Fresh Produce Discussion Blog

Created by The Packer's National Editor Tom Karst

Monday, October 31, 2011

Taxpayers Tricked Into Treating Sugar Farmers

Taxpayers Tricked Into Treating Sugar Farmers

When you dig into your Halloween candy this year, does it taste twice as good as it did a few decades ago? Over the last 30 years, sugar subsidies have effectively doubled the price U.S. consumers pay for sugar. Annual food costs have increased by about $9 per person over that time--which doesn't sound that large until you tabulate the $1.7 billion net gain to U.S. sugar growers. The sugar costs twice as much, but is the candy twice as sweet? No.

As Vince Smith and Michael Wohlgenant, two agricultural economists, wrote this summer, "That is a lot of candy to share among less than 20,000 relatively wealthy sugar farmers." They’re not alone in recognizing this spooky policy. Congressmen Joe Pitts (R-Pennsylvania) and Danny Davis (D-Illinois) have called the sugar program "an outdated and tightly controlled government program that is long overdue for reform."

The true scare comes from the findings in Wohlgenant’s American Boondoggle paper: every dollar of these farm benefits to sugar programs costs the U.S. economy 76 cents because of economic inefficiencies. Should the Farm Bill really be a vehicle for transferring income to wealthy farmers and landowners from poorer average consumers?

Revised onion handling regs: Idaho - eastern Oregon

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 3410-02P
Agricultural Marketing Service
7 CFR Part 958
[Doc. No. AMS-FV-11-0025; FV11-958-1 FR]
Onions Grown in Certain Designated Counties in Idaho, and
Malheur County, Oregon; Modification of Handling
Regulations
AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: This rule revises the handling regulation for
onions handled under the Idaho-Eastern Oregon onion
marketing order. The marketing order regulates the
handling of onions grown in designated counties in Idaho,
and Malheur County, Oregon, and is administered locally by
the Idaho-Eastern Oregon Onion Committee (Committee). This
rule revises the marketing order’s handling regulation to
allow special purpose shipments of onions for
experimentation. The revision will allow the Idaho-Eastern
Oregon onion industry to identify and develop new market
niches and is expected to benefit producers, handlers, and
consumers of onions.
EFFECTIVE DATE: [INSERT DATE 1 DAY AFTER THE DATE OF
PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER].
2
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barry Broadbent or Gary D.
Olson, Northwest Marketing Field Office, Marketing Order
Administration Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs, AMS,
USDA, 805 SW Broadway, suite 930, Portland, OR 97205;
Telephone: (503) 326-2724, Fax: (503) 326-7440, or E-mail:
Barry.Broadbent@ams.usda.gov or GaryD.Olson@ams.usda.gov.
Small businesses may request information on complying
with this regulation by contacting Laurel May, Marketing
Order Administration Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs,
AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, STOP 0237,
Washington, DC 20250-0237; Telephone: (202) 720-2491, Fax:
(202) 720-8938, or E-mail: Laurel.May@ams.usda.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final rule is issued under
Marketing Agreement No. 130 and Marketing Order No. 958,
both as amended (7 CFR part 958), regulating the handling
of onions grown in certain designated counties in Idaho,
and Malheur County, Oregon, hereinafter referred to as the
"order." The order is effective under the Agricultural
Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C.
601-674), hereinafter referred to as the "Act."
The Department of Agriculture (USDA) is issuing this
rule in conformance with Executive Order 12866.
3
This final rule has been reviewed under Executive
Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. This rule is not
intended to have retroactive effect.
The Act provides that administrative proceedings must
be exhausted before parties may file suit in court. Under
§ 608c(15)(A) of the Act, any handler subject to an order
may file with USDA a petition stating that the order, any
provision of the order, or any obligation imposed in
connection with the order is not in accordance with law and
request a modification of the order or to be exempted
therefrom. A handler is afforded the opportunity for a
hearing on the petition. After the hearing USDA would rule
on the petition. The Act provides that the district court
of the United States in any district in which the handler
is an inhabitant, or has his or her principal place of
business, has jurisdiction to review USDA's ruling on the
petition, provided an action is filed not later than 20
days after the date of the entry of the ruling.
This final rule revises the handling regulation for
onions handled under the order. Specifically, this rule
revises the handling regulation to allow special purpose
shipments of onions for the purpose of experimentation
without regard to the minimum grade, size, maturity, pack,
4
and inspection requirements of the order. The revision
will give the Idaho-Eastern Oregon onion industry the
opportunity to identify and develop new markets. The
changes are expected to benefit producers, handlers, and
consumers of onions. This rule was unanimously recommended
by the Committee at a meeting on January 20, 2011.
Sections 958.42, 958.51, 958.52, and 958.60 of the
order provide authority for assessment, mandatory
inspection, and establishment of grade, size, quality,
maturity, and pack regulations applicable to the handling
of onions. Section 958.53 of the order provides authority
for the issuance of special regulations, or the
modification, suspension, or termination of requirements in
effect pursuant to §§ 958.42, 958.52, 958.60, or any
combination thereof, in order to facilitate the handling of
onions for certain specified purposes.
Section 958.328 establishes minimum requirements for
onions handled subject to the order. Currently, no person
shall handle any lot of onions unless such onions are
inspected, are at least “moderately cured”, and meet the
grade, size, maturity, and pack requirements of paragraphs
(a), (b), and (c). Paragraph (e) delineates specific types
5
of special purpose shipments that are exempt from the
requirements of the order. Paragraph (f) outlines the
safeguards for such special purpose shipments.
The Committee recommended this revision to the
handling regulations to respond to the industry’s desire to
have greater flexibility in indentifying and pursuing
unique marketing opportunities for onions that do not
conform to the requirements of the order. The concern from
the onion industry is that onion producers and handlers
within the order’s production area are at a competitive
disadvantage, relative to other onion producing regions,
with respect to their ability to identify and develop new
markets for non-standard onions. Adding authority to allow
experimental onion shipments under the order provides
handlers access to markets not previously available to
them.
An example that demonstrates how the industry benefits
from this final rule would be a scenario in which a handler
wants to produce and ship a unique, irregularly shaped
small onion (e.g. a heart or a square shape) in order to
target a newly developed niche market. Since irregular
shape is a physical characteristic that does not conform to
6
the order’s grade requirements, previously such onions
could not have been handled under the marketing order.
However, with this exemption for experimentation the
Committee can now allow the shipment of those specific type
onions while still maintaining the integrity of the order.
If the market for such onions increases significantly, the
Committee could then incorporate changes into the handling
regulations to accommodate their handling without the
continued need for an exemption.
The potential for marketing opportunities like the
example described above motivated the Committee to
recommend modifying the handling regulation to add
“experimentation” to the already established list of
special purpose shipments allowed under the order. Onion
shipments for experimental purposes will thus be exempt
from the grade, size, maturity, pack, and inspection
requirements of the handling regulation. Shipments made
under the experimental exemption continue to be subject to
the assessment requirement of the order, however. With
this special purpose shipment provision for
experimentation, handlers have greater flexibility in
pursuing various types of unique marketing opportunities
7
that were previously not available under the handling
regulation.
The Committee will require handlers to request preapproval
for such experimental exemptions. Through the
approval process, the Committee will be able to regulate
the quantity and timing of such shipments. It is the goal
of the Committee that any experimental shipments of onions
will be temporary in nature. At the point that emerging
experimental markets reach a sufficient volume or continue
for such a length of time as to be deemed sustainable by
the Committee, the Committee could then recommend changes
to the handling regulation requirements to accommodate the
marketing of such onions on a permanent basis.
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
Pursuant to the requirements set forth in the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601-612), the
Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) has considered the
economic impact of this action on small entities.
Accordingly, AMS has prepared this final regulatory
flexibility analysis.
The purpose of the RFA is to fit regulatory actions to
the scale of business subject to such actions in order that
8
small businesses will not be unduly or disproportionately
burdened. Marketing orders issued pursuant to the Act, and
rules issued thereunder, are unique in that they are
brought about through group action of essentially small
entities acting on their own behalf.
There are approximately 35 handlers of Idaho-Eastern
Oregon onions who are subject to regulation under the order
and approximately 250 onion producers in the regulated
area. Small agricultural service firms, which include
onion handlers and receivers, are defined by the Small
Business Administration (SBA)(13 CFR 121.201) as those
having annual receipts of less than $7,000,000, and small
agricultural producers are defined as those having annual
receipts of less than $750,000.
The National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS)
reported in the “Vegetables 2010 Summary”, published in
January 2011, that the total F.O.B. value of onions in the
regulated production area for 2010 was $133,041,000. Based
on an industry estimate of 35 handlers, the average value
of onions handled per handler is $3,801,000, well below the
SBA threshold for defining small agricultural service
firms. In addition, based on an industry estimate of 250
9
producers, the average F.O.B. value of onions produced in
the industry is $532,164 per producer. Since the F.O.B.
value is usually significantly higher than the farm gate
value that the producers actually receive, most onion
producers within the order’s production area could be
considered small agricultural producers under the SBA
definition. Therefore, it can be concluded that the
majority of handlers and producers of Idaho-Eastern Oregon
onions may be classified as small entities as defined by
the SBA.
This final rule revises § 958.328(e) of the order’s
handling regulation to allow special purpose shipments of
onions for the purpose of experimentation without regard to
the minimum grade, size, maturity, pack, and inspection
requirements currently prescribed under paragraphs (a),
(b), and (c) of § 958.328. The revision will allow the
Idaho-Eastern Oregon onion industry to identify and develop
new markets for non-standard onions that have not been
previously available. The changes are expected to benefit
producers, handlers, and consumers of onions.
At a meeting on January 20, 2011, the Committee
discussed the impact of the recommended changes on handlers
10
and producers in terms of increased costs. The Committee
believes that, since this change exempts certain shipments
of onions from regulation, this action will not add any
additional requirements or costs relative to the existing
regulation. Since the utilization of the special purpose
shipment provision is voluntary in nature, any additional
regulatory burden placed on a handler as a result of this
final rule will be by their choice. The changes may,
however, create opportunities for producers and handlers to
develop new markets and to enhance revenues. The Committee
believes that the potential benefit associated with this
action outweighs any potential increase in administrative
cost or regulatory burden incurred by the handler.
The Committee discussed various alternatives to adding
experimental shipments to the list of special purpose
shipment exemptions contained in the order’s handling
regulation. Some members suggested that the provision was
too broad in scope and needed greater restrictions. After
deliberation, the Committee concluded that it would be
impossible to anticipate what might be “experimental” in
the future and that affording the greatest latitude to the
provision, while maintaining strict Committee oversight,
11
was in the best interest of the industry. The Committee
also considered taking no action with regard to adding an
experimental shipment provision, citing the potential for
abuse. After deliberation, the Committee agreed that the
experimental shipment provision is needed to respond to
changes in the industry and that there would be sufficient
safeguards to protect the integrity of the order.
This final rule imposes additional reporting burdens
on handlers who make special purpose shipments of
experimental onions. This action requires the modification
of two existing Committee forms and an increase in burden
hours for three existing forms. As with all Federal
marketing order programs, reports and forms are
periodically reviewed to reduce information requirements
and duplication by industry and public sector agencies.
Paperwork Reduction Act
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the order's information collection
requirements have been previously approved by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) and assigned OMB No. 0581–0241,
“Onions Grown in Certain Designated Counties in Idaho, and
Malheur County, Oregon, M.O. No. 958.” However, as a
12
result of this action changes in those requirements are
necessary and have been submitted to OMB for review.
As noted in the initial regulatory flexibility
analysis, USDA has not identified any relevant Federal
rules that duplicate, overlap or conflict with this rule.
AMS is committed to complying with the E-Government
Act, to promote the use of the Internet and other
information technologies to provide increased opportunities
for citizen access to Government information and services,
and for other purposes.
In addition, the Committee’s meeting was widely
publicized throughout the onion industry, and all
interested persons were invited to attend the meeting and
participate in Committee deliberations on all issues. Like
all Committee meetings, the January 20, 2011, meeting was a
public meeting and all entities, both large and small, were
able to express their views on this issue.
A proposed rule concerning this action was published
in the Federal Register on June 21, 2011 (76 FR 35997).
Copies of the rule were made available to all Committee
members and onion handlers. Finally, the rule was made
available through the Internet by USDA and the Office of
13
the Federal Register. A 60-day comment period ending
August 22, 2011, was provided to allow interested persons
to respond to the proposal. No comments were received.
Accordingly, no changes will be made to the rule as
proposed.
A small business guide on complying with fruit,
vegetable, and specialty crop marketing agreements and
orders may be viewed at:
www.ams.usda.gov/MarketingOrdersSmallBusinessGuide. Any
questions about the compliance guide should be sent to
Laurel May at the previously mentioned address in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
After consideration of all relevant matter presented,
including the information and recommendation submitted by
the Committee and other available information, it is hereby
found that this rule, as hereinafter set forth, will tend
to effectuate the declared policy of the Act.
It is further found that good cause exists for not
postponing the effective date of this rule until 30 days
after publication in the Federal Register (5 U.S.C. 553)
because handlers are already shipping onions from the 2011-
2012 crop and handlers want to take advantage of the
14
revision as soon as possible. Further, handlers are aware
of this rule, which was unanimously recommended by the
committee at a public meeting. Also, a 60-day comment
period was provided for in the proposed rule.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 958
Marketing agreements, Onions, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 7 CFR part
958 is amended as follows:
PART 958 – ONIONS GROWN IN CERTAIN DESIGNATED COUNTIES IN
IDAHO, AND MALHEUR COUNTY, OREGON
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 958 continues
to read as follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601-674.
2. In § 958.328, revise paragraph (e) and the
introductory sentence of paragraph (f) to read as follows:
§ 958.328 Handling regulation.
* * * * *
(e) Special purpose shipments. (1) The minimum
grade, size, maturity, pack, assessment, and inspection
requirements of this section shall not be applicable to
shipments of onions for any of the following purposes:
15
(i) Planting,
(ii) Livestock feed,
(iii) Charity,
(iv) Dehydration,
(v) Canning,
(vi) Freezing,
(vii) Extraction,
(viii) Pickling, and
(ix) Disposal.
(2) Shipments of onions for the purpose of
experimentation, as approved by the Committee, may be made
without regard to the minimum grade, size, maturity, pack,
and inspection requirements of this section. Assessment
requirements shall be applicable to such shipments.
(3) The minimum grade, size, and maturity
requirements set forth in paragraph (a) of this section
shall not be applicable to shipments of pearl onions, but
the maximum size requirement in paragraph (h) of this
section and the assessment and inspection requirements
shall be applicable to shipments of pearl onions.
(f) Safeguards. Each handler making shipments of
onions outside the production area for dehydration,
16
canning, freezing, extraction, pickling, or experimentation
pursuant to paragraph (e) of this section shall:
* * * * *
Dated: October 26, 2011
Ellen King
Acting Administrator
Agricultural Marketing Service
[FR Doc. 2011-28197 Filed 10/31/2011 at 8:45 am;
Publication Date: 11/01/2011]

