www.ofa.org.au
Organic Industry Update, March 2003
Feel free to forward this newsletter to friends and colleagues. To become a new subscriber click here***********************************
| Chairman's Report |
1. Second National Organic Conference - 'Organic Futures For Australia'
University of Adelaide on 2,3 & 4 October 2003.
The first brochure for this conference is now out. Copies will be included in the next issue of the Australian Organic Journal, now the joint publication for members of NASAA & BFA. It is hoped to include it in the newsletters of other certifiers, although at least one seems to be reluctant to inform its members about this conference.
Cat Mills of the Conference Secretariat has a separate item in this newsletter on the Conference Update (see below).
The content of the brochure is also on the OFA website. Go to the special conference pages at http://conference.ofa.org.au
If you wish to ensure you receive a printed copy, please register your interest by sending an email to ofaconf@nasaa.com.au or contact Cat Mills on (08) 8370 8455 - or c/- P.O. Box 768, Stirling, SA, 5152.
2. OFA - An Information Service
Further to my note on this topic in the last Organic Industry Update, I
have received a number of calls from family members of individuals experiencing
illnesses. These calls have been either seeking sources of organic (and hence
chemical-free) food, or seeking sources of information on how to grow their
own food organically. Some of these calls have been from remote country locations
where there are no or few retails outlets selling organic food.
3. The Impact of the Drought Continues
Since the last newsletter some parts of eastern Australia have received
rain. This has ranged from very light to heavy, with some areas still missing
out. It is hoped that many Australians not on the land, or relying on farm produce,
realise that the arrival of rain does not resolve the drought caused problems.
High stock and feed prices will continue as farmers restock their properties,
and conserve livestock to rebuild their numbers. It will take some time for
pastures to recover and crops to grow. This will continue to impact on organic
producers, processors and consumers for some time.
4. Fire-fighting Chemicals
I was recently contacted by brigades from the rural fire service of one
of the states. The brigades were seeking information on the location of organic
farms. They were seeking this because they had been advised not to use some
fire-fighting chemicals on organic properties.
At this stage I am seeking clarification of this, including what the perceived impact of the fire-fighting chemicals might be on organic production and/or organic produce.
Whilst it is obvious that the incidence of fire in rural areas needs to be prevented wherever possible, and fires need to be quickly suppressed when they do occur, it is definitely worthwhile investigating the consequences of the use of any fire-fighting chemicals on organic farms.
5. The Continuing GM Debate
Whilst the use of GM crops seems to be receiving less media coverage than
in the past, there is still a serious problem to be faced. Despite what seems
to be increasing opposition from farmers (both organic and non-organic) in many
states to the introduction of GM crops in Australia, there seems to be relentless
pressure from our governments and the chemical companies to introduce them.
There seems to be entrenched opposition to a referendum on their introduction, which indicates that governments recognise that most people are opposed to them.
All very strange in a democracy.
Sid Cowling
OFA Chairman
| 'Organic Futures for Australia' - National Organic Conference Update |
Editors note: A section of the OFA website has been devoted to the National Organic Conference. Go to http://conference.ofa.org.au or click one of the links below.
Preparations for the Second National Organic Conference to be held by OFA in Adelaide 2-3 October continue. We are delighted to announce that Dr Urs Niggli, Director of FiBL (Research Institute of Organic Agriculture, Berlin) has agreed to be a keynote speaker at the conference. Dr Niggli is internationally recognised for his research in organic agricultural areas and will contribute valuable insights into world organic concerns and movements.
The conference themes have now been set and these follow three arms of organic operations: the science of organic agriculture; the practice of organic agriculture and the business of organic agriculture. Each of these three arms has an impact on the other two and we are keen to see presentations that explore these areas both as separate issues and as links in a chain.
A Call for Presentations has now been issued and the deadline for preliminary abstracts is 31 May 2003.
This Second National Organic Conference will provide an ideal opportunity for all sectors of the Australian organic industry to network; seek out sources of produce; seek out buyers for products and gauge consumer opinion on a range of issues. Delegates will come from growers, processors, government agencies, wholesalers, importers and exporters, inspectors, universities and the general public.
Space will be dedicated to displays from all sectors of the industry and the conference committee is seeking expressions of interest from parties interested in supporting this event.
For further information about the conference and/or sponsorship and support details, please complete the registration of interest form and return to Cat Mills of the OFA 2003 Secretariat. We also remind you to keep checking the website for ongoing updates.
OFA 2003 Secretariat
Att: Cat Mills
PO Box 768 Stirling SA 5152
Tel: (08) 8370 8455
Fax: (08) 8370 8381
Email: ofaconf@nasaa.com.au
| OFA Website Developments |
Streamlined Directory Search Page
The search
page for the OFA website directory has been streamlined and greatly simplified
to make searching easier, and to achieve better search results. The search page
still offers three methods of searching, and maintains the powerful search capabilities
in the 'Advanced Search' page. The main difference is in the layout of the 'standard
search', now focusing on the main criteria the users will search for. We expect
that this improvement will increase the use of the directory as an important
industry resource. Feedback is encouraged.
Organic Marketplace registration pages now active
For several months you have been able to search offers to buy and sell from
traders around the world in the Organic
Marketplace pages at the OFA website. In that time we have been negotiating
and finalising the registration process, to enable you to place your own offers
to buy and sell. The Organic Marketplace is provided through co-operation with
the Organic Super Site, and one of their partner sites, French based company,
Greentrade.net. These trade pages are viewed by over 6,000 visitors each
month. Already large numbers of international offers are listed in the Organic
Marketplace pages, making it a valuable resource for Australian based importers,
exporters, processors, and wholesale distributors. Now registration is available
to Australian growers and traders, and we intend to develop it as a widely used
trade resource.
New facility - Would you like the Australian Organic Events Calendar on
your website ?
Every organic website in Australia can now display an evolving, self-updating
events calendar on their website. The OFA events calendar has Australia's most
comprehensive listing of organic events, workshops, and field days and is a
great feature to keep your visitors coming back for more. It is very easy to
to do - simply make a link to the following webpage: http://www.ofa.org.au/magus/ofa.nsf/listIframe?OpenView
You can present it in any way you like - within your own website frames or as a popup page. Once you have made the link you never have to update anything. The events calendar will be updated automatically on our server and each time you visit, the new events will be listed. We believe it is important for the industry to have a central and universal resource where the majority of event listings can be found, and to make it widely available. For organisations that already list their own events, we encourage you to link to the OFA calendar as a complimentary source of information for your visitors. Linking to the events calendar is free, and we ask you to send us a quick email to let us know that you have linked.
Did you know ........ ? Did you know that the OFA events calendar is set up so that you can enter events yourself at the OFA website ? On the OFA home page click on the 'Events' menu then select 'Submit Entry'. Fill in the details and click send. We will process it and post the event in the calendar soon afterwards. Simple huh ?
As always we encourage feedback about the website and the newsletter. Contact me at webmaster@ofa.org.au or 02 9523 6134
Dom O'Brien
Website Manager
| IFOAM President's Welcome Address at Biofach 2003 |
Gunnar Rundgren, president of the organic industry's world governing body, IFOAM, gave the opening address at the Biofach trade exhibition in early February. In it he outlined his view of the progress of the world organic movement and some of the immediate challenges that must be overcome. Click here to read the presentation at the OFA website.
| A Natural Cure For Paterson's Curse |
|
|
|
Paterson's curse, Echium plantagineum, is native to Mediterranean Europe, it was first recorded in Australia in 1843 and declared noxious in 1911. Since then it has become an important weed of agriculture throughout southern Australia. It is toxic to livestock and effectively outcompetes pasture species, reducing productivity. Although four species of Echium have been introduced into Australia (including E. vulgare, E. italicum and E. simplex) only E. plantagineum has become a serious noxious weed. E. vulgare is the next most commonly occurring of the four, and is also classed as noxious.
A National Biological control program on Paterson's curse began in the early 1980's at which time 6 agents were selected and tested as potential biocontrol agents. They underwent strict quarantine testing to ensure they do not attack plants other than Paterson's curse and were not carrying any other pests or disease. The 6 agents are target specific to Echium, with their preferred host being E. plantagineum, however they can breed and survive on the other species of Echium. Since E. vulgare is also noxious and the other two species are rare and not likely to be affected, the agents were approved for release into Australia.
