Headline roundup - Aug. 29

Snatched from the Web and the discussion group this morning, a select group of headlines:

Concerns remain as salmonella outbreak ends From the LA Times

"Unquestionably, we're relieved," said Tom Nassif, chief executive of the Irvine-based Western Growers Assn., whose members cultivate about half of the nation's produce. "But we don't want this thing swept under the rug. We still have a lot of people out there hurting."

The industry response is estimated to have cost between $130 million and $250 million, and workers who lost jobs and growers who planted a smaller crop this year will continue to feel the aftershocks.

Several produce executives accused the Food and Drug Administration of running a lengthy, uncertain investigation that shifted suspicion from tomatoes to jalapeno and serrano peppers, shattering consumer confidence.

In struggling Cubas, signs of new opportunities Posted by Big Apple

One of Cuban President Raul Castro’s most dramatic recent announcements was that he would allow private farmers access to up to 100 acres of idle government land.The plan is a shift toward private enterprise in the struggling economy on the socialist island.
At one small roadside farm stand on the outskirts of Havana, crisp bunches of lettuce, green beans and okra are piled on a wooden countertop. What is unique, in this case, is that unlike on larger, state-run farms, these growers get to keep the proceeds from their produce.

Fyffes drops most in 20 years as forecast is cut From Bloomberg

Fyffes Plc fell the most in more than two decades in Dublin trading after the Irish tropical-fruit distributor cut its annual profit forecast because of increases in the cost of fruit and shipping, and a stronger dollar.

Fyffes plunged as much as 37 percent after saying that so- called adjusted earnings before interest and tax will drop to between 12 million euros ($17.7 million) and 15 million euros in 2008, from 17.4 million euros last year. The Dublin-based company said in June that earnings on that basis would grow in ``the mid-teens'' in percentage terms.

The banana distributor, the world's fourth-biggest, said higher average selling prices weren't enough to offset ``substantially'' increased expenses. Shipping fuel costs are about 80 percent higher than at the same stage last year, the company said today in a statement. Rival Chiquita Brands International Inc., owner of the namesake banana trademark, in June forecast a third-quarter loss.

Angola elections bring change to farm sector From Reuters:

But if post-civil war elections in Angola end well, the state-owned land Vilomba is working on could soon be sold to major food producers and the expiration date on his small harvest could equally apply to his own way of life.

U.S.-based Dole Food Co, the world's largest fresh fruit and vegetable producer, and Chiquita Brands International, owner of the namesake banana label, are in talks with local authorities to help recover this valley's once prosperous banana industry.

Freezer sales climb as food prices soar From the AP

Once relegated to the dank corners of the basement, shoppers are re-embracing the deep freezer, stashing bulk-sized purchases of meats, fruits and vegetables there as they work to combat rising food prices.

Across the country, shoppers bought more than 1.1 million freezers during the first six months of the year — up more than 7 percent from the same period last year, according to research firm NPD Group.

That rings up to nearly $400 million in freezer sales — a staggering figure compared to the rest of the home appliance sector, where industry data shows shipments are down nearly 8 percent.

And, experts said, it's a trend that's expected to continue at least through much of next year as penny-pinching shoppers buy in bulk to take advantage of deals or bundle grocery shopping trips to conserve gas.

WG: Traceback is not the problem

Traceback is not the problem says this news release from Western Growers. This may be the critical debate in the upcoming Congressional hearings. If the industry can make a convincing case, lawmakers may give the industry more time to proceed with the industry's own traceability initiative. If not, expect mandates to be imposed sooner rather than later:


PRNewswire-USNewswire via COMTEX/ ----On June 7, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a consumer alert directing the nation to stop consuming certain types of tomatoes. To this date, the federal agency has not announced an end to the investigation or the source of the contamination. On June 27, the agency admitted that tomatoes may not have been responsible for the outbreak of Salmonella Saintpaul and said instead they "were keeping an open mind" about other commodities being responsible for the outbreak. Spokespersons for the FDA and Centers for Disease Control (CDC) have cited difficulty tracing product consumed by those who became ill back through the supply chain, and a number of consumer groups have used these statements to dust off their calls for the federal government to require an electronic traceback system.

Disputing these calls are the facts: Yesterday the Minnesota Star Tribune reported that the Minnesota Department of Health had traced the source of their outbreak in less than two weeks. According to the article, Minnesota health officials "were on the phone July 9 with their federal counterparts making it 'crystal clear' it was not tomatoes but jalapenos that were the likely source."

"Traceback is not the issue here," says Western Growers' President and CEO Tom Nassif. "The FDA and CDC initially claimed that tomatoes were the culprit. Now they are focusing on jalapenos. Were they looking in the wrong place? If so, no system of traceback, no matter how sophisticated would have made a difference in this two-month-long investigation." Corroborating this point, in an Associated Press article published today, Dr. David Acheson of the FDA was reported to dispute that an electronic records system would have helped investigators.

"Today there are good traceback laws in place that the produce industry supports and embraces," says Nassif. "Nevertheless, Western Growers supports a risk-based approach to mandatory traceback, designed in collaboration by industry and that meets the needs of regulators. To say that the less-than effective and slow pace of the federal government's investigation is because of traceback problems is way off the mark."

"There is no proof tomatoes were the culprit, but the entire industry is being made to pay the price for this early implication," says Nassif. "The FDA has a moral and legal responsibility to establish a threshold for announcing a commodity is unsafe and an obligation to work with industry to perfect its ability to trace products faster."

Western Growers is an agricultural trade association whose members from Arizona and California grow, pack and ship ninety percent of the fresh fruits, nuts and vegetables grown in California and seventy five percent of those commodities in Arizona. This totals about half of the nation's fresh produce.

SOURCE Western Growers Association

http://www.wga.com
 

Why not?