Increased assessment rate for walnuts grown in California

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 3410-02P
Agricultural Marketing Service
7 CFR Part 984
[Doc. No. AMS-FV-11-0062; FV11-984-1 FR]
Walnuts Grown in California; Increased Assessment Rate
AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: This rule increases the assessment rate established
for the California Walnut Board (Board) for the 2011-12 and
subsequent marketing years from $0.0174 to $0.0175 per
kernelweight pound of assessable walnuts. The Board locally
administers the marketing order which regulates the handling
of walnuts grown in California. Assessments upon walnut
handlers are used by the Board to fund reasonable and
necessary expenses of the program. The marketing year began
September 1 and ends August 31. The assessment rate will
remain in effect indefinitely unless modified, suspended, or
terminated.
EFFECTIVE DATE: [INSERT DATE 1 DAY AFTER THE DATE OF
PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER].
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff Smutny, Marketing
Specialist, or Kurt J. Kimmel, Regional Manager, California
Marketing Field Office, Marketing Order and Agreement
Division, Fruit and Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA;
2
Telephone: (559) 487-5901, Fax: (559) 487-5906, or E-mail:
Jeffrey.Smutny@ams.usda.gov or Kurt.Kimmel@ams.usda.gov.
Small businesses may request information on complying
with this regulation by contacting Laurel May, Marketing
Order and Agreement Division, Fruit and Vegetable Programs,
AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, STOP 0237,
Washington, DC 20250-0237; Telephone: (202) 720-2491, Fax:
(202)720-8938, or E-mail: Laurel.May@ams.usda.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule is issued under
Marketing Order No. 984, as amended (7 CFR part 984),
regulating the handling of walnuts grown in California,
hereinafter referred to as the "order." The order is
effective under the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of
1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601-674), hereinafter referred to
as the "Act."
The Department of Agriculture (USDA) is issuing this
rule in conformance with Executive Order 12866.
This final rule has been reviewed under Executive Order
12988, Civil Justice Reform. Under the marketing order now
in effect, California walnut handlers are subject to
assessments. Funds to administer the order are derived from
such assessments. It is intended that the assessment rate
as issued herein will be applicable to all assessable
3
walnuts beginning on September 1, 2011, and continue until
amended, suspended, or terminated.
The Act provides that administrative proceedings must
be exhausted before parties may file suit in court. Under
section 608c(15)(A) of the Act, any handler subject to an
order may file with USDA a petition stating that the order,
any provision of the order, or any obligation imposed in
connection with the order is not in accordance with law and
request a modification of the order or to be exempted
therefrom. Such handler is afforded the opportunity for a
hearing on the petition. After the hearing, USDA would rule
on the petition. The Act provides that the district court
of the United States in any district in which the handler is
an inhabitant, or has his or her principal place of
business, has jurisdiction to review USDA's ruling on the
petition, provided an action is filed not later than 20 days
after the date of the entry of the ruling.
This rule increases the assessment rate established for
the Board for the 2011-12 and subsequent marketing years
from $0.0174 to $0.0175 per kernelweight pound of assessable
walnuts.
The California walnut marketing order provides
authority for the Board, with the approval of USDA, to
formulate an annual budget of expenses and collect
4
assessments from handlers to administer the program. The
members of the Board are growers and handlers of California
walnuts. They are familiar with the Board's needs and with
the costs for goods and services in their local area and are
thus in a position to formulate an appropriate budget and
assessment rate. The assessment rate is formulated and
discussed in a public meeting. Thus, all directly affected
persons have an opportunity to participate and provide
input.
For the 2010-11 and subsequent marketing years, the
Board recommended, and USDA approved, an assessment rate of
$0.0174 per kernelweight pound of assessable walnuts that
would continue in effect from year to year unless modified,
suspended, or terminated by USDA upon recommendation and
information submitted by the Board or other information
available to USDA.
The Board met on June 9, 2011, and unanimously
recommended 2011-12 expenditures of $7,402,450 and an
assessment rate of $0.0175 per kernelweight pound of
assessable walnuts. In comparison, last year's budgeted
expenditures were $6,812,000. The assessment rate of
$0.0175 is $0.0001 per pound higher than the rate currently
in effect. The quantity of assessable walnuts for the 2011-
12 marketing year is estimated at 470,000 tons (inshell),
5
which is 35,000 tons more than the 435,000 during the 2010-
11 marketing year. At the recommended higher assessment
rate of $0.0175 per kernelweight pound, the Board should
collect approximately $7,402,500 in assessment income, which
would be adequate to cover its 2011-12 budgeted expenses of
$7,402,450.
The following table compares major budget expenditures
recommended by the Board for the 2010-11 and 2011-12
marketing years:
Budget Expense Categories 2010-11 2011-12
Employee Expenses $ 577,500 $ 693,500
Travel/Board Expenses/Annual Audit $ 208,000 $ 218,000
Office Expenses $ 118,850 $ 117,750
Program Expenses Including Research
Controlled Purchases
Crop Acreage Survey
Crop Estimate
Production Research Director
Production Research
Sustainability Project
Grades and Standards Research
Block Grant Research
Domestic Market Development
$ 20,000
$ 95,000
$ 105,000
$ 88,500
$1,042,000
$ -0-
$ 125,000
$ -0-
$4,400,000
$ 20,000
$ 95,000
$ 115,000
$ 88,500
$1,036,000
$ 25,000
$ 150,000
$ 200,000
$4,635,000
6
Reserve for Contingency
$ 32,250 $ 8,700
The assessment rate recommended by the Board was
derived by dividing anticipated expenses by expected
shipments of California walnuts certified as merchantable.
The 470,000 ton (inshell) estimate for merchantable
shipments is an average of the two prior year’s shipments.
The Board met on June 9, 2011, and unanimously approved
using a two prior years’ average to formulate the 2011-12
estimate. Pursuant to §984.51(b) of the order, this figure
is converted to a merchantable kernelweight basis using a
factor of 0.45 (470,000 tons x 2,000 pounds per ton x 0.45),
which yields 423,000,000 kernelweight pounds. At $0.0175
per pound, the new assessment rate should generate
$7,402,500 in assessment income and allow the Board to cover
its expenses.
Section 984.69 of the order authorizes the Board to
maintain a financial reserve of not more than two years’
budgeted expenses. Excess assessment funds may be retained
in the reserve or may be used temporarily to defray expenses
of the subsequent marketing year, but if so used, must be
7
made available to the handlers from whom they were collected
within five months after the end of the marketing year.
The assessment rate established in this rule will
continue in effect indefinitely unless modified, suspended,
or terminated by USDA upon recommendation and information
submitted by the Board or other available information.
Although this assessment rate will be in effect for an
indefinite period, the Board will continue to meet prior to
or during each marketing year to recommend a budget of
expenses and consider recommendations for modification of
the assessment rate. The dates and times of Board meetings
are available from the Board or USDA. Board meetings are
open to the public and interested persons may express their
views at these meetings. USDA will evaluate Board
recommendations and other available information to determine
whether modification of the assessment rate is needed.
Further rulemaking will be undertaken as necessary. The
Board's 2011-12 budget and those for subsequent marketing
years would be reviewed and, as appropriate, approved by
USDA.
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
Pursuant to requirements set forth in the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601-612), the Agricultural
Marketing Service (AMS) has considered the economic impact
8
of this action on small entities. Accordingly, AMS has
prepared this final regulatory flexibility analysis.
The purpose of the RFA is to fit regulatory actions to
the scale of business subject to such actions in order that
small businesses will not be unduly or disproportionately
burdened. Marketing orders issued pursuant to the Act, and
the rules issued thereunder, are unique in that they are
brought about through group action of essentially small
entities acting on their own behalf.
There are approximately 4,500 growers of California
walnuts in the production area and approximately 74 handlers
subject to regulation under the marketing order. Small
agricultural producers are defined by the Small Business
Administration (SBA) (13 CFR 121.201) as those having annual
