[compost_tea] NOP and CT

From: Tim Livingstone <tlivingstone_at_jollyfarmer.com>
Date: Wed, 07 May 2003 08:19:12 -0300

Hi Kirk,

You made mention of NOP rules. The letter mentioned is
documenting "policy" based on recommendation, not legally binding
rules or law.

I am not aware of any rules made by NOP regarding compost tea -
only recommendations. Only their rules are legally binding, not their
recommendations. It can be hard to sort these out, but in this case
there does not appear to be any legal ruling of any kind on compost
tea. This leaves certifiers open to decide what they will.

We've had to dig into this issue for our own organic certification.

Hope this helps,
Tim Livingstone

>Doc, you need to check the data.:-) Legally, that is. The letter to
>Tom was from A. J. Yates, Adminstrator of the USDA Agricultural
>Marketing Service, of which the NOP is a part. The letter IS the
>documentation. The Organic Foods Production Act of 1990, which
>authorizes the NOP, provides that all authority rests with the
>Secretary of Agriculture, for whom Yates acts as a high-level
>manager. I agree with you and see Yates' point of view as
>completely invalid and really dumb -- but it has the legal, binding
>authority of the US federal government behind it, at least
>until it's challenged and over-ruled in court or USDA speaks
>differently.

>What does this mean? Almost nothing to most folks on this list,
>unless they are struggling with an organic certifier who buys in to
>the
>USDA/AMS/NOP position on CT, or are in a mindset to mount a
>legal challenge. (If so, let me know, I am, having done a
>certification
>struggle.) As it turns out many if not most certifiers are allowing
>compost tea use, it seems, using a National Organic Standards
>Board recommendation of April 2002, or winging it wonderfully ala
>Washington state (apart from chelation confusion..?). NOP chose
>not to use this recommendation, deciding compost tea is "not
>eligible to satisfy" the soil fertility and crop nutrient management
>rules. Yaagh! Yates' most recent letter is actually an improvement
>on the NOP staff report! Have we made some progress here?






Received on Wed May 07 2003 - 13:17:45 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Feb 07 2012 - 14:29:12 EST