Hugh MartinDOMESTIC AGRICULTURAL production recorded a decline of 18 per cent in 2002, a news item earlier this week told us. That is hardly surprising given the extraordinarily bad weather experienced throughout the year. In fact it should be remembered that we had a particularly nasty flood in December 2001, the effects of which carried over into last year.
Before the farmers could regain their footing the May/June flood rains hammered them into the ground again. And, as if that was not enough, in September, hurricanes Isidore and Lilli swept over them leaving tons upon tons of water on the land drowning their crops and animals and, for weeks, making it almost impossible for them to carry out any form of cultural practices. A fall of only 18 per cent from the previous year's production under those circumstances represents a remarkable performance by the small farmers of this country. It is an impressive indication of their resilience and independence especially when it is remembered that the assistance by the Government was limited to a fraction of the losses sustained by the sector.
What must be of greater concern is the report earlier this month of a 50 per cent fall in ackee exports last year compared to the previous year. Bear with me now. It was just under three years ago that the United States lifted the 28 years ban on ackee exports from Jamaica. This cleared the way into the most lucrative market for a commodity that was gaining increasing demand outside of the ethnic market. Ackee became the crop of the future and other countries were now scurrying to get a share of it.
In my column of January 25, 2002, "More Than A Quattie Worth" I outlined the tremendous effort put out by a number of local organizations to get the ban lifted and of the difficult requirements imposed on processors to achieve export accreditation. At that time four local companies had received it and eight of the remaining 16 were close to passing this Hazard Analysis at Critical Control Point Programme (HACCP). The Ministry of Agriculture's Fruit Tree Crop Project was in full swing and we were told that the emphasis was on increasing the ackee tree population to meet the demand of growers who would be putting in large acreages of the crop.
So what could have happened in so short a time to result in such a massive decline. Surely not the flood rains as they could hardly have damaged the sturdy trees? "Maybe", opines Mr. Albert Shand, Executive Director of the Rural Agricultural Development Authority (RADA). Mr. Shand theorises that the floods, while not affecting the trees had a serious effect on the fruits resulting in them becoming soft and susceptible to rotting. Admittedly, this would render the fruits unsuitable for canning and could help to account for the fall in exports. But is that a sufficient explanation? I don't think so and Mr. Shand was quick to suggest another more believable but quite startling explanation; the absence of bees.
Bees? Yes, bees are required for pollinating fruit trees, a necessary process in the production of fruits. Unfortunately it is a detail we all learnt in school but most of us have forgotten. Mr. Reginald Peddy, Director of the All Island Bee Keeping Development Project, Ministry of Agriculture, once told me that bee-keeping contributed more to agriculture than any other sub-sector - as much as $1.8 billion. That figure included the value of the honey and other products; the infrastructure; the then 40,000 hives and the contribution of pollination, which is estimated at 15 to 20 times the other values. While the claim is arguable no one can disagree with the suggestion that bees are of immense value to agricultural production because of their assistance to pollination as they seek material for food and shelter for their colonies.
So what is this absence of bees Mr. Shand was talking about. Well, it seems as if the American Foul Brood disease that has affected the country's bee industry has had a devastating effect on the bee population. Not only has the disease been responsible for the death of large numbers, one of the methods of control has been to destroy entire colonies where the disease appears instead of just individual infected hives. Latterly, more sophisticated control methods have allowed for less drastic measures so the decrease in population has slowed.
However, Mr. Shand's reference was not so much about the registered colonies. The wild bees have virtually disappeared from the landscape as without treatment they have been wiped out by the disease as well as, since 2000, by the varoa mite.
A few weeks ago colleague columnist Marjorie Stair bemoaned the fall in yields of mangoes and I believe breadfruit. She may have ascribed the problem to some soil-borne disease. She may also want to look into Mr. Shand's theory.
Hugh Martin is a communication specialist and farm broadcaster. E-mail;: humar@cwjamaica. com.
