"Organic" has many definitions and dividing lines. There's legal organic, technically organic, and all kinds of flavors in between.

Technically, human sewage sludge is organic...legally (in the US) it's not organic use for certification purposes.

Technically, GMO plant material and plant material with applied chemical pesticide/herbicide sources that are composted is organic...legally (in the US) it's still organic use for certification purposes.

Technically, animal wastes that have been fed anti-biotics and hormones applied to land is organic...legally (in the US) it's still organic use for certification purposes.

etc...etc...etc...

Unless you're looking to get certified and follow things by the book, it's up to your personal comfort and preference.

Very few, if any, of the veggies that you buy in the store are Genetically Engineered, yet. Corn and soybeans are the crops that have been. If the produce you purchase in the store is properly prepared there should not be any pesticide residue on that food. Of course any pesticide residue on that food is now in the water system. So composting that food will not add, significant amounts, to your compost.

i said most store bought produce is GMO And/Or been treated with pesticide, yes corn, soybeans and you forgot tomatoes are mainly your GMO crops. My point is all these articles and publications about organic gardening stating to compost kitchen scraps are incorrect.

Composting is the great neutralizer. In nearly all cases, the composting process will remediate any effects of pesticides or GE'd produce and the resulting product can be considered "organic" in all but the most stringent certification process.

And you might want to read up on GMO's and genetically engineered crops - there is a BIG difference. Essentially any plant that is hybridized (either naturally or manually) is genetically modified. A perfectly acceptable practice that has been going on for eons. Genetically engineered crops are very distinct, with the DNA artificially modified to be pest or disease resistant or otherwise altered to enhance flavor, appearance, longevity, etc.

btw, GE'd tomatoes haven't been around for years, after an initial introduction that failed to sell well. There are rumors of a new variety that includes a peptide that mimics "good" cholesterol in the reduction of heart disease, but it is not yet on the market.

Scary thought, huh? No telling what vegetables that may actually improve your health could do for you........

I'm sorry i strongly dissagree with you, GMO and GE are the same thing, hybrids are crosses between 2 different varities.

directly from the non gmo website
http://www.nongmoproject.org/about-gmos-2/
GMOs (or âÂÂgenetically modified organismsâÂÂ) are organisms that have been created through the gene-splicing techniques of biotechnology (also called genetic engineering, or GE). This relatively new science allows DNA from one species to be injected into another species in a laboratory, creating combinations of plant, animal, bacteria, and viral genes that do not occur in nature or through traditional crossbreeding methods.

a few other sources.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetically_modified_organism
A genetically modified organism (GMO) is an organism whose genetic material has been altered using genetic engineering techniques

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/_/dict.aspx?rd=1&word=genetically+modified+organism
An organism whose genetic characteristics have been altered using the techniques of genetic engineering.

last i read the first generation of GMO or GE tomatoes lacked flavor and are currently being re-engineered to enhance the flavor, also i never stated GMO tomatoes have been around for years.

There are three different categories heirlooms, hybrids and GMO's also called GE

There are no GMO tomatoes in the market, nor do I know of any current research being done with them in GMO...definitely none done by the "Big 6" GMO major player companies. Some minor companies may be playing around with it, but it's not a profitable area since Mexico can crap out tomatoes at pennies on the pound.

Disease, weed, and pest pressure are not an issue with this crop. Consumers don't care to pay more for a slightly more nutrient-rich tomato, and those that would care to pay more wouldn't be in the GMO-friendly market. The biggest push, historically, for GMO tomatoes have been for self life/storage/shipping...and they've all failed miserably in the market place.

GMO crops (especially those by the "Big 6") are mostly geared towards those planting huge acreage...corn, soy, sugar beets, canola, etc.

While there are a lot of educational research/development...so much of this has a hard-to-impossible time breaking through to production because of lack of profit potential.

i read this article last month about tomatoes being re-engineered.

http://www.nationofchange.org/poor-tortured-tomatoes-agribusiness-1378903998

That's a university project...finding a producer to actually make it, market it, and put it in the market place is an entirely different beast.

The same people likely to buy this type of tomato are also the type of person to care about GMO content of foods...which adds a double-whammy to the possible profitability of the product before we get into what Mexico is doing to the market at large (where they crap out tomatoes for pennies on the pound).

Well, a hybrid plant IS genetically modified - it has different DNA than either of its parents - so I'm not sure why all the sematic hoo-ha. Except that perhaps those on the organic-or-die bandwagon include all plants with some sort of genetic modification - even through hybridization - as the dreaded Frankenplant GMO's!!! Makes the issue sound so much more dire than it really is, dontcha know :-))

Genetic engineering or artificial gene manipulation is totally different. And seldom has much of an impact on fresh produce. Stay away from corn and soybeans and you should be good to go.

And we may need to read a little more carefully. I stated that gmo'd tomatoes had not been available for years....they hit the market, failed in the promises they implied, struggled for sales and disappeared. At this time there are none on the market.

A hybird plant is not genetically modified, thats like saying a white person and a black person produce a kid its genetically modified, its a cross threw natural means. When you use the term genetically midified or engineered cones with the human elment of artifically tampering like gene splicing. Weather there are GMO tomatoes on the market or not more and more crops are being tinkered with and are being pushed onto the market, but i have to agree with what nc-crn said theyll have to compete with countries like mexico who mass produce cheap produce.

Hybrid plants are genetic modifications of the parent plants just as you are a genetic modification of your parents and your children would be genetic modifications of their parents. So, in a way you are right in that every bit of food you eat has been genetically modified but then so have all the flowers, shrubs, and trees around us.
Of the foods you eat only corn and soybeans have been Genetically Engineered, had genes that would not in any way, shape, or form normally combine in a plant, inserted in a lab. Your description above is very apt and does produce a genetically modified child.

A hybird plant is not genetically modified, thats like saying a white person and a black person produce a kid its genetically modified, its a cross threw natural means.........

Oyy!! It's hard to have any sort of reasonable discussion when an understanding of basic botany/biology and genetics is so severely lacking...........

LoL trust me i have a very good understanding of genetics, you guys are using the term geneticly modified out of context and too the extreme, yes everyliving thing is a combinbed variation of the biological parents, thats call basic evolution. When the term geneticly modified is used theres a human element invovled ie artificial engineered by humans. Hybrids are not gentically modified unless humans crossed the 2 in a lab using artificial means which would be call a genetically modifed hybrid. Genetically modified and hybrids are 2 seprate things! I think you all need to read up yourselves especailly definitions, now this post got way off topic, everyone have a good day!

"Genetically modified (GM) foods are foods derived from organisms whose genetic material (DNA) has been modified in a way that does not occur naturally, e.g. through the introduction of a gene from a different organism. Currently available GM foods stem mostly from plants, but in the future foods derived from GM microorganisms or GM animals are likely to be introduced on the market. Most existing genetically modified crops have been developed to improve yield, through the introduction of resistance to plant diseases or of increased tolerance of herbicides."

http://www.who.int/topics/food_genetically_modified/en/

"Some very strict gardeners will hint that a hybrid is taboo, inferring that itâÂÂs a genetically modified plant (GMO). That is incorrect. Cross-pollination is a natural process of crosses within the same plant species."

http://m.bonnieplants.com/gardening/tabid/70/id/265/What-is-an-Heirloom-What-is-a-Hybrid.aspx

The companies pushing the Genetically Engineered plants have convinced the USDA that what they do, insert genes that would not in any way become a part of any plant outside the laboratory, that what they do is substantially the same as what happens in nature when plants cross pollinate.

Going back to the OP's question, I have some concerns about what constitutes organic and what does not. I may consider becoming a CA Certified Organic in the future just not right now.

I want to bring in horse manure from a known source that I can trace the source of feeds etc and compost. But, from what I have been told starting in 2013 Horse manure is no longer considered organic even composted.

On the other hand, I can pick up kitchen food scraps from restaurants (not meals but the unused fruits and veggies parts) and compost that and it is considered organic.

I would rather skip the official label and use the horse manure than random restaurant scraps.

I just looked this up for the duplicate thread in the Soil forum, and I don't know about California, but it seems nationally (NOP) kitchen scraps and horse manure are fine.

Here is a link that might be useful: NOP Compost Guidance PDF

My info came from a soils grad from Cal-Poly working on his own organic farm. (he can't use the manure so I remove it)

The kitchen scraps are fine and he can collect those

Hmm, you may want to officially check on that before making your certification decision, it sounds a bit peculiar.

Although I suppose you might not want to check before then - you could lose your source of free manure!

During the composting process, the DNA of the plant and animal scraps is decomposed ... as far as bacteria and molds are concerned, GMO or not, it's just another energy source.

