gwrudolph wrote:

I don't think there is anything against bringing food. Just ag items (fruits, nuts, etc)

Exactly - and meats, soils, and a few other ag things. It's not a generic food prohibition.

atcsundevil wrote:

klm617 wrote:

There are no more customs forms when you enter the US

Of course there are. Many airports now have customs kiosks, but airlines still regularly distribute the I-94 (Customs Declaration) form. Generally, the only passengers who don't need to complete any forms are those enrolled in Global Entry. However, completing the customs declaration on the kiosk is in lieu of competing and submitting an I-94. Failure to declare goods on a kiosk is no different than failing to do so on a paper form. Because I have Global Entry, I've never used a customs kiosk, but if it's similar to the GE kiosks, it's just a simplified version of a customs declaration. There may not be as much detail as an I-94, but it's still the passenger's responsibility to know and understand what's required of them. These requirements are prominently displayed in inspection areas and in many inflight magazines, even if most passengers ignore them. Most people are let off with a warning in these instances, but that's at the discretion of the officer, and there may be other mitigating factors, like prior violations.

I-94 forms are the old white forms visa holders used to fill out before arrival.....discontinued years ago. The blue form pertaining to customs is the 6059b.

twicearound wrote:

atcsundevil wrote:

klm617 wrote:

There are no more customs forms when you enter the US

Of course there are. Many airports now have customs kiosks, but airlines still regularly distribute the I-94 (Customs Declaration) form. Generally, the only passengers who don't need to complete any forms are those enrolled in Global Entry. However, completing the customs declaration on the kiosk is in lieu of competing and submitting an I-94. Failure to declare goods on a kiosk is no different than failing to do so on a paper form. Because I have Global Entry, I've never used a customs kiosk, but if it's similar to the GE kiosks, it's just a simplified version of a customs declaration. There may not be as much detail as an I-94, but it's still the passenger's responsibility to know and understand what's required of them. These requirements are prominently displayed in inspection areas and in many inflight magazines, even if most passengers ignore them. Most people are let off with a warning in these instances, but that's at the discretion of the officer, and there may be other mitigating factors, like prior violations.

I-94 forms are the old white forms visa holders used to fill out before arrival.....discontinued years ago. The blue form pertaining to customs is the 6059b.

I corrected myself in my second post.

The more to the Story is that she should not have lied and tried to bring it into the USA, and as she says eat it on the next fight. Is that so hard to understand?

It is disturbing so many people here think it’s okay a person gets a fine for bringing an apple that was handed out on a plane. Because that’s the rules. Fruit bought in the country of origin, I guess there’s a case. But handed out on the plane?
Well, it’s the rules that are wrong!
And I’m very interested to hear arguments in defense of this rule.

Also, watch the movie “Brazil”.

jetwet1 wrote:

I am guessing she decided to show the agent who was boss, bad move.

She did? Then that was a bad move. Can you provide links to any quotes, articles, interviews, or statements confirming she tried to show the agent who was boss?

Jalap wrote:

It is disturbing so many people here think it’s okay a person gets a fine for bringing an apple that was handed out on a plane. Because that’s the rules. Fruit bought in the country of origin, I guess there’s a case. But handed out on the plane?
Well, it’s the rules that are wrong!
And I’m very interested to hear arguments in defense of this rule.

You do understand that international flights are catered locally? Delta isn't hauling apples overseas so they can serve American apples on the return trip.

The rule serves a totally legitimate function of the FIS to keep agricultural pests and diseases - which can hitch a ride on fresh produce - out of the country.

$500 is practically a traffic citation. Pay it and move on. What a stupid hill to die on.

What would have happened if she just ate the apple right there at the custom area? For argument sake, let say she pull it out of her carry on and ate it right before her was flagged for random search.