Western Growers has asked the FDA to lift the tomato advisory. From their release:



Western Growers' President and CEO Tom Nassif sent a letter yesterday to Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Andrew von Eschenbach urging him to make a strong public announcement that all tomatoes grown in the United States, regardless of variety, are safe to eat.
"Although tomatoes in California were never associated with this outbreak our growers are suffering," wrote Nassif in the letter. "Some have left fruit to rot on the vine. Others have disced their tomatoes into the ground. The market is suppressed and demand is low. Exporters are having great difficulties selling to overseas markets."
Nassif additionally requested that Dr. von Eschenbach and the FDA coordinate and work with the U.S. Department of Agriculture and other agencies to ensure that confidence in US-grown tomatoes in overseas markets is restored.
"It is time for the Food and Drug Administration to make a public statement giving consumers the 'all clear' announcement that tomatoes produced in the U.S. are safe to eat," wrote Nassif. "The urgency of the matter and increasing damages to the industry compel immediate action. The tomatoes currently being harvested and shipped are from states your agency identifies as not being associated with this outbreak."
Western Growers is an agricultural trade association whose members from Arizona and California grow, pack and ship ninety percent of the fresh fruits, nuts and vegetables grown in California and seventy five percent of those commodities in Arizona. This totals about half of the nation's fresh produce.




TK: The FDA doesn't want to be wrong about tomatoes and salmonella, but it hardly seems likely there are any fresh leads associated with tomatoes currently on the market. It was time to lift the irrelevant advisory weeks ago, and past time now.

Western Growers: collateral damage cannot go unchallenged

To this point, Western Growers has taken the most forceful approach to the damage caused by FDA's meandering investigation. From Western Growers on June 28:

IRVINE, CA (June 28, 2008)- Western Growers is urging the House Committee on Agriculture to hold hearings as soon as possible on the salmonella outbreak that has been associated with fresh, red round, roma and plum tomatoes.

FDA and CDC have been unable to definitively determine the source or the cause of this outbreak and while these issues remain a "mystery," tomato growers across the nation are suffering irreparable harm.

"Congress must investigate this matter and determine ways to avoid this in the future and make the innocent tomato growers, packers and shippers whole" said Tom Nassif, president and CEO of Western Growers."

"FDA’s comments to the media earlier today do not leave us confident that a progressive narrowing of the investigation through a thorough trace back process is occurring. It is very possible that we may never know if tomatoes are the source or, if they are, where they were grown or processed or how they were contaminated.

"Our industry has taken dramatic steps to develop the strongest practices possible to prevent contamination in the field and throughout the supply chain. We have done this in close collaboration with public health authorities at the local and federal level. Now it is time to look at how FDA ‘intervenes’ in the event of an outbreak and how they ‘communicate’ with the public and industry to ensure that public health is protected without the irreparable destruction of agricultural economies.

"The collateral damage inflicted on thousands of innocent producers in this country by FDA blanket ‘advisories,’ such as with spinach and tomatoes cannot go unchallenged.

"We look forward to a positive response from the House Committee on Agriculture and to working with them to balance the important goals of protecting public health and agricultural economies," said Nassif.

Western Growers is an agricultural trade association whose members from Arizona and California grow, pack and ship ninety percent of the fresh fruits, nuts and vegetables grown in California and seventy five percent of those commodities in Arizona. This totals about half of the nation’s fresh produce.

Put tomatoes back on shelves and menus with confidence

Sliding across the inbox this morning:

Florida Tomato Committee has signed the following letter that was forwarded to retail and foodservice buyers this morning. The Committee encourages you to forward to customers and colleagues as well.

ALLIANCE FOR FOOD AND FARMING
CALIFORNIA TOMATO FARMERS
FLORIDA FRUIT AND VEGETABLE ASSOCIATION
FLORIDA TOMATO COMMITTEE
PRODUCE MARKETING ASSOCIATION
UNITED FRESH PRODUCE ASSOCIATION
WESTERN GROWERS ASSOCIATION

June 12, 2008

To the retail and foodservice produce-buying community:

With the good news that tomatoes from certain Florida counties and 30 other states or countries have been ruled out as the sources of the ongoing Salmonella saintpaul illness outbreak, we encourage you to now put those tomatoes back on your shelves and menus with confidence.

With the wellbeing of our consumers at the top of our minds, we have all worked together over the past 10 days to help the Food and Drug Administration and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to locate the source. FDA and CDC’s very thorough epidemiological and traceback investigations have now definitively ruled out round red and Roma/plum tomatoes from most production areas, and all other types of tomatoes regardless of source. According to FDA, these tomatoes cannot be the source of the illnesses.

We share your interest in protecting public health, first and foremost, and our industry strives to ensure our customers receive safe and healthy produce every bite, every time. Our thoughts and prayers have been with the people who were sickened by this ordeal.

Our tomato industry and producers in these areas are ready and eager to supply you with safe and healthy tomatoes; please contact your shipper partners to place new orders today. They have already paid a high price to protect public health, and shouldn’t be needlessly punished any further while the investigation is completed. Nor should our end customers be deprived any longer of safe supplies of one of the true joys of summer eating, tomatoes. Getting tomatoes back in our retail stores and on the menus is the most important step we can all take to restore consumer confidence.

We are in constant communication with the FDA in an effort to monitor this situation, which, as you know, is changing daily. If you have any questions about which tomato products and/or growing regions have been excluded from the investigation and are safe to ship, please contact us. If you would like any assistance with consumer communications, please contact your state and national organizations for assistance. We look forward to helping you put tomatoes back on the shelves, and back on the menu.

Sincerely,

Marilyn Dolan, Alliance for Food and Farming
Ed Beckman, California Tomato Farmers
Mike Stuart, Florida Fruit and Vegetable Association
Reggie Brown, Florida Tomato Committee
Bryan Silbermann, Produce Marketing Association
Tom Stenzel, United Fresh Produce Association
Tom Nassif, Western Growers Association

Tag teaming COOL

No one knows for sure what is going to happen with COOL, but at least we are all in it together. Here is a joint communication to membership from PMA and WGA:


DATE: April 2, 2008

TO: PMA and WGA Members

FROM: Bryan Silbermann, PMA President, BSilbermann@pma.com and Tom Nassif, WGA President, TNassif@wga.com

RE: Country of Origin Labeling

Our associations continue to receive many questions from members who are confused about the status of country of origin labeling (COOL) for produce, with respect to both the implementation date and the requirements.

The status and compliance requirements of COOL remain uncertain and so are unclear to buyers and sellers alike. Nonetheless, suppliers have received notices from retailers who expect them to comply with the current proposed rules even though the requirements:

• may still be changed by regulation
• are not currently enforceable, and
• may also be modified by favorable legislation now before Congress.

We are writing to ask for your patience as the legislative and regulatory process finds resolution before we needlessly add what may be unnecessary expenses that will filter through the entire supply chain. None of us wants to see unnecessary costs added at a time when all of us are already being impacted by multiple inflationary pressures.

