Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Capital press. (Salem, OR) 19??-current | View Entire Issue (June 16, 2017)
12 CapitalPress.com June 16, 2017 ‘The entire industry will be working to promote the brand’ COSMIC from Page 1 They are the top agricultural commodity, grossing $2.4 bil- lion annually. About 65 percent of the apples grown in the U.S. come from Washington or- chards. For three weeks in April and May, Anderson laid out neat rows and hauled trees and fertilizer, helping his three workers plant by hand 2,200 Cosmic Crisp trees on a little over 2 acres. Elsewhere in Cen- tral Washington, other grow- ers planted up to 20,000 trees apiece, mostly by machine. Anderson is optimistic about the new apple. “It’s something being heav- ily promoted, sounded like it might be fun. And, yes, I’m looking for better returns,” said Anderson, 64, who with his wife, Sally, runs the orchard. Anderson tore out Fuji ap- ple trees last fall to make room for his Cosmic Crisp. “Fuji are very late and I don’t have a long enough growing season. There have been years I picked them in the snow and years they froze on the trees,” Anderson said. About the apple Cosmic Crisp, once known only by its breeding name, WA 38, is the result of a cross be- tween Enterprise and Honey- crisp apples made 20 years ago by apple breeder Bruce Barritt and his team at the Washing- ton State University Tree Fruit Research and Extension Cen- ter in Wenatchee. The “parent” varieties were chosen for their outstanding fl avor, color, stor- age ease and resistance to dis- ease and disorders, according to Barritt. His successor, Kate Evans, says Cosmic Crisp rated “sta- tistically signifi cantly” better in consumer tests of its taste and texture. It has a sweet, tangy fl avor the industry believes consumers will like better than the popular Honeycrisp — and it’s easier to grow and store. Carolyn Ross, WSU asso- ciate professor of food science, led the naming process in 2014, settling on Cosmic for the ap- ple’s lenticels, tiny skin pores that look like starbursts, and Crisp, referencing its fi rmness and relationship to the Honey- crisp. Unprecedented plan Even after the new variety was developed it took years before the fi rst commercial or- chards were planted this spring. Nurseries had to build up enough Cosmic Crisp “mother” trees to provide scion material for budding onto rootstock. Af- ter budding, it takes two years to grow the trees for orchard planting. This spring, the fi rst 630,000 Cosmic Crisp trees were plant- ed. An estimated 5 million trees will go out during each of the next two springs. This rapid roll-out marks a fi rst for the industry. “The 5 million is an ex- tremely high number for any one variety of apple tree to be Washington apple plantings (Percentage of statewide annual plantings by variety) Variety 2015 2016 2017 2018* Red Delicious Golden Delicious Granny Smith Jonagold Gala Fuji Braeburn Cripps Pink Honeycrisp Managed † WA 38 (Cosmic Crisp) Other 2% 0.6 7.2 1.3 10.8 7.2 0.2 6.1 39.9 21 0 3.7 1.7 0.3 0.8 0.6 14.6 11 0 6.1 35.9 26.5 0 2.6 1.7 0.2 2.8 0.2 9.4 10.6 0.1 8 21.8 34.2 7.5 3.5 0.5 0.4 0.5 0 3.7 3.2 0 1.9 12.5 34.4 40 2.5 NOTE: Percentages may not equal 100 due to rounding. *Estimate † Managed varieties, also known as club varieties. Source: Neal Manly, Regal Fruit planted in any given year in the state or nationwide,” said Neal Manly, managing partner of Regal Fruit, an apple breeding and variety management com- pany in Ephrata, Wash. According to Manly’s sur- vey of the state’s nurseries, 40 percent of the trees planted next year will be Cosmic Crisp. Only Red Delicious and Hon- eycrisp reached 40 percent of annual plantings in the past and Gala peaked at 25 percent. Newly planted trees pro- duce few apples in their fi rst two years, so Anderson and other growers will knock them off early so the tree’s energy will go toward growth. Lynnell Brandt, president of Proprietary Variety Manage- ment, a Yakima, Wash., compa- ny WSU hired to help manage the commercialization of Cos- mic Crisp, estimates that near- ly 200,000, 40-pound boxes of Cosmic Crisp apples will debut in U.S. stores from the 2019 crop. That will jump to 1.9 mil- lion boxes in 2020, 5 million in 2021 and 9 million in 2022. At the Washington State Tree Fruit Association meet- ing last December, Robert Kershaw, president of Domex Superfresh Growers in Yaki- ma, said such an accelerated ramp-up has never before been tried. He called it “insanity” and a “gamble” that could end in reward or failure and said it would take the whole industry pulling together to write the Cosmic Crisp success story. West Mathison, president of Stemilt Growers in Wenatchee, said the fastest switch in the consumption of varieties will happen over a fi ve-year span that