This news page is updated weekly in an attempt to keep up with everything that is going on in organics these days. Newest items are listed at the TOP.

Baking Better Bread Or Just Making More Dough?

Growing Number Of Corporations Using ‘Greenwash Marketing’ To Cash In On Demand For Organic Food

By Lisa Hare
lisa.hare@yankton.net

Published: Saturday, May 8, 2010 12:25 AM CDT

With the growing success of organics and increasing consumer interest in buying foods grown on sustainable farms without toxic chemicals, many food companies are launching new marketing campaigns chock-full of environmental-friendly catchphrases and re-packaging products that lend the appearance of the company “going green” — even if little or no actual change to the product has occurred.

In February, mega-food company Sara Lee  launched the Eco-Grain™ label for its EarthGrains breads with a major marketing campaign that blanketed the Web, Facebook, Twitter and National Public Radio.

Sara Lee billed the trademarked product as “environmentally friendly” bread that “will save the earth, one field at a time” because Eco-Grain wheat is grown with “precision agriculture.”

Though actually used in small proportions in its EarthGrains brand breads, Eco-Grain is touted by the company as more sustainable than organic grain. What has been described as a “crass and exploitative marketing ploy” has angered many in the organic community.

“For Sara Lee to claim that their wheat is ecologically grown and sustainable, when they appear to make no effort to reduce or eliminate their use of toxic pesticides that have terrible effects on the environment and public health, is highly disingenuous,” said Nathan Jones, an organic farmer from King Hill, Idaho, and chairman of the Organic Advisory Board of the Idaho state department of agriculture.

The trouble with calling Eco-Grain environmentally friendly is that synthetic fertilizers and pesticides, neither of which are environmentally friendly, are still used in the production of the wheat that is used to produce Eco-Grain. Also, precision agriculture isn’t exactly something new, or something exclusive to Eco-Grain farmers. In fact, more and more conventional farmers of all the major commodity crops are using precision technology in applying chemical fertilizer to their fields.

In precision farming, satellite imagery is used to identify various levels of soil nutrients of a given field to determine fertilizer requirements for different areas of that field. Also known as “variable rate technology” (VRT), this allows the farmer to pinpoint which areas of the field need more or less fertilizer, instead of blanketing the entire field with one big dose.

“Consumers aren’t necessarily aware that (precision agriculture) is not new,” said Charlotte Vallaeys, food and farm policy analyst at The Cornucopia Institute, a Wisconsin-based organic industry watchdog.

“It’s more of a cost-saving practice for farmers, not an environmentally friendly or sustainable method of production, but that’s how (Sara Lee) is marketing it,” she added.

Another point of confusion for consumers is in the term ‘natural’ which splays across the label in bold print: “Eco-Grain 100 % Natural.”

“The term ‘natural’ on products like bread is not regulated by state or federal government,” said Marion Nestle, professor of nutrition at New York University. “Companies that use the term ‘all natural’ essentially come up with their own definition.”

“‘Natural’ can mean anything,” Vallaeys said. “Because there’s no legal definition, there’s no third-party verification or legal protection.”

Vallaeys added that a growing number of corporations like Sara Lee are seeking to profit from consumers’ interest in ecological and healthy food production. But unlike organic companies, these companies are doing practically nothing to ensure that ingredients are truly ecologically produced.

“It’s a prime example of corporations trying to capitalize on the valuable market cachet of organic, while intentionally misleading consumers — without making any meaningful commitment to protect the environment or produce safer and more nutritious food,” Vallaeys said.

In addition to the organic prohibition against chemical fertilizers, federal regulations also prohibit organic farmers from using toxic pesticides that are commonly applied to conventional wheat fields, including those growing Eco-Grain

One such pesticide typically used in conventional wheat production is 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D), which EPA researchers have correlated with numerous birth defects of the respiratory and circulatory systems, as well as defects like clubfoot, fused digits and extra digits.

Other research has linked the use of toxic pesticides on wheat fields to increased cancer mortality rates.

In addition to chemical fertilizers and pesticides, conventional wheat farmers sometimes use synthetic fungicides and other chemicals to treat their fields.

