Fresh Produce Discussion Blog

Created by The Packer's National Editor Tom Karst

Monday, April 30, 2007

Deportations hit home

This story from The New York Times describes the plight of one immigrant family fighting deportation. From the story:

Last year on May 1, hoping to influence Congress to adopt legislation making illegal immigrants legal, hundreds of thousands of immigrants held marches and work stoppages across the country. This May 1 there will be another round of rallies and marches, but this time immigrants will also be protesting a surge in deportations.
The events are expected to be much smaller than a year ago, organizers said, as stepped-up enforcement by the authorities has made illegal immigrants wary of protesting in public and more doubtful that Congress will soon act to give them a chance at legalization.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials, facing intense political pressure to toughen enforcement, removed 221,664 illegal immigrants from the country over the last year, an increase of more than 37,000 — about 20 percent — over the year before, according to the agency’s tally.
While President Bush and many Democrats have called for a path to legalize some 12 million illegal immigrants, a significant number of
Republicans in Congress reject the plan because they view it as amnesty for lawbreakers. They advocate a broader campaign of deportations that would expel many illegal immigrants and, they say, drive millions more to give up and go home.

TK: That some Republicans advocate a plan to deport illegal immigrants and potentially divide families shows that this nation seemingly must endure more pain before coming to grips with reform. The planned big push on Capitol Hill by farmers and other industries in mid-May may well be the last, best hope for comprehensive immigration reform before 2009 or later.

Labels: ,

And Indian irradiated mangoes again

Just got this over the wire:


SECRETARY JOHANNS TO PARTICIPATE IN RECEIVING SHIPMENT OF INDIAN MANGOS
WASHINGTON, April 30, 2007 - Secretary of Agriculture Mike Johanns will participate with U.S. Trade Representative Susan C. Schwab and Indian Ambassador Ronen Sen in receiving the first shipment of Indian mangos.
WHO: Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns
U.S. Trade Representative Susan Schwab
Indian Ambassador Ronen Sen
WHAT: Photo opportunity receiving the shipment of Indian mangos
WHEN: Tuesday, May 1, 2007
2:45 p.m. EDT


TK: This Washington photo shoot indicates that this indeed is a big deal, particularly for Indian mango exporters.

Labels: ,

Why not marketing order?

I visited with Tom Bellamore, senior vice president and corporate counsel of the California Avocado Commission, Irvine, this afternoon. We had a pretty lengthy chat about the legislation on Capitol Hill that would impose California's state minimum maturity standards on imported fruit. I asked, why not use a federal marketing order to get this done? Bellamore said the California industry didn't necessarily want the bureaucratic and administrative trappings of a marketing order, and said the concept of minimum maturity standards had been discussed in joint meetings with Chilean and Mexican interests.

Later - the reaction of the Chilean industry.

Labels: , , ,

H.R. 2051

From the House avocado bill H.R. 2051


110th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. R. 2051
To amend the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 to provide for the application of mandatory minimum maturity standards applicable to all domestic and imported Hass avocados.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
April 26, 2007
Mrs. CAPPS (for herself, Mr. ISSA, Mr. FARR, Mr. CALVERT, Mr. CARDOZA, Mr. GALLEGLY, Mr. FILNER, Mr. MCCARTHY of California, Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California, and Mr. HUNTER) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Agriculture
A BILL
To amend the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 to provide for the application of mandatory minimum maturity standards applicable to all domestic and imported Hass avocados.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Hass Avocado Quality Assurance Act of 2007'.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND DECLARATION OF POLICY.
(a) Findings- Congress finds the following:
(1) Hass avocados are an integral food source in the United States that are a valuable and healthy part of the human diet and are enjoyed by millions of persons every year for a multitude of everyday and special occasions.
(2) Hass avocados are a significant tree fruit crop grown by many individual producers both domestically and abroad.
(3) Hass avocados move in interstate and foreign commerce and Hass avocados that do not move in interstate or foreign channels of commerce but only in intrastate commerce directly affect interstate commerce of Hass avocados.
(4) The maintenance and expansion of markets in existence on the date of enactment of this Act, and the development of new or improved markets or uses for Hass avocados, are needed to preserve and strengthen the economic viability of the domestic Hass avocado industry for the benefit of producers, importers, and other persons associated with the producing, importing, marketing, processing, and consuming of Hass avocados.
(5) The marketing of immature Hass avocados adversely affects demand for all Hass avocados because immature avocados are unpalatable and unfit for human consumption and, when marketed, result in dissatisfied customers who will cease purchasing Hass avocados.
(6) There is no better method of ensuring the maturity of Hass avocados than through requiring that Hass avocados meet an established mandatory minimum maturity standard, as measured by percentage of dry matter.
(7) The application of consistent and mandatory minimum maturity standards for all Hass avocados is necessary for the maintenance, expansion, and development of markets for Hass avocados.
(b) Purpose- It is the purpose of this Act to set forth certain mandatory quality standards in the form of mandatory minimum maturity requirements for all Hass avocados, and to provide the Secretary with the authority necessary to ensure that such standards are met, with the intention of--
(1) strengthening the position of the Hass avocado industry in the domestic marketplace; and
(2) maintaining, developing and expanding markets and uses for Hass avocados.
SEC. 3. MATURITY REQUIREMENTS FOR HASS AVOCADOS.
Subtitle A of the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 is amended by adding at the end the following new section:
`SEC. 209. MATURITY REQUIREMENTS FOR HASS AVOCADOS.
`(a) In General- Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of the Hass Avocado Quality Assurance Act of 2007, the Secretary of Agriculture shall issue final regulations to ensure that all Hass avocados sold to consumers in the United States meet the minimum maturity standards (as measured by percentage of dry matter) for sale to a consumer of the State of California, as required by regulations issued pursuant to chapter 9 of division 17 of the California Food and Agricultural Code or any succeeding provision of California law governing the minimum maturity standards of Hass avocados for sale to a consumer.
`(b) Exceptions- Subsection (a) and the regulations issued pursuant to subsection (a) shall not apply to Hass avocados--
`(1) intended for consumption by charitable institutions;
`(2) intended for distribution by relief agencies;
`(3) intended for commercial processing into products; or
`(4) that the Secretary determines should not be subject to such subsection or such regulations.
`(c) Use of Existing Inspectors- The Secretary shall, to the greatest extent practicable, use inspectors that inspect avocados for compliance with section 8e of the Agricultural Adjustment Act (7 U.S.C. 608e-1), reenacted with amendments by the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, to conduct inspections under this section.
`(d) Penalties-
`(1) DIVERSION- The Secretary may divert, export, or repack and reinspect any Hass avocados that do not meet the requirements of this section or the regulations issued pursuant to this section.
`(2) CIVIL PENALTIES- The Secretary may require any person who violates this section or the regulations issued pursuant to this section to--
`(A) forfeit to the United States a sum equal to the value of the commodity at the time of violation, which forfeiture shall be recoverable in a civil suit bought in the name of the United States; or
`(B) on conviction, be fined not less than $50 or more than $5,000 for each violation.
`(e) Fees- The Secretary may prescribe and collect fees to cover the costs of providing for the inspection of Hass avocados under this section. All fees and penalties collected shall be credited to the accounts that incur such costs and shall remain available until expended without fiscal year limitation.
`(f) Authorization of Appropriations- There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out this section.'.
SEC. 4. SEVERABILITY.
If any provision of this Act or the amendment made by this Act, or the application of such provision to any person or circumstance, is held invalid, the remainder of this Act and the amendment made by this Act, and the application of such provision to other persons not similarly situated or to other circumstances, shall not be affected by such invalidation.



