California Ag Network

Category: Ag Legislation

  • Almond Board of CA 2021 Election Results

    The Almond Board of California (ABC) has released election results for the Board of Directors positions whose terms of office begin August 1, 2021. As a governing body for the industry, the ABC Board of Directors is comprised of five handler and five grower representatives who set policy and recommend budgets in several major areas, including production research, public relations and advertising, nutrition research, statistical reporting, quality control and food safety. 

    The names of the following nominees have been submitted to the U.S. Secretary of Agriculture for selection:

    Independent Grower

    Member Position One (one-year term):                     

    Paul Ewing, Los Banos                       

    Alternate Position One:                                         

    Brandon Rebiero, Modesto

    Member Position Three (three-year term):                

    Joe Gardiner, Earlimart

    Alternate Position Three:                                           

    Chris Bettencourt, Westley     

    Independent Handler

    Member Position Two (three-year term):                   

    Bob Silveira, Williams 

    Alternate Position Two:                                              

    Dexter Long, Ballico                           

    Member Position Three (one-year term):                  

    Darren Rigg, Le Grand 

    Alternate Position Three:                                            

    Chad DeRose, McFarland      

    Cooperative Grower

    Member Position Two (three-year term):                  

    Christine Gemperle, Ceres     

    Alternate Position Two:                                              

    Kent Stenderup, Bakersfield  

    In addition, Lisa Giannini, Hickman, has been named to fill the Cooperative Grower Alternate Position One role.

  • Numerous Health Benefits Found in Summer-Favorite Watermelon

    No summer barbecue is complete without fresh watermelon. As the nation moves towards the summer grilling season, you may want to consider how watermelon’s fruit chemistry can affect your overall health. Researchers in the USDA’s Agricultural Research Service (ARS) recently identified over 1,500 small molecules of diverse chemical characters in the fruit, known as phytochemicals. They concluded that eating watermelon is an excellent way to increase your intake of antioxidants, non-protein amino acids and lycopene. This means that every time you eat watermelon, you’ll be improving the health of your cells, organs and nervous system.

    The research specifically finds that the antioxidants in watermelon can help your body fight free radicals and slow down cell damage. The fruit’s non-protein amino acids will also help to repair your body tissue, break down food from other meals, and even regulate your blood pressure.

    “Watermelon could be part of the refreshing and healthy fruit options on your summer picnic table,” said USDA-ARS scientist Larry Parnell. “The fruit has gone through many years of evolution, domestication, and selection for desirable qualities—mainly those associated with flesh color, texture and nutrient and sugar content. But our research continues to find that the fruit contains a wide range of nutrients that improve your overall health.”

    Most Americans purchase the sweet dessert watermelon species, Citrullus lanatus, at their local grocery store or farmer’s market.  This species is among the most important vegetable crops grown and consumed throughout the world, with over 100 million tons in annual global production.  The fruit also has more lycopene than a raw tomato, which is linked to healthy eyes, overall heart health and protection against certain cancers. Other nutrients, like carotenoids, flavonoids, carbohydrates and alkaloids, are also found in the flesh, seed, and rind.

    “I worked with Dr. Parnell and the team to develop a pioneering concept of using big data and computational biology to identify and catalog all of the phytochemicals that exist in edible fruit,” said ARS researcher Amnon Levi. “The research to identify the metabolic pathways and genome sequence of genes involved in the production of beneficial phytochemicals could be highly useful for plant scientists and breeders aiming to improve nutrient content in fruits and vegetables.”

    The watermelon’s phytochemicals are human-cell-protecting compounds found in fruit, vegetables, grains and beans. All of these nutrients can contribute to your overall health in numerous ways.

    Watermelon was introduced to Europe via Moorish Spain in the 10th century. Since then, watermelon has been cultivated successfully in warmer Mediterranean regions before being brought to the Americas by European colonists during the 16th century. Today, watermelon is grown in 44 U.S. states, while major production is centered in California, Florida, Georgia and Texas.

    Fruits and vegetables are a part of a healthy, balanced diet, with the recommendation being 1.5 to 2 cups of fruit and 2 to 3 cups of vegetables per day.

