Apparently Arthur Harvey (the Maine blueberry farmer and National Organic Program inspector who sued the USDA over its management of the program) is not yet satisfied.

You may recall that in a June 2005 ruling, synthetics were effectively banned from products labeled organic. Congress passed amendments to the Organic Food Products Act in late 2005. Then, the list of allowable synthetics was restored earlier this year, 2006.

Now, Arthur Harvey has again taken legal action. He claims “that the Secretary of Agriculture failed to meet the requirements of the Consent Judgment and Order of the District Court” (according to OTA).

That’s it. That’s all I have. But, if you would like a little light reading, I have plenty of articles to offer.

• “Harvey v. Veneman’s spectre of unintended consequences roils organic waters,” by Dan Sullivan in New Farm (Rodale), March 2005.
• “Women Lead Demand for What’s Really Organic,” by Kristin Bender in Women’s eNews, April 25, 2005.
• Letter “To the OTA and to the Community,” signed by a long list of community members, including OTA members, at National Campaign for Sustainable Agriculture, November 18, 2005.
• “Higher standards: Blueberry farmer Arthur Harvey continues to stir national debate over organic food rules,” by Sean Donahue in Maine Biz, November 2005.
• “Ruling Prompts Controversy: Organic Trade Association proposals opposed by consumer organizations,” by Cissy Bowman in Cooperative Grocer, November-December 2005.
• “So You Want to Sue the USDA?” Audio tape of panel from Acres USA 2005 conference. Panel includes Arthur Harvey, Jim Riddle, Margaret Scoles & Cissy Bowman (moderator) . 120 minutes of fun.
• “Food Fight,” by Jason Mark in Earth Island Journal, Spring 2006.
• “USDA Criticized for Helping “Industrialize” Organic Farming.” Press release from The Cornucopia Institute at Common Dreams, May 10, 2006.

Happy reading until we hear more about the National Organic Program and the tug over standards.

If you read our post last year attempting to explain the he-said-she-said fight over national organic standards, you may be happy to know the matter has now been settled. Or, maybe you won’t be.

This week, the US Department of Agriculture revised the National Organic Program rules to comply with the final judgment and order of Harvey v. Johanns from the U.S. District Court in Maine June 2005.

That is the good news about maintaining the organic status of organics. Hold on for the bad news.

The list of synthetics allowed in products labelled “organic” has been restored. This is what the Organic Trade Association was fighting for all along. The OTA stated this week, “The final rule clarifies that non-organic agricultural materials may be used as ingredients in or on processed products labeled as ‘organic’ only when such organic products are not commercially available.”

There you go. The judgment stands, and so does the list of synthetics. It is difficult to see how this is a win for truly natural “organic” products.

Read what organic blueberry farmer Arthur Harvey himself wrote September 2005 about the threat to organic standards. As always, your interests as organic consumers are better represented by the Organic Consumers Association than by trade organizations. Meet other organic consumers and ask questions on the organic consumers’ forums and blogs.

Several years ago, when these fights over standards were already going on, the farmer who ran my CSA found himself squeezed by new organic regulations because his method of farming with natural compost was ruled out where sludge was ruled in. He said what we need is a new standard with a new word, “Hyperganic.” As corporations rule and brand organic, it makes sense to stay with small local producers like Community Supported Agriculture, Farmers’ Markets, and your local cloth diapermaker.

It’s Consumers vs. Trade this week in congress. The Organic Trade Association is pushing for restoration of National Organic Standards. That sounds reasonable, doesn’t it?

Let’s not stop there, though. In a ruling in June, the U.S. District Court in Maine banned synthetic ingredients in products labeled organic. The regulations (2002) were found to violate the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990 because they granted a blanket exemption to synthetic ingredients when organic ingredients were not “commercially available.” In July of this year, organic certifying agents were notified that current regulations will not be interpreted to grant this exemption.

The Organic Trade Association (OTA) is the industry representative of Heinz, Dole, Kraft, Unilever, and other so-called organic food producers (as well as little organic cloth diaper manufacturers like me, through our sister company Fuzbaby). They seek a restoration of an exemption for synthetic ingredients under National Organic Standards. They had hoped this restoration would take place as a rider on an farm appropriations bill this week.

As one might assume, The Organic Consumers Association (OCA) does not sit back and watch such actions. They call on their 600,000 members to fight.

OTA members like me have received many updates from the organization on this issue, but the Organic Consumers Association are better organized and have a constituency much more willing to call and write the House Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies. After tens of thousands of contacts last week, the Senate Appropriations bill included only a quick compromise , which called for “an evaluation.”

Then she said: OCA Safeguard Organic Standards
Then he said: OTA Questions and Answers, 9/25

Then he said: OTA Setting the Record Straight, 9/26
Then she said: OCA Talking Points, 9/28

Get a basic rundown of the story from Grist Magazine, a source of environmental news & commentary. In “O Brother, Where Artificial Thou? Fight over synthetic ingredients splits organics community,” by Amanda Griscom Little posted today. [OK, let me just say that despite their great content, Grist Magazine’s attempts at snappy titles have always been a huge turn-off. Seriously, no one cares how clever their editor is. Just give us the facts.]

Can the divisions be healed? One organic community leader calls for resolution among the differing opinions. I don’t know about healed, but I see a major struggle between corporate organic and the people who want the word “organic” interpreted to mean the highest level of natural ingredients. This is precisely the fight I watched my beloved CSA (RIP) go through when the regulations stated that they could put sewage-related sludge on their fields but their could not use their own farm’s compost. My farmer suggested a new label for the real natural food: Hyperganic.

While this issue is currently more relevant to food producers, the effects may well spill over into fiber production.

Who knew interpretation of organic regulations could be so exciting?

More organic resources from Firefly Diapers, including “All Organic Is Not Equal.”