Crop Production - Calif. navel oranges down 34%

Navel orange production is down - a lot - for 2008-09. After the low prices of last season, California growers may like it better this way. Here are some highlights of the USDA's Sept. 12 crop production report: Also, follow the link for extensive potato variety info this year.

California navel orange production for the 2008-09 season is forecast at 32.0 million boxes (1.20 million tons), down 34 percent from last season's revised production of 48.5 million boxes (1.82 million tons). This initial forecast is based on an objective measurement survey conducted in California's Central Valley between July 21 and August 27. Survey results show average fruit set per tree is at the lowest level on record, down 48 percent from last year's set and down 23 percent from the previous record low. The low fruit set is due to high temperatures in May which resulted in excessive fruit drop. Average fruit size is lower than average, but fruit quality is expected to be good.

Florida Citrus: The first two weeks of the month were busy for growers as they put out final applications of summer oils, cleaned ditches, and fertilized, mowed, and hedged groves. The focus changed when Tropical Storm Fay swept across the Florida peninsula twice during the middle of the third week. Although fruit drop from the wind was minimal, tree damage could result from excess water generated by the storm. Citrus producing counties along the East Coast had up to a foot of rain in a single week. Counties in the southern and central citrus areas recorded rainfall amounts between three and eight inches, and isolated areas reported higher amounts. Most growers began pumping excess water out of ditches and canals before the storm hit, in anticipation of extreme rainfall amounts, and continued pumping for several days afterwards. Access to groves with canker or greening was monitored by owners. Every precaution to prevent the spread of disease was being implemented. Where caretakers have spent ample time maintaining groves, oranges progressed well with sizes up to almost baseball size by the end of the month. Grapefruit were typically slightly less than softball size at month's end. Overall, conditions remained good in well-managed groves. California Citrus: Valencia orange harvest was slow during August due to decreased demand. Some growers were holding onto fruit until late summer or fall when demand is expected to increase. Lemon harvest continued. Navel orange fruit size continued to develop, as some trees were sprayed for scale. Citrus growers continued grove maintenance. Irrigation was necessary in many areas due to hot weather.

California Noncitrus Fruits and Nuts: Irrigation continued during August in vineyards and orchards. Growers were monitoring water use closely due to water restrictions in many locations. Table and wine type grape harvest continued during the month. Flame and Thompson Seedless, Diamond Muscat,Black Emerald, Red Globe, Summer Royal, Autumn Royal, Princess, and Crimson varieties were harvested. Wine and juice grape varieties harvested included Alicante Bouchet, Chardonnay, Cabernet, Carignane, Grenache, Merlot, and Zinfandel. Growers began laying grapes on the ground to dry, marking the start of the raisin grape harvest. Zante currants were harvested and rolled. Stone fruit and pomegranate cultural practices such as irrigation, summer pruning, and treatments to control weeds and insect pests continued. Peach, plum, and nectarine varieties were harvested. In Yuba County some cling peach orchards were being left unharvested due to damage from the April freeze. Other tree fruits harvested included figs, Asian and Bartlett pears, and Gala and McIntosh apples. The pear crop appeared to be below average in some locations. In Stanislaus County, field fumigations were underway in strawberry fields. Various kinds of berries were still being picked in parts of the State. Kiwifruit was sizing in Yuba County. Olive fruits were sizing nicely, though some groves were expected to be left unharvested due to low yields. Almond harvest was well underway during August. Many new acres came into production this year, and the quality of fruit nuts looked good. Hull-split was still occurring in many groves. Walnut orchards were prepared for harvest, and trees were propped due to the heavy crop. Cleanup of broken limbs was underway, and treatments for codling moth, mites and husk fly continued. Yields appeared low in groves damaged by frost earlier in the season. Pistachios growers were preparing for harvest.

On local food - is it bullet proof?

Going through some email links, a few insightful selections about local food that are worth looking at:


Blogger: local food reconsidered From Cindy W:

What about local food? Is the concept bullet proof?

A couple of years ago, I happened upon an interview of Peter Singer, a professional ethicist (who knew there was such as profession?) who was best known for his 1975 book “Animal Liberation” – a canonical text of the animal rights movement.

In his book The Way We Eat, aside from discussing ethical issues with animal husbandry, he provided a curious example against the local food movement. Singer argued that the “socially responsible folks in San Francisco would do better to buy their rice from Bangladesh than from local growers in California.”

Why? California rice is produced using artificial irrigation and fertilizers that involve intensive energy use. Rice grown in Bangladesh takes advantage of the natural flooding of the rivers and does not require any artificial irrigation. It also doesn’t require as much synthetic fertilizers since the river washes down nutrients. The energy used for the Bangladesh rice to get to our table is quite efficient compared to the artificial irrigation and local trucking. Shipping, it seems, is ten times more energy efficient than trucking.

Interesting food for thought.

Then another article this year pointed out that local fruits and veggies might have more food-miles than produce at the supermarket. Wandering about San Francisco’s famous Ferry Plaza farmers’ market, the author observed that most farmers there drove their “Ford, Isuzu or Chevrolet trucks, packing anywhere between 200 and 2,000 pounds of goods”. They trucked their produce an average of 117 miles.

In comparison, the produce from a conventional distributor who buys from California, Arizona, Washington, Texas and Mexico averages 942 miles.

But they mostly use semi-trailer trucks that can pack 40,000 pounds of food. After a bunch of detailed carbon calculations later, the author concluded that the wholesaler won for the most part as far as CO2 emission was concerned.

