The iconic California avocado is in trouble, and this farmer is fighting to save it
Avocado trees blanketed the hillsides of ACA Groves in three directions, just a portion of a 372-acre spread studded with 16,000 specimens, many of them dense with branches weighed down by that quintessential California fruit.
The serene San Diego County property felt far from the chaotic epicenter of the global avocado industry in Mexico.
Violence, corruption and environmental degradation have saturated the avocado trade there, causing the U.S. to briefly stop imports and senators to agitate for action by the federal government.
"Mexican avocado imports are tainted conflict fruit," said Kachuck, 70, a former neurologist who heads his family's business. "The Mexican avocado industry is corrupt and ungoverned - and the American consumer is being deceived."
A deluge of inexpensive avocados from Mexico has imperiled the livelihoods of California growers, Kachuck among them.
A quirky and voluble man, Kachuck is on a quest to save the California avocado, taking political and legal action against entrenched interests he sees as an impediment to farmers like him. He calls himself a "Neuroavocado Warrior."
"You've got to be an activist, you've got to be proactive and you have to defend your strengths and buttress your weaknesses in everything you do," said Kachuck, a married father of three adult children. "Everything has adversarial components to it. But the operative part is making peace."
As recently as the 1990s, the U.S. did not import Mexican avocados. But 1994's North American Free Trade Agreement opened the floodgates: now roughly 90% of the avocados consumed here are imported. And the bulk of that fruit - again, roughly 90% - comes from Mexico, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
At the same time, Southern California farmers must survive in a drought-prone state, and extreme weather brought on by climate change has meant irregular crop yields, among other challenges. Dylan Marschall, a real estate broker who specializes in avocado properties, said the market dynamics are brutally simple: "Yeah, California has better-quality avocados, but retailers are in the business to make money. And if they can get [better] prices from Mexico, they aren't going to pay for California fruit."
Amid the tumult, Kachuck has battled with the California Avocado Commission, accusing it of insufficiently aiding growers. Now he is bracing for President Trump's trade policies, unsure what they might do to his business.
Kachuck said he would welcome a tariff, but pointed out that another major Trump initiative - deporting millions of immigrants in the U.S. illegally - could seriously deplete his and other farmers' labor forces.
Change can't come soon enough. Kachuck's line of credit is tapped out and he's had to draw hundreds of thousands of dollars from his retirement account to keep the business afloat.
Amid the avalanche of foreign fruit, the seasons spanning 2019 through 2023 were "just awful," Kachuck said. The COVID-19 pandemic amplified the problems. But he presses on.
"Yeah, I'm taking chances. And I'm stupid enough to not know when quitting is correct," he said. "I just have this general sense of optimism - or hubris - that I can figure it out."
The quintessence of California
Kachuck took over his family's business in 2010, making the long drive to San Diego County from his home in Valley Village. He had just walked away from a career in medicine - he'd practiced as a neurologist at USC for 20 years - to aid his ailing father.
Israel Kachuck, a onetime astronautics engineer and general contractor, bought more than 450 acres of mostly barren land in the 1960s and began planting avocado trees.
"He had been a restless soul for as long as I was aware," Kachuck said. "lt was part and parcel with what he was doing: moving things around in his brain to accommodate problem solving that was interesting and remunerative."
The son had a similar wandering spirit.
"My avocado did not fall too far from the tree," Kachuck acknowledged.
He studied music composition and briefly played keyboard - three days in 1976 - with the Pointer Sisters. He then moved to New York to compose music for a girlfriend's dance company until his curiosity about how the brain works led him to neurology. Next came medical school, graduating from USC in 1987.
When he got involved in ACA Groves about 15 years ago, his dad was grateful. "For the first time in his life, he was finally sharing the business with somebody," Kachuck said.
Before long, though, Israel was diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease. He died in 2021 at 92. Though he'd been addled by the ailment, he understood that his son had managed to preserve the family business.
"The saving of the family legacy was a very important obligation I felt," said Kachuck, who added, with a laugh, that he had also hoped the business would ensure his children "had more than just a neurologist's income to support their lifestyles."