TK: Points 5 and 6 may be the trouble spots.
5) The marketing of immature Hass avocados adversely affects demand for all Hass avocados because immature avocados are unpalatable and unfit for human consumption and, when marketed, result in dissatisfied customers who will cease purchasing Hass avocados.
(6) There is no better method of ensuring the maturity of Hass avocados than through requiring that Hass avocados meet an established mandatory minimum maturity standard, as measured by percentage of dry matter.


TK: Do we know from evidence that immature avocados are creating dissatisfied customers? Is there "no better method" of ensuring maturity of hass fruit than by requiring imported fruit meets California's standard? I'm sure those are two points of divergence between California growers and foreign competitors.

Labels: ,

Immigration headlines

Immigration reform is going to be a hot topic in May. Here are today's headlines...




Bush pushes immigration reform in speech to Miami grads

Florida senator hasn't given up on immigration reform

Hundreds march for immigration reform in Houston

Analysts: Tough political road for immigration reform

Labels: ,

Sunday, April 29, 2007

Looking ahead to reform

As we approach the critical month of May in the Congressional debate for immigration reform, I offer this interview from early April with Luawanna Hallstrom, chief operating officer and general manager of Harry Singh & Sons and Business Manager for Oceanside Produce Inc., Oceanside, Calif. I ask her about the H2A program; Harry Singh & Sons farms some land on federal property and has had experience with the H2A program since 9/11. She, more than any other person, now how much the U.S. needs immigration reform, and especially reform of the H2A program.

Here is the link on an excerpt from our visit.

Labels: ,

Rulemaking in Florida

More on the avocado front.

Here is the Federal Register rule that was published March 29. The advanced notice of proposed rulemaking is considering applying Florida avocado marketing order standards to all avocados. This seems to be a back door effort to use the Florida marketing order to impose tougher standards on imports. Comments are due by the end of May.

Here is a summary of the rule:

SUMMARY: The Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS), prior to undertaking research and other work associated with revising official grade standards, is soliciting comments on the possible revisions of the United States Standards for Grades of Florida Avocados. At a meeting with the Fruit and Vegetable Industry Advisory Committee, AMS was asked to review the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable grade standards for usefulness in serving the industry. As a result AMS is considering revisions to the Florida Avocado standard to include all avocados.

TK: Florida avocados account for just 12,000 tons out of the 282,000 tons of U.S. avocados produced in 2005-06(California accounted for the balance). Plus, they produce very few hass fruit. It doesn't seem correct that the Florida marketing order should set the standards for all other avocados, including imports.


Labels: ,

Searching for answers

Tom Burfield of The Packer had this coverage from Feb. 5 that mentions the possibility of federal legislation relating to maturity standards for imports of hass avocados.

Avocado growers told to get involved
By Tom Burfield, Western Correspondent
OXNARD, Calif. -- It's up to California avocado growers to become more involved in the market if they are to prosper while avocado volume continues to climb beyond the 1 billion pounds that hit the U.S. market in 2006, a California Avocado Commission official said during the group's annual meeting.
Mark Affleck, president and chief executive officer of the Irvine-based commission abandoned the commission's usual meeting format and replaced the presentations and speeches with a two-hour question-and-answer session Jan. 30 in Oxnard and Feb. 1 in Temecula.

Later...

A pessimistic state of mind that seemed to permeate an industry that feared an avocado glut may have affected those returns.
"What we need is strength in the selling system," he added, and more control over how and when the fruit from all sources enters the market.
Quality, especially in regard to imported fruit, also is important to sustain the market, said Tom Bellamore, vice president and corporate counsel.
The board is working to get federal legislation passed that would require imported fruit to meet the same minimum maturity requirements as California fruit.



TK: This link shows all the USDA marketing orders. Note that Florida avocados are listed, but not California. I would assume legislation is needed to implement minimum maturity standards for imports because California's standards for maturity are enforced through state law, not a federal marketing order. There may not be a precedent for using state law to compel imports to meet minimum maturity standards.

From the 2006 California Avocado Commission annual report:

California State Law dictates certain maturity standards that have helped us earn our reputation for a consistent supply of #1 fruit. But these standards do not apply to imported avocados, resulting in sub-par quality and performance across the category.

To raise the quality bar across the entire category and hold all producers accountable to deliver a good product, CAC is introducing federal legislation mandating that all suppliers meet our California State Fruit Maturity Standard. This law, which we intend to attach to the 2007 Farm Bill, changes nothing at all for California growers but it does compel
importers to deliver mature, high quality fruit to the marketplace.


TK: Here is a link to California's minimum maturity standards. From a trip two years ago in Chile, I know exporters there perform maturity tests on hass exports. How imposition of a California standard would change export opportunities is unclear, but we'll gather trade input this week. It sounds like the legislation introduced in Congress on this issue by Sen. Boxer is targeted for inclusion in the 2007 farm bill.


Labels: , , , , ,

Saturday, April 28, 2007

A group that will have you

It was Mark Twain that said, "I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member." Well, the Fresh Produce Industry discussion group (link on the right side of the blog) will have you as a member, but only if you are a a part of the industry(loosely interpreted- after all, I'm in the group). Feel free to check it out. When a member, you can see who else has signed on and post any discussion topic/ I've uploaded a fair amount of resource files that might be helpful to your understanding of the industry.

Labels: ,

Headline roundup

Salads and salmonella in the UK

Fruit, veggie bouquet

USA Today: Whole Foods buying local

Tesco to open 100 U.S. stores by February

Florida citrus growers wait for APHIS rules on fresh shipments

Florida growers seek answers on citrus greening

Whole Foods satire

UK: Why aren't more farmers switching to organic?

French alarm at food miles

Over 4,000 customers have asked Wegmans to build store in their community

Fungus may be causing bees to disappear

Labels: , ,

Hass to be

On April 26, two bills were introduced relative to hass avocados:

Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., introduced :

S. 1229: A bill to amend the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 to provide for the application of mandatory minimum maturity standards applicable to all domestic and imported Hass avocados.


Rep. Lois Capps, D-Calif., with nine co-sponsors, introduced;

H.R. 2051: To amend the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 to provide for the application of mandatory minimum maturity standards applicable to all domestic and imported Hass avocados.


TK: The text of these bills is not available yet, but I wonder if this is another sign that California hass growers are having a hard time adjusting to a world where their market share - well over 90% in the 1970s - is now closer to 50%. Can anyone illuminate what these bills intend to accomplish?

Labels: ,

Kroger v. Wal-Mart

Kroger gets a rocking when Wal-Mart comes a knocking.

Kroger says it is increasing its market share in most markets that Wal-Mart has entered, reports analysis in The Cincinnati Enquirer. The story about the home town retailers is headlined "Kroger beating Wal-Mart; Market share is growing."

Is this home cooking - favorable press coverage - tilted in favor of Kroger?

Actually, the story is supported by numbers and third party analysts. Importantly, the story notes that Kroger's prices have come down in response to W-M competition. So while market share may have increased, profitability has declined.


