House Bill H.R. 875 does it hurt backyard gardens?

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-875

I have seen in a couple of places people concerned about their right to grow their own food. What does this bill really mean for organic growers growing their own food?

Title IV, sect. 401 says

And so on. IANAL, but it looks to me it only regulates farms and food establishments. Farms are not well defined, but I suspect the backyard garden does not qualify. Though there is a presumption of interstate commerce, I suspect any backyard gardener in trouble because of this act can show that there is no commerce, interstate or otherwise, involved.

I’m a gardener, and I’m not worried - unless I can somehow figure out how to get someone to give me money for my excess zucchini.

IANAL, but isn’t it considered “interstate commerce” even to grow something for your own personal consumption?

From the definitions:

While I suppose you could argue that growing your own food makes your home/garden a “facility owned or operated by a person located in any State that processes food,” this is specifically disclaimed by the exception: “For the purposes of registration, the term ‘food establishment’ does not include a . . . nonprofit food establishment in which food is prepared for or served directly to the consumer.” Even that exception seems to imply that the definition does not apply to home gardens, but even if it did, you would be covered under the non-profit part.

Definitions, 13 (B) – Any food from a backyard garden would be processed and prepared for delivery ‘directly to the consumer’ – i.e., the family in whose backyard the garden is located.

I am shocked to learn that I am in Polycarp’s ignore list.

No. The silly case that established this was someone growing wheat for their own consumption in violation of a quota system. In other words, if they were growing hteir own, they were not buying wheat, which affected the open market, which included wheat in interstate commerce.

A regulation that explicitly deals with food safety in processing establishments that do not prepare food for the consumer, with no question of quotas, could not depend on that case as precedent.

You’re not – I was typing as you posted, and we simulposted, sort of – I didn’t preview to see you had made the point while I was composing a post.

I know. I was just razzin’ ya.

Stupid lookahead definition. (We hereby modify the definition we haven’t given yet.)
I have a hard time considering a backyard garden a food establishment by the early definitions. In any case, 13(B) makes it clear, since it covers recreational fishing also.

:rolleyes:

Only if there’s a state border between your garden and your kitchen…

One might think so… then again…

Cheesesteak: That’s seriously fucked up. We need a return to states rights more than we need anything. The predatory Federal government and capitalist oligarchs need to be buffered, we need a layer of protection.

I think of more concern than the interstate commerce issues are the unintended consequences that might ensue. The fiasco that CPSIA turned out to be ought to remind us to make sure to get things like this right the first damn time.

Are the standards reasonable? Are they worked in over an appropriate time? They sure weren’t with CPSIA.

Incidentally, that CPSIA issue ought to shut up both the idiots claiming deregulation is always the answer and the morons who blame it on every problem we now face.

This bill will affect home gardeners about as much as legislation that prohibits them from increasing their stock of plant-patented varieties by means of cuttings - an illegal act which of course no gardener ever commits.

:smiley: