National Organic Standards Board

Livestock Subcommittee Discussion Document

Marine algae listings on National List

September 6, 2016

I INTRODUCTION

During its recent five year sunset review of almost 200 materials the NOSB noted that there are a number 

of materials listed that are either marine algae or extracts of marine algae. The National List includes 

overlap in species in the various material listings. Some of the materials listed lack a Technical Report (TR) 

which limited full review of all algal materials. Public comment during Sunset Review indicated serious 

concerns about the following:

• Conservation of wild marine algae 

species

• Overharvesting of some species in some 

geographic areas

• Need for clarification of which species are 

used, and from which geographic areas

• Need for clarification of which species 

can or are being cultivated

• Clarification of wild harvesting 

techniques

• Feasibility of harvesting by individual 

species selection as opposed to multispecies harvesting by littoral or marine 

zone

• Extraction methods

• Sequestration of metals or other 

contaminants in some wild algal species

Because of public comment the NOSB requested a limited scope TR to address these concerns. The TR 

was received on August 9, 2016.

The goal of this discussion document is to present a brief analysis of our present understanding of the 9 

marine algae on the National List and request public comment. Depending on public comment the NOSB 

may develop a proposal to annotate some of the materials on the list, or clarify the naming convention 

used to list these marine materials because many of the naming conventions may be duplicative and 

redundant. Alternatively, the NOSB may recommend that the NOP provide further guidance on use of 

seaweeds in organic production. 

II BACKGROUND

Seaweeds have been commonly used, in many ways, throughout human history. They comprise a

seemingly unlimited renewable resource subject, however, to the usual depletion through unintended 

over harvesting and pollution. Open oceans, tidal and intertidal zones appear to be relatively open to 

public harvesting. The laws that control harvesting, establish conservation zones and seek to ensure 

sustainable seaweed harvest, while protecting marine ecosystems worldwide, are highly variable, and 

typically poorly articulated and not easy to enforce.

In the face of exponentially growing pressure on marine resources, decline in fisheries, decline in 

species, decline in habitats, and depletion of seaweed species in many geographic areas, the European 

Commission in May 2016 held a conference to focus on Organic Seaweed Rules, Blue Growth and the 

Bioeconomy1

. The conference provided examples of good management in areas of high ecological 

quality which were not contaminated, and where environmental assessment and estimation of biomass 

was undertaken at the outset, and a sustainable management plan is in place. 

 11 http://coastwatch.org/europe/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Organic-Seaweed-Coastwatch.pdf
However, most of the seaweed harvested for human use is not certified organic, but simply harvested 

from or cultivated in marine environments worldwide. Some marine environments are polluted by run 

off from terrestrial activities taking place over generations. Some seaweed species grow back very fast 

following harvest, while others take many years. Because of high demand, harvesting does not 

necessarily protect biomass and rarely involves ecosystem management. Little is really understood 

about the multi-tropic impact on seaweed harvesting or cultivation.

It is within this context of a desire to allow use of marine plants and algae in organic production, while 

at the same time ensuring long term sustainability, that the marine materials on the National List must 

be reviewed.

There are nine separate listings for marine materials on the National List which are the subject of this 

document: 

1. Aquatic plant extracts (TR 2006) - aquatic plant (algae) extracts are most commonly derived 

from kelp such as Ascophyllum species and Ecklonia maxima (Sea Bamboo) as well as other 

seaweeds harvested from the North Atlantic. Ascophyllum nodosum, (Rockweed) a species 

known to be overharvested in many geographic regions, is in the Fucaceae, a brown seaweed, 

Class Phaeophyceae – not able to be cultivated and known to be regionally overharvested.

2. Alginic acid (TR 2015) is primarily extracted from brown seaweeds, Class Phaeophyceae. Major

commercial sources are from species that include Ascophyllum (North Atlantic), Laminaria and 

Saccharina (various northern hemisphere oceans) and Macrocystis (California and Mexico), with 

lesser sources from Lessonia (South America), Durvilea (Australia), Ecklonia (South Africa), 

Sargassum, and Turbinaria.