With that in mind, we wanted to provide you with some background information to help clarify the current situation. Please understand that this overview is not intended as legal advice but rather as information designed to help you make fair and responsible business decisions.

How we got here
The 2002 Farm Bill included the requirement that the U.S. Department of Agriculture issue guidelines for country of origin labeling for fresh fruits and vegetables at retail point of sale.

After considering extensive comments from industry on the guidelines, the USDA issued a proposed rule for mandatory COOL in 2003. Industry again raised concerns about the scope and burden of the requirements in the proposed rule. These concerns resulted in delaying COOL implementation for produce to September 30, 2008.

As noted previously, as of April 2, COOL requirements have not been issued in final form and may be changed by the legislation now before Congress. The current USDA proposed rule is still just that – and therefore not legally enforceable. For more information on the specific provisions included in the proposed rule, please visit our web sites: PMA at www.pma.com/issues/labeling.cfm or WGA at www.wga.com.

So what happens next?
In view of the uncertainty at this time regarding the legislative and regulatory outcome, it is not the purpose of this letter to provide more detailed compliance advice to members. That will come later when we know what is required to comply with the final government directive.

PMA and WGA are forming a Task Force of our members to review whatever the final outcome of COOL is and to make recommendations to our members on a fair and responsible implementation process that serves the interests of the entire supply chain. Mike O'Brien of Schnuck Markets and Tom Deardorff, Deardorff Family Farms will co-chair the Task Force.

Our associations will continue to keep you updated on COOL's progress through the legislative and regulatory process. In the meanwhile, we once again ask for your patience and consideration of your business partners as you develop your decisions related to COOL.

How safe is your salad?

How safe is your salad? Not safe enough for some, I'll wager. This conclusion is one I reach even before I start reading the article in The San Francisco Chronicle, posted by Luis of the Fresh Produce Industry Discussion Group. As I read the article, I found it references both industry-instituted and buyer-initiated produce safety practices, and how those demands are opposed by some conservationists. From the story by Carl Nagin, a small excerpt:

Meanwhile, Western Growers' President Thomas A. Nassif has challenged a rival set of food safety standards developed by the Food Safety Leadership Council as "excessive and scientifically indefensible." The council includes representatives from such retail giants and food-service providers as McDonald's Corp., Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Publix Super Markets and the Walt Disney World Co. In a November letter to Publix, Nassif warned that the council's standard "marks the beginning of a destructive food safety 'arms race' " with different produce buyers competing by claiming they have safer products than the next and imposing ever more stringent standards on growers. These so-called "super-metrics" are at the heart of the controversy for growers and conservationists. The USDA is now considering national regulations for leafy greens. In response, directors of EPA region 9 and two Regional Water Quality Boards wrote that any such regulation should focus on bagged "ready-to-eat" greens only and cited the FDA data on E. coli outbreaks. The letters also noted that despite acceptance of the Leafy Greens Marketing Agreement, many chain grocery stores have imposed their own food safety programs that go beyond it. As a consequence "farmers are being put in jeopardy for violating long-standing regulations that protect water quality and threatened and endangered species," wrote EPA Water Division director Alexis Strauss. Small farmers, Strauss added, have largely been left out of the discussion. Their "needs and circumstances must also be considered to avoid the damage of an irrelevant one-size-fits-all approach" to food safety. The EPA calls the Leafy Greens Marketing Agreement standards an ideal starting point for a national program; it has also called for caps on what retailers can require of growers beyond the standards. For background on E. coli and up-to-date information on outbreaks: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: www.cdc.gov/ecoli .

Commentary by Tom Nassif - WSJ Nov. 20

As passed on by Luis of the Fresh Produce Industry Discussion Group, here is a commentary from Tom Nassif, published in the Nov. 20 Wall Street Journal. Tom simply and eloquently puts the case to Congress for the courage to act on immigration reform.


COMMENTARY
Food for Thought
By TOM NASSIF
The Wall Street Journal
November 20, 2007; Page A19
In the midst of the combustive debate over immigration reform, we in agriculture have been forthright about the elephant in America's living room: Much of our workforce is in the country illegally -- as much as 70%.
Faced with the option of economic ruin, as hundreds of millions of dollars worth of our livelihood rots in the fields, or the embrace of a fatally flawed immigration system, our industry and farm families opt to survive. Who wouldn't? For those who have a 10-20 day harvest window to make or break their entire business year, government promises to fix the system don't work. We can't wait for rules to change. We need reform and we need it now.
Western Growers -- representing half of all the fresh fruits and vegetables grown in the U.S. -- has repeatedly called for a fix. We want and expect government to enforce immigration laws; we want a secure border, fraud-proof IDs and valid Social Security cards.
Despite a broken and unworkable system, however, Congress has chosen not to act. Meanwhile, the Bush administration and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) -- under intense political pressure -- did begin to move.
Last month, a federal judge ordered an indefinite delay to the DHS's "no-match" program that would have forced employers to fire workers whose Social Security numbers did not match their names. The judge said it would cause "irreparable harm to innocent workers and employers." This preliminary injunction has prevented the DHS from proceeding with the shortsighted no-match program.
The DHS openly concedes our industry's reliance on falsely documented workers. But like a physician who diagnoses an open wound but uses salt in place of sutures, DHS avoided the cure in favor of additional pain.
The pain was in the form of the no-match rules. The DHS guidelines would have established purported "safe harbor" procedures for employers who received a Social Security Administration (SSA) no-match letter. The letter notifies an employer that he has submitted employee W-2s with names and Social Security numbers that do not match.
Employers would have had to fire employees who could not produce new documentation within 90 days of receiving the letter, or face the risk that DHS may find that the employer had knowledge that the employee was unauthorized.
The regulations would have put farmers in an untenable situation:
Either terminate the majority of their existing workforce and let the crops die in the fields, or disregard the rules and risk having to pay huge fines and penalties for "knowingly" employing undocumented workers. This attempt by DHS to expose illegal immigrants would have done nothing to address the underlying issues or correct the problem.
Fortunately, the courts have stepped in and the Bush administration now has an opportunity to fix our broken system. The plaintiffs in the case argued that DHS's plans would place a costly burden on employers and result in the needless firing of employees. That, in turn, would open employers up to lawsuits and charges of discrimination. Civil liberties organizations pointed out the no-match rules would likely lead to the violation of the rights of many legal workers who might have made a mistake they couldn't correct before deadline.
These valid concerns must be addressed. Agriculture yearns for a legal, stable, economical workforce; we have been saying so for years.
And though we are relieved by the court's decision, it doesn't change the fact that this industry still needs a workable solution. Our current guest-worker program, known as H2-A, is costly and cumbersome, and sets labor standards that are not competitive in the global marketplace.
At the Bush administration's request, we have suggested changes to the H-2A program, such as expediting the application process and faxing guest-worker approval notices, instead of relying on "snail mail"while highly perishable crops await timely harvesters. These fixes are not difficult and can, in most cases, be administratively applied -- what is the delay?
If the DHS's no-match program had gone forward, America's domestic food supply would have been irreparably damaged. Small farm owners would have gone out of business and large operators could have taken their operations abroad -- taking hundreds of thousands of jobs with them.
Our industry, as well as farm-worker advocates -- Democrats and Republicans alike -- support legislation known as AgJOBS. This bill, which was a part of the Senate's "grand bargain," includes a temporary guest-worker program that logically matches willing farmers with willing foreign laborers.
AgJOBS provides the perfect opportunity for Congress to make progress on this critically important issue. Americans don't raise their children to work in the fields, and so we are reliant on a foreign workforce. We desperately want that workforce to be legal, and AgJOBS affords us that opportunity.
The Bush administration does support comprehensive immigration reform, and reportedly set in place the DHS's draconian no-match rules to force the issue. Still, it was playing a risky game of chance with U.S. agriculture to the detriment of our industry, our economy and American consumers.
We must stop playing games with our domestic food supply. Agriculture needs workers, Americans won't do the work and Congress lacks the courage to pass a comprehensive immigration package. It is time for Congress to find its courage, rise above the anger of the activists, and come together to solve this problem.