    The Agricultural Research Service is the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s chief scientific in-house research agency. Daily, ARS focuses on solutions to agricultural problems affecting America. Each dollar invested in agricultural research results in $17 of economic impact.

  • Preparing for Almond Hull Split

    Almond experts say there is only one proven way to know when hull split begins: inspect your trees from the top down, starting in the southwest corner of the canopy.

    The importance of knowing precisely when hull split occurs is critical because it signals the proper timing for treatments to control navel orangeworm (NOW) and, as appropriate, hull rot. Whether growers use a ladder, climb atop a pruning tower or lop off a few high branches with extension pruners, the goal is to understand what’s happening in the top of the tree, where nuts mature at a faster rate.

    Simply looking up into a tree’s canopy from the orchard floor is a sure fire way to miss the advent of hull split. When hulls split, a scent is released into the air, attracting female NOW moths to lay their eggs on the suture of the splitting hull. As the hull splits, fungal spores also can enter and spawn hull rot infections.

    Missing the beginning of hull split and allowing NOW or pathogens to gain a toehold in an orchard can wreck a grower’s entire season and reduce the value of the crop, costing growers in returns if nuts are rejected after harvest.

    Summer split invites unwanted guests

    Growers can determine if hull split has occurred – and if it’s time to spray – if, when they squeeze the end of the hull, the entire suture opens up, exposing the shell within.  Almond hulls split as the fruit ripens, and timing varies based on weather conditions and variety. For instance, the variety Nonpareil typically splits in early- to- mid-July, earlier than some other varieties.

    However, it’s at the stage before this, when the hull is split in a deep “V,” that susceptibility to NOW and wound pathogens that cause hull rot (Rhizopus, Aspergillus, and Monilinia) increase, making it vitally important that growers actively monitor their trees.

    Vice President of Member Services for Blue Diamond Growers Mel Machado advises growers to look for blank nuts – those without a kernel inside – as those hulls are the first to split, several days ahead of the “sound” nuts (those with a full kernel).

    Mel Machado, Blue Diamond Growers

    “The blanks are like the warning shot, signaling the start of hull split,” he said. “When full hull split does occur, the nuts at the top of the canopy will open up first.”

    Experts say growers should pay attention to trees on the edge of their orchards as they often ripen more quickly. Growers should also closely monitor the upper and outer portions of the canopy, particularly the southwest quadrant of the orchard block where the hot afternoon sun aids in the splitting and drying process.

    “Better to be too early than too late”

    Hull split applications should be made no later than at 1% hull split. This is the most effective time to spray for NOW as it often coincides with initiation of the second NOW flight.1

    Once growers identify hull split in their orchard, their next step should be to initiate timely treatment. Experts warn that waiting too long to begin spraying will cost growers, as will performing a poor spray job.

    Machado advised, “It’s better to be a bit on the early side than late” when spraying. Once hull split begins, he recommended the entire orchard be sprayed in five days or less. “If it takes 10 or 15 days, that’s too long,” he said.

    Planning ahead – especially for smaller growers who rely on custom applicators – is essential.

    “Watch your fields closely and be in contact with your operator early on,” Machado advised.

    In larger orchards, Machado advises growers consider starting with aerial sprays, recognizing that ground-based sprays don’t always provide complete coverage at the tops of the trees.

    “We’re seeing growers effectively incorporate aerial applications into their treatment programs for the first application in order to cover the acreage in a timely manner,” Machado said.

    The best time to spray is early in the morning or at dusk.

    “Do not spray in the heat of the day – your application will evaporate into thin air and you won’t get the material where it needs to go. That’s a waste of time and money, as you’re not only wasting spray material but you also won’t achieve the coverage necessary to combat crop damage,” Machado said.

    Finally, growers should ensure their ground-based sprayers are properly calibrated, the nozzles are unplugged and that air flow isn’t restricted. Once it’s time to spray, growers should remind applicators to drive no more than two mph through orchards to ensure optimum coverage and to drive down each row to ensure the trees are equally covered.

