Two foodborne illness outbreaks this summer have exposed a widening gap in federal oversight of imported produce — a gap that now covers roughly half of all fruit and vegetables consumed in the United States.

The harder number for domestic growers: consumer data firm Numerator estimates fresh produce spending fell by roughly $280 million for each month that Cyclospora concerns persisted. From mid-July to mid-August, Central Coast California growers plowed under about one-third of harvest-ready lettuce, laid off workers and lost their expected annual profit — even though their lettuce had no connection to the outbreak.

De Ann Davis, senior vice president of science at Western Growers, laid out the case in an opinion piece arguing for measurable accountability on imported produce safety. Her argument is not against imports; it is for parity and consequences. Domestic and foreign growers should face comparable food-safety expectations, verification rigor and penalties. Right now, she writes, they do not.

The outbreak figures are stark. As of Aug. 27, 2026, the Food and Drug Administration reported 11,458 illnesses, 495 hospitalizations and two deaths in a multistate Cyclospora outbreak linked to iceberg lettuce sourced from central Mexico. A separate, ongoing Salmonella Javiana outbreak has sickened 431 people and hospitalized 57 across 32 states, tied to jalapeño peppers grown in Sinaloa. Those peppers moved through restaurants, wholesalers and manufacturers, triggering numerous downstream recalls of prepared foods.

Collateral damage on U.S. farms

When an imported product is implicated, domestic growers who had no connection to the outbreak lose markets, crops and jobs. Consumers rarely distinguish among farms, regions or even commodities when official information is incomplete or broad warnings dominate coverage. Perishable produce cannot sit in a warehouse waiting for confidence to return.

The jalapeño outbreak shows how quickly the same costs spread through a different supply chain. Recalled peppers were ingredients in prepared foods sold through national restaurant and retail channels. Davis lists the direct costs: product destruction, sanitation, refunds, recall administration, interrupted production and emergency supplier changes.

She argues these losses are preventable if authorities identify the affected product, source and distribution path as quickly and specifically as the evidence allows. Clearer public communication by federal, state and local officials about the origin of outbreak crops, she writes, likely would have calmed consumer fears and mitigated at least some of the damage on American farms.

Staffing ports, accessing Mexican fields

Davis calls on FDA to hire new staff or relocate existing personnel to major ports of entry. She also urges the Trump administration to use diplomatic and bureaucratic channels with the government of Mexico — by far the largest source of imported produce — so on-site FDA personnel can access source farms and packinghouses after an outbreak.

Under her framework, an outbreak, repeated positive sample, major traceability failure or significant supplier-verification violation should activate rapid traceback, importer inspection, targeted sampling and, where warranted, an on-site foreign farm or packinghouse investigation, environmental assessment and genomic analysis. Enhanced oversight should continue long enough to verify controls are working, with proportionate consequences for repeated noncompliance.

FDA already collects data on foreign farms, importers, border examinations, sampling, warning letters, import alerts and outbreak tracebacks — but Davis says that information is very hard to find. Congress and the public, she argues, should be able to see which commodities and regions receive enhanced review, whether repeated problems change a supplier's risk status, and what corrective actions are verified before normal import entry resumes.

Testing traceability before 2028

The Food Safety Modernization Act's Traceability Rule carries a 2028 compliance deadline. Before it arrives, Davis wants FDA to test traceability performance rather than simply confirm records exist. Imported-produce records should preserve farm, packinghouse, importer and lot identity through U.S. distribution. Routine trace exercises should measure the percentage of investigations completed to the farm and lot, the time required, and the frequency of incomplete or conflicting information. Those records should be reconciled with importer files under the Foreign Supplier Verification Program, so discrepancies trigger inspection and correction.

FDA has published a domestic fresh produce oversight strategy, implementation plan and performance measures. Imported produce has no equivalent — and Davis says the agency must close that gap now, before the next outbreak shifts another round of preventable losses onto growers who produced safe food.