United States 

Department of 

Agriculture FAS Quarterly Reference Guide

Foreign 

Agricultural To World Horticultural Trade: 

Service

Circular Series Trade Issues Edition

FHORT 4-03 

Mar 2004 

Growth in U.S. Specialty Crop Trade is 

Accompanied by Growing Numbers of Trade 

Policy Issues

Imports Exports 

$20 

$15 

$10 

$5 

$0 

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 

Calendar Year 

Billion

Source: Bureau of the Census, DOC

Note: Trade figures include processed and fresh fruits, vegetables, and tree nuts.

Approved by the World Agricultural Outlook Board/USDA 
Horticultural Trade: 

World Trade Issues Edition

CONTACT PHONE PORTFOLIO

FRANK TARRANT 720-6590 DIRECTOR

STACY GEHRT

Administrative Assistant

720-6590

SHARON MCCLURE 720-7931 DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR MARKETING

ANGELLA GREAVES

Administrative Assistant

720-7931

ERIC MOYÈ

Management Analyst

720-6877 Canada/Snapback, NAFTA Quarterly Report, UES Technical Contact, HTP Homepage 

Coordinator, Strawberries 

JEFFREY JONES

Supervisory Marketing Specialist

720-8495

ELIAS OROZCO

Agricultural Economist

720-6791 Honey, hops, blueberries

REY SANTELLA

Agricultural Economist

720-0897 Pears, Cling Peaches, Papayas, Cranberries, and Asparagus

EVELYN ALEXANDER

Marketing Specialist

720-9903 Figs, Vegetables, Dates, New Potatoes, Pomegranates, Apricots

TED GOLDAMMER

Marketing Specialist

720-8498 Cherries, potatoes

SONIA JIMENEZ

Marketing Specialist

720-0898 Citrus, Peaches, Plums, Nectarines, Apples, Section 108 Program

LISA TWEDT

Marketing Specialist

720-6086 Kiwifruit, Cherries, Watermelon, Raisin, Emerging Markets Program, QSP Program, 

GBI Coordinator

INGRID MOHN

Marketing Specialist

720-5330 Tree Nuts, Ginseng, and Hort Buzz Newsletter

KRISTA DICKSON

Marketing Specialist

690-1341 Dried Plums, Tomatoes, Table Grapes, Confectionary, TASC Program

LARRY DEATON 720-3423 DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR ANALYSIS

DEBRA PUMPHREY

Senior Agricultural Economist

720-8899 Fresh and Processed Citrus, Coffee; U.S. Trade Questions on Spices & Essential Oils ; 

Information Technology Coordinator

MARK RASMUSSEN

Senior Policy Analyst

720-7304 Biotech Issues, SPS/Food Safety/Quality Issues Coordinator, Bilateral Technical & Policy Issues

JEFF NAWN

Agricultural Economist

720-1863 Policy Issues Coordinator for Subsidies & Tariff Issues, Tariff Rate Quotas & 

Licensing, Trade Agreements, Multilateral Policy Issues, Kiwifruit

NANCY HIRSCHHORN

Supervisory Agricultural

Economist

720-2974 Situation & Outlook Supervisor, Publication Editor, Export Forecast Coordinator, 

Briefing Paper Coordinator, Key Development Coordinator, Trade Issues Database 

Coordinator, Olives, Mushrooms

KYLE CUNNINGHAM

Agricultural Economist

720-0875 Tree nuts, cut flowers, and nursery products

ROBERT KNAPP

Agricultural Economist

720-4620 Canned Deciduous Fruit and Sugar

SHARI KOSCO

Agricultural Economist

720-2083 Fresh and Processed Vegetables (includes potatoes and tomatoes)

DWIGHT WILDER

Agricultural Economist

690-2702 Dried Fruit, Berries, Beer/Hops, Melons, Tropical Fruit, Stone Fruit, Avocados

HEATHER VELTHUIS

Agricultural Economist

720-9792 Fresh Deciduous Fruit, Table Grapes, Apple Juice

March 2004
Table of Contents

Introduction 

Note to Subscribers of the FAS Quarterly Reference Guide to World 

Horticultural Trade 

Select Horticultural Trade Issues 

Summaries of Barriers to Trade by Commodity 

Horticultural Tariffs for Selected Countries 

2003 Tariff Rates for Selected Commodities in Key Markets 

APHIS Accomplishments for Horticultural Products 

A Summary of Animal, Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) 

Phytosanitary Accomplishments for U.S. Horticultural Products for 2003. 

Foreign Government Market Access Requests 

A List by Region of Foreign Government Requests for Access to the U.S. 

Market for Specific Horticultural Products. 

Technical Assistance for Specialty Crops (TASC) Program 

Fiscal Year 2003 Project Summaries 

Page 

1 

2 

31 

35 

38 

39 

Introduction 

The Trade Policy Edition of the FAS Quarterly Reference Guide to World Horticultural Trade is 

the first of a series of annual reports that provides the status of significant phytosanitary and 

tariff barriers to U.S. exports of horticultural products. The removal of barriers to trade is of 

great importance to the U.S. horticultural industry. The purpose of publishing the information 

contained in this report is to heighten awareness about trade barriers that negatively impact the 

U.S. horticultural industry. 

The implementation of phytosanitary measures and tariffs are accepted methods of protection 

provided such measures are consistent with the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 

(GATT). However, import restrictions imposed on agricultural products that fail to comply with 

international rules are actionable under U.S. trade law and through the World Trade Organization 

(WTO). This report presents trade barriers that adversely affect U.S. horticultural exports that 

may or may not be consistent with international trading rules. 

March 2004 World Horticultural Trade: 

Trade Issues Edition 
The trade barriers summarized in this report are not intended to be an exhaustive list of all trade 

issues of importance to the U.S. horticultural industry. Instead, the report attempts to provide a 

review of various barriers to trade impacting a broad spectrum of U.S. horticultural industry 

interests. The omission of a particular trade issue or country does not imply that it is not of 

concern to the U.S. Government. 

In addressing trade barriers the U.S. Government uses several forums that include bilateral and 

multilateral negotiations, collaborative research, pre-clearance programs, and dispute settlement 

mechanisms. Bilateral and multilateral negotiations on trade barriers may take place within the 

context of the World Trade Organization (WTO), Free Trade Agreements (FTA), Consultative 

Committees on Agriculture (CCA), or the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC). 

Additionally, the pest research, field surveys, and pre-clearance programs that are often funded 

under the Technical Assistance for Specialty Crops (TASC) Program play an important role in 

supporting efforts to remove trade barriers. Finally, if the U.S. Government has sufficient 

evidence demonstrating that a trading partner has failed to address a trade issue within the terms 

and conditions of international trade rules, the U.S. Government may resolve such issues by 

seeking Dispute Resolution within the WTO. 

Acknowledgements: This publication was written by the Horticultural and Tropical Products 

Division of the Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS) with assistance from the U.S. horticultural 

industry, Phytosanitary Import Management Office and Trade Support Team of the Animal and 

Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), the Sanitary and Phytosanitary Affairs Office of the 

U.S. Trade Representative, and the International Trade Policy program area of the Foreign 

Agricultural Service. 

The schedule for the 2004 issues of the FAS Quarterly Reference Guide to World Horticultural 

Trade is as follows: 

1. Production, Supply, and Distribution Edition (January 2004). This publication 

includes 5 years of Production, Supply, and Distribution Data for over 30 products. 

Additional information is available on the web at: ht tp://www.fas.usda.gov/psd/ 

2. Charts Edition - illustrating major trade trends, country features, and commodity 

features (April 2004) 

3. Trade Data Edition (July 2004) 

4. Trade Policy Edition (October 2004) 

These four publications replace the written monthly publication World Horticultural Trade and 

U.S. Export Opportunities. The analytical articles formerly published in World Horticultural 

Trade and U.S. Export Opportunities are now updated on the Horticultural and Tropical 

Products Division Homepage at: http://www.fas.usda.gov/htp/ . 

Horticultural Trade: March 2004 

World Trade Issues Edition 
Directory Issues by Commodity

Commodity Country 

Almonds China

India

India

Apples Australia

China 

Japan

Korea, South 

Mexico 

Mexico 

South Africa

Taiwan 

Cherries Israel

Japan

Mexico

South Africa 

Citrus Argentina 

Australia

China

Korea, South

Korea, South

Mexico

Figs Japan

Lettuce Japan

Papayas Japan

Korea, South

Peaches (Canned) EU

Pears China

Korea, South

Pistachios Israel

Mexico

Issue Page 

In-Shell Tariff 1 

Phytosanitary Restriction 1 

Tariff 2 

Phytosanitary Ban 3 

Phytosanitary Restriction 4 

Phytosanitary Restriction 4 

Phytosanitary Ban 5 

Phytosanitary Restriction 6 

Anti-Dumping Duties 7 

Phytosanitary Ban 7 

Phytosanitary Restriction 8 

Phytosanitary Ban 9 

Phytosanitary Ban 9 

Phytosanitary Restriction 10 

Phytosanitary Ban 10 

Phytosanitary Restriction 11 

Phytosanitary Restriction 11 

Phytosanitary Restriction 12 

Phytosanitary Restriction 13 

Tariff 13 

Phytosanitary Restriction 14 

Phytosanitary Restriction 14 

Phytosanitary Restriction 15 

Non-Technical Barrier 16 

Phytosanitary Restriction 16 

Subsidy 17 

Phytosanitary Ban 18 

Phytosanitary Ban 18 

Non-Technical Barrier 19 

Non-Technical Barrier 19 

March 2004 World Horticultural Trade: 

Trade Issues Edition 
Directory Issues by Commodity – cont.

Commodity Country 

Potatoes Brazil 

Canada 

China 

Japan 

Korea, South 

Mexico 

Taiwan 

Venezuela 

Raisins India 

Stone Fruit Australia 

China 

Mexico 

Mexico 

New Zealand 

Table Grapes Australia 

Tomatoes Mexico and Guatemala 

Mexico 

Walnuts Korea 

Korea 

Issue Page 

Phytosanitary Ban 20 

Technical Barrier to Trade 20 

Phytosanitary Ban 21 

Phytosanitary Ban 22 

Phytosanitary Restriction 22 

Phytosanitary Restriction 23 

Phytosanitary Restriction 23 

Phytosanitary Restriction 24 

Tariff 25 

Phytosanitary Ban 25 

Phytosanitary Ban 26 

Phytosanitary Ban 26 

Phytosanitary Restriction 27 

Phytosanitary Ban 28 

Phytosanitary Restriction 28 

Phytosanitary Ban 29 

Technical Barrier 29 

Tariff 30 

Phytosanitary Ban 30 

Directory Issues by Country

Country Commodity 

Argentina Citrus 

Australia Apples 

Citrus 

Stone Fruit 

Table Grapes 

Brazil Potatoes 

Canada Potatoes 

China Citrus 

Pears 

Potatoes 

Stone Fruit 

Almonds 

Apples 

EU Peaches (Canned)

Guatemala Tomatoes

India Raisins

Almonds 

Almonds 

Issue Page 

Phytosanitary Restriction 11 

Phytosanitary Ban 3 

Phytosanitary Restriction 11 

Phytosanitary Ban 25 

Phytosanitary Restriction 28 

Phytosanitary Ban 20 

Technical Barrier to Trade 20 

Phytosanitary Restriction 21 

Phytosanitary Ban 18 

Phytosanitary Ban 21 

Phytosanitary Ban 26 

In-shell Tariff 1 

Phytosanitary Restriction 4 

Subsidy 17 

Phytosanitary Ban 29 

Tariff 25 

Phytosanitary Restriction 1 

Tariff 2 

Horticultural Trade: March 2004 

World Trade Issues Edition 
Directory Issues by Country – cont.

Country Commodity 

Israel Cherries 

Pistachios 

Japan Cherries 

Figs 

Lettuce 

Papayas 

Apples 

Potatoes 

Korea, South Citrus 

Citrus 

Papayas 

Pears 

Potatoes 

Walnuts 

Walnuts 

Apples 

Mexico Cherries 

Citrus 

Pistachios 

Potatoes 

Stone Fruit 

Stone Fruit 

Tomatoes 

Tomatoes 

Apples 

Apples 

New Zealand Stone Fruit 

South Africa Cherries 

Apples 

Taiwan Potatoes 

Apples 

Venezuela Potatoes 

Issue Page 

Phytosanitary Ban 9 

Non-Technical Barrier 19 

Phytosanitary Ban 9 

Phytosanitary Restriction 14 

Phytosanitary Restriction 15 

Non-Technical Barrier 16 

Phytosanitary Restriction 4 

Phytosanitary Ban 22 

Phytosanitary Restriction 13 

Tariff 13 

Phytosanitary Restriction 16 

Phytosanitary Ban 18 

Phytosanitary Restriction 22 

Tariff 30 

Phytosanitary Ban 30 

Phytosanitary Ban 5 

Phytosanitary Restriction 10 

Phytosanitary Restriction 14 

Non-Technical Barrier 19 

Phytosanitary Restriction 23 

Phytosanitary Ban 26 

Phytosanitary Restriction 27 

Phytosanitary Ban 29 

Technical Barrier to Trade 29 

Phytosanitary Restriction 6 

Anti-Dumping Duties 7 

Phytosanitary Ban 28 

Phytosanitary Ban 10 

Phytosanitary Ban 7 

Phytosanitary Restriction 23 

Phytosanitary Restriction 8 

Phytosanitary Restriction 24 

March 2004 World Horticultural Trade: 

Trade Issues Edition 

Almonds 1

Country: China 

Commodity: Almonds, In-Shell 

Barrier: Tariff 

Issue: China maintains a high tariff on in-shell almonds that hampers exports of U.S. in-shell 

almonds. 

Status: China made concessions on agriculture in order to become a member of the WTO. 

