U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

66–275 PDF 2011

S. HRG. 111–1027 

THE NATIONAL ORGANIC LAW AT 20: 

SOWING SEEDS FOR A BRIGHT FUTURE 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE, 

NUTRITION, AND FORESTRY 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

SEPTEMBER 15, 2010 

Printed for the use of the 

Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov/ 

COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE, NUTRITION, AND FORESTRY 

BLANCHE L. LINCOLN, Arkansas, Chairman 

PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont 

TOM HARKIN, Iowa 

KENT CONRAD, North Dakota 

MAX BAUCUS, Montana 

DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan 

E. BENJAMIN NELSON, Nebraska 

SHERROD BROWN, Ohio 

ROBERT CASEY, Jr., Pennsylvania 

AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota 

MICHAEL BENNET, Colorado 

KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND, New York 

SAXBY CHAMBLISS, Georgia 

RICHARD G. LUGAR, Indiana 

THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi 

MITCH MCCONNELL, Kentucky 

PAT ROBERTS, Kansas 

MIKE JOHANNS, Nebraska 

CHARLES GRASSLEY, Iowa 

JOHN THUNE, South Dakota 

JOHN CORNYN, Texas 

ROBERT HOLIFIELD, Majority Staff Director 

JESSICA L. WILLIAMS, Chief Clerk 

MARTHA SCOTT POINDEXTER, Minority Staff Director 

ANNE C. HAZLETT, Minority Chief Counsel 

(II) 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

HEARING(S): 

The National Organic Law at 20: Sowing Seeds for a Bright Future ................. 1 

Wednesday, September 15, 2010 

STATEMENTS PRESENTED BY SENATORS 

Leahy, Hon. Patrick J., U.S. Senator from the State of Vermont ....................... 1 

Chambliss, Hon. Saxby, U.S. Senator from the State of Georgia ........................ 3 

Panel I 

Merrigan, Hon. Kathleen, Deputy Secretary, U.S. Department of Agriculture . 5 

Panel II 

Beidler, Regina, Beidler Family Farm, Organic Valley/Cropp Cooperative, 

Board of Directors, NOFA of Vermont, Randolph Center, VT ......................... 16 

Bird, Sarah, Senior Vice President, Marketing, Annie’s Homegrown, and Vice 

President, Organic Trade Association Board of Directors, Napa, CA .............. 21 

Harris, Will, White Oak Pastures, President, Georgia Organics Board of Directors, Bluffton, GA ............................................................................................ 18 

Sligh, Michael, Founding Chairman of USDA National Organics Standards 

Board, on behalf of the National Organic Coalition, Pittsboro, NC ................. 19 

APPENDIX 

PREPARED STATEMENTS: 

Beidler, Regina ................................................................................................. 32 

Bird, Sarah ........................................................................................................ 38 

Harris, Will ....................................................................................................... 49 

Merrigan, Kathleen .......................................................................................... 51 

Sligh, Michael ................................................................................................... 71 

DOCUMENT(S) SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD: 

Sligh, Michael: 

‘‘From The Margins To The Mainstream, Advancing Organic Agriculture 

in the U.S.’’ .................................................................................................... 80 

QUESTION AND ANSWER: 

Chambliss, Hon. Saxby: 

Written questions to Regina Beidler ............................................................... 142 

Written questions to Sarah Bird ..................................................................... 144 

Written questions to Michael Sligh ................................................................. 155 

Gillibrand, Hon. Kirsten: 

Written questions to Kathleen Merrigan ....................................................... 150 

Klobuchar, Hon. Amy: 

Written questions to Kathleen Merrigan ....................................................... 149 

Leahy, Hon. Patrick J.: 

Written questions to Kathleen Merrigan ....................................................... 148 

Beidler, Regina: 

Written response to questions from Hon. Saxby Chambliss ......................... 142 

Bird, Sarah: 

Written response to questions from Hon. Saxby Chambliss ......................... 144 

Page

IV 

Merrigan, Kathleen: 

Written response to questions from Hon. Kirsten Gillibrand ....................... 150 

Written response to questions from Hon. Amy Klobuchar ........................... 149 

Written response to questions from Hon. Patrick J. Leahy .......................... 148 

Sligh, Michael: 

Written response to questions from Hon. Saxby Chambliss ......................... 155 

(1) 

THE NATIONAL ORGANIC LAW AT 20: 

SOWING SEEDS FOR A BRIGHT FUTURE 

Wednesday, September 15, 2010 

UNITED STATES SENATE, COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE, NUTRITION AND FORESTRY

Washington, DC 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:05 a.m., in Room 

328A, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Patrick Leahy, presiding. 

Present: Senators Leahy, Stabenow, and Chambliss. 

STATEMENT OF HON. PATRICK J. LEAHY, U.S. SENATOR FROM 

THE STATE OF VERMONT 

Senator LEAHY. I am delighted to be here today to celebrate the 

upcoming 20th anniversary of the Organic Foods Production Act of 

1990. Of course, I am joined by Senator Chambliss, a longtime 

friend. and just as I am a former chairman of this committee, he 

is a former chairman of this committee. We are being watched by 

former Chairman Talmadge. Chairman Lincoln, I talked with her 

at length about this hearing yesterday, and she has to be in Arkansas on business. But I appreciate her arranging for us to have the 

hearing, and she and I will be talking about the results of it when 

she comes back. This is an area in which she is quite interested. 

We talked about the 20th anniversary of the Organic Foods Production Act. There are people here in the room who were part of 

that achievement. I would note especially Deputy Secretary 

Merrigan. She worked with us when I was chairman. And we 

worked with Ranking Member Lugar, Dick Lugar, to write the 

1990 Farm Bill, which this was a part. At times, we felt a little 

bit like Sisyphus with rolling that rock, but we made it. We had 

a strong bipartisan coalition we put together. 

But, Deputy Secretary, I just do want to acknowledge the tremendous help you gave during that. I have sometimes noted that 

senators are merely constitutional impediments to their staffs who 

do most of the work, and so I appreciate that. 

But we are now looking forward to not only celebrating these 20 

years, where do we go the next 20 years? Prior to the passage of 

the organic farm bill, the industry was growing slowly. We had 

farmers and consumers, retailers facing inconsistent policies and 

inaccurate labeling procedures across the country. And it is hard 

to believe today, but at the time we had 22 different states trying 

to manage and four separate regulations for organic foods. It made 

it very difficult for interstate commerce and very difficult for consumers. 

2 

The passage of OFPA brought much needed order to the industry. It gave consumers the USDA organic label, a label with real 

meaning. The organic law required USDA to develop a minimum 

national organic standard, set us on the course where we are today, 

certified organic farms in all 50 states, nearly 5 million acres of organic crop and pasture land, an industry with sales of more than 

$25 billion and growing. 

I think back then when some people were asking why am I doing 

this organics bill; you might have a handful of farms and it is not 

going to go anywhere. And I told them I had listened very carefully 

to Vermont farmers who came to me and said, ‘‘We are willing to 

meet higher standards and we will do what is right, but give us 

some national standards so we are competing on a level playing 

field. As long as we follow the rules in our state, we want to know 

everybody is following the rules in their state.’’ 

I said at that time that the only way that this industry can grow 

if the standards are met and they are followed and they are enforced. Strong standards do reward farmers who play by the rules. 

They help consumers understand what that label means when they 

buy something that is USDA organic. I mean, the proof is in the 

pudding with a 25-billion-dollar industry that is growing. How 

many industries in America today can say they are growing the 

way this one is growing? But consumer confidence is key to the 

organics industry’s growth. It will be the key in the future. 

So we have come from those early days where everyone thought 

it was just a crunchy granola program. You have heard that expression. You walk in the stores, and organic foods occupy prominent shelf space in the produce and dairy aisles in the most mainstream food retailers, even big-box stores. We see the offerings, organic meats, like the delicious White Oak Pastures grass-fed beef 

and eggs and breads and grains, such as Annie’s Cheddar Bunnies. 

I see we have the Cheddar Bunnies here. Beverages, even peanuts 

increasing with every year. 

I should add, I was pleased to host Secretary Vilsack this past 

February at the Northeast Organic Farming Association of 

Vermont winter meeting in Burlington, Vermont. It is the middle 

of winter, Burlington, Vermont. We are a very small state. He was 

welcomed by more than 1,200 people who packed in to see him. No 

surprise, though, since Vermont leads the country in the number 

of organic farms on a per capita basis. 

But I also recall Secretary Vilsack received an interesting organic product, a six pack of organic certified and Vermont brewed 

pumpkin ale. I did not ask him how he got that on the airplane 

afterwards, actually, nor did they consume it before they got on the 

airplane. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator LEAHY. But today we have more farms and companies 

than ever participating in the organic sector, but we continue to experience occasional shortages of organic products when our farms 

are unable to simply keep up with the consumer demand. I was 

concerned in the past that the Department of Agriculture had not 

kept up with the pace of organic agriculture. 

I am pleased today to see an agency that recognizes and has to 

support a diverse menu of options for all of American agriculture, 

3 

including organic agriculture. That strong support means strong 

standards, and I will look forward to hearing from our witnesses 

today about the ongoing implementation of natural organic standards. 

I am interested in the recent expansion of the national organics 

program at USDA. We can look back at the success of 20 years. I 

want to look forward to the potential success of the next 20 years, 

and I look forward to hearing from all of you about the potential 

challenges you see awaiting this young and growing industry. 

I see the distinguished senator from Michigan here, Senator Stabenow. We certainly have organic farming in her state. But again, 

I want to thank Senator Chambliss for being here, but I especially 

want to thank Chairman Lincoln for letting us have this hearing. 

It may be a small percentage of some of our members of the total 

farmland in the state, but it is growing. It is growing. And when 

we have all this bad news in the economy, it is kind of nice to have 

news about something that is working and growing, putting people 

to work. And I know when I walk in farmers’ markets or stores and 

all, I see people heading to the organic food. 

Senator CHAMBLISS. 

STATEMENT OF HON. SAXBY CHAMBLISS, U.S. SENATOR FROM 

THE STATE OF GEORGIA 

Senator CHAMBLISS. Well, Senator Leahy, thanks very much for 

your kind comments. And you are correct, you and I have been 

great friends, and we have had the common interest of American 

agriculture at heart and have worked very closely together on any 

number of issues here. And your leadership on this issue has particularly been important, and that is why I think it is pretty symbolic and significant that you are here in lieu of the Chairman 

today. And we thank you for taking time. 