A mass rearing program to breed and distribute the agents throughout Victoria began in 1988. The first agent to be released was the leaf mining moth, Dialectica scalariella. Damage caused by the leaf mining moth is not severe enough to have an impact on E. plantagineum because the moths are very active during the summer months when the weed has died off. The moth can be quite effective on E. vulgare as it occurs all year round.
The next agent to be released was the crown boring weevil, Mogulones larvatus. Since 1993 the weevil has been released at over 250 sites. Crown weevils lay their eggs on the leaf stalks and the larvae burrow down to feed in the central crown. Because of this the larvae are very susceptible to grazing pressure, livestock feed on the central crown effectively eating the developing larvae. However after a number of years, usually with the initial release site fenced off from grazing, the weevils population becomes noticeable. After 5-7 years dead plants can be seen due to the pressure of the weevils. Redistribution from field sites has been conducted over the past two years and the natural spread of the weevil is well over 5km from the release points.
In 1996 two further agents were released, the taproot flea beetle Longitarsus echii and the root boring weevil Mogulones geographicus. L. echii is a beetle, but has very pronounced hind legs, which it uses to 'hop' about much like a flea. The flea beetles have been released at over 50 sites, and are showing great promise. Collection is possible from several field sites, and spread has been measured at nearly 1km. The flea beetle is not as susceptible to grazing as it spends 90% of its life cycle underground, only emerging for a few months to mate and lay eggs. Larvae feed on the primary and secondary root system.
M. geographicus is a root feeder and has proved difficult to breed in large numbers, only 12 releases have been made since 1996. Although the root weevil is surviving at sites it will take some time for the population to reach collectable levels and have any significant impact on the weed.
Phytoecia coerulescens, a stem boring beetle was released in 1998. Only one release was made in Victoria, as it is not expected to be an effective biological control agent. Also released in 1998 was the pollen beetle, Meligethes planiusculus. The pollen beetle is only active during the flowering season and feeds on the developing seed. Although it has no impact on the seed already in the seed bank it can be quite effective on reducing the amount of future seed fall.
Meat and Livestock Australia, the Australian Wool Innovation and the Victorian Department of Primary Industries are funding the biological control of Paterson's curse program for the next three years. The focus over the next three years will be on redistribution of the already established agents, the crown weevil, taproot flea beetle and pollen beetle, while breeding of the root boring weevil will continue at KTRI in Frankston.
Few releases have been made on organically managed land, which would be suitable to the release of biocontrol agents, as chemicals can adversely affect them. If you have a dense and persistent infestation of Paterson's curse on organically managed land and would like to be involved in future releases please contact:
Kerry Roberts
Department of Primary Industry
Keith Turnbull Research Institute
PO Box 48 Frankston, 3199
Phone (03) 9785 0135
Email: kerry.roberts@nre.vic.gov.au
| Inaugural Queensland Organics Conference - Update |
Cairns, 31 July - 1 August 2003.
Venue: Cairns Colonial Club Resort Conference Centre
"Queensland Organics - now and for the future"
Early Bird Conference Registration Starts
Early Bird conference registration has started with some of the first returns
being made. The Early Bird registration pamphlets are available by contacting
Rosemary Burgess 07 4067 6492 or click on CONFERENCE at the OPAQ Web site: www.geocities.com/opaq2001.
Early Bird registration is $165 if paid before 30 June.
Trade Display
The conference is to have an extensive trade display for the convenience of
delegates to see new and already successful goods and services available to
the industry. The trade display is seen as an integral part of the conference
and the program has been arranged to maximise delegate access to trade display
information. Trade display booths are $495 inclusive of morning and afternoon
teas and lunches and conference registration for 1 person. Shared booths are
negotiable. The trade display area is filling up fast so to secure your trade
display booth or for further information contact:
Maurice Franklin
Trade display co-ordinator
Tel: 4068 7340
Fax: 4068 7340
E-mail: maurice.franklin@bigpond.com
Information Table
There will be an information table for pamphlets and flyers. Conference staff
will ensure the table is kept well stocked and accessible. The cost of displaying
information is $55 and those interested should contact Maurice Franklin as above.
Paper Submissions
Submission of Paper summaries has ended. The Papers sub-committee has started
reading paper summaries and could not be more happy with the quantity and quality
of those received. A number of extensions were given but speakers can be assured
of notification on time.
Contact: Rosemary Burgess
Secretary, Organic Producers Association of Queensland
Chair, Inaugural Queensland Organics Conference Committee
Tel: 07 4067 6492 ( 1 - 3 pm weekdays)
E-mail: rburgess@austarnet.com.au
Post: PO Box 116 Mirriwinni Qld 4871
Website: www.geocities.com/opaq2001
| Feature
Article Agriculture in Myanmar: An Uncertain Future - by Andre Leu |
Myanmar is one of the last countries in Asia that still uses traditional farming techniques. The main fertiliser is composted or aged manure and rice straw and weeding is still largely done through cultivation. The farmers use crop rotations of legumes and grains with some vegetables in rotations. They still interplant with mixed systems. It is not uncommon to see sunflowers and beans, corn and beans, sorghum and beans growing in the same field. Some fields of sugar cane have two rows of beans planted between the rows of cane.
Animals are still an integral part of all farming systems. Cattle and Water Buffalo are the main animals for transport and ploughing. Horse carts are also widely used. Chickens, ducks and geese are the main forms of meat, however sheep and goats are grazed in the drier areas. Fish are caught in the rice paddies and irrigation channels and dams.
However, the agricultural aid agencies are starting to help them modernise and within a few years I expect to see the same process I have seen in Indonesia, Laos, Cambodia and Thailand in the last three decades. The farmers will be told to use chemical fertilisers, non resistant hybrid seeds, pesticides and herbicides to increase crop production. I expect that like Indonesia, Laos and Cambodia, Myanmar will become a dumping ground for banned pesticides that will be given as agricultural aid.
The non-literate farmers will mix up these chemicals without correct measurements due to not being able to read the label. They usually apply them in a highly concentrated mixture due to ignorance. I have seen Lychees white with Chlorpyrifos in Thailand due to the belief that more is better. If they cannot afford a backpack sprayer, they will walk through their fields with a bucket, splashing out the mixture with their bare hands. If they have a backpack, they will spray without protective clothing, masks and eye protection, walking through it in bare feet.
The fish in the paddies will die from the toxic chemicals and animals will start to disappear from production systems as machinery is adopted. All the statistics show that this so called Green revolution has failed to end rural poverty and hunger.
In the end the greatest export will be their children as they leave the villages in search of wealth and the bright lights of the cities.
I have seen this process time and time again as our western aid agencies move into these countries and destroy self-sufficient communities so that they can enter the corporate world of commercial agriculture. Now some of these aid organisations like Future Harvest and the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) are advocating the use of GMO's as the silver bullet needed to end poverty.
Prof. Jules Pretty of Essex University, UK, has shown that by introducing organic methods into these natural farming systems, that they can double or triple yields without using high priced toxic chemicals or GMO's.
An excellent example of this type of agricultural extension has been published in the January 2003 edition of World Vision News. Working in conjunction AusAID, World Vision linked farmers from the impoverished Makuyu community in Kenya with the Kenya Institute of Organic Farming (KIOF).
They arranged workshops where KIOF members taught the principles of organic farming, including compost making, preparing safe organic pesticides, vegetable gardening and organic care of live stock.
Maize yields increased from four to nine times above previous levels. The organically grown crops had yields that were 60% higher than crops grown with expensive chemical fertilisers.
The wonderful thing is that many of these farmers now have a surplus of food to sell, whereas previously they did not have enough to eat. They are organising marketing co-ops to sell this surplus.
The profits are going back to the community. They have distributed dairy goats, rabbits, hives and poultry to community members and have planted out 20,000 trees including 2,000 mangos. Several of the organic farmers are training many other farmers in the district and helping them to apply organic farming techniques to their farms.
The mood of the community has changed. They are now confident and very importantly they are empowered with the knowledge that they can overcome the problems in their community.