Kachuck immersed himself in a wide-ranging education in avocados, from their agronomy to the unlikely backstory of their California triumph.
Once known as the alligator pear, the avocado traces its history to southern Mexico, where the fruit, according to some experts, was first cultivated about 5,000 years ago. (In Nahuatl, avocado is ahuacatl, sometimes defined as "testicle.")
Though it is not native to California, the avocado is arguably as tied to the state's identity as the orange once was. This is thanks to the venerable Hass variety, discovered in the 1920s by a Pasadena mail carrier-turned-grower, Rudolph Hass. His namesake variety accounts for 95% of avocados consumed in the U.S.
The proliferation of Mexican and other Latin cuisines cemented the avocado's position as an American staple - largely via guacamole. But the fruit hit some speed bumps on its path to ubiquity. Amid an obsession with low-fat diets in the 1980s, avocados were spurned by many - even though their fats are mostly unsaturated.
Enter: the California Avocado Commission, which is overseen by the California Department of Food and Agriculture and whose main responsibility is to market and promote the state's fruit. In the 1990s, the commission - which is funded by an assessment of the gross dollar value of California avocados sold - invested in research to establish the fruit's health efficacy, said avocado farmer Duane Urquhart, a commission board member at the time.
Once the avocado's nutritiousness was established, Urquhart said, the commission launched a marketing and education campaign to teach consumers how to use them, even working with cooking schools to develop recipes. "That," he said, "was when we really created the U.S. market for California avocados."
Now praised as a superfood, avocados are at turns revered and vilified. Consider the endless disparaging of millennials over their avocado toast. But that hasn't stopped anyone from eating them.
The avocado's rise had an unintended consequence: Business interests in Mexico took notice.
Board machinations
As inexpensive Mexican avocados flooded the state, many California growers looked to the avocado commission for help. But Kachuck felt its board of directors made major missteps.
In late 2020, an agricultural trade attorney advised the commission's board that it could petition the United States International Trade Commission for import relief, which can include tariffs.
Such a complaint, the attorney said, could prompt an investigation and have a "chilling effect on foreign competitors," recalled avocado farmer John Cornell, then a board member.
But the avocado commission never took action.
Writing in the commission's "From the Grove" publication in 2023, the board's then-chairman, Rob Grether, derided what he termed "fanciful fixes for foreign fruit flow." The California avocado industry's retail and food-service partners would oppose such efforts, he wrote.
Kachuck was incredulous: "There was so much information about malfeasance in the Mexican avocado industry."
Complicating matters were competing interests.
Though many California growers complained about Mexican imports, some of their peers had avocado groves or related businesses in Mexico too. Other issues pitted farmers in the north - Santa Barbara, San Luis Obispo and Ventura counties - against those south in San Diego and Riverside.
This all came to a head when Growing Coachella Valley, a nonprofit advocacy group, asked the commission in 2021 to support California legislation that sought to hold imported agriculture to state health and environmental standards.
But the commission's board never even voted on whether to support the legislation. According to minutes from a board meeting, a staff member said he and legal counsel determined that AB 710 was not in the commission's "best interest" in part because it would put the group in "a precarious position" with important retailers.
Kachuck fumed. In February 2024, he called out the commission's board of directors at its meeting in Oxnard: "You betrayed my trust, that of our avocado growing community, and as well that of the American consumer."
The California Avocado Commission did not respond to multiple interview requests; instead, a staff member referred The Times to minutes from its board meetings.
Kachuck's comments at the Oxnard meeting galvanized a loose coalition of other unhappy growers, most of them in the San Diego area. They decided to fight the issue through the 2024 board election, with six seats up for grabs on a body composed of 20 members and alternates.
'Borrowed money' and ballot failures
Kachuck believed the election presented a realistic opportunity to shake up the commission.
He sent out mailers and posted a get-out-the-vote appeal on the website of American Avocado Farmers, a group he and other growers formed last year.
