Wal-Mart enters the organic milk business. But is it really organic?

Published on September 17th, 2006

Posted by SN in General

New York Times – September 16, 2006:

Many organic foods have been popping up on the shelves of Wal-Mart in recent years, but none have been as popular as organic milk. For many shoppers, particularly mothers with small children, it is the first organic product they try.

Now organic milk is about to become much more widely available, as Wal-Mart rolls out its own organic brand, which will be cheaper than similar milk on the market. But critics worry that what consumers will be getting is a diluted form of organic milk.

Activist groups, as well as some organic food retailers and dairies, contend that the company where Wal-Mart and the other big retailers get their milk operates large factory farms that are diluting the principles of organic agriculture and delivering customers a substandard product. They argue that Aurora’s cows do not spend any significant time roaming pastures and eating fresh grass; instead they live on a diet high in grains.

“They are trying to cut corners in the interest of producing milk as cheaply as possible,” said Mark Kastel, senior farm analyst at the Cornucopia Institute, which represents organic family farmers.

Wal-Mart and its supplier say that those allegations are misleading and that Aurora’s two farms in Colorado and Texas are in full compliance with Agriculture Department standards for organic dairy.

23 users responded in " Wal-Mart enters the organic milk business. But is it really organic? "

Subscribe to this post comment rss or trackback url

# 1 Peter Rodwell said, on September 17th, 2006 at 6:25 am

So who sells inorganic milk, then?

# 2 Danryan1 said, on September 17th, 2006 at 6:39 am

That picture is shameless.

# 3 Named said, on September 17th, 2006 at 6:54 am

What’s wrong with the picture? She’s drinking milk… And she’s making me thirsty doing it!

# 4 Named said, on September 17th, 2006 at 6:54 am

Ooops… They changed the picture… Can we have Senna back?

# 5 sdf said, on September 17th, 2006 at 6:57 am

“They are trying to cut corners in the interest of producing milk as cheaply as possible”

mmm mmm good

# 6 SN said, on September 17th, 2006 at 7:01 am

“Can we have Senna back?”

I’m with you!

# 7 OmarTheAlien said, on September 17th, 2006 at 7:37 am

Cows eat grass, get milked, go back out and eat more grass, that’s organic, right?
Anf that’s way too much milk for one girl to drink alone; I should be there helping her.

# 8 Jägermeister said, on September 17th, 2006 at 8:10 am

First image:

# 9 Stephen said, on September 17th, 2006 at 8:10 am

The milk is organic as defined by the USDA, which is the only controlling, legal definition (it’s a regulated identity standard).

“The cows do not spend any significant time roaming pastures and eating fresh grass.” They have sufficient access to pasture and grass as currently required. Aurora is increasing it to comply with proposed changes in the standards, which are not yet approved.

Face it, there is nothing on this earth that Wal-Mart could do that would not result in this kind of carping.

# 10 AB CD said, on September 17th, 2006 at 8:30 am

The people who love organic also want small farms only making the stuff. Wal-Mart organic will never fly for these folks.

# 11 Jägermeister said, on September 17th, 2006 at 10:43 am

#10

Any source for that assumption?

# 12 TJGeezer said, on September 17th, 2006 at 1:59 pm

Actually, the people who opted out of corporate agriculture and made “organic” synonymous with healthful to consume, tended to be smaller farmers. It’s a huge topic, but one bottom line seems to be that the term “organic” is now a legal one, redefined by… Congress? FDA? Ag. Dept.? – and some practices not allowed before are now okay under the rules. It has the former organic agriculture people upset to the point they’re trying to bring in a new term that the corporate types haven’t had time to attack and the government authorities haven’t yet had time to debase.

We’re dealing with Wal-Mart here. Do YOU really expect them to stay with the concept, or bend the regulations to maximize their profit?

# 13 joshua said, on September 17th, 2006 at 2:15 pm

non-organic milk is from milk cows that are also fed/injected with hormones/protiens and other non-natural substances. Also what the pastures are sprayed with can determine organic or not. Assuming the cows get pasture time.

But #9 is right. It really dosen’t matter to the Wal-Mart bashers what the company does, they are wrong. Interesting that in the U.K. Wal-Mart wins praise for it’s efforts to sell good, organic local grown products to help cut food travel time to help the enviroment. In the U.K. it’s known as ASDA.