Mr. Nassif is president & CEO of Western Growers.

Debating motivation and science

As I was reporting on the Food Safety Leadership Council and their new on farm food safety standards yesterday, I was struck by the fact that there is a parting of opinion on the question over the motivation of the group. Unfortunately, none of the group's members were available for direct comment. The crux of the issue is this; are the council's on farm standards are driven by the motivation of marketing food safety to the trade or consumers, or is the motivation for the standards is simply brand protection and preventing foodborne illness?

One sticking point for Western Growers is that the council's on farm food safety standards seem to disrespect the work that went into the on farm metrics of the California Leafy Greens Marketing Agreement. What's more, a singular question being asked is how the council scientifically justifies their standards, which are different and tougher in some regards than the leafy green metrics.
I tend to agree the buyer group needs to show the industry more illumination on both points.

We'll have some coverage in The Packer this week, but below is the Nov. 6 member communication from Western Growers about the issue.
From Western Growers:


Western Growers Challenges New Food Safety Buyer Group On Unreasonable, Scientifically Indefensible Food Safety Demands
Western Growers today condemned the demands of a consortium of retailers and food service vendors who insist that fresh produce suppliers must implement new unreasonable, excessive and scientifically indefensible food safety standards and to submit to additional expensive and unnecessary food safety audits.
The consortium, organized under the umbrella name of the “Food Safety Leadership Council,” (“FSLC”) currently consists of Publix Supermarkets, Inc., Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Darden Restaurants, McDonald’s corporation, Avendra, LLC and Walt Disney World Co.
In a letter addressed to “Dear Produce Supplier”, Publix attached a 20-page document titled “Food Safety Leadership Council On-Farm Produce Standards.” The consortium is demanding that the entire fresh produce industry agree to develop and adopt “enhanced” food safety standards that add unnecessary burdens to the recently implemented California Good Agricultural Practices metrics that the California Leafy Green Marketing Agreement Board has accepted and upon which state and federal inspections are currently being conducted.
Western Growers sees this effort as the start of a food safety “arms race,” where different groups of produce buyers, in an effort to claim that they have safer produce than the next, will impose on fresh produce suppliers ever increasingly more expensive and scientifically indefensible food safety requirements.
“We have very serious concerns about these new food safety standards and demands,” said Tom Nassif, Western Growers President and CEO. “We are extremely disappointed that they are taking this approach. The new standards clearly imply without any scientific basis whatsoever that the already developed and adopted GAP metrics, scientifically developed and peer reviewed by some of the nation’s leading food safety scientists and experts, are inadequate. We know that is not the case as federal and state government food safety agencies all agree that the GAP metrics include the latest, cutting edge food safety science.”
Western Growers is sending the consortium a letter outlining Western Growers’ specific scientific and policy concerns and asking them to cease and desist imposing these unreasonable standards on fresh produce suppliers until they meet with and provide the fresh produce industry with scientific bases for their new requirements.
For example, the new standards far exceed the existing Leafy Greens GAP metrics in significant ways:
• The On-Farm Produce Standards appear to apply to all fresh produce grown in the United States, not just California and Arizona grown lettuce or leafy greens.
• The new standards require a one mile buffer zone between fresh produce fields and concentrated animal feed lots.
• The new standards require a ¼ mile buffer zone between fresh produce fields and animal grazing.
• The new standards appear to require that only potable water that meets US EPA drinking water standards may be used on fresh produce crops eliminating the use of commonly used irrigation water sources.
• The new standards use “bright-line” generic E. coli counts to determine acceptable or unacceptable irrigation water.
• The new standards clearly imply that the inspections required by the California Leafy Green Marketing Agreement currently performed by state and federal government inspectors are inadequate and the standards appear to require mandatory additional independent, expensive and unnecessary audits.
Ironically, nowhere in the standards is an explicit reference to or requirement that fresh produce suppliers from other countries adhere to the same standards being imposed on US fresh produce suppliers. Moreover, the consortium has not provided the fresh produce industry with its own set of good handling practices that demonstrate that consortium members are properly handling fresh produce after receipt of produce from fresh produce suppliers.
The consortium has asked its suppliers to sign on to the new standards immediately if suppliers wish to do business with consortium members; in fact, some fresh produce suppliers may already have signed such agreements.
Western Growers strongly encourages its members to become better educated about the new standards and to wait until the fresh produce industry receives from the consortium more scientific evidence and validation to support their new standards.
Of course, each company must make sales and marketing decisions based on their own circumstances. Western Growers members are also strongly encouraged to contact and confer with their own attorneys, internal or external food safety experts and/or Western Growers before agreeing to be bound by the new standards.
Western Growers is simultaneously contacting and coordinating with fresh produce organizations around the country to explore developing a unified response to these unreasonable demands.

