Re: [compost_tea] Re: NOP and CT

From: Robert Norsen <bnbrew_at_yahoo.com>
Date: Sat, 31 May 2003 15:38:11 -0700 (PDT)

Where's Texas? Steve, when you are flyng a Bt-14 out of Randoph Field, Texas is a long ways in all directions! Glad to hear that Texas is coming on strong with Oranic agriculture. Betsy Ross is doing a complex CT test on pastures there somewhere. How is it going, Betsy? Tell us all about it? Bob

Steve Bridges <kimas_at_texasgrown.com> wrote:Kirk,
You ask "Where's Texas"? I have forwarded your reply to Leslie McKinnon, who
heads the Texas Department of Ag. certifying department. I will post her
response to your questions/thoughts when she responds.

As president of the Texas Organic Growers Association, I can assure you that
we are behind the use of quality AACT 100%. As you know, a large problem in
large-scale organic growing is keeping costs down. AACT effectively does
just that. I am a firm believer in the value of compost tea and am working
with several farmers on developing their compost tea use. If you need, or
anyone needs a Texas contact, please let me know.

Just yesterday I was at a meeting , at the USDA-Weslaco facility in the
Texas valley, assisting in the formation of a national conference on organic
farming principles. It is a conference that has taken place for two years
now, though regional in scope, with an emphasis on Holistic Resource
Management as it's main goal (http://www.holisticmanagement.org/)
(http://www.hrm-texas.org/). I don't know how many of you know Malcolm Beck,
but he has been a major force of change regionally, if not nationally. He
started Garden-Ville in San Antonio in 1957, making compost
(http://www.garden-ville.com/). He has been the driving force behind the
valley conference that has had two regional conferences. This year, with the
help of the fine folks at the USDA-Weslaco facility we are including not
only range management, but organic farming. The details are being nailed
down, but it is going to be a great learning opportunity.

The facility at Weslaco, in far south Texas, is the only USDA funded organic
research facility in the nation. Last year they had a budget of $130,000.
This year, their expected budget is going to be $1 million dollars. Yep, you
heard that right, one million dollars! And this is a group of people that
deserve our total support. They are good people that support the organic
line of thoughts and practices. They want to prove, scientifically, that
organics works. Think they need our support? I'll keep the listserve
informed of any ongoing developments.

So, Texas is here. We're working it. We're short of organic farmers, but
we're working to fix that too. We have an outdated website at
www.texasorganicgrowers.org (hey it's been spring and I own a retail organic
plant nursery, and I'm in charge of the website!). Look for an update site
in the next couple of months.

Steve Bridges
President-Texas Organic Growers Association
www.texasorganicgrowers.org
kimas_at_texasgrown.com



----- Original Message -----
From: "Kirk Leonard" <kirk_at_oregonatural.com>
To: "Compost Tea Group" <compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2003 7:49 PM
Subject: [compost_tea] Re: NOP and CT


