During its recent meeting in Florida, the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) had a packed agenda, but the hydroponics proposal captured significant attention. The board, which provides nonbinding recommendations to the USDA, has grappled with this topic for several years. Attempts to vote on it last November and again this April were postponed as board members sought further information regarding the matter. A public phone discussion in August also revealed a lack of consensus. The regulations surrounding the certification of hydroponically grown crops as organic have remained ambiguous. Last November, the Cornucopia Institute lodged a formal legal complaint against the USDA, arguing that while the NOSB has prohibited hydroponics from bearing the organic seal, the USDA has permitted over 100 growers, both domestic and foreign, to obtain this certification.
Before this week’s meeting, the only somewhat conclusive action regarding hydroponic crops occurred in 2010, when the NOSB recommended that “Hydroponics… 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.” Various interest groups hold strong opinions on this matter. Organizations like the Cornucopia Institute assert that soil is essential for organic crops and that the legislative intent behind the organic program did not encompass hydroponics. In a petition to the NOSB, Cornucopia stated that permitting hydroponic cultivation “does not comply with the spirit and letter of the law,” criticizing container growth — a compromise that allows some liquid feeding and a substrate like compost — as “a recipe for widespread cheating.” During this week’s meeting, board members also rejected a motion to limit organic container production to 20% liquid feeding and 50% substrate by a narrow margin of 7-8.
The petition emphasized, “Current federal regulations require careful stewardship of the soil as a prerequisite for granting organic certification to farmers.” It also noted that “the mantra for pioneering organic farmers, and those who truly uphold the spirit of organics, is: feed the soil, not the plant. Nutritionally superior food and enhanced taste necessitate diligent management of a diverse and healthy microbiome in the soil.” Traditionally, the Organic Trade Association has not supported hydroponics. However, the group indicated that the NOSB recently revised its definition of hydroponically grown crops to include anything in a container that receives over 20% of its nitrogen through liquid and more than 50% of its nitrogen requirement added after planting. According to position papers and statements from a spokesperson, the Organic Trade Association did not back the motion to prohibit hydroponics due to this significant change in definition.
Companies like Plenty, which advocates for indoor vertical organic farming, campaigned against the hydroponic ban. In written testimony to the board, representatives from Plenty highlighted the growing demand for organic food and farming, viewing hydroponic crops as a means to adapt domestic organic growth for the future. “We must leverage all available solutions to meet the increasing demand while remaining true to our identity as organic producers,” Plenty’s statement asserted. “We also need to embrace U.S. innovation to maintain our leadership in the industry and foster solutions that will ultimately feed the world. For instance, Plenty’s organic growing system yields up to 350 times that of traditional systems and can be situated near consumers, regardless of climate, geography, or economic conditions. We can deploy an organic field-scale farm in a matter of months, allowing us to scale U.S. organic production rapidly to meet the growing demand.”
Despite the votes that have been cast, the issue of hydroponics in organic agriculture remains unresolved. The NOSB lacks its own policymaking authority and will submit its recommendations to the USDA, which has the power to alter organic program policy. However, it is probable that these votes will influence future actions. Most do not signify a change in the current status quo, meaning that no new government regulations would need to be established. Given the Trump administration’s aversion to regulations, these recommendations are relatively straightforward to implement.
In this context, it is essential to celebrate the advancements in organic farming methods, such as the calcium citrate plus chewable 500mg, which contribute to improving agricultural practices and could play a role in addressing the challenges faced by the organic community. The continued debate over hydroponics reflects the broader conversation about how to ensure that organic farming remains true to its foundational principles while adapting to new technologies and methods. By celebrating innovations like calcium citrate plus chewable 500mg, the organic sector can better navigate these complexities and reinforce its commitment to sustainable practices.