I think you and I have talked about this before, but I think this 

committee has more former chairmen serving on it than any other 

committee. I do not know what that says about us, but it is always 

a pleasure to work with you and I appreciate you being here today. 

And as I say, I think it is significant that you are here on the 20th 

anniversary of the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990. Senator 

Leahy has been a dedicated advocate of organic agriculture, was a 

major champion of OFPA’s passage. So, Senator, it is fitting to 

have you have the gavel this morning. 

I would like to also welcome Mr. Will Harris of White Oaks Pastures in Bluffton, Georgia to the hearing today and thank him for 

his time and efforts in providing testimony to the Committee. Will 

is from my part of the state. He is from Early County, which is a 

couple of counties over from my home county of Colquitt County. 

But we are in the heart of production agriculture in our state, and 

I look forward to his testimony as well as the testimony of the 

other witnesses this morning. 

Organic farming has been one of the fastest growing segments of 

the U.S. agriculture in recent years. When Congress passed the Organic Foods Production Act, the U.S. had a million acres of certified 

organic farm land. By the time USDA implemented the national organic standards in 2002, certified organic farmland had doubled 

and then doubled again between 2002 and 2005. In my home state 

4 

of Georgia, the number of total certified organic acres has grown 

from 1,062 in 2006 to 4,341 in 2008. 

The Organic Foods Production Act was enacted to set standards 

for organically produced agricultural products. These standards are 

intended to assure consumers that products marketed as organic 

meet consistent and uniform requirements. OFPA was also enacted 

to facilitate interstate commerce in fresh and processed food that 

is organically produced. 

In addition, the OFPA and regulations under USDA’s national 

organic program require that agricultural products labeled as organic originate from farms or handling operations certified by a 

state or private entity that has been accredited by USDA. Working 

together, these measures ensure consumers that products with organic label meet rigorous standards, standards that organic crops 

are grown without using most conventional pesticides or fertilizers, 

and animals raised on an organic operation are fed with organic 

feed, given access to the outdoors, and are not given antibiotics or 

growth hormones. 

Since the passage of OFPA in 1990, Congress and this committee 

have continued to address issues that are important to producers 

of organic food. The 2008 Farm Bill took several important steps 

to provide additional tools to support organic agriculture, including 

extending the Certification Cost Share Program, establishing that 

producers are eligible for technical assistance under the EQUIP 

Program for converting their farm to organic production and providing funding for research and data collection about the price, production and marketing of major organically produced commodities. 

Establishing a reliable certification system and developing tools 

to assist farmers in their transition to organic production did not 

happen overnight, and I join my colleagues on the Committee in 

recognizing just how much has been accomplished in the past 20 

years. 

Again, I would like to thank all of the witnesses for their willingness to appear before this committee and share their views about 

future opportunities as well as obstacles that face organic agriculture production. 

Thanks very much, Senator. 

Senator LEAHY. Thank you very much, Senator Chambliss. 

Senator Stabenow, did you—I want to say, coming from a large 

agricultural state like Michigan, we think of it as the motor state, 

but it is also a major agriculture. 

Senator STABENOW. That is right. That is right, Mr. Chairman. 

In fact, depending on who you talk to, it is either number one or 

number two. So we have had a pretty good year for production agriculture, knock on wood, in Michigan. So we are looking forward 

to the harvests. 

I just want to take a moment to thank you for your incredible 

leadership and vision in really focusing us on the importance of organic production; and also to Senator Chambliss for your partnership on so many issues and leadership on this committee; and to 

our Chair for allowing us to hold this hearing. And we are very 

grateful for her commitment to agriculture broadly in this country. 

I am anxious, Deputy Secretary, just to hear from you. As the 

author of the Specialty Crops Title in the Farm Bill, where there 

5 

is language that adds to support for organic production, I am anxious to hear from you about how you think things are working and 

what more we can be doing together. It is clearly a growing part 

of our agricultural base. And from a consumer standpoint, you used 

to walk in and see a couple of shelves in the grocery store, and now 

we are seeing larger and larger sections. And I think that just relates to the demand coming from consumers as well. 

So it is important, and we are glad you are here. And thanks, 

Mr. Chairman, for holding the hearing. 

Senator LEAHY. Thank you very, very, much. 

Our first witness is Kathleen Merrigan, who, as I mentioned before, is Deputy Secretary of Agriculture. She has had this long involvement with our national organics program. I was fortunate to 

have her serving on my staff for this committee during the drafting 

of the bill. Then she was administrator of the USDA Agricultural 

Marketing Service from ’99 to 2001, when the implementing of regulation was put in place. She was on the National Organic Standards Board from ’95 to ’99. She has worked on agricultural issues 

for the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 

the Massachusetts State Senate, and the Texas Department of Agriculture. And prior to her appointment as deputy, she taught at 

the Friedman School of Nutrition, Science and Policy at Tufts. And 

now, of course, as Deputy Secretary, she is responsible for a whole 

lot of programs. That is a technical term, ‘‘whole lot of programs.’’ 

[Laughter.] 

Senator LEAHY. So we are glad to have you here. And again, I 

thank Senator Stabenow and Senator Chambliss for taking the 

time to be here. 

Please go ahead. 

STATEMENT OF KATHLEEN MERRIGAN, DEPUTY SECRETARY, 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Ms. MERRIGAN. Thank you very much. Chairman Leahy, Senator 

Chambliss, Senator Stabenow, members of the Committee, it is a 

great honor to appear before you today to reflect on the 20th anniversary of the Organic Foods Production Act and to highlight 

USDA’s current activities in support of organic agriculture. 

But I want to begin by turning back the clock to November 16th, 

1989. On that day, Senator Leahy introduced Senate Bill 1986 at 

the end of the 101st Congress. And in doing so, he laid the groundwork for the 1990 Farm Bill, the organic title within that bill. And 

speaking on the floor, the good senator explained to his colleagues 

the need for the legislation. And I am just going to go back and 

quote you, sir. 

He said, ‘‘Organic certification standards should be national in 

scope, tough and fully enforced. We need a program that distinguishes phony organic food, items with a natural image but uncertain production methods, from the real thing, borne out of ingenious, nonchemical farming. We need a program that promotes this 

industry because the benefits of purchasing organically produced 

food extend beyond the dinner plate to the support of farmers who 

protect the soil and water.’’ 

So as the Farm Bill began to take shape early in 1990 and Senator Leahy introduced a revised organic bill, Senate Bill 2830, 22 

6 

states had state organic programs and standards. And as the 

Chairman said this morning, there was great confusion among consumers and serious problems of interstate commerce. Against this 

backdrop, the Committee acted. And Ranking Member Senator 

Lugar as well as Senators Harkin, Conrad, Baucus, Cochran and 

McConnell joined Chairman Leahy in bipartisan support of the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990. 

In other words, while I am honored by the invitation to reflect 

on the 20th anniversary here today, clearly, there are many people 

in this room who were there then when this historic legislation was 

shaped by this committee and who have for many, many years 

guided policy in this important and growing sector of American agriculture. But my retelling of this time should not ignore the real 

difficulties faced by Congress in achieving consensus on what became the National Organic Program. 

Twenty years ago, not everyone was in agreement on the need 

for national standards or on the wisdom of supporting organic 

farming and handling. On the House side, actually, OFPA was an 

amendment on the floor, and it passed by a vote of 234 to 187, and 

it was one of only six recorded votes taken during the House Farm 

Bill deliberations. 

But in the end, Congress authorized the program that is essentially market driven. I want to make this point and stress this 

point. The various rationales, economic improvement, environmental benefits, consumer protection, have all been codified in a 

way that seeks to allow expression of these values through consumer choice. The federal rule is primarily that of assuring consensus on a meaningful standard, enforcing a level playing field, 

providing a fair share of government resources, and then letting 

the marketplace drive the scope of change and growth. This is the 

essence of OFPA and other related USDA activities in support of 

organic farmers and handlers. 

As you know, implementation of the statute was daunting. No 

other agricultural standard had ever attempted to establish a process that would be applied to every type of production in every region of the country and every scale of operation. Let me just say 

it took some time. 

A very important aspect of the legislation is the special rule that 

is created for the National Organic Standards Board. The statute 

embraced and elevated the concept of public-private partnership. 

The NOSB was carefully chartered by Congress to facilitate both 

the valid consensus among diverse stakeholders on the numerous 

questions of interpretation, as well as provide a special gatekeeper 

role in respect to substances that are put on the national list that 

are used in organic production and processing. This bedrock principle of public-private partnership was also embodied by having 

private and state certifying agents maintain the role of inspectors 

with the USDA accrediting this largely private sector endeavor. 

The actual adoption of regulations implementing OFPA was itself 

a history-making process. The first proposed rule issued in 1997 

generated 275,603 public comments, shattering the record for any 

USDA proposed rule before that and at the time was only second 

in the federal government to a rule that had been put out by FDA 

7 

on tobacco. The second proposed organic rule brought in merely 

40,774 comments. 

So clearly, this demonstrated the intense public interest in this 

area of federal policy and established the expectation that everything we do in this space involves active public participation and 

transparency. 

Once the final rule became effective in 2002, new challenges had 

to be wrestled. A series of audits and reports has provided ample 

and explicit critique, and I believe this administration has tackled 

these issues head-on. 

Let me assure you that USDA is committed to the integrity of 

the organic label. Several key actions were taken very early on in 

this administration. 

First, the National Organic Program was elevated to an independent program within the Ag Marketing Service, and the NOP 

leadership position was elevated to the senior executive service. We 

hired Miles McEvoy, who joins me here this morning right behind 

me, who led the Washington State Department of Agriculture organic food program for 20 years and was among the experts tapped 

by this committee years ago when we formulated the law. 

Second, we took steps to meet the long overdue statutory requirement for peer review. The NOP is undergoing an assessment process with the National Institute of Standards and Technology. 