receipts of less than $750,000, and small agricultural
service firms are defined as those having annual receipts
are less than $7,000,000.
According to the 2007 Census of Agriculture,
approximately 89 percent of California’s walnut farms were
smaller than 100 acres.
USDA’s National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS)
reports that the average yield for the 2010-11 crop was 2.22
tons per acre. NASS also reported the average price
received for the 2010-11 crop was $2,110 per ton.
9
A 100-acre farm with an average yield of 2.22 tons per
acre would therefore have been expected to produce about 222
tons of walnuts during 2010-11. At $2,110 per ton, that
farm’s production would have had an approximate value of
$468,420. Assuming that the majority of California’s walnut
farms are smaller than 100 acres, it could be concluded that
the majority of the growers had receipts of less than
$468,420 in 2010-11, which is well below the SBA threshold
of $750,000. Thus, the majority of California’s walnut
growers would be considered small growers according to SBA’s
definition.
According to information supplied by the industry,
approximately two-thirds of California’s walnut handlers
shipped merchantable walnuts valued under $7,000,000 during
the 2010-11 marketing year and would therefore be considered
small handlers according to the SBA definition.
This rule increases the assessment rate established for
the Board and collected from handlers for the 2011-12 and
subsequent marketing years from $0.0174 to $0.0175 per
kernelweight pound of assessable walnuts. The Board
unanimously recommended 2011-12 expenditures of $7,402,450
and an assessment rate of $0.0175 per kernelweight pound of
assessable walnuts. The assessment rate of $0.0175 is
$0.0001 higher than the 2010-11 rate. The quantity of
10
assessable walnuts for the 2011-12 marketing year is
estimated at 470,000 tons inshell weight, or 423,000,000
pounds kernelweight. Thus, the $0.0175 rate should provide
$7,402,500 in assessment income and be adequate to meet this
year’s expenses. The increased assessment rate is primarily
due to increased budget expenditures.
The following table compares major budget expenditures
recommended by the Board for the 2010-11 and 2011-12
marketing years:
11
Budget Expense Categories 2010-11 2011-12
Employee Expenses $ 577,500 $ 693,500
Travel/Board Expenses/Annual Audit $ 208,000 $ 218,000
Office Expenses $ 118,850 $ 117,750
Program Expenses Including Research
Controlled Purchases
Crop Acreage Survey
Crop Estimate
Production Research Director
Production Research
Sustainability Project
Grades and Standards Research
Block Grant Research
Domestic Market Development
Reserve for Contingency
$ 20,000
$ 95,000
$ 105,000
$ 88,500
$1,042,000
$ -0-
$ 125,000
$ -0-
$4,400,000
$ 32,250
$ 20,000
$ 95,000
$ 115,000
$ 88,500
$1,036,000
$ 25,000
$ 150,000
$ 200,000
$4,635,000
$ 8,700
The Board reviewed and unanimously recommended 2011-12
expenditures of $7,402,450. Prior to arriving at this
budget, the Board considered alternative expenditure levels
but ultimately decided that the recommended levels were
reasonable to properly administer the order. The assessment
rate of $0.0175 per kernelweight pound of assessable walnuts
was derived by dividing anticipated expenses of $7,402,450
by expected shipments of California walnuts certified as
12
merchantable. Merchantable shipments for the year are
estimated at 423,000,000 pounds, which should provide
$7,402,500 in assessment income and allow the Board to cover
its expenses. Unexpended funds may be retained in a
financial reserve, provided that funds in the financial
reserve do not exceed approximately two years’ budgeted
expenses. If not retained in a financial reserve,
unexpended funds may be used temporarily to defray expenses
of the subsequent marketing year, but must be made available
to the handlers from whom collected within 5 months after
the end of the year, according to § 984.69 of the order.
According to NASS, the season average grower prices for
the years 2009 and 2010 were $1,710 and $2,110 per ton,
respectively. These prices provide a range within which the
2011-12 season average p rice could fall. Dividing these
average grower prices by 2,000 pounds per ton provides an
inshell price per pound range of $0.86 to $1.06. Dividing
these inshell prices per pound by the 0.45 conversion factor
(inshell to kernelweight) established in the order yields a
2011-12 price range estimate of $1.91 to $2.36 per
kernelweight pound of assessable walnuts.
To calculate the percentage of grower revenue
represented by the assessment rate, the assessment rate of
$0.0175 per kernelweight pound is divided by the low and
13
high estimates of the price range. The estimated assessment
revenue for the 2011-12 marketing year as a percentage of
total grower revenue will thus likely range between .74 and
.92 percent.
This action increases the assessment obligation imposed
on handlers. While assessments impose some additional costs
on handlers, the costs are minimal and uniform on all
handlers. Some of the additional costs may be passed on to
growers. However, these costs are offset by the benefits
derived by the operation of the marketing order. In
addition, the Board’s meeting was widely publicized
throughout the California walnut industry, and all
interested persons were invited to attend the meeting and
participate in Board deliberations on all issues. Like all
Board meetings, the June 9, 2011, meeting was a public
meeting and all entities, both large and small, were able to
express views on this issue.
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
(44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the order’s information collection
requirements have been previously approved by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) and assigned OMB No. 0581-0178
(Walnuts Grown in California). No changes in those
requirements as a result of this action are necessary.
14
Should any changes become necessary, they would be submitted
to OMB for approval.
This final rule imposes no additional reporting or
recordkeeping requirements on either small or large
California walnut handlers. As with all Federal marketing
order programs, reports and forms are periodically reviewed
to reduce information requirements and duplication by
industry and public sector agencies. As noted in the
initial regulatory flexibility analysis, USDA has not
identified any relevant Federal rules that duplicate,
overlap, or conflict with this final rule.
AMS is committed to complying with the E-Government
Act, to promote the use of the Internet and other
information technologies to provide increased opportunities
for citizen access to Government information and services,
and for other purposes.
A proposed rule concerning this action was published in
the Federal Register on August 16, 2011 (75 FR 50703).
Copies of the proposed rule were also mailed or sent via
facsimile to all walnut handlers. Finally, the proposal was
made available through the Internet by USDA and the Office
of the Federal Register. A 30-day comment period ending on
September 15, 2011, was provided for interested persons to
respond to the proposal. No comments were received.
15
A small business guide on complying with fruit,
vegetable, and specialty crop marketing agreements and
orders may be viewed at:
http://www.ams.usda.gov/MarketingOrderSmallBusinessGuide.
Any questions about the compliance guide should be sent to
Laurel May at the previously mentioned address in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
After consideration of all relevant material presented,
including the information and recommendation submitted by
the Board and other available information, it is hereby
found that this rule, as hereinafter set forth, will tend to
effectuate the declared policy of the Act.
Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553, it also found and determined
that good cause exists for not postponing the effective date
of this rule until 30 days after publication in the Federal
Register because the 2011-12 marketing year began on
September 1, 2011. Further, the marketing order requires
that the rate of assessment for each marketing year apply to
all assessable walnuts handled during the year; the Board
needs to have sufficient funds to meet its expenses which
are incurred on a continuous basis; and handlers are aware
of this rule which was unanimously recommended at a public
meeting. Also, a 30-day comment period was provided for in
the proposed rule.
16
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 984
Marketing agreements, Nuts, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Walnuts.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 7 CFR part
984 is amended as follows:
PART 984 – WALNUTS GROWN IN CALIFORNIA
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 984 continues
to read as follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601-674.
2. Section 984.347 is revised to read as follows:
§ 984.347 Assessment rate.
On and after September 1, 2011, an assessment rate of
$0.0175 per kernelweight pound is established for California
merchantable walnuts.
Dated: October 26, 2011
David R. Shipman
Acting Administrator
Agricultural Marketing Service
[FR Doc. 2011-28198 Filed 10/31/2011 at 8:45 am; Publication
Date: 11/01/2011]

