http://www.aglinenews.com

" I heard it
through the
AgLine"

 

December 29, 2009

 

 

·        United releases metrics for tomato food safety

·        Practical methods help keep carbon in the soil

·        America’s salad bowl feels pinch of recession

·        Food prices facing perfect storm – Analysis

·        Food waste is enough to turn your stomach

 

 

United releases metrics for tomato food safety

WASHINGTON, D.C. – With an increased spotlight on food safety issues, buyers and suppliers of fresh and fresh-cut tomatoes now have a reliable set of auditing benchmarks, thanks to the combined efforts of over 100 stakeholders from all stages of the fresh tomato supply chain.

          United Fresh released the Food Safety Programs and Auditing Protocol for the Fresh Tomato Supply Chain, 2009, a harmonized food safety audit protocol identifying policies and practices that the fresh tomato industry expects its facilities to have in place to minimize the microbiological hazards associated with fresh and fresh-cut tomato production and handling.

          "This effort was a true collaboration between the tomato industry, our customers and government,” said Ed Beckman, president of California Tomato Farmers and participant in the development of the document. “Not only is there agreement on standardized risk reduction protocol for the entire supply chain, there's agreement that a single commodity-specific audit has greater merit than multiple generic audits.  The growers of California Tomato Farmers were pleased to successfully pilot the program and look forward to working with our customers on full implementation in 2010."

          Growing out of United’s 2008 second edition of the Commodity Specific Guidelines for the Fresh Tomato Supply Chain, the 2009 document includes four sets of tomato food safety protocols: Open Field Production, Harvest and Field Packing; Greenhouse; Packinghouse; and Repacking and Distribution. Each set contains auditable requirements, or “items,” that the protocol developers concluded should be attainable and in place for any North American fresh tomato operation, regardless of region, size, growing practice or sub-commodity handled. Additionally, each protocol is accompanied by a checklist which provides an audit format that auditors can use to assess and record compliance.

          “This document will be a valuable asset for the fresh and fresh-cut tomato industry in terms of reducing confusion and conflicting expectations,” said Dr. David Gombas, United Fresh senior vice president of food safety and technology and corresponding editor of the document. “We found that multiple stakeholders in the tomato industry were unsure of what constituted ‘compliance’.   By bringing together a critical mass from the U.S. and Mexico fresh tomato supply chain, including suppliers, customers and representatives of FDA and USDA, the industry was able to come to consensus on what was reasonable and attainable by growers and handlers, and also satisfied customers’ expectations.” 

          The document has already been met with favorable reviews from stakeholders within the tomato industry, including Reggie Brown, executive vice president of the Florida Tomato Exchange.

          "The Florida tomato industry is enthusiastic about the partnerships across the industry that created these auditing protocols,” he said. “The standardization will allow greater attention on the implementation of good food safety practices rather than redundant audits."

          The next step, which has already begun, is a training course for government and private sectors auditors in how to perform audits according to the harmonized tomato food safety protocol.

          To review or download Food Safety Programs and Auditing Protocol for the Fresh Tomato Supply Chain, 2009, please click here, and for more on United Fresh efforts in the field of food safety, visit www.unitedfresh.org.

Return to Top

 

 

Practical methods for keeping carbon in the soil

 

(USDA-ARS) – Curbing greenhouse gas emissions from cultivated fields may require going beyond cutting back on nitrogen fertilizer and changing crop rotation cycles, according to research by Agricultural Research Service scientists.

 

Jane Johnson, a soil scientist at the ARS North Central Soil Conservation Research Laboratory in Morris, Minn., is looking for practical ways to keep carbon in the soil and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

 

In a comprehensive study, she raised corn, soybean, wheat and alfalfa in rotation so that each crop grew in the same year, on plots treated with and without fertilizer. She also used a less-aggressive tillage system known as strip tillage, in which only narrow bands of soil are tilled instead of an entire field. For comparison, she replicated the cropping system adopted by many Minnesota farmers-raising corn and soybeans in a two-year cycle on fertilized plots tilled with a chisel or moldboard plow.

