Organic Management Systems: Section/Division in ASA-CSSA-SSSA? Survey Results

Summary:
ASA members ask the question: "Should there be an Organic Management Systems Division in the American Society of Agronomy?"

Sixty-two responses were received by the deadline of December 15, 2007 (summary attached). The majority (58/62) favored some form of "organic" recognition within the societies by answering "yes" to either question 1 or 2.

Questions


1- I think we should consider changing the name of A-8 to "Integrated Ag and Organic Systems" and not start a separate division
Yes: 31
No 28
Maybe: 2
No Response: 1
Total: 62

2- I would like to see a separate Organic Management Systems division
Yes No Maybe no response Total responses
Yes: 27
No: 33
Maybe: 1
No Response: 1
Total Responses: 62

3- I am interested in serving on the Organic Discussion Group
Yes: 30
No: 27
Maybe: 2
No Response: 3
Total Responses: 62

4- I would like to see "Local Foods" included in the new name
Yes: 9
No: 38
Maybe: 4
No response: 11
Total Responses: 62

Summary:
Number stating yes to either question 1 or 2 (I.e., approve of recognizing some form of 'organic'--either in A-8 name or as separate division): 58

***Comments from Survey Posted With Permission (if you have questions, please contact Kathleen Delate)***
PLEASE NOTE, SURVEY COMMENTS BELOW WERE WRITTEN ACCORDING TO QUESTION NUMBER

Kathleen DelateAssociate ProfessorDepts. of Agronomy & HorticultureOrganic Specialist106 Horticulture Hall, Iowa State Univ., Ames, IA 50011Phone: 515-294-7069; FAX: 515-294-0737Webpage: http://extension.agron.iastate.edu/organicag/
It appears that many long-term members of A-8 would not want to change the name of A-8, since "Integrated Ag Systems" has been 'working' for them, so we should probably look at creating a new division that has the word 'organic' in it. I am not opposed to adding 'sustainable' or 'ecological' or 'biological' to the name (such as "Organic and Ecological Systems") but these other terms can be confusing to some, as they are not defined as succinctly as 'organic.' We are still debating the definition of 'sustainable' in classes at Iowa State University, while there is pretty universal agreement on what constitutes an organic system (as someone said, "Like it or not, the USDA-NOP/E.U. 2092/91 rules have organized 'organic' for us). Within organic systems, there will always be the challenge of making them as 'sustainable' and 'ecological' as possible; this does not rule out, however, the need to have a separate 'organic' division within the Societies, similar to what the ASHS (Horticulture Society) has. There, as would be the case in ASA/CSSA/SSSA, the 'organic' division is the home for presentations/symposia that "address the science of organic/ecological systems in general, ecosystem services, more applied efforts with a focus on organic production/marketing, and/or concerns of certified organic systems." "Local foods" have been included in may of these discussions/presentations so I'm not sure if we need to include it in the name, but I would not be opposed to it. In order to prevent the new division being associated with a 'movement' (as one person wrote), members would be responsible for reviewing papers, symposia, etc. to assure that only peer-reviewed science is presented, as we did for the Organic Ag symposium.

Doug Collins
Crop and Soil Sciences - WSU
Puyallup Research Center7612 Pioneer Way Puyallup, WA 98371
dpcollins@wsu.edu
phone: 253-445-4658
cell phone: 206-387-9569
Comment: Thanks for organizing the survey

Pat Carr
Agronomist/Adjunct Professor,
Cropping Systems-Organic Farming
North Dakota State University
Dickinson Research Extension Center
1041 State Avenue
Dickinson, ND 58601
ph. 701.483.2348 xx143
fax 701.483.2005
mobile 701.590.0405
1. I would like to see a separate Organic Management Systems division. Yes, though I think the group might want to explore a different name for this new division to encompass other ecologically-minded farming methods. I'm concerned after visiting with (xx) that some colleagues might react negatively to a new division focused exclusively on organic farming (personally, I WANT a division focused on organic farming but am a bit concerned about the 'political' ramifications of moving in that direction). 3. I am interested in serving on the Organic Discussion Group (yes/no). Yes. 4. I would like to see "Local Foods" included in the new name. No; I guess I would prefer to see this emphasis in a description of the new division. I think local food emphases, which I suspect many A8 members support, is a separate topic from organic/ecological production methods.