Here is an excerpt:

The results indicate that a recent building binge of supercenters by Wal-Mart not only failed to garner it more market share, but may have led a growing number of shoppers to seek out Kroger's neighborhood shopping approach.
In addition to emphasizing convenience, Kroger is closing the price gap.
A pricing analysis by Bank of America analyst Scott Mushkin last fall found that Kroger's prices were 7.5 percent higher than nearby Wal-Mart supercenters, compared to 20 percent to 25 percent five years ago.
Wall Street is rewarding Kroger's strategy by driving its share price to record levels last week, closing Friday at $29.73.
Kroger thrives when Wal-Mart comes calling, David B. Dillon, Kroger chairman and chief executive, told Wall Street analysts during a March conference call.
"There are 34 major markets in which supercenters have achieved at least a No. 3 market share," Dillon said.
"Our share increased in 27 of those 34 markets."
Kroger competes against 1,262 supercenters - a 10 percent increase in stores from 2005 - and of those centers, 1,000 are operated by Wal-Mart.
Yet in the 44 major markets in the United States where Kroger operated nine or more stores in 2006, the company increased its market share, Dillon told the analysts.
Kroger lost market share in six markets and remained unchanged in one region.



TK: Kroger has done some things right in competing with Wal-Mart, and it doesn't necessarily mean Wal-Mart is falling down. When I was writing about increased activity of Wal-Mart in the St. Louis region last year, I had asked Ron McCormick about the impact on market share of other retailers. Here is what he said then:

When Wal-Mart enters a city with established local chains, it is not uncommon to see one of those chains gain market share while other might lose sales, said Ron McCormick, vice president and divisional merchandise manager for produce and floral for Wal-Mart Stores Inc., Bentonville, Ark.
Those chains that are good merchandisers can see their business increase, he said.


TK: Not surprising, the approaching footsteps of Wal-Mart in any market make retailers perform better. Hats off to Kroger for a winning strategy so far.

Labels: ,

Friday, April 27, 2007

Holy Grail or afterthought?

How important is a seal or label demonstrating to consumers that California leafy greens were grown according to Good Agricultural Practices? That's a practical consideration now. As this story notes, the California leafy greens marketing agreement board is considering the use of a seal.
From the story:

"There is a plan at some point to use a seal that would alert consumers, so that they'd know the produce they're purchasing has been handled properly," says a spokesman for the California Department of Food and Agriculture.


TK: How brand marketers choose to display the seal on bags of spinach and other leafy greens will be revealing. One would think the board will likely put some parameters in place regarding the size of the seal on consumer bags, and its use may be optional. I think the use of the seal is a good idea and will be important to consumers, at least in the short term.

Labels: ,

Farm to table in China

This sounds familiar; a politician is talking about produce safety, and for good reason. This time, the dialogue is in another language. Here is the link to a report from China about "farm to table" food safety of fresh fresh produce.
From the story:

Chinese President Hu Jintao urged Party and government officials to ensure that farm produce is safe and strict agricultural standards are enforced at a meeting on Tuesday.
Hu Jintao, who is also general secretary of the Communist Party of China (CPC) Central Committee, said quality control of farm produce all the way from field and barn to consumers' tables is vitally necessary.
Hu, presiding a working group of members of the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee, said applying strict agricultural standards is crucial to ensuring all 1.3 billion Chinese have enough safe food.
After listening to lectures by two experts on agriculture and food science, Hu called for better monitoring of environmental conditions in major farm producing areas.
China must produce more chemical-free produce and green food, Hu said, noting that farmers should be taught to use fertilizers more cautiously and scientifically.



TK: China's many small farmers make it challenging for the country to educate and communicate about food safety, and there are numerous there have been numerous illness outbreaks related to misuse of inputs. Here is the link to a story about pesticide misuse in China. Meanwhile, the drumbeat about food safety and FDA oversight continues in America. Here is a Reuters story looking at how Congress may cut off salaries of some FDA officials if things don't improve.

Labels:

Indian mangoes on the way

India's irradiated mangoes are headed to the U.S., according to this story from the Turkish Press online, (one of my favorite sites... not so much).
From the April 26 story:

The United States is set to receive its first consignment of prized Indian mangoes in 18 years after lifting a ban, officials said Thursday.
Commerce ministry officials here said 150 boxes of the famed King Alphonso and Kessar varieties would depart by air for New York later on Thursday from the western Indian city of
Mumbai.
"This weekend Indian mangoes could be on the breakfast tables of Americans who fancy the 'king of the fruits,'" a ministry official told AFP, as Indian customs said it would clear the consignment for export.
India has been pushing for years to export its mangoes to the United States since they were banned in 1989 over problems with pests such as fruit flies and weevils.
But US President George W. Bush and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh signed a deal in New Delhi in March 2006 to promote trade in agriculture that paved the way for the mango exports.
The mango is native to India, which grows more than half the world's output but whose exports amount to just seven percent of the world mango trade.
Indian export officials say the mangoes are being irradiated in
India to ensure there is no risk of introduction of plant diseases and pests.

From the March 12 Federal Register final rule that allowed imports of Indian mangoes.

Although this final rule will allow imports of all mango varieties, according to comments received on the proposed rule, producers in India are currently interested in exporting six varieties of mangoes to the United States--`Kesar,' `Alfonse,' \13\ `Banganpalli,' `Lagra,' `Dussehry,' and `Neelam'--from four States: Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat, Maharashtra, and Uttar Pradesh. Based on a site visit conducted by APHIS officials, we believe the majority of exports would originate from Gujarat and Maharashtra, where there are two and six production areas, respectively, producing `Kesar' and `Alfonse' varieties. Comments received on the proposed rule indicate that the harvest season in India stretches from March to July. According to the request from the Government of India, the quantity of mangoes exported to the United States would be about 100 sea containers per year.\14\ With India being the world leader in mango production, and a typical export packinghouse having a shipping capacity of 40-50 metric tons (over 88,000 lbs.) per day for 45-50 days of the harvest season, the amount imported into the United States would likely only be limited by U.S. market forces. Entry of Indian mangoes into the domestic market would provide increased variety and greater selection for consumers in the continental United States.


Here is a press release link from India confirming the first shipment.

TK: I called the New York City USDA market news office and they said the Indian mango has not appeared yet. I have a call into USDA APHIS on the facts of the story. Though I could poke fun at the majestic tone of this story - "prized Indian mangoes" and "king of fruits" - it is no small occasion when the world largest producer of mangoes begins to send irradiated fruit to the U.S. Any Fresh Talk readers handling this new deal?

Labels:

Mission minded

I think PBH lost out on an opportunity to build excitement in the Fruits and Veggies More Matters Web site by passing on the chance to use Disney characters on their Web site. An earlier post provides Elizabeth Pivonka's letter to the board on the decision.

Either way, this is not a make or break decision. Much more work on the Fruits and Veggies: More Matters message must be done to even nudge the awareness meter of the brand.These efforts will take much more toil and investment. As the graph at the bottom of the blog show, current visitors to the More Matters Web site are measured in the thousands, not millions.

Using the Disney characters would have given the F&VMM site more oomph and personality, and the brainstorming by Imagination Farms to be extend the More Matters should be commended. From all indications, IF remains committed to extended the More Matters message in other ways.