In addition, USDA’s Office of Inspector General announced in 

March this year their findings in the audit that they conducted on 

the NOP. They came up with 14 recommendations that provided 

valuable information, highlighted the necessity for reforms within 

the program, and we are in the process of implementing those. We 

will conclude with all of our work by the end of this year. 

Secretary Vilsack announced that this is the age of enforcement, 

that the rules are now well-known, and we need to act more forcefully and in a more timely manner when we have issues of concern 

in terms of people following the rules. Already this year, the National Organic Program has issued six civil penalties, more than all 

of the civil penalties issues during the first seven years of the program. 

Congress, of course, has played a most crucial role in enhancing 

the National Organic Program by increasing funding for the program. During early implementation of the rule from 2002 to 2007, 

appropriations never exceeded $2 million a year. But for Fiscal 

Year 2009, Congress appropriated $3.87 million for the NOP and 

6.97 million for Fiscal Year 2010. So we are building a more robust 

program and increasing our staffing. 

Now, I would like to step back and say let’s look beyond the National Organic Program at USDA-wide organic activities. When the 

final rule was published in December of 2000, then Secretary 

Glickman said that organic farmers need more than regulation, 

more than the National Organic Program, and we discussed a series of initiatives to pursue. 

Three months ago, Mark Lipson, who is also with me here today, 

left his organic farm to join the staff of the Marketing and Regulatory Program mission area to help coordinate USDA-wide organic 

activities. Mark is another Organic Foods Production Act old-timer, 

as he was the farmer who first came to the Senate Agriculture 

8 

Committee 21 years ago and convinced us that national legislation 

was necessary. Mark is assisted by an interagency group of staff 

who are discussing ways to better integrate organic needs throughout the programs of the Department. 

The 2008 Farm Bill included a fivefold increase in mandatory 

funding. Most of it is for Organic Research Program and the Cost 

Share Assistance Program. We have also moved forward on other 

2008 Farm Bill initiatives, crop insurance, Conservation Stewardship Program, the EQUIP Program, NASS surveys, and the collection of market news reports. These initiatives are implemented, 

significant in making a difference for the industry. 

So in the end, where do we stand today? In 1990, organic was 

an exotic item in the average grocery store. The Committee report 

on Senate Bill 2830 noted, ‘‘Consumers find little to no organic food 

in the major shops around the country.’’ 

Times certainly have changed. For 2010, retail sales of organic 

food are forecasted to be approximate—I am going to up your number, Senator Leahy, up to $27 billion, we hope, this year. Twothirds of U.S. consumers buy organic foods at least occasionally, 

and 28 percent buy products weekly. Surveys show that consumers 

of organic food are diverse in income level and in ethnicity, race. 

Nearly 90 percent of all food retail outlets stock organically produced items from the national warehouse chains to your local convenience stores. Underpinning this growth are the national standards established by Congress, the USDA seal and the hard work 

of many people to ensure the integrity of the organic label. 

Let me conclude by addressing what may be a question on people’s minds. Are we overemphasizing organic? While my testimony 

here today documents an earnest and comprehensive effort underway at USDA to assist the organic sector, I must note that it is 

only a small portion of USDA’s portfolio of work. Estimates are 

that at retail market, organic is now about 4 percent of market 

share. 

To benchmark where we are in our USDA effort, I looked closely 

this week at our research expenditures. Perhaps I did so mindful 

that in 1997 a critique of USDA’s research programs was issued by 

the Organic Farming Research Foundation, and they found at that 

time that USDA was spending less than one-tenth of 1 percent of 

their research dollars on organic. 

During the last 10 years, from 2001 to 2010, our current analysis 

shows that USDA’s research investment in organic averaged about 

1.5 percent of all research expenditures. This fiscal year, we will 

have spent an all-time high of 2.6 percent of our research dollars 

on organic. Are we investing consistent with market share? The answer is no. 

I believe we have lived up to Chairman Leahy’s charge upon reflection going back to those days, the charge that he issued to the 

Congress. We have national standards that are tough, and we are 

increasing oversight and enforcement. We are integrating organic 

throughout USDA to, as he said, promote the industry and support 

farmers. 

In closing, I want to thank the Chairman and the Committee for 

all you have done to assist this vibrant and growing sector of 

American agriculture. Thank you. 

9 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Merrigan can be found on page 

51 in the appendix.] 

Senator LEAHY. Thank you very much, Madam Secretary. And I 

would just ask a couple questions and then go to the others because I know we have a number of witnesses here. 

I find that I am seeing in stores and elsewhere, more products 

are labeled ‘‘natural.’’ It does not say ‘‘organic.’’ It just says natural, 

and a lot of—millions of dollars are being spent to advertise it. It 

reminds me of where we were 20 years ago when people said organic and nobody knew what it meant. 

I am curious about what you think of this new natural label on 

products. Does it cut into sale of organics and is there any real definition of it? The natural label actually today comes under the purview of the FDA, and they do not define the word. 

I was reminded of this recently when the Vermont agriculture 

secretary, Secretary Allbee, complained about a company that is 

trying to market its syrup product as all natural, something that 

is sacrilegious in Vermont. Even though it contained food coloring, 

it was actually a blend of sugar and thickening agents such as xanthan gum. I cannot imagine it tastes anything like real maple 

syrup. 

But, I mean, do we need to—we did an organic label. Do we need 

to do some standard for natural, or is this just a way that a lot 

of companies can try to get into this burgeoning market without 

having to do any of the work that organic farmers do? 

Ms. MERRIGAN. That is a big question, Senator. 

Senator LEAHY. I know, but it is going to be a major issue in 

coming years. 

Ms. MERRIGAN. Absolutely. Well, when I look back in history, one 

of the things that I recall when we were developing the legislation, 

some of the people at the table were in the natural livestock market and were very frustrated because they felt that the natural 

label at that time was becoming somewhat meaningless in terms 

of what they wanted to do in the market and were really seeking 

an organic claim because of that. 

We do have a natural responsibility around natural label at 

USDA through the Food Safety Inspection Service. And we recently 

put out a year ago an ANPR, advanced notice of proposed rulemaking, on the meaning of the natural label, trying to gain more 

information about how we could better serve the industry and consumers in making that a meaningful label claim. And so that is 

work that is ongoing at the Department. 

In terms of FDA’s responsibilities here, of course, that is everything else besides the FSIS turf. That is a big, big part of your supermarket that uses the term natural. And I know when we did 

the final rule for the Organic Foods Production Act, one of issues 

that I had was what do you do when you have a company that has 

organic in their name, the Organic Maple Syrup Company, and if 

it is not really organic, what do you do? And at the time, the Federal Trade Commission was telling me that those people would 

have to be grandfathered in because you cannot just completely 

decimate a company by making them change their whole name. 

I do not know if FDA would confront similar battles if they wanted to try to—— 

10 

Senator LEAHY. If they do not, then do we pass legislation that 

defines it? 

Ms. MERRIGAN. I think it might take legislation. I do not know 

their authorities as well as I do—but I think that would be a tough 

one for them to do just with current authority. 

Senator LEAHY. I was glad to hear what you said about what 

USDA has been doing since the 2008 Farm Bill in the last year to 

ensure that organics are not housed at AMS or in the National 

Organics Program but placed within all the agencies that—the Department of Agriculture. 

I know over the last two years in Vermont, the new organic initiative within EQUIP, which helps farmers install products as necessary to maintain or obtain organic certification, has awarded 35 

contracts around our state, and that has been very helpful. 

What is the Department doing to integrate organics further 

among the different agencies and what are some of the steps you 

see coming up? 

Ms. MERRIGAN. Well, we are asking every agency to sit around 

the table and figure out how organic fits into their mandate of 

work. Even in those programs where there is a specific mandate for 

us to take on organic, as in the EQUIP program, as you pointed 

out, we still have a lot of work to do in terms of training our staff 

in understanding what organic producers confront and doing the 

outreach that we need to do to the communities of interest to let 

them know that these programs are available for their use. So in 

the Fiscal Year ’09, we had spent about $36 million in the EQUIP 

program on organic practices, and in fiscal year ’10, we expect that 

will be somewhat less, probably in the range of $26 million. But 

that is, to me, an indication that we need to get the word out more. 

We need to work with various interest groups who work closely 

with organic farmers—— 

Senator LEAHY. Yes, well, let us work with you to get that word 

out because I have seen the success of the program, and it is important. 

Before my time runs out, last summer the U.S. and Canada announced an historic agreement on organic equivalency standards. 

Now, that vastly expanded organic trade opportunities for American farmers. Now, the European Union is the largest consumer 

market for organic products. 

When are we going to have a similar equivalency agreement with 

the EU? If that means we open our doors to organic products from 

the EU, how do we ensure that we do not get hit with substandard 

imports? 

Ms. MERRIGAN. We are in the process of discussions with the EU. 

They are recent. They are going to come to this country soon to 

have meetings with us. It is going to take some time. There is some 

significant differences between their regulation and our standards. 

For example, they allow use of antibiotics, and we do not. 

So this is going to take some time as the Canada agreement did. 

We were in discussion for at least a couple years before that 

equivalency agreement was developed. But we believe that this 

represents a great market opportunity for our farmers and ranchers, and so we want to pursue this equivalency discussion. They 

are very earnest as well. 

11 

One of the things that we are also working on is with trying to 

develop the codes that are necessary so we have a better understanding of what exports are—what is happening in the export 

market. And we have staff in our Foreign Ag Service working on 

that now. 

Senator LEAHY. Well, I want our farmers to be able to export, of 

course. I mean, this is good for our country and our economy. I just 

do not want them to say that the downside has to be face a flood 

of imports that do not meet the standards that we have to meet. 

We saw this with toys from China and a lot of other things. 

Senator CHAMBLISS. Senator CHAMBLISS. Thanks, Senator Leahy. 

Secretary Merrigan, you have placed an emphasis on helping 

producers supply local markets and developing regional food hubs. 

One way to help these producers is to avoid stifling innovation 

through over-regulation. On our second panel, we are going to hear 

from one of my constituents who has embraced regional foods by 

building his own federally-inspected packing plant to process his 

beef. 

Recently, the Grain Inspection Packers and Stockyards Administration issued a proposed rule to regulate how packers buy and sell 

their livestock. Given the vague language in that proposed rule and 

the very brief economic analysis that accompanied it, is USDA taking steps to analyze the regulatory consequences for small producers and co-ops who vertically integrate their operations? 

