Comment from Claude Roberts

To whom it may concern: For centuries people have said 'an apple a day keeps the doctor away,' however we have since learned that apples are merely a good source of carbohydrates and fiber. Nevertheless, the apple has consistently remained a popular fruit not only in our diets, but our culture as well. The largest and most thriving city in our country is nicknamed 'the big apple,' American folklore refers to a mythical man by the name of 'Johnny Appleseed,' and even this comment I am typing today is done on an apple computer. In other words, Americans take their apples very seriously, and thus we must ensure that the most quality varieties of apples are available to our citizens. To my knowledge, it seems appropriate to allow a variety of apples from Malus domestica as long as it is under the same conditions as the Fuji apple. The Fuji apple happens to be one of my personal favorite apples, and I would really enjoy tasting some apples from the same part of the globe, however I understand that there are certain risks involved. I think that if we apply the regulations in Sec. 319.56-27 we should be good regarding these risks because it would require the apples to be cold treated and fumigated. Additionally, they would be inspected for the peach fruit moth (Carposina niponensis), the yellow peach moth (Conogethes punctiferalis), and the fruit tree spider mite (Tetranychus viennensis). The fuji apple has been in American marketplaces for a long time now and if the new apples fall under the same guidelines then I do not understand what could be harmful about allowing these new apples in our marketplace. Although I realize that I have no real emotional ties to the apple economy, I realize that it has substantial effects to our citizens, as well as foreign competitors in the world marketplace. However, if the proposal is true and these apples will not substantially affect the domestic trade of apples then I do not see why this proposed rule should not be followed throug