The PBH Executive Committee now must come up with parameters that allow the staff clear direction in the pursuit of their mission to expand fruit and vegetable consumption. Elizabeth Pivonka mentioned to me once that one of their public health partners raised objections to a campaign with McDonald's on one of their salad items. Now, an association with Disney characters is nixed because of competitive concerns among produce marketers. PBH and the industry must figure out how to vault the More Matters brand into the mainstream of the American consciousness without offending any of their core supporters - and it doesn't look like it will be very easy.

Labels: , ,

Chile's the best

It is nothing the produce industry already didn't know, but the World Economic Forum has recently ranked Chile as the top Latin American country relative to its attractiveness for private investment in infrastructure. The best were Chile, Brazil, Colombia and Peru, while the least attractive were Venezuela, Bolivia and the Dominican Republic.

Here are the scores:

Rank Country Score
1 Chile 5.432
2. Brazil 4.403
3. Colombia 4.334
4. Peru 4.235
5. Mexico 4.046
6. Uruguay 4.027
7. El Salvador 3.978
8. Guatemala 3.649
9. Argentina 3.4110
10. Venezuela 3.3711
11. Bolivia 3.3412
12. Dominican Republic 3.33

The factors measured by the score macroeconomic environment, legal framework, political risk, past track record on private investment, financial markets and relationship between government and society.


In other news about Chile, China surpassed the U.S. in the first quarter of the year as the number one overall export destination for all Chilean exports. Hot demand for copper and last year's free trade agreement helped fuel the growth in China shipments.

Labels: ,

Thursday, April 26, 2007

Anonymous sources

Few reporters are immune from the use of anonymous sources, but they sorely test the reader's trust in the the process of fact gathering. They too easily can hide motives and bend the truth w/o accountability.

I have one source in Va/DC that has been a periodic correspondent, providing me information "for background only" (that's another discussion) on certain aspects of USDA. I must say the information he provides is valuable and has given me much insight into the FPB. This source is truly anonymous, as I have no idea who he/she is.

Lobbyists - most non-association lobbyists, that is - don't want their name in the paper or, for that matter, in blogs. For them, it is all about their clients.

But there is too much use of anonymous sources on matters of import and character. Free reign on anonymous submissions leads to suspicions that the reporter is "carrying water" for one interest or another. We should all try to avoid that fate.

Labels:

AgJobs push gaining momentum

Last night at the opening reception of the Produce Marketing Association's annual board meeting, I had a chance to chat with a few people about this week's big push to make Congress more aware of AgJobs.

Anthony Barbieri of Acme Markets, whom PMA's Kathy Means called one of the biggest advocates, says he has contacted five Congressional offices. Look in the April 23 edition of The Packer for a guest column on the subject by Barbieri, co-penned by Ed Kershaw of Domex.

This is truly an effort that needs full industry support. If you haven't contacted your Congressperson, do so ASAP.

Labels: , , ,

More buzz kill

Taiwan is having it share of problems with bee populations that are dying off. The story from Reuters reports:

Over the past two months, farmers in three parts of Taiwan have reported most of their bees gone, the Chinese-language United Daily News reported. Taiwan's TVBS television station said about 10 million bees had vanished in Taiwan.
A beekeeper on Taiwan's northeastern coast reported 6 million insects missing "for no reason", and one in the south said 80 of his 200 bee boxes had been emptied, the paper said.



TK: A mass phenomenon over the millions of missing bees.. Disease, pesticides, cell phones - nothing has been ruled out as a possible cause. I would like to get an assessment from scientists about what tangible effects this bee shortage is having, and we may to wait for several months for that.

Labels:

Elizabeth responds

I had left Elizabeth Pivonka a voice mail with a question about their consumer Web site and also with a query about feedback she was getting on the issue of how the foundation was responding to concerns raised by some about their alliance with Imagination Farms.

She passed on this email:

From: Elizabeth Pivonka Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 3:11 PM
Subject: PBH & Imagination Farms

TO: PBH Board of Trustees

Many of you have expressed concern about a recent alliance that was announced between PBH and Imagination Farms. I appreciate those of you who contacted PBH directly to express your concern. I’d like to frame the issue for you and update you on what we’re doing about it.

Imagination Farms, through a brainstorming session we had with them in January, agreed to develop -- at their expense -- some fun, educational materials for children on our website using Disney characters, with PBH involvement and approval. At no time was it considered that Imagination Farms would show their products or mention their Disney Garden brand on the PBH website. We saw this as an opportunity to provide excitement (value) to moms and her children and help drive traffic to the new Fruits & Veggies—More Matters web site. That is the most immediate tangible piece from our initial discussions with Imagination Farms, but there was potential for more, thus my approval of the words “strategic alliance” in their press release.

Last week some of you raised the concern that any use of the Disney characters by PBH provided some trustees with a competitive advantage, at the expense of other trustees who are not themselves aligned with Disney. I confess that I was initially surprised by this reaction, although now I certainly understand it.

My concern at this point is the development of parameters to guide us with collaborations, alliances, or partnerships in the future. If there were issues with Imagination Farms, then some of our past activities should have also been called into question. It would be inefficient to have you approve everything that we do; that is why we have a Board Positions, Policies & Procedures Manual and an executive committee to act in place of the board when the board is not in session. This particular case brought to our attention the need for more extensive parameters – beyond what has already been requested by our health partners -- in PBH collaborations.

So, yesterday your PBH executive committee had a very lengthy conference call about this issue, with extensive dialog both before and after the call. They’ve taken this very seriously and are working on a policy that will provide guidance in such situations in the future; guidance that will prevent an unfair competitive advantage to some at the expense of others, but will still allow for collaborations that will benefit our collective effort to increase fruit and vegetable consumption.

Suffice it to say that we will not be placing Disney characters on our website. I think Imagination Farms deserves credit for trying to do more to support our cause of increasing consumption. In fact, in further conversations with Imagination Farms this week, they have expressed their continued commitment to support in-kind PBH web development within the final policy parameters that are set forth, despite the dialog of the past week. They share our commitment to increase fruit and vegetable consumption. They happened to be the “lightening rod” example that brought to light some parameters that needed more extensive discussion.

The PBH executive committee is planning a follow-up phone call to discuss this early next week, after which I’ll update you again. In the meantime, let me know if you have any questions and I welcome your continued comments.

Finally, I remain convinced that our new Fruits & Veggies—More Matters initiative will have a lasting impact on consumers. As many of you heard at our recent board meeting, Moms need help in translating their positive attitudes and intentions about fruits and vegetables into action. With your help, we can make that happen!

Thank you for your ongoing support!

Respectfully,

Elizabeth



Elizabeth Pivonka, Ph.D., R.D.
President & CEO
Produce for Better Health Foundation



TK: This is a well written letter and speaks for itself. In my conversation later in the day with Elizabeth, she spoke of development of parameters by the executive committee to address the issue of alliances. She pointed out that PBH public health partners exert a kind of pressure to influence alliances on one hand and of course, members of the board from the industry have their own set of concerns, often rooted in their competitive positions. All viewpoints are defensible, but don't make the job of creating innovative promotions and alliances any easier.

An episode like this makes me think how great it would be if PBH were funded with $25 million or $50 million from the farm bill, rather than $10,000 contributions from 120 different board members. With a mandatory promotion order or farm bill funding, PBH would have the autonomy to cut a marketing swath that would cast a long shadow for the entire industry. Yet the large board of directors - while arguably a hindrance to PBH executives - also provides the feedback and ownership of the message that the industry values.

