Backyard Aquaponics
A place to discuss aquaponics

hygicell .. I was talking about the Australia situation ... not Belgium, Canada or the US.

That's good news that those countries have organic certification of hydroponics but each certification body in Australia has its own philosophy and
you certainly wont convince a bio-dynamic certification body that hydroponics is a good idea. If all 7 of the certifiers taket that stance then there will need to be an 8th.

I do have something in writing .. the NASAA standard and it specifically rules out hydroponics.

bio-dynamic is not the same as certified organic.

but have it your way, Slane
I give up trying to convince you of the existing possibilities

after all it's your country, not mine, as you so clearly point out

nothing was ever changed by people who sat back sulking in a corner complaining that nothing could be changed

Frank

so with work to do, who is going to do it??
I figure an interest needs to be there before action will happen.

Frank, I think slane was just pointing out the difference of a countries bias
based needs!

Frank, why don't you apply for organic certification? Certification is a long expensive process taking at least 3 years and lots of time and money. It seems that pretty much everyone here is doing aquaponics for their own personal consumption, so why would they have any reason to go through the process of certification?

It seems you have spent a lot of time trying to convince everyone else that they should follow this path, why don't you do it yourself?

Mmm... good point EB!

Michael Evans of Applied Nutrition, the makers of the new organic fish feed is involved with (or has links to) the BFA organic accredition arm......

I have submitted the US "Final Recommendations" paper to him and asked that both BFA and ACO review the paper and comment....

Hopefully either Michael or myself will be able to post a response here shortly...

Sadly, This again shows that neither you nor Creative 1 have carefully read my postings, Earthbound, like I have politely asked.
You will not blame me for finding that annoying.

You would have known that it was me who started this thread:

so if you ask:

and comment:

reread this:

that's why I do my research:

I by now know through researching the situation in the EU, in Canada, in the US: they all accept or will accept hydroponics techniques as certifiable organic.
These are serious precedents for anybody over the world to get this accepted in their country too.
In a discussion like this, I would assume that people who care to comment do so out of a real interest to learn whether certification is possible or not.
I believe it is, and have tried to explain on what grounds.

As it is my goal to do so, I was looking to find support.
and trying to give you some by posting my findings and conclusions, thus giving you valuable arguments for certification application.

All I get from some is a stubborn insisting that it can't be done. On points that I have already argumented. Read my postings, please.

If you would read the USDA final recommendations, you would get a completely different view of what you call "bureaucracy".
This document and how it came about shows that rule makers take their jobs very seriously.
I wish you would do the same: if you want to join in a discussion, please take a positive attitude and inform yourself of what is already said.
I have repeatedly and politely asked to do so.
Why don't you?

no hard feelings,
Frank

thanks, Rupert
some positive action was needed.

Frank

Mostly I agree with you Frank but the point you seem to be missing is that in Australia things are different. In Australia we don't have draft guidelines we have legislated Guidlines that every certifying body within Australia must base their own guidelines upon. Australian certifying bodies may make and require more onerous standards but they must meet at least the standard set by AQIS.

Since this basic standard states the hydroponic methods can not be certified then it is a very real possibility that AP plants may not be certifiable as organic. It is possible that someone could get the AQIS standard changed but as you are probably aware getting Governments to change can be extremely difficult (beuracratic inertia).

Stuart

proof only exists in mathematics, Stuart
I am well aware that the situation in Australia is different, that is why I compare it to other countries.
but evolution exists everywhere, Australia is no exception.
you keep insisting that the situation is what it is, thereby implying that change is impossible
I disagree

I am right now sending the "final recommendations" to one of the two accredited certification agencies in Belgium for consideration.
Will keep you all informed.

Frank

I didn't say it was impossible.

You, your self said action should be taken before draft guidelines become finalised guidelines or things would be much more difficult to change. Unfortunately we have missed the chance at effecting the draft guidelines but someone could certainly take a shot at getting the guidelines changed.

Your "gravel + fish poo = soil" argument may work within the guidlines as they stand but we will have to wait and see.

Fortunately in Australia we don't have the legislation requiring people to be certified in order to claim that their produce is organic. This means that the people on this site that are planning cottage level commercial operations (in Australia) will still be able to claim organic status even if they are not certified.

Also because they are small its unlikely that they will bother with the expense and hassle of getting certified.

That all said I don't want to cause offense so I hope in this and other threads we can continue to bounce ideas off each other.

You say "fortunately", Stuart
I disagree.
I am sorry, but it is my opinion that the word "organic" (or some other word, like "bio" in Belgium, "oeko" in Germany) in publicity and on produce should be reserved to those who can prove they are certified organic.
As already said, some companies (not little ones at that, like Danone) have been forced to change existing brand names to that effect if they were not certified organic.
It is a tendency to protect such a word all over the world aimed at protecting both producers and consumers.
This is the only way to ensure as best as possible that a product is really produced organically.
A claim is just not good enough. So many untruths are told about our food.
When I buy a product in a supermarket claiming to be organically produced, I want to have some guarantee I can objectively trust.

greetings

Frank

Stuart, can you link me to the AQIS standards??

Not saying you're wrong but I wasn't aware that the Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service was involved in and/or set any standards for "organic" certification.

Frank, why are you annoyed... Have you read what I said, or more to the point comprehended what I'm saying?????

My point is, that I see little sense in bouncing ideas backwards and forwards about what may and or may not be acceptable by certifying agencies. Trying to work out arguments as to why aquaponics may or may not be certified, without even approaching them first. You might find that "the road to certification" is as simple as starting the process, and they accept everything. Without having to research to any great extent.

There's no sense in preparing for a big "war" with the certifying agencies, as to why you think certification should be accepted, citing references from numerous papers and documents from around the world. When perhaps, just perhaps, they might look at the very first application and say, "Ok then, no worries"... Then all this discussion and work is pointless.

Wouldn't it be more logical to apply for certification, wait for their response. AFter all, they are the ones that make the decisions, if they knock it back, then it's time for the work to begin in citing the references.. In this aspect I see your point of view as being the negative one, you are the one who seems to be assuming that certification will not be granted, and that you will need to qualify your arguments to them.

I'm all for working smarter, not harder.

I've just read through the Nasaa organic standard concerning aquaculture species and can't see any reason why they wouldn't certify aquaponically produced fish.. The plants? Well who knows.

Once again, you don't know until you try. Pick a certifying body, download their application, fill it out and send it off, start the ball rolling.

Which brings me back to my original post yesterday. As most people on this forum are small backyard producers growing for themselves, there is no need nor want for organic certification, it is a long drawn out process that is costly.

A committee including AQIS and other involved parties (including OGAWA, the Organic Growers Associatio0n of WA) is currently working on enforceable standards for food labelled "organic".