California raw almonds must be treated, judge rules | McClatchy Washington Bureau

×
Sign In
Sign In
    • Customer Service
    • Mobile & Apps
    • Contact Us
    • Newsletters
    • Subscriber Services

    • All White House
    • Russia
    • All Congress
    • Budget
    • All Justice
    • Supreme Court
    • DOJ
    • Criminal Justice
    • All Elections
    • Campaigns
    • Midterms
    • The Influencer Series
    • All Policy
    • National Security
    • Guantanamo
    • Environment
    • Climate
    • Energy
    • Water Rights
    • Guns
    • Poverty
    • Health Care
    • Immigration
    • Trade
    • Civil Rights
    • Agriculture
    • Technology
    • Cybersecurity
    • All Nation & World
    • National
    • Regional
    • The East
    • The West
    • The Midwest
    • The South
    • World
    • Diplomacy
    • Latin America
    • Investigations
  • Podcasts
    • All Opinion
    • Political Cartoons

  • Our Newsrooms

You have viewed all your free articles this month

Subscribe

Or subscribe with your Google account and let Google manage your subscription.

Politics & Government

California raw almonds must be treated, judge rules

Michael Doyle - McClatchy Newspapers

March 09, 2009 06:25 PM

WASHINGTON — A federal judge Monday upheld requirements that raw California almonds be treated to protect consumers from salmonella poisoning.

In a blow to organic almond producers and handlers, the Washington, D.C.-based judge rejected challenges to pasteurization requirements designed by the Almond Board of California. The Agriculture Department formally imposed the rules in March 2007, setting off sparks.

The ruling issued by U.S. District Judge Ellen Segal Huvell did not directly address the merits of the almond pasteurization standards. Instead, Huvell dismissed largely on technical grounds the complaint filed by Fresno-based farmer Nick Koretoff, Livington-based farmer Cynthia Lashbrook and others.

Huvell determined the farmers had failed to exhaust potential administrative remedies. Moreover, the judge said farmers might not have legal recourse even if they could prove the safety rules would cause economic injury.

"Their fundamental concern is with the impact of the treatment regulation on their ability to sell their almonds in a niche organic market at a premium," Huvelle noted, adding that "the Supreme Court (has) specifically recognized that not every loss would qualify as a deprivation of a definite personal right of the producer."

Almond Board and Agriculture Department officials were unfamiliar with the judge's decision and offered no comment on it.

But while rather technical in nature, the 11-page ruling promises real-world consequences in the San Joaquin Valley, which dominates U.S. almond production. Among other things, the Agriculture Department estimates anti-salmonella treatments will add somewhere between two cents and seven cents per pound to the cost of almonds.

The 10-member almond board, based in Modesto, administers the federal marketing order by which the $2.5 billion-a-year industry regulates quality control, research and advertising. The board recommended new safety rules in 2006 following incidents of salmonella contamination in 2001 and 2004, and the Agriculture Department subsequently put them in place.

The new rules required almond handlers to achieve a stricter reduction in salmonella bacteria count, by pasteurizing the nuts before shipping. Pasteurization methods range from blanching and steam treatments to use of chemicals.

"While contamination in almonds is not common, the industry determined that aggressive measures were necessary to prevent any other occurrences," the almond board stated at the time the rules were imposed.

Organic almond growers, though, claimed in their lawsuit filed in September that the new requirements "functionally shut them out of the organic market." The growers stated that "substantial amounts" of their almonds could not be sold in the last two years.

"(Organic almond) handlers have built their businesses, in part, by marketing raw almonds to customers interested in buying food that is minimally processed, free from the use of chemicals, and not exposed to heat treatments, roasting, or other processes," the lawsuit stated.

Raw almonds could be sold for up to 40 percent more than treated almonds, the unhappy growers noted.

The 2001 salmonella outbreak first identified in Canada was traced back to bulk raw almonds. A second salmonella outbreak in 2004 resulted in the recall of 15 million pounds of almonds. Consumer confidence falls with every food scare, industry leaders note.

Read Next

Latest News

Trump administration aims to stop professional baseball deal with Cuba

By Franco Ordoñez

December 29, 2018 02:46 PM

The Trump administration is expected to take steps to block a historic agreement that would allow Cuban baseball players from joining Major League Baseball in the United States without having to defect, according to an official familiar with the discussions.

KEEP READING

MORE POLITICS & GOVERNMENT

Congress

’I’m not a softy by any means,’ Clyburn says as he prepares to help lead Democrats

December 28, 2018 09:29 AM

Courts & Crime

Trump will have to nominate 9th Circuit judges all over again in 2019

December 28, 2018 03:00 AM

Investigations

Cell signal puts Cohen outside Prague around time of purported Russian meeting

December 27, 2018 10:36 AM

Congress

Lone senator at the Capitol during shutdown: Kansas Sen. Pat Roberts

December 27, 2018 06:06 PM

Elections

California Republicans fear even bigger trouble ahead for their wounded party

December 27, 2018 09:37 AM

Congress

Does Pat Roberts’ farm bill dealmaking make him an ‘endangered species?’

December 26, 2018 08:02 AM
Take Us With You

Real-time updates and all local stories you want right in the palm of your hand.

McClatchy Washington Bureau App

View Newsletters

Subscriptions
  • Newsletters
Learn More
  • Customer Service
  • Securely Share News Tips
  • Contact Us
Advertising
  • Advertise With Us
Copyright
Privacy Policy
Terms of Service