Thread: Is Immigration Enforcement Affecting Farmers?

Is Immigration Enforcement Affecting Farmers?

POSTED: 8:34 pm PDT October 13, 2006
UPDATED: 8:50 pm PDT October 13, 2006

SAN DIEGO -- Have you noticed prices increasing on your fruits and vegetables?

Many have said it might be one of the trickle-down effects of immigration enforcement.

California farmers said they are suffering from a labor shortage and are forced to pass their losses on to you.

The farmers come from all over Mexico and various countries throughout South America.

“If we don’t have access to farm labor, that entire industry is at state,” said Eric Larson of the San Diego County Farm Bureau.

The industry is California’s agriculture, and the problem is a labor shortage. According to the California Farm Bureau, immigration enforcements since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks have put a serious dent in the workforce.

“You're seeing a labor shortening of about 50 percent, at least. In some areas, it's higher than that,” said Luawanna Hallstrom of Harry Singh and Sons.

Hallstrom is the CEO of one of the largest vine-ripe tomato producers in the country. Immediately after 9/11, a federal crackdown found many of her employees were illegal. The company lost three quarters of its workforce right at the beginning of harvest season.

“We lost about $2.5 million in crops and when our workers did come, it took us about two weeks for all of us to go in and clean out the rotted fruit and try and figure out what we had left to salvage,” said Hallstrom.

Federal investigators have the expertise to spot fraudulent paperwork. That is not the case for the farmers, as they can only assume the workers’ documents are the real deal.

The California Farm Bureau strongly supports a guest worker program where laborers can cross the border back and forth with ease. For now, the workforce is said to be dwindling because of problems entering the U.S.

Earlier this month, millions of pears in Northern California were lost because of that shortage.

“We live here, too. We want a secure country, but the reality is we rely on a foreign-born workforce,” said Hallstrom.

Many people ask why an American-born workforce is not used. Over the last few years, the California Farm Bureau claimed it advertised for 137,000 laborers. Nearly 500 applicants sought the jobs, but only three reported to work.

The San Diego County Farm Bureau has done studies and claimed that for the loss of every laborer, at least three other jobs are lost.

If the harvest can’t be picked, there is no need for the packers, truckers or distributors.

Copyright 2006 by 10News.com. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed

http://www.10news.com/news/10074665/detail.html

What enforcement?

Yes.

What enforcement?

Many people ask why an American-born workforce is not used. Over the last few years, the California Farm Bureau claimed it advertised for 137,000 laborers. Nearly 500 applicants sought the jobs, but only three reported to work.

What wage was offered to Americans - the same as to illegals?

Over the last few years, the California Farm Bureau claimed it advertised for 137,000 laborers. Nearly 500 applicants sought the jobs, but only three reported to work.

What they really mean is that out of 137,000 positions and the last several years, they hired only 3.

People don't show up for jobs they don't get hired for. De de dee!

It still makes me see red when I hear this kind of whining. There are 25-30 million IAs here and they can't find fruit pickers.

Maybe the contractors could spare a few. OR maybe they could pick up a couple of hundred from the day labor sites.

We're hearing a lot of such talk in CA, how the farmers can't find workers for the fields. Well, probably most of the workers have gotten smart and gone to construction or elsewhere making more money. Working the fields is probably their last resort. And I wouldn't be surprised if this has been a problem for farmers for a long time. They can just use the current situation to blame their problems on.
Yes, I agree, what enforcement?

Have you noticed prices increasing on your fruits and vegetables?

Many have said it might be one of the trickle-down effects of immigration enforcement.

California farmers said they are suffering from a labor shortage and are forced to pass their losses on to you.

The farmers come from all over Mexico and various countries throughout South America.

Completely bogus, don't believe it! The worse drought in over a decade is what is hurting some crops.

Sep. 14, 2006

Gov. Perry Requests USDA Drought Assistance for 20 Counties

AUSTIN - Gov. Rick Perry has requested that the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Farm Service Agency provide disaster relief assistance for 20 additional counties where farms and ranches have experienced damage due to the effects of drought, including: Anderson, Baylor, Callahan, Cherokee, Cooke, Cottle, Crockett, Dallas, Eastland, Fayette, Henderson, Kaufman, King, Loving, Nueces, Reagan, Rusk, Throckmorton, Upton and Van Zandt counties.

Texas has been suffering from severe and prolonged drought conditions for more than a year, resulting in an estimated $4.1 billion in losses to the agricultural industry.

"Having grown up in a farming and ranching community, I know first hand how devastating a drought can be to individual farmers and ranchers and the agriculture industry statewide," Perry said. "We want to help get farmers and ranchers the federal assistance they deserve as quickly as possible."

