Skip navigation

Up to the Challenge

It's been a big year for the United Fresh Produce Association. Shortly after the United Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Association finalized its merger with the International Fresh-cut Produce Association in September 2006, a major E. coli outbreak dealt a significant blow to the leafy greens industry. The United Fresh Produce Association immediately leveraged the expanded scope of the combined organizations

It's been a big year for the United Fresh Produce Association. Shortly after the United Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Association finalized its merger with the International Fresh-cut Produce Association in September 2006, a major E. coli outbreak dealt a significant blow to the leafy greens industry. The United Fresh Produce Association immediately leveraged the expanded scope of the combined organizations to maintain contact with the FDA in Washington and give growers access to food safety experts on the ground in California. The association has since helped develop new safety initiatives, such as the California Leafy Greens Marketing Agreement, even as it has continued to lobby for the produce industry on issues such as Country of Origin Labeling, immigration reform and the upcoming 2007 Farm Bill. SN discussed these issues with Tom Stenzel, president and CEO of United Fresh. The following are excerpts from that interview:

SN: United's merger with the International Fresh-cut Produce Association was completed last September. What benefits have members of both associations seen so far?

TS: The food safety issue is the biggest example of immediate benefit. We announced the intent to merge around this time last year, and the merger was completed legally in September 2006 — almost exactly in time for that unfortunate E. coli outbreak. Basically, we combined the expertise and resources of our two staffs. There really wasn't anything that was cut out. So when the outbreak hit, we were able to have a food safety expert here in D.C. who had been a previous IFPA employee, and our food safety expert in California, who had previously been a UFFVA employee. So the merger really did immediately streamline our ability to serve the industry on food safety and interact more effectively with the FDA in Washington.

A couple of other things I'd mention are internationalization and the future impact on our trade shows. IFPA had a lot more international involvement. In November, we had our first European conference — the European Fresh Cut Produce conference — that attracted about 200 people from 18 countries, so we were really pleased with that. Also, Fresh Tech — which is a technology, equipment, packaging, food safety and supply chain-focused show that we picked up from IFPA — is currently scheduled [in Palm Springs, Calif.] a week apart from our Marketplace show in Chicago. We're going forward with both of these shows, but they won't be a week apart. We're looking at whether we may want to schedule them side by side in the future.

SN: United helped develop California's new Leafy Greens Marketing Agreement, which requires growers to adhere to a new set of “good agricultural practices” monitored by the state. What's next in the industry's efforts to ensure produce safety?

TS: We worked really hard to make that happen. Our scientific team has been pretty much writing those food safety standards and vetting those standards with industry members, government scientists and academics. We've encouraged the industry to step up and become part of that agreement. It's a very important first step, to show that the industry is doing everything we can to minimize risk with our products. Part two comes now — trying to take that agreement that's been made in California and translate it into a national, uniform regulatory approach. We really believe that, long term, we need to have government set those standards, and we need those standards to be uniform.

SN: Are there any plans to market these new safety initiatives to consumers, in order to regain confidence?

TS: We aren't going to go too far in that direction. Consumers want to know that their food is safe — that it's as safe as it can be. And they look to government, growers and other members of the industry for that assurance. But most supermarkets will tell you that their customers don't come in the door with questions about which food is safe and which food is not. They expect the food that's there to be safe for sale. It may be thousands of man-hours of work for us and our members out there in the field to ensure that, but it's not necessarily a message that you take out to the consumer. They expect that of us.

SN: The FDA ultimately found that the E. coli strain that led to last year's outbreak probably came from a cattle ranch near a spinach field. How can growers mitigate risks from other, unrelated farming operations?

TS: When you're growing food for ready-to-eat products like salad products, you've got to take into account all of the environmental risk factors in your area. So if you're downstream from a cattle ranch, you've got to make sure that you don't have a problem or you don't grow a ready-to-eat food there. What's got to happen, and what's a big part of this [Leafy Greens Marketing Agreement], is a very thorough assessment of land use that looks not only at proximity to ranches and other farming operations, but also what the land has been used for in the past, composting, water testing, making sure irrigation water is clean. We've said that these things should be done all along, now we're saying that they have to be done.

SN: After several delays, it looks like the deadline for Country of Origin Labeling compliance will happen in 2008 for the produce industry. What is United doing now in terms of lobbying or helping the industry prepare?

TS: That has been a very difficult issue. Eighteen months ago, when COOL was pushed back to 2008, we in the produce industry, along with FMI and members of the food retailing industry, sat down together and said, “This is not going to be delayed forever. We really do want to find a permanent solution on this.” We have reached an agreement between the major produce growing associations and FMI to support what we call produce country of origin labeling. One of the problems with the current law is that it mixes together meat and seafood and produce, and they just really are different. The current law that is on the books is chock full of burdensome regulations and extra costs that don't benefit the consumer. What we are proposing to Congress is a program that would allow us as an industry to provide Country of Origin Labeling the way we do it now on PLU stickers, bags and other packaging, and then USDA would survey and ensure that 70% of produce carries that country of origin labeling. If we can reach that 70% threshold and stay above that, it would remain a voluntary program. One hundred percent compliance just isn't realistic, no matter how tough the standards. There's 400 different items in most produce departments. If we come short, and are not able to maintain 70% compliance, then it would become a mandatory program. The challenge today is to push that through Congress before 2008.

SN: The USDA presented Congress with a set of recommendations for the 2007 Farm Bill earlier this year. What was your opinion of those recommendations, and what is United doing to ensure the industry's interests are represented in this new bill?

TS: We've introduced our own bill in Congress called the Eat Healthy America Act that basically contains all of the provisions that we would like to see in the next Farm Bill. It's a marker bill that gets all of our policy objectives out there that we're hoping to have included in the Farm Bill itself. We think the USDA did a really good job. Secretary [of Agriculture] Mike Johanns has been very sensitive to this being an equitable Farm Bill. Fruits and vegetables represent about [44%] of all farm value in the United States, and yet we really had no major role in past Farm Bills. He has done a good job of looking at various policy objectives that would make the fruit and vegetable industry more competitive and more successful. We don't want subsidies, but we are pushing for investment in research — food safety is a key for us, but all kinds of research.

One of the best things that we see coming in this Farm Bill is the attention it gives to nutrition and health policy — getting kids to eat more fruits and vegetables. It helps the industry, but it also helps kids' health and school lunch programs. For example, there's a major program that looks like it will be expanded in this Farm Bill. It's a snack program that was started in the 2002 Farm Bill as a pilot program, but Sen. Tom Harkin, chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee, is pushing hard to make it national. It would provide a free fresh fruit or vegetable snack to kids — primarily in elementary school — every day. Not only is it a great way to introduce them to trying new foods, it's also something that can be incorporated into teaching health and better food choices.