Paying for plum pox eradication

Just talked to a few people about plum pox eradication costs. It seems the state of New York has argued for a 50 meter buffer zone for infected trees and the USDA has insisted on a 500 meter buffer. One grower said that Ontario's weak plum pox eradication program - at least it has been considered weak until now - has not convinced New York growers they can stave off the plum pox virus based on their own efforts alone. What's more, the 500 meter buffer zone will slash output of affected producers. In one instance, a 500 meter buffer would mean three growers of stone fruit would have to destroy trees - even though only one of them had an infected tree.

Meanwhile, in Michigan, the Michigan State University Southwest Michigan research station is hard hit, with the 500 meter buffer zone taking out all of its stone fruit acreage and years of research work on that farm.

Together on produce safety

PMA and United have just issued a statement indicating both groups have found agreement with an "independent but common" conclusion that produce safety standards must be federally mandated, risk-based and allow for commodity specific regulation.

TK: This is a watershed moment. Both organizations have staked their positions in the same camp, and that is a sign of unity and solidarity that must be appreciated by their members. In my view, neither PMA or United wants federal mandates for produce safety that weigh down the industry with excessive costs. However, both groups understand the need for federal oversight to restore consumer confidence. What is problematic is the fact that the public has substantially less confidence in the FDA right now than they have in produce growers.

Don't blame it on Milton

This link to a blog about food safety comes from KSU's Doug Powell and the Food Safety Network. The blog author is Jacob Grier, self described as " a barista, bartender, close-up magician, and freelance writer loosely associated with the libertarian policy scene in Washington, DC."

In his criticism of a Time magazine column by Paul Krugman, Grier cites this passage by Krugman.

The Bush administration won’t issue food safety regulations even when the private sector wants them. The president of the United Fresh Produce Association says that the industry’s problems “can’t be solved without strong mandatory federal regulations”: without such regulations, scrupulous growers and processors risk being undercut by competitors more willing to cut corners on food safety. Yet the administration refuses to do more than issue nonbinding guidelines.

Grier writes this in response:

Citing this as evidence displays an astonishing degree of ignorance from a professional economist. When existing industry players call for supposed public interest regulation, that should immediately send up a red flag that what they really want is to squeeze out potential competitors. Strict regulations will almost certainly put up barriers to entry in the food industry. Whether they’ll actually make things safer is far less obvious. At no point does Krugman explain what regulations he’d like to see put in place, how they’ll deal with imported food, and whether or not they’ll be cost effective.


TK: Are food safety outbreaks a failure of the markets or a failure of regulation? Or do lawyers share some blame? Buyers, lawyers and government are all trying to atone for those failures now. United's call for government oversight is still a matter of great interest and amazement, as evidenced by Krugman and Grier.

Rising tensions

I see that Ken Cook's Mulchblog has coverage from of the House Ag Committee markup of conservation programs. Chuck Abbott of Reuters also had this coverage. The long and short of it is that there is no money for new programs, including those efforts to more equitably fund conservation needs of fruit and vegetable producers. Some environmental group leaders are saying that the lack of responsiveness by the Ag Committee could lead to a greater effort to amend the farm bill with floor debate.

From the Reuters piece by Abbott:

Without more money for land stewardship, the Agriculture Committee may face a revolt when it brings its bill to the House floor, warned Scott Faber of Environmental Defense.
"The leadership has to provide more funds for conservation ... Today is a good day for those who want to write the farm bill on the floor," said Faber, who is part of a coalition of environmentalists, small-farm activists, fiscal hawks and international development groups who say the U.S. farm program should spend more on stewardship and less on crop subsidies.
Land stewardship programs will get roughly $5 billion a year under congressional formulas for agricultural programs. Crop supports will get $8 billion.
California Democrat Dennis Cardoza said stewardship programs must be expanded so that fruit, vegetable, nut and nursery crop growers can meet a mounting regulatory burden and so that specialty crop growers get a more equitable share of supports.
He proposed a $305 million air quality program to combat dust and ozone but withdrew it because there was no money.
Kirsten Gillibrand, a New York Democrat, proposed full funding of the Conservation Security Program, which would cost billions of dollars, but withdrew her amendment because there was no way to pay for it at the moment. Created in 2002, CSP is the first green payment program for land stewardship. Under current plans, it would be mothballed until 2012.
Under the outline drawn by Agriculture Committee leaders, funding will double, to $2 billion a year for the Environmental Quality Incentives Program, which shares the cost of controlling farm and feedlot runoff. Funding would climb for the Farm and Ranchland Protection Program, which buys easements to prevent urban sprawl.
But enrollment in wetland and grassland programs would stall. The land-idling Conservation Reserve would retain its cap of 39.2 million acres.
Although a $20 billion reserve may be created for agriculture, there is no assurance lawmakers can meet the rules for using it. It is fairly certain that renewable energy programs will get $4 billion to $5 billion from the reserve.

Canker rulemaking

The USDA issued a May 22 notice on citrus canker regulation in Florida.

