Ellie Gabel, Revolutionized

Ellie Gabel, Revolutionized

What It Takes To Design Efficient Indoor Farms For Optimal Crop Growth

Bob West

Bob West

California Farmers Get Early Jump on Disease Control Efforts

Nadia Sabeh, Dr. Greenhouse Inc.

Nadia Sabeh, Dr. Greenhouse Inc.

Get The Airflow Right For Your Greenhouse Plantings

David Eddy

David Eddy

Automated Harvest In Fruit Orchards Remains a Challenge

One Million Pounds Of Michigan Cherries Wasted Due To Federal Regulations

Christina Herrick Posted by Christina Herrick|August 20, 2009

Michigan growers are being forced by federal regulations to destroy about a million pounds of cherries, reports www.UpNorthLive.com.

Advertisement

The regulations say the growers are only allowed to sell a certain percentage of their crop and the rest must be destroyed. A number of growers are wondering if there isn’t something better that can be done with the crop rather than having it go to waste.

“25% of our fruit has to be destroyed or harvested onto the ground,” local grower Denny Hoxsie told www.UpNorthLive.com.

Hoxsie says he thinks the idea of donating the cherries to organizations is a good idea, he says it’s not a realistic one.

” I think growers would be more than willing to donate fruit, but what they’ll probably run into with tart cherries is there has to be something done with them…they have almost zero shelf life. They have to be frozen, or canned, or something done…that’s a fairly expensive proposition,” he said.

Top Articles
Squash Growers Weigh in on Current State of the Crop

0

Christina Herrick is former Editor of American Fruit Grower magazine and Western Fruit Grower magazine, published by Meister Media Worldwide. See all author stories here.

Leave a Reply

Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:
September 26, 2011 at 9:47 pm

What a pit-e, You can’t have your cherry pie and eat it to!$. So get off the dole or shut up. Sure it’s a shame to waste food, but you let the government into your hen house. Ya know if you give money to a panhandler today there will be one on every corner tomorrow. We all need to tell the government to take their sorry handouts and shove it where the weeds dont grow. We need to take our country and self-respect back.

Reply
Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:
September 26, 2011 at 9:47 pm

Almost everyone I know agrees with the last part
of the above rant. WE need to take our country
and self-respect back.

Reply
Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:
September 26, 2011 at 9:47 pm

With due respect to both of the previous writers, is it not true that the “federal regulations” referred to are part of a federal marketing order created and voted on periodically by cherry producers as a means of supporting supply and ensuring stable supplies to their customers (a critical aspect of maintaining the profitability of processor customers in a crop as prone to shifts in supply due to production variation?)

I suggest the more appropriate way of describing the situation is that
a) Tart cherry production is a highly variable business, prone to “big” and “little” crops.
b) Tart cherries, to be usable, need to be processed very soon after harvest, so a processing industry is absolutely required in order for a tart cherry producer to have any market at all.
c) To stabilize supplies and make the economics of both growing and processing cherries work (most years for most growers), growers and processors worked together, put their minds to the task, and devised a system that would bring a more orderly marketing process to the industry.
d) The solution that they came up with, while imperfect, is better than completely unfettered production because it stabilzes markets for both producers and processors over time, allowing both producers and processors of multi-year crops to access credit in financial markets.
e) The make the producer-driven solution work, producers approached the federal government and asked that the solution be imposed.
f) While imperfect, the solution has managed to receive the support of the majority of the producers through periodic voting and renewal of the federal order.

So it seems to me that individuals in the cherry industry have taken control of their own destiny, used tools to create multi-year, long term approaches, that create business opportunities that would not otherwise exist.

Democracy works imperfectly, but better than other systems. Quit your bitching and half-story ranting.

Reply
Avatar for doctordollarmoney doctordollarmoney says:
November 4, 2016 at 11:32 am

You have perfectly described what is known as “price rigging”, which is illegal. However, the Federal Government –who are supposed to be the public’s watchdogs– allows it occur, under FDA regulations.

Reply
Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:
September 26, 2011 at 9:47 pm

Nice comments by all above. Last guy is right. Cherry producers wanted a solution and they looked to the govt for help with the one they came up with. The dairy industry did the same and that is why many of the smaller farmers are struggling or out of business. Now the cherry farmers are seeing the same. Not one of them should whine and this should become a non-news items as they asked for it. Cherry farmers let the fox in the hen house so they have to deal with it with a smile as next year they may only have to dump half as much but they will still be in business for whatever that is worth. People had good intentions with marketing orders but the major flaw is the involvement of the govt. Good luck to those farmers.

