Idaho Organic Focus Group Final Report

The Idaho Organic Alliance[1] received a specialty crop grant in 2002 from the Idaho Department of Agriculture (ISDA). The purpose of the grant was to gather information about organic production to help the Department of Agriculture, the University of Idaho Cooperative Extension, and non-profit organizations improve and expand organic agriculture programs in the state of Idaho. One part of the grant provided for focus groups to be conducted around the state in the spring of 2005 to hear grower concerns about the organic program at the state and federal level and to learn about suggestions for improvement. The following is a report of those focus group discussions.

All organic growers in the state of Idaho who were certified or registered organic with the ISDA were invited to attend one of three regional focus groups. The groups were held on March 18 in Moscow, April 1 in Nampa, and April 2 in Twin Falls. There were five growers in the Moscow session, twelve in the Twin Falls session, and eight in Nampa. Each session addressed the same general topic areas and asked the participants to identify issues of importance to them and recommend solutions to address them. These topic areas were:

The focus group sessions revealed Idaho’s organic farmers are philosophically committed to the ideals of providing healthy nutritious food, protecting the environment and supporting their local community. They believe they offer a model of economic sustainability and stewardship to a less stable and shifting Idaho agriculture. According to the farmers, the National Organic Program which establishes the standards by which a product is labeled “organic” is under constant political threat. Organic growers have no effective lobby, and feel the Idaho Department of Agriculture is not their advocate. Idaho treats the organic program as a second class citizen, frustrating the farmers who see the growing public demand for organic products as requiring a strong, well-funded and visionary program. There is widespread agreement that failing to enforce certain provisions of the program, such as the $5000 gross exemption, jeopardizes the good name of organic and risks the livelihood of organic growers who depend upon public confidence in the certification process.

The Idaho requirement for each grower to attend annual continuing education is not accompanied by any organized method of providing it. The ISDA is not mandated to provide the education. The University of Idaho, in the opinion of southern Idaho farmers at least, is not a reliable resource, and no other organization provides timely, organic-specific education. Growers unanimously agreed on the value for education on a wide-range of topics from understanding organic regulations to direct marketing.

While the farmers were critical of aspects of the state and national programs, they offered realistic solutions such as encouraging the Idaho Department of Agriculture to view the organic program as a viable and growing part of the state’s agriculture, clarifying rules and enforcement procedures, improving the ISDA organic website, providing more educational opportunities, and offering a clearly-written handbook for growers.

All the groups shared a deep personal conviction about the importance and values of organic farming expressed in preservation of the health of individuals, their families, and the community. There was a profound philosophical commitment regarding stewardship and sustainability over multiple generations. This ethic was strongly linked to other issues such as building community and supporting the local economy.

Beyond philosophical considerations, growers agreed there were economic reasons for being organic and there were many market opportunities for organic products. The expanding market and the profitability of organics provided some the opportunity to pursue broader sustainability and social justice goals.

The growers identified several important differences between organic agriculture and conventional agriculture. Probably most significant was optimism about the future of organic farming and enthusiasm about the continued growth of the organic market. Personal interactions with customers served to reinforce their convictions. Participants suggested that conventional agriculture was at a crossroads, pointing to consolidation of virtually everything from seeds to markets, declining supply and rising costs of fossil fuels, an aging farmer population, and troubling social justice issues within the industry. The organic farmers saw themselves as offering hope for long-term sustainability to consumers, to other farmers, and to agriculture in general.

The organic farmers also differentiated themselves from conventional farmers in their marketing strategies, selling into niche markets and commanding a higher average price for their goods. Direct marketing was extremely important, even to the largest organic farmers. Beyond maintaining control of their products, the local markets presented the opportunity to interface with the public on a different level than that experience by their conventional neighbors. There seemed to be a remarkable relationship of farmer and customer that involved communication, trust and flexibility all of which allow organic growers to personalize their products to match consumer interests. The organic farmers felt they possessed a great deal of power to make decisions on all aspects of their farming operation and they derived a great sense of pride in “doing the right thing”.

There were some drawbacks to growing organically, as larger-scale participants pointed out. Banks and other lenders were not supportive of alternative agricultural practices. This may preclude some farmers from even considering organics. Additionally, information about organic practices and certification may be elusive.

The general consensus was that the NOP was a valid program, especially for interstate commerce but could be much improved and was under threat from some political quarters. Several universal themes about the NOP emerged from the groups.

Idaho’s organic farmers were deeply troubled about the lack of consistent enforcement of the organic rules. Without effective enforcement every organic farmer and every organic product was suspect and the word “organic” lost credibility to producers and consumers. Farmers found themselves in the position of policing the program themselves and were not universally comfortable with the prospect of confronting neighbors and fellow farmers with apparent violations of program guidelines.