Perry�s previous requests for USDA assistance for 39 counties are pending approval. These include Bee, Blanco, Bowie, Brooks, Camp, Clay, Cochran, Coleman, Collin, Delta, DeWitt, Franklin, Gaines, Grayson, Gregg, Guadalupe, Haskell, Hood, Irion, Jack, Jim Hogg, Jones, Knox, Lynn, Martin, Montague, Morris, Navarro, Palo Pinto, Parker, Rains, Smith, Somervell, Titus, Tom Green, Upshur, Wise, Wood and Young counties.

The USDA has already granted Perry's requests for assistance to 49 drought-stricken counties, including: Armstrong, Bosque, Brewster, Calhoun, Colorado, Dallam, Dimmit, Duval, Fannin, Foard, Frio, Gillespie, Glasscock, Hamilton, Hardeman, Hartley, Hopkins, Hunt, Jeff Davis, Jim Wells, Johnson, Karnes, Kenedy, Kinney, Kleberg, LaSalle, Lavaca, Live Oak, Llano, Lubbock, Mason, McLennan, McMullen, Nolan, Oldham, Pecos, Potter, Presidio, Red River, Runnels, San Patricio, Stephens, Taylor, Terrell, Victoria, Wilbarger, Willacy, Wilson and Zavala counties.

When a USDA request is approved, qualified farm operators in designated counties are eligible for low-interest emergency loans from the USDA's Farm Service Agency. Producers can borrow up to 100 percent of actual production for physical losses, or a maximum of $500,000. The agency offers additional programs, such as technical assistance, to eligible farmers.

In 2005, Gov. Perry requested a statewide drought declaration to pave the way for federal assistance for all farmers and ranchers who suffered losses due to extremely dry conditions; the USDA approved assistance for 245 Texas counties last year.

http://www.governor.state.tx.us/divisio ... 09-14.1219

Excerpt:

Total losses and possible aid

Adding up the crop losses, supplemental irrigation costs, and lost grazing capacity, the total direct impact of drought conditions in 2006 on Nebraska crop and livestock producers is estimated at nearly $342 million. There are some policies and programs to help partially offset these losses, including crop insurance indemnities and emergency haying and grazing of Conservation Reserve Program acres.

Agricultural disaster assistance as currently proposed in Congress also would provide some relief with payments to livestock producers for part of their losses in 2005 and 2006 and payments to program crop producers for certain economic losses. But, crop disaster assistance provisions in the current proposal would cover crop losses related only to the 2005 crop, not the 2006 crop.

Regardless of how much assistance might be provided, it is clear that the effect of the drought is significant and will impact farm income and cash flow levels on Nebraska farms and ranches.

http://www.agriculture.com/ag/story.jht ... ref=ag1001

And then there are some crops, like grapes, being purposely left in the field (on the vine):

September 26, 2006

Price and Demand Down for 2006 Wine Grapes
San Joaquin County grape growers have a bad hangover. California's 2005 bumper winegrape harvest is depressing prices and demand, even though this year's crop is relatively light, to the point where some vineyards may go unpicked.

Merlot and Cabernet Sauvignon, both red wine grape varieties widely planted in the county, are in particular straits, industry experts said Monday.

"We're seeing a fair-size crop that is not being bought up. There's a potential for a lot of fruit being left in the field this year, and we're seeing very low prices on what is being sold," said Rodney Schatz, owner of Mokelumne Rim Vineyards in Acampo.
"This year, there's many of us with fields that (aren't getting) sold," agreed Keith Watts, a Lodi-area grower. Vineyard operators have struggled with low grape prices for the past several years. However, Watts added, "This is definitely going to be one of my worse years in the cycle."
In the late 1990s, area growers enjoyed a stretch of strong demand with prices averaging more than $500 per ton, up to an average $532 per ton in 1998, according to San Joaquin County Agricultural Commissioner's Office.

That good fortune, however, encouraged a surge in new vineyard plantings, and since 2000, average county winegrape prices fell to a little more than $400 per ton before dipping to a dismal $366 per ton in 2003. A short crop and slight price gain in 2004 offered hope that an upswing was starting only to be dashed by the 2005 harvest.

"We were on the path to price recovery, but that huge crop not only knocked us sideways, but backwards," said Mark Chandler, executive director of the Lodi-Woodbridge Winegrape Commission.
The big crop's impact was exacerbated by wineries buying so-called overage, fruit produced in excess of contracted amounts, for a minimal $100 per ton, barely enough to cover the cost of harvesting, he noted.