3. Agar-Agar (TR 2011) is typically derived from red seaweeds, Class: Rhodophyceae. The marine 

algae that produce agar-agar are widely distributed throughout the world and several different 

species are utilized for extraction. Most commercial agar-agar is extracted from Gelidium and 

Gracilaria species, but other commonly used species include Pterocladia and Gelidiella. The 

most important sources worldwide include the coasts of Japan, Spain, Portugal, Morocco, 

Senegal, Chile, Mexico, the southern United States, India, the Philippines, Madagascar, South 

Africa, Egypt, and New Zealand although many other countries also supply algae used to make 

agar-agar. Although most agar-agar is produced from algae that grow in the oceans, Gracilaria

algae are also cultivated on a commercial scale by some countries. 

4. Carrageenan (TR 2011) is a generic term for a family of linear polysaccharides derived from 

species of red seaweeds (Rhodophyceae). They can be wild harvested or cultivated. Typical 

species used are Chondrus crispus, Mastocarpus stellatus, Euchema cottonii and Eucheuma 

spinosum, which grow in the warm waters of the Philippines, Indonesia, and Tanzania and 

produce kappa- and iota-carrageenan, respectively. The Asia-Pacific region has remained the 

largest source of carrageen-producing seaweed, supplying over 50% of the market from 1999 

through 2009, and the Americas have similarly maintained 16-18% of the global market. 

5. Alginates are derived from brown seaweeds (See TR 2015). Of the species in the class of brown 

seaweeds, 41 species are used for extracting alginates, including: Ascophyllum nodosum from 

Ireland, Norway, UK; Cystoseira barbata from Egypt; Durvillaea potatorum from Australia; Fucus 

serratus, F. vesiculosus from Ireland; Laminaria digitata from France, Ireland; Laminaria 
hyperborea from Ireland, Norway, Spain, UK; Laminaria japonica from China; Laminaria 

ochroleuca from Spain; Lessonia nigrescens from Chile, Peru; Lessonia trabeculata from Chile; 

Macrocystis integrifolia from Peru; Sargassum crassifolium, S. gramminifolium, S. 

henslowianum, S. mcclurei, S. siliquosum, S. vachelliannum fromVietnam; Sargassum ilicifolium, 

S. myriocystum, S. wightii, Turbinaria conoides, T. decurrens, T. ornata from India; Sargassum 

polycystum from Indonesia, Thailand.

6. Beta-carotene from algae (TR, 2011) is typically derived from green algae, Class: Chlorophyceae.

The common source of beta-carotene color is derived from the micro-algae Dunaliella salina and 

Dunaliella bardawil. These species are cultivated. Dunaliella species are commonly observed in 

salt lakes in all parts of the world from tropical to temperate to Polar Regions where they often 

impart an orange-red color to the water. In a review article conducted by Dufosse et al. (2005), 

they concluded that algal forms are the richest source of pigments and can be produced in a 

renewable manner, since they produce some unique pigments sustainably. The report also 

stated that the production of β-carotene from Dunaliella will surpass synthetic as well as other 

natural sources due to microalgae sustainability of production and their renewable nature. (TR 

2011, 530-545).

The following 3 materials did not have detailed TRs until 2016:

7. Kelp is a broad generic term for brown seaweeds, Class Phaeophyceae, in the Order 

Laminariales, with at least 30 genera and many species, and in the Order Fucaceae such as

Ascophyllum nodosum. However the term “kelp” as used in fertilizer means ANY macroalgae 

seaweed, brown (Phaeophyceae), red (Rhodophyceae) or green (Chlorophyceae) (Assoc. of 

American Plant Food Controls (AAPFC)). Kelp used in organic livestock production must be 

certified organic, but for use in processing for humans non-organic kelp is allowed. Pacific 

Kombu, and Undaria innatifida are also Kelp species. Fucus species are intertidal, but Laminaria 

species are deep water.