The exemption of growers who gross under $5000 in organic sales was extensively discussed. The farmers agreed there were cost savings to this low-income group, but the concept invited fraud, public confusion, and skepticism of the program as a whole in light of the lack of consistent enforcement of the regulations.

Focus group participants were also concerned about a certification system that offered no reward or advantage to products from integrated organic systems that follow the spirit as well as the letter of the law. The growth of the organic industry has apparently created farms whose operations were variously described as “organic-by-substitution”, “organic-by-neglect”, and “organic-but-not-sustainable”. These farms threatened to sully the good name of “organic” and erode public confidence.

The Twin Falls and Nampa groups spent considerable time on the political nature of the NOP and the complex relationship between it, the USDA, the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB), the Idaho Department of Agriculture (ISDA), and those who are certified. The Twin Falls growers feared the latest controversies regarding the national program might invite a re-examination of a program that took years to develop and, critically, present an opportunity for whimsical or politically-motivated alterations. The USDA and the ISDA were felt to be merely fulfilling legislative mandates and not embracing support for an organic culture as they do with other programs and policies which have numerous and effective lobbyists. Growers felt their representative, the NOSB, had little voice in the program.

The approved materials list was discussed by all groups. Some growers felt there were items on the list that should not be, and others felt the list was not readily available. Other issues that were not necessarily discussed in all the groups included the availability of organic seeds and the certification of nursery stock.

The Idaho Department of Agriculture provides certification for growers and handlers in the state of Idaho to the standards of the NOP. The farmers quickly zeroed in on the shortcomings they perceive within the Idaho program. The universal perception was that the ISDA only has a symbolic and limited interest in organic agriculture, has no philosophical commitment, and doesn’t recognize or value the increasing public demand for organic products. This seems especially true with respect to expanding niche markets in Idaho that could continue to contribute significantly to rural community sustainability across Idaho’s landscape. This lackluster approach to organics has failed to create the appropriate infrastructure to provide good customer service. According to many of the farmers, the ISDA does not clearly act as an advocate for Idaho farmers issues at the USDA level. The farmers were particularly upset by the timeliness of the certification process and general sluggishness of the system. The farmers were frustrated that their growing, vibrant industry was not recognized by the ISDA and acknowledged the growth of organics without commensurate growth of staff and funding has amplified problems. Every participant had kind words for the efforts of the organic staff, but suggested staffing and funding was woefully inadequate. A one-person staff, especially in an organization where organics was not valued, made the program very vulnerable.

The Idaho organic program is allegedly supported by user fees, but participants were frustrated by the lack of ISDA willingness to share this financial information, even to the growers on the Organic Advisory Committee of the ISDA. The cost share program for certification costs has been widely publicized but growers who have applied are still waiting for payment.

Idaho’s organic farmers represent a diversity of crops, cropping systems, production schedules, and marketing. Some growers felt the “one-size-fits-all” approach to the application and paperwork was unfair to fresh market vegetable growers who operate complex production and marketing operations.

The inspection process was reported as uneven. Northern Idaho and Twin Falls growers felt the inspections were untimely, inadequate, and not fair across the board. Nampa area farmers felt their inspectors were fair, but could be more timely. Northern Idaho growers felt they were frequently training their inspectors about organic methods during the inspection.

Idaho’s requirement for annual grower education surfaced as a major issue. Everyone agreed that education is essential to have a strong producer base. New organic growers in particular need more information about the program and the certification process than just the legalese of the regulations and a stack of forms. Continuing education classes need to be offered frequently, regionally, and address the needs of the local organic community. In-state resources were generally perceived as inadequate, compelling growers to look beyond the state for help.

Idaho is unique in the United States in requiring growers to demonstrate annually that they have attended some type of continuing education about organic practices. Growers did not fault any specific organization for failing to provide this, but pointed out if the state demands it, the state should fund it or at least ensure educational opportunities are offered. The farmers almost universally felt the ISDA should not necessarily be responsible to provide the education, but should at least help publicize its availability. There was also some question about the enforcement of this provision of the Idaho program.

Public education about organic certification was a theme throughout the groups. The farmers felt the public was increasingly interested in purchasing organic foods and were interested in the meaning of certification and organic agriculture. They bemoaned the fact there was little to no organic agricultural education in the schools.

The farmers offered a range of solutions to improve organic agriculture in Idaho, from long-term to immediate and from local to national in scope. In broad terms they believed the Idaho Department of Agriculture needed to support and strengthen the organic program and become an advocate for Idaho farmers at the national level. Farmers wanted to attend regional meetings at which they can network, learn about certification and organic methods, and provide feedback to the ISDA. Reference materials such as an organic handbook and an improved ISDA organic website would be useful to farmers of all levels and provide guidance to retailers and customers. The farmers needed organizations to provide political and public advocacy, networking, mentoring, and educational opportunities.