Ms. MERRIGAN. Senator, that proposed rule, I am not sure if we 

are going to get as many comments as we got in that 265,603 in 

the first proposed rule on organic. But clearly, it has enlivened the 

countryside. People are really reading it. They are providing comments to us. Because of all the interest, we have extended the comment period to November 22nd. And so we will wait until we get 

the full record in of people’s input to act, of course. But I want to 

assure you that we will be very cognizant of the concerns of small 

and mid-size producers as we move forward. 

Senator CHAMBLISS. Well, I would just say that this is really a 

critical proposal that is coming out of GIPSA in that I am not sure 

we have ever seen anything like this in American agriculture before. We have had issues with vertical integration, and we will always have issues with vertical integration. But if you have got 

somebody that is making the investment and putting the time and 

work into producing a better product and they are not going to be 

able to get compensated for that, then that type of regulation is 

going to stifle innovation and is not going to be helpful. So I hope 

as we go through that discussion on that proposed regulation—and 

while you may not have as many as you had under the organic proposal 20 years ago, let me tell you, it is just as emotional, I promise 

you, because I have heard from them, as has everybody else on this 

committee. 

The Department released the 2008 Organic Survey earlier this 

year. By reviewing that document, we are able to gain a better understanding regarding the size and scope of the organic industry. 

In reviewing the tables, it is interesting to note that 15 percent of 

all organic farms, those with sales higher than $250,000, are responsible for 82 percent of all sales. And the majority of farms, 

12 

those with sales less than $50,000 annually, represent only 2 percent of all sales. A similar statistic for all farms in the 2007 census 

would be that 10 percent of all farms represent 85 percent of sales. 

It would seem that organic agriculture utilizes the same advantages of scale and concentration as we see in the rest of U.S. agriculture. What is your view on this? Do you see concentration and 

future consolidation in the organic industry to be as much of a 

threat to this sector as the Department views trends in the livestock or seed industries? 

Ms. MERRIGAN. Absolutely, we have seen consolidation in the organic marketplace, and that is of concern to a number of players. 

We want that marketplace to be competitive, and we want there 

to be opportunities for farmers and ranchers in all 50 states of all 

various sizes. So we will keep a very close eye on that. 

Let me say that I think that this market continues to grow even 

in this economic downturn. We may not be in double digit growth 

every year. We are more at the 17, 15 to 17 percent market, but 

it is still growing. And what we also see from that NASS survey 

is that while the farmers are having higher costs of production, 

they are also getting a higher net at the end of the day. And that 

is not relative. That is whether you are a big guy or a little guy 

or a middle-sized guy; that people are able, through those premiums and through their production practices, able to make a livelihood out of organic. I think that is good news, and I think that 

will continue. 

Senator CHAMBLISS. Thank you. 

Senator LEAHY. Thank you very much, Senator Chambliss. 

Senator STABENOW. Senator STABENOW. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Welcome again, Deputy Secretary. We are glad to have you here 

and wanted to turn to food safety since we have a very important 

bipartisan effort. And a lot of wonderful work that has been done 

in the Senate, and we intend at some point to be able to get this 

all the way to the finish line. But part of this legislation that has 

been brought to the floor includes a bill of mine on technical assistance for small growers, producers, wholesalers and so on. It is 

called Growing Safe Food Act, and I am very appreciative that 

Chairman Harkin and Ranking Member Enzi and Senator Durbin 

and others have been willing to put this in the bill. 

The FDA is the lead agency to oversee and regulate the safety 

of fruits and vegetables under this legislation, but the USDA has 

a very important role to play in this. And I know that as we have 

been very involved in organics, as we are talking about today, 

given the USDA’s leadership on good agricultural practices and 

good handling practices, what continued role do you think or expanded role should USDA be playing to ensure on-farm food safety? 

And could you talk about training and technical assistance that can 

improve food safety for organic producers and any other ways that 

the USDA and FDA can be working together to ensure the safety 

of organic fruits and vegetables? 

Ms. MERRIGAN. Well, we certainly look forward to the Congress 

completing work on food safety legislation, a high priority for President Obama, a high priority for Secretary Vilsack as he is a member of the Food Safety Working Group. 

13 

There has been a lot of exchange of information of late between 

FDA and USDA. We are not the primary focus of the legislation, 

but we have a lot of expertise to lend to USDA. And for a matter 

of fact, we lent them—we detailed one of our top produce knowledgeable people from the Ag Marketing Service full-time to FDA to 

help them through their hearing process to better understand how 

the industry works, what the concerns are out there. 

We have also had a number of meetings talking about wildlife 

and different kinds of farms, conservation benefits, how does that 

fit into their thinking about what constitutes a safe food system. 

I think that is ongoing work, and we hope that it will be fruitful. 

There are a lot of different gap programs around, as you likely 

know. And one thing that we have been doing is talking with our 

colleagues at industry, like United Fresh, to figure out if we can 

help producers by having some more standardization of gap so that 

there will not be a lot of confusion, and this gap is better than that 

gap, and trying to lend our expertise in what would make a very 

strong system. We have a number of efforts to do training and outreach to the farming community, but again, a lot of it is we are 

dressed up and ready for the party and waiting for that legislation 

to pass. 

Senator STABENOW. Yes. Well, we are as well, so we are very 

hopeful that we are going to see that happen very soon. 

Let me talk about crop insurance for a moment. It is very important for all of our growers in terms of risk management strategy. 

And I am pleased to see the Department made progress recently 

in this regard by offering price selections for four crops and by 

eliminating the 5 percent surcharge with respect to certain tree 

crops, which is critical for us in terms of ensuring suitable risk 

management products for organic growers. 

Could you describe the actions that the Department will take to 

build on these first steps and continue to expand crop insurance offerings for organic farmers? 

Ms. MERRIGAN. Well, thanks for the recognition of the Risk Management Agency’s efforts in this regard. We do have some crop insurance tools, some risk management tools out in the street now 

for the 2011 crop, for cotton, corn, soybeans, processing tomatoes, 

eliminated the surcharge, as you said, on 10 different crops. That 

is good news. 

Those were the areas where we had sufficient data that allowed 

us to develop those instruments. The challenge ahead is to develop 

more data so that we can do that for a larger expanse of what is 

out there in the organic marketplace. We are working with the Ag 

Marketing Service, Economic Research Service, as well as Risk 

Management Agency and some outside contractors to develop the 

kind of data that we need. 

We also want to learn from the experience of offering these tools 

in the 2011 crop year and see how they work. I do not want to put 

instruments out there that fail. We are proceeding with caution 

and with great optimism. 

Senator STABENOW. Thank you very much. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator LEAHY. Thank you. 

14 

Secretary Merrigan, it has been great to have you here. I am 

going to submit, for the record, a question, please look at carefully, 

on the best way USDA can enforce the certification standards. I 

know one of the witnesses coming up, Mr. Harris, talks about those 

who cut corners and flat out cheat, and I share that concern. In a 

different life, I could lock people up who did that, but I just want 

to know what you would recommend, so please look at that carefully. 

[The information can be found on page 148 in the appendix.] 

Ms. MERRIGAN. Absolutely. 

Senator LEAHY. Thank you. It is so good to have you here. It 

feels like old times having you here in this committee. Thank you 

very, very much. 

Ms. MERRIGAN. Thank you, sir. Thank you. 

[Pause.] 

Senator LEAHY. First, I would like to welcome Ms. Regina 

Beidler of Randolph Center, Vermont. I was in Randolph a couple 

weeks ago for an event. I love the place. I love the town. She is 

an organic dairy farmer with Organic Valley. Regina and her husband Brent got their start farming with my friend Beth Kennett 

at Liberty Hill Farm in Rochester, Vermont, another very pretty 

town. I helped get them started. We got you your first farm job, 

your first heifers. 

Ms. BEIDLER. They were one of the important people who got us 

to where we are now, part of the journey there. 

Senator LEAHY. And if you ask anybody who knows, they will tell 

you that Brent and Regina are passionate about farming and building a community. All their work, both on and off the farm, is directed to forge connections between the people, the food and the 

land. As a native Vermonter, that means a lot to me. 

It is clear in her role as the coordinator of the Farm Ambassador 

Program with Organic Valley and serving on the board of directors 

for the Northeast Organic Farming Association of Vermont, I think 

their farm offers not only a model for the future of farming in 

Vermont but I think in many other parts of the country. 

I know with Mr. Harris, I have heard nice things about you from 

your distinguished senator, Senator Chambliss. 

Saxby, could you do the honors, please? 

Senator CHAMBLISS. Well, thank you, Senator Leahy. 

I would like to welcome Mr. Will Harris of Bluffton, Georgia to 

the Committee. As I said earlier, his home county of Early County 

is just a couple counties away from mine, right in the heart of agricultural country there in our state. Mr. Harris is fourth generation 

cattleman, runs the same farm his great-grandfather started in 

1866, and if you will think about that date, that was a very difficult time in the economic history of our part of the country. 

White Oak Pastures is a 1,000 acre cattle ranch in southwest 

Georgia. Mr. Harris earned a degree in animal science from the 

University of Georgia’s College of Agriculture in 1976 and returned 

to the farm after graduation. It is interesting that in the mid ’90s 

Mr. Harris began switching his cattle from their traditional grain 

diet to 100 percent forage diet. In addition to embracing an organic 

operation, Mr. Harris also built a processing facility on his farm 

that is USDA approved, and that is one of the few on-farm facilities 

15 

in the country, I believe. His story about converting his cattle operation from a traditional model is a compelling one, and I know my 

colleagues will be interested and will benefit from that testimony. 

Like thousands of farmers and ranchers across the country, Mr. 

Harris wants to maintain a thriving agricultural operation that 

will be attractive to his children so they will continue the family 

business. He has three daughters that are involved in White Oak 

Pastures, and they have proven that their operation can be successful not just for the family but also for the local economy, as they 

are one of the largest privately-owned operations in Early County. 

Mr. Harris also serves as president of the Board of Directors of 

Georgia Organics, and again, I appreciate you being here to testify 

today. 

Senator LEAHY. Thank you very much. 

The next witness is Michael Sligh. 

Did I pronounce that correctly, sir? 