Same when you eat it - the digestive process pretty well destroys cells and rips them apart into their constituent amino acids.

I do see the point about composting kitchen scraps - I eat organic mostly, but when I have something that is conventional, I tend to throw it away instead of compost it. I figure there just might be something on it I don't want in the compost, and I'm concerned that even if it gets fully hot (which it may not) it wouldn't break down the (admittedly small amounts of) pesticides and artificial fertilizers. Cut flowers I always throw in the trash - they have dyes and other chemicals. But then, I'm the type of person who even gets concerned putting unwashed organic veggies in the compost!

If you've already purchased and eaten conventional produce, what are the potential consequences you're worried about if the pesticides and fertilizer residues from the leftovers don't break down in your compost?

A GE crop is not the same as a hybridied crop. Hybridiation does not include the addition of foreign or alien genes to the species. Although modification is possible with hybridiation the term GMO is not associated with this type of application.

Wheat is one example of where hybridiation has gone amiss. Todays wheat creates a protien that many people cannot tolerate and it is part of the reason that we are seeing so much gluten sensitivity these days. It has literally been hybridized into a franken food, totally foreign to human biology. We need a return to the old wheat strains predating 1950 or so.

Most conventional produce pesticide/herbicide issues with food crops are on the surface of the plant.

Once you get past the peels and/or wash it well, you've taken care of most of the issue.

Also, as mentioned...these substances break down in the presence of light/heat/microbes/etc. into rather inert substances.

This post was edited by nc-crn on Wed, Oct 2, 13 at 15:42

ArrowD claims: "Wheat is one example of where hybridiation has gone amiss. Todays wheat creates a protien that many people cannot tolerate and it is part of the reason that we are seeing so much gluten sensitivity these days."

Oh really? Last time I checked out this claim of a "new" protein in wheat, I found that it was discovered in the early 1800s which was well before any large-scale hybridization.

Can you link to some references, please.

I'm not sure about new proteins but I have read that their is something like 3 times the amount of gluten in our modern wheat. From William Davis' book "Wheat Belly".
This wheat is not technically what we now call GMO by gene splicing techniques ala Monsanto and co, it was instead done by exposing the seed embryos to highly mutagenic chemicals and hoping for random results to turn up something useful. They were wildly successful. Almost all wheat now consumed is of this type. And why not. Yields were very much increased and the shorter, more uniform stalks reduced blow-over problems.
It seems to me entirely more dangerous than Monsanto's techniques, but nobody seems concerned. I sometimes wonder how the level of acceptance would change if Monsanto had done this instead.

Ugg...that Davis book and his lack of knowledge about horticulture/crop production. He may have a handle on health, but he's missing a lot when it comes to crop development.

First, Dr. Davis is a medical doctor with no background in horticulture.

Second, the "mutant" wheat he goes on about is 1- not created by Monsanto (it is BASF and some educational institutions) 2- it's Clearfield wheat which is naturally resistant to certain herbicides early in it's growth by this forced chemical mutation hybrid 3- Clearfield varieties are planted on about 1m acres...out of the 62m acres of wheat planted.

Third, the mutant genes came from a French wheat variety called 'Fidel' which was naturally resistant to a specific class of herbicides, but was not a commercially viable variety in the US. The crossing process used was used to speed up crossing these traits, not because it wouldn't be able to be done naturally. Texas A&M actually did most of the heavy work on this cross in conjunction with BASF. Also, this didn't happen til the late 1980s and it didn't hit the market til the mid/late-1990s.

Fourth, his notions about wheat protein diversity are off base. His claim that modern wheat varieties only contain 10-15% protein compared to older varieties is just bunk. Variation from 7-25% are quite common in older varieties and are all over the place. His claim that wheat was "left alone" for 200+ years up until the 1940s by breeders is simply bunk.

Fifth, Monsanto isn't the beginning, nor end of the world, but it seems to be the only corporation some people are aware of in the world.

Wheat is a complex crop cultivated over many thousands of years for different purposes. From a genetic point of view there are diploid (2 sets of chromosomes), tetraploid (4 sets of chromosomes), and hexaploid (6 sets of chromosomes) varieties out in the wild before science even had the means to determine chromosome content...much less mess with them. The genetic diversity is wide in scope

I can't speak on the medical stuff he claims...such as linking wheat consumption to autism and schizophrenia, though there's a lot of people upset about those claims, too.