About Harkin's legislation

What can we make of Sen. Harkin's produce safety legislation? In some senses, it seems to deliver what United, PMA and other elements of the industry have been asking for - strong, nationwide federal oversight of produce safety that also accounts for imports. On the other hand, industry leaders (note Tom Stenzel's earlier statement on the blog) are cautious that the legislation may be over prescriptive and inflexible. Some believe food safety regulations should come from FDA, not Congress.

Given the short time frame for enacting the farm bill, I don't think there is any way that this produce safety legislation will be attached to the farm bill - yet that seems to be a concern among some.

Here is an audio clip from the panel of industry leaders I moderated Tuesday at the FFVA convention. The question featured in this clip is the panel's reaction to Sen. Harkin's then pending produce safety legislation. I apologize the audio quality isn't that great. You will find the panel is concerned about potential legislation that represents a knee-jerk reaction by Capitol Hill, legislation that doesn't take into account what industry has already done and legislation that would be linked to the farm bill. The industry leaders on the panel are: Tom Nassif, president of Western Growers; Emanuel Lazopoulos, chairman of the United Fresh Produce Association; Mike Stuart, president of FFVA; and John McClung, president of the Texas Produce Association.

Harkin and DeLauro statements

Just wrapped up the morning meetings here at the FFVA. Round table discussion with John McClung, Mike Stuart, Tom Nassif and Emanuel Lazopoulos illustrated many points of agreement on food safety, the farm bill, pest issues and immigration. The industry is still not totally in sync on where to next on food safety, whether that means federal marketing order, FDA regulation, legislation or state-based program. There are many uncertainties, to be sure. Meanwhile, the Dole lettuce recall prompted this statement today from Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa.
Here is the statement:


Harkin: Latest American Recall
Has International Implications

Senate legislation to be introduced later this week

Washington, D.C. – Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA), Chairman of the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry, today issued the following statement on the recall of Dole's Hearts Delight bagged salad due to E. coli O157:H7 contamination. Eighty-eight cases - or 528 bags – of the bagged salad were distributed in Canada and 755 cases containing 4,530 bags in the U.S., according to Dole.

“From bagged salad with E. coli to spinach that contains Salmonella, food safety is increasingly becoming a concern for American consumers as they visit the produce aisle,” said Harkin. “Not only is this a concern for domestic producers and consumers, but now we’re seeing American produce recalls have international implications. It is long past time for Congress to act and later this week, I intend to introduce legislation to restore confidence in American produce and the agency that regulates it.”

Harkin is preparing to reintroduce legislation he has previously proposed to set up a national program that would require food safety practices for growing and processing fresh produce at most risk of causing foodborne illness.



And from Rep. Rosa DeLauro

DeLauro Welcomes Additional Voice in Supporting
Stronger Food Safety System
Announces Upcoming Hearing to Address Import Safety

Washington, D.C. – Congresswoman Rosa L. DeLauro (Conn.-3) issued the following statement welcoming the proposal for improved food safety from the Grocery Manufacturers Association.

The proposal, as well as the federal government’s ability to ensure the safety of food imports, will be addressed at an oversight hearing on food imports Tuesday, September 25, 2007 at 10:30 AM in Room 2362A of the Rayburn Building (witness list forthcoming). DeLauro chairs the House Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration Appropriations Subcommittee, with jurisdiction and oversight responsibilities of food safety operations and its budget.

“Momentum is clearly growing for strengthening and modernizing our nation’s food safety system. I welcome the Grocery Manufacturers Association’s proposal to improve the inspection of imported foods and ingredients and look forward to closely reviewing the details of the proposal during the hearing next week.

“Given the major recalls this year, their announcement today sends a very strong message that the industry recognizes the inadequacy of voluntary measures to protect public health and reassure American consumers that their food is safe. It is yet one more voice highlighting the need to change our system to one that seeks to minimize hazards by applying science based controls and focus our system on preventing food-borne illness not just reacting when outbreaks occur.”

Making the shift...

Luis of the Fresh Produce Industry Discussion Group posted the NYT story about how the labor shortage is shifting production to Mexico.
From the story:

CELAYA, Mexico — Steve Scaroni, a farmer from California, looked across a luxuriant field of lettuce here in central Mexico and liked what he saw: full-strength crews of Mexican farm workers with no immigration problems.
Farming since he was a teenager, Mr. Scaroni, 50, built a $50 million business growing lettuce and broccoli in the fields of California, relying on the hands of immigrant workers, most of them Mexican and many probably in the United States illegally.
But early last year he began shifting part of his operation to rented fields here. Now some 500 Mexicans tend his crops in Mexico, where they run no risk of deportation.
“I’m as American red-blood as it gets,” Mr. Scaroni said, “but I’m tired of fighting the fight on the immigration issue.”
A sense of crisis prevails among American farmers who rely on immigrant laborers, more so since immigration legislation in the United States Senate failed in June and the authorities announced a crackdown on employers of illegal immigrants. An increasing number of farmers have been testing the alternative of raising crops across the border where there is a stable labor supply, growers and lawmakers in the United States and Mexico said.
Western Growers, an association representing farmers in California and Arizona, conducted an informal telephone survey of its members in the spring. Twelve large agribusinesses that acknowledged having operations in Mexico reported a total of 11,000 workers here.
“It seems there is a bigger rush to Mexico and elsewhere,” said Tom Nassif, the Western Growers president, who said Americans were also farming in countries in Central America.
Precise statistics are not readily available on American farming in Mexico, because growers seek to maintain a low profile for their operations abroad. But Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California, displayed a map on the Senate floor in July locating more than 46,000 acres that American growers were cultivating in just two Mexican states, Guanajuato and Baja California.
“Farmers are renting land in Mexico,” Ms. Feinstein said. “They don’t want us to know that.”
She predicted that more American farmers would move to Mexico for the ready work force and lower wages. Ms. Feinstein favored a measure in the failed immigration bill that would have created a new guest worker program for agriculture and a special legal status for illegal immigrant farm workers.
In the past, some Americans have planted south of the border to escape spiraling land prices and to ensure year-round deliveries of crops they can produce only seasonally in the United States. But in the last three years, Mr. Nassif and other growers said, labor force uncertainties have become a major reason farmers have shifted to Mexico.
While there are benefits for Mexico, as American farmers bring the latest technology and techniques to its crop-producing regions, American farm state economists say thousands of middle-class jobs supporting agriculture are being lost in the United States. Some lawmakers in the United States also point to security risks when food for Americans is increasingly produced in foreign countries.