Saturday, October 29, 2011

Are Your Customers Always Right?

Are Your Customers Always Right?
Expert Reveals Which Ones Are Right for Your Business

In business, the squeaky wheel almost always winds up getting the grease. Customers tend to be rewarded for complaining, but that strategy leaves money on the table, according to marketing consultant Betsy Kruger.

“No one likes hearing a complaint, so when a customer complains, a business quickly and resoundingly rectifies the complaint,” said Kruger, author of Top Market Strategy: Applying the 80/20 Rule (www.BetsyKruger.com). “The problem with this strategy is that disgruntled customers bring in less profit than loyal customers. Your business should focus on gratifying your most profitable customers.”

Contrary to popular opinion, the customer is not always right, Kruger says.

“It’s wrong to reward complainers,” she says. “You should reward loyal customers since they reward your business with higher profit. You should value their business since loyal customers value your business.”

Kruger says the 80/20 rule governs all results, including profits from customers.

“When you sort customers by their profitability, this universal law predicts that the top 20 percent of your customers will generate 80 percent of your profit. Conversely, the bottom 80 percent of your customers will generate only 20 percent of your profit – and virtually all of your complaints. This means you should target the top 20 percent with a top market strategy.”

Your business can profit from the 80/20 rule by enacting these steps:

* Distinguish your top customers – Identify ways the top 20 percent of your customers differ from other customers and what characteristics they have in common. Realize that your top customers are highly profitable.

* Target your top customers – Gratify your top customers with a top market strategy. Discontinue marketing to the bottom 80 percent of your customers by automating all interactions with that group.

* Promote to top prospects – Focus resources on converting similar prospects into top customers. When you replace your less profitable customers with these new customers, you can expect your total profit from customers to quadruple.

“You may feel it’s rude to consider some customers as less valuable than others, but research proves it’s true,” Kruger says. “The top 20 percent of your customers magnifies your profit, whereas the bottom 20 percent of your customers magnifies your complaints.”

“I feel it’s rude to reward complainers since loyal customers deserve to be rewarded. When you prioritize your customers with the 80/20 rule, you are prioritizing your profit.”

Friday, October 28, 2011

Comment period extended: Child Labor Regulations, Orders and Statements of Interpretation; Child Labor Violations—Civil Money Penalties

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Wage and Hour Division
29 CFR Parts 570 and 579
RIN: 1235-AA06
Child Labor Regulations, Orders and Statements of Interpretation; Child Labor
Violations—Civil Money Penalties
AGENCY: Wage and Hour Division.
ACTION: Notice and Extension of comment period.
SUMMARY: This document extends the period for filing written comments for an
additional 30 days on the proposed revisions to the child labor regulations published on
September 2, 2011. The Department of Labor (Department or DOL) is taking this action
in order to provide interested parties additional time to submit comments.
DATES: The agency must receive comments on or before December 1, 2011. The
period for public comments, which was to close on November 1, 2011, will be extended
to December 1, 2011.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by RIN 1235-AA06, by either one
of the following methods:
Electronic comments: through the Federal eRulemaking Portal:
http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Mail: Wage and Hour Division, U.S. Department of Labor, Room S-3502, 200
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20210.
Instructions: Please submit one copy of your comments by only one method. All
submissions received must include the agency name (Wage and Hour Division) and
Regulatory Information Number identified above for this rulemaking (1235-AA06). All
comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information provided. Consequently, prior to including any
individual’s personal information such as Social Security Number, home address,
telephone number, e-mail addresses and medical data in a comment, the Department
urges commenters carefully to consider that their submissions are a matter of public
record and will be publicly accessible on the Internet. It is the commenter’s
responsibility to safeguard his or her information. Because we continue to experience
delays in receiving mail in the Washington, DC area, commenters are strongly
encouraged to transmit their comments electronically via the Federal eRulemaking Portal
at http://www.regulations.gov or to submit them by mail early. For additional
information on submitting comments and the rulemaking process, see the “Public
Participation” heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this
document.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or comments
received, go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Arthur M. Kerschner, Jr., Division of
Enforcement Policy and Procedures, Branch of Child Labor and Special Employment,
Wage and Hour Division, U.S. Department of Labor, Room S-3510, 200 Constitution
Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20210; telephone: (202) 693-0072 (this is not a toll free
number). Copies of this notice of proposed rulemaking may be obtained in alternative
formats (Large Print, Braille, Audio Tape, or Disc), upon request, by calling (202) 693-
0023. TTY/TDD callers may dial toll-free (877) 889-5627 to obtain information or
request materials in alternative formats.
Questions of interpretation and/or enforcement of regulations issued by this
agency or referenced in this notice may be directed to the nearest Wage and Hour
Division District Office. Locate the nearest office by calling the Wage and Hour
Division’s toll-free help line at (866) 4US-WAGE ((866) 487-9243) between 8 a.m. and
5 p.m. in your local time zone, or log onto the Wage and Hour Division’s Web site for a
nationwide listing of Wage and Hour District and Area Offices at:
http://www.dol.gov/whd/america2.htm.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Electronic Access and Filing Comments
Public Participation: This notice of proposed rulemaking is available through the
Federal Register and the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. You may also access this
document via the Department’s Web site at http://www.dol.gov/federalregister. To
comment electronically on federal rulemakings, go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
http://www.regulations.gov, which will allow you to find, review, and submit comments
on federal documents that are open for comment and published in the Federal Register.
Please identify all comments submitted in electronic form by the RIN docket number
(1235-AA06). Because of delays in receiving mail in the Washington, DC area,
commenters should transmit their comments electronically via the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at http://www.regulations.gov, or submit them by mail early to ensure timely
receipt prior to the close of the comment period. Submit one copy of your comments by
only one method.
II. Request for Comment
The Department is proposing to revise the child labor regulations issued pursuant
to the Fair Labor Standards Act, which set forth the criteria for the permissible
employment of minors under 18 years of age in agricultural and nonagricultural
occupations. The proposal would implement specific recommendations made by the
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, increase parity between the
agricultural and nonagricultural child labor provisions, and also address other areas that
can be improved, which were identified by the Department’s own enforcement actions.
The proposed agricultural revisions would impact only hired farm workers and in no way
compromise the statutory child labor parental exemption involving children working on
farms owned or operated by their parents.
In addition, the Department proposes to revise the exemptions which permit the
employment of 14- and 15-year-olds to perform certain agricultural tasks that would
otherwise be prohibited to that age group after they have successfully completed certain
specified training.
The Department is also proposing to revise subpart G of the child labor
regulations to incorporate all the regulatory changes to the agricultural child labor
provisions made since that subpart was last revised. Finally, the Department is proposing
to revise its civil money penalty regulations to incorporate into the regulations the
processes the Department follows when determining both whether to assess a child labor
civil money penalty and the amount of that penalty.
In the Federal Register of September 2, 2011 (76 FR 54836), the Department of
Labor published a proposed notice of rulemaking requesting public comments on
proposed revisions to the child labor regulations issued pursuant to the Fair Labor
Standards Act, which set forth the criteria for the permissible employment of minors
under 18 years of age in agricultural and nonagricultural occupations. Interested parties
were requested to submit comments on or before November 1, 2011.
The Department has received requests to extend the period for filing public
comments from members of Congress and various agricultural business organizations,
including, but not limited to: American Sheep Industry Association; National Cattlemen’s
Beef Association; National Pork Producers Council; National Turkey Federation;
California Farm Bureau Federation; National Association of State Departments of
Agriculture; National Association of Agricultural Employers; National FFA
Organization; and the American Farm Bureau Federation. Because of the interest that
has been expressed in this matter, the Department has decided to extend the period for
submitting public comment for 30 additional days.
Dated: October 26, 2011
Nancy J. Leppink
Deputy Administrator, Wage and Hour Division
BILLING CODE 4510-27-P
[FR Doc. 2011-28075 Filed 10/28/2011 at 8:45 am; Publication Date: 10/31/2011]