Sara Lee responded to the criticism by issuing a statement that said that EarthGrains never claimed that Eco-Grain products are organic. “We’ve been completely transparent about the environmental benefits,” the company said.

In addition, some of Sara Lee’s other bread ingredients, such as soy oil and soy lecithin, are grown and processed using genetic engineering and chemical extraction with the toxic solvent hexane, both technologies that are banned in organic production.

However, the company insists Eco-Grain wheat “is grown using precision agriculture, an innovative farming practice shown to reduce the use of fertilizer and fuel, which is better for the environment.” It claims the introduction of Eco-Grain is the “first step toward improving the environmental benefits of our products, and we know that more can be done.”

But the company’s environmental track record reveals a different path. The EarthGrains Baking Companies, Inc., a subsidiary of Sara Lee, paid a $5.25 million civil penalty for leaking refrigerants at a rate 35 percent higher than allowed by law. A 2003 Department of Justice press release called the violations the “the largest ever corporate-wide violations of stratospheric ozone protection regulations.”

Climate Counts, a nonprofit organization rating corporations on their efforts towards mitigating climate change, gave Sara Lee a score of only two in its 2007 Company Scorecard Report. The report said Sara Lee ranked in the bottom because it “made limited or no public efforts to engage in a widening discourse on climate change and corporate climate initiative.”

And Sara Lee isn’t the only company trying to cash in on the nation’s green revolution. Several companies are finding new ways to “greenwash” their products.

While the organic label is the gold standard of eco-labels on food packages, one major loophole in the federal organic standards remains. While companies are tightly regulated in terms of their use of the word “organic” on food packaging, some businesses are deceiving customers by using the words “organic” or “organics” in their company name on food that does not legally qualify as organic.

“Deceptive labeling practices, like putting ‘organic’ in a company or brand name, hurts the ethical competitors and the entire organic food industry by blurring the meaning of the word ‘organic’ for consumers,” said Mark Kastel, senior farm policy analyst for Cornucopia. “Consumers should be able to trust that any food package with the word ‘organic’ displayed prominently is truly certified organic, contains predominantly organic ingredients, and meets the letter and spirit of the law. Unfortunately, this is another example of a major agribusiness trying to blur the line between products labeled ‘organic’ and ‘natural.’”

 Oskri Organics, Organic Bistro and Newman’s Own Organics are examples of companies selling products that do not qualify to bear the USDA organic seal, yet may appear organic to consumers based on the prominence of the word “organic” in their brand name.

Oskri Organics sells a variety of foods, including fruit preserves, nutrition bars and tahini (sesame butter). Some of their products, however, contain no certified organic ingredients. These Oskri Organics products are therefore no different from conventional foods, yet many consumers are presumably being led to believe they are organic based on the company name displayed on product packaging.

Organic Bistro sells frozen entrees made with organic vegetables, but uses non-organic chicken and turkey.

“There is certainly no shortage of organic chicken or organic turkey, which are obviously more expensive than conventional meats,” Kastel said. “By using conventional ingredients to cut costs, yet displaying the word ‘organic’ so prominently on their packages, Organic Bistro is unfairly competing with truly organic companies that commit to sourcing organic meat.”

Newman’s Own Organics sells some certified organic products and some that only qualify for the “made with organic” label (70 percent organic content), yet uses the term “organics” in their name — on all food packages.

Newman’s Own Organics, founded by the late actor Paul Newman and his daughter Nell, is a prominent company in the natural/organic marketplace and respected for the generous donations of their profits to charity.

Newman’s Own Organics Newman-O’s cookies contain conventional sugar, conventional canola oil and conventional cocoa, yet the Web page displays the USDA organic seal and states: “Like our other products, Newman-O’s are certified organic by Oregon Tilth.” Yet these products do not legally qualify to bear the word “organic” or the USDA organic seal on their packaging.

“Newman-O’s, a product similar to Nabisco’s Oreo cookies, are not organic, yet consumers are led to believe that they are,” Vallaeys said. “Products that contain conventional ingredients, which are freely available in organic form, would never qualify for the USDA organic seal, and we think it’s time for the USDA to crack down on corporations gaming the system.”