    “There are some guys who spray every other row, and that’s not a good idea,” Machado said. “There are two sides to the tree; you need to spray both of them.”

    Machado reinforced that hullsplit sprays offer the final chance to manage NOW populations before harvest. Still, these applications are only part of a coordinated, year-round, integrated pest management plan to combat NOW that also must include winter sanitation and mating disruption, both of which are performed earlier in the crop year. — By the Almond Board of California

  • Whole Orchard Recycling Benefits and Incentives

    Almond Board of California — Exciting research shows that conducting Whole Orchard Recycling (WOR) in almonds can increase crop yields in subsequent orchards, provide long-term benefits to soil health (such as improved water retention and nutrient levels) and increase carbon sequestration.

    Conducted by researchers from the University of California (UC) Davis and UC Agricultural and Natural Resources, with funding in part by the Almond Board of California (ABC), this study identifies significant advantages to practicing WOR, the breadth of which are detailed in a report published in the journal PLOS ONE.

    The study spanned over a decade and compared plots within a nine-year-old orchard where WOR took place with plots where trees had been burned and their ashes tilled into the soil. At ninth leaf, researchers also tested the impact of deficit irrigation mid-growing season by reducing the amount of water applied by 20% for some of the trees.

    When the results were placed side-by-side, the plots where WOR took place consistently bested the plots where old trees’ ashes were tilled into the soil. Among other benefits, researchers discovered a:

    • 19% increase in yields at ninth leaf and 15% increase in cumulative yield over five years, 
    •  30% increase in soil water holding capacity (water retention), and 
    • 17% increase in total soil nitrogen levels. 
      • To note: Subsequent research found that additional nitrogen is needed in the first year.

    “Almond growers have long been told that implementing practices to improve soil health will provide all these benefits, but until now there had been very little data demonstrating that a focus on feeding the soil with organic matter can make a meaningful difference in yield and crop quality,” said Gabriele Ludwig, Ph.D., director of Sustainability and Environmental Affairs for the Almond Board.

    Study shows significant yield increases
    Key among the multiple positive outcomes discovered by this WOR study is the potential for increased yields. This finding not only brings good news for a grower’s bottom line, but it also has positive implications on the industry’s effort to produce “more crop per drop,” an effort it is striving to achieve as part of its Almond Orchard 2025 Goal to reduce the amount of water used to grow a pound of almonds by an additional 20%.

    “The increased water holding soil capacity that occurs as a result of Whole Orchard Recycling means that trees are subject to fewer extremes in terms of water availability, as more water is held in the upper layer of the soil where the majority of the tree’s roots are, and where tree uptake takes place,” Ludwig explained.

    Research shows that WOR increased water retention in the soil by up to 30%. While Ludwig cautioned that this data does not lend itself to a recommendation that growers can use less water if they practice WOR, it does indicate that applied water is used more efficiently by trees in orchards where WOR has occurred.

    Amélie Gaudin, Ph.D., an associate professor of agroecology in the UC Davis Department of Plant Sciences and a co-author of the WOR research report, said that by allowing more water to penetrate and the remain in the soil, WOR also reduces potential irrigation-related losses caused by runoff or evapotranspiration.

    “In plots where WOR occurred, water was more likely to reach and be used by the trees, allowing for increased yields as trees experienced less short-term stress and therefore achieved greater water use efficiency,” Ludwig said.

    A hedge against deficit-induced tree stress
    This study also demonstrates that by increasing soil organic matter, WOR helps insulate orchards from negative impacts of deficit irrigation, which involves a delicate balance between stressing one’s trees just enough to prevent too much moisture and potential for disease in the orchards with not overstressing the trees to a point where their yields and overall health are compromised. According to the research, the deficit-irrigated trees in the WOR plots maintained higher stem water potential compared to the deficit-irrigated trees in the burn plots, indicating trees in the WOR plots were less water stressed.

    “We forget that trees can get stressed enough to shut down photosynthesis, whether that’s because they can’t keep up with water demand in the hot afternoons, for a day or two before irrigation, or during harvest,” Ludwig said. “So, when the upper layers of the soil can hold more water, the trees are better buffered from those stresses.” 