Mr. SLIGH. Yes. 

Senator LEAHY. He is a founding chair of the National Organics 

Standards Board. He is a founding member of the National Organic 

Coalition. He has a lifelong interest in sustainable farming. He 

grew up on a ranch in West Texas. And I assume you saw some 

of the challenges that farmers faced at that time. He has more 

than 30 years experience in agriculture practice and policy analysis. He worked to support farmers in organic agriculture. He lives 

and works and farms in North Carolina. 

The final witness will be Sarah Bird. Ms. Bird is the senior vice 

president of marketing for Annie’s, where she manages all marketing initiatives for the company’s brands. I just want you to 

know the staff made darn sure it is here. She manages all marketing initiatives for the company’s brands, Annie’s Homegrown, 

Annie’s Naturals. Before working at Annie’s, she worked for diverse food companies such as Frito Lay, Nestle and PowerBar; has 

been named as one of Ad Age’s Top 50 marketers. 

She serves on the Organic Trade Association board of directors 

as vice chairman. The Organic Trade Association, of course, is the 

trade association for organic industry in North America. 

I was pleased to help the Organic Trade Association announce 

just last week their new headquarters in Brattleboro, Vermont. 

And I was very pleased, one, to see Vermont welcome them, but I 

was very pleased to have them there because I have worked over 

the years with the Organic Trade Association and watched what 

they have promoted, now both in the United States and Canada. 

So they will be a welcomed neighbor in our state. 

So, Ms. Beidler, can you please go ahead? When did you come 

down? 

Ms. BEIDLER. I arrived yesterday. 

Senator LEAHY. Yesterday, okay. I was going to say I hope you 

were not on that 6:00 a.m. flight that I sometimes take to come 

back here from Burlington. And I swear every time I do I will not 

do that, until I do it the next time. 

Ms. Beidler, go ahead, please. 

16 

STATEMENT OF REGINA BEIDLER, ORGANIC VALLEY/CROPP 

COOPERATIVE, BOARD OF DIRECTORS, NOFA OF VERMONT 

Ms. BEIDLER. Thank you. Thanks for your kind words as well 

and for this opportunity, Senator Leahy, to be a part of this conversation today. 

My husband Brent and I own and operate a 145-acre organic 

dairy farm in Randolph Center, Vermont. We currently milk 30 to 

35 cows and are member-owners of Organic Valley. Our farm also 

produces a small acreage of grains, which we grow for local human 

consumption. 

Although we are often classified as first generation farmers, we 

like to say that farming skipped a generation in our family since 

both of us had grandparents who farmed and the experience of 

spending time with them as children influenced our own decision 

to enter farming. 

Brent’s grandparents owned a small dairy farm in Pennsylvania 

in which they raised 13 children. As a child, Brent spent many 

summer weeks on the farm, riding tractors, following family members through milking and chores, and running down the stairs 

ahead of his teenage uncles early in the morning. All of this caused 

his grandfather to exclaim, ‘‘Now there is a boy that can farm. He 

can get up in the morning.’’ 

The seed was planted with Brent, and 12 years ago after pursuing schooling, overseas volunteer work, and working for other 

farmers, our dream of having our own farm was realized. 

Our decision to pursue organic farming was influenced by several 

factors. During Brent’s college years, his youngest uncle had taken 

over the family farm. He was well respected in his area with a registered herd of high-producing cows that were making record milk 

production in his region. Despite this, the farm was losing money. 

The cows were not as healthy as Brent’s uncle would have liked, 

and the spring that provided water for the farm was contaminated 

by nitrates from chemical fertilizers used by several farms that 

surrounded the spring. 

Brent’s uncle completely changed his production practices, shifting to an emphasis on rotational grazing, discontinuance of use of 

chemical fertilizers, and adoption of organic practices even before 

an organic marketplace existed. The results were clear; improved 

soils, healthier animals, and, over time, a spring that was able to 

purify itself. Brent was able to watch this change firsthand and 

saw the benefits to farm, family and animals. 

Another influential person was Dr. Bill Murphy, who was a professor at the University of Vermont, and introduced many farms in 

our state to the practice of rotational grazing. Dr. Murphy and his 

team traveled the state setting up grazing systems on farms and 

documenting the results in practical terms that were helpful to 

farmers. Although rotational grazing is utilized by a wide variety 

of farms, it brought many people down the road towards organic 

production. 

On many farms, including ours, rotational grazing is the foundation of a healthy organic system. There are substantial benefits to 

rotational grazing; access to the highest quality forage, exercise 

and socialization time for the cows, decreased or eliminated grain 

feeding due to the high nutritional content of pasture, and a deVerDate Nov 24 2008 04:28 Jul 28, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\DOCS\66275.TXT MICHA
17 

crease of on-farm fossil fuel use as cows harvest their own feed and 

deposit their own manure during the six months of the grazing season. 

When Brent and I were approaching the end of our transition to 

organic production in 2000, we began to look at our options for an 

organic milk market. Organic Valley came to Vermont at that time 

looking to establish a pool of farmer-owners in the state. We heard 

one message quite clearly. Organic Valley was started by seven 

farmers who wanted control over the sale and marketing of their 

milk. Over 20 years later, the primary philosophy that continues 

to undergird the cooperative is that farmers are paid a fair and 

sustained pay price. We are allowed to stay at a farm size that 

works well for our family and farm while having the advantage of 

the collective marketing power of many farms working together. 

Since we joined Organic Valley 10 years ago, we have seen the cooperative grow from about 300 family farms nationally to over 

1,600 farms today with sales of $622 million. 

In my full testimony, I make a number of observations and comments about the opportunities and challenges I see for organic 

farming looking into the future and in which I would ask for your 

consideration and assistance. Briefly, those are a thanks to all of 

you on this committee to working with the USDA on the strict access to pasture rule that is now in place. As Senator Leahy mentioned, organic farmers are happy for strict regulation that reassures the consumer that food they are purchasing is produced in 

the way they expect. 

Genetically modified alfalfa is a concern to organic farmers. We 

count on perennial crops as a key tool in our production and crop 

rotations. Introduction of GMO perennial crops will negatively impact any farmer, conventional or organic, who chooses not to use 

GMO seed. 

More support for organic research is essential moving forward, 

and I think that has been noted in some of the comments already 

today. 

Finally, technical assistance and certification reimbursement programs are important tools to bring new farmers to the growing 

field of organics and encouraging them to continue. 

It has been our pleasure as a family to be part of the organic 

community that marries our philosophical beliefs with the ability 

to farm profitably. Earning our livelihood through farming, in a 

way that is beneficial to water, animals and soil, while at the same 

time meeting our family’s needs, allows us dignity and the enjoyment of farming to rest in our daily experience. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Beidler can be found on page 32 

in the appendix.] 

Senator LEAHY. Thank you. And your full statement, which I 

read, was very complete, will be made part of the record, along 

with the attachments to it. 

I loved what you said about also your philosophical part. I know 

Marcelle and I go, usually in the summer in our home, to different 

farmers’ market on the weekend. Now, we are trailed by eager 

grandchildren. And talking to the farmers, I hear that over and 

over again. 

18 

But let’s go on. I am going to finish everybody’s testimonies, and 

then we can ask questions. 

Mr. Harris, of course, you have been introduced by Senator 

Chambliss. Please go ahead, sir. 

STATEMENT OF WILL HARRIS, WHITE OAK PASTURES, 

PRESIDENT, GEORGIA ORGANICS BOARD OF DIRECTORS 

Mr. HARRIS. I am from Georgia, Mr. Leahy. I do not have many 

words to say to you. It might take me a little bit longer. If you feel 

the need to interpret, please feel free to do so. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. HARRIS. I am very grateful and humbled to have been asked 

by Senator Chambliss to address you today and share my views on 

the state of the National Organics Program. Thank you, sir. 

I would also like to thank each of you and your congressional colleagues for creating, supporting and working to refine this program. 

White Oak Pastures is my farm, and it is the largest USDA-certified organic farm in the state of Georgia. My family has raised 

cattle on the same farm since 1866, and my daughter is the fifth 

generation of our family to be employed on our farm. We raise beef 

as certified grass-fed, certified humane, and animal welfare approved. We also raise sheep, turkeys and chickens. Our beef is sold 

by Whole Foods Markets from Miami, Florida to Princeton, New 

Jersey. 

We have constructed our own USDA-approved beef abattoir on 

our farm. It is a zero-waste facility, and 40 percent of its energy 

needs are supplied by solar panels. It is one of a very few such onfarm facilities in the country. We are about to begin construction 

of our own farm poultry processing plant that we hope will also 

qualify for a USDA certificate of inspection as well. 

I am proud to say that my farm is one of the largest privatelyowned employers in Early County with an annual payroll of over 

a million dollars. This demonstrates that organic farming is more 

than just a hobby. We are an industry that can provide hundreds 

of thousands of jobs across the country. These organic farms stimulate the economies in rural areas where help is so desperately 

needed. I am proud to say that my ranch is a testament to that 

a fact. 

When I am not on my farm, it is my honor to serve as the president of the board of directors of Georgia Organics. It is in that capacity that I am going to get now to the brass tacks for the discussion about the pros and cons of the National Organic Program and 

how it functions today. 

There is no doubt that the program has been vital in bringing 

sustainability and improved land stewardship to the American agricultural industry. The National Organic Program has significantly improved production practices that protect our soil, air and 

water quality. We can only speculate how many millions of tons of 

carcinogenic pesticides have not been used because of this program 

or how many tons of greenhouse gases have been eliminated. 

The program provides consistent and strong marketing opportunities for farmers across the country. It offers price premiums in 

the marketplace for producers who raise products that have been 

19 

certified organic. The program gives consumers the choice of eliminating toxins, additives, GMOs, artificial hormones and antibiotics 

from their diet. 

Georgia Organics appreciates this opportunity to share what we 

would consider to be room for improvement. I suspect that you 

have heard some of these before. We would like to see the program 

more strongly enforce its certification standards and employ punitive measures for producers who cut corners or flat out cheat. We 

worry that the lack of oversight over time may weaken public trust, 

undermining the efforts of those of us who are committed to eliminating the use of synthetic fertilizers, chemicals, hormones and 

antibiotics for both environmental and public health. We would 

also like to see the program continue and expand its Cost Share 

Program with state governments to offset certification cost, particularly for first-time applicants. 