 

She used a hydraulic soil probe to measure the organic carbon sequestered in the soil, and closed-vented chambers to measure emissions of carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide. She found that when measured over the course of a year, greenhouse gas releases were largely the same under two-year and four-year rotation systems, and that applying nitrogen fertilizer had less overall impact than anticipated on nitrous oxide emissions. Nitrous oxide emissions peaked during spring thaws when the sun warmed the soil, regardless of which tillage or rotation system was used.

 

Chisel and moldboard plowing increased carbon dioxide emissions for a short time. But measured over the course of a year, carbon dioxide emissions were no different from plots with intensive tillage than plots without it. She also found no consistent patterns to methane releases.

 

Johnson's work is part of a five-year ARS project known as GRACEnet (Greenhouse gas Reduction through Agricultural Carbon Enhancement network) in which researchers at more than 32 sites are examining strategies to help reduce agriculture's climate change footprint. The project supports the USDA priority of responding to climate change.

 

Return to Top

 

 

America’s salad bowl feels pinch of recession

(TheCalifornian.com) Salinas Valley's No. 1 industry — agriculture — felt the recession's pinch in 2009.

"People are still waiting to see whether the economy will pick up," said Bob Perkins, executive director of the Monterey County Farm Bureau. "They're waiting to get paid for something so they can pay their suppliers. The concern everywhere is if somebody goes under, there's a domino effect through the supply system."

"Ag is always under economic pressure," said Joe Pezzini, chief operating officer of Ocean Mist Farms. "There's a squeeze on margins and the ability to sustain a profit. There are businesses you've seen go by the wayside; times are tough and there may be others."

In May, Monterey-based SK Foods filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. The next day, sister company Salyer American Fresh Foods came under the control of a receiver as banks claimed $34 million in loans were in default. Forty full-time and hundreds of seasonal employees lost their jobs.

The recession was hardly the only factor in their collapse. SK Foods was the target of federal investigations. Eight employees and associates entered guilty pleas in government cases alleging price-fixing, bribery or misbranding.

SK Foods wasn't the only ag company taking a financial hit or downsizing.Chiquita Brands International, which owns Fresh Express in Salinas, posted a $412 million loss in the last quarter of 2008. In January, it announced companywide layoffs, including an undisclosed number at the local plant.

In March, the Dole Fresh Vegetables plant in Gonzales laid off 186 seasonal asparagus workers. River Ranch Fresh Foods announced a "permanent cessation" of harvest operations at its Abbott Street facility in Salinas effective June 1, with job losses up to 210.

As consumers hunted for ever-lower food prices, big stores such as Costco, Safeway, Walmart and Kroger tried to use their purchasing power to meet that demand. A few grocery chains now control more than 80 percent of the market, said Lorri Koster, chairwoman of the Grower-Shipper Association and co-chairwoman of the Mann Packing board.

In the cut-lettuce or bagged salad sections, instead of a local label — such as Fresh Express — your eye was just as likely to be drawn to a retailer's brand.

"That narrows our margins," Koster said.

In ag, the greatest profits are in "value-added" products and services. Grape growers here ship most of their product out of the county for winemaking elsewhere. Whether it's wine or bagged salads, growers want to keep that wealth in Monterey County.

The expense of farming here, where land and living costs are high, makes value-added all the more desirable; but in a vicious circle, that expense tends to drive the activity out of the area.

"We have to maintain and lower the costs of doing business here," Koster said.

Williamson Act

As 2009 went on, though, costs actually grew for some as the Williamson Act became a casualty of the state's budget crisis.

The act provides property tax discounts to owners promising to keep their land in agriculture. The state historically reimbursed counties for the lost tax revenue.

But Sacramento's budget deal stopped reimbursement, at least for now. About a third of the 750,000 acres of farmland in Monterey County are contracted under the Williamson Act.

"There were signs it was coming back in January, but we're told it's not," Perkins said. "That's very disturbing to rural counties like Monterey. If the state doesn't provide the funding, a lot of counties would abandon the program. In the long run, it could raise taxes on a lot of people."

Cattle ranchers would be the hardest hit.

"You just can't make enough on range cattle to pay the taxes," Perkins said. "Ranchers are indicating they might have to sell off some land. We could see huge changes in the landscape of Monterey County."