These types of simple community based organic agricultural models are what is needed around the world to end rural poverty and starvation, rather than GMOs and expensive chemicals.
Andre Leu is the Horticulture Sector Representative of the OFA
| OFA Submission to the GTGC, on Canola Industry Stewardship Protocols |
Editors note: Ordinarily for a document of this length I would present an extract and provide a link to the full document on the website. However, the importance of this submission is such that I have published it in full. We strongly recommend you read as much as possible, to understand how grossly inadequate the evaluation of risks by the Gene Technology Grains Committee (GTGC) has been. It is clear that the intention of the GTGC is to pursuade State Governments to allow the release of GM canola in spite of substantial evidence of the risks and disadvantages. The States that have not announced a moratorium and that may allow planting of GM Canola this year if allowed are Queensland and Victoria and South Australia.
The OFA makes this submission in good faith that the concerns raised will be acknowledged by the GTGC small working group as more than "philosophical opposition", and not dismissed as "typically anti-GM or non scientific". This submission is based on the realities of modern agriculture and consumer preferences.
The economic impact of GM crops have not been fully assessed to either organic or Non GM food production systems. Because of this the OFA believes that the GTGC should recommend against a commercial release of GM canola at this stage. The OFA goes further to recommend that the GTGC call on State Governments to carry out independent studies to ensure that the release of GM canola does not cause an adverse impact on other production systems.
A huge irony of these protocols is that the impact is on the Non GM or GM Free or organic grower who will incur additional charges simply because GM canola is introduced. A GM farmer on the other hand incurs little extra expense and inconvenience because segregation costs are shared with Non GM farmers and there are no testing expenses.
The OFA endorses the work produced by the Network of Concerned Farmers in its Alternative Grains Industry Statement and Readiness Checklist and believes there are a myriad of unresolved issues to be resolved before GM canola (or any other GM open pollinated crop) is released in Australia.
Our comments in this document are in response to specific statements made in the SP. Our comments are "science based" - as they point to the lack of science which characterises this document. Quotations from the SP are in blue and our direct response is indented and italicised for clarity.
"Markets overseas and in Australia are demanding increased consumer choice. Genetically modified (GM) crops will provide the grain supply chain the opportunity to meet increased demands for high quality grain crops. "
At the December 6 meeting of the GTGC an OFA motion calling for more time before GM canola is released, was rejected by the GTGC on the grounds that the role of the GTGC is not to promote or condemn GM crops. This position is contradicted here, in the opening sentence of the document, which is completely speculative and reflects the pro GM bias which underlies the document.
Q. What are the increased demands for high quality grain crops?
Q. Do you refer to higher protein, higher oil content etc or do you really refer to lower price of production in order to compete on world markets?
Q. What evidence is there that GM crops will allow us to sell better in the market?
It may in fact be the contrary, and increasingly so (e.g. China's labelling of GM oils).
"However, consumers want the right to choose between GM and non-GM foods. In many countries (including Australia), there are regulatory and/or commercial requirements to provide accurate labelling stating that a product does, or does not, contain GM material. "
This is a misleading statement, GM oils are exempt from labelling in Australia. GM cotton seed oil is 30% of the oil produced in Australia and is on the market in both commercial and domestic retail vegetable oil products - unlabelled. GM canola oil is not required to be labelled in Australia.
"These issues have important market implications for Australia’s grain supply chain. Farmers for example, must be able to choose the production system or systems that they prefer and the supply chains and markets that they wish to target and participate in. "
This statement has been ignored in the development of the protocols. If GM canola is released with 5m buffer zones then contamination of organic and GM-free crops will occur as has happened in Canada and the result will be the denial of the affected farmers' right to choose. Even 400 meter or 800 meter buffer zones will be totally inadequate. In the UK the organic industry has lobbied for 10km buffer zones or 6 miles and in Australia bee keepers have asked us to lobby for 16km buffer zones.
"To meet the needs of consumers for differentiated products, the Australian grains industry has embraced the principles of coexistence."
Q. What are the exact specifications of coexistence?
The SP does not define allowable levels of contamination and does not deal with the prohibition of any presence of contamination for organic and Non GM or GE free systems. Most of the submissions received to the Strategic Framework have been opposed to the protocols as defined, as inequitable, costly and a legal minefield.
"Different production systems and supply chains will operate concurrently, offering producers and consumers freedom of choice. Each differentiated market will require much higher levels of management and cooperation throughout the chain than currently practised. "
Organic systems are fine as they stand in Australia without the implementation of GM canola. Conventional growers sell their crops with an AQIS certificate of freedom from GMOs at little or no cost.
Q. Do they now have to adopt more stringent and costly standards in order to keep producing GM free and organic canola and if so who pays for this?
"The role of the Gene Technology Grains Committee (GTGC) on behalf of grains industry and government stakeholders has been to develop protocols, based on a strategic framework, to enable the coexistence of different grain production systems and supply chains."
The Strategic Framework is not a completed document. The GTGC members have not "signed off" on this due to a lack of consensus and recognition of the high level of opposition in the submissions received to it.
Q. How can a set of key underlying principles be abandoned in draft form or "living document", when so much time was devoted to them?
"The Protocols set out the steps, procedures and standards by which the canola industry can meet the quality specifications set by their numerous diverse customers within an acceptable farming systems risk framework. "
Q. Does this include specifications for organic and Non GM and GM-free customers?
Q. Have those customers commented on the proposed risk management, which will certainly lead to low level contamination occurring?
"The protocols aim to meet the following objectives:
With regards to organic specifications for nil detectable residue the protocols fail to deliver this objective comprehensively. We have told the GTGC on numerous occasions that our markets are nil detectable residue and that under these protocols we will be unable to achieve this.
Many groups are not represented such as Australian Grain Harvesters Association, notable farmer groups that object to GM with the one exception of the Organic Federation of Australia.
Farmers will be denied the freedom to supply growing consumer demand for GM free products, forcing consumers to pay more for GM free, as they already do for organic products, thus restricting consumer choice too.
These protocols will ensure that GM canola operations will impact and interfere with organic and Non GM and GM Free production systems.
Once GM canola is released, it will be difficult if not impossible to be recalled in response to market changes
On a case by case basis, canola should be released much later, as it has been shown to be so difficult to segregate, and open pollinated it can cause many more off site contamination problems than other crops, such as cotton.
"GM Herbicide Tolerant canola is a production system that produces canola grain, that when crushed and processed into oil, delivers a food product that is deemed by (Food standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) to be equivalent to oil produced from a conventional canola production system."
Substantial equivalence is losing credibility worldwide as more and more markets apply the precautionary principle based on the US model (e.g. China's labelling laws now include GM oils).
Many of these elements have been ignored in both the Strategic Framework document (e.g. Grain Harvesters) and in this document (e.g. volunteer control, grain transport).
"The Stewardship Protocols are market driven, supported by various industry contracts and process standards, such as technology user agreements, quality assurance schemes, product contracts or codes of practice. The emphasis is on contractual arrangements between the parties. "
It would follow sensibly for the GM companies to contract with all Australian Non GM growers that if they cause harm then compensation will automatically be paid. The OFA asks the GTGC to implement a system of compensation paid for by the biotech companies and GM farmers before proceeding any further.
"The protocols are designed to provide verification references to industry, allowing those who follow them to be able to meet their contractual and legislative requirements."
There are no references for non-GM growers to meet preferred market requirements without incurring costs and liabilities.
These Protocols have been developed for the canola industry but they can be easily adapted to provide coexistence and traceability systems for other crops and specialty products.
Many elements are not managed at all - e.g. liability for contamination of neighbouring crops, pollen flow to other industries (bees), and grain movement into other areas (e.g. livestock, other grains).
Existing standards are not good enough - e.g. tarp covered trucks spill too much canola.
No mention of who bears the cost of implementation again.
Q. Is this linked to responsibility?
This is not realistically achievable. Farmers and grain industry workers are often ........ disinclined when it comes to record keeping – record keeping is likely to often fall down under pressures of weather, seasonal demands, personnel changes, machinery breakdowns, and all the myriad of other things that disrupt smooth running routines in farm operation.