8. Seaweed- Pacific Kombu is a kelp, often Laminaria japonica. This species is cultivated in waters 

of Japan, Korea and China. 

9. Wakame- Undaria pinnatifida is a kelp species native to cold temperate coastal waters in Japan, 

Korea and China, but it has also become an invasive weed species in numerous other locations.

Undaria is widely cultivated in China and Japan.

III RELEVANT AREAS OF THE RULE, NOP GUIDANCE, AND NOP MEMOS

§205.601 Synthetic substances allowed for use in organic crop production

In accordance with restrictions specified in this section, the following synthetic substances may be used 

in organic crop production: Provided that, use of such substances do not contribute to contamination of 

crops, soil, or water...

(j) As plant or soil amendments.

(1) Aquatic plant extracts (other than hydrolyzed) –Extraction process is limited to the use of 

potassium hydroxide or sodium hydroxide; solvent amount use is limited to that amount 

necessary for extraction.

§205.605 Nonagricultural (nonorganic) substances allowed as ingredients in or on processed products 

labeled as “organic” or “made with organic (specified ingredients or food groups)).”

(a) Nonsynthetics allowed:
Acids (Alginic; ...).

Agar-agar.

Carrageenan.

(b) Synthetics allowed:

Alginates.

§205.606 Nonorganically produced agricultural products allowed as ingredients in or on processed 

products labeled as “organic.”

(d) Colors derived from agricultural products-must not be produced using synthetic carriers and 

solvent systems or any artificial preservative. 

(2) Beta-carotene extract color derived from carrots or algae (pigment CAS 1393-61-1).

(l) Kelp – for use only as a thickener and dietary supplement.

(t) Seaweed, Pacific Kombu.

(x) Wakame Seaweed (Undaria pinnatifida).

§205.207 Wild-crop harvesting practice standard.

(a) A wild crop that is intended to be sold, labeled, or represented as organic must be harvested 

from a designated area that has had no prohibited substance as set forth in §205.105, applied to it 

for a period of 3 years immediately preceding the harvest of the wild crop.

(b) A wild crop must be harvested in a manner that ensures that such harvesting or gathering will 

not be destructive to the environment and will sustain the growth and production of the wild crop.

NOP 5022, Guidance- Wild Crop Harvesting, effective July 22, 2011, provides details to clarify §§205-

207.

NOP Policy Memo 12-1, Production and Certification of Aquatic Plants, issued September 12, 2012 

provides further clarification, as follows:

This policy memorandum is issued as a reminder that aquatic plants and their products may be 

certified under the current USDA organic regulations. Certifiers and their clients may use the USDA 

organic regulations, including the National List of Allowed and Prohibited Substances at 7 Code of 

Federal Regulations (CFR) 205.601-205.602, as the basis for the production and certification of 

cultured and wild crop harvested aquatic plants. 

While current USDA organic regulations specifically exclude aquatic animals from organic 

certification, no such exclusion exists for aquatic plants. Further, some parts of the USDA organic 

regulations specifically address aquatic plant production. For example, some aquatic plants, such as 

kelps and seaweeds, are listed in 7 CFR 205.606 of the USDA organic regulations, allowing their use 

in non-organic form when certified organic forms are not commercially available. Producers and 

certifiers are required to comply with the USDA organic regulations when producing or certifying 

cultured and wild crop harvested aquatic plants. 

The use of ground and surface waters, ponds, streams, or other waterways for aquatic plant 

production may be regulated by Federal, State or local authorities. Aquatic plant producers should 

consult with Federal, State and local authorities to ensure compliance with all applicable laws, in 

addition to the USDA organic regulations, regarding the use of synthetic substances and other 

materials in ponds and waterways. Also, under 7 CFR 205.200, aquatic plant producers must ensure, 

and certifying agents must verify, that production practices maintain or improve the natural 

resources of the operation, including soil and water quality. 