China’s tariff treatment of in-shell almonds is higher than that applied to shelled almonds. 

During 2003 China applied a tariff of 25.2 percent, which decreased to the final bound rate of 24 

percent in 2004. By comparison the tariff on shelled almonds will be reduced from 14 percent to 

the final bound rate of 10 percent in 2004. 

In 2002, the United States exported $4 million of shelled almonds and $696,000 of in-shell 

almonds to China. U.S. in-shell almond shipments represent 67 percent of all in-shell almonds 

imported by China. The U.S. almond industry estimates that removal of import duties on 

almonds would boost Chinese imports of U.S. almonds to more than $45 million. 

China’s almond production is relatively small, about 20,000 tons in 2002. Tree nut merchants in 

China maintain that domestic almond production is trending higher. However, this increase in 

production is not expected to threaten the market share of U.S. almonds due to the relatively high 

quality of imported product. 

Country: India 

Commodity: Almonds 

Barrier: Phytosanitary Barrier 

Issue: The Government of India’s (GOI) new import procedures affect U.S. shipments of 

almonds. 

Status: On January 1, 2004, the GOI implemented the Plant Quarantine (Regulation of Import 

into India) Order (PQO) without WTO notification. The PQO establishes new import procedures 

and quarantine requirements on agricultural products imported into India and have effectively 

halted U.S. almond exports to India. 

The PQO requires that almonds (and dry and fresh fruits) be fumigated with methyl bromide or 

any other fumigant approved by the GOI. The U.S. almond industry’s standard fumigant is 

phospine, which is not currently approved under the PQO. Many U.S. agricultural industries, are 

phasing-out the use of methyl bromide in accordance with the Montreal Protocol including the 

U.S. almond industry. Prior to the PQO, almonds treated with phosphine were allowed entry 

into India. GOI has declined APHIS’ formal request to approve phosphine as an alternative 

fumigant to methyl bromide. APHIS and FAS continue to press India for an immediate remedy 

to this issue. 

March 2004 World Horticultural Trade: 

Trade Issues Edition 
2 Almonds

The PQO also requires that the fumigation be endorsed on the phytosanitary certificate, which 

requires a U.S. government official to be present to monitor the process. Almond handlers are 

experiencing difficulty and incurring higher costs trying to meet GOI’s new import requirements. 

The GOI requires that the almonds be heated to 82°F, a temperature difficult to attain in 

California during the winter season. Many of the fumigation chambers capable of providing this 

service are not centrally located to almond fields. The additional cost of complying with the 

PQO - transporting the almonds to a chamber, fumigating with methyl bromide, phytosanitary 

inspection and certificates fees - are estimated to be up to $900 per load. 

The PQO has already disrupted trade. U.S. exporters have reportedly delayed almond shipments 

to India. In February 2004, the GOI announced that any shipments en route to India prior to 

January 1 be fumigated in the country and released. The Ministry of Agriculture will consider 

shipments en route after January 1 on a case-by-case basis. 

In CY 2002, U.S. agricultural exports to India totaled $274 million. U.S. almonds exports to 

India totaled $68 million, or 25 percent of U.S. horticultural exports to India. U.S. almonds are 

produced exclusively in California and are an important agricultural export reaching $1 billion in 

CY 2003. 

Country: India 

Commodity: In-shell Almonds 

Barrier: Tariff 

Issue: The U.S. almond industry is concerned that the new preferential trade agreement between 

India and Afghanistan will erode market share for U.S. almonds. 

Status: On May 13, 2003, the Government of India (GOI) publicly notified the tariff concessions 

granted in the India-Afghanistan Preferential Trade Agreement. India has offered Afghanistan 

tariff concessions of 50 percent of the applied duty rates. This will lower the price of almonds 

from Afghanistan to within 8 to 10 percent of the average wholesale price of California almonds. 

In addition, the U.S. industry is concerned about the enforcement of the rules of origin under the 

new trade agreement. If rules of origin are not strictly enforced transshipments from Iran into 

Afghanistan may enter India at the preferential tariff rates. This may cause further erosion to 

U.S. market share. It is estimated that in the short-term U.S. almonds may lose 5 to 10 percent of 

the market share. The long-term impacts will depend upon the export supplies available from 

Afghanistan and possible transshipments from Iran. 

Since the agreement is between a WTO member (India) and a non-WTO member (Afghanistan), 

the United States cannot use WTO channels to challenge this preferential trade agreement. 

Horticultural Trade: March 2004 

World Trade Issues Edition 
Apples 3

Country: Australia 

Commodity: Apples 

Barrier: Phytosanitary Ban 

Issue: Biosecurity Australia (BA) prohibits imports of U.S. apples primarily due to concerns that 

apples produced in countries where fire blight is present may transmit this bacterial disease to 

orchards in Australia. 

Status: Australia is reportedly free of fire blight and bans imports of apples from countries 

where fire blight is present. However, APHIS and the Ministry of Agriculture in New Zealand 

have requested BA to provide access to imported apples. Specifically, the U.S. industry is 

interested in developing a market in Australia for apples produced in the Pacific Northwest 

(Idaho, Oregon, and Washington) and later in California. 

APHIS has urged BA to initiate an import risk assessment (IRA) for apples. In March 2000, 

APHIS provided BA a first draft list of pests and diseases known to occur in the Pacific 

Northwest. To date BA has not initiated an IRA for apples and has requested during the January 

2004 technical bilateral a comprehensive pest list reviewed by APHIS. The U.S. apple industry 

has expressed concerns about the delays in BA’s initiation of the IRA. 

The United States and New Zealand contend that commercially packed apples are not a pathway 

for fire blight. On November 25, 2003, the WTO ruled in favor of the United States that Japan’s 

quarantine measures for fire blight imposed on U.S. apples were maintained without scientific 

justification. BA has indicated that it intends to issue a revised draft IRA for New Zealand 

apples taking into account the WTO panel decision. Market access for U.S. apples would then 

be addressed by BA through modifying the import policy for New Zealand apples rather than 

initiating a separate IRA process. 

* See Section titled “Technical Assistance for Specialty Crops Fiscal Year 2003 Project Summaries and 

Allocations” of this periodical for information on TASC projects addressing trade barriers related to this issue. 

March 2004 World Horticultural Trade: 

Trade Issues Edition 
4 Apples

Country: China 

Commodity: Apples 

Barrier: Phytosanitary Restrictions 

Issue: China’s State Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection, and Quarantine 

(AQSIQ) prohibits imports of U.S. apples other than Red and Golden Delicious varieties 

produced in Washington, Oregon, and Idaho due to quarantine concerns over the bacterial 

disease fire blight. 

Status: Despite APHIS’ requests for China to authorize the importation of six additional apple 

varieties (Fuji, Gala, Granny Smith, Rome, Jonagold, and Braeburn) and approve California as 

an eligible producer state in the apple export program to China, AQSIQ has maintained current 

import restrictions on U.S. apples. 

AQSIQ contends that fire blight may be transmitted to China’s domestic crops if import 

restrictions are eased for U.S. apples. However, AQSIQ has not provided APHIS with scientific 

evidence that would justify excluding additional apple varieties and production areas from the 

export program due to fire blight. 

APHIS maintains that mature, symptomless apples produced under commercial conditions have 

not been shown to transmit fire blight. In April 2002, APHIS provided AQSIQ a study 

evidencing this bacterial plant disease is not transmitted through apple shipments. APHIS has 

not received a response from AQSIQ regarding the findings of this study. AQSIQ’s approval of 

access for additional apple varieties to China is critical to the California apple industry. 

In a related matter, on December 10, 2003, the WTO ruled in favor of the United States that 

Japan’s quarantine measures for fire blight imposed on U.S. apples were maintained without 

scientific justification. APHIS is now better placed to press China for movement on U.S. apples 

in light of the WTO ruling. 

* See Section titled “Technical Assistance for Specialty Crops Fiscal Year 2003 Project Summaries and 

Allocations” of this periodical for information on TASC projects addressing trade barriers related to this issue. 

Country: Japan 

Commodity: Apples 

Barrier: Phytosanitary Restriction 

Issue: Japan maintains highly restrictive requirements for U.S. apple imports due to concerns that 

apple imports are a pathway for fire blight. On December 10, 2003, the WTO ruled in favor of 

the United States that Japan’s quarantine measures for fire blight imposed on U.S. apples were 

maintained without scientific justification. 

Status: Japan imposes restrictive import measures for U.S. apples that include frequent, 

intensive orchard inspections, onerous buffer zones around registered orchards, an array of 

treatment requirements (chlorine dip, cold treatment, fumigation) and product segregation. The 

Horticultural Trade: March 2004 

World Trade Issues Edition 
Apples 5

WTO panel and Appellate Body agreed with the United States that mature symptomless apples 

are not a vector for transmission of the bacterium that causes fire blight and that Japan's 

measures are not justified under the WTO SPS agreement. 

After discussions to determine a reasonable implementation period to phase-out existing import 

restrictions for apples, Japan and the United States agreed that Japan will have until June 30, 

2004, to implement new import procedures that are in compliance with the WTO decision. At 

the conclusion of the implementation period, if the United States is not satisfied that Japan's 

implementation meets its WTO obligations, the United States can pursue additional proceedings 

to confirm Japan's continued non-compliance and to receive authorization to retaliate. 

Backed by extensive research supporting the position that mature, symptomless apples are not 

carriers of fire blight, the United States had sought for years to obtain changes in the import 

requirements. Due to Japan’s continued intransigence on the issue, the United States launched a 

WTO dispute settlement case against Japan in March 2002. In light of the recent WTO ruling, 

the USTR and USDA will work with Japan to implement new import requirements. 

* See Section titled “Technical Assistance for Specialty Crops Fiscal Year 2003 Project Summaries and 

Allocations” of this periodical for information on TASC projects addressing trade barriers related to this issue. 

Country: South Korea 

Commodity: Apples 

Barrier: Phytosanitary Ban 

Issue: Korea prohibits the import of U.S. apples due to phytosanitary concerns such as coddling 

moth and fire blight. 

Status: APHIS has been negotiating with Korea to authorize imports of U.S. apples since 1993. 

In 1996, Korea submitted a pest risk assessment for U.S. apples to APHIS that identified 13 

pests, including three spider mites (Yellow, Pacific, and McDaniel) of quarantine concern, and 

requested a proposal for the appropriate mitigation measures. Negotiations have stalled due to 

the U.S. apple industry’s inability to implement proposed field controls or fumigate apples as a 

condition for gaining access to the Korean market. There is a possibility that certain techniques, 

such as irradiation or controlled atmosphere, could allow pest-free apple shipments to Korea. 

These techniques require furthe r research before being adopted by the U.S. horticultural industry. 

In addition to the phytosanitary barrier, Korea imposes an import tariff rate on apples of 45.6 

percent that is prohibitive and will severely limit sales of U.S. apples if access is autho rized. 

March 2004 World Horticultural Trade: 

Trade Issues Edition 
6 Apples

Country: Mexico 

Commodity: Apples (Pacific Northwest) 

Barrier: Phytosanitary Restriction 

Issue: Phase-out of Mexico’s monitoring of the Pacific Northwest (Washington, Oregon, and 

Idaho) apple export program in September 2001, as called for under the agreement with Servicio 

National de Sanidad, Inocuidad y Calidad Agroalimentaria (SENASICA), continues to be 

delayed. Mexico has cited additional pest risk concerns and inspection irregularities as a 

justification for maintaining an inspector in Washington State at a cost to the U.S. apple industry 

of about $150,000 annually. 

Status: In 1999, officials of the SENASICA and APHIS agreed to phase out oversight by 

Mexico of the apple export program by September 2001. Mexico’s oversight of the inspection 

program was to provide assurance to SENASICA that shipments of apples produced in the 

Pacific Northwest are free of the Oriental Fruit Moth. 

During the initial stages of the program, eight inspectors from Mexico monitored the activities of 

U.S. inspectors responsible for certifying apple exports to Mexico. This included treatment 

certifications and shipment verifications on a year-round basis. Over time, as the program 

proved effective, all inspectors except one in Washington State returned to Mexico. 

However, Mexico has cited additional pest risk concerns and packing facility irregularities in 

Washington State as a justification for the continued presence of the Mexican inspector. The 

U.S. industry and certifying state agencies contend that Mexico’s claims are not warranted and 

do not justify the continuing presence of a Mexican inspector. 

Since implementing the program, over 62.5 million cartons have been shipped to Mexico without 

a pest of quarantine significance being detected at the border by Mexican inspectors that would 

threaten Mexico’s quarantine security. 

APHIS has rejected Mexico’s demands for strengthened measures as a condition of the program 

transfer. SENASICA and APHIS are trying to negotiate acceptable terms for discontinuing 

oversight responsibility for apples produced in Washington State. Recently the Mexican 

inspection program has been expanded to Virginia and Michigan. 

* See Section titled “Technical Assistance for Specialty Crops Fiscal Year 2003 Project Summaries and 

Allocations” of this periodical for information on TASC projects addressing trade barriers related to this issue. 

Horticultural Trade: March 2004 

World Trade Issues Edition 
Apples 7

Country: Mexico 

Commodity: Apples 

Barrier: Anti-Dumping Duties 

Issue: For more than a year, the Northwest apple industry has attempted to re-negotiate a 

suspension agreement with Mexico to eliminate trade prohibitive anti-dumping duties imposed 

on U.S. apples after the termination of the previous suspension agreement. 

Status: In January 2002, under pressure from the Mexican apple industry, Mexico’s Secretariat 

of Economy (SE) engaged the Northwest Fruit Exporters (NFE) to negotiate a new suspension 

agreement, citing violations of the suspension agreement. Despite NFE’s efforts to reach an 

agreement, SE ended negotiations in spring 2002. In August 2002, Mexico imposed a 46.58-

percent import duty on Red and Golden Delicious apples imported from the United States to 

protect domestic producers. 

