Papaya posse

The USDA has drawn opposition from "the usual suspects" regarding the University of Florida's request to deregulate genetically engineered papayas in Florida. Here is a sampling from the Center for Food Safety:


The Center for Food Safety (CFS) is a non-profit, membership organization that works to protect human health and the environment by curbing the proliferation of harmful food production technologies and by promoting organic and other forms of sustainable agriculture. CFS represents 67,000 members throughout the country that support organic agriculture and regularly purchase organic products.1 In addition to the comments submitted herein, CFS is concurrently submitting 7,873 comments from CFS Food Network members opposing the deregulation of GE papaya (Docket No. APHIS-2008-0054)

Later....

In general, the University of Florida claims in support of its Petition for Determination of Nonregulated Status for the X17-2 Line of Papaya (hereafter “Petition”) that there has been no reported adverse environmental impacts from the commercial planting of PRSV papaya. However, the history of PRSV papaya tells a very different story. Those who grow non-GE papaya in Hawaii have been devastated by the introduction of GE papaya. While the petitioner claims that PRSV papaya has “revitalized the Hawaiian industry,” (Petition at 1), the petition completely fails to address significant adverse effects to the non-GE papaya industry in Hawaii resulting from wide spread biological contamination and the related adverse economic harm to Hawaiian papaya growers, and how similar adverse effects will likely befall growers in Florida, Puerto Rico, and anywhere else this new GE papaya may be grown.3 APHIS similarly ignores the recent history in Hawaii when it failed to address biological contamination and the interrelated economic consequences. Thus, the following comments illustrate why the proposed deregulation should not be finalized until APHIS prepares an environmental impacts statement (“EIS”) to fully review the significant environmental effects of this possible deregulation. At its core, the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”) directs federal agencies to prepare an EIS for all “major federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment.”4 An EIS must “rigorously explore and objectively evaluate all reasonable alternatives” to the proposed federal action.5 An EIS must also include a full and fair discussion of the proposed action’s effects and their significance.

Relevant effects may be “ecological . . . aesthetic, historic, cultural, economic, social, or health, whether direct, indirect, or cumulative.”7 In the recent federal court decision Geertson Seed Farms v. Johanns, the United States District Court held, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed, that where biological contamination of a non-GE crop is made possible by the deregulation of its GE counterpart, APHIS must prepare an EIS to disclose and analyze the contamination as well as the interrelated adverse economic effects. There is ample evidence from the deregulation of PRSV resistant papaya for Hawaii that such adverse impacts are not only possible, but highly likely. Additionally, in its EA APHIS fails to evaluate potential adverse impacts to threatened and endangered species, organic papaya growers and the choice of consumers to eat non-GE papaya, the adverse impacts associated with the pesticidal viral coat protein, and the cumulative impacts of an additional national deregulation of a GE PRSV papaya variety. For the reasons set forth below, the Center for Food Safety respectfully request APHIS to prepare an EIS to evaluate these impacts prior to deregulation.

Fresh Produce Marketing Strategies

Jim Gorny alerts us to a short course with an impressive lineup of presenters. From Jim:


The UC Davis Postharvest Technology Research & Information Center today announced a new addition to its portfolio of produce industry educational course offerings: Fresh Produce Marketing Strategies. The three-day short course scheduled for March 24-26, 2009 takes place on the UC Davis Campus in the newly dedicated Robert Mondavi Institute Sensory Theater and is now open for registration, including online registration at http://postharvest.ucdavis.edu/Announce/marketing.shtml.

The program developed by Dr. Roberta Cook and other leading produce marketing professionals is designed specifically to meet the needs of fresh produce industry managers and executives who are interested in improving their ability to develop and execute innovative fresh produce marketing strategies. “This short course is simply a must attend event for any produce executive grappling with buyer and supplier consolidation, channel blurring, and rapidly evolving consumer preferences and profiles” said Roberta Cook short course faculty director. “Enhancing your ability to assess emerging marketplace complexities and adapt your firm’s marketing tactics and strategies to current market realities is what this short course will deliver to participants.”