Other companies that offer both conventional and organic products have not acted deceptively, by eliminating the term “organic” from their company name or company logo on their non-organic packaging.

Although Dean Foods’ WhiteWave division took a lot of heat last year when it introduced its first non-organic dairy products under the Horizon label, for example, the giant dairy conglomerate no longer uses the term “organic” in its name or on its brand logo for its new “natural” product line.

“It seems that some corporations appear more interested in corporate profit and greenwashing than true environmental stewardship, and are doing everything they can to take advantage of this confusion among consumers,” Kastel said.

States Look to Join Agriculture Antitrust Fight

• Study the seed industry's concentration and property rights claimed to see whether there is any way to change existing laws. Five companies own the most commercially successful trait technologies for crops, and those transgenic seeds account for 80 percent of corn planted in the United States, 92 percent of soybeans and 86 percent of cotton.
• Repeal antitrust exemptions for railroads that have been in place since the 1980s and make transportation more accessible to small producers.
• Explore how states can help enforce antitrust laws under the Packers and Stockyard Act, passed in 1921 to ensure fair competition and fair trade practices in the marketing of livestock, meat and poultry. States have not historically brought cases under that federal law, and the attorneys general say cooperation could better regulate an increasingly concentrated buyers market in the livestock industry.
• Review the antitrust immunities given to certain dairy cooperatives and the laws governing how milk is marketed to make sure they still protect farmers and don't become a vehicle for large entities to exclude smaller farmers from the market.

Ban on Nicotinyl Insecticides to Protect Bees a "Spectacular Success"

In an attempt to stop honey bee death and slow Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD), Italy banned the use of nicotinyl seed treatments in 2008.  Heavy bee mortality and rampant CCD occurred in areas of Italy where substantial acreage had been planted to corn treated with nicotinyl seed coatings.

Beekeepers and scientists monitored bee health throughout the 2009 corn season and have reported "...a resounding, spectacular success."  Throughout the country where corn previously was associated with heavy bee mortality and/or CCD, bee losses have been either minimal or nonexistent.

Source: "Bees 'restored to health' in Italy after this spring's neonicotinoid-free maize sowing," June 29, 2009.

Roundup Ready Gene Flow Already Tainting Alfalfa Seed Supply

In a timely announcement, Cal/West Seeds reported that 12% of over 200 lots of conventional alfalfa seed tested positive for the Roundup Ready (RR) gene in 2009 testing – up from 3% in 2008. 
The rapid increase in the spread of the RR gene in non-GE alfalfa seed reinforces the concern that the RR gene will quickly spread throughout the nation's alfalfa seed stock if the USDA and Courts allow the commercial planting of RR alfalfa to resume this season.

Source:  J. Reich and D. Johnson, "Roundup Ready Alfalfa Status," Cal/West News, Winter Issue 2010.

Agricultural Marketing Service takes step to address NOP audit concerns
USDA’s Office of Inspector General released its Oversight of the National Organic Program audit report on Thursday, March 18, and made seven key findings that needed to be addressed to ensure the integrity of organic agricultural products sold in the United States. As part of the report, the Office of Inspector General outlined 14 specific recommendations, which the Agricultural Marketing Service has already reviewed and is either currently addressing or taking steps to address.

FDA posts Q and A on “organic” cosmetics
In a March 8 Question and Answer posting on its web site, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) outlined the position that organic cosmetics must meet USDA regulations for the organic claim and all FDA regulations for cosmetics. Click here to read the answers.

NOSB publishes its meeting notice
The National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) has published a Federal Register notice of its upcoming meeting April 26-29.

Judge rules against immediate ban on GE sugar beets
Judge Jeffrey S. White of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California denied a motion for a preliminary injunction that would have prohibited U.S. plantings of genetically engineered sugar beets this spring. Recognizing that the plantings pose a likelihood for irreparable harm to the environment, the court, however, said that the delay by plaintiffs in not filing for the preliminary injunction earlier had already resulted in 95 percent of sugar beets grown and processed being genetically engineered. With 99.9 percent of seed already purchased for this year’s growing season, the court said a preliminary injunction would have led to a sugar shortage and detrimental economic effects to the sugar industry. The court added that it might rule very differently on a permanent injunction pending the full environmental review by APHIS.