But only 14% of eligible voters cast ballots, Kachuck said, and just one of the candidates he and a handful of like-minded farmers had backed was elected. "It's awful," he said. "I'm spending money I don't have - it's borrowed money. At this point I am 80% through my retirement account."
Kachuck's failure at the ballot box may stem in part from the geographical divide. In addition to comparatively plentiful and inexpensive water, northern farmers enjoy another advantage: a later summer harvest, which means their fruit is picked after the Mexican crop has inundated the market. The Southern California avocado harvest roughly coincides with that flood.
Some farmers wonder if the gulf between the northern and southern poles of the industry is so wide that each region might be better served by having its own commission.
Others are gearing up for a different vote: Every five years, the state's food and agriculture department holds a referendum that allows growers to decide whether the commission should continue to serve them. The next one will be held in spring 2026, a department spokesman said.
And then there is the big elephant in the boardroom: President Trump's on-again, off-again tariffs.
Kachuck pivoted to a new strategy in the meantime: In February, he and three other farmers sued Fresh Del Monte Produce, Calavo Growers and Mission Produce in federal court, alleging they violated the California Business and Professions Code by falsely marketing their avocados as "sustainably and responsibly sourced" when they actually come from Mexican orchards planted on deforested land.
Jennifer Church, attorney for the plaintiffs, said that the case "is really about the American public being misled to the detriment of our local farmers."
Fresh Del Monte, Calavo and Mission did not respond to requests for comment. But in May, the companies filed a joint motion to dismiss the growers' lawsuit, arguing in part that the challenged statements are typical "corporate puffery," a legal term for exaggerated marketing claims that may not be objectively factual but are generally permissible.
A better avocado
The fight over California's avocado industry has become Kachuck's focus - to the detriment of other pursuits. There are things he wishes he could work on, like cultivating the Reed avocado, a little-known variety that's about the size and shape of a grapefruit.
"It's the most luscious, creamy, large and delicious avocado I've ever tasted," he said.
He maintains 50 Reed trees, but doesn't sell the fruit, instead giving it away to friends and family. The Reed, Kachuck said, spoils quickly after being picked, but could be made hardier via genetic intervention, such as cross-breeding.
Kachuck was in his element showing off the Reed trees during a visit to ACA Groves, taking obvious pleasure in the ranch's pastoral tableau. He crunched across alluvial soil in scuffed sneakers. A gust of wind turned an avocado tree into a viridescent blur.
"I would love to concentrate on making a better avocado for us," Kachuck said.
He noted that Reed avocados have something unique going for them: They are not commercially grown in Mexico.
At least not yet.
Copyright (C) 2025, Tribune Content Agency, LLC. Portions copyrighted by the respective providers.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
8 minutes ago
- New York Post
Trump isn't trying to ‘erase history' at Smithsonian — he's reversing a destructive woke takeover
Liberals were up in arms this week after President Trump said he wanted a review of the Smithsonian Institute — saying their displays were too negative, and too focused on slavery. But Trump isn't trying to 'erase history,' he's looking to reverse a woke movement that has indeed rewritten the American story to highlight suffering rather than providing a balanced picture of our past. Trump's criticism that the Smithsonian is overly focused on slavery is not unreasonable: In nearly every exhibit, critical race theory in general, or slavery specifically, makes an appearance. For instance, its new Benjamin Franklin exhibit on his innovations includes a whole section on slavery — with assumptions, but no proof, that slaves assisted Franklin in his electrical innovations. Even if they hadn't, the curators argue that without their work around the house, Franklin couldn't have spent the time on his experiments! 