IV DISCUSSION:
The NOSB submitted brief information on each of the nine materials and posed seven questions to the 

NOP for the limited scope TR. This TR was received in August 2016 and the responses to these questions 

are briefly discussed below. The TR cited a number of references but the literature review was limited. 

Some additional relevant references are included in this discussion.

1. Nomenclature: Many of the National List listings are generic terms or overlapping terms lacking 

specificity, such as “agar-agar”, “carrageenan”, “aquatic plant extracts” or “kelp”. Should each 

listing include specific Latin names of approved algae? Should the word “plant” be replaced by the 

word “algae”?

The TR provides sources of marine polysaccharides (TR 2016, Table 3) but acknowledges the 

somewhat arbitrary nomenclature of red algae. Thus it may be possible for the NOSB to propose

some clarity in the listings through use of Latin names. However, it must be noted that taxonomic 

revision amongst algal species has become commonplace. Morphologically plastic species in the 

same geographical location and identical species in different geographic locations are frequently 

given different scientific names (TR 2011 631-634 and 689-716).

Habitat forming seaweeds include the Laminariales (Laminaria species and others) and Fucales

(Ascophyllum and others). Currently many of these species are referred to by a single common name 

“kelp”. This creates confusion because macroalgal species are harvested by different methods, their 

life histories and growth rates differ, and thus the impacts of cutting and harvesting on these species 

will differ. Clarification in naming conventions is thus of importance if conservation of habitat and 

species is taken into consideration.

2. Overharvesting: The nine listings include thousands of species of algae from many different 

geographic locations, the marine intertidal zone, deeper ocean areas, and wild harvested beds. 

Which species, genera, classes are being overharvested? Which geographic regions indicate 

overharvesting impact? What is the trend in harvesting marine algae? What is the present status 

and trends in harvesting and overharvesting of Ascophyllum nodosum?

The TR provides examples of the following seaweeds being overharvested: Irish Moss (Chondrus 

crispus), Rockweed (Ascophyllum nodosum) and giant Kelp (Macrcustis pyrifera). It must also be 

noted that ocean warming and other environmental factors probably contribute to depletion of 

these species (see also: Halat et al, 20152

; Kay et al, 2016.

3

). Overharvesting impacts not only the 

specific plant species or genus, but all the associated plant and animal species that form the marine 

ecosystem in a given location. (see also Keats et al 19874 and Kelly, 20055

There is limited evidence to suggest that the harvesting of agarophytes (algae used to make agaragar) may be harmful to biodiversity. The current world demand for agar-agar is reportedly 

increasing, which has placed pressure on the overharvested natural sources. Overharvesting of 

many wild Gracilaria strands has resulted in the destruction of some of the larger genetic reserves 

 2

Laryssa Halat, Moira E Galway, Sara Gitto and David Garbary, Epidermal shedding in Ascophyllum nodosum

(Phaeophycea): seasonality, productivity and relationship to harvesting. Phycology, Vol.54(6), 599-608, 2015. 3 Lauren M. Kay, Allison L. Schmidt, Kristen L. Wilson, Heike K.Lotze, Interactive effects of increasing temperature 

and nutrient loading on the habitat-forming rockweed Ascophyllum nodosum. Aquatic Botany 133, 70-78, 2010. 4 Keats, D.W., Steele, DH and South, G.R. The role of fleshy macroalgae in the ecology of juvenile cod (Gadus 

morhua) in inshore waters off eastern Newfoundland. Journal of Zoology, 65:49-53, 1987. 5 Kelly, E (ed) The role of Kelp in marine environment. Irish Wildlife Manuals, No. 17, National Parks and Wildlife 

Service, Dept. Environment, Heritage and Local Govt., Dublin, Ireland.
for the species. Harvesting of wild agarophytes may also reduce biodiversity on nearby beaches (TR 

2011). In 2015 there was a global downturn in availability of agar-agar.