David Clay
Plant Science Department
South Dakota State University
Box 2207A
Brookings, SD 57007
Telephone: 605-688-5081
E-mail: David_Clay@sdstate.edu
I would be willing to join this discussion. Note below our current description.Division A08 focuses upon holistic and integrated systems approaches in agricultural research and technology development. Collaborative program development with agricultural professionals, crop advisers, and natural resource conservationists, including farmers and those who provide agricultural and natural resource information, services, and products. Its purpose is to enable interaction among agricultural and natural resource scientists, professionals and practitioners for the purpose of fostering collaboration and mutual understanding in research and development of integrated agricultural systems.

Doug Karlen USDA-ARS
National Soil Tilth LabIowa State Universirty
2150 Pammel Drive
Ames, IA 50011
Ph: (515) 294-3336
E-mail: doug.karlen@ars.usda.gov
1. Yes - but be sure to get vote out to all Division A-8 members and start with a name such as "Integrated and Organic Ag Systems". 2. NO, we have too many Divisions in the tri-societies already. 3. No - I simply don't have the time to additional opportunities. 4. No - not needed in the name, just include it as part of the marketing for all local ag systems.


Stuart Turner
CPAg #025755903
Kilawea Dr
West Richland, WA 99353
509-539-5524
Agforensic@aol.com
I am a CPAg working with several large organic fruit and grape producers, as well as the largest handler of bio-solids in the PNW. There are some unique issues beyond these crops, especially on program grain crops. We cannot get insurance coverage in many areas like the conventional producers have...organic fertilizers seem foreign to Rain & Hail and like companies. There are some major challenges ahead, I like the idea of continuing to integrate production, sustainable ag and Organic...rather than a divorce and separate entity. The animal ag - especially CAFO/AFO people are closely integrated here with nutrient recycling - especially dairy in my area with a predominance of large, freestall style operations milking 4-12,000 head. Let me know if there is anything specific I can do to assist as this develops, I am one of the few - not extension, university, or ag chem/fertilizer related consultants out there where the rubber meets the road.


William Anderson
Prof. of Agronomy
Plant and Earth Science Department
University of Wisconsin-River Falls
314 Ag Science
410 South Third Street
River Falls, WI 54022
715-425-3941
I'm interested. I teach Crop 368/568 Sustainable Agriculture at the UW-River Falls campus, which contains a segment focused on organic production systems. We are developing an Organic Production Systems course as well, and recently added a Sustainable Agriculture option within our Crop and Soil Science major. We grow some organic alfalfa/brome on our college farm. 4: I'm not sure "local foods" belongs -- I like to support the local food movement, whether or not the local foods are organic. I'm not sure they are logically tied together...


Joji Muramoto
Associate Researcher
Center for Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems (CASFS)
University of California, Santa Cruz
PICA-UCSC, 1156
High St.Santa Cruz, CA 95064 USA
ph: 831-459-2506
fax: 831-459-2867
Email: joji@ucsc.eduwww.agroecology.org
This is good going and I'm so thrilled to see this happening. 1. I think we should consider changing the name of A-8 to "Integrated Ag and Organic Systems" and not start a separate division. NO: First I'd like to know how much presentations were related to organic ag. in A8 sections this year (or even the last 5 years..). 2. I would like to see a separate Organic Management Systems division. YES: I believe this is time to create a separate division. I also would like to know more about ASHS's organic division. How has it been managed? By whom? How many members? 3. I am interested in serving on the Organic Discussion Group. YES: Given the overwhelming work load I have, I'm not sure how much actual activities I can do for the group. However, I'll happy to be a part of the Discussion Group. 4. I would like to see "Local Foods" included in the new name. YES: Great idea. We should ask questions like "Is organic sustainable?"


