Latest food labeling taking effect

CAPITAL REGION — In 2007, more than $112 million worth of fresh vegetables made their way into U.S. markets from the People’s Republic of China.

Another $106 million worth of edible fish and seafood was imported from the Philippines, and some $700 million in red meats came all the way from New Zealand in 2007, according to statistics from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Foreign Agricultural Service.

Up until now, consumers in some instances had little or no idea from where the food they bought at their grocery store came.

But that is changing, as the federal government begins implementing the Country of Origin Labeling law.

At the end of a six-month grace period, grocery stores and other retailers that sell at least $230,000 in fresh and frozen fruits, vegetables and meats will be subjected to fines if they don’t ensure that consumers know the country from which their food items are coming.

Despite being discussed for at least five years, the rules were refined to the point of an interim rule only two months ago, so retailers are facing pressure to cope with the new responsibilities, said Deborah White, chief legal officer at the 1,500-member Food Marketing Institute, which represents food retailers and wholesalers nationally.

“They didn’t know exactly what they were going to have to do for the covered commodities until eight weeks ago,” White said.

Products don’t necessarily take a straight path to the aisles of grocery stores, White said, and one issue complicating the work is coordinating the new requirements among some 100,000 different suppliers.

“Another complicating factor is being able to explain the law, the regulations in a way that makes sense to store-level associates,” White said.

White said there are more than a million employees in stores who will have to be trained on what they have to do to help their employers remain compliant.

Record keeping will also add another layer of work to the task, White said.

The law requires a paper trail to prove the country of origin is indeed the source of foods covered by the law, she said.

“You have companies that have a couple hundred different stores. They have to make sure the people in each store are getting the correct information and posting it in the proper way,” White said.

White said research she’s seen indicates consumers are more interested in other factors than the origin of their food.

“The research traditionally shows that consumers are more interested in the quality of the foods. They want high-quality foods and they want fresh foods and they want them to be affordable,” White said.

“I think certainly our research hasn’t shown that this is a driving force in consumer purchasing behavior.”

Others in the industry disagree.

The New York Farm Bureau has a different perspective on what people are looking for when they go shopping.

“Consumers are demanding to know where their food comes from and we certainly support the idea of identifying the source of people’s food,” Farm Bureau spokesman Peter Gregg said.

Gregg noted the popularity of the state’s Pride of New York program, which highlights locally grown items, and said once people start seeing where their food is coming from, local producers will see benefits.

“We’ll be at a big advantage, I think. When people have the information at their fingertips, they’re going to choose food from New York as opposed to food from China,” Gregg said.

“If there were two bags of apples, one from New York and another was from Chile, I think they would easily pick the apples from New York. We just need to make sure that they’re properly identified. It’s hard to determine in some cases,” Gregg said.

Making country of origin more visible on products is likely to get shoppers thinking about where their food is coming from, and it could spark more interest in locally grown foods, said Montgomery County farmer Kathleen Harris.

Harris raises lamb, and said some lamb products found in grocery stores come from Australia, where the lambs are raised differently.

Harris contends American lamb tastes better than Australian lamb, and fears people selecting the foreign variety might not like it and stop buying lamb altogether.

“It’s not a very popular meat and if somebody’s trying that for the first time and they don’t try American lamb, they might not like the flavor of it,” Harris said.

The new federal program gives the American lamb producer an advantage in the marketplace, Harris said.

Hannaford Bros. Co., which operates more than 164 stores in the Northeastern United States, sees the program as another way to help consumers make decisions when they shop, said Michael Norton, director of corporate communications.

The company implemented a “Guiding Stars” program to make it easy for shoppers to identify nutritious foods.

“When we implemented the guiding stars nutrition program, that was something nobody asked us to do,” Norton said. “We heard our consumers saying, ‘I want it to be easier.’ We were willing to invest dollars in that.”

The same is true for the new laws requiring country of origin labeling, he said.

Hannaford has agreements with 220 local farms across the Northeast in an effort to supply consumers with local products, Norton said. That doesn’t prevent grocers from selling quality produce from other countries, he said.

“I think what people want and what they deserve is good food and good prices and as a retailer what you’ll do is you’ll try to make all those decisions that maximize that value,” Norton said.

“Sometimes that’s a food from another state or region or another country or from less than 10 miles away. Clearly the consumers want choices and they want us to help them be in control of those choices,” Norton said.

Deadlines for the new rules, which were included in both the 2002 and 2008 farm bill legislation, were pushed back several times. But now a variety of food items are required to include labels, stamps, marks, placards or some other clear and visible sign on the package, display, holding unit or bin holding the food that indicates the country or origin.

These requirements include veal, lamb, pork, chicken, goat, wild and farm-raised fish and shellfish, peanuts, pecans, ginseng and macadamia nuts, according to the USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service.

The same rules are already in effect for wild and farm-raised fish and shellfish, according to the USDA.

The rule went into effect so that it applies to products that are produced and packaged after Sept. 30, 2008, said Billy Cox, a spokesman at the USDA.

Cox said for the first six months following Sept. 30, those affected by the new rules will receive a grace period.

“The goal of work during this grace period is to help the industry and the retailers to fully understand the law and to get into compliance,” Cox said.

Afterward, retailers who fail to comply could be fined $1,000 per incident, Cox said.

Processed foods, such items as fried, broiled, grilled or smoked or cured, are excluded from the rule. Some food products that have been processed, changing their character, are also exempt, including teriyaki-flavored pork loin, breaded chicken tenders, marinated chicken breasts and salad mix that includes lettuce and carrots, according to the USDA.

Other federal rules apply to other items, according to the USDA. For example, frozen vegetables that were grown in another country have to say so under provisions of the Tariff Act of 1930, according to the USDA. Fish imported from another country and then processed in the United States also requires country of origin labeling pursuant to the Tariff Act.

Under another rule, any meat that is packaged in a “consumer-ready” fashion has to be labeled with country of origin information, according to the USDA.

Cox said officials expect to begin monitoring compliance with the labeling law in April.

“After the six-month period, we will be fully enforcing the law. We’re taking the law seriously and we will be following up with complaints to see if they’re valid and to see if anything needs to be done,” Cox said.