Carrageenan production levels have decreased in Europe and increased substantially in China. Cold 

water species of red seaweed used to make carrageenan (from Chile, Mexico, Canada, and France) 

are generally harvested from wild populations. Overharvesting of Gigartina species at its 

northernmost limit in Chile resulted in a severe reduction in population size and a complete crash in 

the total number of seaweed landings in the early 2000s (TR 2011). Most carrageenan production 

comes from cultivated beds.

3. Selective harvesting: There are about 6,500 species of red algae (Rhodophyta) such as Chondrus 

species, Palmiria, Delessaria; about 2,000 species of brown algae (Phaeophyta) such as Laminaria 

species, Ascophyllum species, Sacharina, Fucus, Sargassum muticum; and about 1,500 green algae 

(Chlorophyta) such as Dunaliella, of which many are not marine. How many species of each class are 

being wild harvested? Can one species be harvested without impacting other species in the same 

location?

The TR 2016 provides Table 5, outlining algal species harvested for economic purposes. The TR 

indicates that there is limited research on this topic. Additional literature search shows some work 

has been done on multi-tropic consequences of kelp harvest on the coast of Norway, indicating 

negative impacts of kelp harvesting on fish abundance and diminishment of coastal seabird foraging 

efficiency (Lorentsen et al, 20106

). Lorentsen points out that kelp fisheries are currently managed in 

order to maximize net harvest of kelp biomass, and the underlying effects on the ecosystem are 

partly ignored. Literature review did not turn up any scientific research comparing certified organic 

kelp harvesting with non-certified wild harvesting.

There is peer reviewed research on habitat impact of seaweed on common eider ducks, such as 

Blinn et al, 2008,7 and fish impact in Nova Scotia, such as Black, 19918

, and impact of mechanical 

harvesting on Ascophyllum , such as Ang, 19939

, and Ang, 1996,10 and Arzel, 199811. And there is 

considerable research on Ascophyllum harvesting impacts.

4. Contamination: Seaweeds can sequester metal ions such as arsenic, lead, zinc and copper. What is 

the indication from the most recent scientific research on sequestration of metals by marine algae? 

Is there a difference in sequestration between species of algae? Are there additional processing steps 

taken to reduce and control for metal content from the raw seaweed material? 

 6 Svein-Hakon Lorentsen, Kjersti Sjotun and David Gremillet, Multi-tropic consequences of kelp harvest, Biological 

Conservation, 143, 2054-2062, 2010. 7 Blinn, B.M., A.W. Diamond and D.J. Hamilton. Factors affecting selection of brood-rearing habitat by common 

eiders (Somateria mollissima) in the Bay of Fundy, New Brunswick, Cnada. Waterbirds 31:520-529, 2008. 8 Black, R & R.J. Miller, Use of intertidal zone by fish in Nova Scotia. Env. Bio. Fishes, 31:109-121, 1991. 9 Ang, P.O., G.J. Sharp & R.E. Semple. Change in the populations structure of Ascophyllum nodosum due to 

mechanical harvesting. Hydrobiologia, 260/261:321-326, 1993. 10 Ang, P.O, G.J. Sharp & R.E. Semple. Comparison of the structure of populations of Ascophyllum nodosu, (Fucales, 

Phaeophyta) with different harvest histories. Hydrobiologoa 326/237 179-184. 11 Arzel, P. Les luminaires sure les cotes bretonnes. Evolotion de l’exploitation et de la flottille de peche, etata 

actuel et perspectives. Editions IFREMER BP 70-29280 Plouzane, France 139 pp.
Marine algae have a large capacity to sorb metals. In fact, algal species are often used as biosensors 

for contamination with arsenic and heavy metals. Their analysis in heavily contaminated areas, 

particularly agricultural soils, can be used to determine required bioremediation strategies (TR 2016 

775-777). The EPA found that levels were well below safe levels in research conducted in the St.

Lawrence. However, increased pollution will lead to higher levels of arsenic and heavy metal in algae 

for human consumption.