I think we can all agree that the $500 fine is a bit arbitrary in that many travelers (myself included) have been caught with food in custom but not subject to any fines. A couple of years ago, my son (then a 3 years old) got hungry while we waited for our bags at LAX so I gave him the stroopwafel and apple juice we got from the flight from Europe. We went thru customs while he was still eating (!) and the custom agent asked if those items came from the plane and we said yes. The agent just laughed and let my son finish his snack.

I did declare food (some chocolates we bought at duty free at AMS) but we were not searched so the question never came up until we were passing thru the final counter where they take the custom form.

FlyingAY wrote:

Seriously: $500 for an apple?

ua900 wrote:

Get caught lying and you *may* face a fine, especially if you're part of a program that often let's you skip lines on grounds that you are particularly trustworthy. House rules.

The thing is, it should not be a *may* when it comes to fines, right? It should be yes or no. It shouldn't be seemingly random.

FlyingAY wrote:

FlyingAY wrote:

Seriously: $500 for an apple?

ua900 wrote:

Get caught lying and you *may* face a fine, especially if you're part of a program that often let's you skip lines on grounds that you are particularly trustworthy. House rules.

The thing is, it should not be a *may* when it comes to fines, right? It should be yes or no. It shouldn't be seemingly random.

It was written the way lawmakers wanted it to be. They are elected officials, and if we (or she) doesn't like it we can vote for elected representatives who remove the "may" part.

That's how the law was written, and that's how law enforcement handled it. It clearly says "you must declare" (she didn't) and "officers may" below.

Just because they give a pass to many people doesn't mean that everyone gets a guaranteed pass. Similar to speeding laws, perhaps a lot of people speed, perhaps many are able to talk their way out of a ticket because they say sorry in one way or another, but ultimately if someone says "not sorry" and "I have a legal right to go without a fine" then that can encourage an officer to not be lenient. After all, she clearly violated the law and it was easily avoidable by checking the yes box. She never said sorry and instead asked the officer to prove that the apple was from France and wasn't from the US. Absolutely no fines if she said yes. And worst of all, the apple would have likely made it through.

http://epermits.aphis.usda.gov/manual/i ... SummCommPI

"You must declare any fruits, vegetables, plants, insects,
meats or meat products, dairy products, animals or
animals/wildlife products, disease agents, cell cultures,
snails, or soil."

"All travelers, including Global Entry members, are subject to
full and random examinations by CBP officers upon entering
the U.S. If you violate any condition of Global Entry or any
law or regulation of the U.S., officers may:
• Revoke your Global Entry privileges;
• Seize any undeclared goods;
• Issue penalties;
• Start criminal prosecution; and
• Initiate any other legal proceedings as appropriate"

http://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/ ... -guide.pdf

This makes as much sense as suing the car dealer for selling you a sports car. But officer it’s not my fault for speeding I have a car that allows me to go fast. I should not pay the fine call the local news channel and tell them I want the dealer to pay my fine for me. Talk about lack of responsibility.

Jalap wrote:

It is disturbing so many people here think it’s okay a person gets a fine for bringing an apple that was handed out on a plane. Because that’s the rules. Fruit bought in the country of origin, I guess there’s a case. But handed out on the plane?
Well, it’s the rules that are wrong!
And I’m very interested to hear arguments in defense of this rule.

Also, watch the movie “Brazil”.

In the eyes of the Customs officer who's doing the examination, there is no proof that the apple she had was provided to her on the airplane; for all the officer knows, she could have picked the apple from a tree while in France, and brought it onto the airplane with her.

Many countries are extremely strict regarding the importation of food products into their countries due to health and safety concerns; there's also a commercial aspect as well, in protecting domestic agriculture from foreign pests. For example, early in the 20th century, a farmer once brought European salami into Canada that was contaminated with foot and mouth disease. The person threw away the salami, and it was fed to the person's pigs, which infected them with foot and mouth disease, which then spread to other neighbouring farms, and continued to spread across the region. The amount of damage done financially was, in today's dollars, in the billions of dollars.

Customs officers generally don't take to well to being A: lied to, and B: be given attitude. If you falsely declare something upon entering a country, the officer has every right to doubt every statement you make from then on, until he/she is satisfied you are telling the truth.