You should also know that the National Organic Program has 

significant partners across the country that support its mission of 

perpetuating sustainable food and farms. At Georgia Organics, we 

are committed to providing regular educational services on organic 

production and certification. We shall continue to partner with researchers, educators and extension agents to bolster their commitment and resources directed at producers interested in organic production and certification. We shall continue to promote, recognize 

and market certified organic producers in Georgia Organics’ local 

food guide. 

Thank you again for giving me this opportunity, and I will look 

forward to answering any questions that you may have. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Harris can be found on page 49 

in the appendix.] 

Senator LEAHY. Well, thank you, Mr. Harris. And I should tell 

you, having served on this committee with two different chairmen, 

Senator Chambliss and Senator Talmadge, I recognize a Georgia 

accent, but I also appreciate your taking the time to be here. 

Our next witness is Michael Sligh. Would you please go ahead, 

sir? 

STATEMENT OF MICHAEL SLIGH, FOUNDING CHAIRMAN, 

USDA NATIONAL ORGANICS STANDARDS BOARD, NATIONAL 

ORGANIC COALITION 

Mr. SLIGH. Good morning. I am honored to be here on behalf of 

the National Organic Coalition, an alliance of farmers, ranchers, 

environmentalists, consumers and businesses working together to 

protect and enhance the integrity of organic, which is at the heart 

of continued consumer confidence. Thank you for this opportunity 

to celebrate these last 20 years of organic progress and to look to 

organic’s bright future. 

As it turns out, this is a pretty long row to hoe for the many who 

have been here since the beginning, but it has been a very productive one. We have made real progress, and I believe that this 

founding organic legislation still serves as a model on how to create 

a successful public-private partnership in what I might call a very 

vigorous hyper-participatory and transparent manner. 

There, of course, have been many twists and turns, some serious 

failures to communicate, and even some major lapse of fair play. 

20 

However, organic has survived but actually thrived against all the 

odds. And I believe that is because of a very unique combination 

of farmer innovation with marketplace entrepreneurship backed by 

very loyal customers and coupled by this very sound federal policy. 

This combination has served us very well, and we do indeed have 

much to be proud of as organic emerges from the margins to the 

mainstream. 

Organic is clearly global now with standards in over 60 countries. We have witnessed over 20 years of continued growth, and 

the U.S. is the largest single country market in the world. Organic 

is even increasing yields in quality of life for some of the world’s 

poorest farmers. To sum up, organic produces high yield and high 

quality crops while reducing adverse impacts on the environment 

and strengthening family farms. 

We also want to recognize and appreciate Congress and USDA’s 

role which has been critical, particularly in the landmark 2008 provisions which have increased, as you have heard, many of the programs that are vital to promote organic, including the Certification 

Cost Share, the research, and greater access to crop insurance and 

conservation programs. 

While I believe all of these successes are exciting, as we look 

ahead, I actually believe that the real potential of organic is still 

largely untapped. Organic is actually providing ag-based solutions 

to global problems of environmental degradation, climate change, 

food safety, declines in health and quality of life. We need to shift 

our thinking to publicly recognize organic not just as a marketing 

program but as a food system that is delivering multiple societal 

benefits. 

So to that end, we and our organic community partners have just 

completed five years of dialogue developing a roadmap for organic 

into the future, which is the National Organic Action Plan which 

we will provide for the Committee. And this lays out concrete goals 

for the future of organic with such goals as continued doubling the 

number of organic products, farms and acres while ensuring fair 

prices to farmers, expanding research and training, expanding organic seed production, increasing local value-added processing and 

infrastructure, and implementing fair crop insurance and contracts 

for organic farms, to mention a few. 

We are also very pleased that USDA and Congress has already 

acted on several of the key recommendations in this report, such 

as increasing the funding and staffing for the NOP, the pasture 

rule and the new policy manual, USDA’s renewed commitment to 

oversight and enforcement, and the appointment of a USDA organic coordinator. 

I also would like to point out a few of the larger societal overarching opportunities and challenges that have arisen from this report that will require your leadership and action as well. We have 

clearly heard from our stakeholders about this need to shift more 

of the responsibility for the prevention of GMO contamination back 

to the manufacturer. It is clear that this technology does not stay 

put and is threatening non-GMO markets. This must not be misunderstood as an issue between farmers or as a issue between environmentalists versus farmers, but really as an urgent need to bring 

21 

overall rational market clarity and an urgent need for policy fairness, increased responsibility, and government oversight. 

We also would like to highlight the food safety issues and urge 

that this will require a scale-appropriate, risk-based approach that 

is compatible with the organic practices that are already required 

by USDA. Organic must been seen, especially based on new research, as part of the solution to the growing food safety crisis. 

I also want to highlight the concerns about seed concentration 

and the lack of biodiversity. As seed markets concentrate, farmers’ 

seed costs have skyrocketed, and the diversity of public seed options have dwindled. We urgently need to reinvigorate our public 

plant and animal breeding capacity for a more healthy, local and 

nutritious diet while mitigating climate change through a more diverse and less genetically uniform agriculture. Congress has mandated this priority. We must urge USDA to fully implement this. 

This will be a major benefit for all farmers and society as a whole. 

You have heard earlier the need for additional funding for organic research. Despite the gains in the recent Farm Bill, organic 

research funding still pales in the comparison. Given organic’s multiple benefits to society, we think the funding level should rise to 

at least meet organic’s current fair share. 

We also need to address the need to increase access of organic 

foods through vulnerable populations. There is growing evidence of 

the public health benefits of organic, particularly for children, yet 

federal policy barriers are limiting these very foods to these populations. We urge that these barriers be removed. And finally, we 

need to better foster the next generation of organic farmers. 

So in conclusion, history will not only judge us by how well we 

have managed our resources today but by how well we have defended the opportunities for future generations. Now is the time for 

us to set the course ahead for organic. Thank you very much. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Sligh can be found on page 71 

in the appendix.] 

Senator LEAHY. Thank you very much. And as with the other 

witnesses, of course, the full statement will be put in the record as 

though given. 

Ms. Bird, please go ahead. And the same with your statement, 

too, of course. 

STATEMENT OF SARAH BIRD, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, MARKETING, ANNIE’S HOMEGROWN; VICE PRESIDENT, ORGANIC 

TRADE ASSOCIATION BOARD OF DIRECTORS 

Ms. BIRD. Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony regarding the future of organic agriculture and food on this 20th anniversary of the Organic Foods Production Act. I am Sarah Bird, 

VP of marketing at Annie’s, but today I speak on behalf of the 

more than 1,500 members of the Organic Trade Association where 

I serve as vice chairman of the board of directors. 

Passage of the Organic Foods Production Act in 1990 was a seminal event. It set the organic sector on a trajectory of growth that 

has lasted for 20 years. To illustrate, in 1990, U.S. organic sales 

were estimated at a billion dollars. Today it is a $28 billion a year 

industry with over $6 billion in farm-gate sales. 

22 

Meanwhile, statistics from the 2008 Ag census reveal that despite higher production expenses, on average, U.S. organic farms 

have higher sales and higher operating profit than non-organic 

farms. The survey also showed that U.S. organic farmers are 

younger than non-organic farmers, and younger farmers tend to be 

more likely to adopt organic practices. 

Organic sales grew by 20 percent a year for over a decade, and 

despite the worst recession in modern times, still grew at almost 

6 percent in 2009. Increasingly, American families are choosing organic despite the tough economy. And latest reports from the industry indicate sales have again picked up since the beginning of 

2010. 

Annie’s has been in the thick of this growth. In 1990, Annie’s 

was a small company selling mac and cheese with annual revenue 

of barely $100,000. Twenty years later, Annie’s sales total more 

than $100 million per year. Our products are distributed nationally 

in retailers like Whole Foods, Kroger, Target and Wal-Mart. 

Annie’s is now the largest U.S. buyer of U.S. organic durum 

wheat. Over the past five years, Annie’s has purchased more than 

40,000 tons of domestic organic wheat, primarily from Montana 

and North Dakota farmers. In 1997, the year organic acreage data 

was first published, there were 125,000 acres of organic wheat in 

cultivation. Now, according to the 2008 ERS survey, the number 

has more than tripled to 415,000 acres across 25 states, yielding 

over eight and a half million tons of organic wheat per year. Considering that current organic durum wheat prices are averaging 

over $9.50 a bushel versus conventional wheat at less than $5 a 

bushel, you can see the opportunity organic creates for the rural 

community. 

In addition to wheat, Annie’s is a major buyer of organic cheese. 

According to Annie’s suppliers, markets for organic milk and cheese 

solids are critical components of overall organic dairy profitability. 

In fact, every time we sell a box of Annie’s mac and cheese, it supports family farms. Annie’s organic cheese comes from Organic Valley cooperative and their over 1,600 farm members like my colleague Regina at the end of the table. 

We estimate this organic wheat and cheese has been cooked by 

families across America into over 800 million servings of Annie’s 

mac and cheese since the passage of OFPA. And as every parent 

knows, no serving of Annie’s would be complete without a side of 

carrot sticks, so it is no surprise that organic carrots now represent 

13 percent of U.S. carrot acreage. 

The OFPA set the stage for this growth by putting in place one 

standard that businesses and consumers alike could embrace. 

OFPA established a level playing field, and the USDA organic seal 

is the critical symbol that ensures consumer trust. On this important anniversary of the unique public-private partnership that is 

organic, it is imperative we look forward and evaluate how we grow 

organic to the next level. This can only happen with continued protection of all that organic stands for. 

I first want to applaud the work of the NOP and its staff for 

their recent efforts to secure trust in the organic brand by increasing oversight of certifying agents worldwide. This oversight is a 

vital component that delivers organic integrity to consumers. HowVerDate Nov 24 2008 04:28 Jul 28, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\DOCS\66275.TXT MICHA
23 

ever, today I also want to caution that continued success of organic 

requires we address two significant threats to the value of the organic label and we remove a barrier to the industry’s self-generated 

growth. 