5. Organic certified wild crafting: Which marine algal species are being harvested under the “wild 

crafting” organic standard, and in which geographic locations? 

7 CFR §205.207 provides the wild crop harvesting standard. This section is further clarified in NOP 

5022 (7/22/2011) as follows:

4. Unmanaged, untrained and uninformed harvesting of wild products from a wild habitat 

without maintaining or improving the natural resources can disqualify the wild products 

from organic certification... and

5.4. Verification of lands or waterways:

1. In the case of public lands or waterways, the responsible authority of those lands or 

waterways should verify that no prohibited materials have been applied to or have 

contaminated the land or waterways for at least three years prior to harvest by providing a 

signed and dated affidavit to the certified operation. 

2. In the case of private lands and waterways, the private owner shall provide a verification 

that no prohibited materials have been applied to or have contaminated the land or 

waterways for at least three years prior to harvest by providing a signed and dated affidavit 

to the certified operation.

There are 5 operations certified by the NOP to produce marine algae. One in Brazil harvests red 

algae; one in China produces nori (red algae); one in Iceland mechanically harvests both kelp 

(Laminaria digitata) and rock weed (Ascophyllum nodosum), and ecological concerns about changes 

in species diversity have been noted (TR 896-897.) In Argentina, several commercial species are 

harvested both by wild crafting and cultivation.

6. Cultivation: Which species are being cultivated, and in which geographic locations? What are the 

environmental issues associated with farming marine algae?

Increasing demand for seaweeds over the last 50 years has outstripped the ability to supply the 

market from natural wild stocks, and 90% of the market demand is met from cultivation (TR 2016, 

189-190). However, not all marine algal species are easily or economically cultivated. For example, 

Ascophyllum nodosum (Rockweed) a species widely harvested, and over harvested, for aquatic plant 

extracts and alginic acid, is a brown seaweed, which is not economic to cultivate. The TR provides 

considerable detail on seaweed farming of many species worldwide.

7. CO2 sequestration: What does recent research indicate about the ability of marine algae to positively 

impact the environment, including global climate change, by their ability to absorb excessive CO2?

The TR 2016 briefly presents research indicating that marine algae are critical in their role as carbon 

sinks with substantial benefits for global climates. Note also the findings of Treventhan-Tacket et al, 
2015 which provides a comparative analysis of various seaweeds and their contribution to carbon 

sequestration12. See also Kay, 2010 cited above.

Summary:

All materials on the National List are reviewed as separate, individual materials, described by chemical 

or species name. However each marine material grows in a complex and not fully understood ecological 

context subject to internal and external stressors, never in homeostasis. In order to fully review a

material against the required OFPA criteria each material must be assessed in the context of where it 

grows, and with an understanding of verifiable assurances of sustainability. Production of marine 

materials must be based on the maintenance of biodiversity of natural aquatic ecosystems, and the 

continuing health of the surrounding aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. With these contexts in mind 

the NOSB asks the public for comment on the nine marine materials noted above.

V REQUEST FOR PUBLIC COMMENT

1. Should the naming conventions of the marine plant/algae listings on the National List be 

consolidated and/or clarified to avoid redundancies and duplication, using Latin binomials?

2. Should annotations be written to clarify specific uses, or harvesting guidelines for any of the 

marine algae listings, such as “no machine harvesting of Ascophyllum”, and “Not harvested from 

a conservation area identified by State, Federal or International bodies”?

3. Is there a need for further NOP Guidance on marine plants/algae?

Motion to accept the discussion document on marine algae listings on National List

Motion by: Jean Richardson

Seconded by: Ashley Swaffar

Yes: 9 No: 0 Abstain: 0 Absent: 0 Recuse: 0

 12 Teventhan-Tacket S.M., Kelleway J.J., Macreadie P.I., Beardall J., Ralph P., Bellgrove A., Comaprison of marine 

macrophytes for their contribution to blue carbon sequestration. Ecology 96”3043-3057, 2015.