The program will include case studies and practical examples presented by both UC Davis agricultural economists and fresh produce industry marketing leaders. This short course will provide valuable marketplace insights to participants by using current and up-to-date produce marketplace data from participating instructor organizations for classroom discussions and break-out sessions. The program is designed for managers and executives from the fresh fruit and vegetable industry, such as grower-shippers, food retailers, wholesalers, distributors, fresh-cut processors and seed companies.

The short course faculty is made up of a highly regarded group of produce marketing experts including:
Roberta Cook, Ph.D., Dept. of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Davis, Course Director
Leslie Butler, Ph.D., Dept. of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Davis
Jan DeLyser, Vice President Marketing, California Avocado Commission
Don Goodwin, President, Golden Sun Marketing
Shermain Hardesty, Ph.D., Dept. of Agricultural and Resource Economics, UC Davis
Steve Lutz, Executive Vice President, Perishables Group
Jim Prevor, Founder and Editor, PerishablePundit.com
Richard Sexton, Ph.D., Dept. of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Davis
Kerry Tucker, Nuffer, Smith, Tucker, Inc.
Alison Worthington, Managing Director, The Hartman Group

So much for the post election bounce

It's a good news, bad news scenario. I filled up with $1.97 per gallon gas, but the world economy is seemingly coming unglued. Here are a few more headlines as we wait from the post election stock market bounce:



Oil drops 7% on recession concerns
Oil tumbled nearly 7 percent on Thursday on expectations that demand would slow further after the International Monetary Fund predicted developed economies would deliver their worst performance since World War II.

Large job losses expected in October numbers
Financial markets, investors and economists are preparing for the worst employment report in five years to be released by the Labor Department on Friday. The median forecast by economists surveyed by MarketWatch was for a loss of 210,000 nonfarm payroll jobs in October, the most since March 2003. According to a survey of work sites, payrolls have already declined for nine straight months for a total of 760,000 fewer jobs.

Retail sales another huge blow
U.S. retailers, already struggling with a protracted sales slump this year, suffered another disastrous sales month in October as Americans continue to shun unnecessary purchases in tough economic times.

The sales reported Thursday were the worst in at least eight years, since Thomson Reuters - which tracks monthly sales for 34 of the nation's largest retailers including Wal-Mart (WMT, Fortune 500), Gap (GPS, Fortune 500), Sears (SHLD, Fortune 500) and J.C. Penney - began tracking the results in 2000.

October same-store sales, or sales at stores open at least a year, fell 0.7% and were much worse than an initial forecast of a 0.3% drop, according to Thomson Reuters.

Later......


Wal-Mart, however, which typically doesn't consider itself to be a gift-buying destination, could emerge in surprisingly good shape after the holiday season.

In October, the world's largest retailer actually reported better-than-expected monthly sales as more cash-strapped consumers flocked to its discount stores for bargains on groceries and household goods.

Wal-Mart said its same-store sales rose 2.4%, beating its own forecast for a 1% to 2% increase in the measure for the month.

Credit card bond sales sink to zero in October
Credit card companies were shut out of the market for bonds backed by customer payments in October for the first time in more than 15 years, as investors shunned the debt amid the global credit freeze.

California's Schwarzenegger proposes measures to temporarily halt foreclosures
The proposal mandates a 90-day stay on the foreclosure process for homes that are still occupied by owners and have received notices of default. Lenders may be exempt from the 90-day stay if they could present proof of an aggressive modification program to permit troubled homeowners to stay in their units.

Fresh Talk Poll - How old are we?