Producer sentenced to two years in prison
The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Lubbock Division, has sentenced Basilio Coronardo, a partner in Sel-Cor Bean and Pea, Inc., operating of Brownfield, TX, to 24 months in federal prison, three years of supervised release and to pay $523,692.08 in restitution after being convicted of fraudulently selling non-organic products as organic.

All Things Organic™ and Natural Products Expo East to Co-Locate -  Expo East to Serve as Business & Education Hub of Organic Community
Natural Products Expo East has been selected as the new home for All Things Organic™, the organic community's leading business and educational gathering place in North America.  In making the announcement, the Organic Trade Association (OTA) stated that the conference will co-locate with Expo East, a partnership that will extend for at least seven years.

Beginning with this year's event October 13-16 in Boston, All Things Organic™ will be the branded organic pavilion for North American organic companies exhibiting at Expo East to distinguish organic businesses from other natural companies at the show. Meanwhile, Organic Products Expo-BioFach America will continue to be co-located at Expo East.

The All Things Organic™ conference program will be incorporated into the Expo East educational programs as a dedicated organic session track developed by OTA. In addition, OTA's Annual Meeting will be held at Expo East, and OTA's popular Leadership Awards Dinner and Dance will be held October 15 in junction with the co-location. Furthermore, OTA's International Reverse Trade Mission will help position the event as an international gathering place for organic interests.

New Hope Natural Media, which organizes Expo East, will work with companies that had signed up to exhibit at the All Things Organic™ 2010 Trade Show originally scheduled in June for Chicago to work out their participation in the new co-location.

OTA companies will continue to receive a member discount when exhibiting at All Things Organic™ at Expo East in Boston. In addition, priority points earned at previous All Things Organic™ trade shows will be applied to the Expo East priority point system for booth selection and placement.

OTA held the first All Things Organic™ Conference and Trade Show in 2001 in Austin, TX, which also hosted the 2002 and 2003 events. In 2004, OTA moved the conference and trade show to Chicago, IL, where it was held annually through 2009.

Organic products face spot testing for pesticides starting in September
from the New York Times, March 19, 2010

Following a federal report detailing widespread lapses in oversight and timely enforcement of organic industry regulations, the U.S. Department of Agriculture has announced that it will start spot testing organically grown foods for traces of pesticides.

The Department of Agriculture said on March 19 that it would begin enforcing rules requiring the spot testing of organically grown foods for traces of pesticides, after an auditor exposed major gaps in federal oversight of the organic food industry.

Spot testing is required by a 1990 law that established the basis for national organic standards, but in a report released on Thursday by the office of Phyllis K. Fong, the inspector general of agriculture, investigators wrote that regulators never made sure the testing was being carried out.

The report pointed to numerous shortcomings at the agriculture department’s National Organic Program, which regulates the industry, including poor oversight of some organic operations overseas and a lack of urgency in cracking down on marketers of bogus organic products.

The audit did not name growers or processors that marketed products falsely labeled organic or say where any such products had been sold.

The head of the National Organic Program, Miles McEvoy, said on Friday that enforcing testing rules was one of several steps the agency was taking to improve oversight of the industry. It will also require unannounced inspections of organic producers and processors and start regular reviews of organic products in stores to make sure they are correctly labeled and meet federal regulations, he said.

“There’s a real commitment from this administration to improve the integrity of this program,” Mr. McEvoy said.

The testing for pesticide residues is expected to begin in September. It will be done by the network of independent certifying agents that are already accredited by the department to inspect and certify organic growers, processors and handlers.

As of last July, 98 independent agents were licensed to inspect and certify about 28,000 organic operations worldwide, the inspector general’s report said.

Mr. McEvoy said that details of the pesticide inspections were still being worked out but that they would probably focus on growers whose risk of pesticide contamination might be highest, like those whose organic fields are cultivated next to nonorganic fields or those that raise both organic and conventional crops.

Some certifiers already do spot tests, he said, but many do not, testing only if they suspect a problem. The inspector general’s report said a review of four large certifiers, which were collectively responsible for inspecting almost a third of the organic operations nationwide, found that none did regular spot testing.

