Peak Phosphosus: between (another) rock and a hard place

Part 2 on Peak Phosphorus. (Again, the North African element makes this all the more pertinent than it was when I wrote this piece, due to the uprisings going on in that part of the world. Appears here exclusively.

For part one see here

Farming supplies of phosphorus come mostly from one part of the world - Morocco. They are also finite. A new Soil Association report suggests a peak in availability by 2033, as well as significant environmental concerns with current use in agriculture.

How could and should farming adapt to the finite nature of its inputs, in particular phosphorus? According to the Soil Association, there are three distinct action areas.

The first is changing how we farm. They point out that �different farming systems vary enormously in their reliance on mined phosphate. Organic farms are more resilient to the coming phosphorus rock �shock�, as it can only be used as a supplement to nutrient recycling (including crop rotations, green manures, and composting), and not as a replacement.�

They continue: �Organic crops generally have a lower fertiliser requirement than non-organic crops, with a greater capacity to scavenge for nutrients through denser and deeper root systems.�

They also suggest the need for a change in consumption patterns: �Eating less meat can reduce the demand for mined phosphate. This is because vegetable-based production is more efficient in its use of phosphorus than livestock production.�

However not all meat is the same: �Meat from livestock grazed on grassland that has not been fertilised with artificial fertilisers, will perform much better than meat from livestock grazed on fields that have been, or livestock fed on grain grown using artificial fertilisers.�

The third is novel but in terms of global nutrient cycles something of an unpalatable inevitability. Its changing how we deal with human excreta. The report recommends �a radical change in the way we treat human ex[c]reta and the need to abandon our current �flush-and-forget� toilet systems in favour of Ecological Sanitation.

�The report also calls for a change to EU organic regulations to allow the use of human sewage � rich in �natural� phosphate - on agricultural land to ensure phosphate levels are maintained. Globally only 10% of human waste is returned to agricultural soils. Urine alone contains more than 50% of the phosphorus excreted by humans.�

The use of these �Biosolids� (treated municipal/human sewage sludge) is already allowed in conventional agriculture.

I spoke to the report author Isobel Tomlinson (Soil Association) to explore these issues further.

Last one first: excreta. �in the longer term we recognise that there are problems with the current sanitation system: high water use, phosphorus water pollution, high energy-use as well as the continuing risk of contaminants - because industrial waste is added to the sewage system you get a risk from heavy metal contamination.�

Separating waste or, equally, nutrient, streams seems to be key: that's industrial from human, as mentioned, but also urine from solids:

�We think that we should move towards ecological sanitation which is a term that incorporates a range of different systems for solving these problems. We particularly mention urine-diverting systems as urine contains half of phosphorus excreted, is generally sterile and there are already examples of it being used in agriculture - for example Sweden. We would also like composting systems � the "humanure" approach - to be considered where appropriate.�

She also expands on the changing consumption and farming. Indeed, the two are connected, as what's produced is also consumed � either by animals or people.

According to Tomilson, along with changing production over to organic methods, what's needed is �An overall cut in dairy consumption, and dairy products to be sourced from grass-fed cows from extensive farming systems; More cereals and root crops and more seasonal fruit and vegetables; Less meat overall, but more grass-fed beef and lamb and less energy intensive, grain-fed and industrially-reared chickens and pigs.�

Ireland is well positioned to produce meat and milk extensively. We may, however, have to convince others to produce less and for us to be �The Producers� - i.e. the main suppliers for many parts of the world due to our extensive grazing. We may however, also have to make our grazing even more low input and grass-based - and do so not just for for phosphorus supply, but for many other environmental reasons too.

the Soil Association report is here

New EU Organic Logo

Following an on-line vote by 130,000 people, the new compulsory EU organic logo has been chosen.

From almost 3500 entrants, three were shortlisted and examined to ensure that there were no copyright infringements.

The winning design comprised twelve stars in the shape of a leaf and, according to the EU Commission, �a very straightforward sign containing two clear messages: Nature and Europe�. It was drawn up by German student Dusan Milenkovic, who receives �6000 in prize money.