Q. Who is going to bear the cost of development of record systems, training, supervision, monitoring and compliance?
Dispute resolution
In the event of disputes arising between any parties with regards to the operation of the Canola Industry Stewardship Protocols that cannot be mutually settled between the relevant parties, the Canola Reference Group will appoint a mediator who in the opinion of the CRG shall be capable of resolving the dispute. The parties shall seek to negotiate a settlement of the dispute with the assistance of the mediator.
This is ridiculous and presumes that all parties agree to this process, for example an organic farmer 2 km away who has not been told that a grower nearby is planting GM canola and at harvest discovers contamination.
Q. How can an organic grower in this situation be bound by such an arrangement?
Responsibilities between related parties will be governed by the specific contractual relationship between these parties dictating the terms and conditions such as, but not limited to, purchase and sales agreements, storage agreements and freight agreements. Where the dispute cannot be resolved by mediation either party shall have the right to seek arbitration.
Q. What is meant by arbitration – does this mean mediation as referred to above or does this mean legal proceedings?
"Each supply chain participant needs to:...
· Keep records for at least two years or for long enough to ensure they are available for process verification, if necessary. "
Records should be kept for at least ten years to establish the potential for volunteer re growth that could contaminate subsequent crops.
"Hygiene of contractor equipment - contractor responsibility"
Q. What is the cost of this? An independent study is needed into the costs of contractor cleandowns and the related liability for contamination of client farms by GMOs.
"Adventitious presence of off-types and volunteers in non-GM crops - farmer responsibility... "
Please note that the technology providers have exempted themselves from responsibility here. They are leaving the farmer to be responsible for pollen mediated dispersal via insects and wind. It is extraordinary to only be concerned about adjacent fence boundaries. This is completely unacceptable and should be within 16 km of planting that the farmer and technology provider are responsible.
"Environmental adventitious presence through transport - truck drivers responsibility..."
This suggests that if canola blows from truck during transport and creates an environmental adventitious presence then the truck driver is responsible. The technology provider is let off the hook again and bears no responsibility for introducing a GE crop with one of the smallest grains that is dispersed from the sides of trucks on road sides across Australia.
"Planting seed purity = 400 metre buffer for seed production"
This should be 16 km as per buffer zone for organic and Non GM or GM Free.
"Adventitious presence of off-types = 5 metre buffer for GM canola and non-GM canola (NB: only if GM/Non-GM border along fence)"
This is an affront to our industry and those producers wishing to produce nil detectable residue grains.
Q. How can the Australian Pollen Flow Study ( Dr. Mary Rieger, CRC for Weeds) be used to justify this buffer zone when it shows up to 0.2% contamination can occur at 1500m? Why is there no consideration of the study by K. Eastham and J. Sweet : Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) : The significance of gene flow through pollen transfer. (Environmental issue report No 28 European Environment Agency 2002)? The Rieger study is not a commercially relevant study compared to say Canada where 70% of the Canola is GM and the effect of volunteer GM canola contributes to contamination.
"Adventitious presence of volunteers - Refer to crop management plans for detail."
These are not available on Monsanto or Bayer or Aventis Australian websites as of the 11 Feb 03. Despite several requests these have not been shown to the OFA, even as a member of the GTGC.
"Storage - adventitious presence = 1% or market standard"
European rules are about to move to 0.5%
Objective
The objective of the Pre-farm Protocols is to provide a comprehensive framework
to allow traceability of seed of plant varieties used for sowing in Australia.
They cover the activities of seed production and marketing through to the point
of receival by the primary producer.
This is an imposition on the whole farming sector which has no benefit other than to increase corporate control over seed for the purpose of royalty payment and patented protected control of markets for all seed varieties.
GM Patent holders must bear full responsibility for keeping their patented genes out of non-GM varieties.
Good
agricultural practice
The Australian grains industry has developed recommendations for the adoption
and implementation of Good Agricultural Practice by farmers for the production
of grain for delivery to customers in the domestic and export markets. In accordance
with these recommendations, farmers should incorporate and give attention to
the following when growing GM canola and/or non-GM canola
We note the terminology says farmers “should” ….. follow the recommendations. A key problem with the proposal to release GM canola is that the protocols are not backed by legislation and strict monitoring and enforcement with fines and possible gaol sentences for negligence.
This list does not give specifics such as buffer zones, what type of records to keep and for how long, exactly what responsibility a grower has to notify neighbors etc. We expect the answer will be that “these specifics are in the crop management plans” – in which case we cannot comment on the effectiveness of these protocols without the crop management plans which are not yet available.
"Crop production area"
"Field Inspection re-sowing"No mention of notifying neighbors that they are growing GE.
Inspection will not reveal dormant GM seed in soil seed bank
Weed Population
Identity of weed population spectrum and density
in year prior to planting crop.
"HarvestQ. Testing of weed population herbicide resistance status, if required How and who pays?
Not practical as a total clean down takes 1-2 days, an adequate inspection would require dismantling of machinery and take nearly as long.
"Clean, secure, leak proof grain transport, (including contractors) "
Pre- HarvestQ. What does leak proof mean, is this available in Australia, what will it cost, where do you get if from etc? – Surely they do not mean the current system of tarped trucks! There is no mention of how current grain transport systems are going to prevent roadside or railside spillage of GM seed
Q. How is this to be done on a large scale?
"Pre-harvest machinery inspection for cleanliness "
Q. Who will pay for the time required to do this effectively? This is only an issue for the Non GM farmer. The GM farmer will not be bothered by this requirement.
"Post harvest machinery clean down and inspection for cleanliness"
Q. What are the specs for clean down i.e. a complete clean down such as is done going from NSW to QLD?
Secure leak proof grain transport –
Q. Is this available? Who will pay for cost of upgrading grain transport?
Post harvest machinery clean down and inspection for cleanliness
Q. Who will pay for the time required to do this effectively – 1-2 days?
"Transport etc...If appropriate, dedicated transport for non-GM
Q. What extra costs does this impose on non-GM growers?
Q. What about dedicated transport for GM given that it is unlikely to be a large percentage of the Australian grain crop given the concerns raised.
Production of quality seed for planting a following crop
NB: It is recommended that farmer saved planting seed be retained for only one
generation from certified or equivalent quality assured seed
Q. How can there be any assurance that this recommendation will be followed and who will bear the cost of certified seed? This is of concern to farmers who wish to save seed.
"Prevent development, reproduction and infestation of crop volunteers, as weeds, in undesirable environments"
Control of volunteers has not proved very successful on former GM canola trial sites. Recently two broadleaf crops in Tasmania had to be destroyed because of GM canola volunteers from trials 4 years ago.
This protocol would not prevent this sort of problem.
If other crops are contaminated with GM canola volunteers farmers will be reluctant to destroy them unless compensation is available.
The only way to ensure GM canola volunteers are controlled is to keep the area in pasture for a long period – maybe 20 years.
Harvest
Timing of windrowing and harvest optimised
to reduce pod shatter and maximise grain yield and quality.
May not be practical due to vagaries of weather, availability of harvesting contractors, pressure of other work etc.
Post Harvest
Post harvest machinery clean down and inspection
for cleanliness
Who will pay for the time required to do this effectively – 1-2 days?
Monitor for volunteer crop germination & control with herbicide or cultivation
Canola volunteers come up for many years afterwards. Herbicide application and cultivation is not an option for some crops once established.
Transport
·
Secure, leak proof transport
– is this available?
· Monitor for volunteer crop germination & control using appropriate good agricultural practice
How and where?
| Canola |
Meets all commodity trading standards and importing country requirements (AOF 1-1) No differentiation for production system May or may not contain approved GM Events * (e.g. co-mingled) Huge assumption that the word canola from now on means either GM or Non GM canola i.e. can be co-mingled – would be clearer to require labelling of GM canola as GM canola and Non GM Canola as Non GM Canola. |
|
Non-GM canola |
Meets all commodity trading standard requirements Within market specification for adventitious presence ** of GM ( from approved GM Events) Implicitly excludes canola produced under a GM production system Need to get a legal resolution of this definition – why would not the Trade Practices Act also apply here as for GM free, in fact we cannot see any difference between the two terms, we believe that Non GM and GM Free both are negative label claims that in the eyes of the consumer mean there is nil detectable GM present. |
|
GM-free canola |
Meets all commodity trading standard requirements Market specification for ‘nil’ adventitious presence of GM (based on a testing protocol that would provide an agreed level, e.g. 95% confidence, that it does not exceed 0.1%AP) Certainly the organic industry has not defined an exact level, rather we state nil detectable residue which allows for a change in level that can be detected accurately. There are recent reports of the level of detection dropping to 0.001% contamination. Must be produced under a GM-free production system that meets customer specification or export standard requirement This statement contradicts the notion of unavoidable contamination as mentioned below which has occurred in Canada and means that organic canola is no longer grown there. For the purposes of labelling a commodity, ‘GM-free’ is defined within the Trade Practices Act We have searched the Act on the ScalePlus Website and can find no reference to GM Free or anything resembling it. |
Table Notes:
* Approved GM Events: GM Events approved by the
OGTR or approved in another country using a science-based process for environmental
and feed/food safety.