50 is the new 20, for Fresh Talk readers, that is. In fact, more than half of the respondents of the most recent Fresh Talk poll are older than 50 years old. Obviously the popular notion that more mature adults are lost in the online world is total bunk. We - speaking as a 49-year old soon to be 50 - are obviously the most savvy of all. From one dated Web site I found this backup data:

The average age of users is middle age (37-40) or older. The idea that the Net is used primarily by young teenagers or young people is a gross misconception that has been around almost since the start of the Internet. In fact, The tenth Georgia Tech demographic survey showed the average age of an Internet user at 37.6 years old. And this was an increase from 35.1 years old in the ninth survey. The surveys have shown an average age of Internet users of around than 35 years old since the surveys started. In October, 2000, the research firm Gartner Group found the average U.S. Internet user is 41 years old with an income of $65,000. According to a U.S. Government study released in 2002, A Nation Online: How Americans Are Expanding Their Use Of The Internet, Internet users in the United States from age 9 to 17 number 25.5 million while U.S. Internet users age 18 and over number 110.7 million--the younger group is outnumbered by almost five to one by the adults.


Fresh Talk poll results:



How old are you?
+50 19 (54%)

40 to 50 6 (17%)

30 to 40 5 (14%)

20 to 30 5 (14%)

below 20 0 (0%)

Votes so far: 35

Poll closed


For more updated research on Web users, check out this 2005 Pew/Internet study.

Philly - no magic bullet but....

Nutrition labeling for chain restaurants has come to Philly. But will consumers pay attention?


From the Center for Science in the Public Interest:

Philadelphia now joins New York City, several counties, and the state of California in passing a strong menu labeling requirement for chain restaurants. Beginning on Jan. 1, 2010, chain restaurants with more than 15 outlets will have to disclose calories on menu boards, and calories, saturated and trans fat, sodium and carbohydrates on printed menus. The measure passed today by the Philadelphia City Council is the strongest in the nation so far, and we hope it is used as a model for other jurisdictions.

There's no reason that consumers shouldn't see the nutritional price for what they're ordering as well as the financial price. While it's no magic bullet, menu labeling is an easy thing that cities, counties and states can do to help their citizens eat healthfully, manage their weight, and avoid diet-related disease. It's also a useful incentive to the restaurant industry to expand the number and variety of healthy choices on their menus.

We expect that the members of the incoming Congress and next Administration are taking note of the popularity of these low-cost menu labeling measures, which can help make a dent in the obesity epidemic and save valuable public health dollars. It now seems hard to believe that not long ago Nutrition Facts labels weren't required on food packages in the grocery store. Similarly, a few years from now, it will be hard to imagine that standardized nutrition information was absent from chain restaurant menus. Congratulations to the Philadelphia City Council, particularly councilmember Blondell Reynolds Brown, for helping to lead the charge.

Western Growers and California Farm Bureau sound off on EPA regulation of soil fumigants

More concerns from the industry about the EPA's soil fumigant proposal. From California Farm Bureau and Western Growers, posted Oct. 30 on the federal docket:


Comments on USEPA’s July 16, 2008 Federal Register Soil Fumigant Proposal for Chloropicrin, Metam Sodium/Potassium, and Methyl Bromide Reregistrtaion Eligibility Decisions.

Summary points

The proposed regulations will jeopardize the safety and quantity of fresh grown fruits and vegetables in the western United States. Fumigation is essential to control pests and pathogens in order to produce an abundant, safe and affordable food supply.
Growers and pest control advisors are in the best position to determine and perform pest management treatment options. These decisions are based on weather conditions, soil conditions, the presence of soil-borne diseases, plant pathogens, pest pressures and other factors. The proposed RED would significantly alter and drastically impact this ongoing successful pest management strategy and fumigation treatments would be made based on regulatory compliance and buffer zones requirements instead of treatment efficacy.
The ultimate effect of these changes cannot be predicted, but will surely include lost production acreage, lower yields, lower quality produce, and the use of more pesticides to counteract the effect of suboptimal fumigation treatments at the start of the crop cycles.
Overall, we are concerned that the proposal will add significant costs and complexities to the production community with no benefit. We believe that this mitigation proposal is trying to fix a problem generally caused by illegal applications. Industry and the grower community have worked closely to effectively deter such actions through various initiatives, stewardship activities, legislation and improvements in county and state processes and oversight. The tremendous economic losses that producers will face are compounded by the compliance and enforcement activities that will over-commit many state and county agencies. As noted these agencies and jurisdictions are currently experiencing budget shortfalls that leave them underfunded and understaffed. We believe USEPA/OPP must address this potential unfunded federal mandate.
We wholeheartedly reiterate our concerns that the USEPA has not taken into account the benefit/cost calculations for buffer zone distance, first responder education, notice to state agencies, and cost to farmers, fumigant applicators, and eventually to consumers. We strongly encourage the Agency to adhere to the same tenets of using the best available science as they mandate from registrants and the agricultural community.
Summary of key considerations:

