CBD CONSUMER PRODUCTS SALES UP 1,710%

CBD CONSUMER PRODUCTS SALES UP 1,710%, PRIMARILY FROM NATURAL RETAIL CHANNEL

Source: Wikimedia Commons

Savvy CBD marketers are finding success in the traditional independent natural products retail channel despite regulatory hurdles.

Source - Hemp Business Journal
Author - Steven Hoffman, Compass Natural Marketing

As the world awakens to the benefits of consumer products made with phytocannabinoid hemp extracts rich in cannabidiol or CBD, traditional independent natural products retailers are seeing the most success as sellers of these products.

So, too, are the manufacturers serving the natural channel that are committed to quality, efficacy, sophisticated marketing, and strict compliance under the Dietary Supplements Health and Education Act (DSHEA).

New Hope Network’s Expo West (2015) drew 70,000 people and Cannabidiol and other hemp related products were on full display for sale and sample.

In addition to states where cannabis is legalized, since 2014, 17 States including conservative states in the South and Midwest have legalized CBD, the non-psychoactive cousin to cannabis’ active ingredient, THC, prompting independent natural products retailers across the country to carry dietary supplements, personal care products, hemp oil-infused beverages and snacks, and other CBD-fortified products at the behest of their healthy lifestyles customers.

In fact, for independent retailers competing in today’s market where mainstream supermarkets are commanding an increasing market share of natural and organic product sales, the CBD consumer products market represents a brand new growth category, and an opportunity for independent natural retailers to distinguish their stores from the competition.

“There is real interest and awareness among customers in the natural channel who have heard about the benefits of CBD and what hemp products can do in terms of a therapeutic effect in dietary supplement form and also in products applied to the skin for muscle aches and inflammation,” said Sarah Shebanek, Wellness Buyer for Alfalfa’s Market, an independently owned natural products retailer with stores along Colorado’s Front Range. Alfalfa’s carries CBD brands including CW Hemp, Restorative Botanical, CBDRx, BlueBird and others.

This story is featured in full in our CBD Report.

“Looking across channels at the 52 weeks ending August 7, 2016, we see  phytocannabinoid products containing the ‘Primary Functional Ingredient’ with $1,344,646 in sales, up 1,463.63 vs. YA (year ago), on an admittedly very small base. Almost all of those sales (97%) are coming from the Natural Channel,” said David Winter, Director of Business Development for market research firm SPINS. The firm, a Nielsen partner that specializes in the natural and organic products channel, named CBD oil as one of the ingredients to watch in its 2016 Trend Watch report.

“I am extremely excited about this new product category opening up,” said Peter Brodhead. “Word of mouth is driving the market. People are getting good results and telling others about it,” said the independent retailer, who, with his wife Janie, has owned and operated Brighter Day Natural Foods in historic downtown Savannah, GA, since 1978. The Brodheads themselves take CBD supplements to help with sleep, and their store offers customers a variety of dietary supplements and whole-plant extract products, along with educational CDs filled with peer-reviewed information and third-party literature that Peter and his staff burn themselves to give away to interested customers.

“We have just touched the tip of the iceberg of the potential of what this category can offer people. As a retailer, I love when people get results; it changes the quality of their lives. That’s what drives me and my business,” said Peter, who noted that Brighter Day’s CBD product offerings, including a variety of products from CV Sciences (formerly Cannavest), feature hemp oil extracts containing “every known compound found in the entire hempstalk…and at price points that make it easy for consumers to try out,” he added.

Engredea Editor Todd Runestad, who has been following the CBD market closely for natural products media leader New Hope Network, publisher of Nutrition Business Journal, Natural Foods Merchandiser and Engredea, and producer of Natural Products Expo East and West, the world’s largest natural and organic products trade expositions, observed,

“If retailers are going to do this right, they will approach CBD like any new dietary supplement. Be diligent about stocking quality products – ask the same questions of any supplement company to make sure they meet the quality standards you provide your customers. There is a tremendous opportunity for one-on-one education, and to bring the beneficial properties of CBD to the masses”

For manufacturers seeking to avoid the scrutiny of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), “Make quality product that matches the label, and don’t make disease claims. Above all, follow the letter of the law,” Runestad advised.

Want to know more about cannabidiol and the natural products channel?  Purchase the full CBD Report here

Source : Hemp Business Journal- Market Intelligence, The CBD Report

Supplement Law Makers Brace for Federal GMO Labeling Law

Supplement Law Makers Brace for Federal GMO Labeling Law

Source - Originally published in Natural Products Insider September 2016
Author - Steven Hoffman, Compass Natural Marketing

“In short, the GMO labeling law could drive larger supplement companies to want to compete in the Non-GMO market.

    —Bethany Davis, Director of Public Affairs, MegaFood, and Communications Officer, Coalition for Supplement Sustainability

President Barack Obama signed a federal GMO (genetically modified organism) labeling bill, the National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard Act, into law this past summer, pre-empting Vermont’s GMO labeling bill and any other state from passing similar measures. USDA, which is charged with implementing and administering the new law, has two years to figure out how to do just that.

Meanwhile, in addition to food manufacturers, makers of dietary supplements will be closely following how the law will impact their labeling.

Dietary supplements, too, are subject to GMO ingredients. For example, in many nutritional supplement products, soy lecithin is a common ingredient that may be derived from GMO soy. Same for ingredients derived from corn, 90 percent of which is genetically engineered. Such corn-derived ingredients as maltodextrin, citric acid and cornstarch are often included in nutritional supplements as binders, fillers, excipients, etc. Commercial-grade vitamin C is often processed from GMO corn; vitamin E is similarly derived from GMO soy. Gelatin in gel caps may come from cows given GMO feed over a lifetime. The list goes on, and considering the number of ingredients in any given multivitamin, disclosing for GMOs is a potential migraine headache for supplement manufacturers.