Weston Price: Experts to Challenge Dietary Myths about Fats, Salt,Plant-Based Diets

Experts to Challenge Dietary Myths about Fats, Salt,Plant-Based Diets

Mythbusters Nutrition Conference Slated for Dallas, Texas



October 26, 2011-Washington, D.C.--The Weston A. Price Foundation, a nutrition education nonprofit organization, will address dietary myths and faddish health claims during their 12th annual conference, Wise Traditions 2011—Mythbusters. The event takes place November 11-14, 2011 at the Sheraton Dallas Hotel, Dallas, Texas.

The Weston A. Price Foundation urges a return to nutrient-dense traditional foods and sustainable, pasture-based farming practices. The group actively works to advance the work of the nutrition pioneer, Dr. Weston A. Price, author of Nutrition and Physical Degeneration.

“Participants will come away with a sense of relief that delicious foods like butter, meat, eggs, and raw milk are not dangerous substances as claimed, but rather foods that support optimal health,” says Sally Fallon Morell, president of the Weston A. Price Foundation. “We will show that the attack on salt is unfounded, and that salt is essential for digestion and overall health.”

Over twelve hundred health and nutrition professionals, family farmers and wellness-oriented citizens from around the world are expected to attend. A limited number of tickets are still available. The event is open to the public and CEU credits are available for some professionals.

Tracks offered at this year's conference include several full day seminars on Friday, November 11: ”Nourishing Traditional Diets” by Sally Fallon Morell; “Gut and Psychology Syndrome” by autism specialist, Dr. Natasha Campbell-McBride, M.D.; “Nutrition and Metabolism” by Stephanie Seneff, Ph.D.; and a biodynamic farming track featuring Hugh Lovell, Michael Schmidt and Christy Hemenway.

Saturday’s joint session of Mythbuster lectures features experts taking aim at myths about fats, salts, industrial sweeteners and plant-base diets. A key speaker is the notable China Study debunker, Denise Minger. The China Study by Colin Campbell has increased the popularity of vegetarianism, yet according the Minger, the research justifying plant-based diets is significantly flawed.

Other partial day tracks will cover the topics of Children's Health, Gut Health, Hormone Health and Recovery from Digestive Problems, Vegetarianism and Cancer. More cooking classes than ever before have been added to the agenda, including classes on broth-based soups and stews, gluten-free sourdough bread and traditional food preparation.

The Exhibitors Hall will showcase a wide array of nutrient-dense foods, pasture based farms, holistic health practitioners and nutritional supplements.

The Wise Traditions yearly conference proudly offers delicious meals that exemplify the principles of nourishing traditional diets. The menu this year was created by WAPF founder Sally Fallon Morell, author of the best-selling Nourishing Traditions.

For further information about WAPF, visit www.westonaprice.org. For the conference schedule or to register for the conference, visit the conference page or phone (304) 724-3006. Press passes are available for journalists, filmmakers and authors.

Statements by Attorney General Holder and Agriculture Secretary Vilsack on Court Approval of Pigford II Settlement Agreement

Statements by Attorney General Holder and Agriculture Secretary Vilsack on Court Approval of Pigford II Settlement Agreement


WASHINGTON, October 28, 2011– Attorney General Eric Holder and Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack released the following statements on the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia approval of the historic Pigford II settlement:

"This settlement allows the Department of Agriculture and African-American farmers to focus on the future, and brings us one step closer to giving these farmers a chance to have their claims heard," said Attorney General Holder. "Accomplishing this settlement has been a top priority of this Administration and I am pleased that the court has approved it."

"Since my first day at USDA, I made it a priority to treat all Americans with respect and dignity and to ensure equal access to our programs. Court approval of the Pigford settlement is another important step to ensure some level of justice for black farmers and ranchers who faced discrimination when trying to obtain services from USDA," said Secretary Vilsack. "President Obama, Attorney General Holder and I are thrilled by the court's approval so we can continue turning the page on this sad chapter in USDA history. In the months and years ahead, we will not stop working to move the Department into a new era as a model employer and premier service provider for all Americans regardless of race, ethnicity or gender."

On Feb.18, 2010, USDA and the U.S. Department of Justice announced an agreement with African-American farmers to settle the Pigford II litigation for $1.25 billion. Congress passed the Claims Settlement Act that funded the settlement in November 2010, and the bill was signed by President Obama in December 2010. The bill that passed the Senate and House included strong protections against waste, fraud and abuse to ensure integrity of the claims process. The claims process will soon be established and announced for individuals who may have faced discrimination.

In February 2010, the Departments of Justice and Agriculture announced the Pigford II settlement with African American farmers, in October 2010, the departments announced the Keepseagle settlement with Native American farmers, and in February 2011, the departments announced the establishment of a process to resolve the claims of Hispanic and women farmers and ranchers. Earlier this year, USDA also released a Civil Rights Assessment report that detailed an aggressive plan to promote equal access and opportunity at the department. The Department of Agriculture is currently implementing many of the department-wide recommendations that will help USDA improve service delivery to minority and socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers, and enhance program delivery and outreach to promote diversity, inclusion and accessibility. An overview of these comprehensive efforts is available at www.ascr.usda.gov/new_era_at_cr_.html.

#

Farm Freedom Coalition: ‘Milk and Cookies’ Could Get Moms Arrested

‘Milk and Cookies’ Could Get Moms Arrested

Mothers to Break Federal Raw Milk Transport Ban



Washington DC - The beloved American tradition of milk and cookies is a crime for some mothers, according to the Farm Food Freedom Coalition, organizers of a planned civil disobedience on November 1. A US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulation makes the transport of raw milk intended for human consumption across state lines illegal, even for individuals purchasing it legally in one state and carrying it into the states where they live.



On Tuesday, November 1, 2011, a group of moms will challenge the FDA’s ban on interstate transport of raw milk by picking up fresh milk in Pennsylvania, transporting it to Maryland, then distributing it, along with cookies, in front of FDA headquarters in Silver Spring, Maryland at a rally from 12:00 -3:00pm.



After numerous armed federal assaults and undercover investigations on farmers, coops and buying groups that supply their raw milk, mothers across the country are disgusted with the FDA’s aggression and ready to take action to protect their families’ food.



“By criminalizing me for the food choices I make for my family, the FDA is effectively saying that I have no right to feed my family what I, as the parent, know is best for them,” says Suzy Provine, one of the “raw milk freedom riders” who chooses fresh milk for her family. “It is one thing to inform me about my choices, but the FDA goes too far by forcing what they think is best on my family.”



The FDA is disrupting thousands of families' food supplies by pressuring states to restrict access to raw dairy. States like Wisconsin and California are shutting down family farms by threatening penalties and jail for farmers.

Wednesday, October 26, 2011

Eurofruit Congress Southern Hemisphere offers delegates insights into what to expect in the future.

Eurofruit Congress Southern Hemisphere offers delegates insights into what to expect in the future.

The Southern Hemisphere’s leading fresh produce conference event takes place in Lima, Peru, on 9-11 November, where some 200 delegates are expected to convene to hear the latest developments and trends affecting the fresh produce industry in the region.

A key session on the importance of finding new export outlets and alternative markets in the fast evolving economies of China and Russia is not to be missed. Matthew Tang from Linkage Holdings (Hong Kong), Peter Li from Hengfeng Fresh Produce (China) and Oleg Ivanov from Big Sur (Russia) will give insights into the flourishing trade relationships between these markets and the Southern Hemisphere.

Alison Clafin from Damco Latin America (Panama) will then speak on the latest requirements and innovations for logistics in the Southern Hemisphere.

Besides these industry-leading speakers, Eurofruit Congress Southern Hemisphere will be offering the best possible opportunities to make quality contacts to grow your business in the region.

Register online and benefit from exclusive savings on the standard delegate fee.

