Fiends of the earth...

[Mr Potato Head]

Having read some posts around the site, I'm intrigued that it seems that not everyone seems to want to be friends with Friends of the Earth, or associated with the Soil Association...

Maybe I'm being a bit thick here, but what exactly is the problem with FOE& the SA?

Now, I appreciate that this may be a contentious issue, so let's try and be polite...

[Rubberman]

Was the dropping of the "r" in the title a freudian slip Mr PH?????

[Cider Boys]

Hello Mr Potato Head

Perhaps it may be beneficial to ask a representative of the organisations to answer any criticisms.

Mine is simple, I have been growing vegetables for over half a century and after receiving some agricultural education for four years when chemical fertilisers and pesticides were the norm I was introduced to ‘The Living soil by Lady Balfour’ and started trying to grow vegetables in the spirit of the Organic methods. These were pioneered by the Henry Doubleday Research Organisation and the Soil Association.

Although I may grow my food using organic methods I am not allowed to make any organic claims unless I am certified by an approved association I can only describe my food as ‘no chemicals used’ which is ridiculous.

If you wish to set a standard that you certify that is of course fair but to also have a legal monopoly on a word used by English speaking people is blatantly unfair and.

What right has an unelected organisation to take a word in common use and only allow it to be used if they approve of you and you pay their fees?

It has completely isolated the small part time grower and gardener who has grown organically for years but can not afford the costly registration. There is now no financial incentive for the small grower of ‘local produce’ to be organic since they are forbidden to use the word by Big Brother SA.

I do not think this was the intention of Lady Balfour and the other pioneers of the organic movement.

Barney

[Mr Potato Head]

Yeah, but the SA isn't the only body allowed to adjudicate on 'organic' status... there are a number of licensed bodies, and surely they are only certifying what is essentially trading standards legislation?

Don't many professions have to be certfied to be allowed to use a certain title / description? Otherwise I'd be Dr Potato Head...

As a consumer, I'd be pretty keen to know that organic meant organic...

... however, as with all of these things, the cost of registration does have to be fair. So is this an issue of cost?

Does HDRA (now 'Garden Organic') come in for similar criticism?

[Geoff]

They are the religious fundamentalists among the people who want better food and a better planet and as such should be largely ignored and marginalised. They are only a step away from the animal rights terrorists. More realistic and attainable targets would have more impact. The SA in particular are denying the general public access to safe flavoursome food at sensible prices. We need a food standard based on measurable criteria such as residues rather than unproven hypothesis and mumbo jumbo. Whether we grow with blood,fish and bone or growmore is totally irrelevant to the health and safety of the food, it only affects the cost and hence the accessibility.

[richard p]

where agriculture is concerned the soil association have their way of doing things which must be followed. for example a few years ago a local dairy farmer was going organic till the sa insisted he plough up his permanant pasture which hasnt been disturbed in living memory.

[Colin Miles]

Well, to SA and FOE I would add Greenpeace. These organisations all started out with very good intentions, but have become overzealous, which is a great shame. The word organic is much abused and, as has been mentioned before on this site, means different things in different countries. And my pet hate at the moment is the 'Post-Organic glow' that one gets from a certain ad.

[Allan]

I am grateful to Cider boys for putting concisely my own position as a small grower who is partly commercial, if he hadn't said it I would have felt the need to. The big mistake of the SA was not so much setting up the commercial standards as Hi-jacking the word Organic and getting John Gummer to make it a legal term. It should have been "to Soil Association Organic standard".
Now their propoganda always implies that anything that isn't to the same methods AND produced by someone paying their exorbitant fee AND subjecting themselves to all the paperwork and inspection is inferior as it, by implication, is grown with those "poisonous chemicals" It doesn't matter that it has been flown halfway round the world and can have been grown in a way that violates their rules. Now,too late, they are using 'local grown' and 'eco friendly' as if they had a monopoly of all these things. They also claim GM Free, what homegrown food isn't and if it were GM it wouldn't be harmful to eat it?
My amnswer to all this rubbish is that everything that I and my wife sell carries our brand name by means of the label. The customer in time gets to know that our products are reliably excellent and grown with the maximum possible of TLC.Our reputation is more precious to our business than any description of Organic. It still leaves us the task of producing enough to meet demand but that is another story.
Allan

[Compo]

Hi there all, at last the debate is getting to a points where all sides can be seen for their true colours. I would not measure up to SA standards, my seed is not organic, not sure about the chemicals that may come in with my manure. home grown compost as I use shop bought vegetables in Winter, not always organic and the waste is compost.

What I do know is this, when the farmer at the back of my house sprays the winter wheat or field beans, he wears a mask and is only allowed to spray with the wind in one direction to avoid our houses. The harvest is then fed to his dairy cattle and he tells me that the ordinary (non organic) milk from Sainsburys and other stores is probably produced from his cows or similar producers in the South West. As a member of the public, I do not have the faintest if these chemicals are safe or not. But why the precautions.

However what I do know is this, I can produce healthy crops with the occasional pest damage enough to supplement my families diet, without using any pesticides or chemical fertilisers, I believe that is better, I also buy bread without preservative, so called organic it tastes better but goes stale quicker. I am simply trying to cut down on unneccessary complications in my families food chain, I also save water, try to have a low carbon footprint and be considerate to wildlife.

