Renais: well, yes and no. These are all excellent things for growers to do, but they are just means to an end; and the end is nutrient density (if you don't mind a bit of jargon). Now there is no magic bullet for producing nutrient density, but it so happens that most of the things on the list have to happen in order to produce it. So a more direct and simpler method of measuring exellence of both the product and the way it was prodoced would be its BRIX level, measured and posted with each batch.

It might be objected that BRIX only measures the solids content of the sap in the product, and that this is mostly sugar. But ah! where the sugar is, there also are the minerals. Most people don't realize that, but here is some logic: a vast array of minerals is needed to produce the sugar, not just those in the sugar, but the catalysts for photo-synthesis such as boron, and those invoved in its transport, such as calcium. So in the tissue, and therfore the sap: no sugar - no minerals; lots of sugar - lots of minerals. BRIX is measurable by a hand-held refractometer; you can buy one on ebay I'm told. Regards, Peter.

For me the quality of the end product is definitely the most important aspect of the produce I grow. Everything else is done to support this quality. Quality for me means that there are no dangerous or undesirable materials in the produce, and that the produce has the best possible taste. Brix is definitely one of the useful measurements of quality. I attended a growers conference in Tucson a number of years ago which had a half day devoted to production of tomatoes (and to a limited extent also cucumbers) with brix reading up to the standards for the export market. In some of the markets the US exports to, much of the produce that is grown in the US would be unacceptable. For instance, there was a lot of discussion of the need to produce a high brix tomato for the Japanese market which also had a number of flavor characteristics like controlled acidity. Consumers, even in lower income strata, in some of these markets are used to a much higher quality product than what we typically get in the US. I've had visitors from Europe often comment on the lack of good quality produce in many American markets.
I also found it interesting and heartening that the Whole Foods folks are looking at the broader implications of pesticide usage, and rewarding growers for not using the more problematic ones. I'm fortunate that I don't have to use any pesticides; everything I grow is protected by a vigorous integrated pest management effort. In addition to introducing beneficial insects, I grow crops just to support ongoing populations of these insects such as fennel and dill for the small flowers for pollen. I also have some catch crops such as eggplants which are a magnet for aphids for me. The eggplants still produce fruit, but they also help to maintain my supply of predatory insects for aphids. As I mentioned earlier, children love my produce; I know they can tell that the produce is better. Maybe if more stores adopt the Whole Foods approach, the general public will raise its standards for what it expects in food, and we will all benefit with tastier, safer foods. Our environment will also benefit as fewer dangerous practices need to be used.
Renais

Speaking of the brix, it is a never-ending amazement to me what trash Americans and Canadians will accept in fruit and vegetables.

I go to central florida for a couple of months in winter, and that region is effectively a food-desert. If one is used to shopping in places like Whole Foods, which vigorously searches out top-notch stuff, going to a typical grocery store in the heartland is a shock. And it isn't like the produce is extremely cheap, either. The Publix chain is considered the best in FL, and it is easily, they even carry some organic certified produce. I have brix-tested all sorts of stuff from there, and it is always poor to once in a while topping out at average.

And it's not like most of the stuff is grown in impoverished FL sand - most of it is imported. I compare it to stuff we grow in the FL garden, and though that latter has low brix compared to what we grow up north, it is almost always higher than average grocery store produce.

Carry a refractometer right into the store and ask the produce manager if you can test all the produce.

How about rating the store on how well they treat their workers ... can they afford to shop there for all this wonderfully ethical food? Can they afford to live in the city where the store is? Do they get health care?

Can they get holidays off?

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2014/11/19/3594455/whole-foods-raise-wages/

Here is a link that might be useful: Whole Foods walkout over low wages

"Selling" BRIX to the public has gone a bit overboard...especially the snake oil gardening sales products.

Aside from being able to manipulate some values by dehydrating post-harvested fruits/veggies, the best way to get a good BRIX is to pick a proper variety/cultivar to begin with.

The difference between a "shipper" and a "home garden" product can be quite wide. There's a good reason many shippers contain less BRIX value measurements...the longer shelf life relies on more than simply strong cell walls.

It's not magic in the soil, using or not using chemicals, the ion balance of your water, etc etc...99% of the job is inherently genetic.

"Aside from being able to manipulate some values by dehydrating post-harvested fruits/veggies, the best way to get a good BRIX is to pick a proper variety/cultivar to begin with." I agree that much of the issue is picking the proper varieties to grow. I have to warn people that the tomatoes I grow cannot be stacked on top of each other in a box and just left; the skins are way to thin to tolerate such rough treatment. On the other hand, one can make sauce with my tomatoes without skinning the tomatoes; the skin is thin enough and flavorful enough that it is included. I too get upset with the materials marketed to increase brix; often I suspect there is no effect, or the effect is achieved by limiting the water intake to the plant. Good standard cultural conditions, combined with proper fertilization and a suitable variety will lead to superior quality. There are some hydroponic greenhouses in the US southwest and Alberta that have perfected these processes. I've visited some, and smile when I hear that they are exporting their best product because the US market does not appreciate it. The run of the mill produce goes to the US market. They are also receiving top dollar for this high quality produce. I must admit that I have not been a huge fan of Whole Foods, but this initiative for rating producers, combined with some of the other changes I've read about in their corporate operations and management have helped to change my mind. Maybe there will be better produce coming to us in the future.
Renais

A basic premise of organic growing is that a good healthy soil will grow strong and healthy plants that will be less likely to be bothered by insect pests and plant diseases and will be more nutritious and taste better. There are studies out there that compare fruits grown in good, healthy soil with fruits grown "conventionally" and the difference in taste is quite noticeable.
I have had people tell me that my tomatoes have too strong a taste (they taste like a tomato should) because they are so used to the bland, tasteless, produce sold in most grocers. Genetics does have some influence on many things but if the food is not grown in good healthy soils with balanced nutrient levels the plants cannot grow fruit that is nutritious.

Renais,

Thank you for growing organic food that are good for people and not killing them.

When my kid moved to the US some years ago, I was relieved to discover Whole Foods. Here I've been buying food from a real organic grower and I was worried about her eating chemicals all of a sudden.

I think there are 2 types of organic food :
- the organic food which answers the criteria of certification, and that is grown organically because it's good business.
- the organic food which is grown by people like Renais, who chose organic out of ideology, to avoid poisoning the planet and people.

The only produces I don't like in Whole Foods are their summer fruits. I don't understand why their peaches are hard as rocks and tasteless. Their summer stone fruits all feel like apples and taste like paper. Why those guys didn't succeed in finding good orchards is puzzling.

for stone (summer) fruits you will have to hit farmer markets. Even chilly Michigan has outstanding peaches when the winter cold does not kill the buds.

Francoise,
Thank you for the words of support. I should point out a couple things. First, there are quite a few certified growers I know who are adament about the quality of their produce, and do not take lightly the goal of tasty food. Two of them I've interacted with are members here, and I would love to live near enough to get their food. I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with being certified; it can be a very powerful business addition, and can also help guide a grower into better agricultural practices. I am one who grows as an avocation, so I would not pursue this route (and I do use some materials and methods that would not be compatible with certification). Note that in the US there is a legal meaning to the terms associated with organic food. One needs to be quite careful to not label something incorrect legally. This is one reason why there are terms such as natural growing or responsible agriculture floating around. A person can be an organic grower (philosophy), but not produce organic produce (legal). Each grower can then define for his market what he means by the terms he uses, and is not constrained by a legal framework. Each of us must determine how we express an organic philosophy, and it really is a philosophy and not an exact science. A quick perusal of postings on this forum will reveal the breath of differing understandings of the meaning of organic culture. For me, as I mentioned, I need to be certain that my food is safe for anyone to eat without worry about any residue, or unsafe materials being present. It gives me very great pleasure to see people eating straight from my plants: it is a sign that they understand and appreciate my growing methods.
I would also like to point out something that I may start a separate thead on later: our individual situations strongly mold how we approach our organic philosophy. I have had the pleasure over many years to work with folks from outside the US who have many fewer agricultural resources, and for whom food growing was much more important to maintaining their lives that it is for the US population. I'll give just one example now that shows the sharp contrast. We were in an area where there was little in the way of mechanized agricultural equipment. Cows were so valuable that people keep the cows by their homes, and went into the fields to cut hay to bring to them; the theft of the cow otherwise would be likely, and disasterous. The bundles of hay were carried by hand to the cow. The cow patties were carefully picked up once they began to dry, and placed on their sides to finish drying. Once they were dry, they were stockpiled as fuel for cooking and winter heating (and this area was very cold in the winter). A few cow patties might be spared to be used on high value crop plants such as a cucumber, but one needed to determine just what was needed, and carefully allocate the scarce resource. We were able to help in several arenas, including introducing more advanced horse-powered agricultural techniques than they had, and pursuing some crop development that could lead to a marketable food so that some cash could be obtained for necessities. These folks perforce followed almost all procedures that would have made them certifiable in the US with one exception. They had some pernicous weed issues which they could not address without herbicides. They were supplied with suitable (non-certifiable) herbicides by another group to clear their land. They still loved their land even though they used this herbicide. (I don't remember what it was, but it was really powerful--much more so than things like our Roundup.) They were practicing the best stewardship of their land and environment that they could; their circumstances limited what was possible. I have also helped introduce people outside the US to hydroponics using "synthetic" nutrients. In some cases, hydroponics allowed many families to signifcantly improve the variety in their diet, improve their intake of vitamins and minerals, and fight hunger. These were not certifiable methods, but they did match my take on organic: best solution for the people and environment involved.
Renais

"Genetics does have some influence on many things but if the food is not grown in good healthy soils with balanced nutrient levels the plants cannot grow fruit that is nutritious."

While a plant does need nutrients to grow properly and to it's fullest capacity that statement isn't comfortable to me.

The genetic influence isn't "some"...it's almost the whole game when you're talking about growing something to harvest stage. You're winning most of your game with crop selection before you get into anything else.

Soil nutrient balance generally has very little to do with, too. A lot of organic farms have very extreme P levels in their soils and they do just fine. Assuming little to no nutrient competition/toxicity issues...what matters is what the crop wants and what it can do with it at what stage in it's life cycle.

So NC you think that genetics will keep people from starving to death if they do not have enough food to eat?
Without the nutrients to support your genes you will not live very long.
One of the reasons we sat down in the 1970's in many places, including Michigan, and wrote standards for organic growing is because of people calling what they were growing "organic" when they used synthetic materials to grow that produce. The National Organic Standards is supposed to be an outgrowth of that. I will state again as clearly as I can that anyone that uses any synthetic product on the land they own is not an organic grower.
To state that you are organic when you use synthetics is not responsible.

This post was edited by kimmsr on Sat, Dec 20, 14 at 6:04

I have no idea where you rant is going or how it even remotely has anything to do with what I wrote.

Seriously, I have no idea where to start...from the "starving to death" rant to your organic farming standards rant.

There's a reason a Fuji apple grown in Washington state profiles extremely similarly to a Fuji apple grown in Chile...China...Poland...etc...

This isn't some untested theory or anything. Genetics matter a whole whole whole lot.