The organic program’s budget increased to $6.9 million for the current fiscal year, from $3.9 million the previous year, Mr. McEvoy said, while its staff is slated to nearly double, to 31 from 16. The Obama administration is seeking to increase the budget to $10 million in the next fiscal year and allow the program to expand to about 40 employees.

Christine M. Bushway, executive director of the Organic Trade Association, an industry group, said improved oversight, and more money to make it possible, were needed to ensure that consumers had faith in the United States Department of Agriculture’s organic seal. “Compliance and enforcement are critical to the seal and the long-term health of the industry,” she said.

Sales of organic products reached $26 billion last year and, until the recession hit, had been growing by double-digit percentages each year.

Ms. Bushway said the organic program never had the resources to keep up with the industry’s growth. “They were underfunded and understaffed,” she said.

The inspector general’s report focused largely on conditions at the organic program at the end of the Bush administration, from 2006 through 2008.

It said that in several cases officials had taken up to 32 months to act against producers or processors that had sold conventional products claiming they were organic — even as those products remained on the market. In one case, the report said, officials failed entirely to take action against an operator that, for two years, sold nonorganic mint under an organic label.

The report also said that the organic program had failed to adequately vet several of the independent certifying agents it allowed to approve organic operations in foreign countries.

Under normal circumstances, the program gives preliminary accreditation to certifying agents based on a review of paperwork they submit. That allows them to begin certifying and inspecting organic producers and processors. But the program is supposed to follow up with a site visit to inspect a certifier’s operations before making accreditation permanent.

In five cases, the inspector general found, officials failed to make the follow-up visits, allowing the certifiers to operate for as long as seven years with only preliminary accreditation.

Officials at the program said that in three cases, involving certifiers operating in Bolivia, Israel and Turkey, they did not send staff members to make the inspections because the State Department had issued travel warnings about potentially dangerous conditions in those countries.

In two other cases, involving certifying agents in Australia and Canada, officials said that scheduling problems blocked them from arranging visits — in one instance for as long as five years.

The Department of Agriculture said in its response to the audit that it had now visited and completed its review of four of the five foreign certifiers cited in the report and had scheduled a visit to the remaining certifier. It did not say if the reviews had found compliance problems.

The audit also highlighted numerous inconsistencies in the way that certifiers operating in the United States enforced organic regulations.

The report warned that officials must tighten oversight of the industry to give consumers the assurance “that products labeled as organic are meeting a uniform standard.”

New Global Organic Textile Standard Online Database Lists All Certified Companies
Nearly 2,800 facilities gain GOTS certification in 2009, a 40% increase over 2008

According to the online database of companies certified to the Global Organic Textile Standard (GOTS) on its web site which was re-launched on March 17, 2010, approximately 1,500 companies with a total of 2,811 facilities in 55 countries around the world were certified to the organic apparel and textile standard in 2009. That is almost a 40 percent increase over the 1,977 facilities certified to the standard in 2008. The GOTS standard was approved in 2006.
 
GOTS is the stringent voluntary global standard for the entire post-harvest processing (including spinning, knitting, weaving, dyeing and manufacturing) of apparel and home textiles made with organic fiber (such as organic cotton and organic wool), and includes both environmental and social provisions for post-farm to retail shelf management. Key provisions include a ban on the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs), highly hazardous chemicals such as azo dyes and formaldehyde, and child labor, while requiring living wages and strict waste water treatment practices. Because all fiber certified to GOTS must already be certified organic, GOTS certification means consumers are purchasing items certified organic from field to finished product. 
 
The top twenty countries based on the number of GOTS-certified facilities are India, Turkey, China, Pakistan, Japan, South Korea, Italy, Germany, Bangladesh, United Kingdom, Hong Kong, Peru, Sri Lanka, Mauritius, United States, Portugal, Taiwan, Indonesia, France, and the Netherlands.

The public database contains almost 400 dyeing facilities, more than 200 spinning, knitting, and weaving units, and approximately 140 printing and manufacturing facilities. While more than 700 companies are listed with an export business, currently about 50 import operations hold GOTS certificates as well. Twelve independent certification organizations around the world are qualified to certify operations to the standard. 