> Allison -- Since you plucked Doc E's whack on me about this subject I'd
risk
> another try at clarifying where USNOP is on CT.
>
> USDA-AMS-NOP regard CT as "raw manure" today, not allowed within 120 days
of
> harvest, per a statement Tom J was finally able to extract from them about
> nine months after he asked, several times. I believe he posted that USDA
> letter in our
> Yahoo space on receiving it early this month. So NOP does not today
support
> CT as we all likely use it; and it is not "approved." These are facts,
but
> they also represent a specious, untenable position. Not long for this
> world, I trust. CT is OK, if you follow on here. USNOP is full of BS
(not
> baking soda...) on CT.
>
> There is no NOP "rule" on CT, so certifiers are able to approve it as they
> choose, and both USDA communication and lack of it can be as weird or
> confusing as imaginable. WA, OR, ME, NOFA certifiers are approving
compost
> teas. Hooray! I don't know who Tom P's (CA?) or Steve P's certifiers are
> but clearly they are stepping up and certifying it, as are others, I
> imagine. Where the heck is Texas, not to mention Arkansas and Alaska?
Where
> are the multitude of other private and non-US NOP certifiers? CT is OK by
> many certifiers.
>
> OMRI has always supported CT, even as some certifiers did not for a time
> last year, per the rule of thumb Elaine stated, but I believe you can use
> anything in CT that's not prohibited in the NOP "National List" available
at
> the USDA/NOP web site. Per NOP's Q&A on materials, CT materials don't
need
> to be certified or OMRI-listed, just not prohibited ones. Compost should
> meet 205.203.x.x... standards (actually, it should be better... a nose and
> touch test is likely better.:-) but materials are less limited.
>
> While not "NOP-approved," CT is NOP-certifiable when made with good
compost
> or vermicompost and natural nutrients. There is no new news here... CT is
> OK under the USNOP, intrinsically, even if USDA themselves don't get why
or
> how. I think it's called common sense, common law, common practice, maybe
> an element of democracy or good organic methods they don't yet get? CT is
> OK under USNOP even if they don't say so yet. They will, I believe. Many
> certifiers already do.
>
> The NOSB recommendation you quote is current - most recent, anyway. It is
> an August 2002 NOP staff radical rewrite of an April 2002 NOSB
> recommendation, though it is clearly not being applied by either NOP or
> certifiers, nor is it what the NOSB Compost Task Force said April before
> last, darnit! But that's another subject.... USNOP's position on CT is
> definitely, and I think deliberately, not clear. But CT is OK...
>
> The key in resolving this confusion today is certifiers. If your
certifier
> approves your uses of CT, you are home free. If not, look for another
> certifier. (As arrogant as it may be, an NOP-certified certifier can
certify
> anywhere, I believe.) Other than materials on the National List, USNOP
does
> not certify materials, only certifiers, by the way. Is this anal enough
> yet?
>
> No? Ultimately, it's a USDA call, not NOSB or certifiers. Unless USDA
> takes certifiers to task on CT, certifiers are in charge. And there's no
> way USDA-NOP can not eventually support CT, hmm? I suspect with Doc E's
> new inputs, NOSB will once again support CT, but better this time.
> Un-anally, CT is not NOP-approved yet. I personally think it's ok to use
> freely.
>
> The Compost Tea Task Force Doc E mentioned is an NOSB group recently
> established to take another NOP look at CT, presumably to make a rule or
> incorporate CT in the "Final Rule?" Doc, what is the objective? And when
> you get a chance, how goes it...?
>
> For those tea makers who don't care about organic certification under the
> USNOP, all of this is irrelevant. You can and should do whatever you want
> to do. (..safely, please not anything dangerous.:-) Go AACT! Go all
> beneficial CTs! Attack Congress if necessary!_at_:-) Grrr! CT is not only
OK
> it's organically excellent!
>
> Might it be interesting or illuminating for us to have a thread on what
> certifiers all over are saying about CT? USNOP is a CT sideshow, imo,
> needing attention and direction but behind the proverbial 8-ball on CT so
> far. NOP certifiers and organic growers are a more sensible bunch, eh?
WA
> and OR Tilth came around, MOFGA and NOFA came around, etc, who else has
come
> around? I'd like to know. Where's AK?
>
> -- Kirk
>
> PS: I believe the operative word in Thomas G's last comment about WA's
> concern on chelated materials is "synthetic" as NOP generally disallows
use
> of "synthetic solvents" for any purpose. As for asking "someone on the
> board" - from whom (NOSB) I think you could get as many different
responses
> as there are members - asking Doc E seems to me to be doing that at this
> point.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: allisonhornor
> To: compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2003 2:16 PM
> Subject: [compost_tea] Re: NOP and CT
>
> Hi all,
>
> I'm very interested in the dialogue about the NOP and whether or not
> they support the use of compost tea. I found the compost Task Force
> reccomendations on the NOSB website and they said: "since compost
> teas are curently under review, they are not eligible to satisfy
> section 205.203 (c) at this time." That specific section is the one
> regarding soil amendments and compost in the final NOP standards. Of
> course, being a scientist, I have no idea what all of this government
> speak means, are they allowed or not allowed? Maybe we could ask
> someone on the board.
>
> http://www.ams.usda.gov/nosb/NOSBrecommendations/CompostTaskForce.pdf
>
> Take care,
> Allison
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> compost_tea-unsubscribe_at_yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
compost_tea-unsubscribe_at_yahoogroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.





Received on Sun Jun 01 2003 - 00:56:23 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Feb 07 2012 - 14:29:18 EST