The USDA is extending the comment period until June 11 for the agency's interim rule that amended the citrus canker quarantine regulations to explicitly prohibit, with limited exceptions, the interstate movement of regulated nursery stock from a quarantined area.

From the notice:

In an order dated April 26, 2007, the United States District Court of the Middle District of Florida, Ocala Division, instructed the U.S. Department of Agriculture to begin a new round of notice-and-comment rulemaking on the issue of the interstate movement of regulated nursery stock from areas quarantined for citrus canker. We solicited comments on the interim rule for 60 days after its publication. Comments on the interim rule were required to be received on or before May 21, 2007. We are extending the comment period on Docket No. APHIS-2007-0032 for an additional 21 days, until June 11, 2007.

Extraordinary emergency

Findings of the plum pox virus in Michigan and New York have added to the urgency of eradication efforts, bringing to mind earlier efforts to eradicate citrus canker in Florida.The May 22 Federal Register included this grave notice about the plum pox virus.
From the notice:

Declaration of Extraordinary Emergency Because of Plum Pox Virus An exotic plant virus, plum pox virus, has been confirmed in New York and Michigan. Plum pox virus is the most devastating viral disease of stone fruit worldwide, causing yield losses to growers and reducing the marketability of fruit. Previously, the disease was known to be present in the United States only in portions of several counties in south-central Pennsylvania.

Plum pox virus is the cause of an extremely serious plant disease, affecting a number of Prunus species, including peach, nectarine, apricot, plum, and almond. Infection eventually results in severely reduced fruit production, and the fruit that is produced is often misshapen and blemished. There is no cure or treatment for the disease once a tree becomes infected. In Europe, where plum pox has been present for a number of years, the disease is considered to be the most serious disease affecting susceptible Prunus species. The disease is spread over short distances by a number of different aphid species, and over longer distances through the movement of infected budwood and nursery stock. Since the detection of plum pox virus in Pennsylvania in 1999, an aggressive eradication program has been conducted in that State, involving a cooperative effort between APHIS and the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture. The program in Pennsylvania has resulted in significant success, with no spread of the disease outside of the general area in which it was first found in 1999, and with only trace amounts of plum pox virus being detected in 2005 and 2006. Following the detection of plum pox virus in Pennsylvania, APHIS has worked with States in which there was commercial production of peaches and other stone fruit to conduct a series of national surveys. Prior to 2006, the result of these surveys has always been negative.

As a result of a cooperative survey conducted by APHIS and the New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets, plum pox virus was confirmed in Niagara County, NY, on July 7, 2006. A total of three infected trees were discovered in two commercial orchard locations. Cooperative surveys were also conducted in Michigan, in this case involving APHIS and the Michigan Department of Agriculture. As a result of these surveys, plum pox virus was detected in a single plum tree at the Michigan State University's Southwest Michigan Research and Education Center, a State-operated facility, on August 11, 2006. In order to prevent the spread of plum pox virus from these new detection sites, an aggressive eradication program will be necessary. The eradication program will involve removal of all infected trees and of all host trees within 500 meters, conducting delimiting and detection surveys over a period of several years to ensure that there are no additional infestations, and establishing appropriate safeguards to ensure that additional spread of plum pox virus does not occur while the eradication program is being completed. Following consultation with State[[Page 28949]]officials from both New York and Michigan, the Department has determined that the States do not have sufficient resources to effectively carry out an eradication program.
The infestation of plum pox virus represents a threat to U.S. stone fruit crops. It constitutes a real danger to the national economy and a potential serious burden on interstate and foreign commerce. Therefore, the Department has determined that an extraordinary emergency exists because of the existence of plum pox virus in Michigan and New York. In accordance with 7 U.S.C. 7715, this declaration of extraordinary emergency authorizes the Secretary to: (1) Hold, seize, quarantine, treat, apply other remedial measures to, destroy, or otherwise dispose of, any plant, biological control organism, plant product, article, or means of conveyance that the Secretary has reason to believe is infected by or contains the plum pox virus; (2) quarantine, treat, or apply other remedial measures to any premises, including any plants, biological control organisms, plant products, articles, or means of conveyance on the premises, that the Secretary has reason to believe is infected by or contaminated with the plum pox virus; (3) quarantine any State or portion of a State in which the Secretary finds the plum pox virus or any plant, biological control organism, plant product, article, or means of conveyance that the Secretary has reason to believe is infected by or contaminated with the plum pox virus; and (4) prohibit or restrict the movement within a State of any plant, biological control organism, plant product, article, or means of conveyance when the Secretary determines that the prohibition or restriction is necessary to prevent the dissemination of the plum pox virus or to eradicate the plum pox virus. The Governors of New York and Michigan have been informed of these facts.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This declaration of extraordinary emergency shall become effective May 18, 2007.


TK: What will be the economic effect is this emergency be on tree fruit growers in New York and Michigan? This certainly raises the stakes for all parties. Here is an analysis of plum pox virus by Blue Diamond Growers of California.