Title: Notes on Vegetable Growers' Meeting, Belle Glade Civic Center, Tuesday, April 25, 1967
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00094254/00001
 Material Information
Title: Notes on Vegetable Growers' Meeting, Belle Glade Civic Center, Tuesday, April 25, 1967
Physical Description: 5 leaves : ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Rosenberger, Stanley E.
Orsenigo, J. R.
Vegetable Growers' Meeting, (1967)
Donor: unknown ( endowment )
Publisher: Florida Agricultural Extension Service, University of Florida, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences
Place of Publication: Belle Glade, Fla.
Publication Date: 1967
Copyright Date: 1967
 Subjects
Subject: Vegetables -- Congresses -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Genre: government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
Congresses   ( lcsh )
 Notes
General Note: Caption title.
General Note: "John H. Causey, Associate County Agent, Presiding."
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00094254
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 433010962

Full Text

'ARIDA AG CULTURAL EXTEN81ON SERVICE
UNlVI tSITY OF FLORIDA
INWIrrUTE OP -OOD AND AGRICULTURAL. OCINCES

OOU.e.a OP ACORCUL.TUnI AGoRICULTUA. EXTENISON SRVICC AmQRIUL.TRAL. EXPRIMNT STATmONS "140sn. onr IP Mr O
II i i m I i II l I I
HUMF L P. 0. Box 987
UI -mLaxr. Belle Glade, Florida '33430

AUG 10 1f7 I 0S ON VEGETABLE GROWERS' MEETING
u 10 ele G1 de Civic Center, Tuesday, April 25, 1967
John H. ausey, Associate County Agent, Presiding
'F A.S.- Urniv. of F
MARKETING OP VEGETABLES -- DR. STANLEY E. ROSENBERGER

I. Recent SMI Produce Buyers School: beneficial, informative, instructive,

a. What do supermarket people look for? It depends on which level of responsi-
bility they represent. Field lookers or buyers speak for the merchandiser not
necessarily representing him, but many times misrepresenting him.

b. How can we get growers to understand what the buyers and merchandisers can use?
Growers should visit supermarket operations, learn how they function, to get
a better understanding and more knowledge,

c. Value of growers-merchandisers school? To improve marketing through better
support.

d. Right or wrong, what are the major marketing problems in vegetables as seen by
merchandisers? Too much varies with the man.

e. What do merchandisers want? Good, fresh, beautiful merchandise. They are not
interested in how it got to the terminal end or in what kind of containers.
At least this is what some claim.

f. Buyers feel their importance, they know it "all" and are experts in antici-
pating consumer demands and product movement at various price levels.

II. Merchandisers' position characterized by:

a. Minimum wage law, in effect for several years; equates labor at $1,60 per hour
but at 40% effective output, this amounts to 70 per minute. Because of the
labor rates, merchandisers insist that produce be consumer-ready on arrival.
They want a one-time handling operation from field to consumer in unitized
or prepackaged form.

b. The hourly wage at the shipping point is believed to be lower than at the
terminal, hence merchandisers feel that preparations should occur at the
shipping point.

c. Use of machinery and hence greater productivity through specialization appear
more adaptable to the producing end of the vegetable business, at least in
the merchandiser's mind.

III. Merchandising is being oriented to consumer-ready produce, i.e. carrot, potato,
radish. Celery, corn and lettuce appear to be in the transition stage. The
sizing problem remains critical. Percentage grading will decrease with time
because of economics. Handling and shipping unsaleable items will become too
expensive. Repeat! Merchandisers want 100% consumer saleable produce ready
to go on the shelves and into the shopping carts.

O OPw ATwI E XTrMON WORK IN AQRICULTUMR AND HOMU ECONOMIC, S.TATl OF PI ORIDA. COAUIOe O ARIOUUTUR".
UNIVUWT OFP POarA, U. S. OrPARTMUIN oW AOROICU.TUNS. ANDo sOAMO O COUNTY COMMIsMNMa, OCQoPaIaWa






a,. Information on supplies will become increasingly itpottant. A quick revti
of celery shipments on a weekly basis illustrates that supplies in the mtd- -
winter of 1965-66 and 1966-67 were greater than the past 3-year average fot -
crates shipped. Convert to a daily basis, use the same carlot shipments, but
add the unused and unwanted celery available at the terminals and a new set of
circumstances. The supply and demand factor is critical; it's hard to con-
trol market supplies from this end without timely knowledge of "cleanup" rate
at other end.

b. Can marketing be planned on a pre-planting basis? Some contracts, agreements "
and techniques should be made for marketing when planting decisions are made,

c. Some merchandisers have produce training classes for handling, preparation
and display, but this labor may turn over faster than the produce even after
expensive training.

d. There should be cross-pollination among ideas and decisions of producers,
shippers, transportation agencies and merchandisers to develop mutual under ,
standing and effective planning in the total marketing system (from farm to
consumer).

