Bok Choi sprouts, slugs, and iron phosphate

Something is nibbling my Bok Choi. Grrr... effing slugs no doubt.

I heard that coffee grounds can repel slugs - considering I use coffee grounds to acidify the soil, that doesn't seem like the best solution. Based on some feedback from an organic gardening forum, it doesn't sound like it works too good anyways.

So... some method of dealing with the slugs is needed. This is, after all, Rain City.

Apparently slugs don't get along with iron phosphate; and I've seen it mentioned as both safe and effective by organic gardeners. Two different products are mentioned: Sluggo and Escar-go.

So the question is: Can I use it and still be considered 'organic' & 'earth friendly'.

The EPA report on Iron Phosphate indicates that it is safe for humans, pets, beneficial insects (worms, bees, beetles), and the watershed (fish). Not one to take anything the EPA prints as gospel...

Oregon State University reports that iron phosphate is safe and effective in the northwest. (As opposed to metaldehyde = bad.)

But of course - enough digging online and you can nearly always find an opposing view. I found a well documented paper that takes shots at the EPA report as being over broad with its declarations of how safe Iron Phosphate. (The EPA over-sell on safety?! Imagine that.) The paper does not assert that iron phosphate is unsafe, it asserts that 'completely safe' is irresponsible over reach, and that Iron Phosphate should be used sparingly and only as directed.

Finally...

I went to the USDA website which turned out to be surprisingly good. Their report on iron phosphate indicates that the EU, Canada, and Japan allows iron phosphate for non-organic crop production, but not for organic crops. The U.S. has similarly voted (2-1) to not certify the use of of iron phosphate for use on certified organic farms. "Currently no synthetic substance has been approved for use as slug and snail bait in organic crop production". However, the same report indicated that "Ferric phosphate is a very effective molluscicide and does not harm humans, animals, non-target insects, plants, or soil microbes. It is a very stable and non-reactive substance in the agroecosystem."

So why did they vote against it? According to the report, because "other organic alternatives exist." Methinks that's lacking detail...

The 'alternatives' are essentially a barrier based approach (copper) or beer traps (yech!).

I'm not certain the direction I'll go on this.