It continues to be hot and dry in South Florida. The abnormally dry conditions cover much of middle Florida down to South Florida, according to the US Drought Monitor.
Portions of South Florida, including Monroe County, Collier County, Hendry County, Broward County, Palm Beach County and Miami-Dade County are classified as ‘D1’ or in a moderate drought.
Pinellas County, Hillsborough County, Manatee County, southern Pasco County and western Polk County are the only parts of central Florida not abnormally dry.
In Georgia, the only part of the state abnormally dry is in north Georgia, extending from Henry County and Clayton County to Elbert County and Hart County. The western part of the state, along the Georgia-Alabama line, including Haralson County, Carroll County, Heard County and part of Troup County are abnormally dry as well.
The only part of Alabama that is abnormally dry is along the Alabama-Georgia line, including Cleburne County, Randolph County, Chambers County, Tallapoosa County, Clay County and small parts of Talladega County and Calhoun County.
Florida Agriculture Commissioner Nikki Fried pleaded with the U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) that Mexican imports of cucumbers and squash are devastating the domestic market, especially her state’s farmers.
In testimony delivered as part of the USITC hearing on the effects of imports on Southeast markets on Thursday, Fried pointed to the statistical impact of both commodities.
From 2015 to 2019, there was an estimated $382 million in lost cash receipts for Florida squash farmers. That equates to 1,222 fewer jobs and a $756 million negative impact.
From 2015 to 2020, there were $562 million in lost cash receipts for Florida’s cucumber farmers. That equates to 1,499 fewer jobs and an overall negative impact of $1.11 billion.
“That’s billion with a ‘B’. That’s over 2,500 good-paying jobs lost, family farms shutting down and parents struggling to provide for their children,” Fried said.
Competitive Disadvantage
She stressed that Florida farmers are at a huge disadvantage, specifically with regards to labor. As Florida approved measures to increase the minimum wage to $15 per hour over the next few years, Mexican farmers can pay their workers as little as 25 cents per day.
Florida’s $90.9 million cucumber industry and $35.4 million squash industry are in danger of dropping even further than it has over the last 20 years.
“The argument that the devastation being felt among Florida’s producers is being caused by increased domestic competition is proven to be simply not true,” Fried said. “As these unfair practices are allowed to continue with no protections or remedies within reach of our domestic producers, we continue to see the harm spread to other states.”
She stated that Georgia’s market share for squash growers decreased by 83.9% from 2015 to 2020.
Hopeful for Different Outcome
Fried also pleaded with the USITC to come to a different outcome than what it generated during the blueberry hearing. It was different commodities but same concept – imports are hurting the domestic market. The USITC voted 5-0 against American farmers claiming serious injury.
“The last time I was here before you, I testified virtually on behalf of our state’s $62.3 million blueberry industry. In that January hearing, we also provided overwhelming evidence and data to support our case. Farmers from Florida and across the United States testified on the personal hardships they have experienced, while Mexico’s blueberry market share in the United States increased by over 2000% since 2009,” Fried said.
“While the ruling in that case was extremely disappointing, it speaks to the need to reform and underlining structure that denies equal access to our nation’s trade remedies for our seasonal producers. It is my hope that while the ITC continues to uncover the devastating impact that increased imports are inflicting upon our domestic cucumber and squash industries, along with your ongoing monitoring of fresh strawberries and bell pepper imports, you will also employ all tools at your disposal to provide equity and fairness for American farmers.”
AUBURN UNIVERSITY, Ala. — One of the most destructive pests of crops in Alabama roam 365 days per year. Feral hogs will damage food plots and a myriad of other natural resources.
Alabama Feral Swine Control Program
The Alabama Soil and Water Conservation Committee recently launched a three-year program to help farmers remove wild pigs from their property. The Alabama Feral Swine Control Program originated in the 2018 Farm Bill. It is funded by the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service. The Feral Swine Control Program is available in select portions of Alabama.
Mark Smith, an Alabama Cooperative Extension System wildlife specialist, said although wild pigs allow hunters an opportunity to harvest wild pork throughout the year, wild pigs cause tremendous damage.
