Dr. Tom,
With Respect....
I agree to an extent....some of us, however honestly did not have the
time available to devote to helping with the details. I am proud of my
OGM and I sincerely thank those who did the "busy work" on our behalf.
I do resent the tone that we do not or did not care, that is a self
centered remark. I work "off farm" 70 hours a week. My farm is my
passion, and my future retirement income...that is the reason I am
building the infrastructure....maintaining my organic standards...and
preparing for later federal certification..(when I can afford it,
college is expensive for 3 children).
When I can afford to retire in a couple of years (I am 51) I want to
live off my farm income. It will not be a lot, all of you know farming
on a small scale often needs outside financial input to "maintain" the
lifestyle we have chosen. To angrily toss all of us into the group
you mention is simply not fair, and could be the reason some have
stayed in the background. Having said that, you are correct that some
(most?? all??) "take advantage" of the organic label, however the ones
who are doing the most damage to organic standards are not the little
guys....it is the large corporations. And Pat, I do thank you. And
every time I go to my mom's house (she passed recently) as I drive by
your farm and say thank you for all you have done for us......if I see
you outside I will stop one of these days.
Related, there is at least one grower near me still using the OGM
certificate, posted in a local business, to give the public the
impression they are certified. The business accepted this certificate
as fact, despite the federal changes. Those are the people you should
address your note to, not a blanket "Nancy and I left the state and it
all went to pot"......the federal standard is too expensive for some of
us smaller people. You left the state in the transition and OGM,s
death was a result of the cost of federal changes, not your leaving. I
won't lie and lead the public to believe my farm is certified since
the expiration of my certificate, but I am proud of maintaining organic
standards and practices.
regards,
don dunklee
On Mar 15, 2007, at 11:16 PM, Dr Tom Zennie wrote:
> The main reason OGM is no longer certifying growers is that the
> growers themselves didn't give a shit about OGM. The majority of most
> OGM growers/members only cared about getting their value added organic
> certification for the cheapest price with the least hassle. It was a
> great organization while it lasted. We could have easily withstood an
> audit but there was no one to step up to the plate and take some
> responsibility for the time and effort to organize the records. Pat
> Whetham could only do so much. and she did a lot!
>
> BTW, the truth be told, the main people for getting OGM accredited
> with the USDA are : Grey Larison, Pat Whetham, Nancy Zennie and me. No
> one else even comes in a distant fifth or sixth. Nancy and I left
> the state and the whole thing went to pot...
>
> OGM was a purely volunteer organization of like minded
> philosophically organic farmers that wanted to help each other and
> their neighbors raise healthy food. It changed however...
>
> p.s. Where are the majority of growers now getting certified? I'd bet
> they not getting it from the "state organic program"!!!!
>
> Zen Sheep Farm
> Tom and Nancy Zennie
> 4963 E CR 900 S
> Cloverdale, IN 46120
> Phone: 765-795-5526
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Taylor Clarkston Reid"
> <[log in to unmask]>
> To: "Dr Tom Zennie" <[log in to unmask]>
> Cc: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2007 4:20 AM
> Subject: Re: [SANET-MG] organic vs. local...
>
>
>> I agree with the importance of certification as well, but am a little
>> bit uncomfortable with the local versus organic idea. I think they
>> should compliment each other not fight it out. I don't think all
>> certified products are the same, and wish there was a way to
>> differentiate local certified organic. Certified growers should be
>> rewarded, there is no substitution for that, and meaningless labels
>> certainly aren't helpful.
>> At the same time I know from reading old OGM newsletters that the
>> three of you (Tom, Susan, and Jim) spent a lot of time and energy
>> working on getting OGM to be an NOP certifier, and it seems pretty
>> messed up to me that part of the reason it's no longer one is the
>> audit process, when there are 40 foreign certifiers who have never
>> been audited, not to mention those programs that have been recognized
>> as 'equivalent' with no oversight from NOP at all.
>> I also know from reading the info that the Center for Food Safety's
>> FOIA request (eventually) yielded, that not all certifiers are the
>> same, even within the U.S. I am wary of certifiers whose main goal
>> is profit, and of large organic or mixed conventional/organic
>> operations for whom the profit motive, not the health of the the soil
>> or the ecosystem is the main concern.
>> I think that there is a value to local as well as organic, and though
>> I agree that certification is essential, I don't think it's a
>> substitute for knowing your grower. To me, Sue's greens or Jim's
>> mushrooms are a hell of a lot more valuable and meaningful than
>> something I get in a box from California or Japan, because I have met
>> them and been on their farms. There is still an element of trust
>> involved, and for me a green and white circle, though better than
>> nothing, isn't really enough.
>> Certified organic is important to me, and I agree there is currently
>> no viable substitute. But fresh, local, and grown with care and
>> respect for the the earth is important too.
>> Respectfully,
>> Taylor Reid
>>
>>
>>
>> Dr Tom Zennie writes:
>>> I second Jim's statements. Without a third party oversight this
>>> whole thing could be loaded with fraud. Some of these same "natural"
>>> farmers still use agricultural products from the "local" elevator.
>>> The same GMO corn and soybeans that the organic people would
>>> definitely lose certification over! A lot of these same people also
>>> still think that roundup herbicide is OK because it so short
>>> lived...
