Search Site   
News Stories at a Glance
Tennessee is home to numerous strawberry festivals in May
Dairy cattle must now be tested for bird flu before interstate transport
Webinar series spotlights farmworker safety and health
Painted Mail Pouch barns going, going, but not gone
Pork exports are up 14%; beef exports are down
Miami County family receives Hoosier Homestead Awards 
OBC culinary studio to enhance impact of beef marketing efforts
Baltimore bridge collapse will have some impact on ag industry
Michigan, Ohio latest states to find HPAI in dairy herds
The USDA’s Farmers.gov local dashboard available nationwide
Urban Acres helpng Peoria residents grow food locally
   
Archive
Search Archive  
   

USDA making $15M available for asparagus losses 2004-07

By SHELLY STRAUTZ-SPRINGBORN
Michigan Correspondent
 
LANSING, Mich. — Asparagus growers will get a total of $15 million to compensate for marketing losses resulting from imports. The USDA this month made available the money to farmers nationwide who were impacted by duty-free imports under the Andean Trade Preference Act (ATPA) from 2004-07.
“America’s asparagus producers were financially affected by a substantial increase in asparagus imports,” said Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack. “This resulted in lower domestic production and a lower market share for U.S. producers. This program will provide assistance to American asparagus producers whose livelihoods were affected.”

In 1991, the ATPA gave farmers in Peru, Columbia, Bolivia and Ecuador tariff-free access to the U.S. market. The act was intended to reduce Andean dependence on illegal drug production by giving growers in these countries a new opportunity. Unlike most free trade agreements, the Andean agreement provided no transition period to allow domestic producers to prepare for a market saturation of zero-tariff asparagus.

“Basically, it was drug policy, not trade policy,” said Michigan Asparagus Advisory Board Director John Bakker.

Weather conditions in these countries are ideal for growing asparagus, and as a result of the trade agreement, Bakker said “there were massive plantings, especially in Peru.

“The industry there just exploded” from 1991 through 1995, he added. “They don’t eat asparagus in Peru or South America, so it was all exported out of the country, and the U.S. was a prime market.”

Bakker said it took about 10 years for these countries to ramp up production and their crop started to hit the United States’ fresh market in the mid- to late 1990s.

By the mid-2000s, they were turning their attention to freezing and canning.
“It had a huge impact on our market,” he said.

The U.S. had about 90,000 acres of asparagus before the act. By last year, total U.S. acreage had dropped to fewer than 40,000. In 2000, he said growers dropped from 63 to 42 cents per pound for processed asparagus “in an effort to hold the markets we could.”

Before imports took full effect on the market, 90 percent of Michigan’s crop was processed, according to Bakker. To remain competitive, growers in Michigan transitioned away from processed to fresh. In 2010, the crop had shifted to just 60 percent processed and 40 percent was sold fresh.

“We have really focused on promoting locally-grown asparagus and it is becoming really big for us,” Bakker said. “We found that by promoting our product and getting it out there, that part of our business really began to grow.”

The Asparagus Revenue Market Loss Assistance Payment Program (ALAP) is authorized by the 2008 farm bill. It allows for a one-time payment to eligible asparagus growers. Farmers can receive $1.06 per pound for fresh market asparagus and $1.08 per pound for asparagus marketed for processing.
Payments will be calculated for each asparagus operation based on its 2003 marketed production quantities. There is a cap of $100,000 per producer, per marketing category. The $15 million will be split equally between fresh and processed asparagus.

Bakker said the USDA program will help growers recoup a small portion of their lost revenue.

“This isn’t going to heal anyone, but it will help our growers reinvest back into the industry,” he said. “New, higher-yielding brands are very expensive to plant. By reinvesting in higher producing fields, we hope it will help us better compete in the world market.”

3/2/2011