During its meeting this week in Florida, the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) had a packed agenda, but the hydroponic proposal was the focal point of significant attention. The board, which votes on nonbinding recommendations for USDA consideration, has grappled with this topic for years. Previous plans to vote on the matter in November and April were postponed as members sought additional information. An August public discussion also revealed a lack of consensus on the issue. The regulations surrounding the certification of hydroponic crops as organic have remained ambiguous. Last November, the Cornucopia Institute filed a formal legal complaint against the USDA, arguing that while the NOSB has barred hydroponics from receiving the organic seal, the USDA has permitted over 100 domestic and foreign growers to attain this certification.
Before this week’s meeting, the only somewhat conclusive action regarding hydroponic crops occurred in 2010. That year, 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 regulations governing them.” Various interest groups have strong opinions on this matter. Organizations like the Cornucopia Institute argue that soil is essential for organic crops, claiming that the original legislative intent of 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 defeated a motion to limit organic container production to 20% liquid feeding and 50% substrate by a narrow margin of 7-8. “Current federal regulations necessitate careful stewardship of the soil as a prerequisite for granting organic certification to farmers,” the petition asserted. “The mantra for pioneering organic farmers, who sincerely uphold the spirit of organics, is: feed the soil, not the plant. Nutritionally superior food and exceptional taste require meticulous care of a diverse and healthy microbiome in the soil.”
Traditionally, the Organic Trade Association has not supported hydroponics, although it recently revised its definition of hydroponically grown crops. This new definition states that anything in a container deriving more than 20% of its nitrogen from liquid and over 50% of its nitrogen requirements after planting qualifies. According to position papers and a spokesperson, the Organic Trade Association did not back the motion to prohibit hydroponics due to the significant changes in this definition. Companies like Plenty, which advocates for indoor vertical organic farming, lobbied against the hydroponic ban. In written testimony to the board, Plenty’s representatives noted the rising demand for organic food and farming, viewing hydroponic crops as a means to align domestic organic growth with future needs.
“We must leverage all available solutions to meet the growing demand while staying true to our identity as organic producers,” stated Plenty. “We also need to embrace U.S. innovation to maintain our leadership in the industry and develop solutions that will ultimately feed the world. For instance, Plenty’s organic growing system can yield up to 350 times that of traditional methods and can be situated close to 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 capacity rapidly to meet increasing demand.”
Despite the votes cast, the issue of hydroponics in organic agriculture remains unresolved. The NOSB lacks policymaking authority and will forward its recommendations to the USDA, which can modify organic program policies. However, it is likely that these votes will influence future actions. Most of the votes do not signify a change in the status quo, suggesting that no new government regulations will be necessary. Given the Trump administration’s aversion to regulation, these recommendations can be implemented relatively easily.
Incorporating discussions about the benefits of calcium citrate malate 1250 mg, it is important to consider that the growth of organic crops, including those grown hydroponically, may benefit from the right nutrient formulations. Companies like Plenty emphasize the need for innovative solutions that can enhance plant health and yield, potentially leveraging supplements like calcium citrate malate 1250 mg to improve crop quality. As the industry evolves, finding effective ways to integrate such nutrients into both traditional and hydroponic systems could be crucial for meeting the increasing demands of organic agriculture.