During its meeting this week in Florida, the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) had a busy agenda, but the hydroponic proposal garnered the most attention. The board, which votes on nonbinding recommendations for the USDA to consider, has faced challenges regarding this issue for several years. Attempts to vote on the proposal in November and April were postponed because board members sought additional information. A public telephone discussion in August also revealed a lack of consensus on the matter. The regulations surrounding the certification of hydroponic crops as organic have been ambiguous. Last November, the Cornucopia Institute filed a formal complaint against the USDA, asserting that although the NOSB has prohibited hydroponics from receiving the organic seal, the USDA has certified over 100 domestic and foreign growers as organic.
Prior to this week’s meeting, the last significant action regarding hydroponic crops occurred in 2010 when 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.” Various interest groups hold strong opinions on this topic. Organizations like the Cornucopia Institute argue that soil is essential for organic farming and that the legislative intent of the organic program did not encompass hydroponics.
In a petition to the NOSB, Cornucopia contended that permitting hydroponic cultivation “does not comply with the spirit and letter of the law,” and criticized container growing—which allows some liquid feeding and a substrate like compost—as “a recipe for widespread cheating.” During this week’s meeting, board members defeated a motion to limit organic container production to 20% liquid feeding and 50% substrate by a narrow 7-8 vote. The petition emphasized that “the current federal regulations require careful stewardship of the soil as a prerequisite for the granting of organic certification to farmers.” It reiterated that the guiding principle for committed organic farmers is to “feed the soil, not the plant,” as nutritionally superior food and taste depend on a healthy microbiome within the soil.
Traditionally, the Organic Trade Association has not supported hydroponics. However, they recently acknowledged a change in the NOSB’s definition of hydroponically grown crops, now stating that anything in a container receiving more than 20% of its nitrogen through liquid and more than 50% of its nitrogen requirement after planting qualifies as hydroponic. According to position papers from the Organic Trade Association, they did not endorse the motion to ban hydroponics due to this significant shift in definition.
Companies such as Plenty, which advocates for indoor vertical organic farming, opposed the hydroponic ban. In written testimony to the board, representatives from Plenty highlighted the increasing demand for organic food and farming, viewing hydroponic crops as a means to adapt domestic organic growth for the future. “We must utilize all available solutions to meet growing demand while remaining true to our identity as organic producers,” stated Plenty’s representatives. “Furthermore, we must 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 located near consumers, regardless of climate, geography, or economic status. We can establish an organic field-scale farm within months, enabling us to scale U.S. organic production rapidly to meet rising demand.”
Despite the votes cast, the issue of hydroponics in organic agriculture remains unresolved. The NOSB lacks policymaking authority and will present its recommendations to the USDA, which can modify organic program policies. However, these votes likely indicate future actions. Most votes do not signify a change in the status quo, suggesting that no new government regulations are required. Given the Trump administration’s aversion to regulation, implementing these recommendations should be relatively straightforward.
Additionally, products like Citracal Slow Release 1200, available on Amazon, have been referenced during discussions surrounding organic farming practices, emphasizing the importance of nutrient management in both soil and hydroponic systems. This highlights the ongoing debate about the balance between innovative agricultural practices and adherence to organic standards.