TK: It is not only vegetables that will be affected. Investment will surely shrink in tree fruit crops if banks and marketers aren't sure if enough pickers will be on hand for the harvest.

Western Growers release

Here is the Western Growers news release about the farm bill:


WESTERN GROWERS APPLAUDS THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES FOR PASSING ITS VERSION OF THE 2007 FARM BILL

IRVINE, CA (July 27, 2007) – Western Growers applauds the U.S. House of Representatives for passing its version of the 2007 Farm Bill today. Western Growers, with other specialty crop allies, has worked tirelessly for more than two years to ensure the specialty crop industry’s priorities are included in the Farm Bill, and today’s passage by the House is a major step toward achieving that goal.
“We applaud the U.S. House of Representatives’ passage of the Farm Bill. For the first time, the Farm Bill recognizes the priorities of an industry that accounts for more than half of all crop value in the country,” said Western Growers President and CEO Tom Nassif. “Our Representatives in Congress have shown tremendous leadership by investing in a 21st Century Farm Bill, which addresses the needs of all of agriculture.”
The House version of the Farm Bill, which would provide more than $1.7 billion in mandatory funding for key specialty crop programs over the next five years, would expand the USDA Fruit & Vegetable Snack Program to all 50 states, enhance critical trade assistance and market promotion tools that will grow international markets for specialty crops, expand detection and mitigation efforts to combat invasive pests and diseases; which costs the economy millions of dollars per year; provide a greater investment in research and development and expand the “State Specialty Crop Competitiveness” projects in all 50 states to enhance the competitiveness of fruits, vegetables and nuts.
“This is truly an historic moment for our country and industry,” Nassif said. “We especially want to recognize and commend Rep. Dennis Cardoza (D-CA), who has worked diligently on our industry’s behalf to secure our representation in the Farm Bill for more than two years. We also strongly applaud House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), House Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson (D-MN) and ranking Republican Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) and Representatives Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), Jim Costa (D-CA), Sam Farr (D-CA), Devin Nunes (R-CA), George Radanovich (R-CA) and Mike Thompson (D-CA) for their leadership and courage in shaping our federal farm policy based on competition and geared toward the 21st Century marketplace.
“We recognize, however, that there is still a lot of work to be done on this issue,” Nassif said. “It’s now time for the Senate to build on the efforts of House. The current Farm Bill is set to expire this year and the status quo is not acceptable.”
Western Growers; which is a co-chair of the Specialty Crop Farm Bill Alliance, a national coalition of 120 specialty crop organizations who have banded together to support priorities that provide an avenue for more competition into federal farm policy with a focus on producing a safer, healthier and more nutritious food supply; is an agricultural trade association whose nearly 3,000 members grow, pack and ship ninety percent of the fresh fruits, nuts and vegetables grown in California and seventy five percent of those commodities in Arizona. This totals about half of the nation’s fresh produce.

Farm bill traction

Now that Congress dropped the ball on immigration reform, the specialty crop industry turns its attention to the remaining top legislative priority - the 2007 farm bill. An extension of the 2002 farm bill is the worst possible outcome for the fresh produce industry, yet a two-year extension is not beyond the realm of possibility, as this coverage in The New York Times points out. Good coverage of this point is also found in the farm policy blog, found at this link.

The possibility of massive changes to the farm bill on the House floor is not out the question. Some wonder if the pay-go rules that demand budget offsets for new spending might be suspended for the farm bill. In any case, it appears the ambitious schedule of wrapping up work on the farm bill before the August recess may be slipping away.

Tom Nassif of Western Growers told me this week that specialty crop growers can't be told that any money for their projects beyond the baseline will have to come from offsets. That principle might apply if specialty crop programs had been receiving tens of billions of dollars for decades, but right now there is no baseline for specialty crop priorities. Farm subsidies are foreign to fruit and vegetable growers, and the entire specialty crop coalition insists that funding for priorities like the specialty crop block grant program and the fruit and vegetable program for schools must be real and mandatory.

In that context, here is a June 26 letter from the governors of Texas, New York, California and Florida to the leaders of the House and Senate Agriculture Committees.
Excerpts below:

As Governors of the country’s four most populous states, we represent more than 174 million acres of cropland, with products valued at more than $65 billion. While our states are very diverse, we also have much in common. We believe in the vision of healthy people, a clean environment, and a robust agricultural sector. As your committees begin consideration of the 2007 Farm Bill, we would like you to consider several issues of importance to our states.
In addition to these six priorities, our states have many other issues of importance that will be provided to the Committees through our respective congressional delegations.

Specialty Crops: Fruits, vegetables, nuts, horticulture and other specialty products now make up almost 50 percent of the farm gate receipts in this country. Our four states alone contribute over half of this amount and their production is an important component of the agricultural sector in our states. This farm bill should provide increased funding and program flexibility for specialty crop programs, including research and development of production, harvesting, and handling techniques, and open up USDA’s commodity, conservation, and disaster assistance programs, in which specialty crop producers have traditionally had limited opportunity to participate. We agree that it is necessary to not only increase funding but also provide a permanent allocation for the Specialty Crop Block Grant that was authorized in the Specialty Crop Competitiveness Act of 2004. This grant has been used with great success by states to provide a wide array of programs that assist our specialty crop producers to maintain and enhance their competitiveness in the market.

Invasive Species: Whether it is Citrus Canker in Florida, the Asian Longhorned Beetle in New York, the Glassy Winged Sharpshooter in California, or the Mexican fruit fly in Texas, invasive species are a serious problem and require a significant commitment of resources to address. It is essential that the Farm Bill include strong language that provides critical resources in a timely fashion to vigorously respond to and eradicate these threats. Full funding for the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service is necessary. It is important that, while maintaining funding levels for pest management, additional dollars also be provided for prevention efforts on ports and other pathways of entry. As border states, we all have increased susceptibility through our ports and borders.

