It seems (to me) that the term "organic," in recent years, has become more of a trendy label and excuse to inflate prices (not that I disagree with the principles behind the original intentions of the word). I typically won't pay more for the organic label unless it's sold on the same premises where it was grown, or sold by the grower/producer. Just because you never know what the tree, produce, etc. is exposed to after it's been wholesaled or consigned.
When I purchase trees I primarily base my decision on price & health/vigor; with preference given to things that are locally grown & adapted to my environment. I'm willing to pay more for something that's noticeably healthy/vigorous, and I'm willing to buy something that looks like it needs some TLC if the price is low enough to justify the gamble of losing it. If it's not considered organic, I will, either, bare-root it when planting, or trust the life in my soil to eventually break down anything undesirable in the potting mix.
If it comes down to choosing between an organically grown tree or something not grown organically, I will go with the lower priced tree if all other traits/variables are the same; but if the price is the same for the trees, and there's no other obvious differences between the organic/non-organic, then I'd choose the organically grown tree over the other one.
So my advice is to look at what options are available for locally grown/adapted trees and decide if your priorities are health/vigor, organic status, or price; and use that to base your purchasing decisions. I frequently see posts where permies mention fruit/nut trees on their land that are likely older than they are, but they consider the produce organically/sustainably grown under their care, even though it's impossible to know what all the tree has been exposed to in it's long lifetime