'Franklin held people enslaved during the time he pursued his electrical experiments. Their labor in his household helped make time that he could use to study electricity. Family, friends, and visitors directly participated in electrical experiments. The records are few and unclear, but enslaved people may also have directly assisted his research.' Another example of the obsession with slavery comes from the National Portrait Gallery; nearly every early Founding Father's description includes a statement on slavery. For example, the description for Thomas Jefferson includes the statement: 'Although Jefferson once called slavery 'an abominable crime,' he consistently enslaved African Americans, including his late wife Martha's half-sister, Sally Hemings, with whom he had several children.' The overemphasis on the history of slavery is a fairly recent development, an offshoot of the Black Lives Matter movement. In 2019, Lonnie G. Bunch III took over as the Secretary of the Smithsonian. Prior to that, Bunch was the founding director of the Smithsonian's National Museum of African American History and Culture, which is nearly exclusively focused on the legacy of slavery, with exhibits such as In Slavery's Wake, Slavery and Freedom, and Make Good the Promise, which deal with the history of slavery. Also in 2019, the Smithsonian collaborated with the New York Times on its 1619 Project, which falsely claims that the United States started, not with the Declaration of Independence or Revolutionary War, but when the first slave ship arrived. As curator Mary Elliot remarked at the time: 'This is a shared history, everyone inherited the legacies of slavery.' But America's history is more than just about slavery, and not everyone inherited this legacy — after all, America is also a nation of immigrants who came after the Civil War. In the Smithsonian 2020 annual report, more obsession with slavery comes into view. The Smithsonian is on a mission to have a completely searchable digital museum called 'The Searchable Museum Initiative.' One may think it would begin with digitization of some our greatest moments in history, such as the landing on the moon, the passing of the US Constitution, or even its great Natural History collections. You would be wrong; the digitization began 'with the museum's Slavery and Freedom exhibition.' The annual report claims that 'The Searchable Museum will provide rich, interactive, digital experiences that match the immersive experience of a visit to the physical museum' — unfortunately, likely as biased as a visit to the museum themselves. The problem with modern museums is not just about the obsession with slavery; it's also about dishonestly painting all of American history as evil and full of horrors — with little or no redeeming qualities. For instance, in the Smithsonian's American Indian Museum in NYC, George Washington hardly gets a mention, but his silhouette is used in a description of him as a 'town destroyer' — supposedly a nickname that Native Americans still use to describe our first President. And yet there's no mention in either of the American Indian Museums — in NYC or DC — about slavery practiced by Native Americans, both before Europeans' arrival and afterward. For example, the Cherokee owned slaves. In 1835, 15,000 Cherokee owned 1,592 African slaves; by the Civil War onset, 17,000 Cherokee owned 4,000 African slaves. While museums should provide an honest account of history, they should not be afraid to showcase and celebrate American achievement, which includes ending slavery. At present, however, museums seem more interested in pushing a woke, revisionist history of the United States. With two new Smithsonian museums in development, the National Museum of the American Latino and the Smithsonian American Women's History Museum, we can expect more of the same — unless we take action against woke propaganda now. Elizabeth Weiss is a professor emeritus of anthropology at San José State University and author of 'On the Warpath: My Battles with Indians, Pretendians, and Woke Warriors.'