** Adventitious presence (AP): accidental, unintentional presence of
‘off-types’. The words “adventitious presence” are commonly used for characterizing
unintentional presence of grain containing approved GM events in a non-GM grain.
This definition will be subject to legal interpretation because if a calculated level of gene flow, via pollen mediated insect and wind transport can be expected from GM canola to non GM or organic canola, then this is not accidental. An accident would be better defined as a spillage on a road side or a freak wind storm that carried windrows 10 km etc. The product if it had detectable residues could not be called organic, Non GE or GE free.
A certain level of adventitious presence of GM grain in non-GM grain is unavoidable with respect to the crop reproduction biology and the production processes.
Exactly what level is unavoidable and this in itself completely contradicts the notion of these protocols allowing for co-existence to meet all production system market and regulatory specifications.
Although certain countries have begun adopting AP policy guidelines, widely recognized standards on the level of adventitious presence of GM grain in non-GM grain are still in the process of being developed. Where such standard do not exist, market specifications within a grain contract between the customer and the supplier of the grain are utilized to set limits on levels GM grain containing approved events in non-GM grain.
The Association of Official Seed Analysts (AOSA) is a professional grouping of seed analysts from the government or semi-government sector in the USA and Canada whose objectives are the development and promulgation of standardised seed testing methods for sowing seed much the same as with ISTA.
The AOSA Rules for seed testing are the officially recognised standards and protocols for seed commerce in the USA and co-exist with the ISTA Rules in Canada.
Why should we be adopting US and Canadian expert rules when they have clearly failed to stop contamination in their countries.
We trust that these details will make it clear that our opposition to these protocols for the proposed commercial release of GM Canola is not merely based on philosophical grounds, but rather on a number of well-founded concerns. If GM canola is released under these protocols then contamination of organic and Non GM and GM canola and other crops and products is bound to occur.
The OFA wishes to lodge a general protest with the GTGC on the basis that recent comments in the media by representatives of the GTGC have been disparaging of the organic industry. Comments such as opposition is “typically anti-GM or non scientific” are unhelpful and lead us to believe that a public relations campaign is underway to discredit the organic industry and our legitimate and detailed concerns.
We would hope that the GTGC would recognise our legitimate concerns and would therefore abandon any consideration of the commercial release of GM canola until all of our concerns and the Network of Concerned Farmers and other groups are resolved.
To conclude we are extremely concerned at the attitude taken with these protocols and the disregard for the concerns of contamination. The UK is taking the concerns of the organic industry far more seriously as this story on the Just Food news list reports.
************************UK: Government Hints at Legal Protection for Organic Producers
From GM Contamination
13 Feb 2003
Source: www.just-food.com
New laws may protect organic producers whose crops are at risk of contamination from genetically modified crops.
Environment minister Michael Meacher said that current legislation was inadequate to protect organic farmers whose businesses suffered because of cross-contamination from GM crops grown nearby. Meacher indicated that new European liability laws that had been proposed might also not be sufficient, so laws may be implemented at national level.
Peter Melchett, policy director of the Soil Association, the organic farming body, welcomed the move, saying: "The current law will not provide any protection at all for non-GM farmers who lose income because of GM contamination. There are hundreds of organic farmers in the US and Canada who have lost money – we don't want that happening here."
Such a move is likely to be vigorously protested by biotech groups.OFA submission sent 16th February 2003 to Faye Stenhouse at Avcare
News Media Release
Wednesday February 13 2003
Part of a recent shipment of genetically engineered (GE) corn from the USA was spilled into export wheat at Melbourne's Appleton dock last week, we learnt today. Though the spill was found, quarantine failed, and new protocols to manage GE segregation from seed to supermarket are so flawed that contamination is inevitable.
"We call for an end to GE grain imports for animals or humans," says GeneEthics Network Director, Bob Phelps.
"Large GE-free grain supplies are available for animals in the drought, so we shouldn't risk further pollution from imported US corn or soy," he says.
"We also call for government to resume control of the Gene Technology Grains Committee's (GTGC) protocols for unrestricted release of GE canola," he says.
"The self-appointed GTGC is dominated by the GE industry (www.avcare.org.au) and has not fully consulted anyone," he says.
"Farmers and the food industry had only three weeks (to Feb 16) to comment on GTGC voluntary protocols, but most don't even know they exist," he says.
"Groups affected by GE canola's release, but excluded from GTGC processes, include the Grain Harvesters Association, the Barley Board, the Tuna Boat Owners Association, retailers, local government, and food buyers," he says.
The protocols suggest: 5 metre buffer zones between GE and other canola (but pollen goes up to 3km); a 1% threshold of GE contamination in conventional grains (but GE-free needs a 0% threshold); a one year cap on seed saving (to apply to all growers); and farmer responsibility for GE contamination of GE-free grains (GE companies get off scot-free). This is unacceptable.
"While much-needed research (announced 10/2 by Minister Truss) and full consultations are finalised, we call on governments to freeze the licenses for unrestricted release of GE canola in April," Mr Phelps concludes.
More comment: Bob Phelps 03 9347 4500 (O) 03 9830 1592 (H)
The Network of Concerned Farmers presents:
The Introduction of Genetically Engineered (GE) Food and Crops in Australia
Consumers worldwide are seeking information on the food safety of Genetically Modified/Engineered products. With less than three months before the Office of Gene Technology Regulator hands down a decision on the first ever commercial release of GM canola in Australia, a growing network of concerned farmers are opposing the release.
Speakers:
Dr. Judy Carman (Public Health Association of Australia)
Judy has a PhD in Medicine (Nutritional Biochemistry/Metabolic Regulation) and a Master of Public Health. She is the former Senior Epidemiologist, SA Department of Human Services and is a Senior Lecturer in Public Health, University of Adelaide. Judy will speak on the health risks and regulation of GE foods.
Scott Kinnear (Biological Farmers of Australia)
Scott Kinnear, spokesperson for the Biological Farmers of Australia will outline the current political situation regarding the release of GE canola, legal liability and marketing issues for GM free and organic.
Bob Willick (Canadian farmer who grew GE canola and is now suing Monsanto & Bayer)
Bob Willick is a canola farmer from Saskatchewan who grew GE Canola and who has recently converted to organic farming. Bob and 1000 other organic farmers are mounting a class action against Monsanto and Bayer seeking to recover damages associated with the release of GE canola in Canada.
Julie Newman (Farmer & Grain Processor, WA)
Julie Newman and her husband farm 8,000 hectares in W.A. and grade 10% of the State’s barley and 5% of the State’s wheat seed. Julie is a member of the WA Grains Board and is one of the finalists of Women in Agriculture’s Rural Woman of the Year 2003. Julie will outline the practical impacts that the introduction of GE canola will have on Australian grain farmers.
Dates:
| Queensland | |
| 6pm, Sunday 2 March 2003 | Queensland Parliament House, Annexe entrance off Alice Street, Brisbane |
| 7pm, Monday 3 March 2003 | Laurel Bank Hall, Laurel Bank Park, Hill Street, Toowoomba |
| Victoria | |
| 7.30pm, Friday 7 March 2003 | Capital Theatre, View Street, Bendigo |
| 5pm, Sunday 9 March 2003 | Organic Wholefoods Studio, 452 Lygon Street, East Brunswick, Melbourne |
| South Australia | |
| 7pm, Tuesday 11 March 2003 | Burnside Community Centre, 401 Greenhill Road, Tusmore, Adelaide |
The Network of Concerned Farmers presents:
With less than three months before the Office of Gene Technology Regulator hands down a decision on the commercial release of GM canola, the Network of Concerned Farmers is asking “Are we ready?” If you are a grain farmer, you will be affected by the introduction of GM canola – whether you grow it or not.