Joseph Heckman Ph.D.
Extension Specialist - Soil Fertility
Cook College, Rutgers University
Department of Plant Biology & Pathology
The State University of NJ
59 Dudley Road - Foran Hall
New Brunswick, NJ 08901-8520
Phone: (732) 932-9711 ext. 119
Fax: (732) 932-9441
heckman@AESOP.Rutgers.edu
I think that if organic gains division status in ASA, that this will be another milestone in the organic movement. One problem with having a division name include both words "sustainable" and "organic" is that it seems to imply that organic ag is not sustainable. And it may not be with organic in its current form, but as much can be argued about the non-sustainable nature of conventional agriculture. I have heard it said, but I have not been able to confirm, that organic pioneer Eve Balfour was the first person to talk about sustainable in connection to agriculture. Nevertheless, historically I think that the whole sustainable movement grew out of the organic movement. With this in mind, I think that an organic ASA division can stand on its own as a division without including the word "sustainable". I think, in regards to formation of an organic division, the most important point to make is that organic needs its own division because of its uniqueness. Organic has matured into a well defined form of agriculture that has a growing market for its products. Agronomists have a responsibility in research and extension work in support of organic agriculture. The voice of consumers in the market place may ultimately be more important than whether or not crop and soil scientists like or dislike organic agriculture in its current form. The word "ecological" was not in widespread use during the early period of organic farming concept development yet organic agriculture developed out of observations using nature as a model (implying an ecological basis) for organic farming systems. I think ecological and agroecological grew in part out of the organic movement but the proponents of ecological or agroecological agriculture seems reluctant to give the organic farming movement much credit. Some of the "rules" for organic practices sometimes seem to lack an ecological basis but I think some of this results from a need to set rather rigid "rules" for certified organic to prevent fraud in the market place.


Perry Miller
Associate Professor of Cropping Systems
Dept. Land Resources and Environmental Sciences
Montana State University
PO Box 173120,
334 Leon Johnson Hall
Bozeman, MT 59717-3120
Ph. 406-994-5431
Fax 406-994-3933
1. I think we should consider changing the name of A-8 to "Integrated Ag and Organic Systems" and not start a separate division. No. (You really have two questions here so might be hard for you to interpret responses I would not support this A8 name change to IAOS but also question whether it is wise to start a splinter organic division.) 2. I would like to see a separate Organic Management Systems division.Not convinced at this time that this would be a good idea. So, No, but open to discussion. My knowledge on this issue is not perfect. 3. I am interested in serving on the Organic Discussion Group. Perhaps. I think it's critical for someone here at MSU to be involved but it may make more sense for someone else to represent us.


Anil Shrestha
PM Weed Ecologist
UC Kearney Agricultural Center
University of California, Davis
Phone (559) 646-6534
FAX (559) 646-6593
E-mail: anil@uckac.edu[mailto:anil@uckac.edu]
I think we should consider changing the name of A-8 to "Integrated Ag and Organic Systems" and not start a separate division. Yes, I would prefer not to have a separate division as this would take away audience and lead to more problems attending conflicting concurrent sessions. A new division would take away audience from A-8. 2. I would like to see a separate Organic Management Systems division. No, a lot of organic research is being done in horticultural crops. Would having a separate division within ASA be inclusive of folks from ASHS? Unless this division would try to bring together people from ASHS. Again would ASHS members be open to membership in a new ASA Organic division. If yes, then a separate division is necessary else having organic systems within A-8 may be better.


Bonnie Ball Coelho
Southern Crop Protection & Food Research Centre
1391 Sandford St., London, ON
Telephone: 519-457-1470 (217)
fax: 519-457-3997
ballb@agr.gc.camailto:ballb@AGR.GC.CA
no comment

Milt McGiffen PhD.
Vice Chair for Extension
Department of Botany and Plant Sciences
University of California
Riverside, CA 92521-0124
FAX: 951-827-5717
Cell: 909-560-0839
Lab Phone: 951-827-5989
Email: milt@ucr.edu
http://www.plantbiology.ucr.edu/people/faculty/mcgiffen.html
I think that "Organic" should have some sort of identity within the societies. A separate division seems right. Beyond that, I do not know which option to choose.