    Gaudin said that by improving water holding capacity, WOR also helps orchards retain nitrogen, one of almond trees’ most necessary nutrients. This has positive implications for groundwater quality in areas where nitrogen leeching is a concern. It also may contribute to yield increases as trees in the WOR plots were shown to have greater access to nitrogen for longer periods of time.

    Another supplementary benefit, Ludwig noted, is that over time, as microorganisms in the soil break down the woody biomass, both macro- and micronutrients contained within the wood are released for reuse by the next generation of trees. This allows growers to “recycle” those nutrients so that they may be used throughout the lifetime of their newly planted orchard.

    Next steps for researchers working on this WOR research, Gaudin said, include further study of carbon sequestration and its implication for greenhouse gases, gaining a better understanding of nitrogen retention, optimizing WOR in different soil conditions and the impacts of integrating WOR with other responsible growing practices such as cover crops or anaerobic soil disinfestation.

    Support for those seeking to conduct WOR
    Growers may be eligible to receive incentive funding to conduct WOR if they apply for funds far enough in advance of conducting the practice.

    • WOR is now a practice eligible for co-funding through CDFA’s Healthy Soil Incentives Program. Payments cover about 50% of the cost of WOR, according to CDFA Senior Environmental Scientist Geetika Joshi. The next round of funding for the program begins in July 2021.
    • USDA-NRCS offers Conservation Stewardship Program funds to growers who find alternatives to burning old trees, providing $783.29 per acre for chipping (used for animal bedding or applied as mulch on another piece of ag land) and an additional $242.09 per acre for Whole Orchard Recycling. While applications are accepted year-round, funding for 2021 has already been announced. Still, growers can submit their applications now to apply for 2022 funding.  
    • For those in the San Joaquin Valley, the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District provides cost-share funds to reduce ag burning through its Alternative to Agricultural Open Burning Incentive Program. Growers participating in this program are eligible to receive $300-$600 per acre, with a maximum of $60,000 per grower. Incentive recipients are typically paid four-to-six weeks after their completion of WOR, and after an invoice has been sent to the district.

    For general questions about incentive programs, industry members may contact ABC’s Jesse Roseman at jroseman@almondboard.com.

    Those interested to learn more about how WOR may be practiced on their operation are encouraged to download or request a physical copy of the Whole Orchard Recycling Guide for California Almond Growers, created in partnership by ABC and UC ANR. Growers are also welcome to watch the     Whole Orchard Recycling Overview and Whole Orchard Recycling – A Grower’s How-To videos, which are hosted on YouTube and found on ABC’s website. Finally, UC Davis provides a robust website dedicated to Whole Orchard Recycling, which offers a deep dive into the research findings, grower testimonials, and more. 

    In addition to Gaudin, co-authors of the study include Kelsey Brewer and Emad Jahanzad of UC Davis; Brent Holtz, Sean Hogan and Cameron Zuber of UC Cooperative Extension; and David Doll, a former UC Cooperative Extension farm advisor.

  • Preparing Almond Growers for Another Drought

    Drought is a serious concern for farmers this year, and in this interview with Daren Williams from the Almond Board of California, he shares some complimentary resources from the Almond Board to help growers weather another dry year, as well as some other insights. Watch this brief video with Daren and read more about it in Pacific Nut Producer Magazine.
    Please thank this video’s sponsor Trece for their industry support.

  • What the Farm Workforce Modernization Act Means for Farmers

    While it has seemed impossible to get anything done at the national level regarding ag labor reform, Sara Neagu-Reed from the federal policy Division of the California Farm Bureau Federation shares in an interview with California Ag Network that hope is on the horizon with the progress of the Farm Workforce Modernization Act. Watch this brief video with Sara as she explains why, and what ag employers should know and do about it.
    Please thank this video’s sponsor Trece for their industry support.

  • Almond Market Update Highlights New Records & Opportunities

    Despite international tariffs, port disruptions and a global pandemic, the California almond industry continues to produce and ship record-setting crops.  Watch this brief video with Richard Waycott as he shares this year’s to-date trends on shipments and what can be expected of orchard production this year.  Read more about it in Pacific Nut Producer Magazine.
    Please thank this video’s sponsor Trece for their industry support.