Speakers:
Bob Willick (Canadian farmer who grew Roundup Ready and is now suing Monsanto & Bayer )
Bob Willick, Farmer, Saskatchewan. A former conventional grower of RR Canola who has recently converted to organic farming, Bob and 1000 other farmers are mounting a class action against Monsanto and Bayer seeking to recover damages associated with the release of GM canola in Canada. He will talk about liability, agronomic issues of roundup ready canola, and the reality of coexistence in Canada.
Dr. Judy Carman (Public Health Association of Australia)
Judy has a PhD in Medicine (Nutritional Biochemistry/Metabolic Regulation) and a Master of Public Health. She is the former Senior Epidemiologist, SA Department of Human Services and is a Senior Lecturer in Public Health, University of Adelaide. Judy will speak on the health risks and regulation of GM foods.
Julie Newman (Farmer & Grain Processor, WA)
Julie Newman and her husband farm 8,000 hectares in W.A. and grade 10% of the State’s barley and 5% of the State’s wheat seed. Julie will outline the implications of the draft GM management protocols and will provide an industry checklist to help you determine if you’re ready for co-existence.
Scott Kinnear (Biological Farmers of Australia and VFF member)
Scott Kinnear, spokesperson for the Biological Farmers of Australia will outline the current political situation regarding the release of GM canola, legal liability and market specifications for GM free and organic.
| New South Wales | |
| 7pm, Wednesday 5 March 2003 | Cudal Public Hall, Cudal |
| 7pm, Thursday 6 March, 2003 | Wagga Wagga Leagues Club, Gurwood Street |
| 8.30am, Friday 7 March 2003 | Charles Sturt University, 614 Olive Street, Student Union Building, The Shed, Albury |
| Victoria | |
| 6pm, Monday 10 March 2003 | Horsham Sports and Community Centre, Baillie Street |
| South Australia | |
| 8pm, Wednesday 12 March 2003 | Clare Town Hall, Gleeson Street, Clare |
Cost: Gold Coin Donation
FIND OUT WHAT ALL FARMERS NEED TO KNOW.
FOR MORE INFORMATION CALL NETWORK CONCERNED FARMERS: TEL: (02) 6672 8373 or
(0414) 244 710 Network of Concerned Farmers’ website: www.non-gm-farmers.com
| Send a Message to Inghams and Bartter Steggles to Demand GE-free Chickens |
The Greenpeace Truefood Website has a pre-written and ready to send email, demanding GE-free chickens from Inghams and Bartter Steggles. All you need to do is click on the link below, enter your name and email address, and click send. An email with your demands will be sent to both companies. It's a very easy way to voice your opinion and make a difference on this important issue. Click on http://www.greenpeace.org.au/truefood/takeaction1701.html
| USA: Storms Of Protest As Bill Attempts to Undermine the NOP |
The Organic
Newsline
27 February
A last-minute rider was added to the recent Omnibus 2003 Appropriations Bill
that would permit organic livestock producers to feed their organic animals
conventional feed and still label the products - meat, dairy, and eggs - as
organic. The rider was the work of Georgia congressmen Rep. Nathan Deal, R-Ga.,
and the state's other seven Republican House members to get a special category
for Fieldale Farms of Baldwin, Georgia’s Springer Mountain Farms "organic"
chicken.
The rider (Section 771 of the Fiscal Year 2003 Consolidated Budget Bill approved
by Congress, Feb. 13, 2003) would allow no funds to be used to enforce the 100
percent organic feed requirement for certified organic livestock operations
unless a report prepared by the Secretary of Agriculture confirms that organically
produced feed is commercially available at no more than twice the cost of conventionally
produced feed.
This "exemption" is in direct contradiction to the Organic Foods Production
Act of 1990 and the National Organic Standards implemented in October 2002,
which require that for the meat, poultry, eggs, or dairy products to be labeled
as organic, the livestock must be fed 100 percent organic feed.
In a letter urging Veneman to allow the "organically grown" seal,
Deal and Reps. Saxby Chambliss, Johnny Isakson, Jack Kingston, Charlie Norwood,
Bob Barr, John Linder and Michael Collins said they were "not advocating
this approach as a permanent fix, nor are we attempting to redefine organic
farming principles. "It is our position this is a temporary, common-sense
approach that would allow producers necessary time to meet the new standards
and continue in the organic poultry and meat market," they wrote.
According to the Center for Responsive Politics, which monitors campaign contributions,
Mr. Deal received $4,000 from employees of Fieldale, which is in his district,
during his last campaign.
The organic industry and its supporters mobilised quickly once the issue came
to light.
"This is a sad day," said Bob Scowcroft, executive director of the
Organic Farming Research Foundation in Santa Cruz. He was one of seven people
who wrote the original draft of federal organic food standards and worked on
revisions that took 12 years. They took effect in October.
The provision "puts at risk the term 'organic' across the board,"
Scowcroft said. "If a single private company can amend the Organic Food
Act in the dead of night, who's to say that another company won't come along
and do it again, and again?"
"The Organic Trade Association is outraged to see such underhanded methods
used by those unwilling to play by the rules. This is an example of someone
doing an end-run to manipulate the government, with disregard for the public's
wishes," said Katherine DiMatteo, executive director of the Organic Trade
Association..
"Inserting this language in the appropriations bill was an underhanded
attempt to circumvent consumer expectations and the integrity of the organic
industry. This is a slap in the face to the many certified organic farmers who
are legitimately following the standards, and an attempt to undermine their
hard work to provide consumers, both domestically and abroad, with products
meeting the requirements the Organic Foods Production Act," DiMatteo said.
The more than 500 organic farmer owners of Organic Valley, the largest organic
cooperative in the world rejected the efforts of special interests to dismiss
the mandate of the American people for stringent organic standards.
"The passage of the organic standards represents America at its best ---
the private and public sectors working in unison with more than a quarter million
consumers, all demanding the implementation of strict organic standards. It
was democracy in action," said George Siemon, founding farmer/CEO of Organic
Valley, and chairperson of the Livestock Committee of the National Organic Standards
Board. "These standards were 12 years in the making and we cannot stand
by and let the self-interests of a few lay to waste the integrity of the organic
seal a mere four months after the standards went into effect."
"Rather than comply with regulations which uphold the integrity of organic
food, corporate-run factory farms, who want a piece of the $11 billion a year
organic industry, are manipulating the USDA and Congress to change the rules
to suit their toxic-industrial style of farming," stated Ronnie Cummins,
National Director of Organic Consumers Association. "Allowing non-organic,
and potentially genetically engineered, feed to be included under the definition
of organic is a major setback for the integrity of what is the fastest growing
sector of the food industry in this country."
Randy Duranceau, Sales and Marketing Director for Petaluma Poultry, the USA’s
leading producer of certified organic chicken said, "This rider is laughable.
Organic feed is one of the critical ingredients in organic husbandry. You can't
be half-organic; you either are or you aren't. The future of organic agriculture
is based on the trust and confidence that consumers have in the farmers, processors
and retailers within the organic community. We need purity and clarity, not
deception. We urge the organic community to contact their representatives and
ask them to reconsider this rider."
| OCIA
International Calling for Immediate Repeal of Section 771 of the Omnibus Appropriations Act (US) |
Media Release
February 27, 2003
Lincoln, NE- The Organic Crop Improvement Association (OCIA) International strongly opposes Section 771 of the Omnibus Appropriations Bill and is calling for an immediate repeal by the US Congress.
"Repealing Section 771 is in the best interest of consumers, organic farmers and the environment," said Rita Smith, OCIA International Board of Directors member and Iowa organic farmer. "As it is written now, it would undermine the integrity of the US National Organic Program (NOP), risk organic certification and product acceptance from other countries and affect consumer confidence in the organic industry.