In August 2003, SE agreed to try to re-negotiate a new suspension agreement to reach an 

agreement, SE must obtain the support from the Mexican apple industry for a suspension 

agreement. Despite positive signals from SE officials, Mexico’s ongoing delays and failure to 

bring this matter to closure has resulted in significant losses to the U.S. apple industry. 

On October 21, 2003, SE published in the Diario Oficial (the Mexican Federal Register) a 

resolution indicating it will initiate a review of the final compensatory duty imposed on imported 

apples from the Red Delicious and Golden Delicious varieties. SE indicated this move was an 

effort to push the Mexican apple industry towards accepting a new suspension agreement. 

However, SE is now insisting that a suspension agreement be reached with all U.S. exporters, not 

just NFE, which will require additional U.S. apple representatives to become involved in the 

negotiations. 

Country: South Africa 

Commodity: Apples 

Barrier: Phytosanitary Ban 

Issue: South Africa prohibits imports of apples produced in the Pacific Northwest and 

California due to concerns regarding fire blight and brown rot. 

Status: APHIS requested access for U.S. apples into South Africa in the late 1990s. The 

National Department of Agriculture (NDA) of South Africa has denied access due to concerns 

that fire blight may be transmitted to South Africa’s domestic crops if import restrictions are 

removed for U.S. apples. NDA has not provided APHIS with scientific evidence that would 

justify excluding apple exports due to fire blight. 

APHIS maintains that mature, symptomless apples produced under commercial conditions have 

not been shown to transmit fire blight. The December 10, 2003, WTO ruling supporting that 

Japan’s quarantine measures for fire blight imposed on U.S. apples were maintained without 

March 2004 World Horticultural Trade: 

Trade Issues Edition 
8 Apples

scientific justification will provide the basis for requesting NDA to remove fire blight as a 

quarantine concern. 

NDA has also indicated that brown rot is of quarantine concern, although it is primarily a pest of 

other fruits, not apples. NDA has proposed to APHIS various mitigation measures that would 

unnecessarily hamper apple exports if implemented. APHIS continues to engage NDA on these 

issues in order to reach an agreement that would allow exports of U.S. apples to South Africa. 

See Section titled “Technical Assistance for Specialty Crops Fiscal Year 2003 Project Summaries and 

Allocations” of this periodical for information on TASC projects addressing trade barriers related to this issue. 

Country: Taiwan 

Commodity: Apples 

Barrier: Phytosanitary Restriction 

Issue: The Bureau of Animal and Plant Health Inspection and Quarantine (BAPHIQ) prohibits 

fumigation at Taiwan ports-of-entry for U.S. apple shipments if codling moth is detected. 

Although fumigation is a viable and proven means of providing phytosanitary protection, 

BAPHIQ insists that non-compliant shipments of U.S. apples be rejected or destroyed. In 

contrast, APHIS maintains that fumigation, as a quarantine measure of last resort, would: (1) be 

less trade-restrictive, and (2) provide Taiwan with an appropriate level of phytosanitary 

protection as outlined in the SPS agreement. 

Status: BAPHIQ has been unwilling to adopt the least trade-restrictive measures for achieving 

its desired level of SPS protection. During the negotiations of the work plan for the 2003 U.S. 

apple crop, U.S. concerns regarding BAPHIQ's overly restrictive import measures were 

discussed extensively. However, BAPHIQ refused to consider fumigation as a treatment 

option were live codling moth detected in any shipments at its ports of entry. 

California, Washington, Idaho, and Oregon are currently authorized to export apples to Taiwan. 

In November 2002 when a single live codling moth was found in two separate shipments of U.S. 

apples, BAPHIQ suspended the entire U.S. apple export program rather than regionalizing the 

restrictions to State boundaries. When the current work plan was renegotiated during 2003, 

BAPHIQ would not agree to regionalize any future export suspensions to individual States. 

APHIS was able to negotiate a "three strikes" provision that would result in an immediate export 

suspension for all four States if there were three confirmed detections of codling moth during 

any single shipping season. 

This approach in proving successful for the 2003-04 shipping season, however APHIS continues 

to request justification from BAPHIQ for disallowing fumigation as a mitigation procedure 

of last resort and not regionalizing future restrictive measures. 

Horticultural Trade: March 2004 

World Trade Issues Edition 
Cherries 9

Country: Israel 

Commodity: Cherries 

Barrier: Phytosanitary Ban 

Issue: Israel prohibits U.S. sweet cherry imports due to unspecified phytosanitary concerns. 

Status: APHIS submitted a list of pests known to be associated with the Pacific Northwest 

and California to allow Israel to conduct a pest risk assessment (PRA). The PRA will be 

conducted by Israel to determine which pests are of quarantine concern. Once the PRA is 

complete, APHIS will review the PRA and propose mitigation procedures to Israel. 

Country: Japan 

Commodity: Cherries 

Barrier: Phytosanitary Ban 

Issue: Japan is unwilling to eliminate a costly fumigation requirement and inspection 

program on imports of U.S. cherries despite evidence demonstrating minimal risk of 

transmitting codling moth. 

Status: In November 2003, the Ministry of Agriculture Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF) 

rejected the USDA/USTR’s request to address import requirements on U.S. cherries in the 

International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC). U.S. cherry shipments to Japan have 

been subject to fumigation with methyl bromide under MAFF oversight in the United States 

since the export program began in 1978. Currently, the U.S. cherry industry pays for two 

MAFF inspectors to travel to the United States to participate in the cherry oversight program. 

In April 2002, MAFF rejected the USDA’s request to eliminate MAFF’s inspection program 

despite the U.S. industry compliance with Japan’s import requirements for 25 years. In 

March 2001, Japan rejected the USDA’s request to remove the fumigation requirement on 

U.S. cherries despite the findings of a pest risk assessment that cherries are not a host of 

codling moth. New Zealand has also requested, without success that Japan modify its import 

requirements for cherries. 

Having exhausted efforts to reach an agreement to remove Japan’s policy of fumigating 

cherry imports, the USDA is pursuing resolution in other venues. 

March 2004 World Horticultural Trade: 

Trade Issues Edition 
10 Cherries

Country: Mexico 

Commodity: Cherries 

Barrier: Phytosanitary Restriction 

Issue: Mexico requires costly and lengthy inspection measures for the importation of U.S. 

cherries. 

Status: In 2003, the United States and Mexico replaced the work plan for sweet cherries with 

a phytosanitary agreement that still required a high degree of fruit inspection and cutting. 

These restrictive import measures were implemented to address the risk of the apple maggot 

(Rhagoletis pomonella) and plum curculio (Conotrachelus nenuphar) being transmitted to 

Mexico but are not commensurate with the risk presented. During the 2004 technical 

bilateral meeting, Mexico doubled the inspection and cutting levels required for the 2004 

season. Accordingly, a work plan was not approved. APHIS continues to press Mexico for 

resolution on this issue. 

Country: South Africa 

Commodity: Cherries 

Barrier: Phytosanitary Ban 

Issue: Sweet cherries produced in California and the Pacific Northwest are prohibited from 

entering South Africa due to phytosanitary concerns. 

Status: Due to concerns regarding mites and various other pests, South Africa precludes 

imports of sweet cherries produced in California and the Pacific Northwest. South Africa has 

proposed that production areas must be free from various pests, along with a high sampling 

rate, and a May to October shipping season as market access conditions for U.S. cherries. 

These import conditions are not feasible for the U.S. cherry industry. APHIS continues to 

negotiate with South Africa to gain more favorable market access conditions. 

Horticultural Trade: March 2004 

World Trade Issues Edition 
Citrus 11

Country: Argentina 

Commodity: Citrus 

Barrier: Phytosanitary Restriction 

Issue: Argentina prohibits entry of citrus from Florida due to concerns over citrus Canker and 

Caribbean Fruit Fly. 

Status: In June 2001, Argentine officials representing Servicio Nacional de Sanidad y Calidad 

Agroalimentaria (SENASA) signed a work plan authorizing the importation of Florida citrus. 

Argentina agreed to allow imports of citrus under the condition that shipments were 

determined free from quarantine pests and soil. The publication of the resolution that would 

have lifted the prohibition was contingent upon SENASA officials completing a site visit to 

Florida. On September 29, 2001 the Argentine citrus rule was remanded and the site visit was 

canceled. SENASA subsequently declined to reschedule the site visit. 

During 2003, discussions between APHIS and SENASA to provide market access for Florida 

citrus to Argentina were reinitiated. APHIS provided updated information on Florida citrus 

canker and Caribbean fruit fly control programs to SENASA. In addition, SENASA is 

reviewing the 2001 operational work plan to determine if modifications are necessary. 

SENASA has not indicated if a site visit will be needed. APHIS will discuss this issue with 

SENASA at the next technical bilateral. 

Country: Australia 

Commodity: Citrus 

Barrier: Phytosanitary restriction 

Issue: Due to the presence of citrus canker and the Caribbean fruit fly (Caribfly), Australia 

prohibits the importation of citrus produced in Florida. 

Status: In July 2003, Biosecurity Australia (BA) released a draft import risk assessment (IRA) 

for citrus from Florida. The draft risk assessment identified 17 arthropods and 3 pathogens 

associated with the importation of citrus from Florida that require management measures to 

reduce the risk to an acceptable level. 

The draft IRA also proposed several measures to manage the risks identified in the draft pest 

risk assessment, including a systems approach for Caribfly based on Florida’s fruit fly 

management program; pest free areas for citrus canker based on APHIS’s management 

program; post-harvest treatments for post-bloom fruit drop and exotic citrus scab isolates; 

freedom of consignments from other identified quarantine pests; and supporting operational 

procedures and verification of phytosanitary status. 

In September 2003, APHIS provided BA comments and data needed to complete the IRA. The 

final IRA is expected to be published in early 2004. APHIS continues to consult with BA on 

the implementation of appropriate risk-based import conditions to facilitate citrus exports from 

Florida. 

March 2004 World Horticultural Trade: 

Trade Issues Edition 
12 Citrus

Country: China 

Commodity: Citrus 

Barrier: Phytosanitary Restriction 

Issue: China’s State Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine 

(AQSIQ) does not authorize the importation of U.S. fresh citrus packed in or shipped from the 

Florida counties of Charlotte, Orange, Pasco, and Polk. 

Status: AQSIQ allows imports of U.S. fresh citrus from shipping and packing facilities in 

approved counties of Arizona, California, Texas, and Florida. At the 2003 bilateral, China 

agreed to approve Charlotte, Orange, Pasco, and Polk counties in Florida to supply fresh citrus 

to China. However, AQSIQ has not implemented the approval of these counties to date. 

APHIS will raise this issue with AQSIQ in March 2004 during technical meetings. 

The first U.S. citrus shipment to China occurred in April 2000. Before APHIS reached a citrus 

agreement with AQSIQ, as part of the Agricultural Cooperation Agreement (ACA) in 1999, 

China prohibited access to citrus produced in all areas of the United States due to quarantine 

concerns over the Mediterranean fruit fly (Medfly). APHIS was able to address AQSIQ’s 

quarantine pest concerns by providing a 4.5-mile radius quarantine zone around Medfly 

detections and requiring that quarantine zones must remain Med fly-free for three years before 

being eligible to supply fruit to China. 

The quarantine pest risk to China in the four prohibited counties of Florida is equivalent to the 

pest risk associated in other Florida counties currently approved by AQSIQ to ship citrus to 

China. In addition, APHIS has provided evidence demonstrating that these areas comply with 

all quarantine conditions and requirements of AQSIQ’s "Program for Exporting Citrus to 

China.” 

Despite evidence demonstrating that these counties pose no additional pest risk to China, 

AQSIQ continues to request additional pest risk analysis to be conducted before considering 

adding these counties to the export protocol. APHIS maintains that there is no scientific 

justification for requesting additional pest risk analysis. 

Horticultural Trade: March 2004 

World Trade Issues Edition 
Citrus 13

Country: South Korea 

Commodity: Citrus 

Barrier: Phytosanitary Restriction 

Issue: In 1997, Korea imposed a mandatory fumigation requirement on all California citrus 

(fresh oranges) shipments to prevent the transmission of red scale. 

Status: APHIS has since requested Korea’s National Plant Quarantine Service (NPQS) to limit 

fumigation to citrus where pests are detected. Fumigation of citrus downgrades the quality of 

the fruit. Industry officials in California have increased efforts to ensure that shipments are 

free of red scale. 

NPQS imposed fumigation for all U.S. oranges as a condition of entry due to repetitive 

interceptions of California red scale. Growers have been effective in reducing the level of 

incidence of this pest in production areas while packinghouses have developed new 

technologies, such as high pressure washes to control such pests. Industry officials state that 

more than 90 percent of California orange shipments to Korea are free of red scale. 

Country: South Korea 

Commodity: Citrus 

Barrier: Tariff 

Issue: Korea maintains a restrictive 50-percent tariff rate on imports of U.S. citrus (fresh 

oranges). 

Status: In 2004 Korea’s tariff rate for out-of-quota citrus was lowered to equal in-quota tariff 

rate at 50 percent. Since the ban on U.S. citrus was lifted in 1995 and the out-of quota tariff 

rate has been reduced, U.S. citrus exports have steadily increased making Korea a leading 

market for fresh oranges. During calendar year 2003, U.S. orange exports to Korea totaled 

nearly $52 million. However, the 50-percent import duty is not scheduled to be lowered again 

and will continue to hamper exports of U.S. citrus to Korea. 

March 2004 World Horticultural Trade: 

Trade Issues Edition 
14 Citrus

Country: Mexico 

Commodity: Citrus 

Barrier: Phytosanitary Restriction 

Issue: Mexico bans citrus imports from Florida primarily due to concerns over citrus canker 

and Caribfly. 

Status: In 2001 APHIS provided the Secretaria de Agricultura, Ganaderia, Desarrollo Rural, 

Pesca y Alimentacion (SAGARPA) of the Ministry of Agriculture in Mexico a pest list and 

programs for controlling and eradicating pests of concern for Florida citrus. However, 

APHIS has not received a pest risk assessment (PRA) from SAGARPA for Florida citrus that 

would provide a basis for negotiating an export work plan for citrus produced in Florida. 

Although, APHIS continues to press SAGARPA during each technical bilateral for 

movement on this issue, Mexico has not provided an acceptable work plan that would allow 

exports of citrus from Florida. 

In 1999, SAGARPA proposed overly restrictive work plan measures to control access of 

Florida citrus into Mexico that ignored historical successes of controlling pests in Florida. 

The major requirements of SAGARPA’s proposal restricted distribution of citrus to Northern 

Mexico, limited the season of export, and required oversight in Florida by inspectors from 

Mexico that would be phased out over 3 years. Subsequently, SAGARPA officials traveled 

to Florida to observe the citrus industry's pest eradication programs, inspection process, and 

packing facilities. 

Figs 

Country: Japan 

Commodity: Figs 

Barrier: Phytosanitary Restrictions 

Issue: Japan does not permit the importation of dried figs treated with sorbic acid or 

potassium sorbate. Sorbic acid is a harmless substance that can be metabolized by humans 

and is used as an anti-microbial agent to retard the growth of common yeast and molds on 

baked goods, processed foods, and dried fruit. 

Status: The California Fig Advisory Board was awarded funding under the Technical 

Assistance for Specialty Crops (TASC) program to implement activities directed at 

elimination of the sorbic acid and potassium sorbate restrictions in Japan. Japan's Ministry 

of Health, Welfare and Labor has requested information and any detailed stud ies that relate 

to the use of potassium sorbate on figs. The Board is currently undertaking a 

comprehensive study that should be completed at the beginning of 2004. 

The need for such approval is to permit the shipment of Mission figs with a moisture cont ent 

of 26 percent to 30 percent as sold in the United States. Presently, only low moisture figs, 23 

Horticultural Trade: March 2004 

World Trade Issues Edition 
Lettuce 15

percent or less without sorbate treatment, can be shipped to Japan. The Board is aware that 

much of the tonnage is then further processed, in Japan, to increase moisture to the 26-30 

percent range and then treated with potassium sorbate. Unfortunately, the secondary 

processing is not very good. Some tonnage is sold as low moisture fruit. High moisture figs 

have better mouth feel, longer shelf life and are much more tender than low moisture figs. 

Low moisture figs form sugar crystals quickly that give the appearance of surface mold. The 

Board’s goal is to standardize shipments, except special orders, to include potassium sorbate. 

Country: Japan 

Commodity: Lettuce 

Barrier: Phytosanitary Restriction 

Issue: Japan regularly rejects or fumigates U.S. lettuce shipments during inspection with 

either methyl bromide or hydrogen gas when non-quarantine pests are detected. 

Status: Japan's overly restrictive quarantine policy continues to sharply limit market access 

for U.S. lettuce exports. The majority of the U.S. lettuce exports to Japan is produced in 

California and Arizona. Fumigation reduces the quality of lettuce and increases cost of the 

product to the Japanese consumer. In July 2003 the United States and Japan tested a preclearance lettuce program in California in an attempt to lessen the rejection rates and 

fumigation of lettuce at ports in Japan. However, the pre-clearance program for California 

resulted in only two lettuce shipments to Japan, one shipment required fumigation before 

being released from port. The pre-clearance program for Arizona began in January 2004. 

* See Section titled “Technical Assistance for Specialty Crops Fiscal Year 2003 Project Summaries and 

Allocations” of this periodical for information on TASC projects addressing trade barriers related to this issue. 

March 2004 World Horticultural Trade: 

Trade Issues Edition 
16 Papayas

Country: Japan 

Commodity: Papayas 

Barrier: Non-Technical Barrier 

Issue: The Ministry of Health Labor and Welfare (MHLW) of Japan currently prohibits 

imports of biotech papayas. 

Status: In January 2003, officials of the U.S. papaya industry met with MHLW in 

Japan to discuss the status of their application. The officials agreed to conduct 

additional research requested by MHLW and in May 2003 the industry submitted a 

revised application. However, MHLW did not approve the application citing a need for 

additional research. The U.S. papaya industry is expected to complete the additional 

research for MHLW’s review. 

In 2000, the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF) of Japan approved 

the U.S. papaya industry’s application to export biotech papaya to Japan. However, 

Japan enacted legislation in 2001 requiring a second-tier approval by MHLW before 

allowing imports of biotech papayas. The U.S. papaya industry submitted its initial 

application to MHLW in 2001. The Government of Japan’s recent establishment of the 

Food Safety Commission will require the U.S. papaya industry to also seek approval 

from a third regulatory entity. 

Country: South Korea 

Commodity: Papayas (fresh, non-biotech) 

Barrier: Phytosanitary Restriction 

Issue: The National Plant Quarantine Service (NPQS) of Korea restricts imports of 

non-biotech papayas from the United States due to fruit fly quarantine regulations. The 

U.S. Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) has been working with 

NPQS to develop a protocol that will address Korea’s phytosanitary concerns. 

Status: In May 2003, the U.S. Agricultural Research Service (ARS) revised the 1994 

draft protocol to incorporate new research regarding thermal tolerances in fruit flies. 

However, NPQS still questions the viability of the vapor heat treatments and is 

requesting confirmatory tests to ensure that the treatment is effective. 

In 1994, a draft protocol for vapor heat treatment was submitted, but NPQS questioned 

the adequacy of the treatments and requested confirmatory tests. These tests were 

never completed under the 1994 protocol because the U.S. papaya industry experienced 

heavy losses from the Papaya Ring Spot Virus. The vapor heat treatment has been used 

continuously in Hawaii since 1984 without incidence of fruit fly survival in commercial 

shipments of papaya. 

Horticultural Trade: March 2004 

World Trade Issues Edition 
Peaches (Canned) 17

Country: European Union 

Commodity: Peaches (canned) 

Barrier: Subsidy 

Issue: The U.S. canned peach industry is struggling to maintain its viability against low cost 

competition from Greece and to a lesser extent from Spain. About 97 percent of U.S. 

production is consumed in the domestic market. Last year low-cost subsidized imports from 

Greece supplied over 16 percent of U.S. consumption, causing U.S. stocks to build and lower 

prices to domestic producers. The U.S. industry suspects that the EU is continuing excessive 

subsidies to growers by payment made through producers organizations. 

Status: Between 1985 and 2000 the United States attempted to limit EU subsidies to canned 

peaches and canned pears through the Canned Fruit Agreement (CFA). The 1985 CFA was 

the result of a threatened U.S. 301 action and a GATT dispute settlement panel report, 

favorable to the United States. The panel determined that the EU was illegally subsidizing 

canners, finding that “aids granted to EU processors nullify and impair tariff concessions 

granted by the EU on canned fruit products.” The CFA was amended several times but was 

never an effective mechanism for limiting EU production subsidies. Nevertheless, the CFA 

did provide an avenue for the United States to monitor and try to make the EU sys tem more 

transparent. Beginning in 1996 and culminating in 2001 the EU initiated reforms to its 

system, modifying production thresholds, withdrawal payments, minimum grower prices, 

and processing aids. In 2001 the EU unilaterally ended the CFA by implementing reforms, 

which changed the method of payment of subsidies and dramatically lowered the amount of 

subsidies paid to producers. The EU also initiated a new channel for payment through 

producer organizations. Since the reforms implemented by the EU in 2001, there has been 

no official activity on this issue. The U.S. industry contends that the reforms are insufficient 

and that significant subsidies are still being paid to EU canned peach producers. The United 

States will continue to monitor EU subsidies to this sector and evaluate their trade-distorting 

effects. 

March 2004 World Horticultural Trade: 

Trade Issues Edition 
18 Pears

Country: China 

Commodity: Pears 

Barrier: Phytosanitary ban 

Issue: China’s State Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine 

(AQSIQ) prohibits the importation of U.S. pears due to quarantine concerns with respect 

to the bacterial disease fire blight. 

Status: AQSIQ has not authorized the importation of U.S. pears due to fire blight. Until 

recently, negotiations with AQSIQ on this issue were on-going from 1995 to 2000. There 

were no bilateral technical meetings between the United States and China in 2001 and 

there was no significant progress on this issue at the technical bilateral meetings in 2002. 

The issue of U.S. pears was not resolved at the September 2003 meeting. Twice APHIS 

has submitted to AQSIQ a pest list and requested a pest risk assessment for U.S. pears. 

Country: South Korea 

Commodity: Pears 

Barrier: Phytosanitary Ban 

Issue: South Korea prohibits imports of U.S. pears due to five quarantine pests. 

Status: South Korea provided APHIS with a pest risk assessment identifying five pests of 

quarantine concern. The development of feasible mitigation measures to address South 

Korea’s pest concerns are under consideration by the U.S. pear industry. However, a 48-

percent tariff rate imposed by South Korea on pears provides a significant barrier to U.S. 

pear industry to develop this market. 

* See Section titled “Technical Assistance for Specialty Crops Fiscal Year 2003 Project Summaries and 

Allocations” of this periodical for information on TASC projects addressing trade barriers related to this 

issue. 

Horticultural Trade: March 2004 

World Trade Issues Edition 
Pistachios 19

Country: Israel 

Commodity: Pistachios 

Barrier: Non-Technical Barrier 

Issue: The U.S. industry is concerned that pistachios produced in Iran are smuggled 

into Israel and competing with U.S. pistachios. 

Status: Based on trade data and market inspections, the U.S. pistachio industry asserts 

that most pistachios sold in Israel are produced in Iran. Although these are banned by 

Israel, it is believed that these unprocessed pistachios from Iran enter Israel through 

various non-pistachio producing countries. However, U.N. Trade Data indicates that 

Germany was the second largest supplier of pistachios to Israel in Calendar Year 2002 

with a value exceeding $2.7 million while the United Kingdom exported $320,000 of 

pistachios to Israel. While U.S. pistachios gained duty free access to Israel in 1996, 

U.S. pistachio exports to Israel have recently declined to near pre-1996 export levels. 

Country: Mexico 

Commodity: Pistachios 

Barrier: Non-Technical Barrier 

Issue: The diversion of Iranian pistachios into Mexico has impeded the growth of U.S. 

pistachio exports to Mexico. 

Status: According to industry reports, Iran may be diverting pistachios that fail stringent 

testing requirements in other countries to developing countries, including Mexico. Reports 

indicate that once Iranian pistachios are denied entry into the EU, exporters must find 

another market. 

The California Pistachio Commission is compiling trade data to present to Mexican 

authorities that may demonstrate that Iran is diverting pistachios to Mexico below the 

cost of production. U.S. industry investigations of the market in Mexico found most 

pistachios are produced in Iran, despite an 18-percent import tariff. 

The Mexican market for pistachios has been disappointing for the U.S. pistachio industry. 

Even though NAFTA negotiations reduced tariffs on U.S. pistachios to zero, the 

anticipated increase in pistachio sales to Mexico has not been realized. 

March 2004 World Horticultural 

Trade: 

Trade Issue Edition 
20 Potatoes

Country: Brazil 

Commodity: Potatoes 

Barrier: Phytosanitary Ban 

Issue: Brazil maintains an import ban on U.S. seed potatoes due to phytosanitary 

concerns. 

Status: Officials of the Ministry of Agricultural of Brazil, U.S. Potato Board, and 

APHIS met in Brasilia in July and September 2003 to discuss the development of a pest 

risk assessment (PRA) for the importation of U.S. seed potatoes into Brazil. The U.S. 

Potato Board is developing pest data to allow Brazil’s Departmamento de Defesa e 

Inspecao Vegetal to prepare a PRA. 

Country: Canada 

Commodity: Potatoes 

Barrier: Technical Barrier to Trade 

Issue: Canadian regulations require that bulk produce (including potatoes) shipments 

cannot be imported without a Ministerial Exemption or waiver issued by the Government 

of Canada (GOC). Waivers are only granted when fruit and vegetable supplies are 

deemed insufficient to meet domestic food requirements. The U.S. horticultural industry 

is concerned that Canada’s bulk easement procedures restrict U.S. exports to Canada. 

Although this issue affects many fruits and vegetables, the National Potato Council 

(NPC) is the first U.S. organization to request the U.S. Government to negotiate with 

Canada to eliminate the bulk shipment restrictions 

Status: During negotiations of the pre-NAFTA Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement 

(CUSTA), U.S. negotiators agreed not to address bulk restrictions in the final agreement 

in exchange for Canada agreeing not to address U.S. section 8e minimum quality import 

requirements on certain fresh produce. However, periodically at the request of the U.S 

potato industry, the U.S. Government has informed Canada that it believes that bulk 

restrictions are inconsistent with WTO and NAFTA Agreements. In response, Canadians 

have questioned the consistency of section 8e requirements with WTO national treatment 

obligations. Hence, there has been a general truce between the two governments over the 

past 20 years not to challenge each other’s respective programs. Until recently, the U.S. 

potato industry has been unwilling to risk a challenge to section 8e. 

U.S. section 8e requirements have not affected Canadian shippers, whereas U.S. shippers 

continue to complain that Canada’s bulk shipment restrictions limit U.S. potatoes exports. 

At the November 14, 2003, Consultative Committee on Agriculture meeting, the U.S. 

officials indicated that a formal request will be issued to Canada to enter into negotiations 

on the elimination of bulk shipment restrictions. 

In 2002, U.S. potato exports to all countries were $123 million, up 37 percent from 2001. 

In 2002, U.S. potato exports to Canada were $114 million, 50 percent more than in 2001. 

Horticultural Trade: March 2004 

World Trade Issues Edition 
Potatoes 21

From January-September 2003, U.S. potato exports to all countries were $75 million, 

down 30 percent from the same period in 2002. From January-September 2003, U.S. 

potato exports to Canada were $64 million, down 37 percent from the same period in 

2002. 

In 2002, U.S. potato imports from all countries were $104 million, up 50 percent from 

2001. U.S. potato imports from Canada in 2002 were $103.8 million, 50 percent more 

than in 2001. From January-September 2003, U.S. potato imports from all countries 

were $72.7 million, down 7 percent from the same period in 2002. From JanuarySeptember 2003, U.S. potato imports from Canada were $72.6 million, down 7 percent 

from the same period in 2002. 

Country: China 

Commodity: Potatoes 

Barrier: Phytosanitary Ban 

Issue: China continues to maintain a phytosanitary ban on fresh table stock potatoes 

produced in the Pacific Northwest and Alaska 

Status: As a result of the SPS bilateral in September 2003, APHIS and China’s State 

Administration for Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine (AQSIQ) signed a 

work plan in December 2003 authorizing the shipment of Alaskan seed potatoes to China. 

In addition China agreed to make immediate progress in completing pest risk assessments 

(PRA) for Pacific Northwest and Alaska table stock potatoes that would provide a basis 

for negotiating a market access agreement or protocol with China. 

APHIS has provided AQSIQ the necessary information on relevant pests, control 

methods, and quarantine regulations for Alaska and Pacific Northwest table stock 

potatoes for China to carry out the PRAs. In July 2001, a Chinese technical delegation 

traveled to Idaho, Oregon, and Washington to observe table stock production areas and 

packing facilities. The delegation was provided an overview of all aspects of the U.S. 

potato industry from planting, growing, and harvesting, to packing and shipping. In 

addition, the delegation received data on potato pests, mitigation measures, pesticide use, 

sprout inhibitors, and the phytosanitary inspection and certification process that would 

allow scientists in China to conduct the PRAs. In August 2003, APHIS also provided 

AQSIQ with a draft export protocol for Pacific Northwest potatoes that set out the 

mitigation processes to address China’s phytosanitary concerns. 

March 2004 World Horticultural 

Trade: 

Trade Issue Edition 
22 Potatoes

Country: Japan 

Commodity: Potatoes 

Barrier: Phytosanitary Ban 

Issue: Japan currently prohibits imports of U.S. fresh potatoes allegedly to prevent the 

introduction of golden nematode and potato wart into Japan. 

Status: The United States has requested Japan lift the import ban on fresh potatoes for 

processing from major production areas where golden nematode, such as the Pacific 

Northwest, California, and other U.S. potato producing areas, is not known to exist 

(potato wart is not found in the United States). However, MAFF has raised new concerns 

regarding a number of viruses that would necessitate post-entry quarantine of imported 

potatoes even if the ban were lifted. 

In an effort to ensure Japan has a sufficient supply of potato chips throughout the year, 

the Japan Potato Chip Association (JPCA) and the U.S. Potato Board are lobbying the 

Government of Japan for a special “zone” that would allow processing facilities to import 

fresh chipping potatoes. JPCA has proposed that suppliers and processors will take 

necessary measures to ensure plant protection by limiting importation of potatoes from 

February through May, when domestically produced potatoes are more likely to sprout 

and deteriorate after long-term storage. A pilot program of this proposal may be 

implemented in 2004. 

The USDA will continue to urge Japan to recognize disease-free areas in the United 

States for golden nematode and potato wart while also urging Japan to permit imports of 

chip potatoes for use in the food service industry, including those under the Japanese 

deregulation initiative. 

Country: South Korea 

Commodity: Potatoes 

Barrier: Phytosanitary Restrictions 

Issue: Korea maintains strict phytosanitary requirements for U.S. potatoes due to 

concerns regarding the transmission of Verticillium tenerum, a non-pathogenic fungus. 

Status: Korea’s National Plant Quarantine Service (NPQS) maintains that Korea is free 

from V. tenerum and, therefore, of quarantine concern. In January 2003, Korea rejected a 

shipment of U.S. chipping potatoes after detecting this fungus. APHIS contends that V. 

tenerum should not be of quarantine concern because the pest is not uncommon. 

Moreover, APHIS has provided NPQS research data evidencing that V. tenerum is not 

pathogenic and poses minimal risk to Korea. Recently, Korea acknowledged that V. 

Tenerum should not be considered a quarantine pest and is making progress to modify 

import requirements for potatoes accordingly. APHIS has also provided to NPQS a draft 

Horticultural Trade: March 2004 

World Trade Issues Edition 
Potatoes 23

protocol proposing that potatoes found to have V. tenerum should be processed into 

potato chips rather than rejected or destroyed. 

Country: Mexico 

Commodity: Potatoes 

Barrier: Phytosanitary Restrictions 

Issue: Mexico maintains a 48-hour hold order on all shipments of US table stock while 

testing for quarantine pests. In addition, Mexico currently restricts the sale of U.S. 

potatoes to areas located within the 26 km of the U.S. border. 

Status: APHIS was able to re-open the Mexican market for U.S. table stock potatoes in 

2003, resulting in greater than $7 million in potato exports. After an initial difficult startup (numerous pest detections by Mexico) APHIS, State regulatory officials and the U.S. 

potato industry worked to develop and implement new inspection procedures for U.S. 

potato exports in October 2003. As result of these new inspection procedures, the potato 

shipment rejection rate decreased from greater than 10 percent to less than 0.5 percent. 

The U.S. potato export protocol with Mexico requires all U.S. fresh potato shipments to 

be held at the border for up to 48 hours to allow Mexico to conduct laboratory tests for 

nematodes, such as Bacterial Ringrot and Columbia Root Knot Nematode. In October 

2004, APHIS will use the testing results to justify expansion of the market beyond the 26 

km restriction. At the February 2003 technical bilateral, Mexico agreed that once the 

U.S. request was received, it would initiate changes to the protocol to allow U.S. potatoes 

greater access to the market in Mexico. 

Country: Taiwan 

Commodity: Potatoes 

Barrier: Phytosanitary Restrictions 

Issue: Taiwan’s phytosanitary restrictions prevent importation of U.S.-origin table stock 

and seed potatoes from Montana and table stock potatoes from Colorado. 

Status: Taiwan currently authorizes imports of U.S.-origin table stock potatoes from 

Alaska, California, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington provided the potatoes are produced in 

areas free of golden nematode, potato rot, potato late blight, and various other pests. 

Taiwan also authorizes importation of U.S.-origin seed potatoes from Alaska. 

On behalf of the potato industry, APHIS has requested that Taiwan also provide access 

for potatoes produced in Montana and Colorado, under similar import conditions already 

established for other States. Market access for U.S.-origin potatoes and other outstanding 

U.S.-Taiwan phytosanitary issues will be addressed during the next bilateral meeting in 

mid-2004. Status updates for both states are summarized as follows: 

March 2004 World Horticultural 

Trade: 

Trade Issue Edition 
24 Potatoes

Montana 

APHIS has been seeking access for Montana-origin seed and table stock potatoes since 

1995. During the June 2003 technical bilateral meeting in Colorado, APHIS requested 

an update on the status of Taiwan’s pest risk assessment (PRA) for Montana-origin 

potatoes. APHIS specifically sought clarification regarding Taiwan’s need for additional 

pest information. Taiwan stated that while conducting the PRA, BAPHIQ officials 

discovered lists of secondary pests in the literature that were not included on the pest list 

provided by APHIS. APHIS reiterated its desire for a quick resolution to this issue upon 

receipt of the requested pest information. To date, market access for Montana-origin 

potatoes has not been authorized by Taiwan. 

Colorado 

APHIS made a formal market access request for Colorado-origin table stock potatoes 

during the June 2003 technical bilateral meeting. A previous market access request was 

withdrawn in 1996. 

Taiwan confirmed that the same pest information that was required for Montana potatoes 

would be needed. APHIS requested that BAPHIQ initiate the PRA. Taiwan officials 

agreed to initiate a risk assessment upon receipt of the requested pest information from 

APHIS. Additionally, Taiwan indicated that they would also require survey data to 

confirm the presence or absence of particular pests of concern in the production areas. 

APHIS stated that several of the pests are not known to occur in Colorado production 

areas and that requiring specific surveys for these pests would be inconsistent with IPPC 

standards for pest-free areas. BAPHIQ officials reiterated that the survey data would be 

necessary to confirm the pest status. To date, market access for Colorado-origin potatoes 

has not been authorized by Taiwan. 

Country: Venezuela 

Commodity: Potatoes 

Barrier: Phytosanitary Restrictions 

Issue: Venezuela maintains tight phytosanitary restrictions on imports of U.S. table stock 

and seed potatoes. 

Status: Venezuela requires that a pest risk assessment (PRA) be completed before import 

requirements for seed potato and table stock potato may be established. APHIS is 

preparing necessary data for Venezuela to initiate a PRA. Following completion of the 

PRA, Venezuela will consider implementing an export work plan to facilitate the import 

of U.S. seed and table stock potatoes. 

Horticultural Trade: March 2004 

World Trade Issues Edition 
Raisins 25

Country: India 

Commodity: Raisins 

Barrier: Tariff 

Issue: India's current duty on imported raisins remains extremely high, protecting the 

market’s domestic raisin producers. 

Status: Recently the Government of India announced the 2003/04 budget, which reduced 

raisin import tariffs from 105 percent to 100 percent. The reduction was not of a 

magnitude to allow viable, commercial market access for U.S. raisins. Moreover, in 

March 2003, India signed a Preferential Trade Agreement with Afghanistan that includes 

tariff concessions of a reduction of 50 percent on the applicable basic duty on raisins. 

The Raisin Administrative Committee (RAC) has been working to expand its marketing 

reach to India through the Emerging Markets Program. RAC’s interest in India stems 

primarily from the growth and wealth of the emerging middle class. Although India 

produces raisins domestically, RAC does not see these raisins as direct competition 

because of their poor quality and lack of appeal to the upscale retail market. A market 

assessment of India conducted by FAS concurred with the RAC assessment of the market 

potential for raisins and supported the Emerging Markets proposal. 

Stone Fruit 

Country: Australia 

Commodity: Stone Fruit 

Barrier: Phytosanitary Ban 

Issue: Australia bans imports of U.S. stone fruit (peaches, nectarines, plums, and prunes) 

due to phytosanitary concerns. USDA has repeatedly requested that Biosecurity 

Australia (BA) initiate a pest risk assessment to evaluate the risk of importing California 

and Pacific Northwest stone fruit. 

Status: On September 1, 1993, APHIS requested BA to grant access to U.S. stone fruit 

into Australia. This request was made on behalf of the California Tree Fruit Agreement. 

During this period, USDA/APHIS requested that BA initiate an import risk assessment 

(IRA) for U.S. stone fruit produced in California, Washington, Oregon, and Idaho. In 

1994 APHIS submitted to BA information collected by the California Tree Fruit 

Agreement and the Northwest Horticultural Council that BA would need to initiate the 

IRA. However, no progress was made by BA in initiating an import risk assessment. 

On May 29, 2002, APHIS resubmitted the pest list to allow BA to initiate an IRA. 

During the January 2004 technical bilateral, BA committed to initiating an IRA in July 

2004. 

March 2004 World Horticultural 

Trade: 

Trade Issue Edition 
26 Stone Fruit

Country: China 

Commodity: Stone Fruit 

Barrier: Phytosanitary Ban 

Issue: China’s State Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine 

(AQSIQ) prohibits the importation of U.S. plums and nectarines due to quarantine 

concerns with respect to the bacterial disease fire blight. 

Status: APHIS has sought access to China for U.S. plums since 1994 and more recently 

requested access for nectarines. AQSIQ continues to ban U.S. plums due to concerns 

about fire blight. Moreover, APHIS has not received credible evidence from AQSIQ 

demonstrating that under commercial conditions plums serve as a pathway for fire blight. 

AQSIQ officials have visited California to observe U.S. plum production, inspection, and 

packing techniques. During the September 2003 technical bilateral, AQSIQ provided 

APHIS a pest list and draft pest risk analysis (PRA) for plums produced in California. 

The draft PRA is under review by APHIS and will be discussed with AQSIQ in March 

2004. 

Country: Mexico 

Commodity: Stone Fruit – Peaches and Nectarines (Northwest) 

Barrier: Phytosanitary Ban 

Issue: Mexico maintains a phytosanitary ban on exports of Pacific Northwest (Idaho, 

Oregon, and Washington) peaches and nectarines due to concerns about Oriental Fruit 

Moth (OFM). 

Status: In response to a proposal from the Pacific Northwest peach and nectarine 

industry, APHIS requested that Mexico establish a time for the 2004 season a pilot 

systems program similar to the apricot program. Apricots from the Pacific Northwest 

have been successfully exported to Mexico under this program since 2002. Due to the 

cooler northern climate and lack of host material, OFM (the quarantine pest of major 

concern to Mexico) occurs at low prevalence in Idaho, Oregon, and Washington. The 

apricot work plan established a systems approach for pest control. Under this agreement, 

local state or county officials in the United States carry-out the daily management of the 

work plan. Mexican officials also visit the production areas periodically to verify that the 

apricot industry is compliance with the agreement. At the technical bilateral meeting in 

February 2004, the apricot program was made permanent. 

Horticultural Trade: March 2004 

World Trade Issues Edition 
Stone Fruit 27

Country: Mexico 

Commodity: Stone Fruit (California) 

Barrier: Phytosanitary Restriction 

Issue: U.S. stone fruit exports to Mexico are hampered by increasingly restrictive and 

costly import requirements 

Status: During the 2004 technical bilateral, APHIS renewed an agreement with Mexico 

to allow for the continuation of the California stone fruit export program to Mexico under 

fumigation. In addition, Mexico agreed with APHIS to grant permanent status to the 

apricot export program. However, due to continued requirements for strict penalties for 

the detection of non-quarantine pests, agreements on California stone fruit using the 

systems approach were not reached in the 2004 season. 