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: Jim Moses To:
>>> [log in to unmask] Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 10:57 AM
>>> Subject: Re: FW: [SANET-MG] organic vs. local... Regarding
>>> Certified Naturally Grown--
>>> I checked this label out two years ago and was not impressed.
>>> They claimed that their "standards" were the same as NOP. But at
>>> that time you could access application forms of certified growers
>>> and many listed violations of NOP standards like prohibited inputs,
>>> commercial transplants, treated seed etc.
>>> It is time to deal seriously with nostalgia for the "good old
>>> days" of organic agriculture, that never really existed. The fraud
>>> and ignorance that existed when everyone had their own standard is
>>> nothing we should want to return. There is a cost involved in
>>> offering the public third-party certified organic products. Anyone
>>> who wants to make these claims should be willing to contribute. If
>>> you want to identify who is getting the short end of the stick, ask
>>> yourself this. What about the growers who pay their dues and
>>> receive no protection from the state and federal agencies who are
>>> pledged to eliminate fraud? What about the increasing number of
>>> questionable labels backed by foundation money that undermine
>>> certified organic? What about the whole phony "Local" verses
>>> "Organic" campaign that clearly has some BIG money behind it?
>>> Divide and conqueror, it is an old story, but it still works. Jim
>>> Moses Vicki Morrone <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>> Hey folks
>>> This is an interesting alternative to certified organic and
>>> probably
>>> would do well at small markets and farmers markets, at this
>>> time. But
>>> then a farmer could combine organic certification with the
>>> farmer pledge
>>> that MOFFA is promoting and cover all the bases and be able to
>>> sell
>>> foods labeled organic. Have you looked into Certified Naturally
>>> Grown? It's a great
>>> alternative and self governing as it was in the old days of
>>> Organic. You
>>> rely on other local farmers, customers or the County Extension
>>> to inpect
>>> your farm.
>>> It's a non profit organization. They do ask for donations and
>>> they also
>>> sell stickers with the CNG logo. You can download brochures
>>> online for
>>> hand outs explaining the program. The website address is
>>> www.naturallygrown.org
>>> They have a questionaire to cover all aspects of Naturally Grown
>>> so
>>> inspection is easy and informative to the consumer, too. I
>>> wonder if this program is catching on yet in California?
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> >From: Douglas Hinds >Sent: Mar 10, 2007 3:03 PM
>>> >To: [log in to unmask]
>>> >Subject: Re: [SANET-MG] organic vs. local... >
>>> most left because of the State and USDA take over of the
>>> >> word organic, we were the volunteers of America now we are
>>> forced
>>> >> slaves to the USDA the certifier and the inspector and the
>>> state.
>>> >> On years like this one with the freeze they make their money
>>> even
>>> >> when I loose money. hehe . My customers that I had for years
>>> >> forced me to be certified after the USDA takeover if I wanted
>>> to
>>> >> keep selling to them so if I want to tell my customer I'm
>>> organic
>>> >> I have to pay the organic police. >
>>> >We knew this would happen, ahead of time, of course (and there
>>> >weren't that many of us that knew what to expect).
>>> >
>>> >> I pay a organic tax because I don't use anything.
>>> >
>>> >You pay the penalty for the OFPA's having the wrong focus. (And
>>> third
>>> >party certification became a big industry, with greater
>>> authority
>>> >than the farmers themselves, thanks to OFPA).
>>> >
>>> >> I have to fill out reports and pay the USDA saying I don't use
>>> >> anything while the USDA will not label GMOs, pesticides,
>>> >> herbicides, fertilizers that kill life on the earth. Its all
>>> >> backwards.
>>> https://finerworks.com/mgallery/artists.asp?U_ID=goldpearl
>>> ________________________________________
>>> PeoplePC Online
>>> A better way to Internet
>>> http://www.peoplepc.com
>>> ********************************************************
>>> To unsubscribe from SANET-MG:
>>> 1- Visit http://lists.sare.org/archives/sanet-mg.html to
>>> unsubscribe or;
>>> 2- Send a message to from the address subscribed to
>>> the list. Type "unsubscribe sanet-mg" in the body of the
>>> message. Visit the SANET-MG archives at:
>>> http://lists.sare.org/archives/sanet-mg.html.
>>> Questions? Visit http://www.sare.org/about/sanetFAQ.htm.
>>> For more information on grants and other resources available
>>> through the
>>> SARE program, please visit http://www.sare.org. If you would
>>> like to access previous postings to the Mich-Organic listserv you
>>> can copy and paste the following URL into your browser address bar
>>> http://list.msu.edu/archives/mich-organic.html
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> ---------
>>> 8:00? 8:25? 8:40? Find a flick in no time
>>> with theYahoo! Search movie showtime shortcut. If you would like
>>> to access a searchable archive of the all the previous Mich-Organic
>>> listserv postings copy this URL and paste in your browser address
>>> field http://list.msu.edu/archives/mich-organic.html If you would
>>> like to access previous postings to the Mich-Organic listserv you
>>> can copy and paste the following URL into your browser address bar
>>> http://list.msu.edu/archives/mich-organic.html
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> If you would like to access previous postings to the Mich-Organic
> listserv you can copy and paste the following URL into your browser
> address bar
> http://list.msu.edu/archives/mich-organic.html
>
If you would like to access previous postings to the Mich-Organic listserv you can copy and paste the following URL into your browser address bar
http://list.msu.edu/archives/mich-organic.html
|