QUESTIONS:

A. What do you do when the buyers insist on putting 70 pounds of celery into a
60 pound crate? The "field looker" may prefer a bulging package because he
thinks it is a better buy. However, the merchandiser sees the damage done
and tends to reject it if possible.

B. How can communications between field and terminal be improved? Through
visiting, interchanges between growers and merchandisers as well as developing
better sources and systems of market information.

C. Would consumer packaging at the shipping point be helpful? Yes, if it reduces
handling or aids in the product protection.

D. Prepackaging is an added expense to the grower, is there any evidence that the
buyer will pay for this preparation? Unfortunately, there will be no adequate
direct repayment for such preparative services. In time, this will be the
only method of selling.

E, Will a standard container be adopted for corn in the future? The merchandiser
prefers a fixed count of saleable items.

F. Comment: labor prices may differ between shipping point and terminal, but
so does labor efficiency.

QUOTE FROM VEGETABLE CROPS DEPARTMENT "VEGETARIAN". May 1, 1967

FRESH PRODUCE BUYER'S SCHOOL.

"In early April, the University of Florida conducted a six-day Short Course
for 52 fresh produce buyers who are members of the Super Market Institute.
This group represented many millions of dollars of buying potential for
Florida's citrus and vegetables. For example, one of these men was in charge
of fresh produce purchases for 485 stores owned by his company.

We believe that anybody interested in the vegetable industry could have learned
something from this school. These include growers, shippers, transportation
people and the fresh produce men who warehouse and retail our products. Many
points need improvement from the field to the consumer's table. This was






especially highlighted in reports by a grower and a produce buyer who spent
two weeks observing and studying each others' operations.

Here are some of the more important deficiencies as pointed out during the
school:

(1) Permitting produce to overheat in the field, by delays in transit to
packing house and on the platform.
(2) Inadequate precooling caused by insufficient capacity, reducing time in
cooler, etc.
(3) Bulge packing or forcing too much produce into the container with re-
suiting injury to produce.
(4) Inadequate grading and limited use of grade standards.
(5) Improper closure of boxes (pointed out as example in sweet corn).
(6) Improper loading for long distance transit.
(7) Over-jarring of produce in transit.
(8) Inadequate refrigeration in transit.
(9) Specifications often attributed to some buyers that may not be best or
even necessary (Example--Shanks and flags on corn).
(10) Rejection of produce at terminals.
(11) Price differential between F.O.B. to grower and that charged the con-
sumer.
(12) A general lack of communication between and among all segments of the
fresh produce industry.

Please note that these points are directed to growers, handlers, precoolers,
middlemen, transporters, wholesalers, retailers, etc. Most people involved
seem to agree that remedies for most of the above deficiencies would be
fairly simple, but implementation may be more difficult."


WEED CONTROL IN VEGETABLE CROPS DR. J. R. ORSENIGO

A. For full comments please refer to the Minutes of the December 27, 1966 Meeting.
If you have lost or misplaced your copy, please advise and we will supply you
an additional copy.

B. USE OF OIL-ATRAZINE MIXTURES FOR CORN.

Recent commercial activity has stimulated local interest in non-phytotoxic
oils as adjuvants for postemergence herbicides in corn and sugarcane. A mimeo-
graph discusses these oils and the role a specific oil could play in Glades
weed control; unfortunately, the mimeo is largely inaccurate & misleading.

Field usage of this one oil seems baded on apparent successes in experiments
under more temperate northern climates distinct from the Glades area. Con-
sistent, successful use of these herbicide-oil combinations is not reported
in the literature; generally, non-phytotoxic oil/herbicide combinations pro-
S vide better annual broadleaf than annual grass weed control as oil-atrazine
mixtures at the commercial level. Few states recommend these combinations,
but more than 2 million gallons of non-phytotoxic oils will be used with
herbicides in the principal corn and soybean areas this season.

Current commercial development has ignored Florida and local research and ex-
perience with non-phytotoxic oil-herbicide combinations. Local research
experience with non-phytotoxic oils since 1962 is summarized below.