The identities and nationalities of the three final contenders have not previously been published, to prevent skewing the voting.

The winning design, �Euro-leaf�, gained 63% of the overall vote for his logo.

From 1st July 2010, the organic logo of the EU will be obligatory on all pre-packaged organic products that have been produced in any of the EU Member States and meet the necessary standards.

It will be optional for products imported into the EU. Other private, regional or national logos will be allowed to appear alongside the EU label.

This includes the logos of the Irish Certification bodies and the UK's quite familiar Soil Association logo.

Importantly for food businesses, there will be an 18 month period of grace to use up existing stock of labels.

However new products will face a challenging time getting the logo integrated into their product packaging.

"I'm delighted that we now have a fresh EU organic food logo," said Mariann Fischer Boel, Commissioner for Agriculture and Rural Development, who first proposed the competition to select the logo.

"This exercise has raised the profile of organic food and we now have a logo which everyone will be able to identify with. It's a nice elegant design and I look forward to buying products carrying this logo from July this year."

Ireland's largest certification body expressed a mixed opinion on it: �IOFGA are glad to see that the arduous process of designing a new EU Logo for organic products has finally come to an end.

The fact that the process has taken so long may mean that the logo has lost some momentum particularly with some of our members who have repackaged their products in the interim. The final three logos initially did not impress but on closer examination the winning design does have some appeal.�

They go on �It is a clean design with a strong emphasis on Europe which of course is the objective of the logo. It remains to be seen how the logo is used on products and an extensive advertising campaign is important to highlight the new logo to organic consumers.�

UK certification bodies, however, have come out fairly unimpressed by the logo.

Molly Conisbee, director of communications and campaigns at the Soil Association said:

"The Soil Association doesn't believe the EU logo will address the desire of consumers to know more about the provenance of their food...�.

She goes on to claim that �we don't think people who buy organic food are so much concerned about EU origins� compared to other values.

The UK's Organic Farmers and Growers called all the logos �a bit dull and uninformative�.

And yet, the latter also considered another of the three logos to be �hieroglyphic�, and possibly a cause of confusion with its small size and intricate detail.

To be fair to the EU Commission, an inevitable confusion was caused by the use of the word �Bio� in the rest of the EU, and �Organic� in Britain and Ireland, to describe the same certification system.

UK certification bodies seem to be both expressing and pandering to a very British cultural separateness from the EU, whilst also protecting their own economic patch.

The Soil Association, for example, feel that their logo is already very familiar, trusted by consumers, and representative of their �higher� standards.

However, as this new logo will inevitably appear on far more products than any one body certifies, this familiarity may soon be backgrounded by the Euro-Leaf.

RADICAL RUPTURE OR RADICAL REALISATION: ORGANIC FARMING AND CLIMATE CHANGE

With random and sudden ruptures, it becomes possible to imagine different realities.

Sudden war, sudden disaster, realising your girlfriend is pregnant, all of these things, from the personal to the seismic, can sharpen the focus and change the dynamic.

Ireland has just experienced sudden onset recession, and even more sudden onset flooding. So what was written in stone has been, literally and metaphorically, washed away.

Who knows what the next decade will bring? Even the next few years will be interesting in that Chinese proverbial sort of way: strikes, deflation, unemployment, but also perhaps the resourcefulness of a young, well educated population shining through.

(Image from NASA)

Global warming and the peaking of oil availability will be defining aspects of these coming years.

We don't know how related to global warming the recent flooding in Ireland has been.

But we do know that organic farming, in some very significant ways, fights both flooding and global warming.

The UK's Soil Association has recently released a report on the soil carbon building dimension to organic farming, and speculated on a world where organic farming was the norm.

This mega-imagining is radical rupture stuff, but maybe now is the time for that sort of thinking.

This new report's key point is that organic farming methods build up the amount of carbon in the soil, which in basic terms means that its not in the sky causing global warming.

Taking their cue from a review of the 39 available comparative studies of organic farming

soil carbon levels, they made some significant points:

�Soil carbon sequestration, according to the IPCC�s scientific advisors on land use, represents 89% of agriculture�s greenhouse gas mitigation potential.� (The IPCC are the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change).

They describe this as a �blind spot�, as it is an otherwise under analysed area: most attention is focused on methane, nitrous oxide and anaerobic digestion.

In other words, locking carbon into the ground is farming's biggest trump card: the report in fact reveals that carbon sequestration may be far more significant that these other areas.

�Unlike the carbon released from fossil fuels, the soil carbon store has the potential to be recreated to a substantial degree�.

This means that farming, properly practiced, can be the planet's knight in shining Armour.

�More widespread adoption of organic farming practices and grass based and mixed farming systems � can make a significant and immediate contribution to greenhouse gas mitigation.�

Humid Ireland is well placed to further develop its grass based and mixed farming systems, as well as organic.

A key comparative finding is the following; �Organic farming practices produce 28% higher soil carbon levels than non-organic farming in Northern Europe, and 20% for all countries studied�

What these levels mean is that, if adopted on a significant scale globally, �organic farming could potentially sequester 1.5 billion t(onnes) C(arbon) per year, which would offset about 11% of all anthropogenic global GHG emissions for at least the next 20 years.�

Thinking globally on this level might seem far fetched and outlandish. But then, so do last year's property prices. And so would the current flood levels, from the vantage point of 12 months ago.

Imagine if farming offset 11% of all human-caused GHG (Green House Gas) emissions?

Crucially, bringing many relevant aspects of the global warming and farming debates together for a country like Ireland, the report suggests the following:

�Grass-fed livestock has a critical role to play in minimising carbon emissions from farming and this must be set against the methane emissions from cattle and sheep�.

�This is because grasslands for grazing livestock, whether permanent pasture or temporary grass on mixed farms...represent vitally important soil carbon stores.�

Ireland has a head start over the more intensive, compound feed driven meat and dairy sectors of other countries.

It may turn out that grass fed animals on mixed farms, just slightly adapted to encompass organic farming principles, will be a significant part of dealing with global warming.

Is that a radical rupture or a radical realisation?

What's in a name? Or, is Rachael organic, or just your new best friend Rachael?

In light of the establishment of a new Irish organic milk producers company (IOMP), it is apt to look again at the organic diary sector across Europe.

In the UK and Ireland, there are both similarities and differences between the respective dairy sectors of the two countries. The UK was importing milk at the beginning of 2008, whereas now it exports. While shortage in supply on mainland Europe is part of this, yet again, the sterling differential helps UK farmers over and above their competitors.

Milk sales in the UK in 2008 were up 10%, according to the Soil Association. This has been put down to the clarity of the organic dairy message and the relatively low price premium organic milk and milk products carry.

Still, this was not enough to stop 'Rachael's Organic' from becoming just 'Rachael's'. The company themselves claim to be suprised by the furore, and put it down to a branding move, a mere name simplification.

�We have been astonished by the attention this small change has attracted,� stated group spokesperson Steve Clarke. �In part it is because there is currently a perceived downturn in sales of organic produce elsewhere but this was not the reason for the logo tweak, which has been in the pipeline for several months since the autumn.�

Across Rachel�s packaging, the manufacturer claimed that the term �organic� would still be highly visible and that it was responding to consumer research conducted last summer that found preference for a simpler brand name.

In others words, like Maria (Carey) Whitney (Houston) Lenny (Kravitz) and of course Bertie (Ahern), when consumers get to know a product well, they know it on a first name basis.

�Rachel�s organic yogurts have in fact seen an 18.3 per cent - year on year - increase in sales for the first quarter of 2009 so we are seeing fantastic growth,� stated Clarke.

Further afield, scientists in Germany, where organic milk is a whopping 11% of the market, claim to have invented an organic milk test.

One of the issues with organic is that the validation process is done through checking on actions, rather than on the products themselves. So paper trials, inspections are used to decide if someone is organic.

Researchers at the Federal Institute of Nutrition and Food Research, Kiel, developed a test based on an analysis of milk fat for the ratio of stable isotopes of carbon.

They used it to identify milk samples from cows raised on feed containing a higher ration of maize, more of which is used in conventional feed than organic rations in Germany.

Organically raised cows are fed less maize but more grass. However, the transferability of this test to other regions is questionable, as the feeding regimes differ from country to country.

This research also discovered higher levels of alpha-linolenic acid, or Omega 3 fatty acids. This is now proving to be typical for organic milk over conventional, and may be part of organic milk's appeal.

Likewise research presented in Ireland by Dr. Carlo Leifert (Quality Low Input Food project in Newcastle University) at the Bord Bia Organic conference last September did much the same. This research consistently pointed to organic as superior nutritionally, especially with regard to Omega 3 and the vital 3 to 6 ratio.
However again, the issue may partly be the grass levels fed. Low input farming (ie low on concentrates high on grass) also scored well nutritionally in Leifert's research.

The make up of the ration has proven to be important too: Researchers (again from Newcastle) found that by adding a mix of soya beans, rapeseed and linseed to the daily food rations for each cow kept indoors, milk quality improved and was comparable to the milk from an outdoor cow eating a fresh grass diet.

In Ireland, both organic and conventional cows eat a higher proportion of grass than elsewhere in Europe, due to the amount it rains here.

Whatever about the rain, across Europe, organic milk and milk products continue to sell well and to carry a strong message.

With a pool of up to 4 million litres of milk, it is likely that the IOMP will have a bright future.

Soil Association report for the organic market in the UK:

Pic: Jason Horner, organic veg seller at Ennis Farmers' Market

The UK's largest organic certification body, the Soil Association (SA), has just published a report on the market for organics. The news is mixed for the overall organic sector, and in some ways, bad for the UK organic farmer.

The situation in Ireland is different to the UK, with the market here remaining stronger. However the UK remains an export location for Irish organic produce. Along with the market itself suffering, the euro sterling differential is compounding the difficulties for Irish organic exports to the UK.

The UK organic market is worth over �2.1 billion annually. Diary is the biggest organic category (29.5%) followed closely by fresh fruit and vegetables (26.2%).

Growth in 2008 in the SA report was at 1.8%. This represented growth in three quarters, and decline in the final 08 quarter. Compared to 11% growth in Ireland in January 2009, the difference in the figures is significant.

The fairly neutral finding of a 1.8% increase disguises the fact that different categories showed sharper variations.

Sales of organic milk, cheese, meat and poultry grew by 10.6%, 11.5%, 13.3% and 17.7% in 2008. Convenience foods and confectionery fell, by 5.9% and 21% respectively. In part this reflects both cutting back and 'back to basics': sales of organic cooking ingredients were up a considerable 13.5%.

The two biggest growth areas for organic in the UK offer little opportunities for Irish farmers.

Certified organic textiles hit the �100 million mark, with organic cotton sales increasing by a full 40%. The organic health and beauty category rose by 69%. This was, however, partly due to consolidation of the certification and labelling regulations as much as an increase in sales: i.e. consumers were buying what they considered to be organic products previously anyway.

There are more signals of changes in what people eat. As reported by Ray Ryan last week for food in general in Ireland, cheaper cuts of meat are also in for organic in the UK. Worryingly, both fruit and vegetables sales were down. Some consumers are also switching to canned or frozen organic vegetables in place of fresh.

The location of purchase has also changed. This reflects both price and other considerations. ASDA, who spoke about their organic sales growth at a conference in Waterford last year, report growth of 25%. ASDA thus increased its share of the market from 8% to around 10%. Another low price multiple retailer, Morrisons, also reported growth in organic sales.

This reflects both increased organic purchasing by a broader socio-economic range of people and people from higher socio-economic groups changing where they shop.
Supermarkets that traditionally attract wealthier consumers have suffered: Tesco, Waitrose, Marks and Spencers and Sainsburys all reported losses in their organic sales.

In the analysis of the report, the SA point out that organic fruit and vegetables, Tescos largest organic area, have begun to pick up again in their stores.

The Co-op achieved double-digit percentage growth, increasing sales by 15%. This is a slightly unusual retail outlet in the UK. It is a consumer co-op with over 2200 stores, and recently took over the Somerfield supermarket chain.

While non multiple outlets (health food stores, box schemes etc) only reported 1.4% growth, farmers' markets were the exception. Growth in this route in the UK was high, at 18.6% to �23.7 million.

All told, for non multiple retailers, Around �11 million is now spent on organic products through independent retailers every week, or �568 million. This compares to �1.54 million through the multiples.

The report also calls for an improvement in the way the organic movement coveys its messages: a perhaps unexpected example of an underreported fact is the following: organic fruit and veg from box schemes are consistently cheaper than those in supermarkets.

In many ways, the strongest signal from this report from an Irish organic farming perspective point to the need for new markets in mainland Europe. In many EU countries the market remains strong or indeed continues to grow.

To access the report, click here

organic tillage in Ireland part 2: brian o regan

Organic tillage in Ireland has a lot of potential but few practitioners, despite supportive rule changes and a strong market.

One man who took the plunge recently is Brian O' Regan of Kinsale. Brian farms 100 acres of tillage. Depending upon the year and rotation, he grows oats, triticale, beans and wheat.

�I was conventional in 2005, but, after the sprays and fertilizers, there was noting out of it� he tells me. �I was always interested in organic. I'd look at the market and it seemed like there was a market for it. An issue at the time was that there was no organic cereal for sale. It was mostly for home use.�

Brian mentioned the importance of visiting other tillage farmers who were already organic. He cites Ben Colchester's farm near Urlingford in Kilkenny as being especially influential for him.

1st November 2006 was Brian's starting date, so on 1st November 2008 he was fully certified organic.

A bonus for those considering converting is the fact that after one year, in-conversion to organic tillage fetches almost the same price as fully certified organic, as it is usable by fully certified organic farmers.

�I was lucky in that in the 1st year of my conversion, conventional prices were high anyway, at 200e a tonne.�

Presently, Brian is achieving more than twice the conventional price. However the yield is half the conventional yield, so input costs, or the lack of them, really matter.

And as is with so many other organic farmers, both economics and other factors were motivators:

�Handling so many chemicals and fertilizers can't be too good for you, but it�s also about the bottom line. I was spending a lot of chemicals. If the year was good, you'd survive, but in a poor year you'd be left with a big bill� he points out.

Although he only stopped spraying and using synthetic fertilizers in late 2006, already, Brian has noticed a difference in the land:

�It�s only now that you'd start to notice the changes. There are more worms on the ground and the ditches are different now too. You don't have as many weeds growing out of them without the fertilizer. The normal herbage does grow, but none of the clumps of nettles you'd see elsewhere are growing there now�

I asked Brian about a hot topic amongst organic tillage growers - the feed holiday story that is doing the rounds in the UK.

This story suggests that because feed prices are so high and the UK market retracting, the UK�s biggest organic certifier, the Soil Association, are asking the competent authorities to weaken the rules on what can be fed to organic animals.

In the not too distant past, sheep and cattle could be fed a non-organic component.

It is worth pointing out that the Soil Association denies even making this request: they instead point to the need for a debate on how best to keep people farming organically, or as close to organically as possible in the current economic situation.

Understandably, Brian is against any watering down of the feed rules: �you are either organic or you�re not. If they started to let in a 10-15% bovine ration, it would kill organic cereal growing in Ireland - that's all they'd be fed, outside of grass. The feed mills would run it to the max - business is business, so they'd push it�.

He also points out that it would be bad for the consumer, �as they'd be unsure of what they're getting�.

Considering all the effort that's gone into getting tillage farmers to convert to organic, Brian claims that increasing the conventional component would slow down the rate of conversions to organic.

Another issue is the fact that in the event of a product recall, as happened with pig meat recently, organic farmers with a conventional component are exposed.

Every farmer in every sector has issues: the price they get, the money they spend, as well as non-economic considerations. Organic tillage, all told, may offer more opportunities than most.

IOFGA and the Soil Association: Lilliput and Brobdingnag sing in harmony

(pictured are Patrick Holden of the Soil Association and Minister for Food Trevor Sargent, at the IOFGA AGM in 2008: picture copyright Oliver Moore)

The Irish Organic Farmers and Growers Association (IOFGA) has formally established a co-operative link with the UK's Soil Association.

This means that the largest certification bodies in Ireland and the UK have agreed to work together.

This arrangement will allow IOFGA access to the extensive research and development programme of the Soil Association.

According to IOFGA chair Kate Carmody, accessing Soil Association market information will be especially useful for IOFGA and its membership: �They have a huge up-to-date database of information on marketing which they have allowed us to access.�

The arrangement will also give IOFGA access more information on organic farming and growing, certification and the promotion of organic food.

According to the organisation �this is of growing importance given the increasing complexity of EU regulations governing the organic sector and it will be especially relevant when dealing with the complex requirements of the food processing and manufacturing industry.�

According to Carmody, the arrangement � has come about because of a long standing relationship with the Soil Association. We have essentially the same standards and we always work together. People prefer equivalence, so its logical to have a reciprocal relationship. A lot of companies want the process to be done to the Soil Association standard.�

This new arrangement could mean that product certified in Ireland will be considered equivalent to Soil Association product in the UK. This could eliminate duplication in the inspection and certification process.

�Both organisations will retain their autonomy under the agreement whilst working together in areas of mutual interest� Carmody points out.

From IOFGA's perspective, this will surely be important. The Soil Association are a far larger and better resourced organisation that IOFGA, with a presence in Northern Ireland already.

They are the largest certifier in the UK � their logo appears on 70% of British organic produce. They employ over 180 staff based in their Bristol headquarters, in regional centres and working as certification inspectors across the UK.

Along with certification, the Soil Association also carry out campaign work in a number of areas: they list these as genetic engineering in food; animal welfare; pesticides; threats to wildlife from intensive agriculture; antibiotics; the closure of small abattoirs; the harmful effects of intensive farming on food quality and safety; and finally setting standards to ensure the integrity of organic food and other products.

Genetic engineering/modification (GM) seems to be a particular bugbear of theirs: Helen Taylor, director of marketing and corporate relations with the Soil Association, spoke at the the National Organic conference in November 2006, held in Carrick on Shannon. She suggested that one third of their campaigning budget goes on fighting GM.

As an organisation, they have placed a particular emphasis on the consumer. Two recent high profile issues they have focused on include air freight and what they call one planet agriculture.
A variety of agri-food, consumer, environmental and business/trade interests were involved in the consultation the organisation carried out on air freight. Their decision to couple air freight and fair trade showed their environmental and social justice credentials to many. To others, especially those involved in importing and exporting products, the Soil Association had stepped way beyond their remit

The One Planet Agriculture is a broad sustainability in food campaign, part of their 'beyond organic' focus.

For the organic operator, they are a veritable one stop shop. Along with the full certification service and the marketing, research and development work already mentioned, they also: run 90 demonstration farms; represent and work for various sub sectors within organic from growers to processors; produce the quarterly magazine Organic Farming; and provide numerous specialist resources for business development.

Whilst IOFGA do have a development officer, the magazine Organic Matters and do as much campaigning as they can, in reality certification takes up the vast majority of their time.

However both IOFGA and the Soil Association do have the bigger picture as well as the small individual operator within their self defined remit. So there are sister organisations in essence. Irish organic farmers will surely benefit from the extra resources they now have access to.

IOFGA are here
SA are here

That infamous organic feed story and the soil association: beyond the hype

Ahhh. That was a nice break. It's good to be back in the blogosphere after taking some time away. My first posting of 09 deals with the claims that the UK's Soil Association have asked for the organic feed rules to be relaxed.

This is interesting on a number of levels. Firstly, the story seems to be just plain wrong. See here. Then there is the level of vitriol directed at organics in the many comments that have followed this story around the place. One sloppy piece of journalism in Christmas week and a: the whole media world jumped on it as absolute fact b: many anti-organic ranters and ravers seemed only too happy to fully and completely believe the story and use it as an excuse for a bit of organo-bashing. For a splendid example, see the comments after the overcooked Times article itself.

