ANAHEIM, Calif. -- Organic-industry advocates used the forum of the Natural Products Expo West here to detail their "Let's Keep Organic Organic" campaign strategy.
At the first annual Expo press briefing here, Susan Haeger, president and chief executive officer of Citizens for Health, Boulder, Colo., unveiled the visual that will be used in its advertising materials -- an apple adorned with four juxtaposed stickers. One has a "USDA Organic Certified" logo, while the others have logos depicting what is considered to be the three most objectionable aspects of the current proposed national organic standards: genetic engineering, irradiation and sludge.
The campaign is providing activist kits, which include form letters, post cards, buttons, sample letters to editors and talking points to use in meetings with legislators, policymakers and the media. The campaign has also set up a web site at www.saveorganic.com, where consumers can get information and respond directly to the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
The campaign, a joint project of the Organic Trade Association, Greenfield, Mass.; Citizens for Health; and Sustain, a Chicago environmental group, is part of a groundswell of protest against the USDA proposed rule. According to observers, the recommendations made to the USDA by the National Organics Standards Board were significantly altered in a number of key areas to create the current document.
The USDA has extended the comment period on the proposed rule to April 30, in response to a deluge of comments and, according to Bob Anderson, chairman of the NOSB, "Secretary of Agriculture Dan Glickman has publicly stated that he will not create a rule that the public and the industry will not embrace."
But Katherine DiMatteo, executive director of the OTA, was not as sanguine.
"I'm cynical,"she said, "because we've worked with the USDA for seven years, we've gone to all the board meetings, commented on the draft, talked with USDA three or four times a year to check on its progress, and then in December, we find we have a rule that doesn't reflect half of what we've said [in that period]."
She further stated that the release of a USDA internal memo, which was obtained by Mother Jones magazine, only added to her cynicism about the USDA's intentions.
Written eight months before the standards were released, the memo reflects USDA disagreement with the NOSB recommendations and how the agency acceded to pressure exerted by, among others, the Clinton White House, in the matter of bioengineered foods. During the extended comment period, the OTA will stress that organics is a consumer-driven niche market, DiMatteo said, which has a place in American business. It should not be made to conform to administration policies created for the mainstream agricultural industry.
"In a democracy there is a need for choice," she said, "and that is what we are going to emphasize."
Retailers who spoke with SN at the Expo expressed their hope that the USDA will heed the public outcry and respond with appropriate revisions.
"The industry is optimistic," said Dale Kamibayashi, director of grocery purchasing for Wild Oats Markets, Boulder, Colo. "The term 'natural' got plagiarized and misused, and we don't want that to happen to the term 'organic.' We hope that [USDA] will revise the standards and recognize and establish boundaries to ensure the integrity of organics."
J.B. Pratt, president of Pratt Foods, Norman, Okla., said that it would be practical to revise the current proposed rule so that the country could have a law in place by the year 2000.