Both phytotoxic and non-phytotoxic oil carriers were evaluated with 2,-4D for
postemergence weed control in 1962 without marked advantage for the oils (EES
Mimeo Report 63-1).




-4-


Rerbitidally effective combinations for postemergence weed taotrol included
atratine,dalapon and diuron with surfactant or with BAP 271 nonphytotoxic oil
in 1964 (1964 Annual Report Fla. Agricultural Experiment Station, page 268).


Also in 1964, postemergence herbicides applied in BAP 271 nonphytotoxic oil-
water emulsions (5 gal, oil to 45 or 95 gal. water per acre) caused more
corn injury than the same herbicides with surfactan~s, and annual grass con-
trol was not improved (EBS Exp. UPR 52-64).

Annual grass control with 1 lb. of atrazine and 5 gpa nonphytotoxic oil (water
emulsion) was superior to the sarte rate of atrazine and surfactant in post-
emergence evaluations (BBS Mimeo Report 65-5).

Atrazine at 2 lb/A plus 2k% nonphytotoxic oil-water emulsions of EAP 250 +
surfactant, Sun 7n, Sun 11, Sun 11E, Texaco 522, Texaco 769 and Texaco 6140
oils provided postemergence annual grass control inferior to the same rate of
atrazine plus the surfactants used locally in cane (EES Mimeo Report 67-6).

The performance of atrazine nonphytotoxic oil mixtures in local cane experi-
ments is summarized below. In no case did an oil-atrazine mixture provide
annual grass control superior to the recommended postemergence programs.

1965 Two applications made with shield sprayer (50 gpa) to Cl. 41-223.


1. Rand weeded

2. 3 lbs/A atrazine
80W + 5% oil

3. 2 lbs/A fenac +
1% lbs/A 2,4-D


3.3 tons sugar/A


3.3 tons sugar/A


3.6 tons sugar/A


1965 Two applications broadcast overall (40 gpa) to C.P. 50-28.


1. 2k Ibs/Atrazine 80W + 5% oil

2. 1 lb/A Atraxine 80W + 4 lb/A
2,4-D + 4% Surfactant


4.50 tons sugar/A


4.53 tons sugar/A


1966 Two applications broadcast overall (40 gpa) twin-row Cl. 41-223.


1. 2% Ibs/A Atrazine 80W +
5% Esso oil

2. 24 Ibs/A Atrazine 80W +
57 Sun 11E

3. 24 Ibs/A Atrazine 80W +
5% Tex 6140

4. 1 lb/A Atrazine 80W +
4 Ib/A 2,4-D + 4%7 surfactant

5. 2 lbs/A fenac + 1 lb/A 2,4-D

1966 Three applications broadcast overall.

1. 24 lbs/A Atrazine 80W +
5% Esso oil


44.1 tons cane/A


50.4 tons cane/A


48,9 tons cane/A


49.8 tons cane/A

52.1 tons cane/A


6.85 tons sugar/A


_


B
,-
a








2. 1 lb/A Atrazine 80W +
j lb/A 2,4-D + %% surfactant


7.39 tons sugar/A


Summary: Nonphytotoxic oils have not improved perfornance(or economics) over
recommended atrazine + 2,4-D + surfactant nor hive the oils consistently
increased control of larger grasses or influenced yields.

There are no recommendations for grower use at this time; the local research
program with the nonphytotoxic oil-herbicide combinations is continuing.

C. IS A CORN-BEAN ROTATION POSSIBLE WHEN ATRAZINE IS USED?

Dr. brsenigo: Yes, on muck especially. Use Atrazine 80W at not more than
1.5 lbs/treated A for early postemergence annual grass and broadleaf control,
grow crop to maturity, plow disc plant.

D. WHAT IS THE BEST CONTROL FOR LATE STICKERWEED INFESTATIONS IN CORN?

Dr. Orsenigo: Prevent late infestations. Get stickerweed while young, small
and tender with directed applications of 2,4-D or atrazine.

E. WHAT CAUSES THE CHLOROSIS (CHLORONEMIA) AND DEATH OF THE MARGINS OF THE OLDER
AND LOWER LEAVES OF ESCAROLE AND OTHER LEAFY CROPS?

Low soil moisture, low relative humidity, gutation from leaf margins and
possible increased soil surface temperature.














John H. Causey
Associate County Agent


5-31-67




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs