Tomato Growers Address the Loss of Methyl Bromide

The loss of methyl bromide in 2001 will have a great impact on Florida's tomato growers.

Wayne Hawkins, executive vice president of the Florida Tomato Exchange, says that the ban will wipe out many growers. "We simply won't be able to compete with Mexican growers, who will still be allowed to use methyl bromide for several years after 2001," he says. The Florida Tomato Exchange represents growers who produce 95 percent of the tomatoes grown in central and southern Florida. Crops from these growers constitute about 50 percent of U.S. fresh-market tomatoes.

Hawkins says that since NAFTA was passed, 100 Florida tomato growers have gone out of business and 24 large tomato packing facilities have closed.

"Our growers are cooperating with universities and with the Government in the search to find alternatives to methyl bromide, but so far, we haven't seen any alternative that works nearly as well," says Hawkins. "Our argument is simple: if Florida growers can't use methyl bromide, then our competitors should not be allowed to use it either."

Growers Speak

Paul DiMare is the largest grower of fresh-market tomatoes in the United States. On 6,000 acres located in Florida, California, and South Carolina, he grows peppers, cucumbers, and squash, but primarily tomatoes. DiMare's operation is a mainstay to the economy of south Dade County, Florida.

"We were one of the first growers to use methyl bromide," DiMare says. "Our farming operation is family run and we've been growing vegetables with this chemical since the early 1970s. We started with a mixture of methyl bromide and chloropicrin on old land. This means that the soil had already been farmed 30 or 40 years and was plagued with problems like nematodes and Verticillium and Fusarium wilts. Although we tried several chemicals to solve these problems, the methyl bromide/chloropicrin treatment was the only thing that worked for us."

And, now, decades later, methyl bromide is the only treatment that DiMare uses to maintain production at an economic level that keeps him in the business of growing tomatoes.

"It costs about $6,000 an acre to grow our tomatoes," he says. "We can't afford to sink that kind of money into the earth unless we're confident that we can recoup that cost by producing a profitable crop. Granted, about 5 percent of that cost is for the fumigant, but we couldn't afford to take a chance on risking the other 95 percent unless we had some security. Right now, methyl bromide is our security."

What would DiMare do if methyl bromide were banned today?

"We'd have to quit farming," he says. "Before we started using methyl bromide, we only got about 25 to 30 percent of the tonnage we now get. There's just no way we could stay in business, because right now there is no commercially available alternative to methyl bromide. And, I don't know of anything that will be available anytime soon. So, realistically, we'd have no choice. We'd go under."

He says a good example of just how effective methyl bromide is comes across loud and clear when the fumigation equipment gets blocked and sometimes skips 100 to 200 feet of soil in a field being treated with methyl bromide. "Of course, we have no way of knowing this at the time, but when that crop matures, it is readily apparent: sickly looking plants that bear little or no fruit."

According to DiMare, he has always been careful about methyl bromide escaping from the soil. "We always had a machine about 20 feet behind the fumigation equipment that was putting down mulch to keep methyl bromide from escaping into the air. In all our years of using this chemical, we've never had a worker affected by escaping fumes."

A little of DiMare's crop goes to Canada, but most of it is marketed in the United States. "'Made in the USA' means a lot to us. We're in stiff competition with Mexican growers, but we're confident that we can meet the needs of U.S. consumers. However, we can't do that if Mexico continues to use methyl bromide when its use is denied us."

John Taylor is a large tomato grower in Florida's Manatee County. Although he doesn't have DiMare's problem of "old land," he nevertheless has problems with soilborne diseases and pests even though he practices crop rotation on his acreage. Taylor also farms in Georgia and Virginia.

"We started using methyl bromide back in the 1970s, but we always put down plastic mulch simultaneously as we fumigated," he says. "I'm not sure that I could make it if methyl bromide were taken away. We've been working with University of Florida scientists for several years now on chemical and other types of alternatives, but nothing has been as effective."

Taylor says that some of the other fumigants work on some problems, but they must be combined with other chemicals to take care of weeds. For production, yield, and quality, nothing compares to methyl bromide.

"Right now, our production, yield, and quality are what helps us keep our heads above water in the competition with California and Mexican growers," Taylor says. "California tomato growers don't have to use plastic tarps because their growing conditions are so different from ours. Their land is arid, so their disease and pest problems are not as significant as ours. The tomato growers there don't need drip irrigation."

These factors mean that the costs of production are lower for the competition than they are for Florida growers. Taylor says that because of higher yields and excellent quality, East Coast tomato growers can compete with California. Also, close proximity to the market saves on transportation costs.

"Quantity and quality are our two major advantages. And they are a direct result of our using methyl bromide," Taylor says. "Yes, it is possible for us to grow tomatoes with some of the proposed alternatives. However, we probably cannot grow enough of a quality crop to cover the costs of production."

According to Taylor, "Losing methyl bromide will take away the competitive edge that Florida tomato growers have enjoyed and that has kept us in business for decades."

[October 1998 Table of Contents] [Newsletter Issues Listing] [Methyl Bromide Home Page]
[ARS Home Page] [USDA Home Page]

Last Updated: October 6, 1998