Rick Barrett reported on the front page of today’s Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that, “One of the biggest threats to U.S. organic farming, those in the industry say, comes from products labeled ‘organic’  but aren’t the real deal.

“In September, for instance, an inspector general audit from the U.S. Department of Agriculture noted that safeguards for consumers were lacking for products coming from overseas.

“The audit also said some imported organic produce shipments were fumigated with pesticides at the border, in violation of organic standards.”

Mr. Barrett noted that, “Not every shipment of fruits and vegetables was doused with chemicals, but if pests or disease were found, some of the products were treated with pesticides even if they were labeled organic.

“A Washington Post investigation found that non-organic corn and soy — with organic labels — were flooding into the United States.”

“The newspaper reported that millions of pounds of ‘organic’ corn and soybeans had been shipped to the U.S. through Turkey despite evidence that the crops were grown conventionally.”

The Journal Sentinel article indicated that, “Although products bearing the ‘USDA Organic’ seal usually come from the U.S., large amounts of organic corn, soybeans, coffee and other commodities are from other countries.

“‘Our audit found that (USDA) needs to strengthen its controls over the approval and oversight of international trade arrangements and agreements for the import of organic products,’ the inspector general’s office said.

“The problems undermine consumer confidence, said Mary Ann Ihm with the Wellspring organic farm in West Bend.”

A news release this week from the National Farmers Union stated that, “As U.S. House and Senate agriculture committee leadership readies a framework for the 2018 Farm Bill, the conservation community has come to a consensus on a fundamental set of provisions to strengthen the conservation title of the bill. National Farmers Union (NFU) joined 20 other prominent farm, food, wildlife and environmental organizations today in sending these recommendations to the agriculture committees.

“‘As we move toward reauthorization of the next farm bill, the Conservation Title programs, funding, and authorities are more critical now than ever,’ wrote the coalition. ‘The farm conservation community, representing agriculture, wildlife, sportsmen, conservation, and environmental organizations, stands united in calling for a strengthened and expanded Conservation Title in the 2018 Farm Bill.’

“The coalition called on Congress to write a farm bill that ensures farmers and ranchers can both increase the productivity and sustainability of their operations and have access to a variety of tools they can choose from to conserve, manage, and enhance shared natural resources.”

The news update added that, “NFU President Roger Johnson said he is hopeful the recommendations can provide a starting point for Congress to craft policy that provides farmers and ranchers with the tools and information they need to protect the environment. ‘Family farmers and ranchers are the original stewards of our land, and they need the flexibility and support offered in these suggestions to ensure the land, water and air is protected and productive for generations to come,’ he said.

“To view a copy of the consensus document, click here.”

Geoffrey Mohan reported yesterday at the Los Angeles Times Online that, “If you like your fast food without antibiotics, order the chicken and hold the beef and pork.

“That’s the advice gleaned from an annual report card published Wednesday on the fast-food and casual-dining industry, which made substantial progress this year in eliminating antibiotics from its poultry supply but lags in its efforts for beef and pork.

“Use of antibiotics to raise animals is one factor behind the rise of drug-resistant infections that sicken more than 2 million people annually, causing at least 23,000 deaths, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.”

Mr. Mohan noted that, “Fourteen of the top 25 companies in fast food have adopted policies aimed at ridding antibiotics that are important to human health from their meat supply, according to Consumers Union and five other public-interest groups that authored the report.”

The Los Angeles Times article also pointed out that, “The companies, which account for two-thirds of the industry’s revenue, include five that adopted policies this year: KFC, Burger King, Starbucks, Dunkin’ Donuts and Jack in the Box.

“‘When it comes to chicken nuggets, we’ve seen incredible change in a few short years — but burgers and bacon are another story,’ said Lena Brook, food policy advocate at the Natural Resources Defense Council, one of the coauthors of the report.”

Jacob Bunge reported yesterday at The Wall Street Journal Online that, “Syngenta said it would settle thousands of lawsuits from U.S. farmers who alleged the Swiss agricultural giant’s launch of genetically engineered corn seeds cost them money.

“Syngenta introduced a new variety of pest-resistant corn, called Agrisure Viptera, in 2011. The strain hadn’t been approved by authorities in China, which in 2013 began rejecting U.S. corn shipments found to contain the Syngenta genes. U.S. farmers allege that the market for U.S. corn shrank as a result, weighing on prices and their incomes.