  • Almond Alliance Holds Convention, Recognizes Outstanding Members

    Among the first agriculture conventions to take place in the post-COVID era, 350+ almond growers, hullers and processors gathered in Las Vegas to convene the long-awaited 39th Annual Almond Alliance Convention. Themed “All In 2021”, Almond Alliance membership and leaders demonstrated their commitment to the continued success of the almond industry by engaging in important discussions on current issues threatening the industry.  Topics included drought and water policy, alternatives for ag burning and almond biomass, avoiding costly mistakes as ag employers, and much more.

    They say, “What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas”, but that cannot be the case for the important discussions that were had at this annual convention.  Attendees had the great opportunity to meet with California Assembly Members and policy makers to discuss the concerns and needs of the almond industry. Attendees were also advised to continue involvement in the legislative and regulatory arena through trade associations such as the Almond Alliance of California.  As one put it, “If we don’t get engaged in discussions on these important issues, the decisions will be made for us,” and “If you are not at the table, you are on the menu”.

    At the convention, Almond Alliance leadership also took the opportunity to recognize some outstanding members that have been greatly involved in supporting the association’s efforts to protect the livelihoods of almond growers, hullers and processors.  Board member John Wynn was proud to announce the Member of the Year Awards for both 2019 and 2020, due to the inability to meet in-person last year.  The 2019 Member and Associate Member of the Year recognitions were awarded to Cortez Growers and Exact Corporation. “Cortez Growers continues to support the work of the Almond Alliance and has hosted several of our huller/sheller training events. They furthered their commitment to advocacy for the California almond industry by becoming the 2nd huller grower member of our association. We are extremely grateful for their commitment and support,” shared Wynn.

    He continued, “Exact Corporation continues to be engaged in advancing the equipment used by the almond industry.  We are thankful that they continue to support our association and have been a key partner in all our advocacy efforts, especially parking their low dust harvester at the steps of the California Capitol for the Almond Festival in Sacramento.”

    Golden Empire Shelling and Premier Trailer were announced as the recipients of the 2020 Member and Associate Member of the Year awards. “We are very thankful to Golden Empire Shelling for be the first Huller Sheller Grower Member and setting the trend for a new level of investment in the Almond Alliance and has the alliance provide updates to his growers every year at their annual dinner,” shared Almond Alliance Chairman Mike Curry.

    Regarding Associate Member of the Year, Curry stated, “Premier Trailer Manufacturing was founded in 1996 by Gene Cuelho. Premier Trailer Manufacturing has an experienced team of craftsman, specializing in the manufacturing of critical transportation for the California almond industry. They are one of California’s most distinguished companies and best-known commercial haulers.  Not only does Premier Trailer show up to Almond Alliance events, but also always willing to help when needed.  Thank-you for your support and dedication.”

    Pacific Nut Producer Magazine is proud to be the Almond Alliance’s official Media Partner and sponsor of the Convention, and for more in-depth proceedings of the annual event, read all about it in the coming issue of Pacific Nut Producer Magazine.

  • Facts on Common Beef Market Myths

    The North American Meat Institute (Meat Institute) today released the following document to clarify common misunderstandings about the complex and competitive beef market in the United States.

    “The members of the Meat Institute and their livestock suppliers benefit from a fair and competitive market,” said Meat Institute Vice President of Communications Sarah Little. “This document uses public sources to give an accurate picture of the dynamic beef market, especially given the COVID pandemic.

    “In July 2020, USDA analyzed the effects of the 2019 Holcomb facility fire and the pandemic, finding no wrong-doing and confirming the disruption in the beef markets was due to devastating and unprecedented events.

    “Despite the pandemic’s challenges the market is competitive and growing.  Since October 2020, there have been several announcements of investments to build new packing facilities or expand capacity at existing plants that would increase cattle slaughter capacity by about four percent, including new independent, local, and regional packers.