Reply
Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:
September 26, 2011 at 9:47 pm

Very perceptive analysis by Kevin- much more informative than the first two rants. Further info for consideration – In field crops, if large crops or product storage carryover is expected, growers can choose not to plant that year. Not so for perennial crops like tree fruits. All a grower can choose to do, if the potential crop/carryover may too large to be profitable, is to minimize inputs and not harvest a portion of their crop while hoping the next year will be better, or to pull out a portion of their trees entirely and grow something else. Not to defend the imperfect fed marketing order, but growers have yet to unify and come up with a better solution, so it is pointless to blame “big government” instead of facing all the actual facts and issues. One alternative could be to set a limit on the number of acres that could be grown profitably year in and year out, but then who would decide who gets how many acres? Some could call this communism, others could call it “club varieties”……..it is a complex issue that changes by commodity and merits a more thoughtful approach and better journalism than a misinformed headline about “wasted cherries due to federal regulations”.

Reply
Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:
September 26, 2011 at 9:47 pm

Further follow-up: see Growing Produce article on “Australians Abandon Vineyards”. This is another potential outcome – dictated by the free market – for overproduction of a processed fruit commodity in a global market. Note the contributed comments about a need for the Aussie government to impose duties to help that industry and its growers. Sometimes we’re too quick to depend on the government, sometimes we’re too quick to blame the government, and sometimes it is too easy to use the government as a crutch one way or the other for situations that require lucid thought, creativity and working together to figure out who are our true friends and competitors…..

Reply
Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:
September 26, 2011 at 9:47 pm

Please,Please,Please! it’s simple less govt.,less taxes, less regulations equal more profit. We now have the internet that let’s us communicate better, easier and faster than ever. It’s work that we can do after the sun goes down. So turn off the boob tube and turn on the info-tube. We need to communicate and not pay the govt. to do it for us. This tool turns the United States into a small town hardware store, what a soap box. Like the Christmas Tree story I am sure you all have heard. You know the one where last year there was only one guy selling tree’s. He made a bundle and was sold out long before Christmas. So Bubba say’s heck I can do that and we sure can handle two tree stands in this town. So he didn’t say nutin to nobody about his plan. He didn’t even tell all his buddies down at the coffee shop who he saw three or four times a week. Well in November comes the bad news. All his buddies had the same idea, to many trees nobody made any money. So did they ask the govt. to step in and solve their problem? NO! they got together and worked it out. Free enterprise works if you keep the govt. out.

Reply
Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:
September 26, 2011 at 9:47 pm

Let me give you two examples from our farm. One year we harvested about 280,000 pounds of cherries and left about 20 % in the orchard because processors had enough cherries and got 5 cents a pound. There was no marketing order that year. The next year we harvested about 275,000 pounds of cherries and were required by the the marketing order now in place that year to put about 20 or so percent on the ground and we received about 17 cents a pound. If processors decide they don’t want the cherries they will tell you they won’t take them and they they go onto the ground also. A very long time ago I heard southern farms got all their cherries off while nothern growers cherries ripened later and could not harvest at all becausse proceeors had all they wanted.

Reply
Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:
December 22, 2011 at 3:16 am

What a pit-e, You can’t have your cherry pie and eat it to!$. So get off the dole or shut up. Sure it’s a shame to waste food, but you let the government into your hen house. Ya know if you give money to a panhandler today there will be one on every corner tomorrow. We all need to tell the government to take their sorry handouts and shove it where the weeds dont grow. We need to take our country and self-respect back.

Reply
Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:
December 22, 2011 at 3:16 am

Almost everyone I know agrees with the last part
of the above rant. WE need to take our country
and self-respect back.

Reply
Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:
December 22, 2011 at 3:16 am

With due respect to both of the previous writers, is it not true that the “federal regulations” referred to are part of a federal marketing order created and voted on periodically by cherry producers as a means of supporting supply and ensuring stable supplies to their customers (a critical aspect of maintaining the profitability of processor customers in a crop as prone to shifts in supply due to production variation?)

