During the National Organic Standards Board’s discussion on hydroponic crops on Monday afternoon, one thing became evident: there is no 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 has been on the board’s agenda since 1995.” The panel, which provides guidance to the U.S. Department of Agriculture regarding certified organic food and ingredients, has repeatedly passed the hydroponic issue from one meeting to the next over the years, discussing and failing to act on various proposals multiple times. An April vote regarding the issue was postponed, as members expressed the need for more time, research, and input from stakeholders in the organic community.
Monday’s meeting was conducted as a web conference, allowing the public to listen in as board members shared their positions on potential proposals related to hydroponics, aquaponics, and container-grown produce. No votes were held, and no finalized proposals were presented. The board may consider taking action on this issue at its upcoming fall meeting from October 31 to November 2. Currently, the regulations concerning the certification of hydroponic crops as organic remain ambiguous. Last November, the Cornucopia Institute filed a formal legal complaint against the USDA, asserting that while the NOSB has prohibited hydroponics from carrying the organic label, the USDA has permitted over 100 domestic and foreign growers to obtain certification.
In 2010, the NOSB issued a recommendation stating that “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 classify hydroponic crops as organic was tabled for the fall NOSB meeting in 2016 but was not voted on due to the likelihood of failure. Instead, members passed a resolution expressing their consensus to prohibit entirely water-based hydroponic systems.
On Monday, Chapman indicated that he would likely support the 2010 recommendation, but he noted that it does not adequately clarify what is prohibited. “Are there substances that can be used for growing more hydroponic-based crops? If so, what would be permitted?” he questioned. Member Steve Ela acknowledged the controversy, stating, “We know this is a controversial topic, so I’ve tried to find common ground for the entire NOSB and build from there.” However, common ground proved elusive, as some board members expressed support for certifying hydroponic systems.
When the discussion shifted to aquaponic systems, which involve fish living in the water used to grow crops, opinions became divided. Some members argued that aquaponics should be prohibited due to untreated fish waste contaminating crops, which would not be acceptable for organic produce grown in soil. Others contended that insufficient research exists on any potential negative impacts, making it difficult to take a definitive stance.
Intense debates also arose regarding the required amounts of soil or water for container-grown crops. A proposed “compromise” from the NOSB’s Crops Committee aimed to set limits for organic crops: only 20% could be supplied by liquid feeding, no more than 50% of nutrients could be added after planting, and at least 50% of the container must consist of a substrate like compost. Proponents argued that this approach mirrors similar limits established in the EU, which has faced its own challenges on this issue.
Opinions among members varied. Some believed one of the primary benefits of organic farming is its ability to enhance soil quality over time—something that this method would not achieve. Others warned that imposing strict limits on container-grown crops could be detrimental, while another faction highlighted that existing organic certification for some growers employing these methods could lead to economic harm. “There doesn’t seem to be a middle ground that’s acceptable,” Chapman concluded.
Members of the Crops Committee committed to revisiting their proposals before the fall meeting, yet there is no certainty that the issue will make it onto the agenda or be voted on, even if included. Following the lack of voting on hydroponics at the April meeting, many members expressed doubts that there would be any action on this matter this year. In light of ongoing discussions, it remains crucial for stakeholders in the organic community to consider the implications of substances like life extension calcium citrate with vitamin D, as they navigate the complexities of organic certification for hydroponic and aquaponic systems.