will “blow people’s hair back.” In the last two seasons, prices for Red Delicious and Gala have crashed because of too much volume and loss of consumer popularity. Brandt anticipates Cos- mic Crisp will replace large amounts of Reds and Gala in Capital Press graphic relatively short order. Older strains of Fuji, Golden Deli- cious, Braeburn, Cameo and Jonagold and even Honeycrisp numbers will diminish, he said. The new mix will be Cos- mic Crisp and proprietary va- rieties, along with some Fuji, Gala, Granny Smith and Hon- eycrisp. “We are hopeful Cosmic Crisp can be the new fl agship of the industry. We have that hope because it’s such a good apple and because the entire industry will be working to promote the brand in a very positive light and the industry has some exclusivity in the North American market, which can enhance the focus,” Brandt said. Washington growers will be the sole source of the new apple in North America for the fi rst decade. Kershaw heads a commit- tee of most of the state’s major tree fruit companies advising Brandt on marketing. “It’s not without confl ict but confl ict is good to sort out all the issues and have a good healthy debate and to make sure we are looking at every- thing from all angles and per- spectives,” Kershaw said. The committee has reached a consensus on every main de- cision, including uniform pack- aging. Grading standards are next and will need to be tightly managed to ensure a successful launch, he said. Financial hopes Honeycrisp is a big mon- ey-maker for the industry, but its margins have begun to nar- row as volume has increased. It’s common for Honeycrisp to sell at wholesale in the $50-$70 per box range while most other unmanaged varieties do well to reach $30. Break-even for or- chards is typically about $17 a box. For Cosmic Crisp, “the ex- pectation is Honeycrisp pric- ing, but the consumer will de- Dan Wheat/Capital Press Ricardo Santacruz reaches for a Cosmic Crisp limb of buds as Eduardo Morales gets ready to wrap the bud. They are part of a crew of 45 budding Cosmic Crisp buds onto rootstock trees at Willow Drive Nursery near Ephrata, Wash., on Sept. 12, 2016. cide. If they sell well at high prices, prices will stay high. If they don’t, prices will need to come down to generate more momentum,” Kershaw said. Red Delicious, the volume king for 82 years, peaked at 61.4 million boxes in 1994 but was still at 39.5 million boxes this year, almost one-third of the state’s apple production. While the volume of Red Delicious has held up, its price hasn’t. It was selling for $11 to $14.90 per box for standard grade, medium size on June 7. In 2014, it bottomed out at $8 per box. At those prices, growers make no money and packer-shipper-marketers, who get their cut fi rst, make little to nothing. Grower costs and packing, shipping and marketing costs all vary, but Anderson, the Manson grower, said on a $30 box of fruit the grower makes one-third and on a $50 box the grower can make two-thirds. Even the popular Honey- crisp has not performed well for him. “I have not done well with Honeycrisp,” he says. “My packouts are poor.” Cosmic Crisp should pro- vide better returns than Honey- crisp because production costs will be lower and storage and packouts — after cull apples are taken out — will be better, Brandt said. He believes the new apple will top 30 million boxes annually. If those numbers hold true and the price stays high, the payoff for the industry would be impressive. In round numbers, just a 10 million-box crop of Cosmic Crisp that sells for $30 per box would gross $300 million; at $50 per box, the crop would gross $500 million. WSU will get a royalty of 4.75 percent of every box that sells for more than $20. On a $500 million crop, 4.75 percent is $23.7 million. There’s also a $1 royalty on every tree sold for planting. Trees generally cost $9, including the royalty. On 10 million trees sold, the royalty is $10 million. Of those total royalties, around 20 percent will go for commercialization costs in- cluding patenting and Propri- etary Variety Management’s fee, said James Moyer, associ- ate dean of research at WSU’s College of Agricultural, Hu- man and Natural Resource Sci- ences. Neither he nor PVM’s Brandt would disclose the man- agement fee. Of the remaining royalties, 10 percent will go to the WSU Offi ce of Commercialization; 10 percent will go to the Col- lege of Agricultural, Human and Natural Resource Scienc- es; 30 percent will be shared by the breeders; and 50 percent will go to WSU plant breed- ing programs with a majority earmarked for apple breeding, Moyer said. “We’re discussing ways in which we could create an en- dowment or some other vehicle to keep the apple breeding pro- gram secure for many years to come,” Moyer said. “We are extremely