    “Meat and poultry companies are utilizing capacity to the best of their abilities with COVID protocol constraints still in place and despite significant labor challenges that existed prior to – and have been exacerbated by – COVID.  In fact, Saturday slaughter for the year was 51 percent above last year and 65 percent over 2019. 

    “Those calling for government intervention in the market never address labor. Labor is, and is likely to remain, a significant factor that affects utilization of production; and is also a factor that will challenge new small and medium sized facilities entering the market.

    “The Meat Institute will continue to work with livestock producer organizations to ensure proposed changes to the beef markets do not have unintended consequences for producers and consumers.”


    Common Beef Market Myths and Facts

    MYTH: Four large meat packing companies control over 80% of the processing market.

    FACT: The top four beef packers in the U.S. account for the purchase and slaughter of about 85 percent of all fed cattle in the U.S., according to the most recent report from USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service’s (AMS) Packer and Stockyards Division (P&S). Fed cattle, however, make up 79 percent of the Federally Inspected cattle slaughter in the U.S. The other 21 percent is made up of cows, both dairy and beef, and some bulls.

    Thus, the “Big 4” beef packers, factoring in the non-fed slaughter plants they own, comprise about 70 percent of total U.S. beef production.

    Fed cattle are steers and heifers that packers purchase from feedlots after being brought to market weight on a diet of grain to produce boxed beef, i.e. primarily the muscle cuts that consumers demand as steaks, ribs, and roasts. Cows and other non-fed cattle, on the other hand, are primarily slaughtered to be made into hamburger. The lean meat from these animals is a necessary ingredient to be made into America’s supply of hamburger produced in combination with the less demanded muscle cuts from the fed cattle.

    Why is that important? About 50 percent of all beef in the U.S. is consumed as hamburger.

     

    MYTH: There is no growth in the packing industry.

    FACT: Despite the pandemic’s challenges the market is competitive and growing. Since last year there have been several announcements about building new packing facilities or expanding capacity at existing plants that would increase cattle slaughter capacity by more than four percent, including new independent, local, and regional packers.

    Plant
    Capacity/Day
    Location
    Announced
    Online
    True West
    500
    ID
    July 2020
    TBD
    FPL (phase 1 of 2)
    500
    GA
    October 2020
    Q42021
    Iowa Premium
    1,250
    IA
    March 2021
    Q42022
    Sustainable Beef
    1,400
    NE
    March 2021
    TBD
    Missouri Prime
    500
    MO
    March 2021
    March 2021
    TOTAL
    4,150
     
     

    Meat and poultry companies are utilizing capacity to the best of their abilities with COVID protocol constraints still in place and despite significant labor challenges that existed before – and have been exacerbated by – COVID. For example, Saturday slaughter as of May 22, 2021, for the year was 52 percent above last year and 67 percent over 2019 for the same period.

    But labor is likely to remain a significant factor that affects utilization of production capacity; and is also a factor that will challenge new small and medium sized facilities entering the market. Brownfield News reports that Missouri Prime, one of the new smaller facilities to come online, is facing labor shortages, “Missouri Prime Beef started processing in March and is up to 150 head a day five days a week with a goal of 500 head a day in five years. But are looking for more cattle in addition to more workers. He says the labor shortage is largely why they are only operating five days a week.”

     

    MYTH: Lax oversight has allowed packer industry concentration.

    FACT: The beef packing industry has been and is one of the most highly scrutinized industries for antitrust issues. The packer concentration ratio in beef packing is monitored every year by the P&S. Not only does P&S monitor the industry, any potential merger or acquisition that regulators believe threatens “too much market power” that could “yield less competition” and be “ripe for market abuse” is subject to review by the Justice Department or the Federal Trade Commission. 

    FACT: The last proposed merger of two the “big four” was in 2008 – and it was blocked by the Department of Justice. In fact, the four-firm concentration ratio in fed cattle beef packing has not changed meaningfully in more than 25 years.

    Image

    FACT: In July 2020, USDA analyzed the effects of the 2019 Holcomb facility fire and the pandemic, finding no wrong-doing and confirming the disruption in the beef markets was due to devastating and unprecedented events.