#10 is partially right. There are sub-groups in the organic area, just as in any group, there is a segment of the organic food population who only equate organic with small farms. They feel that once you go big or mega, you can’t produce organic…..which is snobbery at least, and foolish at it’s worst. Keeping the price of organics high only hurts the segment of the population that needs it the most, the poor and low income people.

When you go into a grocery and see organic tomato’s at 3.95 a pound and non-organic at 1.09 a pound, which do you buy when your on a limited food budget?

# 14 joshua said, on September 17th, 2006 at 2:22 pm

#12 posted while I was writing my post. What he says is very true. There is an effort to water down the term or meaning of organic. Infact the goverment has lowered some of the requirements. The effort was to try and get more farmers to go organic but has been used to skirt the original intent of the meaning.
As to the dairy issue of this post, what Wal-Mart is doing isn’t wrong, as long as what the cows get isn’t altered from it’s natural state with additives and chemicals it is organic. Screaming because the cows are wandering the pastures enough is silly.
It’s becoming almost impossible to run dairy farms anymore due to the ever encrouching movement by people to the suburbs. They move in and before a year has passed want the dairy farmers out.

# 15 Ron Larson said, on September 17th, 2006 at 4:02 pm

Sounds like it all boils down to how one defines “organic”. And I am sure there are as many shades of the term as there are colors.

I have not read the USDA’s definition of organic. So I can’t say what I think of it. But, given that it is a government body funded by a pro-business administration, then I would bet that their defination is far weaker than what the man-on-the-street thinks “organic” means.

And, there will always be a group of people who will argue that an organic label is not organic enough. To them, the cow must live free and in peace with their bovine god. The cow must willingly give up their milk out of love and kindess, and perhaps self milk too. It gets silly.

I, for one, do not equate “free range” with organic. What I want is milk that doesn’t contain hormones and chemicals.

# 16 BryanP said, on September 18th, 2006 at 6:29 am

It’s got carbon atoms in it, right? Then it’s organic.

Stop borrowing words with defined scientific meaning. Buncha *** hippies.

# 17 jim said, on September 18th, 2006 at 7:43 am

In the past the term ‘organic’ could mean just about anything. It was a marketing gimmic because there wasn’t any standards about what it meant. (same with “lite” or “light”, it could refer to the color or just about anything) So the government gave it a definition. You may want a different definition, but we now have an official definition of what organic milk is. (before it could have meant just about anything)

# 18 OhForTheLoveOf said, on September 18th, 2006 at 8:32 am

Strawmen fly on DU like bullets fly in a gunfight.

Yes. There are people who will always be critical of Wal Mart.

What’s funny to me about conservatives being critical of liberals (because let’s face it, this is about cons and libs in this context) is that cons accuse libs of always being critical of Wal Mart, never giving them another chance, always dredging up past mistakes to define the present company…

…wasn’t it conservatives who championed the “three strikes and your out” legal policies of the late 90s?

If Wal Mart is looked at more critically than the next faceless, soulless, big box, culture destroying megastore, maybe it’s because they have the most to atone for.

# 19 ECA said, on September 18th, 2006 at 8:46 am

Milk,
the the 1 material in the world, NO mamal drinks after being weened, EXCEPT MAN.

# 20 James Hill said, on September 18th, 2006 at 9:06 am

Interesting choice in pictures, guys.

It’s a shame Wisconsin isn’t more like that.

# 21 Rob said, on September 18th, 2006 at 11:51 am

Bush Administration definition of organic: you drink it, it flows into your organs. Therefore, it is organic.

Remember, ketchup is a vegatable!

# 22 Jason_w said, on September 18th, 2006 at 1:59 pm

Organic today is nothing but a marketing term, like “green” or “low emission”

# 23 Miguel Correia said, on September 19th, 2006 at 3:08 am

The point we’ve come to… having “organic” as a good adjective for milk, something I always took for granted, even if cows are being given artificial hormones. Does this mean that non-organic milk is being synthesized in laboratory?

Someday we’ll say to our children “there was a time when milk was extracted from cows”, to which they will reply “yuccckkk!! grosss!!!”.

Leave Your Reply Below...

Comment Moderation is Active, so if your comment doesn't
show up immediately, please don't submit it again.

Special Deals 4U

25% off eHarmony subscription with code EHTECH
12-percent discount forever with code TECH
10-percent discount and free month using TECH10
10-percent or 30 dollars off weekly car rental!
Get 10-percent discount on car rental!
Get 10% off rental cars!
Get 10% off Dollar rentals!
Discounts on domain names!