1/24/01 -- I find it very difficult to find any "compromise" within the Decas proposal. Given the current industry situation, the Decas proposal simply suggests that Ocean Spray and Northland growers (about 75% of all growers) destroy a significant part of their crop while the other 25% of the growers do nothing.

The total supply of cranberries vs. the total demand is the problem. As growers, we can find a plan where we all share equally in correcting the problem or we can expect to see no plan that will pass and the possibility of $5 per barrel cranberries.

I am sick of the accusations and innuendo within the Decas editorial aimed at Ocean Spray and Northland. It is simply designed to inflame individual growers and to divide the growing community as we try and solve the problem in a manner equitable to all growers.

It is no secret that I do not agree with many of the management goals at Ocean Spray. They probably don’t agree with many of my goals. Those are handler differences, not grower differences.

It is also no secret that today, most of the oversupply is in the hands of Ocean Spray and Northland. If Ocean Spray and Northland would not have contracted for the fruit it would still be in the system. The extra fruit will drive down the price of all fruit regardless of which handler has the fruit. We cannot expect to get approval for a plan that punishes a grower because he chose to sign with a specific handler. We can only expect approval of a plan that treats all growers equitably as we bring supply and demand in line.

As a final statement, since Ocean Spray and Northland’s financial results are publicly available, the "pain" every shareholder is feeling is clearly evident. I challenge Mr. Decas to make the financial results of all of his entities public so everyone can determine his level of "pain" and his contribution to solving the industry problem.

Obviously, Northland and Ocean Spray shareholders are already taking the biggest financial hit for the industry’s oversupply. Asking us to bleed more by dumping our fruit while others gain or maintain current profits is not "compromise."

I have posted a revised plan that I believe is a compromise designed to increase grower price and treat all growers equally. I urge you to review that document.