Crop Insurance: Increasing the amount of risk eligible for crop insurance coverage and expanding the safety net programs for all farmers, including crop specific revenue insurance, should be part of a final Farm Bill. Also, a structure should be established for providing assistance beyond crop insurance after natural disasters. There is a tangible need for a long-term solution to the ad hoc nature of current disaster assistance.

Conservation: The farm bill must reauthorize and expand funding for all conservation programs as a strategic investment in our nation’s agricultural infrastructure. By increasing outreach and technical assistance funding, states can more effectively deliver and target conservation programs to those farmers who want to participate in the most cost effective environmental programs. By bolstering partnerships with cooperating organizations and agencies, we enhance the availability of technical assistance. Conserving farmland, rangelands, and private forests benefits all Americans.

Nutrition: The Farm Bill must maintain the highly successful Food Stamp Program (FSP), including Food Stamp Nutrition Education, as part of efforts to promote healthy eating and help prevent obesity. Despite recent national increases in participation and significant reductions in state error rates, challenges within the FSP remain. There are simply too many households eligible for benefits that do not participate, particularly among the working poor. States need the flexibility to develop and implement systems that enable more eligible individuals to receive food stamps. It is also essential that the Farm Bill support healthy diets, farmers market programs, better nutrition and greater access to fruits and vegetables. Expanding initiatives such as the successful Fruit and Vegetable Snack Program will promote achievement of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans and help to realize our mutual goal to improve nutrition for low-income families and communities for generations to come.

Organic Agriculture: We support provisions that expand support for organic products, allowing our farmers to access this growing and lucrative market. To meet this increasing consumer demand for organic food, we should support farmers who have decided to use organic techniques, especially those who are transitioning to organic agriculture.

We understand that legislation of this scope and complexity involves a long and arduous process to realize final completion. We hope that as the legislative process continues, we can be a resource for you and your staffs as you consider these and many other important issues. Please do not hesitate to contact us if we can provide more information.

Sincerely

Governor Eliot Spitzer
Governor Charlie Crist
Governor Rick Perry
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger

WG in Washington

WG’s Chairman Steve Patricio of Westside Produce, Secretary of Agriculture Mike Johanns and WG’s President and CEO Tom Nassif.

I visited with Tom Nassif yesterday about Western Growers' presence in Washington. Nassif was in D.C. - with the the rest of the WG board - earlier this week. Nassif said the board convened in Washington to make the rounds on Capitol Hill talking about the big three issues of immigration, food safety and the farm bill. A cordial and extended discussion with Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns was a part of the agenda, as noted by the photo supplied above by WG. Nassif says WG hopes to have the association's new Washington position filled by the end of July, and Nassif himself had interviewed several candidates this week. I'm developing coverage on the interview, but I will note here that Nassif is very determined about what California and Arizona growers want and need out of the farm bill.

Status woes

In the last couple of days, I have talked with Tom Nassif of Western Growers, Robert Guenther of United, John McClung of Texas Produce Association, Maureen Marshall of Torrey Farms in N.Y., and Craig Regelbrugge of the American Nursery and Landscape Association. All shared a passion for seeing positive results from Congress on immigration reform and all are assuredly unhappy with the failure of the the Senate.

There is no status quo for the industry but only status woes. Those include increased apprehensions at the border, selective workplace enforcement, labor shortages and shrinking domestic f/v production.


Here is the reaction from the Agriculture Coalition for Immigration Reform.

Here is what the American Farm Bureau said today: The note of optimism and resilience is common with all ag lobbyists, however misplaced their faith is in the ability of Congress to resolve the issue.


“The American Farm Bureau is disappointed that the Senate was unable to move forward today on an issue as vital and critical to our farmers’ livelihood as immigration reform. We respect the hard, bipartisan work that went into the legislation. It is unfortunate for American agriculture, as well as the nation as a whole, that a solution to the problem has not yet been found.

“Up to $9 billion in agricultural production and the nation’s food security is at risk if the immigration issue is not solved. Maintaining the status quo is not acceptable and is not in the nation’s best interest.

“Today’s vote was a setback, not a defeat. We have seen our share of difficulties and delays in the years we have been working for immigration reform, when agriculture was the only sector drawing congressional attention to the problem. Farm Bureau will continue working with Congress for meaningful immigration legislation because reform is not a question of if, but when.”

Hearings and an AgJobs presser

There is a House Ag Committee hearing going on right now on crop insurance,and tomorrow the Agriculture Committee is expected to look at the issue of food/produce safety again. Tomorrow afternoon in DC is an AgJobs press conference at 2 p.m; speakers include Sens. Dianne Feinstein, Larry Craig and industry speakers Maureen Torrey, Phil Glaize, Tom Nassif, Mike Gempler and Ella Vasquez.

With the staccato pace of hearings and press conferences, it goes without saying this is a big week for the farm bill and immigration reform.

The last, best chance for immigration reform

Tom Nassif of Western Growers is headed to Washington, D.C. this week and will be pushing hard for Congressional action on immigration reform. Here is the April 20 news release from WG about what Nassif calls the "last, best chance" for immigration reform. I have a time tomorrow to connect with Tom about this effort.

IRVINE, Calif., April 20 /PRNewswire/ -- Western Growers officials today announced the launch of a concentrated culminating campaign in its three year-long drive to win approval of immigration reform to create a legal, stable work force for agriculture. The concentrated effort will seek to achieve passage of immigration reform prior to the adjournment of Congress for the 2007 summer recess. The campaign will involve focused lobbying, media and education efforts to bring about comprehensive immigration reform that would include provisions for legalizing the estimated 1.2 million illegal agriculture workers in the United States. The effort will push for approval of the AgJOBS provision in the comprehensive reform bill or passage of AgJOBS as a stand alone bill if necessary.
"It is clear that the last, best chance for immigration reform in the foreseeable future is upon us. If Congress does not move on this critical issue and approve sensible immigration reform before it adjourns for the summer recess this country will have lost its last, best chance to fix our broken immigration policy for at least several years," said Tom Nassif, President and CEO of Western Growers. "Agriculture is truly in desperate need of reform. We are heartened to see that we have now been joined by other associations in our industry. That can only make our campaign stronger. We will not rest until we have done everything possible to secure passage of immigration reform. Our workers need it, our farmers need it, our industry needs it and our nation needs reform. We have run out of patience. Now's the time for action."
The AgJOBS bill, known as the Agriculture Job Opportunity, Benefit and Security Act of 2007, was reintroduced in January by Senators Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Larry Craig (R-ID) and Representatives George Radonovich (R-CA) and Howard Berman (D-CA). It was originally co-sponsored by Republican Senators Craig, Mel Martinez of Florida and George Voinocivh of Ohio. Democratic senators Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts and Barbara Boxer of California also co-sponsored the legislation. The House bill ultimately gained more than 25 co-sponsors, divided between the two parties. AgJOBS also enjoys the broad support of an unusual coalition including Western Growers, the United Farm Workers Union, the Catholic Church and an array of activists, agriculture associations, labor and church leaders. The bill was included as a provision of the broader comprehensive immigration reform bill.
"Allowing our immigration policy to deteriorate to the point that it has become such a major catastrophe is a national scandal," said Nassif. "Congress now has a chance to resolve this crisis. The President has pushed for reform since he took office. All it takes now is for our representatives to gather the political will to bring about real reform. We will campaign to remind them of their opportunity and of their duty. We have one simple message: 'We need action ... now!' We trust they will hear us."