Enforcement. The ISDA should provide clear enforcement policy and procedures to address violations of the NOP and the Idaho program. These procedures should address the means by which growers, farmers’ market managers, retailers, and the public can identify potential problems and report them. A policy should be implemented to randomly inspect a small number of registered organic growers and test their products. Enforcement should be directed to focus on the following: use of the word “organic” by growers who are not certified or registered with the ISDA; use of the word “certified” by growers who are not certified; failure to certify when organic gross sales are over $5000; use of “registered” organic products to create “certified” organic products, and failure to provide a farm plan that represents holistic systems and sustainability.

Education. The ISDA, in coordination with organizations and institutions that conduct organic education, should ensure that such opportunities are available to Idaho’s organic farmers annually in each major region. The annual requirement of certification should be enforced.

There should be more educational opportunities within the state about organic certification for growers, handlers, retailers, inspectors, and consumers. Since farmers’ market managers and extension educators frequently are the first to be contacted by potential new growers, ensure they are well prepared to direct the growers appropriately. Integrate organic agriculture information into the Ag in the Classroom curriculum.

Regional meetings. Annual winter gatherings of organic farmers, inspectors, and ISDA staff should provide educational opportunities, and address statewide and local topics. Recommended topics included:

Grower Handbook. Organic farmers, handlers, retailers, farmers market managers, and U of I extension educators should have a handbook that provides a clear language interpretation of the NOP, details of the Idaho program and inspection procedures, explanation of inputs, seed sources, mentor lists, and resource lists. An annual update should be available to keep the handbook current. This guide will be designed specifically to assist new growers in the certification process, and provide basic information about the program to all growers and handlers. It may be available on the ISDA website, but should be published and physically provided to every certified and registered producer and handler as part of the program fee. Suitable materials may already exist in other certifying organizations.

Idaho organic information on the web. The ISDA should make the organic program pages more accessible on their website. Web search engines should be able to easily locate the website by entering “Idaho organic” and similar search terms. The website should provide helpful information for all Idaho growers, including basic certification information, forms, and links to other websites that provide production and marketing information. The website should also provide retailer and consumer information about organic certification.

Producer/handler directory. The organic producer directory currently published by the ISDA should be revised to address the needs of farmers, handlers, retailers, farmers’ market managers, extension educators, and the public. It should be published in the same year as the growers are certified.

Other existing ISDA organic literature. These publications should be reviewed for the opportunity to provide consumer information, and organic program references, including certification and application procedures. At a minimum, all such ISDA materials should provide basic information and the means by which a reader could learn more information about the organic certification process.

ISDA administration. The organic program requires more funding and staff. The farmers felt very strongly that the ISDA should develop a department-wide vision of organic agriculture in the state, including the long-term implications for state economics and resources. This vision and the role of the ISDA should be clearly communicated to the organic growers. The status of the organic program would be greatly enhanced if it were a separate program within the ISDA. Idaho’s organic program should be reviewed to determine if the state could adopt more stringent standards than the national program to provide a market advantage to Idaho growers.

Streamline the certification process making it timely and useful to organic growers. Customer service to the growers should be greatly improved. Move the application process up in the year to allow growers to complete paperwork before the field season. If any aspect of the certification process cannot be provided in a timely manner, it should be outsourced until department resources can provide it. The cost share program should be better publicized and the reimbursements more timely.

The ISDA marketing division should be used to market Idaho’s organic products. The Idaho Preferred Program should include an organic component. Provide direct marketing assistance and support for farmers markets since so many organic farmers use them. Assist in the development of local wholesale and institutional markets for organic products.

Inspections. The ISDA must ensure inspections are fair and timely. When they arrive on the farm, inspectors should be prepared, knowledgeable, and have quick access to reference information.

Idaho non-profit organizations. There should be clear understanding of the role and responsibilities of the ISDA, University of Idaho and the Cooperative Extension Service, and non-profit organizations in addressing the needs of organic farmers in the state. A non-profit may be the best vehicle for performing or coordinating items on the following list, although the U of I may have a role in some:

Regardless of who performs the work, the organic farmers in Idaho will benefit from consideration and implementation of these suggestions. A respected certification system, highly educated farmers, and committed partnerships of government, institutions, and non-profits will assure the success of the organic program for years to come.[2]

[1] In January 2005, the Idaho Organic Alliance merged with Rural Roots and maintained the name of Rural Roots.

[2] Information about this report may be obtained from Janie Burns, 9904 Southside Blvd., Nampa, ID 83686