Dana Dinnes
National Soil Tilth Lab
Ames, IA
Dana.Dinnes@ars.usda.gov
Although I agree with having a formal division to emphasize the organic systems science, I view the Local Foods issue as more of a rural sociology science and thus is not good fit within the Tri-Societies. I still would be interested in reading papers on that field, however. In the discussions I have sat in on in regard to creating a new division, it seems that one of the bottom-line decisions factors has been based upon how many research papers were recently published for that field of science. So, being curious about this I did a quick search on the ISI Web of Science and got these numbers of published research papers from the key phase for the time period of 2000-2007: Organic agriculture = 2048 papers; Organic systems = 20579 papers; Organic farming = 1792 papers. Seems to me that should justify serious consideration for creating a new division.


Michel Cavigelli
Research Soil Scientist
Sustainable Agricultural Systems Lab
Animal and Natural Resources Institute
Bldg 001, Rm 140
BARC-West10300
Baltimore Ave.
Beltsville, MD 20705
301-504-8327 office
240-304-9480 cell
301-504-8370 fax
michel.cavigelli@ars.usda.gov
Thanks for your part in organizing the symposium and for the invitation to give a presentation. I got a lot of good feedback after the talk. With respect to the idea of having an organic division, I did not attend the A-8 meeting where that was discussed but I am not a big fan of the idea. I think that A-8 as is serves the organic community well if not better than a division that specifically has the name organic in it-after all, you were able to organize this symposium within that existing framework. It is not clear to me that having a separate organic division would have much benefit beyond what A-8 already offers. Some specific comments in response to your email. 1. Organic agriculture is now its own specialization-with faculty positions around the country specifically dedicated to organic ag research and education; national and international conferences specifically on organic ag research and education present peer-reviewed research (i.e., the IFOAM Organic World Congress in Italy, 2008); and students are requesting specific curriculum in organic agriculture (e.g., Washington State University now offers a B.S. in Organic Agriculture).There are lots of specializations within agronomy or any science but that alone is not sufficient reason to have a new division. By this argument we would have a separate division on, for example, soybean breeding. There are faculty hired specifically as soybean breeders, there are meetings for just soybean breeders but this is not adequate reason to have a division on soybean breeding. Granted, organic is a broader topic than soybean breeding but the purpose of A-8 is to house integrated systems research such as organic. 2. Coordinated efforts around organic agriculture within the Tri-Societies will result in organizing presentations on organic ag to avoid overlap in session topics (as occurred on more than one occasion at ASA this year); a directed revenue stream to support national and international speakers at the annual meetings; and recognition of organic agriculture as a bona fide topic at the Tri-Societies meetings. Is there anything about A-8 that does not allow this already? (Especially compared to 1988 when I first presented at the A-C-S meetings) organic is currently a bona fide topic without its own division.3. Although not a unanimous opinion, members of the Committee on Organic and Sustainable Agriculture (COSA), a committee within the Tri-Societies, have suggested that a separate division on sustainable/organic agriculture be developed within the Tri-Societies because of the strong interest in sustainable/organic agriculture topics they have observed each year at the COSA Roundtables they have held at ASA annual meetings. COSA would continue to function as a committee and continue with their own Roundtables or workshops, with a particular emphasis on policy and philosophical issues within sustainable/organic agriculture in contrast to the new division, which would emphasize research results. I don't like the idea of calling a division sustainable agriculture (all others are not sustainable?) but I prefer the current A-8 Integrated Systems name. That is distinct from the other divisions much more so than sustainable or organic because it has explicit in the name that there is integration among the various components of the system. Organic might have that implicitly but there are certainly plenty of examples of organic farms not being as well integrated or as sustainable as they could be. Especially as more conventional farmers are interested in transitioning to organic, I think emphasizing the integrated whole is even more important. Is this really true? Again, A-8 seemed to serve this need without the need for a new division. 1.No to a separate division. No to this division title. This title, to me, suggests that organic systems are not integrated systems and/or vice-versa. What's wrong with keeping the name as is? 4. No. Integrated Ag Systems addresses this important topic already.


Joseph Omielan
Univ of KentuckyPlant and Soil Sciences Dept
1405 Veterans Dr - Room 318
Lexington, KY 40546-0312
Phone: (859) 257-5020x80823
FAX: (859) 257-7874
E-mail: joe.omielan@uky.edu
no additional comment


Laurie Drinkwater,
Associate Professor,
Dept. of Horticulture,
Cornell University
led24@cornell.edu
Maybe. Two questions here. This is an interesting idea that would be worth considering. My sense is that we would not succeed in identifying a name that will include everyone who has become associated with A-8. 2. NO. At this point, I do not find the arguments for an organic section compelling, although after more discussion I could be convinced otherwise. Considering that "organic" is 1) a legally defined marketing label, 2) a social movement with a lot of baggage and 3)not based on a clear scientific framework, it just doesn't seem like a useful conceptual framework for a section within ASA. Many organic proponents argue that ecological principles serve as the foundation for organic agriculture, however in practice this is simply not true. I agree that a majority of scientists do apply ecological concepts to research in organic systems and many organic farmers apply ecological principles in designing their cropping systems but the organic rule that defines US organic ag. does not reflect ecological principles. For example, the USDA rule does not include ecological concepts of energy flows and nutrient balance and permits many practices which are not ecologically sound. As a scientific professional society, I think we need to clearing distinguish between scientific knowledge and US agricultural policy. 3.YES. I am interested in participating in a discussion about how can we form a section that will serve as a forum for ecological approaches to agriculture, which encompasses organic ag. 4. NO. If we use a broader term such as ecological agriculture, we do not need to list every aspect of the systems.

Dale Hess
Agroecologist
Director of Collegiate Programs
Merry Lea Environmental Learning Center of Goshen College
P.O. Box 263Wolf Lake, IN 46796
Tel: 260-799-5869 ext 117
Fax: 260-799-5875
Web: http://www.goshen.edu/merrylea/
Thank you for considering these issues!In response to the four questions: 1. I think we should consider changing the name of A-8 to "Integrated Ag and Organic Systems" and not start a separate division. No - as I would add my voice to those who consider that in the long run a separate division is justified (point 2 below) given the significant differences between conventional and organic agriculture; and what I expect to be the growing importance of ecological agriculture.2. I would like to see a separate Organic Management Systems division. Yes - but I think that certified organic systems are just one facet of a broader movement to produce food locally in an ecologically, economically and socially responsible way. Perhaps the name should reflect this: e.g., Organic and Sustainable Systems Division? 3. I am interested in serving on the Organic Discussion Group. Yes, I am open to this. 4. I would like to see "Local Foods" included in the new name. Yes, this should certainly be considered! We emphasize local, sustainably produced foods in our region; not all are certified organic.

Stefan Seiter
Oregon State University – Department of Horticulture
Main Campus Albany
Phone (voice mail): (541) 917-4765
E-mail address: stefan.seiter@linnbenton.edu
Website: http://cf.linnbenton.edu/mathsci/aghort/seiters
Name: My preference is ecological agriculture division or organic agriculture division - don't use sustainable, don't use integratedYes outside groups and those from other sessions, divisions etc. dealing with "organic" should be included.


Ronald B. Sorensen,
Ph.D. Research Agronomist
P.O. Box 509: 1011
Forrester Dr.
SEDawson, GA 39842
229.995.7411 (voice)
229.995.7416 (fax)
229.995.7414 (sec)
email: ron.sorensen@ars.usda.gov
1. I think we should consider changing the name of A-8 to "Integrated Ag and Organic Systems" and not start a separate division. YES. In my opinion, organic farming will always be a small aspect of the total agricultural research arena. Organic will always be with us but I do not believe it will be a cure all or be all and will ebb and flow with peer pressure, commodity groups and political movements. Right now, organic has a large following and great research is being accomplished. We need to acknowledge the organic presence and organize the society such that all research has an avenue to present and disseminate research information. However, I do not believe the Society needs a separate division unless there is enough individuals to support a division and that the division will have "staying power" for the long term. We will only know this with time.3. I am interested in serving on the Organic Discussion Group. Yes. I am not well versed in organic research but am interested in the concept.