Regulation, food safety

Growers found themselves in an uncertain regulatory environment in 2009, and change remains in the air.

"If health-care [legislation] gets stalled or resolved, Congress will move on to food safety next," Pezzini said. "There's been a lot of criticism of the FDA for their inability to safeguard the food supply and that's propelling this issue forward.

"It's a question of deciding which authorities — USDA, FDA, others — will have jurisdiction, and how far-reaching those regulations will be. The House has already passed a version; it's still in committee in the Senate. Obama has recognized it as an important issue."

In September, the USDA held a hearing in Monterey on a proposal to take California's Leafy Greens Marketing Agreement national. The state agreement on food safety measures, participation in which is voluntary, was a response to a fatal E. coli outbreak in Central Coast spinach in 2006. Leafy Greens has support in the ag industry, but some organic farmers protested, citing the cost of compliance and arguing the agreement blurs the distinction between marketing and food safety.

Water

With the ag water discharge waiver that's been in place for five years expiring, growers must present their proposal for run-off monitoring to the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board in the spring of 2010. Growers would like something akin to current requirements, under which they need only demonstrate progress in the reduction of fertilizers, minerals and sediments in run-off.

"Water board staff has wanted to turn it into more of a regulatory big-hammer program and set numerical targets to be reached," Perkins said.

Statewide, there is a growing focus on water conservation, especially in the Central Valley, which relies on water from other parts of the state. Locally, manifestations of this concern include drip irrigation and water recycling.

"It's all a sign of this state in which we have more people than we have resources for," Pezzini said. "There's greater scrutiny on what's in the water as it leaves the farm. Conservation practices are going to become more important."

The board, Pezzini said, is under greater pressures now because of the shortages in the Central Valley, where many fields were simply left fallow in 2009.

Recalls

Monterey County growers and food processors issued more recalls in 2009 than in 2008.

  Dec. 10: OrganicGirl Produce voluntarily recalls 120 cartons of packaged Berries & Balsamic salads because they may contain an incorrect condiment package with an unlabeled allergen for walnuts.

  Sept. 17: Ippolito International voluntarily recalls 1,715 cartons of spinach as a precaution against salmonella.

  Aug. 27: Steinbeck Country Produce voluntarily recalls 3,360 cartons of iceless green onions as a precaution against salmonella.

  Aug. 12: NewStar Fresh Foods voluntarily recalls 772 cartons of iced jumbo green onions as a precaution against salmonella.

  July 29: Camacho's Food Processing recalls 1,450 pounds of fried pork skins after they were distributed without federal inspection.

  July 21: Tanimura & Antle voluntarily recalls 22,000 cartons of wrapped and bulk romaine lettuce heads as a precaution against salmonella.

No illnesses were reported. Salmonella, for example, presented itself in random FDA test samples rather than in clinics or hospital beds. Growers said the rising recalls were actually a good sign, showing increased scrutiny of food safety. They also said it was possible that the samples tested became contaminated after leaving the Salinas Valley.

Crop report

The Monterey County Crop Report that came out in May — and covered the prior year — showed the gross value of crops here rose to $3.82 billion in 2008, one-tenth of a percent higher than 2007.

That income hadn't fallen in a recession year was reason for some to cheer — but it was a muted cheer, as the expense side was much less favorable.

The 10 top-selling crops in 2008 ranked in the same order as the year before. They were led by leaf lettuce at $651.5 million, up 6 percent, and strawberries at $619.2 million, up 2 percent. Head lettuce held the No. 3 spot despite dropping $48 million. Head lettuce totaled $460.6 million.

Grapes were No. 6 at $238.3 million. Spinach continued its comeback from the 2006 E. coli outbreak and held onto the No. 8 slot at $131 million.

Artichokes lost ground. The No. 14 crop was down 10 percent in value, almost $8 million, to $66.6 million. Artichoke acreage was down 17 percent. "That's a commodity that's struggling," Pezzini said.

Synergene acquisition

In November, Switzerland-based Syngenta AG bought Salinas-based lettuce seed producer Synergene Seed & Technology. Terms of the deal were undisclosed. The Swiss firm also acquired Santa Maria-based Pybas Vegetable Seed as it sought a foothold in the North American market.

The two Central Coast companies employ about 20 to 25 people, and were eyed for germplasm that could become the basis for new lettuce varieties.

Return to Top

 

Food prices facing perfect storm – Analysis

 

(foodnavigator.com) – There’s a perfect storm building for food prices. You don’t have to scan the horizon to see the signs; the clouds are developing all around us - at a faster rate than anyone expected.

 

It’s a lethal cloudscape of high energy prices and climate change that threatens to send prices soaring – but this may not be a bad thing: Provided the world’s poorest are insulated from its effects.

 

Today’s historically low food prices will end soon with significant and, for some, catastrophically high, rises in the years ahead. That means food policy-makers and food companies should plan now how best to mitigate the effects of this building storm.

 

It’s a readjustment many companies and government bodies at various junctures in the food supply are welcoming – if its resonances can be contained within the developed world. With the hyper competition that typifies many western retail markets driving food prices to historic lows, a reality check spurred by an energy crisis and environmental concerns is no bad thing.

 

The food industry must remain profitable or the innovation required to feed ever-more mouths (nearly 10 billion by 2150) won’t be forthcoming.

 

Increased energy

 

Search at the storm’s heart and you will find high energy prices. Last week the price of crude oil reached $80 a barrel following US statistics revealing a sharp fall in US stockpiles. According to the US Petroleum Institute, stockpiles fell by 4.4m barrels instead of the predicted 1.2m. The reports sent US light crude prices up 90 cents to $80.

 

News like that can only sharpen the US’s apparently ravenous appetite for fuel crops.

 

And acres devoted to fuel crops are, by definition, not being tilled for food.

 

Earlier this year the United States Department of Agriculture published an outlook suggesting that for the period 2007-08, global consumption of wheat exceeded production by 14.7m tons, leaving global wheat stocks at their lowest in 30 years.

 

In Europe, lower plantings and adverse weather have also lowered harvests in some of the major producing and exporting countries.

 

In Australia, a significant world wheat producer, drought has slashed wheat yields by 52 per cent, according to the Food and Agriculture Organisation.

 

Dr Sushil Pandi of the International Rice Research Institute has warned: “Shortfalls in production and subsequent price rises are being exacerbated by increasing competition for land, labour and water for biofuel production.”

 

China has shifted more than three million hectares out of rice production and into biofuel crop production, he added.

 

It’s not just competition for land, high energy prices are having a powerful impact on the costs of food transport. Increasingly Western distribution systems depend on transporting food vast distances from producer to consumers.

 

In some cases, food is shipped around the world simply for processing, to take advantage of low labour costs, and then shipped back again for consumption. These practices appear increasingly unsustainable.

 

Climate change

 

Meanwhile, there is the greatest threat of all – climate change. Its precise impact is impossible to predict. But William Cline, senior fellow at the Institute for International Economics and the Center for Global Development in Washington, suggests global warming will cause a 16 per cent decline in global agricultural gross domestic product (GDP) within 11 years.

 

Time is running out for policy-makers and food companies to plan a response to these threats. A good starting point is UN secretary general Ban Ki-moon’s call for a “single global vision” to address the problems of world hunger. In a chilling warning he said there can be “no food security without climate security.”

 

As part of that process food companies can and should reduce their energy consumption to sustainable levels. This applies both to the production of food and to its distribution.

 

It may be innovation in this area that offers the greatest hope for food production to maintain a price befitting to its true costs – and to the benefit of individuals and the planet they inhabit.

 

The perfect storm for food prices may be impossible to avoid. But it could be a good thing if it makes Western nations value food more appropriately.

 

Mike Stones has written on food and farming topics for 20 years. He lives in Southern France and co-owns a small family arable farm in northern England. If you would like to comment on this article please email michael.stones ‘at’ decisionnews.com.

 

Return to Top

 

Food waste is enough to turn your stomach

 

(Deutsche Welle) – The amount of food thrown away and buried in landfills around Europe and the United States is contributing to the global food crisis and adding a new dimension to the climate change debate.

