Michigan asparagus producers voiced a number of concerns and questions to officials in Washington D.C. about how asparagus imports, particularly from Peru, are cutting into their markets.
Michigan asparagus grower Dick Walsworth of Mears and asparagus processor Alton Wendzel of Coloma Frozen Foods, along with specialists from Michigan Farm Bureau, Michigan Agricultural Cooperative Marketing Association and American Farm Bureau Federation visited the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the U.S. Trade Representa-tive’s office, the Department of State and eight Michigan legislators on July 18 and 19.
“This year two to four million pounds of Michigan asparagus did not get harvested that normally would go into harvesting. This caused a lot of pain to some growers,” said Walsworth.
Michigan’s market is mostly processed asparagus and the cheap imports caused some production to go unharvested, said Ken Nye, Michigan Farm Bureau horticulture and forestry specialist.
In the early 1990s, the United States granted Peru duty-free access for most products with the intent of trying to improve the economies of the Andean countries, according to Nye. “This was done to encourage them to be less dependent on drug trafficking and the production of illegal drugs,” he said. Because of the Andean Trade Preference Act (ATPA), asparagus growers in Peru have tariff-free access to markets in the United States in an agreement lasting 10 years. Mexico, a primary supplier to the U.S. of fresh market asparagus, also receives a reduced tariff.
In addition to the trade advantage, Peruvians have near-ideal weather and soil conditions for asparagus production with a 12-month production cycle and high yields per acre. Nye said in the past asparagus from Peru has been grown for the fresh market, although now they have entered the processing market.
Asparagus, like other vegetables, is a labor intensive crop, according to Walsworth. He has traveled throughout Peru and said that a lot of Peruvian growers’ inputs are made in the U.S. and land is not cheap there. However, he said the United States cannot compete with the $6 a day for labor that is common in Peru.
“Our costs are approximately 20 cents a pound while their cost is probably two or three cents,” Walsworth said.
“I was impressed that they knew what was going on, although there were no promises made. We were well received wherever we went,” said Walsworth about the representatives from the State Department and the people who handle foreign trade relations. The delegation discussed asparagus imports and the need for a USDA purchase of canned asparagus with Gus Schumacher, USDA undersecretary.
The delegation representing the Michigan asparagus industry want to see the Andean agreement not renewed after it expires in December 2001, or to have some sort of volume limit on duty-free commodities, according to Walsworth and Nye.
Asparagus, being a fairly high-value product, has about a 15% tariff for processed asparagus and, depending on the time of year, about a 22% tariff for fresh market asparagus, Nye said. The industry could also explore a competitive statement, which means if Peru is competitive in the asparagus industry they would not be eligible to receive duty-free status, said Nye.
The U.S. Trade Represent-ative’s office is requesting comments on the ATPA through Sept. 11 and the Michigan Farm Bureau plans to respond on behalf of the Michigan asparagus industry, according to Nye.
“We will refocus our efforts right after the election when we know who the players are,” said Walsworth, about what’s next for the Michigan asparagus group representatives.
To illustrate the problem of imports to the U.S. asparagus industry, there were three to five million frozen pounds of imported asparagus into the U.S. while the total U.S. production of frozen packs was 10 million pounds, Walsworth said.