For all delegate, marketing and press queries, contact:

Hannah Gorvin, Commercial Manager
Eurofruit Congress Southern Hemisphere, 9-11 November 2011
Tel: +44 20 7501 3707, Fax: +44 20 7498 6472
Email: info@eurofruitcongress.com

Key themes in the FRUIT LOGISTICA 2012 supporting programme

Key themes in the FRUIT LOGISTICA 2012 supporting programme

Berlin, 26 October 2011 – Along with a complete market overview of products and services from across the fresh produce value chain, FRUIT LOGISTICA 2012 (8-10 Feb.) includes a first-class conference programme offering representatives from the international fresh produce trade in-depth information in a series of seminars and panel discussions focusing on current market issues, problems and industry trends. The 31st Fresh Produce Forum taking place at the ICC Berlin on the day before the trade fair opens (7 Feb.) will kick off the world's leading fresh produce industry event. This year's theme: "Sourcing 2020".

Six Hall Forums will be presented in Hall 26 during the three days of the trade fair. The topics of the lecture series organised by FRUCHTHANDEL MAGAZINE (Düsseldorf) include: Optimising urban retail logistics (8.2.), How to handle crisis management (8.2.), The global citrus market (9.2.) The new banana business (9.2), Regional sourcing on an international scale (10.2.) and Innovation in the fresh produce business (10.2.). All events will be simultaneously translated into English, French, German, Italian and Spanish.

Outstanding achievements in the fresh produce trade will be honoured with the following industry awards: "FRUCHTHANDEL MAGAZINE Retail Award 2012" (7.2.) and the FRUIT LOGISTICA INNOVATION AWARD 2012 "FLIA" (10.2.).

Overview of FRUIT LOGISTICA 2012 supporting programme

31st FRESH PRODUCE FORUM
TUESDAY, 7 FEBRUARY 2012
15.30 – 19.00 HRS, ICC Berlin, Saal 15.2

Sourcing 2020

The sourcing of high quality fresh produce will become a whole new challenge over the next decade. The food retail sector is making an effort to become more involved in the procurement process in order to ensure long-term supply, optimise costs and gain more influence on the products and specifications. In the face of a rapidly-growing world population, global production will be reorganised to some extent. At the same time, the role of conventional fruit suppliers is changing and they will need to once again demonstrate their expertise as providers. The focus of discussion will be on the following issues:

• What effect will direct sourcing by the retail sector have?
• How should producer organisations and fruit trading companies position themselves?
• What impact will demographic trends and the expansion of economically powerful markets in Russia, the Middle East and Asia have on sourcing and trade flows?

International experts from the research, production, wholesale and retail sectors will analyse the situation and take a look into the future. What awaits the fresh produce trade? How can the sector optimally prepare for the future?

The "FRUCHTHANDEL MAGAZINE Retail Award 2012" will be presented in conjunction with the Fresh Produce Forum.

The Fresh Produce Forum will be simultaneously translated into English, French, German, Italian, Spanish. The participation fee is €85.00 and includes a permanent pass for FRUIT LOGISTICA and FRESHCONEX. Registration and information updates are available on www.fruitlogistica.com/ Events.

HALL FORUM PROGRAMME

WEDNESDAY, 8 FEBRUARY 2012
11.00 – 12.00 HRS, FRUCHTHANDEL MAGAZINE HALL FORUM, HALL 26

Optimising urban retail logistics
Urban areas suffer from increasing traffic congestion, noise and exhaust emissions. Delivery vehicles struggle to meet deadlines. Local supply logistics are in dire need of optimisation. The project presented here aims to save costs, reduce noise and CO2 emissions and optimise deliveries. One of the unique features: cooperation between competitors.

WEDNESDAY, 8 FEBRUARY 2012
15.00 – 16.00 HRS, FRUCHTHANDEL MAGAZINE HALL FORUM, HALL 26

How to handle crisis management
Addressing a topic that is as timely today as it will be tomorrow, this Hall Forum presents strategies for exploring the right answers, approaches and solutions ahead of time in order optimally prepare for the worst-case scenario. What needs to be accomplished at the various trade levels? How should communications with consumers be organised?

THURSDAY, 9 FEBRUARY 2012
11.00 – 12.00 HRS, FRUCHTHANDEL MAGAZINE HALL FORUM, HALL 26

The global citrus market
This Hall Forum presents the current status and future trends in global citrus production and consumption in Europe, the southern hemisphere and other key supplier countries. The market is rapidly changing. Where will production increase? Where will it be cut back? What are the determining factors? What is the outlook for the future? How can trading companies adapt to the situation?

THURSDAY, 9 FEBRUARY 2012
15.00 – 16.00 HRS, FRUCHTHANDEL MAGAZINE HALL FORUM, HALL 26

The new banana business
Bananas are among the most popular consumers products. Keeping them fresh involves a number of unique challenges. The market is highly competitive and consumer approval sometimes comes with a high price. What is the main focus today? How can products and services be improved? How can consumption be increased?

FRIDAY, 10 FEBRUARY 2012
11.00 – 12.00 HRS, FRUCHTHANDEL MAGAZINE HALL FORUM, HALL 26

Regional sourcing on an international scale
Regional sourcing is one of the key issues in the trade. The focus is on familiarity and trust between products, consumers and the POS. Many suppliers label their products sold on foreign and domestic markets with the country of origin and use this as a marketing focus. How can this successful concept be further expanded? How can cooperation be optimized across the entire supply chain? How can the fresh produce trade become more directly involved?

FRIDAY, 10 FEBRUARY 2012
13.00 – 14.00 HRS, FRUCHTHANDEL MAGAZINE HALL FORUM, HALL 26

Innovation in the fresh produce business
What has become of the previous FRUIT LOGISTICA INNOVATION AWARD "FLIA" winners? Are these products successful in the market? Are they popular in the eyes of consumers? What can be learned from this? What makes an innovation successful?

FRIDAY, 10 FEBRUARY 2012
14.30 – 15.00 HRS

Presentation of the FRUIT LOGISTICA INNOVATION AWARD 2012 "FLIA"

This press release and information updates for the FRUIT LOGISTICA 2012 supporting programme are available on the Internet: www.fruitlogistica.com / Events.

Tuesday, October 25, 2011

One in Five Americans to Order Restaurant Takeout or Delivery on Halloween, According to National Restaurant Association Research

One in Five Americans to Order Restaurant Takeout or Delivery on Halloween, According to National Restaurant Association Research

(Washington, D.C.) Twenty percent of Americans say they plan to order takeout or delivery from a restaurant while trick-or-treaters come around this Halloween, according to new research by the National Restaurant Association (www.restaurant.org). Among younger adults (age 18-34) and families with children, that figure rises to 33 percent and 28 percent, respectively.

In addition, the Association’s research shows that 16 percent of adults will go out to a restaurant or bar to celebrate Halloween during the weekend or on October 31. At one-quarter, younger adults (age 18-34) are more likely to do so than older adults.

“While not a traditional holiday for dining out, Halloween is clearly an occasion where restaurants play a major role in celebrations, according to our new research,” said Hudson Riehle, senior vice president of the Research and Knowledge Group for the National Restaurant Association. “One-fifth of consumers say they plan to use restaurant takeout or delivery on October 31, signaling to restaurant operators that Halloween specials and promotions around off-premise options might be a good idea.”

“In addition, Halloween falls on a Monday this year – the least popular day of the week to dine out – which may give restaurants a welcome sales boost in this continued challenging economic environment,” Riehle added.

When asked about the most important factor in selecting a restaurant or bar for Halloween celebrations, happy hours and Halloween costumes are the top choices among those planning to go out:

• 32% said they will seek out an establishment with happy hour or other pricing specials
• 22% will select a restaurant that encourages Halloween costumes or competitions
• 16 % prefer locations with activities for families and children
• 15% will choose a restaurant or bar located near activities, such as Halloween parties, parades or haunted houses
• 7% say a location with Halloween-themed food and drink items and decorations is their top choice

The National Restaurant Association surveyed 1,116 American adults on October 20-23 about their plans around Halloween 2011

Agriculture Secretary Vilsack on Priorities for the 2012 Farm Bill

Agriculture Secretary Vilsack on Priorities for the 2012 Farm Bill



--Remarks As Delivered--



ANKENY, Iowa, Oct. 24, 2011 – Today, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack spoke at the John Deere Des Moines Works on USDA priorities for the 2012 Farm Bill. Below are the Secretary’s remarks as delivered:

“I appreciate the opportunity to be here at John Deere to talk about a subject which I think is a very, very important; and that is about the priorities for the upcoming legislation, often called the Farm Bill.



“Now, this legislation and the bills that Congress will pass is really about keeping pace with the changing needs of agriculture and the challenges which face rural America. It's about providing an adequate food supply for our nation and the world. And the choices that these lawmakers will make will help shape agricultural, food, and rural development policy and will help determine what our farms and our rural communities look like.



“It's also going to determine where our energy supply comes from and if we all eat. So we need to think bigger than the words "Farm Bill" suggest. After all, for decades this bill has been about a whole lot more than just farming. It's been about energy, it's been about nutrition, it's been about jobs. Now, some may keep calling it the Farm Bill out of convenience, or maybe even out of tradition; but I think we're doing it a disservice.



“If we want this legislation to have the support of the other 98 percent of Americans who don't farm, we've got to remind those Americans why this legislation matters to them and to their families.



“Now, first of all, I want to acknowledge that there are considerable external pressures that will affect this effort. Fiscal and political realities about the size of our debt and the deficit have inspired a very tight budget environment.