“Wild pigs cause more than $55 million a year in agriculture damage in Alabama,” Smith said. “Other states such as Georgia, Tennessee and Louisiana report similar damage nearing about $100 million each year.”
The USDA program offers landowners two options: Landowners can receive assistance from USDA Wildlife Services to conduct wild pig removal operations and/or substantial rebates. Program participants can receive up to 70% off on purchases of high-tech trapping equipment. This equipment allows farmers to catch the pigs easier and remove them.
“Help is on the way for farmers whose land falls within the Feral Swine Control Program area,” Smith said. “Assistance like this doesn’t happen often. All eyes are on this program for the next couple of years to measure its success.”
More Information
To learn more about the Alabama Feral Swine Control Program, and if you qualify for assistance, visit the Alabama Soil and Water Conservation website. Contact Bence Carter or Mark Smith for more information and to find out how Extension can assist your operation.
According to UF/IFAS, Asian bean thrips (ABT) populations continue to swing back and forth across the South Florida region. While flower thrips are the predominant species north of Miami-Dade, a few locations still are reporting ABT at the dominant species.
ABT populations ranged from 0.2 to 0.7 per bloom in southeastern Hendry County. Populations were reduced where records of 10 ABT per bloom were previously located to 0.1 to 1.1 per bloom. A change in the user’s pesticide program to include 5 modes of action multiple sprays per week is likely the reason for the population drop.
ABT populations ranged from 0.0 to 2.0 ABT per bloom at bloom and early pod development stages in northeastern Hendry County. Hotspots were reported in central Hendry County, where populations ranged from 0.1 to 1.6 ABT per bud or bloom.
Populations increased to 1.0 to 2.0 ABT per bloom or 1.0 to 5.0 ABT per plant in eastern Palm Beach County. A few hotspots remain in western and northwestern Palm Beach County, with reports of 1.0 to 2.0 ABT per bloom.
Snap bean plantings are still young in southern Martin County, so ABT was not reported. Beans were harvested, and young peas were not yet scouted in northern Collier County.
Another southern pea season means one thing for Alabama producers; cowpea curculio will be a factor.
“If you’re a southern pea grower, odds are you have seen this insect or will see this insect at some point in the production cycle,” said Neil Kelly, Alabama Extension Regional agent in Southeast Alabama. “Over the last several years, it has become devastating to southern pea crops in the Southeast for sure.”
As devastating as cowpea curculios can be, it’s important that growers utilize every tool in the toolbox.
Crop rotation helps prevent pest buildup. Spray frequently in 3-to-5-day intervals when label permits. Alternative insecticides applied to the soil and foliar application need high moisture.
Kelly recommends that growers start insecticidal treatments two to three weeks before flowering. Second generation curculios can overwhelm the crop if not controlled.
Mix PBO with synthetic pyrethroids, but it’s important to rotate chemicals to prevent resistance.
Another important management tactic is also something that should be done every year – scouting. Get ahead of the problem before it worsens throughout the season.
“Obviously, you’ve got to get out there and do your scouting. You’ve got to be diligent,” Kelly said. “You need to scout early in the morning. These insects have a tendency to go down and hide when the sun is bright. Usually, peak activity is sometime around 9:30, 10 o’clock in the morning. Much after that, it starts to get hot, and you’ll see them move further down in the canopy.”
What makes curculios difficult to spot is they’ll drop down and play possum at the base of the plants. It’s also important to check the weeds around the field, specifically broomsedge, narrow-leaved vetch and purple cudweed. Growers need to intensify scouting when flowering begins.
Last year it was ensuring worker safety in the early stage of the coronavirus pandemic. This year, the focus is making sure workers have access to vaccines.
It’s a tale of two seasons but one constant remains – COVID-19, says Allison Crittenden, Director of Congressional Relations at the American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF).
“I think if you zoom out to when the pandemic first started, we were very concerned about the ability of our workers to even get to our farms and be able to work. As soon as they got here, we were incredibly concerned and put measures in place to prevent the spread of coronavirus and prevent anybody from getting sick. Not only do we care about these individuals and their health, but with labor intensive agriculture, you have to have the workers there to help you plant the crop and harvest it,” Crittenden said. “If folks are not feeling well or if they have coronavirus, that can certainly limit the folks that are able to get the job done on the farm.