The choices for food and supplement manufacturers are outlined in the law: disclose in plain English the presence of GMOs on the package; or instead of plain English, manufacturers can opt for a toll-free number or a digital QR code on the label that consumers with smart phones can scan to find GMO disclosure information on a manufacturer’s website. (Of note, under the new law, USDA Certified Organic foods and supplements will be able to make a non-GMO claim on the label without being subject to any testing for GMO contamination.)

Even FDA Is Critical

However, critics—including FDA—say the law is so full of loopholes that many GMO-derived ingredients will be exempt from labeling, as will any ingredients derived from newer gene editing GMO technologies.

“According to Obama’s own Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the [law will] exempt most current GMO foods from being labeled at all," said Andrew Kimbrell, Director of the Center for Food Safety. “The FDA further commented that it ‘may be difficult’ for any GMO food to qualify for labeling under the bill."

Additionally, “[Oil] made from GE (genetically engineered) soy would not have any genetic material in it," FDA commented in response to the new law, which only covers products that contain “genetic material." “Likewise, starches and purified proteins would not be covered," FDA said. Those three ingredients, exempt under the new federal GMO labeling law, are some of the most widely used ingredients when it comes to GMOs in foods, reported Triple Pundit.

“We see the new GMO labeling law as discriminatory and fatally flawed," said Megan Westgate, executive director for the Non-GMO Project. “No one can argue that we all have a right to know what’s in the food we’re eating and feeding to our families. That’s what the mandatory labeling movement is all about, and the violation of this simple right to know is what makes the passage of the National Bioengineered Food Disclosure law so reprehensible."

“In light of the lack of transparency outlined in the new law, we will continue to work with our participants to provide the highest standard for non-GMO verification and GMO avoidance," Westgate said. “The Non-GMO Project is the only independent, third-party program that requires on-going testing of ingredients that are at high-risk of being genetically modified. The bottom line is that this new law does not directly impact the Non-GMO Project or the right of companies to use the Butterfly label on verified products."

Supplement Makers Face Choices

“What’s interesting is that the Vermont GMO labeling bill excluded dietary supplements," said Bethany Davis, director of regulatory affairs for supplement maker MegaFood, and communications officer for The Coalition for Supplement Sustainability (CSS), a trade association dedicated to maintaining independently verifiable and transparent standards across the dietary supplement supply chain. “It appears based on what we know so far, that the federal bill includes them and that supplements will be subject to disclosure," she said.

“In the natural channel, a desire to offer non-GMO lines of product has been present for years," Davis continued. “What will be interesting to observe going forward is whether this federal bill will expedite food, mass and drug channel players' interest in offering non-GMO lines as well. We have already seen some evidence that this is the case. In short, the bill could drive larger supplement companies to want to compete in the non-GMO market."

Davis added, “The challenges with respect to this bill include getting the technology right (we aren't convinced QR codes are an effective way to communicate with consumers on this issue) and ensuring that the standard is meaningful. We would like to see the standard help consumers discern whether ingredients were made from GMO crops, not just whether or not there is GMO protein or DNA in the finished product. We are aligned with FDA on the concern that in its current language, the bill would let lots of processed ingredients made from GMO crops be exempt from labeling simply because testing may show a negative result because there is no viable material to test in highly processed ingredients."

Davis also encouraged companies to get involved in how the law is implemented. “MegaFood plans to work with our trade associations and with CSS to participate in comment periods and town halls related to this bill. The goal is, of course, for folks to be able to discern what’s in their food—and supplements! CSS will continue to offer guidance for companies that want to use absence claims and offer non-GMO lines that are verified by a third party," she concluded.

Time to Go Organic?

“We had hoped to see a different kind of law than what Congress just passed on the view that consumers are clearly asking for more information about the foods they eat," said Loren Israelsen, president of the United Natural Products Alliance (UNPA), in a podcast interview with Jon Benninger, vice president, global health and nutrition network, Informa Exhibitions. Originally founded in 1991 by eight Utah-based dietary supplements companies, UNPA now boasts more than 100 members globally.

“The food industry was mainly concerned with two things. One was a proliferation of state laws that would require different labeling in different states. That’s a legitimate concern," Israelsen said. “The other reason was that any labeling that would say ‘contains GMOs’ is not good for business," he opined. “But now, rather than a mandatory standard there is a standard that will create several ways on the label to identify GMO ingredients. I imagine we will see litigation and extended rule making, as FDA and USDA apparently do not agree on some of the fundamentals. We’re probably looking at five years, realistically, not counting any litigation.

“Our position continues to be that mandatory labeling of the presence of GMOs is what consumers want, and we believe that is in the best interest of the industry for purposes of clarity," Israelsen continued. “In a way, I hope that the industry transcends the administrative part of the law and does not get caught up in trying to figure out, ‘Well, how do we put a QR code on the label?’ One element I find really interesting was the last small section of the bill saying the USDA Organic seal will be considered sufficient as a claim of non-GMO. If I were running a company and I were not organic, I would do all I could to understand how to move in that direction," he said.

Looking for more on GMO labeling and consumer expectations? Steven Hoffman will be discussing the latest on federal and state labeling initiatives in the panel discussion “GMOs: Today’s Challenges, Tomorrow’s Opportunities" on Thursday, Oct. 6, at SupplySide West 2016.

Steven Hoffman (steve@compassnatural.com) is managing director of Compass Natural, providing brand marketing, PR, social media and strategic business development services to natural, organic and sustainable products businesses.

Food Manufacturers Brace for New Federal GMO Labeling Law

Photo: Compass Natural

Food Manufacturers Brace for New Federal GMO Labeling Law
Source -  Presence Marketing September 2016 Newsletter
Author -  Steve Hoffman

Now that President Obama signed a federal GMO labeling bill into law on July 29th , as flawed as the new law is, U.S. food manufacturers will soon have to decide how they want to deal with mandatory GMO ingredient disclosure as the USDA develops labeling rules within the next two years.