“Last week a bipartisan leadership group in Congress submitted a proposal to the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction, also known as the Supercommittee, to cut $23 billion out of the bill over the next ten years. And though these numbers are by no means final, it is a reminder to all of us that if we want this legislation to accomplish a lot, we have to understand that there will be considerably less funding in which to do it. So our priorities must be clear. We simply need to do more with less.



“We have to simplify existing programs; we need to reduce redundant provisions; and we need to put a premium on creating innovative solutions to address our current and future problems, also recognizing the importance of making targeted investments to keep agricultural productivity high and our rural communities vibrant. So today I want to offer some thoughts on those priorities.



“Let me begin with our responsibility to strengthen American agriculture. Many folks don't realize this, but American farmers and our agricultural industries contribute in no small way to the economic health and strength of our great country.



“Agriculture is responsible for one out of every twelve jobs in our economy. The folks who work here, the UAW machinist folks who I met with earlier, they can tell you the work in this plant is directly tied to how significant and strengthened the agricultural economy is.



“What we do on the farm ripples through the economy and helps to create jobs, particularly when agriculture is thriving. What's more, the productivity of American farmers and ranchers help American families stretch their paychecks.



“Americans spend, on average, about 6 to 7 cents out of every dollar they earn on food. This is far less than families around the world. It gives us the freedom and the flexibility to spend or invest in other parts of the economy. And today I'm proud to say that agriculture is a bright spot in the American economy.



“After adjusting for inflation, farming income today is at its highest level in nearly 40 years, farm debt is falling, and farm equity is growing. In short, American agriculture is on sound footing. But we didn't get here by accident.



“We're here because of the policies and the investments that have been made over the course of many decades. We're here because we've focused on three core principles that have helped to shape the success of American agriculture, and those principles need to be protected and advanced as Congress works on legislation.



“The three principles can be simply stated: We need to maintain a strong safety net, we need to support sustainable productivity, and we need to promote vibrant markets. As they work on this bill, Congress must agree on the right mix of policies to provide an adequate safety net for those who need it. High input costs means agriculture will always remain a high risk. A bad crop, ruined by a natural disaster or an unpredictable price collapse, can put a hard-working farm family out of business quickly. These families rely on a strong safety net.



“This year I visited farms across the country who were devastated by natural disasters. I met farmers this spring who were never able to plant a crop because their land was flooded. I saw fires and droughts in the southwest destroy forests and grazing land. And this fall I stood in fields of fruits and vegetables that were ready for harvest but were ruined by Hurricane Irene. It was a visceral reminder of how important the safety net is for our farmers, ranchers, and our producers.



“In my conversations with these producers, I heard about parts of the safety net that are working pretty well. I also heard about parts that weren't. The SURE program isn't sure enough or swift enough, ACRE is not simple enough, and crop insurance may not cover enough.



“There are a few things that came up over and over again in my conversations with these farmers, and they need to be addressed in the next Farm Bill. Farmers recognize that the safety net makeup will likely change, but the production and protection it affords ought not to be compromised. And here are several keys to make sure that that protection and production are protected:



“First, producers need assistance quickly after they lose their crops to a natural disaster. Their bankers are not going to wait two years to make loan payments and receive those loan payments, and they can't expect -- nor can we expect -- our producers to wait two years to have the safety net kick in.



“Second, the safety net needs to reflect the diversity of American agriculture. That is to say, it needs to work for all kinds of farms. It can't favor the planting of one crop over another. It needs to make sense for farmers, and it needs to work for ranchers. It's got to work for row crop farmers in Iowa, specialty crop producers in upstate New York, cattle ranchers in Texas, or rice or cotton farmers in Louisiana.



“Third, the programs that comprise the safety net have got to be simple and understandable. Programs shouldn't discourage farmers from applying, they shouldn't be too costly to attain, or too slow to matter.



“And, finally, the safety net has got to be accountable and justifiable to the 98 percent of us who do not farm. We have a responsibility to the American people to use their resources wisely and to provide assistance only when it's needed. Congress has a tremendous opportunity to make sure the safety net works for all of our producers, and it's extremely important that they get it right.



“As I said, agriculture will always be risky, but good policy can avoid needless risks. While established farmers may have enough equity in their farms and ranches to survive a bad year or two, that's not necessarily true for beginning farmers or ranchers. The program design also needs to take that distinction into account and appreciate that distinction. So as we strengthen the safety net, we should also make it easier for young people or older people, who have never done it before, to begin farming.



“Why is this important? Well, it's simple. America has an aging farming community. In the past five years, we've seen a 20 percent decrease in the number of farmers under the age of 25; and based on the last ag census; the average American farmer is 57 years of age. Nearly 30 percent of American farmers are over the age of 65, which is almost double the number of folks in the workforce over 65. Now, some of these folks want to slow down or retire; but they have no one to take over the farming operation. That challenges us to find new ways, through tax policy, through regulations, through our credit programs or other programs, to help transition farms to the next generation.



“We'll need a community effort to recruit, train, and support this new generation of farmers and ranchers; and we need to make sure that it's for operations of all sizes.



“Now, the second key principle I alluded to earlier centers on sustaining agricultural productivity. Farmers and ranchers and growers must be able to produce an affordable and appealing product each and every year.



“Our farmers are the most productive in the world, and that leadership position must be maintained. Today there's no question that American farmers can produce enough to feed our nation, but that hasn't always been the case. Over the past 60 years, yields per acre of major crops -- corn, soy, wheat, and cotton -- have doubled, tripled, and in some cases even quadrupled.



“At the same time, livestock production and specialty crop production have become far more efficient. Now, this evolution was not pre-ordained. Producers embraced new science and new technologies and production techniques we see here at this plant. We laid the foundation for this incredible productivity through a sustained investment in research; and Congress must find ways to support research that is focused on crop production and protection, on livestock production and protection.



“Studies have shown that public investments in agricultural research earn a 20 dollars-to-1 return of investment in the U.S. economy. Once that information is disseminated to farmers, ranchers, and producers, they take it and make -- make it work. And these benefits extend beyond just economic returns. Research also leads to improved soil and water and air quality, and they help us to design strategies that will enable us to deal with the impacts of the changing climate.



“Public funding for agricultural research has remained basically flat-lined since the 1990s, clearly not keeping pace with other federally-supported research; and a recent USDA study sounded a warning signal to all of us that there is a direct link between increases in agricultural investment on research and agricultural productivity. If we continue to flat-line our commitment to research, our productivity will likely suffer; this at a time when our productivity will have to continue to increase to meet the global demand for food.



“Now, in addition to research, conservation is also an equally important component and strategy for sustainable productivity.



“In the 1930s a terrible drought and years of overworked farms led to the Dust Bowl, and millions of tons of soil were swept into the air. Since then USDA has worked with farmers and ranchers and producers to improve the land and make it more productive through conservation.



“USDA has forged voluntary partnerships with land owners yielding real public benefits. In the last 30 years producers have reduced soil erosion by more than 40 percent, and agriculture has now become the leading cause of restoring wetlands, whereas before, it was the leading cause of wetland loss.



“All of this is providing cleaner and better water for American people. Farmers understand why all of this matters. They understand the need for healthy and productive soil and the need for a plentiful water supply, and they appreciate that voluntary conservation programs support both needs.



“Now, in the past three years, USDA has looked for better ways to target conservation investments; and as a result, today we have a record number of acres enrolled in conservation programs. Guided by science, farmers will work to use the right conservation program and practices in the most critical areas of their farms.



“An analysis proves that this approach of voluntary conservation works; but, clearly, we cannot afford to let up. That's why we're maximizing our efforts by embracing locally-driven conservation programs and by entering partnerships that focus on large landscape-scale conservation programs. We have one here in the upper Mississippi River. We should also combine that strategy with an approach that gives farmers and ranchers regulatory certainty when they adopt certain conservation practices.



“I want to encourage Congress to continue their commitment to improve conservation programs, to maintain a robust investment in voluntary conservation assistance and to encourage our efforts towards regulatory certainty tied to conservation. Fewer programs, more flexibility, simpler applications, and a streamlined process for applying will help target our resources effectively and efficiently.



“Now, given limited federal resources, we also need to find creative ways to incent the private sector to invest in conservation.



“Now, if we can measure, and if we can verify the positive results of conservation, we can encourage the development of local markets in which businesses can purchase that result which will allow them to meet one of their regulatory requirements. Leveraging private sector resources will avoid a decline in conservation practices in the face of fewer dedicated federal resources.



“Now, the final principle for promoting our agricultural productivity and protecting our farms obviously involves promoting strong markets. Now, as Congress works on this bill, they should recognize we need vibrant, fair, and diverse markets at home and abroad for our farmers, ranchers, and producers of all types and all sizes.



“USDA has expanded markets for American goods abroad for decades, working aggressively to break down trade barriers with our global partners. At home we're reaching out to producers and enterprises of all sizes with information about how they can get into the export game, how they may be able to export their goods, and how they can make the financing to make it work. And these efforts have had a real impact.



“Over the past five years, U.S. agricultural producers have doubled the total value of their exports; and this year will be the best year we've ever had for American exports. They'll top $137 billion, $20 billion more than last year. This will allow us to have a record trade surplus in agricultural production and products of $42 billion; and this will support, as importantly, nearly a million jobs.



“Just last week, to help build on this success story, President Obama signed trade deals with Colombia, Panama, and South Korea. And this is going to add an additional $2.3 billion of agricultural exports for a range of products.