Labels: , , ,

Wednesday, April 25, 2007

What FDA knew and when they knew it

This UPI story highlights a strange reality that occasionally occurs in newspapering. News that isn't the news, presumed scandal when none exists. This story follows on a story in The Washington Post earlier, covered in this blog post, headlined "FDA Was Aware of Dangers To Food" with a tagline that "Outbreaks Were Not Preventable, Officials Say"

Here is the lede of the UPI piece:

The Food and Drug Administration has known for years about contamination problems at a Georgia peanut butter plant and on California spinach farms that led to disease outbreaks that killed three people, sickened hundreds, and forced one of the biggest product recalls in U.S. history, documents and interviews show.

TK: Of course the FDA wasis aware of food safety concerns. It has been communicating steadily with the industry over the past few years about the need for commodity specific guidance.

The FDA sent a letter to California growers in 2005 expressing "serious concern" about foodborne illness outbreaks from lettuce and spinach crops in the state, which at the time had totaled 19 since 1995, CBS News reported Tuesday.

TK: The way this is written makes it sound as if the existence of this letter is recent news. Not so. I was at FDA's headquarters in December 2005 and had asked Brackett about the letter, which was posted on the FDA's Web site.

However, no action was taken and the FDA instead urged the industry to take "the appropriate measures to provide a safe product." The E.coli outbreak a year after the warning left three people dead and more than 200 sickened.

"Sadly, today this great Food and Drug Administration, when it comes to food safety, has become the weakest link," Sen. Richard Durban, D-Ill., said. Officials said the FDA, which is responsible for 80 percent of the nation's grown foods -- compared to 20 percent under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Department of Agriculture -- has far fewer inspectors than the other agency.
"If products are regulated by FDA, like seafood and produce and grains, they might only see an inspector once every five or 10 years," said Caroline Smith DeWaal of the Center for Science in the Public Interest.

TK: Protestations to the contrary, these stories state FDA "took no action" after previous outbreaks. While the industry leaders like Bryan Silbermann and Tom Stenzel have called for more consultations before the FDA makes public statements about foodborne illness outbreak, stories like these increase pressure on the agency to shout from the rooftops any scrap of information they have.

Labels: , , , ,

GAO testimony

Here is the link to a GAO testimony on food safety yesterday before the House Energy and Commerce subcommittee.
Some highlights:

For example, the majority of federal expenditures for food safety inspection were directed toward USDA’s programs for ensuring the safety of meat, poultry, and egg products; however, USDA is responsible for regulating only about 20 percent of the food supply. In contrast, FDA, which is responsible for regulating about 80 percent of the food supply, accounted for only about 24 percent of expenditures.

We have proposed that Congress consider legislation that would require companies to alert USDA or FDA when they discover they have distributed potentially unsafe food and that would give both agencies mandatory food recall authority. Congress has not enacted legislation granting agencies general mandatory recall authority. We have also recommended that USDA and FDA better track and manage food recalls, achieve more prompt and complete recalls, and determine if additional ways are needed to alert consumers about recalled food that they may have in their homes.


The recent outbreaks of E. coli in spinach and Salmonella in peanut butter, along with outbreaks of contaminated pet food, underscore the need of a broad-based transformation of the federal oversight of food safety to achieve greater economy, efficiency, effectiveness, accountability, and sustainability. GAO’s high-risk designation raises the priority and visibility of this necessary transformation and thus can bring needed attention to address the weaknesses caused by a fragmented system. Among the reasons we designated the federal oversight of food safety as a high-risk area is that USDA and FDA have limited recall authority.

TK: An expression goes that 20% of the people do 80% of the work in a church or any organization. The FDA is taking that a step further; it receives 20% of food safety dollars and is responsible for 80% of the food. Beyond more bucks for FDA, the GAO favors a unified food safety agency and expanded FDA authority.

Labels: , ,

Ask the expert

I visited the http://www.fruitsandveggiesmorematters.org/ Web site today and find that the page with Ask the Expert questions was fairly much bursting with activity. That's good to see it being used extensively. Here is the link to the page.

One thing I noticed is that moms who come to the Web site may have a certain edge to their passion about fruits and veggies. For example, one mom wanted to know what "slow carb" produce could be recommended. One mom complained that there was nothing on the importance of organic or sustainable agriculture. She (we presume) wrote "Any chance of that chance of such a thing happening when all the sponsors are huge loveless corporations?"

Another wondered if two of the same kind of fruit or veggie counted as one or two servings. One question asked what fruits and veggies are great for potassium, and another post asked about weight loss and why it wasn't happening with her fruit and veggie-rich diet.

All in all, the Ask the Expert site is very authentic, with misspellings littering the posts like blueberries in the morning cereal bowl. The expert who answers all these questions is Elizabeth Pivonka, and she has to be encouraged with the interaction so far.

However, it is interesting to note the one email expressing some reservations about the the middle of the road aspect of the PBH message. Perhaps the most passionate GenX moms may believe most in organic produce and sustainable farming. Is there any way to drill deeper and create more than one Web site that caters to different demographics within the GenX mom category?

See the graph at the bottom of the blog for how one Web company has measured the site's traffic.

Labels: ,

Maureen's moment

Maureen Torrey Marshall, chair of the United Fresh Produce Association, presented testimony before the Senate Agriculture Committee yesterday. here are The link to her full remarks is here.

Some excerpts:

As the policy discussion for the 2007 Farm Bill takes shape, we look forward to working with you to develop new programs and enhance existing programs that will improve the competitiveness of the specialty crop industry. Over the past two years, the coalition has been working with members of Congress to develop specific legislative language consistent with our priorities. The culmination of that work came last week, when Senators Debbie Stabenow and Larry Craig, along with 17 co-sponsors, introduced the Specialty Crops Competition Act of 2007, S. 1160. We believe this legislation is a comprehensive farm bill package providing the necessary framework to enhance the competitiveness of the specialty crop industry. We expect this legislation to begin a constructive discussion of specialty crop farm policy and allow our industry to play a significant role in the farm bill debate.

Later....

Many of the provisions of S.1160 address these concerns. I would like to highlight today nine (9) key areas of S.1160, which we believe Congress should incorporate into the 2007 Farm Bill because they will enhance the foundation of policy tools available to this important segment of U.S. agriculture.
1. Prohibition of Planting Fruits and Vegetables on Contract Acres As referenced in S. 1160, the Alliance strongly supports maintaining or strengthening the current U.S. planting policy, which restricts producers from growing fruits and vegetables on acres receiving program payments.

2. Nutrition Policy . The Dietary Guidelines for Americans call for the consumption of 5 to 13 servings a day of fruits and vegetables as a cornerstone of good health. Yet, on any given day 45 percent of children eat no fruit at all, and 20 percent eat less than one serving of vegetables.
3. State Block Grants The Alliance also supports continued expansion of the State Block Grant Program for Specialty Crops that was authorized in the 2004 Specialty Crops Competitiveness Act
4. Research Policy Federal investment in agricultural research dedicated to improving the competitiveness of the U.S. specialty crop industry has been shrinking in real terms and is not adequate to meet the needs of the industry. s.
5. Conservation Policy Because of these factors, the industry supports expanding cost share and incentive programs such and the Environmental Quality Incentives Program and the Conservation Security Program that encourages producers to invest in natural resource protection measures they might not have been able to afford without such assistance.

6. International Trade Policy . Farm bill programs that have worked well increasing access to foreign markets for domestically produced fruits and vegetables are the Technical Assistance for Specialty Crops and the Market Access Program. These programs should be continued and expanded in the next Farm Bill.
7. Disaster Assistance Policy The current $80,000 payment limit on disaster payments is not equitable for specialty crop producers.The Alliance believes that cost of production and crop value should be used to index disaster assistance payments to allow specialty crop producers to receive more equitable disaster payments.
8. Invasive Pests and Disease The Alliance supports enhancing the structure and resources of APHIS to better identify and prioritize foreign pest threats, provide timely adequate compensation to producers impacted by emergency eradication programs, and create an export division to more quickly process export petitions from U.S. specialty crop growers.
9. Labor Needs As Congress continues to debate immigration reform the produce industry urges Congress to support comprehensive immigration reform which includes a strong temporary worker program that will match a willing foreign employee with a willing employer when no U.S. workers are available.


TK: The first point Maureen brings up is the planting prohibition on farm program acres. How long the industry can hang on to this bargaining chip - and how much it will ultimately be worth - is one of the key questions of the 2007 farm bill debate.

Labels: , , , ,

Hearing coverage

Coverage of yesterday's House Energy and Commerce oversight and investigation subcommittee on food safety is extensive on the Web, but mainly based on a single reporter, Andrew Bridges of the Associated Press.

From the AP:
From the story:

Families victimized by tainted spinach and peanut butter put a human face on recent high-profile outbreaks of foodborne illness Tuesday, urging lawmakers to strengthen federal oversight of the nation's food supply.

``I can't protect them from spinach - only you guys can,'' said Michael Armstrong, as he and his wife, Elizabeth, cradled daughters Ashley, 2, and Isabella, 5.
The two girls fell ill - Ashley gravely so - in September after eating a salad made with a bag of the leafy greens contaminated by E. coli.



TK: The families of those sickened were effective witnesses, though perhaps lawmakers' penchant for asking leading questions made them appear to be just props at times. This version of the story focused entirely on the testimony of the victims and the reaction of lawmakers, though some longer versions include reference to Natural Selection's testing program.




Labels: , ,

Tuesday, April 24, 2007

No spinach aid in supplemental bill

Washington lobbyists tell me today there is no spinach aid in the conference report for supplemental appropriations for Iraq. This report from The Hill confirms, and also indicates that the bill will likely be vetoed anyway because of Democratic language on putting a date on U.S. troop withdrawal.
From the story:

The Iraq supplemental will not be as “clean” as President Bush demanded, but Democratic appropriators yesterday agreed to eliminate two domestic-spending projects that Bush and the GOP have criticized and to remove the fixed timeline for troop withdrawal.The House-Senate conference committee on the supplemental, which Democrats have trumpeted as the first open conference in years, agreed to replace the binding timetable in the House’s original version with a redeployment goal of April 1, 2008. Conferees also removed $25 million in relief for spinach farmers, $40 million for the Christmas-tree industry, and $74 million in peanut-storage money from the bill.


Labels: ,

Johanns to discuss farm bill legislative language

Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns indicated he will discuss legislative language for the Administration's Farm Bill proposals during a conference call with reporters tomorrow afternoon. Stay tuned.

Labels: , ,

Raw product and end product testing

The House oversight hearing on food safety is fascinating. A lot of questions whether FDA needs more authority to institute recalls and impose regulations, of course.

Representatives of Menu (pet food) ConAgra (peanut butter) and Natural Selection (spinach). Charles Sweat, president of Natural Selection LLC, told the committee about raw product and end product testing at their packing facility. Sweat said that the testing has revealed pathogens on raw product lots from California, Arizona and Mexico but no pathogens on end product.
To date, Sweat said 23 raw product samples have tested positive for pathogenic E. coli, and 16 tested positive for salmonella. All those lots were destroyed in an incinerator, he said.

Sweat said Natural Selection, as far as he knows, is the only company doing raw product testing for E. coli in California. However, he said that Natural Selection does not want to use food safety as a competitive advantage, but is sharing their experience with other firms and associations.

I would have to say that Natural Selection's testing for pathogens - modeled after the meat industry's testing for E. coli - is far-sighted and seems to be an obvious path for the industry.

Labels: , ,

House and Senate Hearings

There are simultaneous Congressional hearings today and I've tuned in both Web casts on my computer, though I can only listen to one at a time. The House Energy and Commerce oversight subcommittee is ongoing as I write this, with testimony from some of the families who have been affected by foodborne illness. Later industry representatives will testify. One GAO representative pointed out that FDA gets 20% of funding while responsible for 80% of food supply. The bias in this hearing, from what I can tell, is for more regulation.

Meanwhile, the Senate Agriculture Committee is also Web casting its hearing, and I see Maureen Marshall of United has already testified. More coverage on these important hearings later in the day.

Labels:

News roundup

From the Google news reel:

Salyer American acquired

GM tomatoes with vaccines

Eating fruits, veggies cuts cancer.

Mackey of Wild Oats interviewed.

Canadian organic produce get new label.

Labels:

Monday, April 23, 2007

USDA reports decline in per capita veg disappearance

We are supposed to be eating more vegetables, not less. But the USDA reports that per capita disappearance of vegetables declined 3% last year.

Here is a link to the pdf file Vegetables and Melon Outlook.
From the report:


2006, per capita disappearance (also known as net domestic use, a proxy for consumption) of all vegetables, melons, potatoes, sweet potatoes, pulse crops, and mushrooms fell 3 percent to 428 pounds. Most of this reduction was due to lower head lettuce and processed tomato disappearance. In 2007, increased supplies of tomatoes and potatoes are expected to be the primary forces pushing vegetable use up modestly from year-earlier levels. Fresh vegetables: On a per person basis, domestic disappearance for consumption of fresh-market vegetables (excluding melons, potatoes, sweet potatoes, pulses, and mushrooms) fell 2 percent to 145 pounds. Fresh use rose for crops like asparagus, snap beans, cabbage, cauliflower, bell peppers, garlic, and romaine and leaf lettuce and dropped for head lettuce, spinach, celery, onions, pumpkins, and tomatoes. In 2007, fresh vegetable use is expected to rise slightly from that of a year earlier.

Labels: ,

Lurker cites NYT

Our anonymous poster Lurker left this message.

