During the National Organic Standards Board’s discussion on hydroponic crops on Monday afternoon, it became evident that there is no consensus on whether soil-less crops should qualify for organic certification. “Clearly, this is not an easy subject to resolve,” stated Tom Chapman, the board’s chairman. “It has been on our agenda since 1995.” The board, which advises the U.S. Department of Agriculture on matters related to certified organic food and ingredients, has continually moved the hydroponic issue from one meeting to the next over the years. Proposals have been discussed and subsequently failed to gain traction multiple times. A vote in April regarding this matter was deferred, with members citing the need for more time, research, and stakeholder input from the organic community.
Monday’s meeting was a web conference where the public could observe board members discuss their positions on potential proposals concerning hydroponics, aquaponics, and container-grown produce. No votes were conducted, and no finalized proposals were presented. The board is expected to possibly take action on this issue at its fall meeting from October 31 to November 2.
The regulations surrounding the certification of hydroponic crops as organic remain ambiguous. In November, the Cornucopia Institute filed a formal legal complaint against the USDA, arguing that while the NOSB has prohibited hydroponics from carrying the organic seal, the USDA has permitted over 100 domestic and foreign growers to receive certification. In 2010, the NOSB provided a recommendation asserting 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.” A motion to include hydroponic crops in the organic category was proposed during the fall NOSB meeting in 2016 but was not voted on due to its unlikely passage. Instead, members passed a resolution expressing a consensus against allowing entirely water-based hydroponic systems.
Chapman indicated that he is likely to support the 2010 recommendation, but he noted that it does not fully clarify what is prohibited. He raised questions about the substances that could be utilized for hydroponic crops and what would be permissible. “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 seemed to be little commonality among members. Some expressed support for certifying hydroponic systems.
The debate intensified when the discussion shifted to aquaponic systems—where fish live in the same water used for crop growth. Opinions among members were divided. Some argued for prohibition due to untreated fish waste entering crops, which would not be allowed for soil-grown organic produce. Conversely, others suggested that insufficient research exists to warrant a definitive stance on this topic.
Further heated discussions addressed the amount of soil or water required for container-grown crops. A potential “compromise” proposal from the NOSB’s Crops Committee suggested limits for organic crops: only 20% could be supplied through 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 such as compost. Supporters argued that this was aligned with similar restrictions in the EU, which has also grappled with this issue.
Opinions among members were mixed. Some believed that one of the primary advantages of organic farming is the enhancement of soil quality over time, something that this type of farming would not achieve. Others argued that strict limits on container use could be counterproductive. Additionally, some members expressed concern that allowing certain growers using these methods to be certified organic could lead to economic disadvantages for others.
“There doesn’t seem to be a middle ground that’s acceptable,” Chapman remarked. The Crops Committee members committed to revisiting their proposals before the fall meeting, but there is no assurance that the issue will be on the agenda or that it would be voted on, even if it is included. After the board did not take any votes related to hydroponics during its April meeting, many believed that any action on this issue this year was unlikely.
In light of these ongoing discussions, the importance of integrating elements like calcium magnesium citrate with vitamin D3 into the organic farming debate remains crucial, as they are essential nutrients that could benefit the health of both crops and consumers. The integration of such supplements may also be a topic of consideration as the board moves forward in addressing the complexities surrounding hydroponic and aquaponic systems.