Mexico continues to require sanctions for numerous pests, many of which are not of 

quarantine concern. During 2003, Mexico added a variety of new quarantine pests to the 

work plan that allows U.S. stone fruit exports into Mexico. Mexico now lists 23 pests of 

concern in the work plan, compared to nine in 2002, and one in 2001. In addition, 

Mexico increased penalties associated with the interception of these pests to a level that 

significantly hamper exports. 

A bilateral technical group consisting of APHIS and Mexican officials met twice in 2003 

to discuss the removal of quarantine pests from the stone fruit work plan. However, no 

pests were removed from the quarantine list. APHIS continues to present Mexican 

officials with evidence demonstrating that at least half of the 23 pests that Mexico lists to 

be of quarantine concern currently exist in Mexico. 

In addition, Mexico’s unwillingness to lower the costs of the systems approach work plan 

made the fumigation and apricot programs the only viable options for the stone fruit 

industry this year. 

Under the current financial agreement, the cost to the U.S. industry of providing the 

Mexican inspectors necessary to export stone fruit almost doubled. The total cost of the 

compensation package for one Mexican inspector is about $11,500 per month. Progress 

in eliminating restrictions under the California stone fruit export program has been slow 

and hampered by disagreements. For 2003, stone fruit sales to Mexico are valued at 

more than $20 million. 

* See Section titled “Technical Assistance for Specialty Crops Fiscal Year 2003 Project Summaries and 

Allocations” of this periodical for information on TASC projects addressing trade barriers related to this 

issue. 

March 2004 World Horticultural 

Trade: 

Trade Issue Edition 
28 Stone Fruit

Country: New Zealand 

Commodity: Stone Fruit - Peaches and Nectarines (Northwest) 

Barrier: Phytosanitary Ban 

Issue: New Zealand maintains a phytosanitary ban of exports on Pacific Northwest 

peaches and nectarines due to concerns about Oriental Fruit Moth. 

Status: In January 2004, APHIS requested the Ministry of Agriculture (MAF) of New 

Zealand to provide access for peaches and nectarines produced in the Pacific Northwest. 

MAF indicated that it requires a formal request and full pest list before considering 

APHIS’ request further. APHIS will soon submit a full pest list to MAF for peaches and 

nectarines from the Pacific Northwest. Currently, peaches and nectarines produced in 

California have access to New Zealand. 

Table Grapes 

Country: Australia 

Commodity: Table Grapes 

Barrier: Phytosanitary Restriction 

Issue: Australia has agreed to allow fumigation of California table grapes upon arrival 

but stringent safeguard requirements have kept California grapes from being fumigated at 

destination ports. 

Status: Following years of negotiating market access to Australia, the first consignments 

of California table grapes arrived in Australia in July 2002. The work plan required that 

grapes could only be fumigated at the port of origin before being shipped to Australia. 

Australia had agreed to review the 2002 work plan after the completion of the first 

shipping, and modified the work plan for 2003 to allow for fumigating grapes at the port 

of destination. This could be a significant benefit to the California grape industry 

because delaying fumigation enhances the shelf life of grapes. In addition, the 2003 work 

plan allows reduced inspection sample sizes and a lower fumigation dosage. 

However, California grape suppliers have not yet fumigated in Australia due to stringent 

safeguard requirements imposed by Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service (AQIS) 

due to concerns regarding the glassy-winged sharpshooter (GWSS). USDA considers 

that extraordinary containment requirements are unnecessary as the GWSS does not 

follow the pathway (it is not found in shipments of commercially packed table grapes). 

Australia's import requirements for U.S. grapes were discussed at the technical bilateral 

in Cairns during January 2004, with progress expected on this issue in time for the 2005 

shipping season. 

* See Section titled “Technical Assistance for Specialty Crops Fiscal Year 2003 Project Summaries and 

Allocations” of this periodical for information on TASC projects addressing trade barriers related to this 

issue 

Horticultural Trade: March 2004 

World Trade Issues Edition 
Tomatoes 29

Country: Mexico and Guatemala 

Commodity: Tomatoes 

Barrier: Phytosanitary Ban 

Issue: Mexico and Guatemala ban imports of tomatoes from the Imperial County in 

California due to Pink Hibiscus Mealy Bugs (PHMB) although this pest is not found in 

agricultural areas in this county. 

Status: In 1999, Mexico discovered PHMB in the Mexicali region of Baja California. 

Shortly thereafter, it was found in a residential area in Imperial County, California. In 

November 2002, Mexico banned the importation of California tomatoes produced in 

Imperial County as a precautionary measure. In September 2003, Guatemala followed 

Mexico’s lead and banned the importation of tomatoes produced in Imperial Valley. 

The California tomato industry is concerned that the actions taken by Mexico and 

Guatemala are unjustified. PHMB has never been found on California tomatoes, nor have 

any PHMB findings been reported in agricultural areas where tomatoes are produced. In 

addition, California tomatoes are washed, sorted, and inspected for compliance with 

Federal Standards. A phytosanitary permit is also required for California tomato exports to 

Mexico certifying that shipments are pest free. 

The California Tomato Commission is requesting that the North American Tomato Trade 

Work Group support a resolution requesting that Mexico lift the ban on the California 

tomatoes produced in Imperial County. In November 2003, the Imperial County 

Agricultural Commissioner met with Mexican officials from the Directorate of Plant Health 

and General Directorate of Phytosanitary Inspection of the Ministry of Agriculture. APHIS 

raised this issue again with Mexico during the February 2004 technical bilateral meeting. 

Country: Mexico 

Commodity: Tomatoes 

Barrier: Technical Barrier 

Issue: Mexico requires the import tolerance for stem and leaf matter not to exceed 5 pieces 

per 100 tomatoes. 

Status: The intent of this standard was to limit pest and debris entering Mexico. However, 

this restriction on stem and leaf matter imposes a barrier to trade that prevents exports of 

U.S on-the-vine (OTV) tomatoes. The United States does not impose a standard for stem 

and leaf tolerance on tomato imports from Mexico. Mexico raised the tolerance for stem 

and leaf matter from zero to five pieces per 100 tomatoes in the early 1990s. However, 

APHIS and the California Tomato Commission continue to press the Government of 

Mexico to raise the tolerance level above the current restriction. 

March 2004 World Horticultural 

Trade: 

Trade Issue Edition 
30 Walnuts

Country: South Korea 

Commodity: Walnuts 

Barrier: Tariff 

Issue: High tariffs have impeded U.S. shelled walnut exports to Korea. 

Status: In calendar year 2003, Korea applied a 32 percent tariff on imports of shelled 

walnuts. During this period the U.S. shelled walnut exports to Korea amounted to $7.4 

million. In 2004, the bound duties were lowered to 30 percent. The California Walnut 

Commission estimates that the removal of the tariff would potentially increase exports to 

over $20 million. 

Country: South Korea 

Commodity: Walnuts 

Barrier: Phytosanitary Ban 

Issue: Korea prohibits the importation of U.S. in-shell walnuts due to codling moth. 

Status: Korea’s National Plant Quarantine Service requires the U.S. walnut industry to 

implement a 3-year pre-clearance program to ensure shipments are free from codling moth 

as a condition for in-shell walnuts to enter the Korean market. Initially, the cost of a 

walnut pre-clearance program and the Korea’s significant import tariff rate deterred the 

walnut industry from pursuing this market. Recently, at the request of the walnut industry, 

APHIS will again engage Korea on this matter. Currently Korea’s applied tariff rate on 

U.S. in-shell walnuts is 45 percent. 

Horticultural Trade: March 2004 

World Trade Issues Edition 
Tariffs for Key Commodities in Select Markets 31

2004 Applied Tariff Rates 

Selected Countries and Selected Commodities 

Commodity 

HS # (s) 

Oranges 

080510 

Grapefruit 

080540 

Lemons 

80550 

FCOJ 

200911 

OJ, nt frz 

200919 * 

Apples 

080810 

Pears 

080820 

Country 

NAFTA 

United States 2.1 16.2-28.7 4.4 39 17.1 0 0-0.40 1/ 

Canada 0 0 0 0 0 0 0-8 

Mexico 0 0 0 20 3/ 1.76 cents/liter 0 4/ 0 

WESTERN HEMISPHERE 

Argentina 

Brazil 

Chile 

11.5 

10 

0 

11.5 

10 

0 

11.5 

10 

0 

15.5 

14 

0 

15.5 

14 

0 

11.5 

10 

0 

11.5 

10 

0 

Venezuela 15 15 15 20 20 15 15 

EUROPE 

European Union 3.2-16.0 5/ 1.5-2.4 6.4 6/ 33.6 7/ 33.6 7/ 4.0-11.2 8/ 5-10.4 8/ 

MIDDLE EAST 

Israel 

OQ NS0.63/kg 

BNM145.8% 

OQ NS0.56/kg 

BNM145.8% 

OQ NS0.69/kg 

BNM221.4% 

OQ 

10.8%+17%VAT 

OQ 

10.8%+17%VAT 

OQ NS1.65/kg 

BNM498% 

OQ NS1.84/kg 

BNM394.2% 

Kuwait 0 0 0 5 5 0 0 

Saudi Arabia 

Turkey 

5 

54 

5 

54 

5 

54 

5 

58.5 

5 

58.5 

5 

60.3 

5 

60.3 

AFRICA 

Egypt 

South Africa 

40 

5 

40 

5 

40 

5 

40 

25 

40 

25 

40 

5 

40 

5 

ASIA 

China 11 + 13 VAT 12 + 13 VAT 11 + 13 VAT 7.5 + 17 VAT 30 + 17 VAT 10 + 13 VAT 10 - 12 + 13 VAT 

Hong Kong 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

India 30 25 30 30 30 50 30 

Indonesia 5 + 10 VAT 5 + 10 VAT 5 + 10 VAT 

5 + 10 VAT + 10 

STL 

5 + 10 VAT + 10 

STL 5 + 10 VAT 5 + 10 VAT 

Japan 

Korea, Republic of 

Australia 

16-32 10/ 

50 

free 

10 

30 

free 

free 

30 

free 

25.5 

OQ-54 + 10 VAT 

5 

25.5 

OQ-54 + 10 VAT 

5 

17 

45 

free 

4.8 

45 

free 

Malaysia 0 5 5 6 6 5 5 

New Zealand 

Philippines 

Singapore 

Taiwan 

0 

10 

0 

20* 

0 

7 

0 

15* 

0 

10 

0 

15* 

5.0-6.5/liter 

7 

0 

21.5~29.0 

5.0-6.5/liter 

1 

0 

22.5~30.0 

0 

7 

0 

20 

0 

7 

0 

10 

Thailand 

30 CIF value or 

25.00 B/kg 20/ 

40 CIF value or 

33.50 B/kg 20/ 

40 CIF value or 

33.50 B/kg 20/ 

30 CIF value or 10 

B/liter + 7 VAT 

20/ 

30 CIF value or 10 

B/liter + 7 VAT 

20/ 

10 CIF value or 3 

B/kg 20/ 

30 CIF value or 

25.00 B/kg 20/ 

The information contained in these tables is drawn from a variety of sources and is intended for illustrative purposes. Accuracy of the individual entries is not 

guaranteed. 

Note 1: IQ means In-Quota Tariff. OQ means Out-Of-Quota Tariff. VAT means Value Added Tax. EXT means Excise Tax. 

Note 2: Sole numbers (without further description or details) means or refer to the applied tariff in percent. 

Note 3: Shaded areas represent import tariffs higher than the United States. 

* 200912 Orange Juice, not frozen, of a brix value not exceeding 20 has not been separately reported in this exercise. 

1/ 0.30 if entered during the period 7/1-3/31 

3/ the lesser of 20 percent ad valorem or $0.0786/liter, with import permit $0.0462 

4/ antidumping duties for U.S. Red and Golden Delicious apples of 46.58%. 

5/ plus entry price during the period 12/1-5/31: max 71 EUR/ton 

March 2004 World Horticultural Trade: 

Trade Issue Edition 
32 Tariffs for Key Commodities in Select Markets

2004 Applied Tariff Rates 

Selected Countries and Selected Commodities 

Commodity Cherries Peach/Nect Strawberry Grapes Almonds ns Almonds sh 

HS # (s) 080920 080930 081010 080610 080211 080212 

Country 

NAFTA 

United States 0 0-0.24 0.13-1.67 $1.13-1.80/cubic 4.1 13.5 

Canada 0-8 0-8 0-8.5 0-1.41 cents/kg 0 0 

Mexico 0 0 0 0 0 0 

WESTERN HEMISPHERE 

Argentina 11.5 11.5 11.5 11.5 11.5 11.5 

Brazil 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10 

Chile 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Venezuela 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 

EUROPE 

European Union 12 17.6 11.2-12.8 11.5-17.6 5.6 3.5 

MIDDLE EAST 

Israel (*) 

July:NS3.30/kg 

BNM72.9%; Aug. -

NS1.18/kg BNM 

80.1%; Dec.-

NS3.78/kg BNM 

84.6%; June -

OQ NS1.53/kg 

BNM314% 

BNM91.8+17%VA 

T 

BNM91.8%+17%V 

AT 

Kuwait 0 0 0 0 5 5 

Saudi Arabia 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 

Turkey 55.0 55.0 55.0 54.9 43.2 43.2 

AFRICA 

Egypt 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 30.0 30.0 

South Africa 5.0 5.0 15 5.0 0 0 

ASIA 

China 10 + 13 VAT 10 + 13 VAT 22.7 + 13 VAT 13 + 13 VAT 24 + 13 VAT 10 + 13 VAT 

Hong Kong 0 0 0 0 0 0 

India 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 Rs 35/kg Rs 65/kg 

Indonesia 5 + 10 VAT 5 + 10 VAT 5 + 10 VAT 5 + 10 VAT 5 + 10 VAT 5 + 10 VAT 

Japan 8.5 6.0 6.0 17 - 7.8 free - 2.4 free - 2.4 

Korea, Republic of 24.0 45.0 45.0 45.0 8.0 8.0 

Australia free free free 5.0 5.0 5 

Malaysia 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 0 0 

New Zealand 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Philippines 7.0 7.0 15.0 7.0 3 3 

Singapore 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Taiwan 7.5 20 20.0 20.0 5.0 2.5 

Thailand 

40 CIF value or 

33.50B/kg 20/ 

40 CIF value or 

33.50B/kg 20/ 

40 CIF value or 

33.50B/kg 20/ 

30 CIF value or 

25.00B/kg 20/ 

10 CIF value or 

8.50B/kg 20/ 

10 CIF value or 

8.50B/kg 20/ 

2/ 

9/ 12/ 13/ 

15/ 16/ 16/ 

The information contained in these tables is drawn from a variety of sources and is intended for illustrative purposes. Accuracy of the 

individual entries is not guaranteed. 

