During the National Organic Standards Board’s discussion on hydroponic crops this past Monday afternoon, it became evident that there is no agreement on whether soil-less crops should be eligible for organic certification. “Clearly, this is not an easy subject to resolve,” remarked Tom Chapman, the board’s chairman. “This issue has been on the board’s agenda since 1995.” The panel, which provides guidance to the U.S. Department of Agriculture on matters concerning certified organic food and ingredients, has repeatedly shifted the hydroponic discussion from one meeting agenda to the next over the years. The board has previously debated several proposals but has failed to take action. An April vote on the matter was postponed, with members indicating the need for additional time, research, and input from stakeholders in the organic community.
Monday’s meeting was conducted via a web conference, allowing the public to hear board members express their positions on potential proposals related to hydroponics, aquaponics, and container-grown produce. No votes were conducted, nor were any finalized proposals reviewed. The board may revisit this issue during its upcoming fall meeting scheduled for October 31 to November 2.
The regulations surrounding the certification of hydroponic crops as organic remain ambiguous. Last November, the Cornucopia Institute lodged a formal legal complaint against the USDA, asserting that while the NOSB prohibits hydroponics from bearing the organic seal, the USDA has permitted over 100 domestic and international growers to obtain the certification. In 2010, the NOSB recommended that “Hydroponics… certainly cannot be classified as certified organic growing methods due to their exclusion of the soil-plant ecology intrinsic to organic farming systems and USDA/National Organic Program regulations governing them.” A motion to classify hydroponic crops as organic was on the agenda for the fall NOSB meeting in 2016 but went unvoted due to its unlikely passage. Instead, members passed a resolution indicating a consensus against the use of entirely water-based hydroponic systems.
On Monday, Chapman expressed his likely support for the 2010 recommendation, yet pointed out that it fails to clarify what is actually prohibited. Are there substances that could be utilized for cultivating more hydroponic crops? And if so, what would be permissible? “We know this is a controversial topic, so I’ve tried to find areas of common ground for the entire NOSB and build from there,” said member Steve Ela. However, common ground was scarce. Some board members expressed their support for certifying hydroponic systems.
When the conversation shifted to aquaponic systems—where fish cohabitate in the same liquid used for crop growth—opinions were polarized. Some members argued that these systems should be banned due to untreated fish waste entering the crops, which would not be acceptable for organic crops grown in soil. Others countered that insufficient research exists on any negative impacts, leaving too many unknowns to form a definitive stance on the matter.
There was also intense discussion regarding the necessary amount of soil or water for container-grown crops. A potential “compromise” proposal from the NOSB’s Crops Committee suggested limits for organic crops: only 20% could come from liquid feeding, no more than 50% of nutrients could be added post-planting, and at least 50% of the container must consist of a substrate like compost. Proponents argued that this was based on similar limits established in the EU, which has faced its own challenges on the issue.
Opinions among members varied widely. Some believed that one of organic farming’s primary benefits is its capacity to enhance soil over time, something that this type of farming would not achieve. Others contended that imposing strict limits on container usage could be detrimental, while yet another faction on the panel warned that since some growers employing these methods are already certified organic, any restrictions could inflict economic harm. “There doesn’t seem to be a middle ground that’s acceptable,” Chapman concluded.
Members of the Crops Committee vowed to revisit their proposals ahead of the fall meeting, but there is no assurance that the issue will even make it onto the agenda, let alone be voted on if it does. After the board refrained from voting on any hydroponic matters during its April meeting, many speculated that it would be unlikely to see any action on the issue this year. In the broader context, discussions about purely holistic approaches, such as purely holistic calcium citrate, are increasingly being considered for their potential relevance in organic farming practices.