I suggest the more appropriate way of describing the situation is that
a) Tart cherry production is a highly variable business, prone to “big” and “little” crops.
b) Tart cherries, to be usable, need to be processed very soon after harvest, so a processing industry is absolutely required in order for a tart cherry producer to have any market at all.
c) To stabilize supplies and make the economics of both growing and processing cherries work (most years for most growers), growers and processors worked together, put their minds to the task, and devised a system that would bring a more orderly marketing process to the industry.
d) The solution that they came up with, while imperfect, is better than completely unfettered production because it stabilzes markets for both producers and processors over time, allowing both producers and processors of multi-year crops to access credit in financial markets.
e) The make the producer-driven solution work, producers approached the federal government and asked that the solution be imposed.
f) While imperfect, the solution has managed to receive the support of the majority of the producers through periodic voting and renewal of the federal order.

So it seems to me that individuals in the cherry industry have taken control of their own destiny, used tools to create multi-year, long term approaches, that create business opportunities that would not otherwise exist.

Democracy works imperfectly, but better than other systems. Quit your bitching and half-story ranting.

Reply
Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:
December 22, 2011 at 3:16 am

Nice comments by all above. Last guy is right. Cherry producers wanted a solution and they looked to the govt for help with the one they came up with. The dairy industry did the same and that is why many of the smaller farmers are struggling or out of business. Now the cherry farmers are seeing the same. Not one of them should whine and this should become a non-news items as they asked for it. Cherry farmers let the fox in the hen house so they have to deal with it with a smile as next year they may only have to dump half as much but they will still be in business for whatever that is worth. People had good intentions with marketing orders but the major flaw is the involvement of the govt. Good luck to those farmers.

Reply
Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:
December 22, 2011 at 3:16 am

Very perceptive analysis by Kevin- much more informative than the first two rants. Further info for consideration – In field crops, if large crops or product storage carryover is expected, growers can choose not to plant that year. Not so for perennial crops like tree fruits. All a grower can choose to do, if the potential crop/carryover may too large to be profitable, is to minimize inputs and not harvest a portion of their crop while hoping the next year will be better, or to pull out a portion of their trees entirely and grow something else. Not to defend the imperfect fed marketing order, but growers have yet to unify and come up with a better solution, so it is pointless to blame “big government” instead of facing all the actual facts and issues. One alternative could be to set a limit on the number of acres that could be grown profitably year in and year out, but then who would decide who gets how many acres? Some could call this communism, others could call it “club varieties”……..it is a complex issue that changes by commodity and merits a more thoughtful approach and better journalism than a misinformed headline about “wasted cherries due to federal regulations”.

Reply
Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:
December 22, 2011 at 3:16 am

Further follow-up: see Growing Produce article on “Australians Abandon Vineyards”. This is another potential outcome – dictated by the free market – for overproduction of a processed fruit commodity in a global market. Note the contributed comments about a need for the Aussie government to impose duties to help that industry and its growers. Sometimes we’re too quick to depend on the government, sometimes we’re too quick to blame the government, and sometimes it is too easy to use the government as a crutch one way or the other for situations that require lucid thought, creativity and working together to figure out who are our true friends and competitors…..

Reply
Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:
December 22, 2011 at 3:16 am

Please,Please,Please! it’s simple less govt.,less taxes, less regulations equal more profit. We now have the internet that let’s us communicate better, easier and faster than ever. It’s work that we can do after the sun goes down. So turn off the boob tube and turn on the info-tube. We need to communicate and not pay the govt. to do it for us. This tool turns the United States into a small town hardware store, what a soap box. Like the Christmas Tree story I am sure you all have heard. You know the one where last year there was only one guy selling tree’s. He made a bundle and was sold out long before Christmas. So Bubba say’s heck I can do that and we sure can handle two tree stands in this town. So he didn’t say nutin to nobody about his plan. He didn’t even tell all his buddies down at the coffee shop who he saw three or four times a week. Well in November comes the bad news. All his buddies had the same idea, to many trees nobody made any money. So did they ask the govt. to step in and solve their problem? NO! they got together and worked it out. Free enterprise works if you keep the govt. out.

Reply
Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:
December 22, 2011 at 3:16 am

Let me give you two examples from our farm. One year we harvested about 280,000 pounds of cherries and left about 20 % in the orchard because processors had enough cherries and got 5 cents a pound. There was no marketing order that year. The next year we harvested about 275,000 pounds of cherries and were required by the the marketing order now in place that year to put about 20 or so percent on the ground and we received about 17 cents a pound. If processors decide they don’t want the cherries they will tell you they won’t take them and they they go onto the ground also. A very long time ago I heard southern farms got all their cherries off while nothern growers cherries ripened later and could not harvest at all becausse proceeors had all they wanted.

Reply
Advertisement

Related posts