California avocado farmers issue dire warning as Mexican imports surge 76%

By Benjamin Brown0%

7/7/2026, 3:30:00 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 31 faulty reasoning types, including Availability Heuristic, Negativity Bias, and Framing Effect, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 26.9% saturation with 112 hits. Analysis detected 1,535 faulty-reasoning hits from 417 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 68.3% and a BS Rank of 76% (4,936 of 20,409 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 75.80% of the article peer group.

California farmers are calling on the Trump administration to adopt a “substantive” seasonal tariff rate on Mexican avocado imports to help save an industry that growers warn is struggling to survive. 
“If the trend continues the way it’s going, I mean, we’ve been having some pretty difficult conversations,” said Andy Sheaffer, who owns Vista Punta Gorda farms in Ventura, California. 
“It’s really difficult to operate when you have such volatility and then when the volatility shifts to really a negative return.” 
Sheaffer, who has been farming for the past 20 years, said prices have recently plummeted for growers due to the influx of avocados from Mexico that have flooded the US market without any real regulation. 
“We started out [last year May 2025] over $2 per pound, I think it was $2.20 to $2.30 a pound,” Sheaffer told The California Post, who is now selling those same avocados for $0.75 cents to $1.10. 
“It just fell off a cliff in the latter part of the season.” 
Ken Melban, president of the California Avocado Commission, told The Post that 10 years ago the state had roughly 6,000 growers, now that number has dropped to about 3,000. 
The problem is a multitude of factors including high labor costs and water regulations that make it hard for US growers to compete with Mexico, which currently pays zero tariffs on avocados under the USMCA agreement. 
“We’ve elected these politicians who have decided to impose these regulations and these labor cost increases on us because they value that as an important component,” Sheaffer said. 
“But then, on the flip side, we’re allowing these countries who don’t have that same value system basically unfettered access to our market.” 
“The cost to the consumer won’t go up exorbitantly, just the grocer will not have as high a margin on that particular piece of produce,” Sheaffer told the Post. 
US trade representative, Ambassador Jamieson Greer said he will meet with Mexico starting the week of July 20 for a third round of bilateral negations related to the USMCA  in the meantime, the pact remains fully in place as conversations between the three countries continue. 
For Melban, he is optimistic that the Trump administration will make an effort to protect American farmers. 
I just had a meeting last Tuesday with senior U.S. officials that are all over this,” he said. 
“I’m hopeful that we’ll be able to figure something out here that works for everybody.” 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 18.0%Benjamin Brown: 6.7%California Post: 4.1%Confirmation Bias18.0%This article: 8.9%Benjamin Brown: 2.0%California Post: 1.4%Anchoring Bias8.9%This article: 26.6%Benjamin Brown: 5.2%California Post: 4.2%Availability Heuristic26.6%This article: 0.0%Benjamin Brown: 0.5%California Post: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Benjamin Brown: 0.3%California Post: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Benjamin Brown: 1.8%California Post: 2.2%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 18.5%Benjamin Brown: 14.1%California Post: 10.4%Framing Effect18.5%This article: 12.5%Benjamin Brown: 2.1%California Post: 0.9%Loss Aversion12.5%This article: 11.0%Benjamin Brown: 0.8%California Post: 0.6%Status Quo Bias11.0%This article: 0.0%Benjamin Brown: 0.1%California Post: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 14.6%Benjamin Brown: 3.2%California Post: 2.5%Optimism Bias14.6%This article: 9.4%Benjamin Brown: 2.7%California Post: 1.5%Pessimism Bias9.4%This article: 26.4%Benjamin Brown: 20.6%California Post: 16.1%Negativity Bias26.4%This article: 6.7%Benjamin Brown: 4.3%California Post: 2.4%Self-Serving Bias6.7%This article: 17.0%Benjamin Brown: 3.0%California Post: 1.5%Fundamental Attribution Error17.0%This article: 6.7%Benjamin Brown: 0.3%California Post: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias6.7%This article: 5.5%Benjamin Brown: 0.8%California Post: 1.6%In-Group Bias5.5%This article: 5.5%Benjamin Brown: 0.8%California Post: 1.