proud of the breeding program and the excitement it has generated in the industry and we are en- couraged by how the industry has come together to cooperate and guide us in the licensing, marketing and developing stan- dards,” Moyer said. Will it work? While the Washington ap- ple industry is hopeful, the big question remains: Will it work? Most people in the industry are optimistic, but some critics ar- en’t as sure. Desmond O’Rourke, retired WSU agricultural economist and an apple industry analyst, says the roll-out of any new va- riety, even when the supply is limited as a proprietary or club variety, can be challenging. “Unless demand is built up as rapidly as supplies become available, it can be very dif- fi cult to maintain a premium price,” he wrote in the January issue of his “World Apple Re- port.” Yields can fl uctuate widely in new plantings and problems can arise in handling, storage, transportation, retail displays and consumers’ kitchens, he wrote. “Des is saying with niche varieties it is a challenge to keep critical mass. That won’t be true with this. We will have critical mass and we will be able to sustain it,” Brandt said. Market penetration will be much higher than any club va- riety and demand will be driven by the “wow” factor, he pre- dicted. “I have yet to meet anyone who doesn’t like this apple,” he said, “and that will drive huge repeat sales.” The industry needs a new main product, consumers are eager for new varieties and will quickly switch from older ones, Brandt said, adding that chanc- es of success are “very good.” Byron Phillips, a national crop specialist in Wenatchee at Valent USA, a farm chemi- cal producer in Walnut Creek, Calif., talked about the Cosmic Crisp risk in a March 5 Linke- dIn post. He fi gured growers will plant 12 million trees in three years on an average of 1,089 per acre on 11,000 acres. Trees, trellises, land preparation and irrigation equipment will cost $25,000 per acre, or $50,000 per acre if the cost of buying land is included, he said. From that he fi gures a col- lective industry investment of $275 million to $550 million over two years. Brandt countered that grow- ers typically replant various amounts of orchard annually, so it’s not so much additional investment as a shift in invest- ment. “What makes this invest- ment an even bigger gamble is that it is being made on a variety that the end consumer has never tasted, never seen and never heard of,” wrote Phillips, a tree fruit horticul- turalist, fi eldman and grower in Wenatchee over 38 years. He’s served on the Northwest Horticultural Council Science Advisory Board for 14 years, been on Washington Tree Fruit Research Commission com- mittees and is past chairman of the state Commission on Pesti- cide Registration. Cosmic Crisp appearance is “very inconsistent,” he wrote. Appearance has long been a fo- cus of Washington apple sales so shifting to fl avor and crunch could be a challenge, he wrote. “I was just commenting on the gamble the industry is tak- ing,” he told Capital Press. “I hope it works out. Our industry has big risk-takers, which is a great thing.” The appearance is as con- sistent as any apple and may- be more so, said Kershaw, the Domex Superfresh Growers president. Consumers today are about taste, fl avor and texture, he said. “I always tell people that maybe appearance gets a con- sumer to buy the fi rst time, but fl avor is what makes them buy a second time and more,” Kershaw said. “Eating quality is key so we want to focus on eating quality.” While Kershaw has called the fast ramp-up of Cosmic Crisp a “gamble,” he says he thinks it will succeed with may- be some bumps along the way. “The best thing for the in- dustry is to not launch any new varieties that are not exception- al,” he said. “If we are always improving, we have a chance of increasing consumption. … It’s really a simple formula. People eat what they like and we need to make sure we are growing what they like to eat.” ‘Let them use any organic technique they want, McLerran says he quashed a tribe proposal to use EPA funds to sponsor measure to restrict farming but they’ve got to conform to the order’ WEEDS from Page 1 Azure Farms could lose its organic certifi cation for three years if it uses the sprays com- monly used by conventional wheat farmers in the area. Stelzer said mowing weeds is a method of “control,” for ex- ample. County offi cials and lo- cal farmers don’t believe mow- ing is suffi cient. However, County Commis- sioner Tom McCoy said the proposal is intended to let Azure Farms select any organic meth- od it chooses to control weed seeds, rather than have the court dictate a method. “We’ll have them commit to not allowing (weed) seeds to form,” he said. “Let them use any organic technique they want, but they’ve