The choices for manufacturers are outlined in the law: disclose in plain English the presence of GMOs on the package; or instead of plain English, food manufacturers can opt for some as yet undeveloped symbol, a toll-free number, or a digital QR code on the label that consumers with smart phones can scan to find GMO disclosure information on a manufacturer’s website. Or, food makers can opt for newer GMO technologies as they become available. Why? Because the new law very narrowly defines “bioengineering” and doesn’t include any of the new gene editing technologies; only older GMO technologies, which are already being phased out, are required to be labeled under the bill.

“According to Obama’s own Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the [law will] exempt most current GMO foods from being labeled at all. The FDA further commented that it ‘may be difficult’ for any GMO food to qualify for labeling under the bill,” said Andrew Kimbrell, Director of the Center for Food Safety. Additionally, “[Oil] made from GE (genetically engineered) soy would not have any genetic material in it,” FDA commented in response to the law, which only covers products that contain “genetic material.” “Likewise, starches and purified proteins would not be covered,” FDA said. Those three ingredients, exempt under the new federal GMO labeling law, are some of the most widely used ingredients when it comes to GMOs in foods, reported Triple Pundit, and yet they will not have to be labeled. © 2016 Presence Marketing, Inc. 19 Food News, Policy and Research Update –

Time to Go Organic? Or, food manufacturers can opt for Certified Organic, or Non-GMO Project Verified products.

Given the myriad loopholes built into the new GMO labeling law, for healthy lifestyles consumers – and the manufacturers that serve them – the Certified Organic and Non-GMO Project Verified seals have just become more important than ever. “As the USDA clarifies what the law requires, Organic Valley is going to work with the agency to ensure organic is protected and that we have the strongest labeling possible under the law. We think the QR code is a dishonest approach to providing transparency to consumers. Ultimately, Organic Valley, as an all-organic company, doesn’t use GMOs and so our interest in this issue stems from wanting consumers to have accurate information about their food,” said Anne O’Connor, Director of Public Affairs for Organic Valley in La Farge, Wisconsin, in an exclusive interview with Presence Marketing/Dynamic Presence. “The law clarifies that the USDA organic label ‘shall be considered sufficient to make a claim’ of non-GMO. This is important because for the first time ever, a law is declaring organic as non-GMO,” she said. “This clarification is in addition to the added benefits of organic which include no synthetic pesticides, (including herbicides), no antibiotics, no added hormones, and other environmental considerations such as manure management and composting to protect our clean water resources.

The Non-GMO Project addresses just one of these issues: whether or not a product was produced with or contaminated by GMOs. There is obvious confusion around each of the label’s claims,” O’Connor added. Steven Hoffman is Managing Director of Compass Natural, providing brand marketing, PR, social media, and strategic business development services to natural, organic and sustainable products businesses. Contact steve@compassnatural.com.

In addition to selling only Certified Organic products, Organic Valley created its own non-GMO label it adds to its product packaging, something it will continue to use, noted O’Connor (see illustration). For Robert Agnew, Senior VP at Bob’s Red Mill, Milwaukie, Oregon, a leading manufacturer of natural and organic whole-grain foods, “We don’t offer any products that are bioengineered, so we won’t have to change our current labeling,” he said. “For many years we have required all of our suppliers to certify their products are produced without bioengineering. Bob’s Red Mill has a very loyal customer base, and many, if not most, of our customers are concerned about bioengineered foods. Along with working with the Non-GMO Project, we have implemented our ‘Sourced Non-GMO Pledge,’” he said. “Historically, there is much value to both the Certified Organic and Non-GMO Project Verified programs, as evidenced by public awareness and commercial viability. For us, we will continue to offer our ‘Sourced Non-GMO Pledge’ and offer organic products. We will be following developments closely and work with our lawmakers as things move along because the law is so new with changes on the horizon,” Agnew noted in an interview with Presence Marketing/Dynamic Presence. “Our consumers are the types that value certification of non-GMOs to reassure them they’re getting the highest-quality ingredients,” Jonathan Davis, Senior VP of Los Angeles-based bread maker La Brea Bakery, told the Washington Post. The company has always sought non-GMO ingredients, he said, and it plans to be completely non-GMO by the end of this year.

A Conundrum for Conventional Manufacturers?

Ellia Kassoff, CEO of Leaf Brands, Newport Beach, California, maker of Hydrox cookies and other conventional cookie and confectionary products, expressed concern about how the public will react to GMO food labels. “It does create this negative feeling with the customer, and I don’t know if the majority of customers in the U.S. fully understand the benefits or non-benefits of GMOs,” he told the Washington Post. “In some cases it’s hard to acquire non-GMO ingredients and sell a product at a price where consumers will buy it,” he also said. “If Hydrox cookies were reformulated to be GMO-free, a package would cost 50 cents more than Oreos, the cookie’s biggest competitor, Kassoff estimated. Madison Heights, Michigan-based Kar’s Nuts received Non-GMO Project certification for its line of Second Nature snack products, reported the Washington Post. However, company President Nick Nicolay said some of the ingredients in its Kar’s brand of snack products do contain GMOs. Yet, finding replacements would drive up his costs, he said. “It’s a little unrealistic for us at this time,” he told the Post. However, going completely non-GMO is something he said the company will consider in the future. Going against the non-GMO grain, one manufacturer, Soylent, says its protein and carbohydrate beverages are “proudly made with GMOs,” on its website. According to the Washington Post, the Los-Angeles-based company favors labels that give details on how GMOs are used so consumers can be well informed about what they’re eating. “Sim

WhiteWave sale high-water mark for Colorado’s natural food industry

By ALDO SVALDI | Denver Post
Commentary by Steve Hoffman

PUBLISHED: July 7, 2016 at 7:30 pm | UPDATED: July 8, 2016 at 4:17 am

Danone SA’s $10 billion purchase of WhiteWave Foods Co. is a big deal — not just because of the hefty price tag, but because it could make Denver and Boulder a center for the organic and natural foods industry not just nationally, but globally.

“This is a vote for lifestyle change going forward by a major player. I am delighted that the vision is embraced,” said Steve Demos, the Boulder entrepreneur who launched what eventually would become WhiteWave Foods back in 1977.

Demos, motivated by a belief that food needed to have a lighter environmental impact, borrowed $500 and initially made tofu in a bathtub. Paris-based Danone on Thursday agreed to pay $56 a share for WhiteWave, which works out to $10 billion after subtracting $2 billion of debt.

The acquisition is the second-largest ever for Danone, which has a market value of $39 billion and sales in more than 130 countries. But the story goes beyond an international dairy giant snapping up one of Denver’s largest public companies in market value.

Plant-based milk sales are growing at 11 percent a year, organic milk sales are rising 8 percent, and conventional milk sales are increasing at 1 percent a year, the companies noted in a conference call on the acquisition.

Consumers increasingly want alternatives, and the WhiteWave purchase, which should wrap up by the end of the year pending shareholder and regulatory approvals, gives Danone a faster way to offer those.

“One of the big systemic risks the global economy faces is use of pesticides and herbicides. WhiteWave is a prime example of a solution and people prefer the solution to the risk,” said Garvin Jabusch, chief investment officer at Green Alpha Advisors in Boulder, which owns shares in the company.

Danone, the company behind yogurts Activa and Oikios and bottled water brands Aqua and Evian, will become a dominant player in dairy alternatives and double its U.S. sales via the acquisition, which it is borrowing cash to finance.

Danone offered to pay a 24 percent premium above WhiteWave’s average stock price the past 30 days. It is paying 26.2 times earnings versus the just under 15 times earnings that dairy firms typically command, Bloomberg calculates.

Jabusch argues that Danone must believe it can expand the reach of WhiteWave’s various brands quickly, and he doesn’t think the French giant will mess with the model that made the company successful.

“What I do see them changing is leveraging their marketing machine and advertising muscle to expand WhiteWave’s reach,” Jabusch said. “It represents a huge opportunity for growth. WhiteWave’s biggest challenge will be adding production capacity.”

But the combination isn’t without its critics. Some shareholders want a higher price, and the advocacy group Food & Water Watch is urging regulators to give a thumbs down on the grounds it will reduce competition.

“These mega-deals consolidate corporate power in the hands of only a few giant food companies, in turn limiting choices for consumers while raising retail prices,” the group said in a statement.

Another concern is whether Danone’s corporate culture will dilute the environmental ethic that drove the creation of various WhiteWave brands and stifle future innovations. WhiteWave is known for spinning out dozens of new products a year, many from its lab in Broomfield. One of the latest offerings is a new banana-based milk.

“Danone is not an organic company. They are a dairy corporation that owns organic brands. Prove me wrong. Show me that you are on a mission to feed the world and save the world,” said Steven Hoffman, managing director of Compass Natural in Longmont.

Boulder-based Celestial Seasonings pioneered the herbal tea market, launching Colorado’s natural foods movement in the process. But after years under a corporate umbrella, Celestial has lost its cutting edge, allowing more innovative rivals to erode its market share, Hoffman said.

Still, Hoffman isn’t concerned that Boulder and Denver will cease to be an innovation hub for the natural foods industry. New companies continue to pop up even as more established ones get gobbled up.

“It continues to shed a light on the Boulder-Denver market. We are an incubator. We are truly an epicenter for these products,” Hoffman said.

When Dallas-based Dean Foods acquired a much smaller White Wave Inc. back in 2002, it paid slightly less than $300 million. WhiteWave was best known then for its Silk line of soy milk. Dean Foods in 2004 purchased Niwot-based Horizon Organic Holdings in 2004, adding organic milk to WhiteWave’s plant-based offerings.

In August 2012, Dean Foods spun off WhiteWave in a $391 million initial public offering, providing the Denver-based company a currency to make numerous acquisitions, including the $600 million buyout in 2014 of Earthbound Farms, America’s largest grower of organic produce.

Now, Danone is willing to pay $10 billion for WhiteWave, and has the distribution muscle to put its products on stores shelves across the globe.

“This is a heck of an endorsement,” said Demos, who no longer holds an interest in the company, but stills view it as a the child he raised.

Role of agriculture, food discussed at new summit

Source: Wikimedia Commons

Discussion on the food we eat was the main dish March 30 at BizWest’s inaugural Food and Ag Summit.

The summit, held at the Ranch Events Complex in Loveland, Colo., featured speakers from colleges, farms, food processors and various marketing and educational agencies who are experts in their fields.

Kimberly Willard, director of events and marketing at BizWest, said the even was prompted by trends and opportunities in the conventional agricultural and natural foods industries.

“We had a steering committee that met to decide what needs should be discussed,” Willard said. “We had it pinned down by February. It was quick work, but it wasn’t born yesterday.”

Willard said the event drew about 200 attendees. Panels spoke on topics such as regenerative agriculture, global trade and raising money to finance and grow business.

Aileen Rickert Ehn, chair of the Agricultural Sciences and Technology department at Aims Community College, moderated a panel on recruiting for talent in agricultural businesses.

“In people’s minds, agriculture goes straight to the farmer on his tractor,” Ehn said. “But we’re also talking about food processing, natural foods and technologies.”

She noted that attendees of the panel she moderated were not necessarily people looking for laborers or employees with a background in the industry, but people with passion, integrity and a good work ethic.

“It’s not the same as it was 100 years ago when people who worked in agriculture came from a farm,” Ehn said. “Now, about 70 percent of people in agriculture haven’t come from a farm.”

Students flocking a agriculture now are doing so, she said, because they believe in the industry and what it’s doing. And with a broader knowledge of the agricultural industry comes the understanding of just how many career opportunities exist, from processing to drone technology, to natural foods and clothing.

The summit also featured panels on how immigration reform may present challenges to the industry, global trade and regenerative agriculture.

Steve Hoffman is managing director of Compass Natural Marketing, an agency that services natural, organic and sustainable enterprises. He spoke on the panel concerning regenerative agriculture and took part in the GMO debate held at the end of the summit.

Hoffman talked about the effect agriculture has on climate change and what farmers can do to help.