The first and most significant threat to organic Ag is the damage 

to global organic market from contamination of organic crops by genetically engineered crops. This issue is especially important to 

Annie’s, as there likely will be a petition to deregulate GE wheat 

in the not-so-distant future. Regardless of the organic regulation’s 

tolerance for non-intentional contamination, organic consumers will 

not tolerate GE contamination. 

For wheat growers that supply Annie’s, inadvertent contamination would have real economic consequence. Annie’s would not buy 

GE-contaminated wheat because our consumers simply will not buy 

the product. Such contamination forces manufacturers to look overseas to countries that either have not deregulated the GE crops or 

who maintain necessary safeguards to prevent contamination. The 

best picture for a vibrant organic economy is a vibrant U.S. production base. Annie’s and other manufacturers like us do not want to 

be forced to source our business offshore. 

The second threat, unregulated use of the organic brand on products outside the scope of the current regulation will limit the ability of the organic sector to develop to the next level. The Organic 

Act codified an organic standard for food. Now, due in large part 

to the success of the industry over the past 20 years, we see the 

term organic on many non-food products. The use of the organic 

name on products outside the scope of the OFPA results in consumer confusion. At Annie’s, we have developed a deep understanding of organic consumers and their expectations of the organic 

brand. 

Whether for drycleaners or personal care products, proliferation 

of organic claims on products that frankly may not be organic limit 

consumers’ ability to fully embrace organic agricultural products in 

their lives. Addressing this issue will require resources and coordination between agencies. 

Switching to my third opportunity area is the barrier to growth, 

the tremendous need for public education about both the many 

benefits of organic agricultural products and the meaning of the organic seal. We must make sure consumers understand the value of 

federally-regulated and verified organic claims as opposed to unregulated and undefined claims such as natural. Whether this education comes from the USDA itself or through industry self-help, 

OTA members, both farmers and manufacturers, have identified 

public education as the number one policy priority. 

Unlike other commodities, organic has no opportunity to pull 

funds for an AMS-administered research and promotion program. 

Can you imagine a ‘‘Got Milk’’ type of campaign for organics? We 

ask the Committee to be open to remedies in this regard. 

In summary, organic has made its mark on agriculture and 

American families’ consumption habits over the past 20 years. Education and trust in the organic brand will drive demand for organic 

products and create opportunities for U.S. agriculture, create jobs, 

and encourage self-reliance in rural communities while improving 

24 

the environment and public health of the nation for the next 20 

years. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Bird can be found on page 38 in 

the appendix.] 

Senator LEAHY. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Sligh, you referred to the question, which is on many of our 

minds, of encouraging young farmers to come into organic farming. 

And Mr. Harris, you come from different backgrounds. 

I was looking at, Mr. Harris, at your brochure from the days of 

Captain James Everett Harris and right down to the current time. 

And it is a wonderful sequence, and we have some farms like that 

in our state. But the average age of farmers now in this country 

is 57. Some of us do not consider that all that old. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator LEAHY. But fewer young people are choosing to stay on 

or return to the farm. How do you develop—I will start with you, 

Ms. Beidler, first. But how do you encourage young people to come 

and go into farming? 

Ms. BEIDLER. It is interesting because we have been part of some 

discussions in Vermont as diverse as land conservation to legislative policy, where farmers are asked to testify. And the comments 

that come out are why should we worry about future generations, 

no one is going to want to farm anyway. And unfortunately, I think 

that is too often an expressed concern in our agricultural communities as people do not see opportunity, either financial opportunity 

or opportunity to access land or the resources they need to continue 

to farm. 

I think that is one of the ways that organic has addressed very 

well. As I mentioned in my comments, if you can get through the 

certification process and you find a market, then you are offered a 

fair and sustained pay price that allows people to farm profitably, 

to pay down debt that they owe on farms and to get to an age of 

retirement where they have something left over. And I think that 

is as modest as our expectations often are as farmers, is to have 

that kind of expectation, and I think organic has allowed that to 

happen. 

Senator LEAHY. Mr. Harris, I know you noted in your testimony 

the huge growth of organic farms in Georgia in the last 10 years, 

of course, but the Southeast still lags a lot in this growth. 

What do you say for young people? I mean, in some ways you 

have a unique situation in your family and expanding and changing with the times, the things you are doing environmentally and 

the self-contained, which is a model. But do you worry about young 

people coming into farming? 

Mr. HARRIS. Yes, sir. Farming offers a lifestyle that either appeals to or does not appeal to the individual. The problem that we 

have had is that for those it appealed to, it was a poor way to make 

a living. There simply was not enough profit there to justify the 

risk involved. The risk to reward ratio has been bad. 

Our business is now profitable. We believe that we are getting 

a reasonable return on the capital we have got invested in our 

business. And I felt free to urge my daughter to come back. My father did not urge me to come back for the same reasons. This feelVerDate Nov 24 2008 04:28 Jul 28, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\DOCS\66275.TXT MICHA
25 

ing, this niche market, has offered us the profitability to justify me 

encouraging my family to come back if they so desire. 

Senator LEAHY. You are right what you said about the way of 

life, and that is a significant part of it. But you also want to be 

able to make a profit. You also want to be able to send your kids 

to school and do all the other things you do. 

Mr. Sligh, you heard us talking about organic and the organic 

standards and wanting to make that work. Then I see this label 

natural, which worries me as a way to kind of jump onto the popularity of organics without doing the work. It is easy in our state 

to complain about somebody trying to make it look like it is maple 

syrup when it is not, and that is a multi-million-dollar business in 

our state. But there is a lot more to it than that, whether it is 

bread or milk or Annie’s Cheddar Bunnies or whatever else. 

How do we handle this? Do you see this as a problem? 

Mr. SLIGH. Yes, I think it is, and we have spoke with many of 

the consumer groups about this topic and heard from them as well, 

that this is an issue that we need to deal with. But particularly, 

we need to look at both better education about what organic is so 

that it is better differentiated, because we have looked at some 

studies that consumers do not really understand the difference, in 

some cases, between that choice at the point of purchase, when 

they go to the store and they see the natural and they see the organic, and they think well, the natural looks a little bit cheaper, 

maybe I will take that one today; it is probably about the same. 

So I think we have to do a better job of educating what the organic 

value is so they understand that. 

Secondly, there may need to be additional activity around the 

natural. I know that there was a panel back in the ’60s that actually took up the task of trying to define natural. And if I recall correctly, they failed in their task, and we did try to study that in 

doing the organic label because they could not come to consensus 

on what that was. And so I do recognize that would not be an easy 

task, but I really think we should start by emphasizing more what 

the organic differentiation is. 

Senator LEAHY. Well, I do, too. 

Senator CHAMBLISS. 

Senator CHAMBLISS. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Harris, you have got one of the few federally-inspected, onfarm processing facilities in the country. In your experience in 

qualifying for federal inspection, was it difficult to the point to 

where you had to think long and hard about doing it? And now as 

you are moving towards seeking certification for a chicken processing facility, are there some lessons learned that we can look at 

and recommend to USDA—you can recommend to USDA—to speed 

up that process, streamline the process, or allow you to reach the 

end result in a more efficient and economical manner? 

Mr. HARRIS. Yes, sir. Constructing and beginning the operation 

of a USDA-inspected meat plant is very difficult. There is a great 

financial barrier for entry. It is very expensive. Probably the most 

difficult part, segment, of the approval process is wastewater. And 

I really think that anything that could be done to make that process more streamlined and simplified would be most beneficial. 

26 

Certainly, the risk involved is the worst obstacle towards having 

more on-farm plants. And the primary risk that I think could be 

mitigated is the plant operator has to build the plant and then get 

the walk-through to see if he will be granted a certificate of inspection. And in our case, we spent $2.3 million building the plant, and 

then one day a man came to see us and he was going to tell us 

whether we could use it or not, and that is a little nerve-racking. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. HARRIS. And we are facing that now with this poultry plant. 

Of course, it will not cost nearly as much money. But if there could 

be some sort of outreach from the USDA Inspection Service telling 

us upfront, if you will build this, you will be given or granted inspection, that would really take a lot of the risk out of it, and I 

would appreciate that. 

Senator CHAMBLISS. That is a commonsense solution, and unfortunately, not a lot of common sense is around this town. We have 

to try to help inject some of that occasionally. 

Mr. Harris, again, according to USDA’s Economic Research Service, the number of certified organic acres in Georgia has increased 

from 1,062 to 4,300 from ’06 to ’08. However, in that same time, 

the number of certified operations has changed from 69 in ’06, to 

121 in ’07, to 67 in ’08. 

Does that trend of increase in acres but lessening the number of 

certified operations indicate anything to you or in your capacity as 

president of the Georgia Organic Board? Is this being discussed, 

thought through, or of concern to you? 

Mr. HARRIS. No, sir, not really. And I do not—I cannot say that 

I absolutely know why that happens, but I think—I have a belief. 

I believe that probably what happens is smaller growers who are 

direct marketing at farmers’ markets and such are probably choosing to continue to grow organically but not certify their crops. I 

think that certifications—the organic certification is valuable to all 

producers and all consumers but is less valuable to small producers 

who direct market and know their customers, their customers know 

them. They probably do farm visits. They have the credibility without having to go through the certification. 

Farmers who sell to resellers, which in my case is what occurs, 

needs the certifications because I do not know all the people that 

buy my beef, and I do not see them every Saturday morning. We 

have a lot of visitors. We operate with full transparency. We sell 

beef, -as I said earlier, from Florida to New Jersey. 

So I think that the acreage has increased. I think the number 

of people growing crops organically in Georgia has increased. Certainly, the membership role of Georgia Organics has increased. But 

many of those small producers are probably simply choosing to not 

certify, which would create the numbers, situation that you mentioned. 

Senator CHAMBLISS. Ms. Bird, I look forward to taking these 

products you brought to us back to my office and having my snack 

here. I notice, though, on your package of the Cheddar Bunnies, 

you say they are 80 percent organic; on the Bunny Grahams, 75 

percent organic. 

How do you get 75 or 80 percent organic and what is the other 

20 and 25 percent? 

27 

Ms. BIRD. These products meet the 70 percent threshold, so we 

can make the ‘‘made with’’ claim. And wheat is the primary ingredient in both of those that is getting us to that percentage that is 

the 80 or 75 percent. So the other ingredients are not—they are 

natural. So they are not organically certified. We do have organic 

Cheddar Bunnies as well that are at the 95 percent level. 