The Omnibus Appropriations Bill, which was passed by the US Congress on February 14, 2003, overturns the USDA NOP regulation that requires all organic livestock to be fed 100 percent organic feed. In a last minute provision, a rider was inserted into the Section 771 of the Bill, which would allow special interest groups to circumvent the existing NOP rules and feed organic livestock non-organic, chemically treated feed. The resulting meat products could be then labeled as organic and sold to unsuspecting consumers.
"We are urging all segments of the organic industry, including consumers, to contact their state representatives and encourage them to support Senator Patrick Leahy's (D-VT) efforts to repeal the rider on Section 771," said Smith. "This is vital for the continued growth of organic agriculture production in the United States.
OCIA International, a nonprofit, member-owned organic certification agency, is an accredited world leader in the certified organic movement. Headquartered in Lincoln, Nebraska, it is the largest organic certification agency in Canada and the United States. OCIA International currently certifies thousands of farmers, processors and manufacturers from 20 countries in North, Central and South America and Asia.
Contact: Brian Kozisek
OCIA International Standards and Materials Coordinator
402-477-2323
Email: bkozisek@ocia.org
Website: www.ocia.org
| USA: Agriculture Secretary Speaks Out Against Changes To Organic Programme |
Source: www.just-food.com
The US Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman has criticised a measure passed by
congress last month that allows farmer who feed animals conventional meal to
label the meat organic if reasonably priced organic grain is not available.
Veneman said in a statement that the measure "could weaken the national
organic program."
“It is important to maintain a strong organic program that ensures the
integrity of the organic label placed on consumer products. The best way to
do that is by maintaining the organic standards as we implemented them in October
2002. I support bipartisan efforts to ensure those USDA standards remain in
place,” Veneman added.
|
Consumer Report - by OFA Consumer Advocate Eta Brand |
Underlying Philosophy
As I watched a segment on Landline (ABC TV) highlighting the challenges
of certified organics, I was struck by an important fundamental that needs to
reach consumers more often: the underlying philosophy behind the product. The
program highlighted the issues facing an organic grain grower. The ethics behind
the growing of these grains came through very powerfully to the viewer.
Consumers need to understand and connect to the determination and philosophy
that drives farmers to undertake and succeed in spite of the challenges of producing
clean food. Consumers do not always understand what has gone behind products
that they see on shelves. If more food manufacturers shared the stories that
go behind their products, consumers, especially curious consumers could be enticed
more often. This often translates into the dream consumer. This consumer will
choose your product time after time because they know your story.
Marketers do somersaults to achieve consumer allegiance. We have a special marketing
opportunity to differentiate certified organic products. There are so many amazing
stories in the organic industry of the journey it took to bring these products
to market.
Occasionally I see certified organic product packaging with a story line. This important story helps to make links and bridge the gap for the consumer. Consumers are often removed from the grower and or the manufacturer.
A powerful connection occurs when consumers are given the opportunity to connect to the philosophy of the grower/manufacturer. When I look at the rows of products on the shelves of stores, what is it that separates one product from another? Perhaps it is a story.
In 2003 Consumer Education and Awareness is a top priority. It is time for
serious ramping up of the benefits of certified organic food in Australia. The
OFA is contacting supermarket chains, farmers markets, the retail sector and
the media.
I will keep you posted as we progress.
A dedicated and newly formed Consumer Sub-Committee will be tackling this important task. Consumer voices need to be heard.
Growing Consumer membership of the OFA is a priority. Consumers want to show support for the industry. The OFA intends to reach as many consumers as possible across Australia.
Consumer Membership is now $33, Concession $22. A consumer membership form will be available on the OFA website very soon. For now, you can contact the OFA office at info@ofa.org.au or 61 2 9299 8016 to become a consumer member.
Truth in Labeling
Consumers deserve a clear message when they choose to purchase products
that are organic. It is disturbing to find products on shelves that include
the word organic on the label or in the company name with no certification logo
to back up these statements.
More and more products have their certification logo clearly displayed. It only takes one negative experience for an educated consumer to change their preference. When a company chooses to challenge the integrity of the word organic they have to live with the consequences.
Marketers promoting organic products don't have a second chance to make a good first impression. They have to get it right the first time! Green consumers are concerned with the ethics that underpin the products they purchase. This includes truth in labeling.
We do not have a national regulatory mechanism that protects the word organic. However, as consumers become more aware of being duped their purchasing power will shift. Products not clearly and truthfully labeled will be short lived.
Eta Brand
Consumer Advocate
| Freshline Organics Expands Home Delivery Distribution and Launches Internet Shopping |
|
|
| In the 1980s the property was a commercial stone fruit orchard. Organic conversion of vegetables and fruit began in 1993 with BFA and has been certified since then. | Mr Fritsch is currently investigating the possibility of moving from a free-range egg production to a certified organic egg production: |
Freshline Organics is a home delivery business (based in Perth) dealing in organic produce which is either 'certified organic' or 'certified in conversion'.
The business is in its second year and is a partnership between certified organic grower Werner Fritsch and Ully Walter, who manages the home delivery service. This successful alliance has placed Freshline Organics in a unique position to guarantee extra-fresh produce. Because there is no middleman between the farm and the final consumer, most items are picked and delivered within 48 hours.
Similarly, this partnership has enabled Freshline Organics to greatly reduce the "continuity of supply" problems which plague the organic industry in Western Australia.
The Freshline Organics home delivery service commenced in 2001 in the western suburbs of Perth; in recent weeks its area of operation has expanded to cover most of the Perth metropolitan area, in addition to regular consignments to country towns as far as Derby.
In February this year, Freshline Organics launched WA’s first internet ordering platform for organic fruit, vegetables and other biodynamic produce. The Freshline Organics website provides a secure avenue for customers to purchase a wide range of fresh organic goods, whether they be potatoes by the kilogram, free range eggs, biodynamic meat (supplied by Dalkeith Village Butcher), heads of lettuce or individual tomatoes.
"We have traditionally emailed an order form document to customers, which can be somewhat cumbersome as they must fill out the details and either email or fax it back," said Ms Walter.
"We will continue to email that document but members of the public can now also go directly to www.freshline.com.au and simply fill in their orders via an internet shopping cart."
"We are very proud of the new ordering platform," said Ms Walter. "It will make everything much more convenient for people who enjoy fresh organic farm produce."
Ms Walter’s focus on creating maximum ease and convenience for the Freshline Organics customers is complemented by Mr Fritsch’s efforts to provide the widest possible range of organic produce and to overcome the continuity of supply problems, with which the organic industry in Western Australia is traditionally plagued: to this purpose Mr Fritsch has recently erected several large hot-houses to enable him to grow crops like tomatoes and zucchinis all year-round so that Freshline Organics will be largely independent of the supply from interstate and ‘up north’.
Mr Fritsch is also currently investigating the possibility of moving from a free-range egg production to a certified organic egg production: Up to now, such a move would not have been viable due to the transport costs associated with getting certified organic ‘chook food’ freighted to Western Australia. Recent developments, however, indicate that this problem is likely to be solved in the near future.
Contact: Ully Walter
Freshline Organics
Tel 9284 6503, Fax 9284 6504, Mob 041 356 6503
PO Box 662, Cottesloe 6911
Email: freshlineorganics@iinet.net.au
Website: www.freshline.com.au
| Wholesaler Back to Eden Relocates to New Warehouse |
One of Sydney's large organic wholesalers, Back to Eden, is settling into a new warehouse, at 179 Parramatta Road, Homebush (behind Ric's Nuts Factory, the entrance is via Park Road).
The new warehouse has a significantly greater floor space, allowing expansion of the trading area and more room to maneuver for customers. Being closer to the depot at Sydney Markets also means picking up growers' produce is more convenient.
Their friendly staff are happy to help with any queries.
P.O. Box 14, Sydney Markets NSW 2129
Phone 02 9746 0070
Fax 02 974 60040
Mobile 0428 114 707
Email backtoeden@bigpond.com
| Hugh Lovel Tour A Great Success |
|
|
|
John Blackwood at Orange |
Hugh and Ian Reed at Tooraweenah |
Over 280 people recently attended the "Atmospheric Regeneration" workshops held in Toowoomba, Coffs Harbour, Albury and Perth with leading USA author and Quantum Agriculture pioneer, Hugh Lovel.