 

Christmas has become a traditional time for over indulgence in Western countries. The holiday season seems to provide everyone with an excuse to eat and drink to excess. Supermarkets burst with sweet treats and a mind-boggling selection of festive fare.

 

While most of it will be ingested, more than a third of food in Europe and the United States will grow moldy fur in the back of the fridge, pass its use-by date and land in garbage.

 

Huge food waste problem developing in Europe

 

In the United Kingdom, one of Europe's worst food waste offenders, around 6.7 million tons of purchased and edible food, worth £10.2 billion (11.2 billion euros, $16.6 billion), are annually discarded. Around 4.1 million tons of this wasted food comes directly from food manufacturers.

 

"Only 30 to 40 percent of produced in Europe ends up at your table," Henrik Harjula, the principal administrator at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in Paris, told Deutsche Welle. "It is already disappearing when it is transported, when it is rotting and when it doesn't meet European standards. On top of this, in many countries in Europe, one third of the food that consumers buy is thrown away and 50 percent of that is thrown away without even being opened."

 

Add Europe's waste to that of the United States and the food waste problem becomes even larger. Around 40 percent of all food manufactured and put on sale in the United States is wasted, and studies show this trend is increasing. Food waste - including waste from farms, manufacturers, retailers and consumers - has risen 50 percent since 1974, reaching about 150 trillion calories per year in 2003.

 

Supermarkets sweeps food to trash

 

"People tend to go to these supermarkets once or twice a month but how can you accurately evaluate how much you a going to consume?" he asked. "They can't tell so they buy extra. Of course, this suggests that consumers are to blame too but there is this trend across Europe of 'buy one, get one free' so people are buying a lot of food that they don't need."

 

The statistics relating to food waste sit uncomfortably with the continued reports of global food shortages and food price spikes. While there are other factors sharing the blame for a global food shortage, including the high cost of oil, a growing population, poor harvests and diverting grains to use for bio-fuels, food waste contributes to the problem.

 

"A lot of the food and agriculture in Europe and the West is subsidized and this is a huge problem for producers in the developing world," Harjula said. "Their products are not competitive on these markets and as a result they cannot sell their products, which leads to farmers losing income, losing their land and the poverty and hardship which comes from that."

 

Food waste causing an environmental stink

 

In addition to its effect on food supply in the developing world, landfills full of food are also detrimental to the environment.

 

"Here in Europe we consume so much globalized food, like kiwis from New Zealand and pineapples from Australia – all of which has to be transported over thousands of kilometers to get here," Harjula said of food's environmental cost.

 

But it's the methane created by rotting food that is having the worst effect on the climate, he added. A greenhouse gas estimated to be 20 times worse for the atmosphere than carbon dioxide, methane is emitted from landfills as food rots.

 

"There are ways of collecting this gas from the decomposing food and using it for energy purposes but it is not a widespread practice at the moment," Harjula said. "What must be done in the meantime is to find away of taking the organic material out of landfill refuse."

 

Until there are more efficient means of harnessing methane, it's important to keep food out of landfills, according to Tom MacMillan, executive director of the British Food Ethics Council.

 

"Food waste is harmful and unfair, and it is essential to stop food going into landfill," he told Deutsche Welle. "Now is the moment all parties should be searching out ways to define prosperity that get away from runaway consumption. Until they succeed, chucking out less food won't make our lifestyles more sustainable."

 

Slow progress taken towards solution

 

European countries are already taking steps to reduce the production of methane from food waste deposited in landfill sites, Harjula said. The enforcement of the EU's landfill directive is expected to reduce the amount of organic material in landfill sites to 35 percent by 2016, but a number of European nations, including Germany, the Netherlands and Switzerland, have already reduced their levels to 5 percent and in some cases even less.

 

 Experts believe that much of the responsibility for reducing food waste rests with the manufacturers. The food industry must find ways to reduce waste throughout the production and supply chain, and find ways to redistribute finished food products and reuse by-products of the production process.

 

 Consumers of course can also do their bit. By planning before shopping for food, consumers can reduce their food waste output at point-of-purchase and in their homes, while adhering to efficient food storage ideas can the amount of food which becomes inedible quickly and then thrown away.

 

Return to Top

 

End Transmission