Allan you have a different dilemma, and I fully understand your plight, I guess you have to make a few quid I guess to get by on, we all need more genuine info and research on Foods etc, and ultimately we all make our own choices. I do not have the foggiest about commercial growing, but I do know that I like what I grow and If I can do it without chemicals, I will!! Organic may be the wrong word. But if I find a cancer research expert to tell me smoking causes cancer, then I will find another one that is not sure...and will likely say it doesn't, I guess you have to listen to common sense and make your own mind up.

I endorse some of the difficulties with so called soil associations and the like, the government is only interested in food when there is a scare and it loses votes. Otherwise it is a bureaucratic pot mess like the immigration system, criminal justice and benefits systems, it will all be different after the revolution!!!

[peter]

With you all the way on that one Compo.

[Mr Potato Head]

Okay, I think I'm getting a bit of a picture of the SA here from all sides, but I still don't understand why it is that the vitriol is poured on it, when it is the only organic certification body in the UK (I think there are about 10) that is non-profit-making. Surely out of all of them, it is the lesser of 10 evils as they are at least not just paying there cash out to shareholders?...

As a consumer, I might want to know that 'Organic' means just that. Just as I might want to know that my strawberry milkshake actually contains strawberries (and milk!) Likewise, I want to feel confident that those strawberries have been grown to strict organic standards... (Though I'll be cross if they've then been flown in from Kenya)

If the issue is that the SA is charging too much, surely you could go to another body for registration?

If the issue is over the 'monopolisation' of the word 'organic' then (aside from my previous argument) the whole food industry is riddled with reserved words or limited usage rules, whether it's Champagne, Parma Ham, Melton Mowbray pork pies, or chocolate, butter or milk... all of which you have to pay to have certified.

If it's all about branding, perhaps we should consider that it's lucky that 'organic' is not managed / owned by Lever bros, Tesco or Danone.

Allan said that being organic was all about reputation, and (hypothetically speaking) surely if one is organic, then it's worth protecting that reputation? Look at it from the other side. If you are an organic producer, would you want any tom, dick or harriet to be able to call themselves organic? Is there anyone out there in the KG-sphere that is a registered organic producer?

To a certain extent, I am playing devils advocate here. I was really just trying to establish what the issues were. However, as Allan correctly said, it's all about reputation and perhaps the word organic (at least in this sense) is already losing it's, as it's hijacked by the likes of the big supermarkets. Maybe it's time for us all to start using a new word and empowering it with the values that we believe in... then we can start charging for it...

... so, now, tell me... what's up with the FOE?

[Geoff]

Compo

Are you similarly concerned about how your farmer neighbour feeds his wheat?

My point is, although excess fertiliser run off is undoubtedly an issue it is not a food safety issue whereas ???cide residues are. To be "organic" you don't only have to stop spraying you have to change your fertiliser which is nonsense from a food safety point of view and increases cost and hence accessibility of safe food. It is what ends up in the food (or more precisely doesn't) that matters most. Similarly GM crops, right or wrong for other reasons, are probably not a food safety issue either.
The environmental and food safety issues need to be separated.

[Colin Miles]

The fact that an organisation is non-profit making doesn't necessarily make it better than one which aims to make a profit. I am sure there are over-zealous non-profit making organisations or all kinds with which one wouldn't want to be associated.

And yes, the term 'organic' has been hijacked. Originally meant in the sense of carbon-based as in organic and non-organic chemistry, it has come to mean - well the definitions are elastic and ever-changing, which is one gripe that I hear about the SA.

I buy 'organic' and 'non-organic' foods on the basis mainly of taste and locality. I will also buy GM foods if it appeals. I am also rather fond of the Grapefruit Ruby Red, a variety which, I believe, was produced in the 50's or earlier via either chemical methylation or nuclear irradiation, like a number of other common varieties. If these are now grown 'organically' can they be called organic?

[Beccy]

Well, to SA and FOE I would add Greenpeace. These organisations all started out with very good intentions, but have become overzealous, which is a great shame. The word organic is much abused and, as has been mentioned before on this site, means different things in different countries. And my pet hate at the moment is the 'Post-Organic glow' that one gets from a certain ad.

In what way has Friends of the Earth 'become over zealous'?

And get real, that ad has nothing to do with organic in the context we are discussing, it talks about the product being made with extracts from plants, not how they are grown, it's just an admans wet-dream.

[vivie veg]

My main problem with Soil Association (or other Organic) standards are that they are not necessarily protecting wildlife and they still have a list of approved chemicals as long as your arm that you can use.

Eg. Soft soap, often recommended as a general insecticide. However, it is just as bad for your benefical insect as the bad ones, so in my view is worse than a man made specific pesticide (not that I would use those either). Whereas, leave those aphids alone and within a few year a resident population of ladybird, bluetits and other preditors will keep the levels under control.

Also if you end up covering the countryside in plastic (a big problem to dispose of and a huge use of oil to make) you will get the NIMBYs complaining

Dr Potatohead (please send £10 and I'll issue you with your Doctorate) is right, there are 10 Approved UK Certification Bodies, 1 of these is Scottish and 1 Welsh, but off the top of my head I can only name SA and Organic Farmers and Growers, all of them will operate the same standards and presumably charge similar fees.

I just wonder what does your product have to be to allow the use of word Organic? Please correct me if I'm wrong, but Aldi have Organic compost...however I did not see a SA sign on it...maybe it had another cert on it. Also the Organic shampoo range. Is it only FOOD that has to be cerified by an approved body? Although I know cotton products can have the SA certificate.