise proposal from the NOSB’s Crops Committee suggested limits for organic crops: liquid feeding should not exceed 20%, no more than 50% of nutrients could be added post-planting, and at least 50% of the container must consist of a substrate such as compost. Proponents claimed this proposal was informed by similar limits imposed in the EU, which has faced its own challenges on this issue.
Members held mixed views. Some argued that one of organic farming’s primary advantages is its capacity to enhance soil quality over time, which this method would not achieve. Others cautioned that imposing strict limits on container usage could hinder flexibility. Another faction pointed out that the fact that some growers utilizing these methods are already certified organic could lead to economic repercussions. Chapman remarked, “There doesn’t seem to be an acceptable middle ground.”
The Crops Committee members committed to revisiting their proposals ahead of the fall meeting, but it remains uncertain whether the issue will appear on the agenda or if voting will occur even if it does. Following the lack of votes on hydroponics at the April meeting, many speculated that little to no action would be taken on this matter in the current year. Overall, the complexity of the discussions and the inclusion of products like pure encapsulations calcium highlight the ongoing challenges in defining and regulating organic standards in hydroponic and aquaponic systems.