“We care about our employees, and we want to make sure we’re able to produce our food supply. We know we can’t do that without them. It’s really important that these essential workers have access to vaccines, so we don’t have to deal with any of the uncertainties that we did in our last summer and last growing season and harvest.”
Education is Key
Crittenden said American Farm Bureau Federation has joined the White House COVID Community Corps, which centers on vaccine messaging and encouraging people to get their shot. She’s hopeful that by being part of this educational initiative, they’ll have access to tools to help people understand the vaccine’s benefits.
“We know that farmers and ranchers and their employees haven’t had the option to telework, because of that, that’s why we’ve advocated for food and Ag to have prioritized access to the vaccine. We’re very pleased that supply is ramping up. Now that we’re moving, hopefully, away from demand concerns, we’re able to focus our effort only on continuing to make sure food and Ag is prioritized. But we also want to ensure folks in agriculture understand the importance of getting the vaccine and that it’s safe and effective,” Crittenden said.
President Joe Biden also bumped up the deadline for all adults to be eligible for the vaccine by April 19.
“It certainly sounds like things are opening up when it comes to vaccines and vaccine availability,” Crittenden said. “We certainly recognize it’s a medical choice and voluntary. But we want folks to understand this is an important step to finally being done with this pandemic.”
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Reps. Austin Scott (R-GA-08) and Darren Soto (D-FL-09) co-led a bipartisan letter to the International Trade Commission (ITC) on Tuesday expressing support for a Section 332 investigation for cucumbers and squash as American specialty crop producers struggle with unfair trade practices that negatively impact operations.
“Seasonal cucumber and squash imports from Mexico continue to dramatically impact U.S. markets and threaten the future of domestic farm production of perishable produce,” wrote the Members. “This Section 332 investigation by the ITC for cucumbers and squash is needed to make a meaningful determination as to the impact of these seasonal imports on our markets. Market changes occur quickly and can devastate a grower’s season in a matter of days if imports increase and the resulting price decreases coincide with harvest. We appreciate your efforts on behalf of our growers and rural communities.”
The letter is supported by Georgia Farm Bureau, Florida Farm Bureau, Michigan Farm Bureau, the Georgia Fruit and Vegetable Association, and the Florida Fruit and Vegetable Association.
Darren Soto
“Georgia Farm Bureau agrees with U.S. Representatives Austin Scott and Darren Soto that a Section 332 investigation for cucumbers and squash is necessary to determine the full impact that imported produce is having on domestic growers. In recent years, Georgia farmers — along with farmers in many other U.S. states — have struggled to compete with the growing surge of imported fresh fruits and vegetables, and as noted by the reports highlighted in the letter, the problem will only get worse unless U.S. officials step in. We are grateful for the leadership of Representatives Scott and Soto along with the other Members of Congress who joined this important effort,” said Tom McCall, President of Georgia Farm Bureau.
“The several specialty crop states represented on this letter should signal a growing national concern for our agriculture sector,” said John L. Hoblick, President of Florida Farm Bureau. “Florida agriculture, and our rural communities as a result, is at a crossroads. This investigation on squash and cucumbers is a helpful start toward a fair solution for our domestic producers, and we applaud our federal policymakers for standing with us.”
The letter was sent two days ahead of Thursday’s ITC fact-finding hearing that will focus on cucumber and squash imports and their impact on the Southeast sector.
In November, Rep. Scott sent a similar letter to the United States Trade Representative (USTR) requesting ITC begin a Section 332 investigation into squash and cucumber imports. Click here to read more.
You can read the text of the letter below or by clicking here.
A $300 million-a-year industry in Florida may soon depend on artificial intelligence (AI) to enhance its flavor.
Research at the University of Florida (UF) shows AI can help scientists breed more flavor into strawberries.
While consumer panels are the method for UF researchers to gauge whether new fruit varieties taste good enough for development into market, in the evolving world of AI, a computer can now tell scientists what strawberries taste and smell like. This will help researchers determine whether a variety is worth more genetic breeding efforts.
