OFNZ Organic Standards - Member Comments

26 May 2008

 

Dear Carol,

Re the use of the OFNZ Production Standard

When this issue was discussed at a FNOG field-day meeting the outcome was that the Far North producers feel that we should move to our own OFNZ Standard forthwith.

After all, this is only certification for the local internal domestic market. The advantages of staying with BioGro and using their Standards & moving to full BG certification are now no longer relevant due to IFOAM allowing affidavits regarding organic status.

We feel that the members nationwide need to be fully informed of the advantages and disadvantages of the OFNZ Standard.

We do not see any point in being held back with irrelevant rules and requirements coming from IFOAM.

Yours sincerely,
Terry Higginson
Chair Far North Organic Group

 

28 May 2008

 

There are several other important reasons to consider using the OFNZ standards that are not listed.  For instance,

  • Bio-Gro and other large money export schemes can be hijacked by multi-national corporations who push their own agendas.
  • OFNZ standards could allow composting toilets, non-organic feed for home chooks, flexibility for seed selection which other IFOAM standards would not.
  • OFNZ standards could emphasize sustainable agriculture (low energy input, city to farm composting,  CSA models, urban agriculture and other permaculture models that aren’t even on the big certifiers horizons, much less radar.

Kind regards, Betsy Kettle 
(Certification Manager, Auckland)

28 May 2008


 

Dear All

While there are some interesting ideas regarding OFNZ having its own standards I think the agrument against is too compelling - costs and credibility are just two big reasons why not. The existing system has heaps of flexibilty but I dont think we have explored the options we already have here to any extent. Betsy has raised some points that could be interesting to explore but they do not in my opinion provide a rationale for adopting a new standard at this time.

There are two types of standards - ones used for certification eg Biogro and then there are the baseline standards upon which certification standards are built such as the IFOAM Basic Standards or CODEX. The whole idea of the IFOAM IBS is that they provide a baseline or guideline only and can be adapted to fit with local situations so such things as non organic feed for chooks can  be added to a standard that is based on the IBS.  

Also OFNZ does not use the Biogro standard as such but rather it uses the Biogro Production Rules with the compliance part of the standards is owned by OFNZ this means that because of this arrangement there is ample room to add some special points.

A couple of comments - we should never have a standard that allows non-organic inputs as unrestricted inputs eg: chook food. It seems to me to defeat the whole idea of being organic and what we are striving to achieve however at this time when we cannot get organic chook food, do we change the standard as a knee jerk reaction to a problem that may or may not be short term - no, but we can make a special allowance for a specific period of time ---- but if we do what happens to the status of the eggs and meat?? are they still organic ??

Regards, Chris May
(Certification Manager, Coromandel)


2 June 2008


Hi Carol and Dennis

Just my thoughts on the proposed standards for discussion.

Having taught Organic Horticulture for a few years now, it is clear to me that the general public are mostly aware of the dominant BioGro Standard, and to introduce yet another standard could be extremely confusing. The ongoing costs of review and monitoring for our own OFNZ standards would, alone, likely outwiegh any gains. I believe the OFNZ funds are far better spent on helping growers do their best to produce health giving food, and to educate the public on the benefits of purchasing from local OFNZ growers - 'Certifying local food for local people!'. OFNZ also needs to promote it's work and logo to the public.

The use of the respected Bio-Gro standard works very well for us  - it would be difficult to gain the same respect/profile for an OFNZ standard given our budget and resource constraints. I suggest we keep it simple and retain the status quo as long as we continue to agree with the philosophy behind/ and rules within, the Bio-Gro Standards and they remain user friendly! (as user friendly as any legal document can be!)

Look forward to seeing other people's comments.

Kind regards
Michelle Ritchie