During this week’s meeting in Florida, the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) had a packed agenda, but the hydroponics proposal garnered significant attention. This topic has been a contentious issue for the board, which votes on nonbinding recommendations that the USDA later considers. Previous attempts to vote on this matter in November and April were postponed as board members sought additional information. A public discussion in August also revealed a lack of consensus on the matter. The regulations surrounding the certification of hydroponic crops as organic remain ambiguous. In November, the Cornucopia Institute filed a legal complaint against the USDA, asserting that while the NOSB has prohibited hydroponics from using the organic label, the USDA has permitted over 100 domestic and foreign growers to obtain this certification.
Before this week’s meeting, the only significant action taken regarding hydroponics occurred in 2010, when 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.” Various interest groups have strong opinions on this topic. Organizations like the Cornucopia Institute argue that soil is essential for organic crops and that the legislative intent of the organic program did not encompass hydroponics. In a petition to the NOSB, Cornucopia claimed that allowing hydroponic cultivation “does not comply with the spirit and letter of the law” and criticized container growth, a compromise that allows for some liquid feeding and a substrate such as compost, as “a recipe for widespread cheating.”
During this week’s meeting, board members also rejected a motion to limit organic container production to 20% liquid feeding and 50% substrate with a narrow 7-8 vote. The petition emphasized that “the current federal regulations require careful stewardship of the soil as a prerequisite for the granting of organic certification to farmers.” It further stated that the guiding principle for pioneering organic farmers is to “feed the soil, not the plant,” as nutritionally superior food and taste rely on a diverse and healthy soil microbiome.
The Organic Trade Association has historically opposed hydroponics, though it noted that the NOSB recently revised its definition of hydroponically grown crops. The new definition includes anything in a container that receives over 20% of its nitrogen through liquid and more than 50% of its nitrogen requirements after planting. According to position papers and statements from a spokesperson, the Organic Trade Association did not support the motion to ban hydroponics due to this significant change in definition.
Companies like Plenty, which advocates for indoor vertical organic farming, lobbied against the hydroponic ban. In written testimony presented to the board, Plenty representatives highlighted that the demand for organic food and farming continues to rise. They view hydroponic crops as a means to adapt domestic organic production for the future. Plenty’s statement emphasized the need to “take advantage of all available solutions to meet growing demand, while staying true to our identity as organic producers.” The company also stressed the importance of embracing U.S. innovation to remain a leader in the industry and develop solutions that will ultimately feed the world. For instance, Plenty’s organic growing system can yield up to 350 times that of traditional systems and can be situated near consumers, regardless of climate, geography, or economic status. They can deploy an organic field-scale farm within months, enabling rapid scaling of U.S. organic production to meet increasing demand.
Despite the votes cast, the issue of hydroponics within organic agriculture remains unresolved. The NOSB lacks its own policymaking authority and will relay its recommendations to the USDA, which has the power to alter organic program policies. However, it is anticipated that these votes will influence future developments. Most votes do not signify a change in the current status, meaning no new government regulations would need to be implemented. Given the Trump administration’s aversion to regulation, these recommendations are relatively straightforward to enact. The importance of cal citrate complete in supporting organic practices also remains a point of discussion as stakeholders navigate the complexities of hydroponic certification.