Several concepts included in this document were not part of any previous public hearing or informational meeting that we attended. We question their origin and validity to be included in the mitigation proposal. Why are items such as Dräger tubes being introduced at the end of this process without previous discussion?

We request that EPA provide more reasonable buffer zones through the use of appropriate models for each fumigant, rather than using the PERFUM model for all them.

Eliminate the proposal for a 48-hour time duration for each buffer zone per application.

Allow overlapping buffer zones.

Delete the proposed requirement for using Dräger tubes as monitoring devices.

Eliminate the proposal for Fumigant Management Plans.

Eliminate posting for buffer zones.

Delete the First Responder Training requirements as a registrant responsibility and instead work with state Office of Emergency Services to build a better training opportunity and process.

Community outreach/town hall meetings requirements should be removed from the mitigation proposal.

FPIDG

One of my recent frustrations with the Web here at work is that recently installed IT firewalls don't let me get to the Fresh Produce Industry Discussion Group. I hope you are not having that trouble at your office, because it is always worth checking each morning what the latest posts are at the discussion group/blog. Also, you will find nice archives of the chats we've had on Fresh Talk, audio files, resource files, more than 55 polls and links to spreadsheets detailing promotion of fresh produce commodities. So find the link to the group on the right side of the blog and sign up now - if you can, that is.

Here are some topics posted overnight at the FPIDG:

From a Financial Times article that Luis linked to:

Wal-Mart, the largest US retailer, has said it believes it could see "extraordinary 0pportunities" in the global retail landscape created by the disruption of financial markets.

Lee Scott, chief executive officer, told investors and analysts this week that "there are probably things that the government might allow you to do that they would not have allowed you to do in the past", while saying that the retailer would take a "thoughtfully aggressive"approach to any opportunities.

He included the possibility of Wal-Mart and its Sam's Club warehouse chain acquiring sites from retailers that were going out of business, with the chance to "negotiate very good rents".

From Luis again, the top ten business litigation predictions, one relating to the FDA:

Whether or not we will see significant change is based on the social and political priorities of the new administration. The question of federal safety regulations is up for debate. Resources are stretched at the Food and Drug Administration. Under [longtime FDA commissioner] David Kessler there were huge changes to health and welfare legislation, but the tort system was not prepared to handle that. The question is, now: How well does the FDA need to be funded, and how powerful will the next administration allow the agency to be on social issues? Another question is whether the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is well funded. The same goes for [the Occupational Safety and Health Administration] and the [Equal Employment Opportunity Commission]. Questions of fuel efficiency and alternative energy requirements may depend on funding of these agencies. -- Emily Nicklin, Kirkland & Ellis; Product Liability.

Later....

Many in the business community would acknowledge that the Department of Labor under Bush has not been particularly aggressive in seeking changes and enforcement in employment law. What labor would say is that a hostile National Labor Relations Board has misapplied the National Labor Relations Act to thwart union organizing. It has been made quite clear by the Obama camp that labor and employment issues will be at the forefront of an Obama administration. First and foremost would be the Employee Free Choice Act, which will make it easier for unions to organize. [When Obama is in office] there will also be significant activity in terms of amendments to Title 7 that would likely seek to remove the caps on damages [and] eliminate or severely curtail the use of arbitration for resolving labor disputes; and amendments to the Occupational Safety and Health Act that would increase penalties under that statute. -- Willis Goldsmith, Jones Day; Labor and Employment