(Posted Fri, Jan 18 '08 at 10:45 UTC)
It does seem that the USDA does not want consumers to have access to good food. They blur the lines and keep the people confused. The only way to insure healthy growing practices is to grow your own or know your farmer!
Why does the American public tolerate this? How do we do something about it? We all have a right to good food and the right to make decisions about our food sources.
|Zone 8a, TX|
|(Posted Fri, Jan 25 '08 at 10:29 UTC) |
So here's the next battleground. We had all better get involved in fighting this.
|(Posted Sun, Jan 27 '08 at 01:59 UTC) |
The link is toa blog but I cant find any article related to what you are talking about could you give a more direct link or explain more in detail thanks.
|(Posted Sun, Jan 27 '08 at 08:39 UTC) |
Thanks for that.
This is unbelieveable.
I wish someone with brains and money would trademark, copyright, and patent a word, phrase, or way of doing something and give it as a open source or public domain to the people so that govt cant come in and take it away.
|(Posted Fri, Feb 1 '08 at 10:10 UTC) |
I don't know where the information about the USDA taking over Certifield Naturally Grown came from.
I just checked the web site, and it still says its run by a private group of mostly volunteers running on donations.
|(Posted Sun, Feb 3 '08 at 09:08 UTC) |
The aren't taking over the organization. They are going to regulate the words Naturally Grown just like they have Organic.
|Zone 8a, TX|
|(Posted Sun, Feb 3 '08 at 08:00 UTC) |
Can Naturally Grown sue the USDA for copyright infringement, or trademark infringement or something of that nature.
I wouldnt be allowed to create another website called local harvest. They would sue me Im sure. Why cant Naturally Grown sue the USDA?
Just a thought.
|(Posted Sun, Feb 3 '08 at 08:17 UTC) |
"I'm from the Government, and I'm here to help."
COPE, you're trying to impose reason on a world that has gone completely irrational. This gets treated like eminent domain -- if the government wants to take it over, they pass a USDA regulation, and presto!
Here locally, our Farmers Market is starting to have serious problems with know-nothing bureaucrats who want to impose regulations that would strangle us. We are lucky enough to have some political cover from some progressive, sustainability-minded people in office, and from a local populace that has learned to appreciate the value and crucial importance of local food. But you can best believe that for years to come, perhaps for the rest of our lives, we will have to fight tooth and nail for the right to get our food to our customers, surviving a bureaucratic onsiaught that would tax us out of existence, prohibit truthful information to our customers, etc.
|(Posted Mon, Feb 4 '08 at 12:56 UTC) |
My take on this is that bureaucracies implode from their own incompetence and I see this happening with the USDA, as well as other arms of state and federal governments. Best to get out of the way, as long as you can make a living. Thus, go certified if it allows you to be in markets at a distance that are necessary to survive. Otherwise forget the nonsense.
|Catering to the unique Ferndale perspective.|
|(Posted Mon, Feb 4 '08 at 10:23 UTC) |
Haugen - I don't think we'll ever convince them of that.....they've put all their self-value in the term. They don't grasp the concept that it doesn't matter if the label say's organic, but only that it IS organic. It's the difference between growing organic and marketing organic. You grow organic with no concern for the marketing of it because you believe it's the right thing to do. You market organic because you believe somebody should pay you more for it. Like payin' kids to get good grades.
Folks, I'm not trying to discount your feelings on the subject, but this business, like any other, is going to have to evolve with the times, and the times they be achangin'...there is no value in fighting a battle you know you can't win, and all the reteric in the world isn't going to change it.
The only way you are going to beat the goverment regulation of those descriptive terms is to play by their rules and use them against them, Meaning the organic taxation stamp is only going to have value as long as you keep paying them for it. Learn to sell your produce for what it is; locally grown fresh produce that just happens to be done with ecologically healthy farming practices while keeping the health of the customer in mind. You've been sold an outdated wagon full of bull that the general buying public is all that concerned. It really is a very small ( in the larger scope of things ) group that make all the noise about how certified organics are God's gift to the world. The proof is in the retail outlets where the masses feed. I know, send any reporter out on the street and have them ask Joe Public how they feel about organics; they will always tell you it's very important to them. But as soon as they are out of sight they head for the nearest supermarket to buy their commercially grown veggies. You can't base the value of a farmer's market by the people you talk to there......that's nothing but preaching to the choir. You're gonna have to get out there and build a customer base on the fact that they know who you are in a limited way and are willing to put their faith in you to grow their food in the most health concious way you can. And to a great many of them it's never going to matter. They have different prioreties, and you'll never change that.