New York Post
8 minutes ago
- New York Post
Trump's DC takeover is just Step 1 — dysfunctional capital needs a bigger fix
Last week President Donald Trump declared war on crime in Washington, DC, when he sent in the National Guard and federalized the district's police force for the 30-day period allowable under the DC Home Rule Act. Trump's motives were good: He's right that it's shameful our national capital has become one of our most dangerous cities. He's also right that DC's crime epidemic hurts America's competitiveness and prestige. But the president's month-long law enforcement takeover won't fix that problem — because the problem is not, at its core, bad law enforcement. It's the fact that DC's government has for decades now shown itself incapable of even the most basic level of public administration. Blame it, too, on Congress, which transferred control over the district to the city's own elected government in the Home Rule Act of 1973 — but has refused to admit its mistake and reverse course. Both the Senate and the House of Representatives remain aloof from the problems they created, even as federal staffers, visitors and on occasion their own members are routinely harassed and attacked by criminals on the streets and in their homes. But the US Constitution stipulates that DC is a national public resource, not a self-governing city like any other. Under the Constitution, it is Congress's responsibility to competently administrate it — and Congress has abdicated that responsibility. When the 30-day takeover period is up (assuming Congress does not renew his privileges), Trump will turn the keys back over to a capital city government that can't staff a police force, can't keep young violent offenders off the streets and can't run a functioning crime lab. District officials can't claim to have reduced crime without cooking the books, and can't protect visiting diplomats from being shot And they're not just failing at law enforcement: DC can't keep its public schools out of the basement of national performance rankings, and can't prevent huge homeless encampments from forming while thousands of district-owned public housing units go unoccupied. The only possible solution to such a crisis of mismanagement is to overturn the law that gave home rule to DC and start over from scratch. And if President Trump is serious about tackling the district's dysfunction, he should do just that. First, the president should build up some goodwill by ending his police federalization and troop occupation, preferably earlier than planned. No need to make excuses; he can simply explain that he's come to realize DC's dysfunction runs far deeper than anything a few extra officers on the streets can solve. Then he and Republican leadership should begin meeting with members of Congress on both sides of the aisle to generate support for Home Rule repeal. While Trump seems to think the entire district is dead set against him, this is incorrect: Many residents, while no fans of the president, are fed up with not being able to safely walk their dogs at night. Longtime Democratic members of Congress have personally experienced the city's dangers for many years, and they all know the ordeal of their colleague Angie Craig (D-Minn.), who was assaulted in her apartment building's elevator just two years ago. If Trump were to approach this issue firmly but collaboratively, he would find the water warmer than he thinks. Legally, the argument is not a hard sell. Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution says that Congress shall have 'exclusive legislation in all Cases whatsoever' over the federal district. Congress has given a 50-year trial to the notion of delegating its power to the people of DC, and that trial has unequivocally failed to produce a district that serves the interests of the federal government, the American people, or the residents themselves. Therefore, we should return to rule by Congress, as the Constitution mandates. Doing so would require a simple act of Congress, passed by both parties, that overturns the 1973 law and dismisses DC's elected representatives. A third section of the new law should establish a congressional committee to appoint exemplary city managers from cities around United States to reconstitute a competent DC government. In many American cities, like Madison, Wis., Phoenix, Ariz., and Wichita, Kan., elected officials appoint professional administrators to oversee day-to-day municipal operations. Washington, DC, should do the same — with Congress taking ultimate responsibility. Some on the left will bemoan the reversal of Home Rule as yet another federal assault on our democracy. But the District of Columbia was never intended by the Founders to be a self-governing state. It was intended to serve the interests of the country as a whole, by providing a safe and orderly place for public administration. Returning DC's governing prerogative to the people of America, not the district itself, will take us one step closer to being the republic the Founders envisioned. John Masko is a journalist specializing in business and international politics.
San Francisco Chronicle
8 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Guatemala grants temporary status to 161 Mexicans fleeing organized crime
GUATEMALA CITY (AP) — Guatemala on Wednesday granted temporary humanitarian status to 161 Mexicans who fled their country last week seeking refuge from organized crime, even as Mexican officials denied that anyone had been displaced. The Guatemalan Immigration Institute said that 39 families, including 69 children, from the Mexican municipality of Frontera Comalapa would be allowed temporarily to remain legally in the country. The families were staying in rented homes, with relatives or in temporary shelters in the Guatemalan border town of La Mesilla. But Eduardo Ramírez, governor of the Mexican border state of Chiapas, said Wednesday on X that those who went to Guatemala have relatives who have been arrested and are facing charges in Mexico, a claim he made without providing evidence. 'The organized crime that operates in the neighboring country of Guatemala wants to discredit our public safety strategy that has given tranquility and social peace in Chiapas' by saying people have been forcibly displaced by crime, Ramírez wrote. 'I categorically deny that fact.' It was not the first time that Mexicans crossed the border to escape violence. In July of last year, nearly 600 crossed at another point on the border. Two of Mexico's most powerful cartels from the northern states of Sinaloa and Jalisco have been battling for control of smuggling routes in the area of southern Mexico in recent years causing multiple displacements. ____
