The Fruit Growers News

This season’s short crop of tart cherries is unprecedented. Just how much will the lack of fruit affect growers, processors and the groups that promote the fruit remains to be seen.

With the 2002 U.S. tart cherry crop forecast at 59.1 million pounds, down 84% from 2001 and 80% below the 2000 crop, the industry is facing many question marks.

How will it affect growers, processors and marketing organizations?

As a recent report from the Cherry Marketing Institute (CMI) says, farmers are always subject to the effects of Mother Nature, and 2002 is no exception. Following spring frosts with prolonged, below freezing temperatures the tart cherry crop was ruined. It is estimated to be the smallest tart cherry crop since 1938.

“Many growers decided whether or not it was feasible to continue production practices this year,” said Perry Hedin, director of Cherry Industry Administrative Board (CIAB).

Some growers in Michigan, decided to only maintain their trees for the next year, others worked to salvage as much crop as feasible.

“The short crop is sure to have an impact on many people. From people who come and work in the region to harvest, to the supplier of ag chemicals – it has some impact downstream, as well,” said Hedin.

The impact has CMI working at the federal level in support of a disaster assistance program for cherry growers and processors. According to CMI, the 2002 crop failure in Michigan and Utah could be devastating to the industry’s infrastructure. Unfavorable weather is blamed for an estimated 85% crop loss in Utah, while Wisconsin’s crop loss is estimated at 70%.

A tour with representatives of Michigan’s federal legislators took place in Traverse City on June 14; and several Michigan counties were declared ag disaster areas on July 22. CMI also is working with the National Grape Growers and the New York Hort Society on a national disaster assistance program.

“Clearly, it is a unique set of circumstances. It is almost unprecedented – and we were not quite sure how to handled it,” said CherrCo President James Jensen. “But the industry has made an effort to stave off any long term ill-effects. One of the things our group wanted to be sure of is that a one-year problem doesn’t become a multiyear problem.”

The group examined many situations before we established price, and found buyers’ overriding concern was availability rather than price, said Jensen. CherrCo represents about 75% of North America’s tart cherry production.

Overall, it is going to be a tough year for growers and processors, Jensen said. In many instances there is no other production to put through the processing plants. According to Jensen, processing plants in Michigan, Utah and even in Wisconsin will sit idle. It is going to be a real challenge for processors in these three states, he said.

As for federal relief being sought by CMI, “If there’s ever been a year when it is justified, this is the year,” he said.

As far as their budgets go, the promotional organizations are preparing for tough times. To tighten their budget, Hedin has limited travel. CIAB elected not to fund the Michigan Agriculture Statistic Service’s Objective Yield Survey for this year.

The information the survey would have provided in a year like this one did not outweigh the expense, Hedin said. The CIAB saved almost $40,000 by not funding the survey this year.

“While, this year is one without precedent,” said Hedin. “It is important to keep in mind that with the inventory that the processors have on hand, we are certainly going to lessen the impact of what would have had happened, said Hedin.

Due to the crop shortage the CIAB-managed crop reserves were to be released to handlers for sale. The industry should be able to clean out its reserves and go into the next crop year, 2003, with little, if any, inventory, said Hedin. The board released inventory reserves to meet the demand for crop that overshadowed this year’s anticipated harvest.

One of the major reasons for CIAB’s existence is to provide a resource for products for the years when the available supplies fall short of demand, explained Hedin. By having reserves and releasing them back to handlers for use in short years, CIAB can assist the industry in safeguarding markets and lessening the economic impact of shortfalls.

The industry would have been short of demand by 99 million pounds of product. With inventory reserves of 44 million pounds available to the handlers, the industry’s shortfall is reduced to 55 million pounds of product. If the USDA’s purchases are removed from the total demand, the shortfall would be reduced to 31 million pounds.

Whether growers will see money from those released sales depends on whether a processor is a cooperative, or if the independent processor may have paid growers for that product already and already own the inventory.

CIAB’s June newslettercharacterized the crop as exceedingly small, and said everyone: growers, processors, industry organizations, material suppliers, chemical suppliers, implement dealers, cold storage facilities, laborers and many others, will feel the pinch.

Consumers will feel the pinch, as well. The short crop is going to change the price of many items, especially some of the industry’s growth items - those prices are going to be significantly higher, and it could have some impact on future use, said Jensen.