Cost is factor in local food From Scotland:

Of course, the "future" of local food, if I may use such a phrase, lies in the hands of all of us, the people who buy and eat it. Local food, though, does cost more, as the producers cannot apply the economies of scale open to the supermarkets, and that will remain the most crucial factor in determining its success.

The local food challenge From JS Online:

For 10 days, from Friday through Sept. 14, consumers are encouraged to spend 10% of their food money on locally grown or produced foods.

But talk to people who make eating local a way of everyday life, and you’ll realize it isn’t really about politics at all.

It’s about food they say tastes better and is fresher and healthier. It’s about the satisfaction of knowing exactly where your food comes from. It’s about a chance to share food activities with the rest of the family. And it’s about helping your community.

Farmers try to keep up with local demand From Lawrence, KS:

In Lawrence, the demand for locally grown fruits and vegetables is already higher than what farmers can provide. The increased interest is seen at The Community Mercantile, Lawrence Farmers’ Market and a service where subscribers pay in advance for a season’s worth of produce.

“It has taken on a life of its own,” said Stuart Shafer, a Jefferson County farmer who sells his fruits and vegetables for the Rolling Prairie Farmers Alliance.

Other headlines;

Eat local to avoid salmonella

WPPC - Mexcian Embassy powerpoint

The powerpoint presented by Froylan Gracia Galicia at the Embassy of Mexico in DC on Sept. 12:

CU hails COOL

Consumers Union is preppng consumers to watch for COOL: From CU:


Yonkers, NY--Consumers Union today hailed the long-awaited implementation of mandatory federal country of origin labeling (COOL) on all meats, fish, poultry and produce sold in retail stores in the United States beginning September 30, 2008. Mandatory COOL for meats, fish, produce and peanuts became law in the United States in 2002. But under pressure from industry, Congress delayed implementation of all but the seafood labeling until October 2008. A Consumer Reports poll released last year found that 92 percent of Americans agree that imported foods should be labeled by their country of origin.

"This is a long-awaited change and we think it will be a great benefit for consumers," said Jean Halloran, Director of Food Policy Initiatives for Consumers Union, nonprofit publisher of Consumer Reports. "If a food safety problem is identified in a particular imported product, as happened with jalapeño and serrano peppers from Mexico earlier this year, then consumers will be able to avoid that product. On the other hand, some people like to buy certain imported products, like New Zealand lamb or Holland tomatoes. Still others just want to buy local produce. Either way, the new labels will give consumers important new information."

COOL is already in effect for seafood and for foods that are packaged or canned in other countries. Some in the industry have indicated that the new rules will impose high costs. "The country labels on seafood seem to have had little impact on price and packaged foods have included these labels for decades. We would be surprised if the new labels on meat and fresh produce caused noticeable changes in price in the supermarket," said Halloran. "Consumers have clearly indicated that they want to have the information to protect themselves at the grocery store, and COOL will help them do that."

Consumers Union is concerned, however, about exemptions from the new labeling requirements. Meat and poultry sold in butcher shops and fish sold in fish markets--some 11 percent of all meat and fish--are exempt because the law is worded to cover only large establishments that sell a certain minimum amount of fresh produce.

CU also objects to exemptions for processed foods. "This means that no ham or bacon or roasted peanuts will indicate their country of origin," says Halloran. Mixtures, such as mixed frozen vegetables or trail mix, are also exempt. "These exemptions are unnecessary and defeat the purpose of the law. Wherever there was any doubt, USDA seems to have come down on the side of industry and created the largest possible exemptions. We hope some of these problems can be addressed in the future," said Halloran.

CU developed an online guide for consumers to understand the new rules, available at: http://www.consumersunion.org/pdf/CU-Cool-Tool.pdf

CONSUMERS UNION’S “COOL TOOL”: DON’T BE FOOLED BY COUNTRY OF ORIGIN LABELING (COOL); THIS GUIDE WILL TELL YOU WHAT IS COOL & WHAT IS NOT

As of September 30, 2008, federal law requires fresh meat, poultry, fish, fruits and vegetables, peanuts and certain nuts to display a label that tells you the country of origin (COOL) of the product. This can come in handy if you have just learned that, say, peppers from Mexico are believed to be contaminated with salmonella. If the peppers in your supermarket are labeled as coming from California, or Chile, that should reduce your salmonella worries.

Under a decades-old law, foods packaged (canned, boxed or bagged) in another country have had to be labeled as to where they came from. The new law extends the requirement to fresh perishable meat, poultry, fish and produce, so that now almost all food should have COOL.

But there are exemptions and exceptions to this new law, and the old one, that may mean that you might still be fooled about from where a food product came. Here are some contrasts as to what will need to be labeled and what still won’t:

COOL (Must indicate country of origin.)
Meat sold in supermarkets.
Fish sold in supermarkets
Raw peanuts
Pork chops
Sliced cantaloupe
Raw almonds
Bagged lettuce
Frozen peas
Raw shrimp
Fresh salmon

NOT COOL (Exempt from country of origin labeling.)
Meat sold in butcher shops. Labeling is only required in stores that purchase a certain minimum amount ($230,000) of fresh or frozen produce a year. Butchers do not purchase any produce, so meat sold by them is exempt.
Fish sold in fish markets. Labeling is only required in stores that purchase a certain minimum amount ($230,000) of fresh or frozen produce a year. Fish markets do not purchase any produce, so fish sold there is exempt.
Roasted peanuts, peanut butter (processed food is exempt).
Ham and Bacon (processed food is exempt).
Fruit Salad (mixtures are exempt).
Trail Mix (mixtures are exempt).
Bagged Mixed Salad Greens (mixtures are exempt).
Frozen peas and carrots (mixtures are exempt).