     

    MYTH: Cattle prices are not being driven by the market.

    FACT: Cattle prices are where they are because they follow supply and demand. 

    Image

    And to be clear, the beef Choice cutout in 2020 (even with COVID and its challenges) averaged $237.67/cwt, … which is lower than in 2014 when it averaged $239.07/cwt.

     

    MYTH: Packers are able to control prices and defy expectations of market fundamentals.

    FACT: The cattle market works just as economists would have predicted given the current conditions: when supplies of cattle increase, prices decrease – and vice versa. The chart above is a text-book example of supply and demand fundamentals.

    FACT: If packers are “able to control prices” why has that profitability not attracted more investors into the market?

    Rabobank said this on that topic.

    Several considerable hurdles must be addressed by both incumbents and new entrants …. First, the upfront cost of a new plant is extremely expensive … $USD 100 million to $120 million for every 1,000 head of daily capacity.

    … the capital depth and longevity required to build and maintain a new plant through its first cattle cycle precludes most would-be investors from considering such a project.   … That’s not a recipe for thin capital or weak hearts.

     

    MYTH: Large price disparities are leading independent cattle producers to go broke.

    FACT: The market suffered through COVID, and the effects are lingering, but Congress provided producers a safety net through CFAP to get through the impact of a once-in-a-century event.

    Image

    Sources: Meat Animals Production, Disposition, and Income 2020 Summary 04/29/2021 (cornell.edu)  
    Meat Animals: Value of Production by Year, US (usda.gov)

    CFAP 1 – accessed January 2021  Coronavirus Food Assistance Program 1 Data | Farmers.gov

    CFAP 2 – accessed January 2021  Coronavirus Food Assistance Program 2 Data | Farmers.gov

     

    MYTH: “Captive supply” practices such as forward contracting and formula-based sales, allow meatpackers to exert more control, limit competition and depress sales in the live cash market.

    FACT: Forward contracts and formula-based sales provide an effective way for producers to hedge their risk and lock in prices. They also often pay premiums for quality. This allows packers and producers and feeders to predict needs in advance, which is a good thing.

    In its 2018 report to Congress, AMS reported, “Stakeholders were in general agreement that formula-based purchases provide greater benefits, in terms of operational efficiency, for both packers and feedlots.”

    FACT: From 2002 to 2019, according to USDA data compiled by economist and industry expert Dr. Nevil Speer, while the number of cattle sold on a cash market basis has declined 55 percent, beef grading at the top two quality grades – Choice and Prime – has increased 39 percent and consumer per capita expenditures on beef have increased 56 percent.

     

    MYTH: Legalizing the sale of state inspected meat in interstate commerce has been thwarted, forcing local producers to bottleneck their beef processing at major U.S. meat packing facilities to get the federal stamp of approval.

    FACT: Selling state inspected meat over state lines is a food safety issue — plain and simple, which is why multiple consumer advocacy groups have long opposed the concept. Moreover, USDA has a program that allows state inspected plants to ship product in interstate commerce, so long as the plants meet federal standards. 

    FACT: Additionally, Congress has provided $60 million to USDA to fund a program that will assist state-inspected plants become federally-inspected plants, which would give them the ability to market out of state and even internationally. Bottomline, there is no “thwarting” involved. The federal-inspection-is-a-barrier-for-small-plants argument is a red-herring. 

    FACT: There are more than 5,000 small federally inspected plants. 

     

    Myth: Meat imports hurt domestic cattle producers.

    FACT: Most of the beef imported into the U.S. is lean, grass fed trim and lower value cuts, which go into processed meat and ground beef. Because of this balance, steaks, loins and higher value cuts are not forced into such lower value products. This balance from imports supports U.S. beef exports at higher values. According to the U.S. Meat Export Federation, the per pound price of U.S. beef exports has averaged a 68-cent premium over the price of imports that go into lower value beef products.

     

    Myth: Cattle prices were higher when Mandatory Country of Origin Labeling (COOL) was in effect.