I heard what the old boys, guys who were growing for market long before most of us even needed to earn a dollar, 5-8 years ago, when they started dropping their certifications. And in large enough numbers that it was on the industry grapevine if you were listening. They said then that gov. regulated organics was going to be prostituted to the point that it wouldn't have real value. I'm talking about the old breed that were self-relient and didn't put much stock in having that much government intervention in their business. Look around you, it's a younger generation that is worried about getting or keeping their certifications. And CNG is just another way of saying USDA in that you're going for that bought and paid for A+. You're making noise about the wrong thing: who cares weither the gov. say's you're growing quality food organicly.......worry about what your customers think. You see them a hell of a lot more often than you see any inspectors.
|(Posted Tue, Dec 2 '08 at 09:28 UTC) |
I don't understand..... The USDA is trying to set some basic standards to protect people from companies that simply label their products as "organic" or "naturally grown"
I'm a business student, and if I knew people wanted to buy "organic" then I would put that word on my products and sell them. The USDA is trying to prevent that.... If not, everyone would be able to use these words, and the real organic growers and organic consumers would be hurt much worse....
instead of complaining, how about some recommendations... how can we improve the situation?
|(Posted Tue, Dec 2 '08 at 11:15 UTC) |
James - In the spirit of postmodern agriculture, i.e. sustainability not built on cheap oil and monocultures, let's do a little deconstruction on your several points.
<<I don't understand..... The USDA is trying to set some basic standards to protect people from companies that simply label their products as "organic" or "naturally grown"> > Yes, the USDA is trying to set some basic standards, but those standards are what people were doing anyway. It would be a tempest in a teapot except for the government restricting the right of people to use the term without the USDA stamp of approval. Certified Organic is NOT about food safety, it is about marketing. Dan Glickman said this in 2000. The government inserted themselves where they were not needed. Protecting consumers has nothing to do with it.
<<I'm a business student, and if I knew people wanted to buy "organic" then I would put that word on my products and sell them. The USDA is trying to prevent that.... If not, everyone would be able to use these words, and the real organic growers and organic consumers would be hurt much worse....>> Since you are a business student, you are already behind the curve. Marketing, advertising, promotion, business plans, etc. are all based on the world as it is, not the world as it is becoming. Assuming people will automatically lie to make more money is another fallacy. The "real" organic growers have been hurt much more by USDA regulations than you realize. Culture trumps economics - witness the growth of the organic movement in the last 40 years. Organics started because of responsible agriculturalists - both scientists and farmers. It was not profitable until the last few years. The growth in organics was not the result of the USDA policies or regulations - they fought us tooth and nail until 2000, then they simply co-opted a term that was already solid. They then watered it down, so now it means almost nothing.
<<instead of complaining, how about some recommendations... how can we improve the situation?>> It is more than a little disingenous to jump into an ongoing debate from people who are actually working their butts off and take a scolding tone. I have been in the Movement for over 40 years and I work 3000+ hours growing food for many more families than just myself. Yet I make far less than minimum wage. I doubt you would be able to survive in what I do every day. A little respect is in order. If you read all our posts again, you will see multiple recommendations. My recommendation is to not use certification and inform the consumer on how their food is grown. Farm tours and transparency are both tools that require little extra output. At this stage in the game, it is not about building complex social structures, but getting the consumer more involved so the farmer can spend more time on the farm. Here's a suggestion for your MBA thesis/research - in the next 5-10 years, the US will have to shift to postmodern agriculture based on human labor - how do we make the transition to 20% of the population growing food?
|Catering to the unique Ferndale perspective.|
|(Posted Tue, Aug 3 '10 at 07:57 UTC) |
[[I don't understand..... The USDA is trying to set some basic standards to protect people from companies that simply label their products as "organic" or "naturally grown"]]
Do you understand that when you ban guns only criminals will have them? Same principle. When you allow all citizens to have guns, then criminals will have them - but so will the honest citizens who can defend themselves from the criminals.
When you set government standards, and because you make implementation of those standards a fee-based activity, only those who can afford to pay the fee will be certified as compliant with the standards. ...which means, those companies who simply label their product. They can pay for both the certification and also for the inspectors to look the other way when necessary.
[[I'm a business student]]
It's your money; you can waste it how you choose.
[[The USDA is trying to prevent that]]
No, they aren't. They are attempting to control access to the industry. That's all they *can* do. This is the government, after all, not an organization whose livelihood is based on actually accomplishing what it or others believe its mission to be.
Any government agency which actually fixes a problem is one that has signed its own death warrant. The USDA doesn't want to make healthy food; they want to find UNhealthy food. If food were automatically healthy, then there'd be no point in the USDA inspection folks existing; 20,000 bureaucratic paper-pushers out of a job, lining the Beltway holding signs claiming: "Will be nosy for food."
[[instead of complaining, how about some recommendations... how can we improve the situation?]]
Here: leave bad-enough alone.
There's nothing so bad that government can't make it worse.
|Ross & Jeannie
Laura Lane Lambs|