According to the GOTS International Working Group made up of the Organic Trade Association (U.S.), Japan Organic Cotton Association, International Association Natural Textile Industry (Germany), and the Soil Association (UK), the database will enable companies developing an organic fiber supply chain easy access to the most up-to-date information.
 
Global retail sales of organic cotton apparel and home textile products reached an estimated $3.2 billion in 2008, according to the Organic Cotton Market Report 2007-2008 released by the non-profit organization Organic Exchange in March 2009.

USDA publishes access to pasture rule
To access the Rule:  http://www.ams.usda.gov/AMSv1.0/getfile?dDocName=STELPRDC5082652&acct=noprulemaking
Also see USDA Q &A on this rule:  http://www.ams.usda.gov/AMSv1.0/getfile?dDocName=STELPRDC5082653&acct=noprulemaking
USDA  PRESS RELEASE FINAL RULE ON ORGANIC ACCESS TO PASTURE
http://www.usda.gov/wps/portal?contentidonly=true&contentid=2010/02/0059.xml

NOP is accepting comments on the exceptions for finish feeding of ruminant slaughter stock until April 19, 2010. Instructions for submitting comments are on page 3 of the final rule.

For more info:
USDA’s press release on the Pasture Rule
Northeast Organic Dairy Producer’s Alliance
USDA'S NOP’s Pasture Rule Info Page

Food Safety Legislation In The Senate
From Organic Farming Research Foundation online newsletter, Spring 2010
The food safety issue continues to play out on the policy front, amidst concerns that future food safety policies will negatively impact biodiversity, environmental conservation and the economic viability of small-scale agriculture.

OFRF supports the development of balanced policies that address the gaps in our food safety system and safeguard public health, while also preserving the environment and keeping family farmers in business. However, pending federal legislation would fall far short of that. In Congress, the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pension (HELP) Committee passed S. 510, the Food Safety Modernization Act, last November. S. 510 now awaits action by the full Senate. (The House passed its food safety bill, H.R. 2749, last August.) S. 510 would require farms that do even minimal processing to register with the FDA, ramp up recordkeeping, develop Hazard Analysis And Critical Control Points plans, and permit FDA inspections. Many of these activities could be extremely costly and overly burdensome for small-scale farmers. The bill makes no distinctions between extremely large, factory style facilities (arguably responsible for the overwhelming majority of food safety outbreaks) and small-scale facilities that wash and bag greens to sell at a local food co-op.

OFRF is supporting a suite of amendments proposed by our colleagues at the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition (NSAC). These amendments would encourage the development of food safety policies that are risk-based, science-based, scale appropriate, sensitive to environmental and biodiversity concerns, and require FDA to work with USDA (including the National Organic Program). In addition, one of the proposed amendments would provide competitive grants to develop food safety training programs and technical assistance for small and midsized agriculture producers, small processors and producer wholesalers. Some, but not all, of these amendments have been taken up by the Senate HELP committee. Read NSAC’s recent blog post to learn more detail on the amendments to S. 510 and find out how you can take action.

For more information:
An Op-Ed about Federal Food Safety Legislation
NSAC’s Food Safety Policy Brief Food Safety on the Farm

Advocate for Organic Priorities in Washington: April 14-16, 2010
The Organic Trade Association (OTA), with participation from OFRF, will be hosting a Policy Conference and Hill Visit Days April 14 and 15. The two-day event will include informational sessions on organic policy issues and hill visits with your Senators and Members of Congress. Confirmed speakers include:

• Dr. Temple Grandin, animal welfare expert
• Miles McEvoy, Associate Deputy Administrator, USDA’s National Organic Program
• Keith Jones, Staff Director, House Committee on Horticulture & Organic Agriculture

Registration cost for participation in the OTA Policy Conference and Hill Days is $250. For more information, visit the OTA website.

In addition, on Friday, April 16, the USDA’s Organic Working Group is hosting a listening session for all USDA agencies to provide updates on their activities related to organic agriculture. Organic producers and other stakeholders are encouraged to attend. For more information, contact OFRF Senior Policy Analyst Mark Lipson, at 831-426-6606 x109 or via email.