“Whether you’re a person who believes climate change is human made or natural, the impact of agriculture still needs to be considered,” Hoffman said.

Hoffman said farmers should be considering ways to draw carbon back into the depleted soil to improve soil health and present a positive solution to carbon building up.

Michael Brown of Greeley, attended the summit. While he doesn’t farm, his father-in-law did and his brother-in-law is continuing the tradition. Brown said he was particularly interested in the panel on immigration reform.

“I didn’t know about the H2A program that brings laborers to work on farms,” he said. “I don’t think a lot of people realize how much of an impact immigration has on agriculture.”

The H2A program helps farmers anticipate labor shortages and transports nonimmigrant foreign laborers to farms to work.

Brown called the summit “amazing” and said there was a lot of good information, even for people who are not in the industry.

For those who missed the summit, there is next year.

“It won’t be a carbon copy,” Willard said. “We’ll decide what issues are important and have a whole new summit.”

Source: The Fence Post

HFG/CFS AT NATURAL PRODUCTS EXPO WEST

HFG/CFS AT NATURAL PRODUCTS EXPO WEST

With its more than 70,000 visitors and 3,000 exhibitors, Expo West is the Coachella of the food industry. Catering to those interested in alternative ways of eating and producing food, Expo West began in 1980 – a time when organic food was still a “hippie-thing”, but GMOs hadn’t entered the market yet (commercial sale of GMOs began in 1994). Today, clean and green eating is all the rage, and Expo West has become an eclectic mix of big players exhibiting alongside new start-ups. Expo West is a must-visit for those who consider themselves part of the Food Movement.

HFG’s friend, Boulder-based organic industry marketing guru Steven Hoffman (Managing Partner, Compass Natural) is an Expo veteran – he’s attended the event a whopping 31 times and remains as enthusiastic as ever. Hoffman said of the event: “What stood out at Expo West was the overall record-breaking attendance and energy at the show. People from all over the world attend Expo West, as it has become the world’s primary showcase of healthy, natural and organic food and products innovation.” Hoffman, former Rodale Institute CEO Timothy LaSalle and others were part of a panel on regenerative agriculture that focused on the role of healthy soils in reversing climate change. The climate momentum we witnessed during last year’s COP21 in Paris is far from over – the industry is now catching up with what scientists and experts have been saying for years.

Expo West took place just a few days before we defeated the DARK Act, a federal bill that if passed would have preempted states from labeling GMOs. But labeling is not where it ends. Another issue that came up more than once was the future of the processed food industry. With new genome editing techniques on the horizon, how will we define GMOs in the future? Where is biotech headed and how will it influence our work as advocates and our lives as consumers? The sentiment at Expo was mostly in support of organic and sustainable foods, whereas in the exhibit halls one could still pick up products vaguely labeled as “natural”.

The “Non-GMO Verified” logo was very much present in the hall, but as Steven Hoffman rhetorically puts it: “Non-GMO product growth continues to be strong, but is it at the expense of a full commitment to organic?” Non-GMO verified products can still be produced with toxic synthetic chemicals, sewage sludge and irradiation. Organic is not a trend – at HFG/CFS, we believe that organic should be the floor, not the ceiling, of food production. Focusing on non-GMO can make shoppers even more confused than they are now due to the overwhelming abundance of labels and certifications.

A definitive highlight at Expo was the Living Wage panel with David Bronner (CEO, Dr. Bronner’s), The Fairness Project, Cambridge Naturals, Ben & Jerry’s and Fair World Project. It’s hard not to support the Fight for $15 – a national campaign that urges states to raise the minimum wage. And yet it’s important to see this fight from the employer’s perspective. The discussion provided great insight into how Dr. Bronner’s, Cambridge Naturals and Ben & Jerry’s have made it their mission to enforce fair labor policies and how this approach can make for a better product and a happier consumer.

See you at next year’s Expo West!

Don't Be Fooled by the Senate's GMO Fake Labeling Bill

Source: Wikimedia Commons

Commentary

By Steven Hoffman, Managing Director, Compass Natural

VIEW FULL ARTICLE HERE: FOODCONSUMER.ORG

“If you already belong to the more than 90% of Americans who want food produced with GMOs to be clearly labeled, then call your Senator today at 888.897.0174 and tell them to vote AGAINST the GMO fake labeling bill." – Former U.S. Rep. Dennis Kucinich

BOULDER, CO (June 29, 2016) – Pro-GMO labeling supporters were planning on celebrating on July 1 – the date when Vermont’s GMO labeling legislation becomes the first mandatory GMO labeling law of the land.

The state’s bold initiative protecting the consumer’s right to know compelled major food companies including General Mills, Campbell Soup, Kellogg and others to announce they would label for GMOs not just in Vermont, but throughout the U.S., just like they have to do in 64 other countries.

Instead, just as we were beginning to see actual GMO disclosures in plain English on food packages across the country as a result of the Vermont law (see photo, right, taken in a Colorado supermarket), a new proposed GMO labeling bill introduced in the U.S. Senate on June 23 seeks to overturn Vermont’s GMO labeling law and ban states from ever passing GMO labeling laws altogether.

Source: Food Consumer

The Growing World of Organic

Source: Wikimedia Commons

The Growing World of Organic: Number of U.S. Certified Organic Producers,  Worldwide Organic Acreage Hit All-time High

By Steven Hoffman

To satisfy domestic and international demand for all things organic, growing consistently at a double-digit pace, the number of certified organic producers in the U.S. hit an all time high in 2014, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) reported in April 2016.Additionally, 43.7 million hectares, or over 100 million acres, of worldwide agricultural land was in organic production at the end of 2014 – a record high, as well, says the Swiss-based Research Institute of Organic Agriculture in its 2016 state of the global industry report, produced in partnership with IFOAM Organics International, the world’s leading organic producer association. According to new market data released by the USDA Agricultural Marketing Service National Organic Program (NOP), there are now 21,781 certified organic operations in the U.S., and 31,160 certified organic operations worldwide. The number of domestic certified organic operations increased by almost 12% between 2014 and 2015, representing the highest growth rate since 2008 and an increase of nearly 300% since record keeping began in 2002, says NOP. The total retail market for organic products is valued at more than $39 billion in the U.S., and over $75 billion worldwide, reports USDA.