There was a very interesting piece on last Sunday's New York Times titled "You are what grow". Link here. Lurker


This a timely and insightful piece, drawing out observations about the cost of calories, obesity and the unintended consequence of our current farm policy.
This is a telling excerpt:

So how can the supermarket possibly sell a pair of these synthetic cream-filled pseudocakes for less than a bunch of roots?
For the answer, you need look no farther than the farm bill. This resolutely unglamorous and head-hurtingly complicated piece of legislation, which comes around roughly every five years and is about to do so again, sets the rules for the American food system — indeed, to a considerable extent, for the world’s food system. Among other things, it determines which crops will be subsidized and which will not, and in the case of the carrot and the Twinkie, the farm bill as currently written offers a lot more support to the cake than to the root. Like most processed foods, the Twinkie is basically a clever arrangement of carbohydrates and fats teased out of corn, soybeans and wheat — three of the five commodity crops that the farm bill supports, to the tune of some $25 billion a year. (Rice and cotton are the others.) For the last several decades — indeed, for about as long as the American waistline has been ballooning — U.S. agricultural policy has been designed in such a way as to promote the overproduction of these five commodities, especially corn and soy.
That’s because the current farm bill helps commodity farmers by cutting them a check based

on how many bushels they can grow, rather than, say, by supporting prices and limiting production, as farm bills once did. The result? A food system awash in added sugars (derived from corn) and added fats (derived mainly from soy), as well as dirt-cheap meat and milk (derived from both). By comparison, the farm bill does almost nothing to support farmers growing fresh produce. A result of these policy choices is on stark display in your supermarket, where the real price of fruits and vegetables between 1985 and 2000 increased by nearly 40 percent while the real price of soft drinks (a k a liquid corn) declined by 23 percent. The reason the least healthful calories in the supermarket are the cheapest is that those are the ones the farm bill encourages farmers to grow.


TK: Even this well written piece probably won't stir the passion of readers about the farm bill. Still, the author - like the produce industry - holds out hope that the backroom deals on the farm bill may be at least replaced in part by more equitable and sensible legislation.

Labels: , ,

Stallman's logic

Bob Stallman, president of the American Farm Bureau Federation, defended that organization's farm bill proposal. While some may call it status quo, that is mistaken, he said.

He said that while other groups have put out farm bill proposals, only Farm Bureau's and the USDA's have sought to do it within the budget guidelines for the 2007 farm bill.

Our proposal offsets a $250 million annual increase in conservation funding for fruit and vegetable producers by capping spending on the Conservation Security Program (CSP) in 2016 and 2017.

The School Fruit and Vegetable Snack Program was authorized to encourage increased consumption of fresh fruit and vegetables by children. The program offers fresh fruit and vegetables free of charge to children in 400 schools in 14 states. The program was funded at $6 million for the 2002-2003 school year and was extended through the 2003-2004 school year. Farm Bureau supports expansion of the School Fruit and Vegetable Snack Program to 10 schools in every state. This should only cost about $7.5 million annually but will provide significant benefits to fruit and vegetable producers now and in the long term, while promoting healthy eating habits among children.
In recent years, USDA has acquired an average of over $300 million a year in fruit and vegetables for schools. About $50 million is purchased and distributed through the Department of Defense Fresh Program, which supplies fresh fruits and vegetables to schools under contract with USDA. We support the administration’s proposal to provide an additional $50 million a year for the purchase of fruits and vegetables specifically for the school lunch program. Some of this new spending could be through added funds for the Department of Defense Fresh Program.



Here, I asked Stallman about the $250 million in exchange for the planting restriction.

TK: Maybe it is the budget constraints, but Farm Bureau's farm bill proposal doesn't approach a sense of fair play for fruit and vegetable producers. Only $7.5 million a year for the fruit and vegetable snack program - in just 10 schools per state - is unacceptable. The industry has to hope it can do much better than this status quo, commodity program-oriented proposal.

Labels: ,

Farm Bureau's nod to specialty crops

The American Farm Bureau Federation has just released their proposal for the 2007 farm bill. The pdf link can be found here in the Fresh Produce Discussion Group. The FB site is linked here.

The highlights from Farm Bureau news release:

Support for maintaining the baseline funding for the commodity title ($7 billion per year) and conservation title ($4.4 billion per year), rather than transferring funding from one title to another. These baselines already include sizable cuts from the 2002 farm bill funding level.

Support for eliminating the fruit and vegetable planting prohibition and for $250 million per year in conservation program funding for specialty crop growers.

Support for a revenue-based counter-cyclical safety net program to protect against both low prices and low yields and provide payments to farmers when they need them most.

Support for a standing catastrophic assistance program that is integrated with a re-rated crop insurance program. Crop insurance coverage would be reduced from the current coverage level because the new standing catastrophic assistance program would cover 50 percent of losses.

Support for retention of non-environmentally sensitive land in the Conservation Reserve Program and allowing the production of energy crops on that land. Those contract holders would be required to produce a cellulosic ethanol feedstock cover crop.

Opposition to any changes in farm bill payment limitations and income means-testing.


TK: This proposal accentuates the status quo. The $250 million for the specialty crop industry, directed through conservation program funding and coming at the expense of the planting provision on program crop acres, is underwhelming -- especially considering produce industry ambitions run much higher and include nutrition program and block grants. While baseline funding for program crops is close to $10 billion a year, specialty crops get $250 million; that's not too equitable.
Developing...

Labels: , , ,

EU push for school fruit and vegetable programs

Above, Lars Hoelgaard, Deputy Director General, Directorate General Agriculture, European Commission, offers support for expansion of school fruit and vegetable programs at a briefing at the European Parliament April 17.


This shot was passed on by Andrew Marshall, government relations assistant with the United Fresh Produce Association, As in the U.S., Lorelei DiSogra of United notes that leaders in Europe are beginning to align agriculture policy with public health goals, and that gives a lift to programs that would distribute free fruits and vegetable in schools. Industry leaders in Europe have asked for 100 million euros to fund an EU program that would provide matching funds for the program to member states.

Labels: ,

FDA on defense

The Washington Post has published a story today by Elizabeth Williamson headlined "FDA Was Aware of Dangers To Food", with a tagline "Outbreaks Were Not Preventable, Officials Say."

As she describes the warning signs the FDA had about both the peanut butter salmonella contamination and the E. coli pathogen linked spinach outbreaks, Williamson notes the House Energy and Commerce subcommittee hearing tomorrow. Among those interviewed include Bob Brackett of the FDA Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition.

From the story:

In a letter sent to California growers in late 2005, Brackett wrote, "FDA is aware of 18 outbreaks of foodborne illness since 1995 caused by [E. coli bacteria] for which fresh or fresh-cut lettuce was implicated. . . . In one additional case, fresh-cut spinach was implicated. These 19 outbreaks account for approximately 409 reported cases of illness and two deaths."
"We know that there are still problems out in those fields," Brackett said in an interview last week. "We knew there had been a problem, but we never and probably still could not pinpoint where the problem was. We could have that capability, but not at this point."


TK: The FDA will not have an easy day tomorrow. Below is the witness list:

The Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations will hold a hearing on Tuesday, April 24, 2007, at 9:30 a.m. in room 2123 Rayburn House Office Building. The hearing is entitled A Diminished Capacity: Can the FDA Assure the Safety and Security of the Nation's Food Supply?

This hearing is part of the Committee's broader investigation into the safety of our nation's food supply and the declining ability of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to conduct inspections and perform laboratory analysis. The hearing will focus on the recent contamination of pet food, peanut butter and spinach. Witnesses will include victims of food borne illnesses resulting from the outbreaks as well as representatives from the companies responsible for producing the contaminated products.