Vance Whitaker, a UF/IFAS associate professor of horticultural sciences, used an algorithm that allows him to predict how a strawberry will taste, based on the chemical constitution of its fruit. The computer method also takes less time than volunteer test panels.
UF/IFAS photo/Vance Whitaker. Taken on 11-08-18.
Whitaker published new research in the journal Nature Horticulture Research in which he and his team used taste-test panels and computer technology to identify the volatiles that give strawberries their unique tangy flavor.
“Some volatiles are more important than others,” said Whitaker, a faculty member at the UF/IFAS Gulf Coast Research and Education Center. “Knowing this allows us to focus in on a few high-impact breeding targets. In other words, now we know which volatile compounds we want to increase in breeding to achieve better flavor.”
Over seven years, 384 consumers came to the UF Sensory Lab in Gainesville to provide feedback on flavor and aroma of strawberry varieties. Whitaker and his team compared their preferences with results that were derived from an already established algorithm and found the volatiles he needs to boost in strawberries he breeds in the future to improve their flavor.
Machine learning algorithms are especially useful for analyzing “big data,” Whitaker said. When the data set is huge and involves a lot of variables at once, machine learning picks out patterns that previous statistical methods cannot.
One Florida state legislator deems House Bill 1601 a “dangerous piece of legislation.” Another accuses “Big Sugar” of attempting to “change the rules” in the middle of the game.
The bill that is likely to see the House in the next couple of weeks has drawn the ire of Florida State Representatives Anna Eskamani and Omari Hardy. Also known as Senate Bill 88, the House bill modifies Florida’s Right to Farm Act to broadly protect farmers from lawsuits if they’ve followed regulatory requirements.
Pending Lawsuit
Big Sugar, which includes Florida Crystals Corporation, U.S. Sugar and Sugar Care Growers Cooperative of Florida, is already involved in a lawsuit which cites sugarcane burning as having harmful effects on their health and pollutes the environment. Both legislators believe the bill’s timing wreaks of Big Sugar’s influence and will have dangerous ramifications if it passes.
“To be so embedded when it comes to their political and community influence, that even the idea of changing a practice so that children and generations to come can have clean air when they walk outside and go to school; because they stand against that, not only have they denied us the opportunity to pursue green harvesting but they are pushing forward a priority bill that would potentially undercut pending litigation filed by local members of the community trying to end the practice of sugarcane burning,” Eskamani said.
Hardy added, “In this case, we have people trying to make a claim in court. Rather than let that play out, Big Sugar has come to the legislature to get the legislature to change the law in the middle of the lawsuit. It’s changing the rules in the middle of the game, and it’s not fair. That’s why this bill should not be heard, but if it’s heard, it should not be advanced, but if it’s advanced, it should not be advanced in its current form. There needs to be significant changes made to this bill.”
Current Litigation Not Impacted?
However, Adam Basford, Director of State Legislative Affairs at Florida Farm Bureau, insists the bill will not impact any current litigation.
Sugarcane burning
“Any current litigation that is going on is unaffected,” Basford said. “For a law to be retroactive, it’s got to be explicitly retroactive, and the language, there is explicitly not retroactive. That’s really the response to the thought that this is in an effort to impact the litigation that’s going on right now.”
But Hardy insists that if that was the case, why wasn’t his amendment that the bill not apply retroactively included?
“While the (bill’s) sponsor says that the bill does not apply retroactively, the fact of the matter is my amendment was not adopted. There’s a reason why you would not adopt a harmless amendment to clarify that the bill does not apply retroactively, because I believe the folks that are pushing this bill want it to stop the lawsuit that is currently in place, to close the doors of the courthouse to people who are seeking justice right now,” Hardy said.
Sugarcane Burning
Sugarcane burning was the focus of Tuesday’s press conference with both legislators as well as citizens impacted by the practice.
Proponents of the agricultural practice say that pre-harvest burns are necessary for Florida farmers and does not endanger surrounding communities. Pre-harvest burns promote healthy plant regrowth for future crops and improves the quality and efficiency of the harvest.