Note 1: IQ means In-Quota Tariff. OQ means Out-Of-Quota Tariff. VAT means Value Added Tax. EXT means Excise Tax. 

Note 2: Sole numbers (without further description or details) means or refer to the applied tariff in percent. 

Note 3: Shaded areas represent import tariffs higher than the United States. 

2/ 0.10 percent if entered during the period 6/1-11/30

11/ plus 0.12-0.33 EUR/kg

12/ plus entry price during the period 6/1-9/30: max 130 EUR/ton

13/ plus entry price during the period 7/21-11/20: max 96 EUR/ton

Horticultural Trade: March 2004 

World Trade Issues Edition 
Tariffs for Key Commodities in Select Markets 33

2004 Applied Tariff Rates

Selected Countries and Selected Commodities

Commodity Pistachios Walnuts Corn p/p Broccoli Lettuce Tomatoes 

HS # (s) 080250 08023 200580 070410 070511 070200 

Country 

NAFTA 

United States 0.24-0.34 6-8.85 5.6 2.5-14.0 0.88-7.62 2.51 

Canada 0 0 0-10.5 0-4.0 0-12.5 0-4.8 

Mexico 0 0 72.6* 0 0 0 

WESTERN HEMISPHERE 

Argentina 11.5 11.5 15.5 11.5 11.5 11.5 

Brazil 10.0 10.0 14.0 10 10.0 10.0 

Chile 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Venezuela 15.0 15.0 20.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 

EUROPE 

European Union 1.6 5.1 5.1 + 94 EUR/Ton 9.6-13.6 10.4-12 8.8-14.4 

MIDDLE EAST 

Israel 0 + 17%VAT 0+17% VAT 

BNM45%+17% 

VAT 

OQ NS1.08/kg 

BNM115.2% 0.62/kg BNM80% 

NS0.81/kg BNM 

244.8%; Nov. -

Kuwait 5 5 5 0 0 0 

Saudi Arabia 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 

Turkey 43.2 43.2 

5.1%+22.9EUR/10 

0 Kg./net 19.5 19.5 48.6 

AFRICA 

Egypt 30.0 30.0 30.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 

South Africa 0 0 20.0 0 0 15.0 

ASIA 

China 10 + 13 VAT 20-25 + 13 VAT 10 + 17 VAT 10 + 13 VAT 10 + 13 VAT 13 + 13 VAT 

Hong Kong 0 0 0 0 0 0 

India 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 

Indonesia 5 + 10 VAT 5 + 10 VAT 5 + 10 VAT 5 + 10 VAT 5 + 10 VAT 5 + 10 VAT 

Japan 0 10.0 14.9 - 10 3 3 3 

Korea, Republic of 30.0 shelled 15 + 10 VAT 27.0 45.0 45.0 

Australia free free 5 free free free 

Malaysia 0 0 8.0 0 0 0 

New Zealand 0 0 7.0 0 0 0 

Philippines 3.0 3 15.0 25.0 25.0 10.0 

Singapore 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Taiwan 3.0 5 13~20 20.0 20 10.0 

Thailand 

10 CIF value or 

8.50B/kg 20/ 

10 CIF value or 

8.50B/kg 20/ 

30 CIF value or 

25B/kg + 7 VAT 

20/ 

40 CIF value or 

4.18B/kg 20/ 

40 CIF value or 

4.18B/kg 20/ 

40 CIF value or 

4.18B/kg 20/ 

14/ 15/ 16/ 

19/ 

The information contained in these tables is drawn from a variety of sources and is intended for illustrative purposes. Accuracy of the 

individual entries is not guaranteed.

Note 1: IQ means In-Quota Tariff. OQ means Out-Of-Quota Tariff. VAT means Value Added Tax. EXT means Excise Tax.

Note 2: Sole numbers (without further description or details) means or refer to the applied tariff in percent.

Note 3: Shaded areas represent import tariffs higher than the United States.

14/ from 1/1-14 and 12/1 -12/31: 96 percent of the cif value, minimum of 1.6 Eu per 100 kg/net and 4/15-11/30: 13.6 percent, minimum of 1.6 EUR 

per 100 kg/net

15/ from 1/1-3/31 and 12/31: 10.4 percent minimum 1.3 EUR per 100kg/gross; and 4/1-11/30: 12 percent , minimum 2 EUR per 100 kilograms

16/ plus entry price: 298 EUR/ton

17/ plus 0.25-0.45 Eur/kg

March 2004 World Horticultural Trade: 

Trade Issue Edition 
34 Tariffs for Key Commodities in Select Markets

2004 Applied Tariff Rates 

Selected Countries and Selected Commodities 

Commodity 

HS # (s) 

Raisins 

080620 

Prunes 

081320 

Wine 

22042 

Potato x sd 

070190 

Potato chip 

200520 

Frz f/f 

200410 

Country 

NAFTA 

United States 1.08-2.29 14 1.1-19.6 1.5-3.1 6.4 6.4-8.0 

Canada 0 0 

3.74-16.22 

cents/liter 

0-$4.94/metric 

ton 0-6 0-6 

Mexico 0 0 0** 0 0 0 

WESTERN HEMISPHERE 

Argentina 11.5 11.5 21.5 11.5 15.5 15.5 

Brazil 10 10 20 10 14 14 

Chile 

Venezuela 

0 

15 

0 

15 

6 

15-20 

4.5 

15 

4.5 

20 

4.5 

20 

EUROPE 

European Union 2.4 9.6 

13.1-32 EUR per 

hl 9.6-13.4 14.1 17.6 

MIDDLE EAST 

Israel 

BNM 

306%+17%VAT 

NS0.90/kg 

BNM27%+17%VA 

9.0%+NS1.01/liter 

BNL 

NS1.59/kg BNM 

207%; May-June: 10.8%+17% VAT 

10.8%+NS2.65/kg 

BNM 45%, BNL 

Kuwait 

Saudi Arabia 

Turkey 

0 

5 

54.9 

5 

5.0 

41 

Not Allowed 

5.0 

70 

5 

5 

19.3 

5 

12 

39 

5 

5.0 

39 

AFRICA 

Egypt 

South Africa 

40 

10 

40 

10 

1800 

25 

20 

0.44 c/kg 

30 

20 

30 

20 

ASIA 

China 10 + 13 VAT 25 + 13 VAT 14 - 20 + 17 VAT 13 + 13 VAT 15 + 17 VAT 13 + 17 VAT 

Hong Kong 

India 

0 

100 

0 

25 

80 

see India note 

0 

30 

0 

30 

0 

30 

Indonesia 5 + 10 VAT 5 + 10 VAT 

90 or 170 + 10 

VAT + 40 or 75 

STL 5 5 + 10 VAT 5 + 10 VAT 

Japan 

Korea, Republic of 

1.2 

21 + 10 VAT 

2.4 

18 (Dried) 

15 

15 + 10 VAT 

4.3 

IQ-30 OQ-304 

13.6 

20 + 10 VAT 

8.5 

18 + 10 VAT 

Australia 

Malaysia 

5 

5 

5 

5 

Rm 66/decaliter + 5 

EXT Rm 

free 

0 

free 

0 

5 

0 

New Zealand 0 0 7 0 5 5 

Philippines 

Singapore 

3 

0 

7 

0 

7 

EXT S$9.50 per 

IQ-40 OQ-40 

0 

7 

0 

10 

0 

Taiwan 

Thailand 

NT$2/kg 

30 CIF value or 

25B/kg 20/ 

6.9 

40 CIF value or 

33.50B/kg 20/ 

10 54 CIF value or 

18.00B/liter + 60 

EXT + 10 

20 

OQ, 125 CIF 

value 

15 30 CIF value or 

25B/kg + 7 VAT 

20/ 

12.5 30 CIF value or 

25.0B/kg + 7 VAT 

20/ 

The information contained in these tables is drawn from a variety of sources and is intended for illustrative purposes. Accuracy of the 

individual entries is not guaranteed. 

Note 1: IQ means In-Quota Tariff. OQ means Out-Of-Quota Tariff. VAT means Value Added Tax. EXT means Excise Tax. 

Note 2: Sole numbers (without further description or details) means or refer to the applied tariff in percent. 

Note 3: Shaded areas represent import tariffs higher than the United States. 

18/ plus minimum 25 EUR/hl

19/ plus maximum 0.09 EUR/kg

20/ B = Baht, which is the Thai currency.

India note

India Note: Total applicable duty on wine ranges from 140 to 250 percent on advalorem value that includes:

/1: Basic Duty applicable on CIF value of the good = 100 percent /2 : Countervailing Duty (CVD): applied on the CIF Value plus Basic Duty: a) 50% or 

$37 per case whichever is higher for CIF value more than $25 but less tha n $40 per case b) 20% or $40 per case whichever is higher for CIF value 

exceeding $40 per case /3: Total Effective Duty = Total Basic Duty + Total CVD 

Horticultural Trade: March 2004 

World Trade Issues Edition 
 APHIS Horticultural Accomplishments 2003 35

Summary of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) 

Phytosanitary Accomplishments for U.S. Horticultural Products for Fiscal Year 

2003 

INTRODUCTION 

This report represents a portion of the eighth annual summary and analysis of USDA’s 

successes in resolving trade barrier issues related to animal disease and plant pest 

concerns as prepared by USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). 

The report highlights solely the achievements of APHIS in resolving trade barriers to 

exports of U.S. horticultural products during 2003. 

The information for this report was provided by the Phytosanitary Issues Management 

Area of Plant Protection and Quarantine, International Services, and the Trade Support 

Team of APHIS. 

EXPORT ACCOMPLISHMENTS 

This report details USDA’s successes in the arena of international trade related to 

phytosanitary barriers and illustrates the nature and effectiveness of USDA’s efforts in 

resolving trade issues. These activities include the opening, retaining, or expanding of 

overseas markets for U.S. agricultural products. 

The report relies on the following definition for SPS trade issues resolution: an SPS 

accomplishment takes place when an SPS issue is resolved in a way that enables the 

movement of commodities and satisfies the health concerns of the countries involved. In 

addition, APHIS divides SPS accomplishments into three categories: Market access 

refers to obtaining first time access to a previously closed market or reopening a market 

that has been closed for some time. Market retention means that access to an existing 

market is preserved in the face of some action that threatens to close that market. 

Market expansion involves increasing the openness of an existing market, for instance 

by enlarging the area eligible for export, increasing the number of varieties eligible for 

export, or reducing mitigation measures (and therefore costs) applied to the export. 

Over the past 3 years, several phytosanitary issues involving U.S. horticultural exports 

were resolved valued at about $90 million.per year. These export accomplishments 

included opening new markets for various products, including stone fruit and cherries to 

Chile during fiscal year 2003 

March 2004 USDA Foreign Agricultural Service 

World Trade Issues Edition 
36 APHIS Horticultural Accomplishments 2003

Export Markets Opened in FY 2001, 2002, 2003 

Market Products Opened FY 2001 FY 2002 FY2003 

Australia Grapes FY2002 n/a $2,285,000 $2,344,000 

Cuba Apples FY2002 n/a 

Japan Cherries FY2001 $90,455,598 

Pakistan Apples FY2002 n/a 

Cuba Pears FY2002 n/a 

Korea Walnuts FY2002 n/a 

Chile Stonefruit & 

Cherries FY 2003 n/a 

Thailand Seed Potatoes FY2001 $ 51,000 

Uruguay Seed Potatoes FY2002 n/a 

Total $90,506,598 

$97,000 $795,000 

$85,923,000 $78,721,000 

$24,000 $0 

$0 $29,000 

$6,346,000 $ 6,923,000 

n/a n/a 

$ 51,498 $ 222,000 

$53,058 $191,000 

$94,779,556 $ 89,225,000 

APHIS successfully retained markets for horticultural products valued at $12.8 million 

during fiscal year 2003. Market potential for these products is estimated to be $19.1 

million. Market retention efforts by APHIS specifically included maintaining access for 

U.S. potatoes to Mexico valued at $6.36 million and U.S. apples to Colombia valued at 

$2 million. 

Current Export Markets Retained in FY 2003

Country Products Trade in 2003 Market potential

Canada Seed Potatoes $ 2,804,000 $ 3,100,000 

Colombia Apples $2,047,000 $4,000,000 

Colombia Nectarines N/A N/A 

Colombia Peaches $348,000 $ 500,000 

Colombia Pears $1,258,000 $1,500,000 

Mexico Potatoes $ 6,364,000 $ 10,000,000 

Total $12,821,000 $19,100,000 

APHIS efforts in expanding existing market access in 2003 were significant. Market 

expansion activities are valued at $62.2 million in 2003 and included greater access for 

U.S. apples to Taiwan, U.S. peaches and nectarines to Mexico, as well as U.S. table 

grapes to Australia. 