Its also interesting to see an organic organisation engage in what seems to be kite flying. Are they seeing the levels of public opposition to such a change? Are they scaring cereal producers into lowering their prices? Are they moving away from organic certification and towards food security?

Another issue highlighted by the price of feed is The UKs over exposure to grain for their cattle farming - dairy and beef. Ireland is at a distinct advantage here.

Finally, the fact that non bovines actually have a non-organic feed component is surely an issue. I can't see the consumer ever imagining this to be the case.

Article begins:
It was recently widely reported that the UK�s largest organic certification body, the Soil Association, was asking for the rules regarding organic feed to be relaxed.

This claim was first mooted in the (UK) Times on December 22nd, and widely reported after this. According to Valerie Elliot, the Soil Association has asked Hilary Benn, the Rural Affairs Secretary �for approval to relax the rules for an indefinite period. They want their members to be able to use conventional animal feed instead of organic food concentrate, which costs double�.

High feed prices combined with a retracting market were blamed for causing this request for a rules� relaxation. In this context, it was claimed in the Times that some organic farmers wanted a �holiday� from the standards on feed. They would, however, maintain their other organic practices, could not sell their produce as organic, and could later rejoin the organic sector, according to the report.

In response however, the Soil Association have claimed that the Times� reporter got her facts wrong on the issue.

They find it �disappointing that the Times chose to run an article which suggests that the Soil Association is backing organic farmers by asking for standards to be relaxed. This is not the case at all�

Rather, they claim to be conducting a consultation on the issue: �the proposal being referred to is simply one stage of a consultation process which gives a rationale of why we have an issue that needs attention� they suggest.

While the Times� report seems to have overstated the case, the situation for organic farmers in the UK remains tough at present.

While Irish cattle, sheep and dairy farmers are also under pressure, those I spoke to were not too enamoured with the idea of allowing conventional feed in.

Richard Auler, who runs a mixed enterprise in Tipperary, which includes cattle, felt that a relaxation of the feed rules would be �a very dangerous road to go down�. He claimed that there would be �no advantage to it� and that it would �only confuse customers�.

I also spoke to Fintan Rice, an organic dairy farmer who supplies Glenisk, about the issue.

Fintan suggested that the situation is indeed tough for organic farmers at present, and that he understands why some farmers would ask for a relaxation of the rules.

�The cost of organic cereals is an issue. Our price of milk has dropped. Feed costs up to 600e per tonne, while the price we�re getting looks like being a heck of a lot less than last year� he tells me.

�Margins are very tight at 46c a litre� he continues. Whatever the route, it seems difficult to avoid spending up to 500e per tonne - even when using a partially in-conversion feed.

�When Barley costs 340e per tonne, it then has to be rolled and mixed in the bin. When it�s mixed with soya ends up costing up 500e a tonne�.

Fintan�s cattle consume 5kg of bought-in feed per day, of which 3-4 kg is in-conversion feed.

However, Fintan would not be in favour of a change in the feed rules. Like many Irish organic cattle farmers, �the main feed is grass or silage�. This reduces his exposure to high prices for bought-in feed.

He also points out that the rules were only recently changed to encourage cereal growers to convert part of their holdings to organic. This was done to counteract the shortage of organic feeds available. Changing the feed rules would �weaken the organic cereal sector, and a lot of work was put into getting them over�.

Neither renting suitable land nor growing his own cereals are options for Fintan, though this differs from farmer to farmer.

He remains hopeful that the market will sort itself out: �If the price of milk falls the price of cereal has to fall too. Something will have to give.�

Fintan also points out that �22-23c a litre for conventional milk � that�s not attractive either�.

Pesticides and bees: the smoking gun located?

It is an ongoing story, one that has seen many conspiracies and possible culprits.

However, there has been a development of late, which is interesting from an organic farming and food perspective.

click here for an update on the story of the decline in the bee population worldwide.