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias5.5%This article: 0.0%Benjamin Brown: 1.4%California Post: 3.0%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Benjamin Brown: 0.6%California Post: 0.6%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Benjamin Brown: 0.0%California Post: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 13.2%Benjamin Brown: 2.4%California Post: 1.6%Recency Bias13.2%This article: 0.0%Benjamin Brown: 0.6%California Post: 0.5%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 3.6%Benjamin Brown: 0.2%California Post: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias3.6%This article: 0.0%Benjamin Brown: 2.1%California Post: 2.6%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Benjamin Brown: 0.4%California Post: 0.5%Straw Man0.0%This article: 8.4%Benjamin Brown: 4.5%California Post: 4.2%Appeal to Authority8.4%This article: 14.1%Benjamin Brown: 2.0%California Post: 1.5%False Dilemma14.1%This article: 0.0%Benjamin Brown: 0.9%California Post: 1.0%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Benjamin Brown: 0.8%California Post: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 13.9%Benjamin Brown: 10.1%California Post: 5.5%Hasty Generalization13.9%This article: 11.0%Benjamin Brown: 1.3%California Post: 0.7%Red Herring11.0%This article: 0.0%Benjamin Brown: 0.4%California Post: 1.4%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 26.9%Benjamin Brown: 8.3%California Post: 9.0%Appeal to Emotion26.9%This article: 7.0%Benjamin Brown: 1.1%California Post: 1.1%Begging the Question7.0%This article: 8.4%Benjamin Brown: 3.8%California Post: 2.7%Post Hoc (False Cause)8.4%This article: 0.0%Benjamin Brown: 0.5%California Post: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 8.6%Benjamin Brown: 1.5%California Post: 0.8%Burden of Proof8.6%This article: 0.0%Benjamin Brown: 0.2%California Post: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Benjamin Brown: 0.2%California Post: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 17.0%Benjamin Brown: 5.5%California Post: 3.6%Anecdotal17.0%This article: 0.0%Benjamin Brown: 0.0%California Post: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 17.3%Benjamin Brown: 2.4%California Post: 2.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)17.3%This article: 0.0%Benjamin Brown: 0.0%California Post: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 3.6%Benjamin Brown: 0.3%California Post: 0.1%Middle Ground3.6%This article: 0.0%Benjamin Brown: 0.2%California Post: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 7.0%Benjamin Brown: 1.1%California Post: 0.2%Special Pleading7.0%This article: 0.0%Benjamin Brown: 0.0%California Post: 0.4%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 11.0%Benjamin Brown: 2.5%California Post: 3.2%Unattributed Quote11.0%This article: 7.4%Benjamin Brown: 1.4%California Post: 2.1%Quote-first Misdirection7.4%This article: 2.4%Benjamin Brown: 12.1%California Post: 13.2%Biased Writer Voice2.4%This article: 0.0%Benjamin Brown: 1.1%California Post: 1.4%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Benjamin Brown: 0.1%California Post: 0.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Benjamin Brown: 3.6%California Post: 3.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Benjamin Brown: 1.2%California Post: 6.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

417 words analyzed.

Speakers

3speakers77%attributed speech94writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 100.0% coverageAndy Sheaffer • 29 words • 0.0% coverageAndy Sheaffer • 21 words • 0.0% coverageAndy Sheaffer • 35 words • 0.0% coverageAndy Sheaffer • 37 words • 0.0% coverageAndy Sheaffer • 13 words • 0.0% coverageKen Melban • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 36 words • 0.0% coverageAndy Sheaffer • 28 words • 0.0% coverageAndy Sheaffer • 23 words • 0.0% coverageAndy Sheaffer • 29 words • 0.0% coverageJamieson Greer • 46 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageKen Melban • 18 words • 0.0% coverageKen Melban • 15 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Andy Sheaffer

100%flagged-word coverage
215 attributed words67% of attributed speech100% writer coverage
0%17.5%35.0%Quote-first Misdirection-33.0 ptsWriter: 33.0%Andy Sheaffer: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-10.6 ptsWriter: 10.6%Andy Sheaffer: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.