Scott Kronberg,
USDA-ARS, Mandan, ND
Scott.Kronberg@ARS.USDA.GOV
No additional comment

David Archer
Agricultural Economist
USDA-ARS-NGPRL
PO Box 4591701
10th Avenue SW
Mandan, ND 58554-0459
email: david.archer@ars.usda.gov
phone: 701-667-3048
fax: 701-667-3054
No additional comment


Guodong Lui
guodong@ufl.edu
No additional comment


Carol Miles,
Ag. Systems Specialist, WSU,
Vancouver, WA
milesc@wsu.edu
No additional comment


Hiroshi Hasegawa
hasegawa@affrc.go.jp
No additional comment


Hans-Peter Kaul
hans-peter.kaul@boku.ac.at
As a member of ASA and Div. A8 from Europe, I'm glad to add my foreign view to the questioned ASA organisational issue. 1. I think we should consider changing the name of A-8 to "Integrated Ag and Organic Systems" and not start a separate division. YES, because it helps to make the organic production system more visible WITHIN agronomy. 2. I would like to see a separate Organic Management Systems division within the Tri-Societies. No, because this splits people and discussions which have to be >combined rather than separated. 3. I am interested in serving on the Organic Discussion Group. NO, simply because I'm not working on organic systems. 4. I would like to see "Local Foods" included in the new name. NO, because ist is an imporant, but not THAT important aspect. I could similarly argue to include "biofuels", "conservation agriculture", "corn-soybean rotations", or whatever...


Jacques Wery
wery@supagro.inra.fr
2. I would like to see a separate Organic Management Systems division within the Tri-Societies (yes/no). NO. Not a separate division but A8 can sponsor Specific Symposium on Organic Agriculture in collaboration with specific OA organisations. 4. I would like to see "Local Foods" included in the new name. NO. But the concept could be developped by A8 and there is room for a specific session on that during a n ASA meeting As the new president elect of the European Society for Agronomy (ESA:http://www.esagr.org/) I am interested in discussing joint ASA and ESA actions on OA and IAg with ASA.


Corey Cherr, UC-Davis
cmcherr@ucdavis.edu
2. I would like to see a separate Organic Management Systems division within the Tri-Societies: No - but I understand the market and funding reality may require it. 3. I am interested in serving on the Organic discussion Group: Yes - I have also worked as an organic inspector since 2004, and so have an additional perspective to research. 4.I would like to see "Local Foods" included in the new name: Yes - At the risk of trying to include too much, I think its important to recognize the motivation behind organic agriculture is social and economic as well as ecological.


Vethaiya Balasubramanian
vbalasubramanian@irrialumni.org
1.Yes. It is better to rename the A-8 as stated above. 2. I would like to see a separate Organic Management Systems division within the Tri-Societies. No, because it will increase the number of divisions. Also organic agricluture will be part of international agriculture. 3. I am interested in serving on the Organic Discussion Group.Yes, I can participate in the discussion group after 21 December.4. I would like to see "Local Foods" included in the new name. No. I don't think it is necessary to include this term in the new name.


Permission to post comments but no name

- 1. I think we should consider changing the name of A-8 to "Integrated Ag and Organic Systems" and not start a separate division. I agree not to start a separate division, and it is not necessary to change the name and add "organic systems", because integrated Ag Systems include organic practices. 2. I would like to see a separate Organic Management Systems division within the Tri-Societies. Yes, that's not a bad idea. I like to see "Local Foods" included in the new name: not sure.

- No additional comment

- Thanks for your visionary proposals

- 1. I think we should consider changing the name of A-8 to "Integrated Ag and Organic Systems" and not start a separate division: Yes to proposed name. This is consistent with NP207 content, if that has any relevance to the non-ARS world. 2. I would like to see a separate Organic Management Systems division:No. 3. I am interested in serving on the Organic Discussion Group: No, but I have a non-ASA colleague who's big in organic research who might be. 4. I would like to see "Local Foods" included in the new name: No. Other: This isn't relevant to your survey, but I'll put in my two-cents worth anyway. AJ has in my experience become so difficult to get published in and editors so adversarial, that I would probably advise organic people to publish elsewhere. Hopefully things will change for the better sometime.

- Perhaps change A-8's name but I don't know if I'm in favor of the proposed name change.

- The first paragraph of your survey results appear to be a bit misleading. You indicate that a majority (58/62) were in favor of an "organic" recognition. The "58" appears to be determined by the "yes" answers to questions 1 and 2. By the same method of counting the "no's," there would be "61" no answers. So it seems there are more "no" than "yes" votes, by your counting approach.