"The wineries bought a lot of overage fruit last year at $100 a ton," Watts agreed.
"It creates a situation where they don't have to go out this year and purchase fruit."
And he added that growers might want to avoid repeating that pattern this year, even if it means leaving fruit unpicked.

"We're kind of afraid to sell it for a low price for fear it will go back into the tanks and haunt us next year," Watts said.
Bulk-wine imports are also undercutting prices, Chandler said.

"It's not just the oversupply in California. It's the oversupply overseas," he said. Some of the largest wineries are global operations with vineyards in places like Australia and South America.
One major bulk-wine broker, discounted that.

"I really don't think that's the issue," said Glenn Proctor of Joseph W. Ciatti Co. in San Rafael.
"What we're still feeling here is a very large 2005 crop," he said. Winery storage tanks around the state still contain wine from last year. "Because of that, they just don't have a great need of the 2006 vintage."
Wine imports, however, are a long-term challenge to California grape and wine producers.

Proctor noted that sales of California wines have grown about 2 percent to 3 percent annually, while overall U.S. wine consumption has risen 5 percent per year. There difference is that wine imports have seen roughly 7 percent yearly gains.

"We, as California wines, are losing market share to the imports," Proctor said.
Schatz, who is also chairman of the California Association of Winegrape Growers, said an effort is underway to meet that challenge.

"We're beginning to understand; it's truly a world market. There's no doubt about it," he said. "A truckload of wine is only a boat ride away."
Last week, he and other leaders of state and regional growers group got together to discuss ideas to market and promote California wine.

"That's where the effort needs to be," agreed Proctor, himself a grape grower. "... We've got to figure out a way to be on the top of consumers' minds."
Schatz and other association officials hope to have a campaign concept in place by the end of the year, so early next year they can try to get other winegrape growers to put money into the effort.

"Are you willing to invest in some marketing in this state and going out and grabbing your destiny in your own hands?" asked Karen Ross, CAWG president.
"I'm absolutely, 100 percent supportive of that," Watts said of promoting California wine. "I think the growers should be ready to support that with money."

Grapes are San Joaquin County's second-most-valuable cash crop, surpassed only by milk. Area vineyards brought growers an estimated $290 million in gross sales last year.
Contact reporter Reed Fujii at (209) 546-8253 or rfujii@recordnet.com

http://www.avenuevine.com/movabletype/a ... 01870.html

Farming is a very fickle business and I'm not buying their whinning about a shortage of illegal workers (cheap labor) causing a rise in prices at the grocery store. This year alone I've read various news stories regarding massive crop losses due to drought and flooding. Heck, I even heard something the other day about an early freezes destroying massive peach crops. Overall, it sounds like it's been a bad year for crops that prefer plenty of moisture and a good year for crops that thrive in dry weather. Basically, there are a lot of angles to consider when talking about produce prices at the grocery store - cheap labor is only one small aspect of the big picture!

The following story is an interesting article that disputes the farming communities claims even further:


Labor Shortages Don't Materialize in California

By Jim Downing, September 12, 2006

"All year, California farm groups have complained that congressional inaction on overhauling immigration laws, coupled with tightening border controls, would lead to a critical shortage of labor.

"With harvest time having arrived, state agricultural leaders are preparing to join their counterparts from around the country this week for a major lobbying push in Washington. They have been gathering anecdotes describing what they say is a damaging labor crisis in the state: Overripe pears are rotting in Sacramento and Lake counties, peaches went unpicked near Fresno, and according to one industry group, at least a few farmers are contemplating a move to Mexico, where cheap labor is plentiful and legal."

Downing's article went on to debunk the main claim:

"So far, however, state surveys show no discernible drop in total farm employment for May, June and July, though an uptick in farm wages suggests a tighter labor supply�

"Looking only at state agricultural employment data, though, there's little sign of farm jobs going unfilled. The market usually varies seasonally with about 300,000 jobs in the winter rising to roughly 430,000 jobs from May through September. This year�at least through July, the latest figures available�was little different.�

Metropolitan news outlets like the New York Times are particularly gullible when being snowed by the agricultural interests' public relations flacks. Big city reporters and editors just don't understand the peculiarities of agricultural economics:

First, the ungrasped key to understanding the Great Pear Crisis comes in the opening lines of Julia Preston�s NYT article:


"The pear growers here in Lake County waited decades for a crop of shapely fruit like the one that adorned their orchards last month� 'I felt like I went to heaven,' said Nick Ivicevich, recalling the perfection of his most abundant crop in 45 years of tending trees."