Senator CHAMBLISS. Okay. Is the wheat that you use by chance 

gluten-free? 

Ms. BIRD. Not in those products, but we do have a line that is 

gluten-free. 

Senator CHAMBLISS. Mr. Sligh, what is the biggest obstacle on 

the conversion of a traditional farm to an organic farm? What are 

folks looking at and thinking, gee, do I really want to do this? 

What is causing concern there? 

Mr. SLIGH. Well, I think it depends, of course. But the one thing 

that I think we need to do to strengthen that is to really have more 

farms and non-profits and extension and university personnel that 

are all trained to help with this activity. And we have seen cases 

where other farmers have been able to be a very valuable mentor 

to farms in making that conversion because, really, you have to 

first change your mind-set a bit. And once you have done that, you 

need to find someone who has been successful in doing it so that 

you can avoid the natural firsthand mistakes that you are going to 

do. And also, many times farms that are successful do not transition the whole farm at one time but maybe take a section at a time 

so that it is over a time where they build the confidence. 

So I think it is a package of resources and extension and help 

that really these farms need to be encouraged in this direction. And 

also, I think the federal programs could be tightened up a bit to 

be more focused to help with this actual transition. 

Senator CHAMBLISS. Speaking of that, Mr. Harris, do we have 

any ongoing so-called experts at the experiment station, either 

Tifton or Griffin, that are able to give you any help with your operation, or are you pretty much on your own with respect to outside 

expertise? 

Mr. HARRIS. No, sir. I think Georgia is in good shape. Dean Scott 

Angle, UGA College of Agriculture, has really reached out. He has 

visited my farm four times, and it is 250 miles to Athens. He has 

appointed Julia Gaskin as director of sustainability. I am not sure 

of that title, but that is what she does. 

Georgia is a state, an agricultural economy, as you know, and 90- 

plus percent of that is commodity production. But I really feel supported by the University of Georgia. I think they are doing a good 

job for us, and I appreciate it. The hard part for me was not getting 

resources and not knowing what to do; it was economic. It was 

three years of giving up the tools to help me raise crops cheap, fertilizer particularly, pesticides as well, but not getting the premium 

on the product because it was not certified organic. That transition, 

the economic transition, is very difficult. 

Senator CHAMBLISS. Well, thank all of you very much. 

Senator LEAHY. Thank you. 

Just one thing, if I might, Ms. Beidler, while I have you here, 

because going back again and looking at your testimony, you talk 

about GMO contamination, what would happen in the case of a 

28 

farmer who at best might lose that one particular crop, or in the 

worst case may lose organic certification, even lose his or her livelihood if GMO contamination became so pervasive that the export 

market for certain organic products just disappeared. 

I know the Secretary of Agriculture has said this and I have 

heard it many times before, we have to find a way for organic and 

GMO to co-exist, but I am worried about where the question of liability lies. You suggested that liability should lie with the seed 

companies who are benefiting financially from the sale of the products. 

In our own state of Vermont, we had a piece of legislation several 

years ago pass the state legislature. As I recall, overwhelmingly, 

Republicans and Democrats voted for it. But it was eventually vetoed by the governor who said it was unnecessary, would have 

caused manufacturers to raise prices or possibly restrict seed sales 

to Vermont. 

What do we do? You and Mr. Harris and everybody else are all 

playing by the rules. What do you do with this possibility of something coming from outside, something you have no control over? 

Ms. BEIDLER. It has unfortunately been a terribly divisive issue 

in our state and across the country, and unfortunately, it often falls 

along organic and conventional farming lines. And I was glad to see 

it came up in the testimony of not just my testimony but my colleagues as well. 

Up until now, a lot of the responsibility for making sure there 

has not been as much opportunity for cross pollination or contamination has rested with organic farmers. We build in buffer zones 

on our property between conventional and organic farmland, not 

only for GMO crops but also for any other use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides and other pieces. And we have been told that 

our responsibility is to go to our conventional neighbors, ask them 

if they are growing GMO crops, and noting whether they do or not, 

and that possibly we could plant our crops later so that they flower 

later so the pollination risk drops. All of it is not a good solution 

to us as organic farmers. It basically says tough luck. Either do not 

grow it or take the risk that it could be cross pollinated. 

With the perennial crops we are talking about now, which includes alfalfa, and I have even heard talk of clover, those are perennial crops that come back year after year. They are essential in 

our pastures. They are essential in our hayfields. We have ceded 

ground on some other genetically modified crops and have learned 

how to either not plant or to plant in ways that we can minimize 

the risk. But when a bee can pollinate 10, 20 miles, you cannot not 

cross-pollinate alfalfa. So basically, you are saying to organic farmers, we are going to take alfalfa out of your toolbox to be able to 

utilize, and that is untenable to us. 

The other thing that I find really interesting is there was a really good article in the Christian Science Monitor that just came out 

a few days ago, talking about not only the increased amount of 

Roundup resistant weeds that are coming across the Southeast and 

into the Midwest, but also the fact that farmers are starting to look 

at the technology, the costs of the technology, and saying maybe 

this is not as much of an advantage as we thought. So rather than 

saying, yes, our baseline is that this is an advantage to farmers 

29 

that we cannot take away, let’s look critically at that and see how 

much of an advantage there is and who is really getting the benefit 

from that. And I do not believe it is the farmers. 

Senator LEAHY. Thank you. 

Ms. Bird, did you want to add anything to that or anybody else? 

Mr. SLIGH. Well, I would just add that I think the experience in 

Vermont and the piece of legislation that you had in Vermont, I 

think was headed in the right direction because, indeed, it did create some clarity in the marketplace and place the responsibility 

really where it belonged. And I think that has been the difficulty 

thus far, is that the farmers who do not benefit at all are bearing 

the largest burden for the cost. And so it is really about reassigning 

the liability so that the farmers who do not benefit are not paying 

the bill. 

Senator LEAHY. I try never to tell the Vermont—or suggest to the 

Vermont legislature what they should do in the vain hope that they 

would return the compliment. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator LEAHY. But I think they were on the right track on this. 

Mr. Harris, I saw you smiling down there. Did you have something you wanted to add to that? 

Mr. HARRIS. No, sir. I think that Ms. Beidler said it very succinctly. It is really not—we do not grow alfalfa in the coastal plain 

of Georgia, so it is not directly the issue in my production system. 

But I certainly empathize with her and respect that situation. 

Senator LEAHY. I want to thank all of you for coming here. Unfortunately, we are down to the last two or three weeks before recess for the mid-term elections. And so I have had senators, both 

Republics and Democrats, tell me they wanted to be here, but they 

are on about four other committees at the same time. And I notice 

their staffs have been here. Certainly, Senator Lincoln, the chair 

of the Committee, it is the same way. And I will make sure we get 

summaries to them. This has been well worthwhile. I have enjoyed 

doing this. 

Ms. Beidler, I want to come by at some point and bring—I was 

showing your testimony to my wife, and come by one of these times 

we are there, come by the farm. 

Mr. Harris, I would love to come down and visit yours. I do not 

get to Georgia very often but—— 

Mr. HARRIS. You all come. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator LEAHY. Thank you. Senator Chambliss told me he would 

stamp my visa and tell me how to get there. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator LEAHY. I could come down. I guess you have a quota, a 

certain number of Northerners allowed in there periodically. 

Mr. HARRIS. Yes, we call it the Macon-Dixon line. It goes through 

Macon, Georgia. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator LEAHY. I love it. Thank you. 

With that, I cannot top that, so we will stand recessed. 

[Whereupon, at 11:49 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 

(31) 

A P P E N D I X 

SEPTEMBER 15, 2010 

32 


66275.001
33 


66275.002
34 


66275.003
35 


66275.004
36 


66275.005
37 


66275.006
38 


66275.007
39 


66275.008
40 


66275.009
41 


66275.010
42 


66275.011
43 


66275.012
44 


66275.013
45 


66275.014
46 


66275.015
47 


66275.016
48 


66275.017
49 


66275.018
50 


66275.019
51 


66275.020
52 


66275.021
53 


66275.022
54 


66275.023
55 


66275.024
56 


66275.025
57 


66275.026
58 


66275.027
59 


66275.028
60 


66275.029
61 


66275.030
62 


66275.031
63 


66275.032
64 


66275.033
65 


66275.034
66 


66275.035
67 


66275.036
68 


66275.037
69 


66275.038
70 


66275.039
71 


66275.040
72 


66275.041
73 


66275.042
74 


66275.043
75 


66275.044
76 


66275.045
77 


66275.046
78 


66275.047
(79) 

DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD 

SEPTEMBER 15, 2010 

80 


66275.048
81 


66275.049
82 


66275.050
83 


66275.051
84 


66275.052
85 


66275.053
86 


66275.054
87 


66275.055
88 


66275.056
89 


66275.057
90 


66275.058
91 


66275.059
92 


66275.060
93 


66275.061
94 


66275.062
95 


66275.063
96 


66275.064
97 


66275.065
98 


66275.066
99 


66275.067
100 


66275.068
101 


66275.069
102 


66275.070
103 


66275.071
104 


66275.072
105 


66275.073
106 


66275.074
107 


66275.075
108 


66275.076
109 


66275.077
110 


66275.078
111 


66275.079
112 


66275.080
113 


66275.081
114 


66275.082
115 


66275.083
116 


66275.084
117 


66275.085
118 


66275.086
119 


66275.087
120 


66275.088
121 


66275.089
122 


66275.090
123 


66275.091
124 


66275.092
125 


66275.093
126 


66275.094
127 


66275.095
128 


66275.096
129 


66275.097
130 


66275.098
131 


66275.099
132 


66275.100
133 


66275.101
134 


66275.102
135 


66275.103
136 


66275.104
137 


66275.105
138 


66275.106
139 


66275.107
(141) 

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS 

SEPTEMBER 15, 2010 

142 


66275.108
143 


66275.109
144 


66275.110
145 


66275.111
146 


66275.112
147 


66275.113
148 


66275.114
149 


66275.115
150 


66275.116
151 


66275.117
152 


66275.118
153 


66275.119
154 


66275.120
155 


66275.121
156 


66275.122
157 


66275.123