Organic grocer aims to raise $1.5 mil' for microcredit loans to poor, small-scale producers

Whole Foods Market, Inc. and its non-profit, Whole Planet Foundation, has teamed up with TastingTable.com to raise $1.5 million to help lift 40,000 people in developing countries out of poverty through microcredit loans. From Feb. 17-March 31, Whole Foods Market invites shoppers to donate directly to the Foundation at checkout registers and online at www.wholeplanetfoundation.org.

OTA offers resource on livestock production practices
OTA has compiled and posted a fact sheet entitled “Organic vs. Conventional Livestock Production: A side-by-side Comparison”.

Global organic area reaches 35 million hectares
Acreage managed organically in 2008 in the world totaled 35 million hectares farmed by almost 1.4 million producers, according to data from The World of Organic Agriculture 2010 released in mid-February at BioFach. Organic agricultural land area increased in all regions, and was up nearly three million hectares, or nine percent, compared to 2007 data. Of the total area managed organically, 22 million hectares were grassland. In addition, 8.2 million hectares were used for cropland. The regions with the largest area of organically managed land are Oceania (12.1 million hectares in Australia, New Zealand, and surrounding island states), Europe (8.2 million hectares), and Latin America (8.1 million hectares), according to statistics in a chapter by Dr. Helga Willer. The report also recorded 31 million hectares that are organic wild collection areas and land for bee keeping. The majority of this land is in developing countries. Meanwhile, according to Organic Monitor estimates, global organic sales reached $50.9 billion in 2008, double the $25 billion recorded in 2003. The report is available for purchase.

Obama’s 2011 Budget Request Proposes $5 Million Cut to Organic Ag Research
The annual appropriations process began on February 1st when President Obama released his 2011 Budget Request. Overall, the budget is a mixed bag for organic ag. While it includes a big increase for improving the integrity and enforcement of organic regulations enforcement, the budget request disappointingly cuts dedicated organic ag competitive research grants by $5 million. Specifically, the Administration’s budget request zeroes out funding for the Organic Transitions Research Program, one of two USDA competitive grants programs exclusively focused on organic ag research. This program was funded by Congress at $5 million in the 2010 Agriculture Appropriations Bill.

For more info, read the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition's blog posts on sustainable agriculture research and organic programs in President Obama's 2011 Budget Request, written by OFRF's Policy Associate Ariane Lotti. Als, read the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition’s FY2011 Appropriations Chart.

Restoring and increasing dedicated organic research and education funding will be the centerpiece of OFRF’s Appropriations campaign this year. If your Senators and/or Representative sit on the Agriculture subcommittees of the Appropriations Committees, stay tuned for upcoming action alerts.

2008 National Organic Production Survey Results Released
USDA’s National Agriculture Statistics Service (NASS) released the results of its 2008 “National Organic Production Survey,” a 331-page report providing detailed information about U.S. organic producers and the organic farming industry. The survey, which included 10,903 certified organic farms and 3,673 small farms using organic standards but exempt from certification, had a very strong response rate of 87%, indicating highly reliable basic data. The information pertains to production in 2008.

Thanks to several years of diligent work by NASS, this is now the most accurate national picture of the overall U.S. organic producer population since the USDA National Organic Program took real effect in 2002. It will have some surprises (both positive and disappointing) as we delve into the details. It will certainly raise many more questions for further work.

A few highlights include:

• 1.6 million acres of harvested organic cropland and 12,742 organic crop farms (both certified and exempt), for an average cropping operation size of 125 acres.
• An additional 128,476 crop acres in transition, implying a potential expansion rate of about 8 percent.
• 5,362 operations reported 1.85 million acres of pasture or rangeland acreage, averaging 345 acres for these kinds of operations.
• Organic farms in 2008 showed themselves on average to have greater revenue, higher expenses, and higher profitability compared with the overall U.S. farm averages in the 2007 National Census of Agriculture.
• Asked to pick just one “primary production challenge,” growers' biggest response was “regulatory problems” (28.8 percent), followed by “production problems” (19 percent), “management issues” (16.6 percent), “other” (13.9 percent), “market access” (12.5 percent), and finally “price issues”(9.3 percent).