Ryan Duffy, director of corporate communications for U.S. Sugar, and Judy Sanchez, senior director for corporate communications and public affairs at U.S. Sugar, said that all controlled pre-harvest burns are regulated by the Florida Forest Service. Every controlled pre-harvest burn requires an individual burn permit for each field, which will only be issued for that day. The Florida Forest Service grants or denies the permit based upon that day’s weather conditions.
Certain criteria must be met for a sugarcane grower to be approved for a burn permit. These include wind direction and speed, atmospheric conditions and location relative to sensitive areas like hospitals, schools and highways.
What Opponents Want
Opponents of the burning practice want sugarcane producers to switch to green harvesting. This practice uses mechanical harvesters to separate the sugarcane leaves and tops from the stalks. It would eliminate burning altogether.
“I want to be clear, no one is trying to end the industry. People are just trying to end this practice that has damaged far too many lives and far too many communities,” Eskamani said. “House Bill 1601 is a dangerous piece of legislation, also known as Senate Bill 88. It completely would negate efforts to seek some sort of judicial process when faced with a nuisance that is outside of a farm. The way they have defined this nuisance is in such narrow terms that particles from sugarcane burning, which by the way, can float upwards of 20 and 25 miles, you will not be able to seek any type of litigation or any type of recourse if this bill were to become law.”
What Mechanical Harvesting Won’t Do
In September, Duffy said that specialty interest groups have selectively chosen a piece of the research and said you can get the same yield if you don’t burn the cane versus cane that’s burnt.
“What that misses is that if you leave all of that leaf trash on the field, it will impact the next year’s crop, and there may not be the same yield next year,” Duffy said.
Basford said the bill is part of the agenda for next week’s Judiciary Committee Hearing. It would then move to the House the following week.
“I think that no one on this call would accept ash falling from the sky onto their home, into their yards, onto their playgrounds where their children play. I also believe that if that were happening that you would want to have the doors of the courthouse open to you. So that if you have a claim, that you can have that claim heard and have it adjudicated fairly,” Hardy said. “What this bill does, it not only allows this practice of sugarcane burning to continue, but it closes the doors of the courthouse to people seeking justice.”
How can you stay in business by selling a commodity for less than the inputs required to produce it? While it may sound like simple economics, it’s a financial game that’s just not adding up for many Southeast vegetable and specialty crop producers?
What’s the ‘X’ factor? Imports from foreign countries like Mexico, Peru and Chile. If they continue to keep bringing in produce like strawberries, blueberries, tomatoes and squash at their current rate, Southeast farmers will continue to suffer.
“The primary issue is if you can’t sell your crop for more than you’ve got in it, then obviously you’re backing up,” said Congressman Austin Scott (R-GA-08). “It doesn’t cost as much to farm in Mexico as it does in the United States. Our producers are losing significant portions of the market share. It is predominantly coming from the imports from Mexico. As Mexico has set aside more protected acres for agriculture, it makes it easier for their farmers to do business.
“We as a country have been flooded by imports who have a lower cost of production than U.S. producers. It’s been moving in the wrong direction for a while. I think now it’s just moving further faster with COVID because your fresh fruits and vegetables; the restaurants that were serving them are at half capacity if they’re open at all.”
Mexico Government Provides Support
According to University of Florida Associate Professor Zhengfei Guan, approximately 95% of Mexico’s protected acreage (those in macro-tunnels, shade houses and greenhouses) is for fruits and vegetables. The Mexican government also subsidizes its fruit and vegetable industry. From 2006 to 2016, the average annual budget for subsidies was $4.5 billion.
“Agriculture has significantly more support in Mexico than we have in the United States right now, unfortunately. When I say more support, I mean at the national level,” Scott said.
It has created a concern that other farmers have voiced: Where will our children and grandchildren get their food one day? As more and more producers are forced to quit because of an inability to stay in business, who will produce food in America?
“I don’t want to be dependent on any section of the world for our food and our nutrition. We do very little in this country to help our Ag producers. We’re competing with other countries that do a lot and have a lower cost of production. Every time the federal government passes a rule and regulation that increases the cost of production within the United States, it’s done at the expense of U.S. food security,” Scott said.