WITNESS LIST

Panel I
Ms. Elizabeth Armstrong
Accompanied by
Ashley and Isabella Armstrong
Indiana

Mr. Gary Pruden
Accompanied by Sea nPruden
Pennsylvania

Ms. Terri Marshall
Louisiana

Panel II
Dr. Anthony DeCarlo
Red Bank Veterinary Hospital
Tinton Falls, NJ 07724

Mr. Charles Sweat
President
Natural Selection Foods
1721 San Juan Hwy
San Juan Bautista, CA 95405

Mr. Paul K. Henderson
Chief Executive Officer
Menu Foods Income Fund
8 Falconer Drive
Streetsville, Ontario L5N IB1
Canada

Ms. Lisa Shames
Acting Director
Natural Resources and Environment
U.S. Government Accountability Office
441 G Street NW, Room 2T23A
Washington, DC 20548

Panel III

Mr. David Colo
Senior Vice President - Manufacturing
ConAgra Foods, Inc.
5 ConAgra Drive
Omaha, NE 68102

Mr. Stephen S. Miller
Chief Executive Officer
ChemNutra, Inc.
810 S. Durango Drive, Suite 102
Las Vegas, NY 89145

Labels: , , , ,

Ron's explanation

Ron McCormick, vp of produce and floral at Wal-Mart, gave an interview to a Reuters reporter about Wal-Mart's organic produce business. The April 23 story is here

While Wal-Mart said last year that it would double its offerings of organic, the reporter notes that the number of organic produce items in Wal-Mart has been scrutinized, with some surmising that the retailer's organic push has fallen flat. The reporter sets up the story with the line that "many are wondering if Wal-Mart has pulled back" from its commitment to organic.

McCormick doesn't get into specifics, but he did say that "really very few stores" could not sell 20 to 25 organic produce items on a consistent basis. At the same time, McCormick said that the chain has moved away from exclusively organic lines.

From the story:

McCormick said Wal-Mart began testing organic produce at a store near Albuquerque, New Mexico, about three years ago, after noticing that virtually all of its competitors had moved into the category.
"We thought if it was a high population, fast-growing market like this, and there's that many people into it, it takes it beyond the world of a Whole Foods or a specialty store -- there must be something there," he said.
So the company set up a 12-foot section in its produce area, combining natural foods, vegetarian items and organic produce.
"I think we added initially about 45 items, and we were getting it from local sources, so it was easy to do," he said.
Some items sold well, others did not, and McCormick said his team played around with the section for a year before organics garnered company-wide interest, with talk of expanding it across the country.
One way Wal-Mart figured it would tackle the category on such a large scale was to go exclusive -- find certain products that were relatively as easy to grow organically as they were to grow conventionally, and then sell only the organic version.

But by only offering three-packs of organic romaine hearts, the company was unable to take advantage of local supply and times when farmers would offer deals on conventional lettuce.
"We were having to say no because our program was exclusively organic on that item. So it got to be foolish not to take advantage of those opportunities," McCormick said.
Wal-Mart also ran into supply issues.
"The growers were straining to meet our volume, which I think also pushes you into an unenviable position in produce," he said.
"We're now trying to build a network of good suppliers that will be able to grow with us and be consistent. Our ideal supplier is one that has a passion for what they're doing and also has the ability to grow as we grow, so you don't have thousands and thousands of suppliers," he said.



TK: It would be helpful to know Wal-Mart's organic sales, but that information won't be forthcoming. Not surprisingly, McCormick clearly signals Wal-Mart is looking to team with the largest organic suppliers and grow business with them.

Labels: , , ,

Marler's testimony

Here is a link to Bill Marler's written testimony that will be submitted to tomorrow's hearing of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. He indicated he won't be a panelist that presents to the committee in person, but he is submitting these written remarks, and some of his clients will testify.

In his written remarks, Marler repeats his signature line, asking the committee to put Marler Clark "out of business."

It is time that you help government, help business, help consumers and make me unnecessary. I will do that by presenting best practices and other recommendations that can make that possible. Therefore, I thank this committee for inviting me to help with a dialogue about making the food chain safer for consumers.


Marler then makes the connection between the E. coli cases on produce with the early struggles the meat industry .

What has changed since Upton Sinclair’s “Jungle” are two things. One, the source of disease has shifted from the meat that Sinclair described to produce. As usually happens, it took a crisis for incidences of E. coli in meat to decline. That crisis occurred in the early 1990s. Undercooked hamburgers containing E. coli from Jack in the Box sickened 650 people, four of them children who died. Shortly, I will discuss how that problem was fixed, perhaps not completely, and the important lessons we as a nation should learn from that. Incidentally, that has been one of the major food safety success stories of our time. According to the CDC, E. coli outbreaks linked to tainted meat have declined by 42 percent. The American Meat Institute puts that figure at 80 percent.Currently, the single largest source of food-borne disease is produce such as lettuce, spouts, tomatoes, spinach, green onions and parsley. Here are some figures. In the past 10 years, the Food and Drug Administration – the FDA – reported 21 outbreaks related to fresh leafy products. In 2006, 205 people became sick and five died from eating E. coli contaminated spinach.


Marler has eight recommendations for the committee:


From research and experience, here are eight recommendations.

First of all, there exist two “best practices” in meat that should be extended to produce. Following the Jack in the Box crisis, the head of the U.S.D.A.’s Food and Safety Inspection service took a regulatory and systems approach to food safety. That “hero” was Michael Taylor. Taylor declared that raw ground beef that is contaminated with E. coli would be classified and treated as “adulterated” within the meaning of the Federal Meat Inspection Act. Following Taylor’s example, we must serve notice to produce and other food processors that E. coli, salmonella, etc. will be classified and treated as adulterants. In addition, the same kind of comprehensive Risk Management System must be established and implemented. Penalties must be criminal and civil.
Two, we need the same kind of food safety champion that Taylor was. This person would be a highly visible symbol of our commitment. Along these lines, it is useful to consider consolidating responsibility in one federal-level agency. That would be the central point for communication about best practices and the point of contact for state and local regulators and health departments.
Three, the track record of business for issuing warnings and recalls rapidly isn’t good. Peanut butter has been a classic example. The federal and state governments should have authority to do this. That means increased funding, particularly at the state level. Most outbreaks are regional, not national.
Four, produce an E. coli vaccine for cows. I would say that the lion’s share of produce problems result from this contaminant passed on through cow feces.
Five, the nation requires education about the benefits of irradiation of all mass-produced food including produce. Resistance to this practice seems to be rooted in public perception, not science.
Six, attention has to be paid to the vulnerability of our food supply system to acts of terrorism. Denial and lack of common sense seem to dominate thinking at all levels – business and federal and state government.
Seven, why haven’t we applied our economic and political muscle to imposing more stringent regulations on food imports? This is a central trade issue that has been neglected.
And, eight, there’s an urgent need to improve the resources available to foodborne disease victims. At the top of the list are the out-of-pocket medical costs. Those are usually not immediately or even eventually reimbursed by medical insurance if victims have coverage. By time compensation comes from litigation, the person could be heavily in debt.

Let me wrap this up with one thought. Just as the boldness, courage and relentlessness of Michael Taylor made meat safer, these eight recommendations can ensure the integrity of the rest of the food chain. And better care for victims. Let me say again: “I ask this committee to put us at Marler Clark out of business.” Thank you.


TK: I think several of Marler's recommendations will find resonance in the produce community, though he tends to stress regulation over research. His strong words about expanded FDA authority and civil and criminal penalties for processors won't be popular. The most effective witnesses before the committee tomorrow likely will be his clients - or some of those sickened by E. coli tainted spinach or leafy greens.

Labels: , , , , ,