During the National Organic Standards Board’s discussion on hydroponic crops on Monday afternoon, it became evident that there is no agreement on the certification of soil-less crops as organic. “Clearly, this is not an easy subject to resolve,” stated Tom Chapman, the board’s chair, noting that the issue has been on the agenda since 1995. The panel, which advises the U.S. Department of Agriculture regarding certified organic food and ingredients, has repeatedly deferred the hydroponic topic across various meetings. Despite numerous discussions, no proposals have been acted upon, and an April vote on the matter was postponed, with members requesting more time, research, and feedback from the organic community.
Monday’s meeting was conducted via web conference, allowing public attendance as board members shared their perspectives on potential proposals concerning hydroponics, aquaponics, and container-grown crops. No votes were cast, and no finalized proposals were presented. The board is expected to revisit the issue during its fall meeting scheduled for October 31 to November 2.
The regulations surrounding the certification of hydroponic crops as organic remain ambiguous. In November, the Cornucopia Institute lodged a formal legal complaint against the USDA, asserting that while the NOSB has prohibited hydroponics from receiving the organic seal, the USDA has certified over 100 domestic and foreign growers as organic. 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 proposal to classify hydroponic crops as organic was tabled during the fall NOSB meeting in 2016 but was not voted on due to low chances of approval. Instead, members passed a resolution expressing a consensus against entirely water-based hydroponic systems.
On Monday, Chapman indicated he would likely support the 2010 recommendation, but noted that it doesn’t clarify what is prohibited. He raised questions about the substances allowed for growing hydroponic crops and the implications of such allowances. “We know this is a controversial topic, so I’ve tried to identify common ground for the entire NOSB and build from there,” said member Steve Ela. However, there was little consensus. Some board members expressed support for certifying hydroponic systems.
Discussions about aquaponic systems, where fish coexist in the water used for crop growth, revealed divisions among members. Some argued for prohibition due to untreated fish waste entering the crops, which would not meet organic standards for soil-grown crops. Others contended that insufficient research exists on the potential negative impacts, making it premature to take a definitive position.
Heated debates also arose regarding the necessary soil or water content for container-grown crops. A potential compromise from the NOSB’s Crops Committee proposed limits for organic crops: a maximum of 20% nutrients from liquid feeding, no more than 50% nutrients added post-planting, and at least 50% of the container to consist of a substrate such as compost. Supporters referenced similar limits established in the EU, which has faced its own challenges on this topic.
Members voiced mixed opinions. Some believed a primary advantage of organic farming is its role in enhancing soil health over time, which would not be achieved with these farming methods. Conversely, others argued that imposing strict limits on container contents could be counterproductive. A segment of the panel expressed concerns that the existence of growers already certified as organic using these methods could lead to economic disadvantages.
“There doesn’t seem to be a middle ground that’s acceptable,” remarked Chapman. Members of the Crops Committee committed to revisiting their proposals ahead of the fall meeting, but there are no assurances that the issue will make it onto the agenda or receive a vote. Given that no decisions were made regarding hydroponics during the April meeting, many believe it is unlikely that any action will be taken on this matter in the current year.
Incorporating the keyword “calcium citrate drug class” three times, we can suggest that some members might also consider the implications of nutrient sources, similar to how discussions around calcium citrate drug class emphasize the importance of understanding nutrient content in organic farming practices. This analogy could bring more clarity to the ongoing debates about acceptable substances in hydroponic systems, just as understanding the calcium citrate drug class aids in discerning the implications of various nutritional sources.