Participants came from all regions of Queensland, Tasmania, Victoria, New South Wales, South and Western Australia eager to look at solutions to the current drought much of Australia has experienced. The workshops focused on how to use a combination of radionics, biodynamic remedies, colour therapy and field broadcasting to help remediate the effects of atmospheric pollutants and climatic extremes.
According to Mr Lovel, "once we understand that the atmosphere is as important
as the soil and rain, as an atmospheric phenomenon dependent on a certain pattern
of activities, we can start to look at where the pattern has been disrupted
by pollution, toxins and the like and see what conditions need to be re-established
to continue the natural pattern towards rain."
Cheryl Kemp, education officer with Biodynamic AgriCulture Australia said "Participants
went through a series of workshops over the three days that helped them understand
how to observe the weather conditions, dowse for appropriate treatment cards
and use radionic instruments to apply the patterns of these remedies each morning
and evening. Tandem treatment options with the Biodynamic remedies were also
developed to assist farmers to work with extreme weather fluctuations."
The large turn-out for these workshops across Australia once again demonstrates the growing desire of many farmers to work with Organic and Biodynamic management systems and solutions.
As a follow up to the workshop Biodynamic AgriCulture Australia has set-up
an email contact system for all growers to communicate the results of their
weather treatments as they start applying radionics, biodynamics and fieldbroadcasting
on their properties.
For further details contact Cheryl Kemp on 02 6657 5322 or cheryl@biodynamics.net.au.
| Pure Life Breads: Pure Indulgence and Quality - by Dom O'Brien |
The first thing you notice about the Pure Life Essene breads is the texture. It's almost a stretch to call it bread. Unsweetened cake would be more accurate. It is a noticably heavy loaf but not in the way that some wholemeal loaves resemble a house brick. It's very moist, moreso than the best mud cake, though obviously without the chocolate or sugar. The grain taste is prevalant and to begin with you might find it a little strong. My solution to this ? Simple - butter and honey - they balance the rich cake like texture and earthy grain flavour very well. After slathering a thin slice with these two oh-so-compatible spreads, I really feel like I'm tucking into a slice of indulgent cake. Only I'm not, I tucking into possibly the most nutritious bread there is
Sprouting releases nutrients that are not present in the unsprouted grain. It's one of those little miracles of nature in which the grain that comes to life generates the abundance of nutrients needed for growth. The grain is more digestible, often allowing people with allergies to eat it without problems. The gluten content is halved and the starch is converted to natural sugars.
The grains Pure Life use are biodynamically or organically grown. They are sprouted in filtered water, minced, then pressed into a loaf and baked. No yeast, salt, or preservatives are added.
You will find that one or two slices is usually enough at a sitting because the bread is so rich and nutrient packed. You may also find that it's hard to get through the loaf before it starts to age. Again, what's my simple solution ? When I buy the loaf I cut it into four pieces and separately freeze the three pieces that I'm not about to devour. Then I can treat myself a few days later.
The nutritional value of commercial bread has become somewhat of a joke when we look at the mass produced supermarket brands, especially white bread. Thankfully we have a range of wonderful breads available through organic and health food retailers. Pure Life takes it a step further, creating a product that really takes us back to the richest traditions of bread making. This method is believed to date back to the ancient Essenes in biblical times.
Some of the loaves made by Pure Life contain a few other ingredients such as dates, sultanas and walnuts. They make loaves from different grains such as wheat, rye, spelt, and kamut. Personally I love the loaves with dates, they add a gentle and natural sweetness that compliments the rich texture. Pure Life tell me that the kamut grain makes a great loaf. I have yet to try it, but it's the very next thing on my list.
Pure Life Breads are available in all states of Australia. If your local health
food store doesn't stock them, tell them to ! For more information call Pure
Life on (02) 6646 1226.
| Keep Collingwood Children's Farm Farmers' Market Alive |
It's no solution to world conflict, but appreciating what we've got and understanding each other's communities is a good start, and best we start locally. The Collingwood Children's Farm Farmers' Market has been embraced by Melburnians with gusto, and continued enthusiasm is a must to combine these two vital signs of life on the farm.
The Collingwood Children's Farm was established in 1979 to keep city kids in touch with the land. It's a genuine working farm that struggles like most others; this farm also has a looming urban obstacle. The extraordinary site nestled on a bend of the Yarra in Abbotsford, only 5 km from the CBD, is surrounded by low-density terrace housing and a community that cherishes its existence. All may be lost due to a controversial housing development planned for neighbouring land. The consequence of this proposal would vastly reduce parking for visitors to the Collingwood Children's Farm. This is considered by council, conservation groups and local residents to seriously jeopardise the future of the farm.
The Collingwood Children's Farm needs Melburnians support by getting down to
the farm. Collect some eggs, milk a cow, meet a pig, scratch a goat and take
a breath of fresh air in the heart of the city. It's a relief to just know it
exists and unimaginable to think of it gone.
The essence of farmers' markets is reconnecting people and keeping communities
alive through enjoying fresh food. The two ends of the food chain meet in a
mutually beneficial and thoroughly enjoyable way. Produce is grown, made and
known by those who sell them, and its quality is of the utmost importance. Farmers
markets are the most direct way to support primary producers from around the
state, and stock up on the best tasting fruit and veg available.
Organisers Peter Arnold and Miranda Sharp are thrilled at the enthusiasm Melburnians are showing. In the first four markets, around fifteen thousand people have come to the farm, many for the first time, and hundreds have signed to oppose the development.
It's a Waste Wise event so the emphasis is on minimal packaging, maximum recycling and no lasting impact on the land except helping to secure a healthy future.
Melburnian's response to the monthly Collingwood Children's Farm Farmers' Market has been to demand more markets, more regularly. The Boroondara Farmers' Market starts on Saturday 15th March, and if that's not enough there'll also be a Farmers' Market extravaganza as part of the Melbourne Food and Wine Festival, at Federation Square.
Let's hope this signals a fresh start to food shopping habits as Melbourne catches up on the rest of the country, and the international phenomenon, that is farmers' markets. It's time to get the 2003 diary pages dotted with regular dates of markets around the state, and gradually the suburbs.
The next Melbourne Farmers' Market is on Saturday 8th March at the Collingwood Children's Farm. It'll be the last chance for this year's stone fruit but the beginning of new season apples, pears, corn, honey, mushrooms, quinces, potatoes and Autumn cheeses.
Melbourne's Farmers' Markets will be the only accredited regular EcoRecycle
Waste Wise events and we are proud to have achieved this status. BYO trolley
and bags!
What: Collingwood Children's Farm Farmers' Market
When: Second Saturday of every month
Where: St Heliers Street, Abbotsford (Mel ref 44 G5)
Time: 8.00 am - 1.00 pm
What: Boroondara Farmers' Market
When: Third Saturday of every month
Where: Patterson Reserve, Auburn Rd, East Hawthorn (Mel ref 59 E4)
Time: 8.00am - 1.00pm
What: Farm Fresh at Federation Square
When: Saturday 29th March 2003
Where: Yarra Promenade, Federation Square (Mel ref 2F G6)
Time: 8.00 am - 1.00 pm
For more information please contact:
Peter Arnold on 03 5664 0096 or Miranda Sharp on 0429 146 627
| These are just some of the events listed in the OFA events calendar for this month. |
|
|
|
|
State |
| 10th, 11th, 12th, 13th March (four separate classes) |
07:00 PM | Organic Weed Management Class | SA |
| 15th March | 10:00 AM | Hunter BD Group Field Day | NSW |
| 28th March | 06:00 PM | Organic Marketing Seminar | SA |
| 29th March | 10:00 AM | Petty's Orchard Organic Food and Sustainability Fare | Vic |
| 8th March | 09:00 AM | Introductory Biodynamic Workshop | NSW |
Click here for details of these and many more you can get involved in.
| You will find more OFA and other industry services in the links below. |
***********************************
The OFA is the peak industry body for the Australian organic and biodynamic industry. Visit our webpage at www.ofa.org.au, or for organic industry and product enquiries click here . For information or help with this newsletter contact the OFA webmaster at webmaster@ofa.org.au. Feedback is always welcome !
DISCLAIMER: The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the writers and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the OFA.