    FACT: In four rulings, each of which the U.S. lost, the WTO concluded that COOL was discriminatory and illegal under WTO rules, and if left in place would have triggered $1 billion in retaliatory tariffs, which is why Congress repealed COOL for beef and pork in 2015.

    Despite COOL being in place, the fastest, largest growth in beef imports was in 2014 – which was the year the size of the U.S. cattle herd was at its lowest, as would be expected based on supply and demand fundamentals.

     

    MYTH: If beef markets are not reformed, consumers will pay more for lower quality beef.

    FACT: Since 2010, beef quality has increased. The percent of beef grading at Choice or Prime has grown from 68 percent to about 85 percent, … cattle producers and meat companies are serving consumers well. This increase in quality has been driven by alternative marketing arrangements, which allow cattlemen to recover the value of their investments in genetics, feeding strategies, animal care, natural and other qualities desired by consumers.

  • Dairy Industry Applauds USTR Decision to Pursue USMCA Dispute Settlement Case Enforcing Dairy Market Access Obligations in Canada

    The U.S. Dairy Export Council (USDEC), National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF) and International Dairy Foods Association (IDFA) praised U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai announced initiation of a U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) dispute settlement proceeding over Canada’s administration of dairy tariff rate quotas (TRQs).

    Dairy organizations have been calling for full enforcement of Canada’s trade obligations given Canada’s ongoing refusal to change how it handles dairy market access under USMCA. Initiating an official dispute settlement will, under USMCA rules, establish a panel to determine whether Canada has been violating its trade obligations. If the panel determines a lack of compliance, the U.S. would then be granted the right to impose retaliatory duties if Canada fails to fix its problematic TRQ administrative practices.

    “On behalf of America’s dairy farmers, we thank Ambassador Katherine Tai for initiating the USMCA dispute settlement process by requesting the formation of a panel to examine Canada’s failure to provide access to its dairy TRQs in accordance with USMCA,” said Jim Mulhern, NMPF President and CEO. “Canada has failed to take the necessary action to comply with its obligations under USMCA by inappropriately restricting access to its market. This needs to stop and we are thankful that USTR intends to make that happen.”

    “Our appreciation goes to the Biden Administration for moving forward with a dispute settlement action against Canada’s administration of dairy TRQs,” said Krysta Harden, USDEC President and CEO. “We have had long-standing and well-founded concerns that Canada undermines its trade agreements when it comes to dairy. Our trading partners need to know that failure to meet their agricultural trade commitments with the United States will result in robust action to defend U.S. rights – today’s action demonstrates just that. The expansion of dairy market access opportunities is critical for our industry. Today’s action is a critical step toward maximizing current export opportunities while sending a strong message in defense against the erection of future barriers in Canada and other markets as well.”

    “Our negotiators and our dairy companies work too hard for the market access obligations in these agreements to be ignored,” said IDFA Trade Policy and International Affairs Vice President Becky Rasdall. “We’re indebted to Ambassador Tai and the teams at USTR and USDA for their efforts to advance this dispute.”

    These dairy organizations have carefully monitored Canada’s actions regarding its USMCA dairy commitments and have urged the administration and Congress to make this a priority as soon as USMCA entered into force. The organizations highlighted for USTR and the U.S. Department of Agriculture the inconsistencies between Canada’s dairy TRQ allocations and Canada’s USMCA obligations. In a detailed filing submitted to the administration, agencies were provided with a specific review of the Canadian TRQ system and an explanation of the negative impacts resulting from them.

    U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai

    These concerns have been echoed by a broad bipartisan coalition of members of Congress. Most recently, several leading members of the House Ways and Means and Agriculture Committees joined together on a bipartisan message to USTR urging further enforcement action and multiple members of Congress shared a similar message during Amb. Tai’s trade oversight hearings in May. Prior to that, Senators broached the topic with USTR during Ambassador Tai’s confirmation hearing process. Last August, 104 Representatives sent a letter to USTR and USDA asking for Canada to be held accountable to its trade promises while a letter in the Senate was signed by 25 Senators. USDEC, NMPF and IDFA commend the continued engagement of so many members of Congress on this important issue.