Subject: Re: Manure usage on certified organic farms

From: Douglas Hinds <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 17:00:10 -0600

Hi Bart and saneteers,

Saturday, March 11, 2000, 7:32:06 AM, you wrote what you wrote and I
agree with your logic.

On the subject of composting, I strongly suggest that vermi-composting
be given preference. Feed the organic material to earthworms and the
worms will finish the job, greatly enriching the end result in the
process. (Depending on the inputs, milling may or may not be in
order).

Douglas

 ***********  REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********

BA> On Fri, 10 Mar 00 22:34:47 -0500, [email-masked] wrote:

>>food, it is essential to consider how current organic standards require 
>>certified organic producers to handle manure as a fertility amendment.  
>>It is obvious that under organic standards, raw manure can NEVER be 
>>applied in such a way that it is in contact with food soon destined for 
>>human consumption. 

BA> So what about the "manure tea" commonly used on many small organic
BA> farms for a kick of soluble nitrogen? Then there is all the alleged
BA> "sheet composting" (spreading raw manure in a thin layer on the ground
BA> and pretending that is composting). And the garden chickens ('bug
BA> patrol') you see on some small organic farms.

BA> Frankly, of the few organic farmers I've seen who actually "compost,"
BA> the majority do a really lousy job. And the stuff in California that
BA> passes for "composted" chicken manure (often used in vegetable
BA> production) makes me reluctant to buy any "organic" produce from
BA> California.

BA> There *are* good organic growers out there, who do a proper job of
BA> composting. I've said on this list before that in my fairly
BA> considerable organic inspection experience only about 5% of the growers
BA> are really good. Half are just plain lousy, and not only do they not
BA> know how to compost, most are stubbornly uninterested in learning how
BA> to do.

BA> Some of the worst are the philosopher-farmers, tragically stuck in
BA> about 1974, and defining themselves in terms of being an organic
BA> farmer. Therefore, of course, since they are (by their own definition)
BA> an organic farmer, anything they do has to be organic (because they, an
BA> organic farmer, did it). And since they also define organic as the
BA> pinnacle of sustainability and healthiness (neither of which it is),
BA> all organic practices are sustainable and healthy. Since they are
BA> organic, everything they do is as sustainable and as healthy as it can
BA> possibly be.

BA> Such unteachable hearts do their consumers (and ultimately the
BA> industry) a great disservice. When organic standards are seen as an
BA> obstacle by the grower, and they are seen as such in many cases, we've
BA> got a problem. Wayne Martin, for many years chair of the Kansas OCIA
BA> certification comittee, and more recently chair of OCIA's International
BA> Certification Committee, has said (quoted with permission) "The
BA> industry's biggest problem in the next few years will be to ensure
BA> grower compliance with the standards already in effect --- particularly
BA> for rotations, soil-building, manure management, and record-keeping."

BA> Existing organic standards for manure management are frequently
BA> ignored, circumvented, or even (on occasion) subverted. As with the
BA> people in eastern Canada who *died* from eating
BA> sheep-manure-contaminated organic sauerkraut (listeria), there are more
BA> organic manure disasters just waiting to give Mr. Avery the ammunition
BA> he needs.

BA> Bart

To Unsubscribe:  Email [email-masked] with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg".  If you receive the digest format, use the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email [email-masked] with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".

All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
http://www.sare.org/san/htdocs/hypermail

---

From: Douglas Hinds <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 17:00:10 -0600

Hi Bart and saneteers,

Douglas

BA> Bart