got to con- form to the order.” The pending agreement al- lows Sherman County weed district employees to monitor Azure’s fi elds. They may access the fi elds “by permission and appointment only” and must be accompanied by Azure Farms representatives. If a weed patch is out of compliance, Azure will have seven days to take care of it. If nothing is done, Sherman Coun- ty will take action, which could involve spraying. Azure’s neighbors don’t want seeds from noxious weeds blowing on to their fi elds, and the pending agreement defi nes control to that effect. In windy Sherman County, weed seeds can set sail. The proposed agreement says it may be an option to let some “B” type weeds go to seed when Azure Farms uses vari- ous biological controls. Other methods mentioned in previous discussions include deep tillage, over-fertilization, covering with landscape fabric to block light and water, and spraying with substances such as calcium, manganese or boron to make blooms wilt. Some Sherman County farmers believe Azure Farms should simply spray with an herbicide such as Milestone and endure the loss of organic certifi cation for three years. The farm could then start over with clean fi elds, the conventional farmers argue. Farmers, espe- cially those who grow certifi ed seed, are most concerned about Rush Skeleton weed, Canada Thistle, White Top, Knapweed and Morning Glory. The organic farm’s weed problems have been a local is- sue since 2006, but came to a head this spring when the coun- ty warned it would ask the Or- egon Department of Agriculture to quarantine the 1,922-acre farm if it didn’t control rampant noxious weeds that neighboring wheat farmers said were spread- ing onto their ground. County offi cials warned they would spray herbicide and bill the farm for the work if the problem was not dealt with. The uproar that followed jolted the county. Azure Stan- dard, based in Dufur, Ore., and a major distributor of organic products, ignited a social media campaign that fl ooded county offi cials with telephone mes- sages and an estimated 59,000 emails from around the world. Critics accused the county of planning to “poison” an organic farm with dangerous chemicals and of somehow doing the bid- ding of Monsanto. SENATE from Page 1 a hearing. The Republican-led committee closed the hearing without immediately voting to send McLerran’s confi rmation to the Senate fl oor, where it could be rejected. McLerran told senators he wanted to collaborate with farmers on cleaning up Puget Sound. “I have a deep respect for the agricultural community,” he said. “The EPA is a tough place to be because it’s an organiza- tion that does have regulatory responsibility, but at my core, I’m a collaborative person.” McLerran served as EPA Region 10 administrator for seven years during the Obama administration. The EPA fund- ed the What’s Upstream cam- paign between 2011 and 2016. Ericksen questioned Mc- Lerran about EPA records that show the agency was kept in- formed as the tribe and Strat- egies 360 developed a media campaign to portray farmers as unregulated water polluters. Ericksen told McLerran that farmers saw the campaign “as an attack on a way of life.” Don Jenkins/Capital Press Former Environmental Protec- tion Agency Northwest Adminis- trator Dennis McLerran. “Looking back, do you feel that was a good use of taxpay- er dollars?” Ericksen asked. Said McLerran: “I felt some of it was a bit over the top.” McLerran said he quashed a tribe proposal to use EPA funds to sponsor a statewide ballot measure to restrict farming, but he didn’t con- nect that plan with the broader What’s Upstream campaign. He said he didn’t know about What’s Upstream un- til he had a conference call with the tribe’s environmental policy director Larry Wasser- man in July 2015. McLerran said he asked the tribe to tone down the campaign, but that the EPA didn’t have the au- thority to stop it. McLerran said the next he heard about the campaign was the following spring when What’s Upstream billboards drew the ire of farmers and some federal lawmakers. EPA records show that months earlier McLerran’s staff prepared “talking points” on What’s Upstream in case the subject came up during a meeting in December at the state Department of Ecolo- gy. McLerran said after the hearing Wednesday that he didn’t recall the report on What’s Upstream that EPA staff wrote for him. The EPA at the national level distanced itself from What’s Upstream after the campaign was condemned by some federal lawmakers, including the chairmen of the House and Senate agri- culture committees. The EPA announced it was no longer funding the campaign, even though its earlier position had been that it couldn’t dictate how the tribe and the North- west Indian Fisheries Com- mission spent the money.