“Every additional billion dollars of agricultural sales helps to generate 8400 jobs at home. So it not only helps improve the bottom lines for farmers and ranchers, but it also puts people to work. Congress can continue this success story and build on it with continued investments in USDA's trade promotion programs, which studies have shown return a -- $31 for every dollar we invest return on investment.



“Frankly, folks, the American brand of agriculture is the envy of the world. We need to make sure that it always remains that way. Now, at the same time we look to expand opportunities here at home for producers, we also have to look at folks and opportunities for ways in which producers can access local and regional markets.



“Local food is one of the fastest growing segments of agriculture. In the past decade direct consumer sales have doubled. Making connections so that a farmer can sell at a local school or hospital, or even a neighbor down the road, creates good-paying jobs in our rural communities and keeps the wealth created from the ground close to home.



“Congress should continue the work that was started in 2008 to support our specialty crop producers with improved risk management tools and expanded market promotion.



“Now, this is more than just a Farm Bill. It also deals with nutrition. That's why farmers aren't the only ones that need a safety net. In a tough economy, families that struggle through tough times and seniors living on fixed income may also need help as well. That's why we have the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.



“Today, through that program, which we commonly refer to as SNAP, 44 million low-income Americans can put healthy, nutritious food on the table. That number's coming down from an all-time high earlier this year as more Americans are finding work with the creation of nearly 2 million private- sector jobs over the last 19 months.



“For many families SNAP is a bridge to self-sufficiency. In fact, you may be surprised to know that half of all new SNAP participants leave the program within eight months. To many Americans, they have an incomplete picture of who actually receives these SNAP benefits and who's benefiting from them.



“I suspect virtually everyone in this audience probably knows someone at some point in time who's a beneficiary of this program. Now, over the last 20 years that program has transitioned from a welfare program to one that is primarily utilized by working families and seniors. Children of those working families are nearly half of all of the SNAP beneficiaries, and the elderly make up nearly 8 percent. At the same time, only 8 percent of SNAP beneficiaries are those who receive cash welfare.



“In other words, 92 percent do not. That's not what most people in America think. So we've got to continue to impress upon Americans the importance of this program, but we also have the responsibility to strengthen it. And since the beginning of the Obama administration, we've worked to eliminate waste, reduce inefficiencies, and combat fraud in the program. As a result, SNAP's error rate last year was the lowest in the program's history.



“By conducting more than 850,000 investigations into suspected SNAP fraud last year, we stopped payments to tens of thousands of individuals who weren't qualified and sanctioned more than 1800 stores for improper trafficking of SNAP benefits or other violations. And we want to work with Congress to continue this work, to improve our data collection, to reduce our error rate, and to stop fraud.



“Any legislation considered by Congress involving farming in rural areas of America must also address the needs of the nearly 50 million people who live in those areas who don't necessarily farm.



“Now, there are bright spots in rural America today. Production agriculture has had a significant success; emerging renewable energy strategies show great promise; consumers' interest in food that's created locally has created new opportunities for small and large firms involved in those local and regional food systems; and USDA has helped to drive job creation with the effective use of taxpayer dollars.



“For instance, we've helped to create or save nearly 105,000 jobs in rural America by partnering with local financial institutions to lend over $5 1/2 billion to several thousand rural businesses that were locating or expanding into America. These resources leveraged another 15 to 20 billion dollars of private investment. We've helped to finance over 435,000 home loans in over 20,000 rural communities; 5,100 rural water and wastewater projects have been funded by USDA, putting people to work and providing clean water for nearly 17 million rural Americans; and we continue to invest in rural electrification, nearly $18 billion in the last two and a half years, to modernize that system.



“Now, by structuring our fees and our interest rates properly, these programs cost little, if anything, to the federal taxpayers; but all of them help to create jobs and improve quality of life. With this in mind, Congress should seize the opportunity to improve rural development programs in this next Farm Bill to make sure that the federal government is the best possible partner it can be for businesses and for people who want to live, work, and create business opportunities in rural communities.



“We need to make it easier for people to access USDA-supported programs, we need to reduce the number of programs, we need to simplify the process for applying for those programs, and we need to focus our efforts on firms that wish and need capital to invest in rural America. We need to promote regional development to leverage our resources to the fullest extent.



“Now, one area of determined effort needs to continue to be a focus on the growing biobased economy, with a particular emphasis on renewable energy and biofuels.



“Rural America has done a great job of helping to develop the domestically-produced renewable energy and fuel. That job must continue because when we create those opportunities, we create jobs, we reduce our reliance on foreign energy sources, and we enhance our national security.



“USDA has to have the tools to be able to continue to help this biobased and biofuel and renewable energy economy, and we need to make sure that it's vibrant in all regions of the -- of the country. Continuing our investment in renewable energy, biofuel, and biobased products will improve the bottom line for farmers as we find creative ways to use that which they grow.



“It will help create jobs in rural America simply because many of the businesses, the biorefineries, and the industries, will be located where the product is, and we will substantially reduce our reliance on foreign oil.



“Just in the last couple of years, as a result of the expansion of the biofuel industry, we've gone from importing 60 percent of our oil to 52 percent.



“The President has challenged us to reduce our dependence on foreign oil by one-third in a decade. That's roughly 18 percent. That 18 percent is roughly equivalent to that which we currently import from the Middle East, a fairly unstable part of the world; and that instability reflects itself in the prices we pay at the pump.



“As a result of our biofuel industries, consumers across America are paying about $0.90, on average, less for gas than they would otherwise pay. So it's a great opportunity for consumer choice, it's a job creator, and it improves income opportunities for farmers.



“Now, I recognize that the assistance we provide to this industry will likely be more targeted and more limited in the future; but we have momentum in many areas of the country to focus on nonfood feed stocks which will allow us to expand the production of advanced biofuels. I'm committed to working with Congress to build on that momentum.



“Just recently we announced an opportunity with the Department of the Navy and the Department of Energy to build a drop-in fuel for aviation from nonfood feed stocks that will be grown and created in rural America.



“The Navy has agreed to purchase the fuel produced by biorefineries that we're going to help build. The commercial aviation industry is excited about this opportunity because this fuel will allow them not only to have more stable pricing, but also will enable them to deal with whatever greenhouse gas regulations may be imposed upon them by other countries in the future. This is an absolute opportunity for us to grow thousands and thousands of jobs in rural America.



“This is the type of program, this is the type of effort that needs to be continued. That's why I'm hoping that Congress, as it looks at the Farm Bill, understands and appreciates the significance of the BCAP program and the REAP program, two programs that are continued -- worthy of continued investment.



“Just in 2009 and 2010 USDA invested in more than 22,000 renewable energy projects. We're pursuing this next generation of advanced biofuels by helping communities and companies invest to build those biorefineries, we're funding regional research, and we're helping farmers to establish those biofuel crops. We're supporting the farmers, ranchers, and businesses taking risks to pursue those new opportunities, and we're helping to establish the infrastructure to put renewable fuel in all of America's gas tanks. Congress's effort has got to continue to offer strategic support to these important industries.



“Now, today, I believe very, very strongly, as I stand here today, in a bright future for American agriculture in rural America. In fact, for American agriculture, it's as bright as it can be. That's why this farm, food, jobs bill -- whatever you'd like to call it -- has got to build on the agricultural economy that we have today.



“We have to improve that economy with a strong safety net, a commitment to conservation, and a focus on market development; and this bill must also continue to provide for food assistance for families that are playing by the rules, working hard to provide for their families.



“And, finally, the bill has to give renewed life to rural America by leading our nation's effort to, once again, get back in the business of what's done here at this plant of making, creating, and innovating things that not only we need in this country, but the rest of the world wants and desires. That will allow us to export, helping to create jobs here in America.



“It's been a long time coming, but rural America's making a comeback, and Congress's important work on this bill will lead to a much brighter, more hopeful, and more optimistic future for rural America. And I'm here today to tell you that USDA stands ready to help.



Thank you all very much.”

ASIA FRUIT LOGISTICA moves to a new location

ASIA FRUIT LOGISTICA moves to a new location in Hong Kong!

Hong Kong, 25 October 2011: Due to its increasing popularity and tremendous growth over the last five years, Asia’s leading fresh produce trade show event will be moving to a new state-of-the-art exhibition centre from 2012.

AsiaWorld-Expo is conveniently located next to the Hong Kong International Airport and has excellent transport links to Hong Kong city centre, which is 25 minutes by train, and to key cities in mainland China.

Looking to the future, the venue is a natural progression for ASIA FRUIT LOGISTICA and Asiafruit Congress. It allows both events to continue growing organically alongside the booming Asian fresh produce market, whilst also providing exhibitors and visitors with all the facilities and services needed to accommodate this growth.

“Now more than ever, the fresh produce business in Asia is really starting to pick up momentum, and will continue to develop as a most attractive market for fresh fruits and vegetables,” says Gérald Lamusse, managing director of event organiser Global Produce Events GmbH.

ASIA FRUIT LOGISTICA 2011 saw 332 exhibitors from 33 different countries showcasing their products and services – an increase of 10 per cent on last year and an incredible 186 per cent growth compared to 2007.

The show also attracted a third more visitors than the previous year - 5,358 visitors from 63 different countries were looking to source the best the market had to offer.

For more information on ASIA FRUIT LOGISTICA, contact Ms. Sinenart Baramirattanachai by email, Sinenart@gp-events.com, telephone: +49 2 941 4600 or visit www.asiafruitlogistica.com