Organic cosmetics to be certified by Organic Trust in Ireland

In a market leading move, the Organic Trust recently announced that it will soon be in a position to certify cosmetics and beauty products as organic.

This would make the Organic Trust, along with the UK�s Soil Association, the only certification body in Britain or Ireland with cosmetics and beauty products on their books.

The area of certifying organic cosmetics is perhaps the most contentious of all the possible areas. There are a number of reasons for this. Firstly, and simply, you can�t or at least shouldn�t, eat cosmetics.

But assuming that people want similar standards for cosmetics they put onto their body as for the foods they put into them, the area is still fraught with controversy.

Lovelula.com specialises in on line retailing of natural and certified organic cosmetics and body care products. Lula herself firstly pointed out that that the general labelling rules are weaker for cosmetics than for other products:

�It is currently legal for a product to be labelled organic if this word is part of its brand name even if it contains no organic ingredients whatsoever. Additionally these products can contain any number of chemical ingredients commonly used in conventional cosmetic products�.

Cosmetics often claim to have organic ingredients in them, or to have other, similar standards.

Lula�s company adheres to the BDIH industry standard as a baseline, while also carrying Soil Association approved products. BDIH is a high standard, but it is an internal industry standard with no third party external validation. For this reason, the Soil Association�s certification is considered stronger. It offers both the ingredients list limitations and the external, independent validation of products.

The Soil Association themselves point to some technical limitations in the area:

�Organic beauty products that contain oils and oil-based ingredients such as balms and body butters can be made using 100% organic ingredients and do not require the addition of preservatives. Sometimes they may use a mild antioxidant such as tocopherol or ascorbic acid which are permitted under organic food standards (both the EU regulation and Soil Association standards) and naturally derived.

However, products that contain water, and water and oil based ingredients such as creams, lotions and shampoos need to have some kind of preservative system so that they are safe to use. In addition they may need an emulsifier which mixes together the oil and water ingredients and stops them separating.�

They go on to suggest that organic preservatives are used, and, if none are suitable, then �a preservative that meets strict toxicological and biodegradibility requirements can be used�. The same holds for the emulsifiers.

The main problem, however, is scale and range: very few products are certified as of yet. Companies like Balm Balm, Spiezia and Pai are certified by the Soil Association, but they are conspicuous in their isolation.

In this context, the move by the Organic Trust is very much a leading edge development, putting them to the forefront of the organic certification sector globally.

I asked Colin Keogh, processing inspector with the Organic Trust, about �organic� cosmetics� bad name globally, compared to organic food:

�The Organic Trust places the credibility of the organic sector above all other considerations. In the rush to fill this vacuum for organically certified health and beauty products, we believe that some undeveloped standards have emerged in the world arena. The Organic Trust were adamant that we would not follow suit. Our Standard has emerged from a painstaking examination of many of the comparable organic and natural standards available in the worldwide market, canvassing the opinion of current producers and where necessary commissioning the appropriate experts in the field to ensure we have the most relevant and workable standards that still hold the credibility of being considered �Organic� in the real sense of the word�.

This includes carrying out individual ingredient and process analyses to assess their suitability for inclusion in the Standard.

Colin also suggested that they were still �at the crossing the T�s and dotting the i�s� stage: their stakeholder panel meets in July. Shortly after this, the list of approved ingredients will be made available.

And after this, we should start to see some trustworthy organic cosmetics, produced and certified in Ireland, on our shelves.

oily food and a conference you shouldn't fly to....

Hi everybody, and welcome to the new year.
The Soil Association's january conference is fast approaching, many interesting themes including in particular peak oil.....see here

Speaking of which FEASTA (the foundation for the economics of Sustainability) are highlighting the connections between animals and ozone depletion here.


it may seem like an obvious, 1980s ish argument, but suprizingly enough food isn't really coming into the peak oil and ozone depletion arguments in anything like as comprehensive a way as it should be - hense the aptness of the SA conf

For example, the Food Commission's most recent magazine points out the complete lack of food as a cause of global warming in the Stern report, despite what they claim is food's 25-30% contribution to said global warming.....