This is a discussion document by a Subcommittee of the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB). Discussion documents are posted for public 

comment, and may later become proposals for full Board consideration. They are not final Board proposals or recommendations, or NOP policy.

National Organic Standards Board

COMPLIANCE, ACCREDITATION, AND CERTIFICATION SUBCOMMITTEE

Assessing Soil Conservation Practices Discussion Document

August 27, 2014

I. INTRODUCTION:

The Organic Foods Production Act of 1990 (OFPA) and the National Organic Program (NOP) 

standards emphasize the importance of maintaining and improving soil quality in numerous places. 

Over the years of National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) deliberations and public discourse, we 

find a clear and consistent commitment to these tenets; in fact, keeping soil in good tilth is both a 

founding principle and expectation of the entire organic community. Because soil conservation is 

critical to maintaining soil health, and soil health is critical to the future of farming, the NOP has 

tasked the NOSB Certification, Accreditation, and Compliance Subcommittee (CACS) with generating 

a discussion document to assess the state of soil conservation practices on organic farm and 

livestock operations. It is our intention to bring soil conservation per se permanently and 

deliberately into the public discourse when we talk about soil management and the practices 

employed on organic farms.

With the help of the certification community and public, we hope to provide clarity about which 

aspects of soil conservation found within the regulation are working well and which need further 

attention or warrant guidance as to their implementation. This assessment of practices will then be 

used to develop specific training and tools to further soil conservation objectives.

II. BACKGROUND:

The NOP is aware of concerns regarding use of appropriate soil conservation practices on organic 

farms, for instance prevention of soil erosion, tillage, fencing of livestock from streams, application 

of manure on frozen soil, and overgrazing of pasture. The Board would like to determine if and how 

grower and livestock operations are complying with the portions of the regulation stating that 

operators must maintain or improve the natural resources, including soil and water quality. Since 

the Natural Resources Conservation Services (NRCS) has been critical to improving our soil resources 

for decades, CACS looked to the NRCS for technical expertise and to assist in aligning as closely as 

possible organic practices and regulatory guidance with their longstanding valuable work toward a 

sustainable soil culture.

The following paragraph is taken from the NRCS webpage. 

“The NRCS mission is to improve the health of our Nation’s natural resources while sustaining and 

enhancing the productivity of American agriculture. The NRCS achieves this by providing voluntary 

assistance through strong partnerships with private landowners, managers, and communities to 

protect, restore, and enhance the lands and waters upon which people and the environment 

depend. The NRCS Vision is to create productive working lands in harmony with a healthy 
environment. Their conservation process entails the following three steps, including 1) resource 

inventory and assessment; 2) technical assistance and technology transfer; and 3) conservation and 

implementation. The 2011 – 2015 NRCS Strategic Plan has three priorities including: 1) getting more 

conservation on the ground; 2) increasing organizational effectiveness and efficiency; and 3) 

creating a climate where private lands conservation will thrive.”

The intersection between NOP and NRCS goals is evident and the opportunity to share best 

practices is welcomed.

III. RELEVANT AREAS IN THE RULE:

205.2 Terms Defined:

Crop rotation. The practice of alternating the annual crops grown on a specific field in a planned 

pattern or sequence in successive crop years so that crops of the same species or family are not 

grown repeatedly without interruption on the same field. Perennial cropping systems employ means 

such as alley cropping, intercropping, and hedgerows to introduce biological diversity in lieu of crop 

rotation.

Natural resources of the operation. The physical, hydrological, and biological features of a 

production operation, including soil, water, wetlands, woodlands, and wildlife.

Organic production. A production system that is managed in accordance with the Act and 

regulations in this part to respond to site-specific conditions by integrating cultural, biological, and 

mechanical practices that foster cycling of resources, promote ecological balance, and conserve 

biodiversity.

Pasture. Land used for livestock grazing that is managed to provide feed value and maintain or 

improve soil, water, and vegetative resources.

Soil and water quality. Observable indicators of the physical, chemical, or biological condition of soil 

and water, including the presence of environmental contaminants.

205.200 General

The producer or handler of a production or handling operation intending to sell, label, or represent 

agricultural products as “100 percent organic,” “organic,” or “made with organic (specified 

ingredients or food group(s))” must comply with the applicable provisions of this subpart. 

Production practices implemented in accordance with this subpart must maintain or improve the 

natural resources of the operation, including soil and water quality. 

205.203(a) The producer must select and implement tillage and cultivation practices that maintain 

or improve the physical, chemical, and biological condition of soil and minimize soil erosion.

2 | Page
205.203(b) The producer must manage crop nutrients and soil fertility through rotations, cover 

crops, and the application of plant and animal materials.

205.203(c) The producer must manage plant and animal materials to maintain or improve soil 

organic matter content in a manner that does not contribute to contamination of crops, soil, or 

water by plant nutrients, pathogenic organisms, heavy metals, or residues of prohibited substances. 

205.203(d) A producer may manage crop nutrients and soil fertility to maintain or improve soil 

organic matter content in a manner that does not contribute to contamination of crops, soil, or 

water by plant nutrients, pathogenic organisms, heavy metals, or residues of prohibited substances 

by applying: (see numbers 1 – 5).

205.205(d) The producer must implement a crop rotation including but not limited to sod, cover 

crops, green manure crops, and catch crops that provide the following functions that are applicable 

to the operation: (see letters a – d).

205.240(c) A pasture plan must be included in the producer's organic system plan, and be updated 

annually in accordance with §205.406(a). The producer may resubmit the previous year's pasture 

plan when no change has occurred in the plan. The pasture plan may consist of a pasture/rangeland 

plan developed in cooperation with a Federal, State, or local conservation office: Provided, that, the 

submitted plan addresses all of the requirements of §205.240(c)(1) through (8).

IV. DISCUSSION:

As mentioned above, maintaining and improving soil quality is a founding principle of organic 

production whose roots are deep within the non-governmental standards across the country long 

before OFPA and the NOP were born. OFPA and the NOP merely but significantly codified these 

principles into law and regulation. While both emphasize the importance of soil quality and 

conscientious soil management and the practices that impact and influence both, soil conservation

has often been given short shrift in recent public discourse, albeit unintentionally. The days of the 

Dust Bowl and the acute attention to programmatic soil conservation that came with it are far 

behind us, the legacy of those days’ remains, of course, and our responsibility for that legacy 

remains robust. 

The following paragraph is also taken from a NRCS webpage.

“The NRCS draws on a long history of helping people help the land. For more than 75 years, NRCS 

and its predecessor agencies have worked in close partnerships with farmers and ranchers, local and 

state governments, and other federal agencies to maintain healthy and productive working 

landscapes. It is the NRCS role to provide national leadership and technical assistance for the 

conservation of our natural resources to ensure the continued production of food and fiber.”

The passage of the Food Security Act of 1985 (P.L. 99-198), (with its Sodbuster, Swampbuster, and 

Highly Erodible Lands provisions) made conservation a prerequisite for participation in USDA 

3 | Page
programs. In order for organic operators to participate in, and benefit from conservation program 

investments, they are required to submit conservation plans if they have erosion problems. Because 

the NOP and the NRCS have common goals, this discussion document presents an ideal opportunity 

to solicit feedback regarding the similarities and differences in their implementation requirements 

for soil and water conservation practices. The NOSB values the opportunity to collaborate with 

partners such as the NRCS.

In closing, our hope is to generate meaningful dialogue within the organic community to identify 

and evaluate opportunities for improving soil and water practices in organic farming and livestock 

operations. We offer this platform as a means for thoughtful discourse and responsible discussion to 

propose solutions where applicable and to strive for continual process improvement. We welcome 

your answers to the questions below in preparation for the fall, 2014 NOSB meeting.

V. QUESTIONS:

1) How do certifiers assess whether production practices, identified in an organic system plan 

and/or observed on-site, maintain or improve soil quality? Is visual assessment sufficient?

2) What tools, other than visual inspection, could aid certifiers in evaluating soil management 

practices, e.g., Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation 2 (RUSLE2) or soil organic matter levels? 

3) What benchmarks do certifiers have for issuing noncompliance’s related to soil conservation: for 

instance, visible erosion, overgrazing, and evidence of manure application on frozen ground, 

manure or compost stored in flooded areas? Are quantitative benchmarks used?

4) What qualifications do certifiers seek among inspectors for evaluating soil management 

practices on-site?

5) What tools do inspectors use (other than soil testing) to evaluate/measure the adequacy of soil 

management during on-site inspections? Is one on-site inspection enough to assess erosion if it 

is done during a single visit?

6) How do certifiers respond if a review/on-site inspection indicates that there is a soil 

management problem? Do certifiers issue notices of noncompliance or note as a finding to be 

reassessed at a later time?

7) How do certifiers respond when complaints are filed about a producer’s soil management?

8) Some USDA benefits require producers to be in compliance with Highly Erodible Land (HEL) 

provisions. Are certifiers aware of USDA Natural Resource and Conservation Service (NRCS) 

classification and HEL provisions? Should certifiers verify whether production acreage is 

classified as “highly erodible land” (HEL) and ensure appropriate soil management practices for 

HEL?

9) Are certifiers aware of USDA NRCS’s tolerable soil loss standards? Should certifiers verify 

whether production acreage has been assessed to meet tolerable and sustainable soil loss 

levels?

10) When NRCS personnel who provide technical assistance on organic operations observe soil 

management risks and problems should the producer be required to communicate this 

information to their certifier?

4 | Page