Oh yeah? A basic rule of agricultural economics: a good year for a crop tends to be a bad year for the crop's farmers. When the harvest is abundant, prices go down and the cost of hiring enough labor to pick all the extra produce goes up. Sometimes it doesn't even pay to harvest the full crop.

Second, there are dozens of different crops. Every year there's an over-abundance of something.


If it's not pears, it's walnuts or strawberries or something else. That allows the PR consultants to concoct fill-in-the-blanks press releases about the shortage of ____ pickers long before the harvest begins.

Third, due to weather fluctuations, crops mature at different times, making efficient scheduling of labor difficult.


For example, according to Downing�s Bee story, Lake County pears normally ripen after Sacramento Delta pears, so the same workers can pick both. But this year, unusual weather delayed the Delta pears�meaning the experienced crews were still tied up in the Delta when the huge crop in Lake County ripened on roughly its normal schedule.

This unavoidable uncertainty means that harvesting is prone to a hurry-up-and-wait syndrome making it an inefficient user of labor. Citing Philip Martin, the UC Davis economist who is the leading expert on farm laborers, Downing explained:

"The agricultural labor market in California differs from other industries in that the total number of laborers in any year is typically much larger than the number of jobs. A state study based on 2001 data found that while the number of farm jobs averaged 388,000 through the year, about 1.1 million different people filled those jobs."

In other words, the growers suck in three people from south of the border for every job they have on average.

The social problem with this inefficiency is this: the farm owners aren't paying the full cost of their illegal laborers. The farmers are massively cost-shifting to the public. We pick up the tab for their workers' medical care, their workers' children's education, and so forth. Thus, the inevitably awkward use of labor on farms exacerbates the growers� socialization of what should be their costs.

Fourth, farm jobs are a "gateway drug" for illegal immigration, luring in huge numbers of immigrants who get used up and then move on to something else, leaving the growers with a voracious hunger for new illegal immigrants.


For instance, pear-picking is a young man's job in California because there has been an endless supply of young men from south of the border to clamber up and down ladders.

In contrast, in Spain, growers have bought motorized picking platforms that don't burn out their employees as fast.

Fifth, the cost savings to consumers from cheap farm labor are minimal.


Of course, politicians who rely on agribusiness campaign contributions would have you believe otherwise:

"Feinstein predicted sharp increases in the prices of fruits and vegetables, and a revolt by consumers if they find themselves faced with �buying lettuce at $2 a head or more, or broccoli at $5 a head or anything else because of the dramatic shortage.� [ A Plea to Save State's Farmers, By Carolyn Lochhead, San Francisco Chronicle, 9/30/06]

Oh yeah (again)? The official Consumer Price Index inflation rate for food and beverages was only 2.5% in the year ending last August, compared to an overall inflation rate of 3.8%.

Consider strawberries, the notoriously labor-intensive crop called " la fruta del diablo" by the stoop laborers who pick them. The San Francisco Chronicle quoted economist Martin:

��If (the consumer) spends $1 on a pint of strawberries, the farmer's getting 18 cents. He gives about one-third of that to farmworkers, so they make 6 cents.� So even if the labor cost were to double, that would still only be a 6 cent increase per pint.� THE IMMIGRATION DEBATE | Effect on economy depends on viewpoint, by Carolyn Said, May 21, 2006]

For many fresh fruits and vegetables, the price increase would be significantly less. And, over time, growers would mechanize or, in the rare cases where that was impossible, would shift their operations to Mexico.

Sixth, farm work attracts to America laborers who even by the standards of illegal immigrants bring minimal levels of human capital with them.


Many farmworkers from Mexico don't even speak Spanish. There are approximately 100,000 Mixtec-speaking Indians in California now. How they are going to assimilate into the American middle class when they haven't assimilated into the Mexican working class in the 485 years since Cortez?

Seventh, as historian Cletus E. Daniel has pointed out, the defining characteristic of California's corporate farms has been " the search for a peasantry." Does 21st Century California truly need more peasants?


As the great management guru Peter Drucker pointed out in 2004:

"But the immigrants have a mismatch of skills: They are qualified for yesterday's jobs, which are the kinds of jobs that are going away."

But if California's Big Ag continues to get its way, these primitive jobs will be around forever�along with an endless stream of new peasants...and an endless supply of new social and political problems for ordinary Americans.
[/quote]

http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/read ... Num=161681

These folks may be able to play their elected representatives for fools - probably because most of them actually know very little regarding the agricultural industry - but the rest of us aren't falling for it! Honestly, it wouldn't surprise me if some in Congress are naive enough to believe absolutely everything they are told by the agricultural industry lobbyist. These folks have no interest in doing their own research, because it's just to much trouble and time consuming.