“Syngenta said Tuesday that its proposed settlement with the farmers would ‘avoid the uncertainty of ongoing litigation.’ A Syngenta spokesman said it was too early to comment on the size of any settlement fund. Syngenta isn’t admitting to the plaintiffs’ charges. The agreement still requires court approval.”

Mr. Bunge also noted that, “Lawyers for the farmers said they looked forward to proposing a final settlement agreement over the next several weeks.”

Reuters news reported yesterday that, “An urban agriculture initiative to make Paris more environmentally sustainable, mainly through farming on the capital’s rooftops, has been such a success that the mayor is unveiling a new round of projects this week.

“Rooftop farming has boomed in the past years from New York to Tokyo via London and Paris.

“By 2020, the French capital will host more than 100 hectares (0.39 square mile) of rooftop gardens and planted walls, the Paris City Hall said. Of this, one third will be devoted to urban farming.”

The Reuters article added that, “The first wave of projects will lead to the cultivation on 32 sites of 425 tonnes of fruits and vegetables, 24 tonnes of mushrooms, 30,000 flowers, the production of 8,000 litres of beer and 95 kilograms of honey.

Karen Madden reported last week at the Wisconsin Daily Tribune (Wisconsin Rapids, Wis.) Online that, “The Wisconsin Supreme Court may decide the future of a proposed mega-dairy farm Saratoga.

“The Golden Sands Dairy farm, which would hold about 4,000 cows and have about 6,000 acres of crops where the company will spread the manure from the cows, has been the subject of controversy since it was proposed by the Wysocki Family of Companies in 2012.

“In April, an appeals court ruled that Wysocki’s building permits for the project did not allow it to plant crops on the land, a ruling that a Wysocki executive said endangered the future of the project.”

Ms. Madden explained that, “Now the Wisconsin Supreme Court will decide whether the company has the right to farm the land. The court issued a notice Sept. 12 stating it would hear the case. “

The article added that, “‘Golden Sands is gratified, but not surprised, that the Wisconsin Supreme Court has taken this case,’ said Jim Wysocki, the company’s chief financial officer. ‘It will provide the court the opportunity to clarify the law of vested rights in Wisconsin for all businesses that create jobs in the state and to rectify the unfair process by which the town of Saratoga sought to deprive Golden Sands of its vested rights.’

Deana Stroisch reported today at FarmWeekNow Online that, “Calling the rule ‘fatally flawed,’ Illinois Farm Bureau’s president called for its repeal and encouraged the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to reconsider the definition of ‘waters of the United States’ (WOTUS).

“‘The definition of WOTUS and the administration of the Clean Water Act have been a focal point of the agricultural community for decades,’ Richard Guebert Jr. wrote to EPA. ‘Illinois farmers own and operate facilities, which produce row crops and livestock, that provide safe and affordable food, fiber and fuel to all Americans and the world. These operations are water-dependent enterprises. … Simply put, Illinois farmers need to know what features on their lands are subject to federal jurisdiction and, by extension, whether their day-to-day farming operations are lawful.’

“On Monday, Illinois Farm Bureau submitted Guebert’s 12-page comments to EPA. Included with the comments: a petition signed by more than 2,500 Illinois farmers in support of the repeal effort.”

Today’s update noted that, “IFB has spent years fighting the rule, believed to expand the agency’s jurisdiction beyond what Congress intended.”

Donnelle Eller reported last week at The Des Moines Register Online that, “After 11 years, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has failed to come up with the tools needed to measure whether large animal-feeding operations are exceeding federal air pollution standards, according to an EPA inspector general’s report released this week.

“That delay has left nearly 14,000 livestock facilities largely exempt from federal air emission oversight, and residents living near those facilities unprotected from harmful emissions that include ammonia and hydrogen sulfide, environmental groups say.

“‘It’s another example that the EPA, through more than one administration, has really been afraid to take on the livestock industry,’ said Wally Taylor, an attorney for the Sierra Club’s Iowa Chapter.”

Ms. Eller noted that, “The EPA blamed the delays on problems with data collected through an industry-backed air-monitoring study and a ‘lack of expertise and resources’ to develop the air-emission measurement methodologies, among other issues, according to the report.”

The Register article added that, “In 2005, the EPA and the livestock industry reached an agreement: Producers would fund an air-emissions study and the EPA would not sue participating livestock operations for clean air violations.

“The air monitoring study, which cost $15 million, was completed in 2010, and EPA released an emission measurement draft in 2012.

“But a scientific board said the study data wasn’t strong enough to be broadly applied outside the study group, which included 27 facilities.

“By 2013, the EPA halted most work on developing air-emission measuring tools, the report said.”