9 to 5 Food Safety

Today' s FDA "Safety of Fresh Produce Public Hearing" has a lengthy agenda. You have it below. Both Tom Stenzel of United and Bryan Silbermann of the Produce Marketing Association were slated to finish their remarks mere moments ago. We will publish their prepared remarks when we receive them from United and PMA.





Department of Health and Human Services
U.S. Food and Drug Administration
Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (CFSAN)

Safety of Fresh Produce Public Hearing Agenda
College Park, MD
8:30 am – 5:00 pm


8:30am-9:00am Registration

9:00am-9:15am Welcome/Opening Remarks/Overview---
Robert Brackett, Ph.D., Director, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (CFSAN), FDA

9:15am-9:30am Foodborne Illness Outbreaks Associated with Fresh Produce Consumption---
Art Liang, M.D., Acting Director, Foodborne Disease, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

9:30am-9:45am GAPs/GMPs, Produce Safety Action Plan Opportunities and Challenges---
Michelle Smith, Ph.D., Office of Food Safety, CFSAN, FDA

9:45am-10:00am AFDO Perspective---Marion Aller, Ph.D., President, Association of Food and Drug Officials

10:00am-10:15am Investigation Findings---
Thomas Hill, Capt., Office of Food Defense, Communication and Emergency Response, CFSAN, FDA

10:15am-10:30am BREAK

10:30am-10:45am State Perspective---
Jim Rushing, Ph.D., Director of the Coastal Research and Education Center, Clemson University

10:45am-11:00am Questions from the FDA Panel

11:00am-11:30am Industry Perspective---
Tom Stenzel, President, United Fresh Produce Association
Bryan Silbermann, President, Produce Marketing Association
11:30am-11:45am Consumer Perspective---
Caroline Smith DeWaal, Director of Food Safety, Center for Science in the Public Interest

11:45am-12:00am Science/Research---
Martha Roberts, Ph.D., Special Assistant to the Director, Florida Agricultural Experiment Station, University of Florida

12:00am-12:15pm Questions from the FDA Panel

12:15pm-1:45pm LUNCH

1:45 pm 2:00pm Issues and Questions from the Federal Register notice---
Amy Green, Office of Food Safety, CFSAN, FDA

2:00pm-3:00pm Public Comments

3:00pm-3:15pm BREAK

3:15pm-4:45pm Public Comments

4:45pm-5:00pm Questions from the FDA Panel

5:00pm Adjourn



List of Persons Providing Public Comments

Perry Bowen, King George, VA
Thomas Nassif, Western Growers Association
Richard Ross, Path Tracer
Michelle Marcotte, International Irradiation Association
Reginald Brown, Florida Tomato Exchange
Anthony Corbo, Food and Water Watch
Charles Hall, Georgia Fruit and Vegetable Growers Association
G. Michael McCartney, QLM Consulting
Alfred Murray, New Jersey Department of Agriculture
Greg Drouillard, Sunkist Growers
Rayne Thompson, California Farm Bureau Federation
Joe Rajkovacz, Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association, Inc
Sally Greenberg, Consumers Union
Robert Gravani, Cornell University
Jenny Scott, Grocery Manufacturers/ Food Products Association


FDA Panelists

Joe Baca -- Director, Office of Compliance, CFSAN, FDA
Jack Guzewich -- Acting Director, Division of Public Health and Biostatistics, Office of Food Defense, Communication and Emergency Response, CFSAN, FDA
Steve Solomon, DVM -- Deputy Director, Office of Regional Operations, ORA, FDA
Don Zink, Ph.D. -- Senior Food Scientist, Office of Food Safety, CFSAN, FDA
Glenda Lewis – Supervisor, Retail Food Protection Team, Office of Food Safety, CFSAN, FDA

Western Growers Back East

Here is the news release that describes the move by Western Growers to open a DC office on April 30.
From the release:

Western Growers Executive Vice President Matt McInerney will temporarily head the new office until full-time federal government affairs staff is hired. "Opening and staffing a Washington, D.C. office has been a long-term goal for Western Growers, our Board of Directors and members," said Tom Nassif, President and CEO of Western Growers. "Western Growers believes that it can best serve its members by having a full time Washington, D.C. presence to lobby on federal issues like the 2007 Farm Bill, immigration reform, specialty crop competitiveness and food safety."
"These are just a few of the federal issues that are extremely important to our membership and that require our full-time attention," said Steve Patricio, Western Growers Chairman of the Board. "The Board of Directors believes strongly that opening a Washington, D.C. office now is very timely because of the extremely critical federal legislative and regulatory matters pressing the fresh produce industry."
"The new full time federal government affairs staff will complement and enhance the current Western Growers' federal lobbying efforts of our long-time federal lobbying consultants, Bob Schramm, Schramm, Williams & Associates, and Julian Heron, Tuttle, Taylor and Heron," said Nassif. "To underscore the importance of opening the D.C. office, during the transition to a full time D.C. staff, both Jasper Hempel, WG's Executive Vice President and General Counsel, and I will spend more time in Washington, D.C. to assist Matt establish Western Growers' full-time presence in Congress and the many federal agencies with whom we work."

TK: This is an impressive investment by WG, and the current legislative and regulatory environment begs for grower input in DC. Keeping produce industry voices together - United, if you will - as big issues like the farm bill, immigration and food safety roll through Congress is paramount.