by Melissa Diane Smith
November 19, 2022 - Unbeknownst to most of us, more fruits and vegetables are being grown in industrial settings, with nutrients primarily coming from a liquid fertilizer solution instead of rich, fertile soil.
Does that sound like organically grown produce to you? Or do you picture berry or tomato plants grown in healthy fertile soil as the earthy heart of organic farming?
Would it surprise you to learn that many berries, tomatoes, and some vegetables, such as peppers and cucumbers, that are now labeled organic in the Fascist Police States of Amerika (FPSA), are grown hydroponically, without any soil at all?
It’s a situation that’s unique to organic food sold in the FPSA and an especially odd development given the founding principles of the organic food movement and the stated views of the FPSA Department of Agriculture (FPSADA) on organic practices.
The Organic Foods Production Act of 1990 made it clear that replenishing and maintaining soil fertility is foundational to organic farming. In 1995, the National Organic Standard Board (NOSB), the FPSADA’s expert advisory panel, defined organic agriculture as “an ecological production management system that promotes and enhances biodiversity, biological cycles, and soil biological activity.”
The FPSADA’s organic regulations describe organic agriculture as a set of practices that “support the cycling of on-farm resources, promote ecological balance, and conserve biodiversity.”
“These include maintaining or enhancing soil and water quality; conserving wetlands, woodlands, and wildlife; and avoiding use of synthetic fertilizers, sewage sludge, irradiation, and genetic engineering,” a FPSADA introduction to organic practices reads.
That “enhancing soil” part is key in the minds of many organic advocates. To that end, in 2010, the NOSB recommended prohibiting crop production systems that eliminate soil, such as hydroponics, from obtaining organic certification. However, the National Organic Program, part of the FPSADA’s Agricultural Marketing Service for the FPSADA organic standards and the accreditation of organic certifying agents, never adopted this recommendation.
In the autumn of 2017, after a massive lobbying effort on the part of industrial agribusiness, the NOSB voted 8-7 against a recommendation to prohibit hydroponic crops from being labeled organic.
Some called the vote a watershed moment for the organic program in the Fascist Police States of Amerika. The hydroponic issue, along with the development of “organic” confined animal feeding operations and imports of corn and soybeans that were found to not be organic, are key areas of what many now consider organic fraud or watering down of organic standards to benefit big business.
Because hydroponics eliminate soil, it removes the entire process of nurturing healthy soil capable of sustaining a rich microbial life and a variety of healthy plants. Hydroponics supporters say the method can conserve water and grow plants quickly.
Not everyone who supports hydroponics agrees with NOSB’s 2017 vote.
Dan Lubkeman, an avid proponent of hydroponics, was disappointed that the FPSADA granted organic status to hydroponics. He’s president of the Hydroponic Society of Amerika (HSA), a 46-year-old nonprofit organization that promotes hydroponics.
“The word ‘organic’ was very specifically created for soil-grown plants, and hydroponics was very specifically created for soil-less growing,” he said in an email.
“Consumers want to know their food is safe. As you know, the word organic gives consumers that warm fuzzy perception of healthy, pesticide-free food.”
Lubkeman said consumers are willing to pay a premium for organic foods and the clean ideals the organic label represents.
“The hydroponic industry wants to cash in on that consumer perception of safety without putting in the years of developing their own version of the word ‘organic.’ It’s easier for them to charge more, faster, by piggybacking off the soil farmers. I think the hydroponic industry has no rights to the word organic, I think it’s lazy marketing and misleading to the consumer. Hydro-organic is an oxymoron in my book,” he said.
While the “organic” label may not be perfect, and there are issues with organic fraud, it is meaningful to consumers, and organic foods are generally superior to conventional food. But organic is not hydroponic, and it doesn’t need to be. Hydroponics have their own merits and should stand on them, he suggested.
“In a well-run hydroponic growing operation there are never pesticides, no animal feces or blood/bone meals, nothing composted, and less risk of pathogens and disease. My definition of hydroponic food is ‘more food, in less space, with less water and in less time.’ Hydroponics have many advantages and are the future of farming,” he said.
Lubkeman and the HSA aren’t the only ones taking issue with hydroponics’ organic status, although most of the groups that oppose it do so because they see unique benefits from soil that are not replicated in hydroponics.