Organic: “Fastest Growing Segment of American Agriculture”

Organic food is one of the fasting growing segments of American agriculture," said Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack. "As consumer demand for organic products continues to grow, the USDA organic seal has become a leading global standard. The increasing number of organic operations shows that USDA's strong support for the vibrant organic sector is helping to create jobs and opportunities in rural communities." According to USDA, consumers are increasingly seeking out local foods, and industry data estimates that local food sales in the U.S. increased to $12 billion in 2014, up from $5 billion in 2008. USDA reports that it has invested more than $1 billion to over 40,000 local and regional food businesses and infrastructure projects since 2009 to boost growing markets for organic products and local foods. USDA has also established a number of resources to help organics producers find technical and financial resources to help them grow domestically and abroad, the agency said in a press release. The site www.usda.gov/organic creates a one-stop resource for operators, and USDA has made market and pricing information for approximately 250 organic products available free of charge through USDA's Market News. In 2015, USDA reported it made more than $11.5 million available to assist organic operations with their certification costs. Additionally, USDA’s NOP has made available to the public a list of certified organic operations and data on organic producers via its recently launched website https://apps.ams.usda.gov/integrity/. With the new database, made possible by the 2014 Farm Bill, organic certifiers can add new operations and report changes to existing operations at any time, allowing USDA to report updated counts of certified organic operations throughout the year. Additional information about USDA resources and support for the organic sector is available on the USDA Organics Resource page. Global Growth: 2.3 Million Organic Producers Worldwide Today, more farmers are cultivating organically on more land in more countries than ever before, according to FiBL’s 2016 report, The World of Organic Agriculture, released in February 2016. At the end of 2014, 2.3 million organic producers were farming, ranching or otherwise engaged in organic production on 43.7 million hectares (108 million acres) of organic agricultural land worldwide, says FiBL. In all, 172 countries reported organic farming activities in 2014 (up from 77 countries in 1999 when data was first collected). (For comparison, the total estimated agricultural land worldwide is 1.5 billion hectares.) Overall, 40% of the global organic agricultural land is in Oceania (including Australia) (17.3 million hectares), followed by Europe (27%; 11.6 million hectares) and Latin America (15%; 6.8 million hectares). Australia is the country with the largest organic agricultural area (17.2 million hectares), with 97% of that area used for grazing, followed by Argentina (3.1 million hectares, and the U.S. (2.2 million hectares). In terms of numbers of organic producers, most are small-scale landholders, and India was number one with 650,000 producers, Uganda second with 190,552 producers, and Mexico with 169,703 organic producers. Of note, reports FiBL, are the countries with the largest share of organic agricultural land relative to total farmland. Leading in this category are the Falkland Islands (36.3%), Liechtenstein (30.9%) and Austria (19.4%). In eleven countries, more than 10% of all agricultural land is organic, including the above mentioned plus Sweden, Estonia,Samoa, Switzerland, Czech Republic, Italy and others. The leading markets for organic products worldwide include the U.S. at number one with 27.1 billion Euros in sales and growing at 11%, followed by Germany (7.9 billion Euros), France (4.8 billion Euros) and China (3.7 billion Euros), reported FiBL. Sources of content and charts: USDA Agricultural Marketing Service National Organic Program; Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL) in partnership with IFOAM Organics International.

[Editor’s Note: Add Charts; see .jpg files attached.]

Senate Introduces Bill to Overturn Vermont’s Mandatory GMO Labeling Law in Favor of Watered-Down National Standard

June 27, 2016

By Steven Hoffman

[Editor’s Note: See two photos and captions to accompany the article, below.]

GMO labeling proponents were planning on celebrating on July 1 – the date when Vermont’s GMO labeling legislation became the first mandatory GMO labeling law of the land. The small state’s bold initiative protecting the consumer’s right to know compelled major national food brands including General Mills, Campbell Soup, Kellogg and others to announce they would label for GMOs not just in Vermont, but throughout the U.S.

Yet, just as we were beginning to see actual GMO labeling disclosures on food packages across the country as a result of Vermont’s labeling law (see photo, below), a new proposed GMO labeling bill introduced in the U.S. Senate just hours before the Fourth of July holiday recess seeks to overturn Vermont’s new law and ban states from ever passing GMO labeling laws altogether.

Unlike Vermont’s law that requires plain English text on the ingredient panel, the Senate bill – the National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard – introduced by ranking Senate agriculture committee members Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) and Pat Roberts (R-KS), calls for a watered-down national standard that would offer manufacturers the option of placing QR code symbols or toll-free numbers on packages instead of plain English text to disclose if GMO ingredients are present. Those using QR codes or “smartlabels” would have to add a phrase such as “Scan here for more food information,” but would not be required to use the term “GMO” or “Genetic Engineering” on the label – a key point to which GMO labeling proponents strongly object.

Loophole, Loopholes and More Loopholes

In another concession to the biotech industry, the Senate bill would tightly define genetic engineering to include only recombinant DNA techniques, which involve transferring a gene from one organism to another different species. As such, all new biotechnology methods, such as CRISPR and gene editing, would be exempt from the national disclosure standards.

Milk or meat from animals fed GMO feed would be exempt from labeling for GMOs, and similarly food sold in a restaurants “or similar food retail establishment” would not have to label for GMOs.

Additionally, according to the Senate bill’s language, foods that have been refined to have the DNA removed would not be subject to any GMO labeling requirements, including refined sugar from GMO sugar beets, corn syrup from GMO corn and oil from GMO canola, William Hallman, Ph.D., Chair of the Department of Human Ecology at Rutgers University, told Food Navigator USA.

The Stabenow/Roberts bill also omits a provision of House bill H.R. 1599 (dubbed by GMO labeling proponents as the DARK Act) that would require FDA to define the use of the word “natural” on food labels but leave it to the agency whether to allow genetically engineered ingredients.