Horticultural Trade: March 2004 

World Trade Issues Edition 
 APHIS Horticultural Accomplishments 2003 37

Current Export Markets Expanded in FY 2003 

Country Products Trade in FY 2003 Market Potential 

Australia Table Grapes $2,344,000 $20,000,000 

Canada Nursery Stock 

Mexico Apricots 

Mexico Nectarines 

Mexico Plums 

Korea 

Mexico 

Mexico 

Taiwan 

Total 

Cherries $3,487,000 

Citrus $8,770,000 

N/A N/A 

$2,971,000 $3,000,000 

$14,000 $3,981,000 

$6,124,000 $10,000,000 

$5,000,000 

$9,000,000 

$15,000,000 

$71,000,000 

$ 62,262,000 $ 136,981,000 

Peaches $11,746,000 

Apples $26,806,000 

For APHIS, a phytosanitary issue arises when plant health concerns potentially limit the 

movement of a commodity in international trade. In such instances, APHIS scientists and 

technical staff enter into discussions with their foreign counterparts on the scientific 

issues related to the movement of the product. The goal of these discussions is to 

determine under which conditions trade can take place without presenting a risk to the 

plant resources of the countries involved. 

Import requirements designed to protect the biological health of the agricultural sector 

can significantly restrict trade. The exchange of technical and scientific information can 

often convince an importing country that the risk associated with imported products is 

less than has been perceived or can be safely addressed through certain risk mitigation 

measures. Like the United States, our trade partners are often cautious in determining 

when and how agricultural trade can occur. 

The successes presented in this report, as in previous years, drew on APHIS’ recognized 

expertise in plant health risk assessment. Another key component is extensive 

coordination among the U.S. Government agencies involved in SPS trade issues. In 

addition to APHIS, USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service and Food Safety and 

Inspection Service supply critical technical input to make trade facilitation possible. 

Within USDA, the Foreign Agricultural Service plays the lead role in developing and 

implementing trade policy. USDA’s partners in resolving phytosanitary trade issues 

include the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, the Department of State, the 

Environmental Protection Agency, and the Food and Drug Administration. 

March 2004 USDA Foreign Agricultural Service 

World Trade Issues Edition 
38 Foreign Government Market Access Requests

The table below provides a representative sample of the scope of current import market access requests. 

For a complete list of current requests and their pest risk assessment status, please refer to the following 

website: https://web01.aphis.usda.gov/PRAStatusWeb2.nsf/Status?OpenView 

Region Country Commodity 

Egypt Mango 

Ghana Eggplant, Okra, Papaya 

Morocco Tomatoes 

Namibia Grape 

South Africa Apricot, Avocado, Cherries, Mango, Pineapple, 

Africa 

Zamb ia Fine Beans, Leek 

China Apple, Citrus, Litchi, Longan, Pears, Rambutan, Rose Apple 

India Mango 

Japan Persimmons 

Korea Apple, Curcurbits, Pepper, Sweet Potato, Unshu Orange 

Malaysia Passion Fruit 

Pakistan Mango 

Philippines Cherry Tomato 

Taiwan Citrus, Grapes, Phaleanopsis 

Thailand Guava, Mangosteen, Passion Fruit, Pineapple, Rambutan 

Asia 

Vietnam Hog Plum, Sugar Apple 

European Union Hazelnut, Plants 

France Apricot, Fig 

Italy Artichoke, Basil, Eggplant, Lettuce, Pears 

Netherlands Skimmia Plants, Tomatoes 

Portugal Green Bean 

Europe 

Spain Apricot, Avocado, Cherry, Grapes, Nectarines, Peaches, Raspberry, 

Watermelon 

Middle East Israel Chard, Longan, Spinach 

Canada Fir Logs, Pine Logs 

North America Mexico 

Avocado, Citrus, Fig, Guava, Hyacinth Bean, Lemon Grass, 

Longan, Neem Fruit, Potatoes, Rambutan, Pitaya, Squash, Star 

Fruit, Sweet Lime, Fir Logs, Pine Logs 

Australia Apricot, Avocado, Broccoli, Citrus, Cherries, Mango, Tomato 

Fiji Papaya Oceania 

New Zealand Honeybees, Lemon, Orange, Persimmons, Sweet Pepper, Unshu 

Orange 

Argentina Cantaloupe, Carrot, Citrus, Lettuce, Pepper, Pumpkin, Raspberry, 

Brazil Papaya, Plum 

Chile Baby Kiwi, Chestnut, Clementine, Fig, Table Grapes, Tomato 

Colombia Blueberry, Papaya 

Ecuador Tomato 

Guyana Cauliflower 

Peru Avocado, Cherry Tomato, Citrus, Cucumber, Sage 

Uruguay Citrus, Watermelon 

South America 

Venezuela Apricot 

Horticultural Trade: March 2004 

World Trade Issues Edition 
Technical Assistance for Specialty Crops 39

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FOR SPECIALTY CROPS

FISCAL YEAR 2003 PROJECT SUMMARIES AND ALLOCATIONS

AgriChem Data Service, Inc. 

Second-year proposal for the development and implementation of a database that helps users 

determine rates and limitations on the usage of agricultural pesticides. The Pesticide Residue & 

Application Database is a crop-specific database that cross references pesticides by chemical 

brand name, method of application, rates and frequency of application, as well as pre- and postharvest interval. The database contains information for the U.S., Mexico, and Canada, 42 crops, 

1400 active ingredients, 29 pesticide types and 14 different timings resulting in nearly 24 million 

combinations. It provides chemical use practices in order to ensure compliance with a target 

country’s MRL standards and provides practical guidance to maximize the benefit to the U.S. 

producer. Second year funding provides for the addition of data for the Codex and Korea, plus 

industry outreach and training. 

California Grape & Tree Fruit League 

Second-year pre-clearance program for export of fresh stonefruit to Mexico. Grant will cover 

costs associated with Mexican inspector salary, per diem, travel, and administrative expenses 

while in the U.S. 

California Table Grape Commission 

Australian Phytosanitary Pre-Clearance: TASC funds will be used to cover the second-year preclearance program for California table grapes to Australia. TASC funding will help underwrite 

the Australian pre-clearance program by covering the costs of the travel for the inspectors, per 

diem, fees, and equipment. It will also cover the coordination and implementation of the 

program by the California Table Grape Export Association. 

California Table Grape Commission 

Protocol Improvements – California Table Grapes to Australia: TASC funds will be used to help 

underwrite the cost of research to (1) demonstrate that current Methyl Bromide (MB) treatment 

is efficacious on California grapes packed in Expanded Polystyrene (EPS) boxes; and (2) 

identify a controlled atmosphere quarantine treatment as an alternative to methyl bromide 

fumigation that will allow the export of green seedless grapes to Australia. Australia’s onerous 

import protocol is limiting the California table grape industry’s ability to reach its export 

objectives. The protocol currently maintains a dual fumigation treatment, including a MB 

treatment and an SO2/CO2 treatment. The current methyl bromide treatment and restrictive 

packaging requirements have severely limited California’s ability to export green seedless grapes 

to Australia. Green seedless varieties are the grapes coveted by Australian importers and 

retailers, and the California grapes with the greatest potential for export to Australia. Over time, 

assuming continuing improvements to the export protocol. 

March 2004 USDA Foreign Agricultural Service 

World Trade Issues Edition 
40 Technical Assistance for Specialty Crops

California Table Grape Commission 

Research to develop a systems approach for Black Widow Spiders (BWS) – California Table 

Grapes to New Zealand. New Zealand imposes an onerous SO2/CO2 treatment on California 

table grapes because of concerns about BWS. The treatment is a barrier to entry into the New 

Zealand market for many California table grape shippers. TASC funding will be used to retain 

an outside researcher with expertise in the behavior of arachnids to work with USDA and 

California Department of Food and Agricultural (CDFA) officials to investiga te the association 

of BWS and California table grapes. The researcher would investigate spider biology and 

behavior, along with table grape production and harvest methods, with the objective of 

minimizing the risk of spiders entering the table grape pathway. If a systems approach for 

mitigation of BWS in the table grape pathway is achieved, the industry could use these findings 

to develop a case to revise the export protocol for New Zealand. Also, if successful and accepted 

by New Zealand, the systems approach for BWS developed through this project could be 

proposed to Australia as a substitute for its existing SO2/CO2 treatment requirements for BWS. 

California Tree Fruit Agreement 

Second-year pre-clearance program for export of fresh nectarines and plums to Japan. Grant will 

cover costs associated with Japanese inspector salary, per diem, travel and administrative 

expenses while in the U.S. 

California Arizona Lettuce Export Council 

A pre-clearance program for lettuce shipments to Japan designed to eradicate the need for 

fumigation of U.S. lettuce in Japan. The lettuce industry has been working with USDA since 

1994 to increase exports to Japan but Japan's fumigation policy ruins the quality of lettuce and 

sales potential. Funds will be used to cover the costs associated with Japanese inspector salary, 

per diem, travel and administrative expenses while in the U.S. 

Citrus Research Board 

A policy analysis of Japan’s SPS standards to aid USDA decision makers. The analysis details 

the substantive issues relating to official control and identifies if any further actions will be 

needed to eliminate trade-restrictive measures. This is the second year of funding for the 

proposal, and includes funds for additional needed translations and analysis in Japan. Could be 

beneficial to other commodities. 

CropLife America 

Second-year proposal for the development and implementation of a database that provides users 

with a list of Maximum Residue Level (MRL) tolerances by active ingredient to desired export 

destinations. Users may query by crop, pesticide active ingredient, and pesticide type. Over 300 

specialty crops are covered, as are 300 pesticides approved by the EPA for use on those 

commodities in the U.S. MRL data are included from 70 countries, the European Union, and the 

Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex). Countries included in the database represent, at a 

minimum, $1 million in annual export revenue for U.S. horticultural commodities. This database 

is especially useful for growers, exporters, chemical manufacturers, regulators and as an aid in 

negotiation of MRL tolerances for U.S. trading partners. Second year funding provides for 

maintenance, the addition of additional 10 countries, plus industry outreach and training. 

Horticultural Trade: March 2004 

World Trade Issues Edition 
Technical Assistance for Specialty Crops 41

Hawaiian Agricultural Research Center (HARC) 

This project is to development an export protocol utilizing irradiation to address phytosanitary 

barriers to export of Hawaiian cut flowers to China and Korea. Once the specific barriers are 

determined the HARC will test the effectiveness of the allowable irradiation levels on pests that 

contaminate Hawaiian cut flower shipments. Then they will analyze the phytotoxicity of the 

effective radiation protocols on each cut flower species and establish procedures to overcome 

any phytotoxic effects on the flowers. The proposal is timely, as the Hawaii State Department of 

Agriculture is currently assessing bilateral agreements with China and Korea. The analysis 

proved that the U.S. has been competitive in China and Korea regarding cut flowers; however, 

trade has fallen sharply in recent years. 

Northwest Fruit Exporters 

Second-year pre-clearance program for export of Northwest apples to Mexico. Mexico is the 

largest U.S. export market for apples. Grant will cover costs associated with Mexican inspector 

salary, per diem, travel and administrative expenses while in the U.S. 

Northwest Fruit Exporters 

Northwest apple exporters are prohibited from exporting their apples to Australia and South 

Africa for quarantine reasons related to fireblight bacteria and other minor pests. Funds will be 

used to gather technical information for risk assessment. 

Michigan Apple Committee 

Second-year pre-clearance program for Michigan apples to Mexico. Mexico requests inspectors 

for a pre-clearance program before shipments take place. Grant will cover costs associated with 

Mexican inspector salary, per diem, travel, and administrative expenses while in the U.S. 

Northwest Horticultural Council 

Proposal to evaluate the potential association of fire blight bacteria with mature pear fruit. 

Markets that could benefit Australia, China, Japan, and South Korea 

Organic Trade Association 

Proposal provides for the analysis, assessment, and auditing of foreign organic standards. The 

Gap Analysis will compare the designated organic standards to the U.S. National Organic 

Program and provide the FAS, NOP and USTR negotiating teams with an understanding of the 

commodities and differences, and the unique technical barriers to trade inherent in the 

regulations. Both conformity and equivalency agreements will be analyzed. Completed analysis 

for EU stands in FY02, the second-year analysis will focus on Japan, and will include some 

preliminary research in Australia. 

March 2004 USDA Foreign Agricultural Service 

World Trade Issues Edition 
42 Technical Assistance for Specialty Crops

U.S. Hop Industry Plant Protection Committee 

The Chemical Registration and Residue Harmonization will increase the harmonization of 

chemical residue standards between the U.S. and the European Union -- 1) provide direct 

communication on foreign chemical registration; 2) increase regulatory cooperation between 

countries; and 3) assist with travel cost so that industry's representative can work with CODEX 

Committee. 

USDA/ARS/Westlaco, Texas 

Funding will be used to conduct tests on irradiation phytosanitary treatment against 

Lepidopterous Borers, Eeriophyid Mites and Terrestrial Gastropods. The testing will determine 

appropriate doses of treatment for these three important quarantine pest groups. Research 

findings will have implications for the following commodity groups: corn, okra, potato peppers, 

cut flowers, lettuce, and citrus fruits. 

VA Apple Growers Association/VA Dept of Ag 

First-year pre-clearance program for Virginia apples to Mexico. Grant will cover costs 

associated with Mexican inspector salary, per diem, travel, and administrative expenses while in 

the U.S. 

Horticultural Trade: March 2004 

World Trade Issues Edition