Regarding penalties for non-compliance, while Vermont’s GMO labeling law calls for a stiff fine of $1,000 per day per product, there is no such penalty under the Senate bill. If the Stabenow/Roberts bill passes, USDA would have no authority to require recalls of products that don’t comply with the labeling requirements, and there would be no federal penalties for violations. States, however, could impose fines for violations of the standards under state consumer protection rules, reported Successful Farming.

The GMO Labeling Standard that Isn’t

Basically, by pre-empting Vermont’s law immediately, along with calling for a two-year delay in any implementation of a national standard – along with loopholes so big you could drive a truck through them – the Senate bill is the federal mandatory GMO labeling standard that isn’t, critics decry.

Vermont Governor Peter Shumlin criticized the two-year delay and pre-emption of Vermont’s law, among other provisions proposed in the bill, and Sen. Bernie Sanders (D-VT) said he would do "everything I can" to defeat it. “People have a right to know what is in the food they eat," Sanders said in a statement.

“While much has been made of the significant problems with the type of labeling proposed in this bill (QR codes, 800 numbers and websites), an equally big problem is that the bill is filled with huge loopholes, meaning that most GMO products could escape any sort of labeling at all, Non-GMO Project Executive Director Megan Westgate told Food Navigator. “Indeed, this watered-down legislation is a world away from the rigorous protocols required of any product bearing the Non-GMO Project Verified label.”

"This proposal falls short of what consumers rightly expect — a simple at-a-glance disclosure on the package," said Gary Hirshberg, chairman of Just Label It and organic food company Stonyfield Farm, in a June 23 statement issued from Just Label It.

“Senators Stabenow and Roberts reached a deal that tramples on the rights of consumers, and the rights of states like Vermont to protect their own citizens. Instead, the Senate appears poised to pass a bill clearly intended to serve the interests of Monsanto and the Grocery Manufacturers Association,” said Ronnie Cummins, international director of the Organic Consumers Association, representing 2 million online and on-the-ground members.

OTA Defends Its Endorsement

In a concession to the organic industry, prompting a controversial endorsement of the Stabenow/Roberts bill from the Organic Trade Association (OTA), producers who have secured a “certified organic” designation from USDA would be allowed to clearly display a “non-GMO” label on their products.

Announcing that the bill “would for the first time require mandatory GMO labeling nationwide,” OTA said, “This legislation includes provisions that are excellent for organic farmers and food makers – and for the millions of consumers who choose organic every day – because they recognize, unequivocally, that USDA Certified Organic products qualify for non-GMO claims in the market place.”

In defending OTA’s position to endorse the Stabenow/Roberts bill, “A compromise bill was happening with or without us,” wrote OTA CEO Laura Batcha and Chair Melissa Hughes in a June 27 letter to membership.

 “This legislation isn’t nearly perfect,” Batcha and Hughes continued. “Some critics say it is a victory for big agriculture and big corporate interests. We understand how some may be fundamentally dissatisfied with this compromise solution, especially as it includes an option to reveal the presence of GMOs through technology that would require a smartphone and Internet access. OTA doesn’t like that option, and we are urging all companies, faced with the choice of how to disclose GMO ingredients, to choose to print a simple and clear statement of GMO content on the product label.”

“Saving the Biotech Industry”

Sen. Roberts, in an interview, said that the bill would “save” the agriculture biotech industry from being denigrated by opponents. “We have not only saved it we have protected it,” he said. “We have to do that. How are you going to feed 8.5 billion people down the road if you don’t have agricultural biotechnology?” Roberts said the electronic code link would let industry provide detailed educational materials on the safety of GMOs to educate consumers. Small manufacturers could use websites or telephone numbers to satisfy the requirements, he said.

Sen. Stabenow said the bill is a “win for consumers and families. For the first time ever, consumers will have a national, mandatory label for food products that contain genetically modified ingredients.”

With Congress in recess, the bill’s introduction came too late to prevent Vermont’s GMO labeling law from going into effect on July 1.

Sen. Roberts said he has talked with Rep. Mike Conaway (R-TX), co-sponsor of HR 1599, which calls for banning state GMO labeling laws and voluntary labeling over mandatory labeling of GMOs. H.R. 1599 passed the House in July 2015. Speaking of his discussion with Conaway in Bloomberg News, Roberts said, “He thinks this is the best possible bill under the circumstances in the Senate knowing we have to get 60 votes. But I don’t’ know that I can get 60 votes to go to conference.”

# # #

Steven Hoffman is Managing Director of Compass Natural, providing brand marketing, PR, social media, and strategic business development services to natural, organic and sustainable products businesses. He served as Marketing Director for the Arrowhead Mills organic brand, is the former Editorial Director of Natural Foods Merchandiser Magazine, former Education Director of Natural Products Expo East and West, and co-founder of LOHAS Journal. Contact steve@compassnatural.com.

© 2016, Compass Natural LLC 

Photo Caption:  Instead of plain English text disclosures, which began appearing in supermarkets across the country in Spring 2016 as a result of Vermont’s GMO labeling law (the Cheerios package above was spotted in a Colorado supermarket), the Stabenow/Roberts bill would allow manufacturers to opt for QR code symbols or toll-free 800 numbers only to disclose GMO ingredients in their products.

Photo Caption:  U.S. Senate Agriculture Committee ranking members Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) and Pat Roberts (R-KS) on June 23 introduced a bill to overturn Vermont’s mandatory GMO labeling law in favor of a watered-down national labeling standard. The bill was backed by the pro-biotech lobby and GMA, however groups including Organic Consumers Association, Center for Food Safety, Food Democracy Now, Just Label It and others criticized it for failing to require text on the package.

The Soil Solution: Regenerative Farming

Source: Wikimedia Commons

Regenerative-farming techniques could reverse climate change through enhancing the soil.

By Eli Wallace

When scientists and environmentalists talk climate change, doom and gloom is often the main topic. Scientific American reported last spring that the earth was essentially at or close to the “point of no return,” in terms of carbon emissions. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) stated in 2009 that unless drastic action was taken between 2015 and 2020, it would be too late to save the ice caps, let alone polar bears, coastal infrastructure and the temperate, predictable weather patterns we know and love.

So it’s not every day you hear an environmentalist declare we can actually reverse global warming.

A woman from a neighboring village sells her produce at Vía Orgánica’s rural market in Peñon de los Baños. In addition to production at the ranch, Vía Orgánica sources produce from more than 100 campesino farmers in the region. Photo courtesy The Valhalla Movement.

Steven Hoffman, managing director of the Boulder-based environmental marketing group Compass Natural and an avid environmentalist with ties to Regeneration International, visited the 2015 United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP21 Global Climate Summit) in Paris this year, where the reversal of global warming through soil regeneration was a major focus.

“People keep talking about reducing carbon emissions and getting to carbon neutral, but that’s not enough anymore,” Hoffman says. “We’re already heating, so we need to take the excess from the atmosphere. A lot of people want to make new technology that can help solve our previous technology problems.”

Hoffman says the conversation around carbon emissions usually centers on personal consumption and oil use, even though 50 percent of greenhouse-gas emissions comes from agriculture.

“Yes, we need to increase renewable energy, but that’s only half the equation. All of the carbon in the air used to be in the ground, and industrial-scale agriculture is responsible. If you ignore that, you’re missing the practical, easily applied solution that we can address immediately.”

That solution, regenerative farming, focuses on increasing organic matter in the soil, which would up the amount of carbon in the soil. “We could sequester more than 100 percent of current annual CO2 emissions with a switch to widely available and inexpensive organic-management practices,” reported the white paper “Regenerative Organic Agriculture and Climate Change,” published by Rodale Institute, a nonprofit agricultural research group.

Nurturing the soil is a major component of regenerative farming that could turn the tide of global warming by sequestering more carbon in the soil. Photo by Lawrence Miglialo, courtesy The Valhalla Movement.

“Organic farming nurtures the living soil,” Hoffman explains. “Plants draw carbon from the air to their roots, where it’s sequestered in soil and used by microbes, worms and other organisms.”

Regenerative-farming practices are a focused, stricter subset of organic farming. They include conservation tillage, maintaining biodiversity, composting, mulching, planting cover crops, rotating crops, and no tolerance for synthetic pesticides and fertilizers that disturb soil life.

Agricultural Overhaul

To reach the goal of 100-percent sequestration of current carbon emissions, a drastic overhaul of agricultural management practices is required. However, “Even if modest assumptions about soil’s carbon-sequestration potential are made, regenerative agriculture can easily keep annual emissions to within the desirable range necessary… [and we would have] a good chance of limiting warming to 1.5° C by 2020,” the Rodale Institute argued.

“Big agriculture drains the soil, so the industry has to add a bunch of amendments—pesticides and chemical fertilizers—to get anything to grow. They’ll tell you that’s how they’re going to feed the world,” Hoffman says.

In addition to organic farming, Rancho Vía Orgánica is a natural retreat center with adobe buildings, walking trails, solar power, rainwater catchment, and gray water and composting systems. Starting in April, the ranch will offer monthly eco tours, where participants cans learn about the latest in organic regenerative-farming and ranching techniques. Photo by Lawrence Miglialo, courtesy The Valhalla Movement.

But he contends organic practices can produce yields comparable to conventional agriculture. The Rodale Institute agrees, pointing out that “yields under organic systems are likely to be more resilient to the extreme weather accompanying climate change,” and noting that “in drought years, yields were consistently higher in the organic systems” tested in its Rodale Institute Farming System Trial, which lasted 30 years.

The institute went on to say, “the continued use of the trope that ‘we will soon need to feed nine billion people’ as justification for seeking ever-greater yields is duplicitous. Hunger and food access are not yield issues. They are economic and social issues, which, in large part, are the result of inappropriate agricultural and development policies that have created, and continue to reinforce, rural hunger.”

Hoffman attended the Paris summit on behalf of Regeneration International and calls the “4 per 1000” initiative decided there “historic.” “The initiative is to increase soil carbon matter .04 percent per year over time to stop the increase in carbon in the atmosphere. It’s the first time in the history of climate change that international governments are discussing the role of soil,” Hoffman says.

Another part to the soil solution is reversing desertification and soil erosion.

“Holistic planned grazing” can reverse both, says the Boulder-based Savory Institute. In 2013, founder Allan Savory put forth the theory that grasslands evolved to depend upon wild herds to break down organic material. Essentially, holistic planned grazing uses livestock to mimic the wild herds of yesteryear, like the great bison herds that roamed America before the 1800s.

With the buffalo herds gone, we now use controlled burning for the same effect, but that releases large amounts of carbon and accelerates desertification by leaving soil uncovered. Savory has had remarkable results employing holistic planned grazing. In one South Dakota study, the technique resulted in total stoppage of soil erosion, a 77-percent decrease in bare ground, and a 40-percent decrease in the space between plants.

“If we [use holistic planned grazing], we can take enough carbon out of the atmosphere and safely store it in the grassland soils for thousands of years,” Savory said in a 2013 TED Talk. “If we do that on about half the world’s grasslands, we can take us back to pre-industrial [carbon] levels while feeding people.”

Take Action

Hoffman says spreading awareness of regenerative farming and supporting organic farms and food products are simple steps everyone can take. In your own yard, he suggests you avoid the monoculture of a grassy lawn as well as chemical pesticides, herbicides and fertilizers that damage topsoil (along with beneficial pollinators and soil organisms). If you have children, teach them sustainable gardening so the next generation of gardeners is familiar with organic practices and values organic food.

“You have to work it from every angle,” Hoffman says. “Never believe individual actions don’t make a difference. The organic industry grew because of individuals, one consumer at a time. We have a responsibility to vote with our dollars.”

Source: Home and Garden Magazine