And if you give the officer attitude, then it's totally your own fault if the officer decides to throw the book at you. A little contrition, apologies, and some humbleness goes a long with anyone charged with enforcing the law, as the officer does have the discretion to show leniency.

If she had instead of challenging the officer's authority and judgment, just said "OMIGOD, I totally forgot about it, I'm really sorry, I won't do that again," the officer could have decided to just give her a verbal warning and wave her through.

But she didn't, and that's why she got hit with a fine and ejected from Global Entry. She's also probably been flagged in the US CBP's system, so every time she now travels overseas and back, she's going to automatically be sent to secondary inspection for the next couple of years.

Jalap wrote:

It is disturbing so many people here think it’s okay a person gets a fine for bringing an apple that was handed out on a plane. Because that’s the rules. Fruit bought in the country of origin, I guess there’s a case. But handed out on the plane?
Well, it’s the rules that are wrong!

Agreed - too many here seem to have too much of a holier than thou attitude.

DfwRevolution wrote:

You do understand that international flights are catered locally? Delta isn't hauling apples overseas so they can serve American apples on the return trip

They do? How do we as regular common folk know this? I know many carriers stock up their catering at the point of origin. So how do I know which airline does and does not?

It doesn't matter what "common folk" know about the catering habits of airlines.

The question on the Kiosk is simple: Do you have any food on you? YES/NO.

They make it simple because it has to be a question that simpletons can answer.

Generally-speaking, if I'm answering a question where the known result of a false answer is a penalty, particularly a substantial one, I will take the 5 seconds to think about whether it's for sure a correct answer. I also would glance through my bag, for example.

What ALL of you defenders are really defending is the "right" of this woman to answer the question without making the effort to ensure that the answer is true.

Because "I forgot" really means, "I didn't respect you, or my legal obligations, enough to make the effort to check."

Because, hey, it's "only" an apple.

But it's not up to her to decide that an apple isn't important. There are a million signs at the airport (again, for simpletons) explaining that FOOD is contraband -- for a very logical reason. So whether SHE thinks it's important or not, the lawmakers that she elected decided it was, and regardless, therefore, of whether she likes the law, it's the law, and she ignores it at her peril.

What if it were a gun? Does the "I forgot"/"I didn't bother to check" defense get you out of a fine for carrying a gun in your bag? I think those folks are usually arrested, and often are later able to work something out.

What if it were drugs? Say she forgot she had an eight-ball of blow in her bag. She meant to hoover it up her nose on the plane, but forgot. She didn't MEAN to bring it past customs...

And on and on. The only reason this is a story is that most "regular common folk" don't have any idea of agricultural risk, as explained in the anecdotes above and otherwise, and so think it's "only an apple".

The only way the system works is if everyone declares everything, and the CBP people make the determination as to whether it's an issue. Don't respect the law or the value of your word enough to check before declaring? Okey-dokey. Then pay the $500, and prepare for a secondary inspection every time you travel for a few years.

Which is the way it SHOULD work -- if you PROVE by your conduct that we can't trust you, then...we won't trust you.

Makes sense to me.

wjcandee wrote:

Because "I forgot" really means, "I didn't respect you, or my legal obligations, enough to make the effort to check."

Wrong. "I forgot" means it's likely she just forgot.
If someone asks me "did you bring food with you", I'm gonna ask myself "Did I bring food as a souvenir or as a gift with me during my trip?". If I keep something that was given to me on the plane, I'll certainly put it, mentally, in another category, and won't think about it at all at the border.

It's not about "is an apple important or not", it's about "Is it gross negligence or an understandable oversight? I'm leaning towards the second option.

Having read through the comments above, I’m not arguing the rights and wrongs of the actions of the passenger, but I think the comments of the CBP Officer were uncalled for and very few have commented on that

Flighty wrote:

LH982 wrote:

Flighty wrote:

No!

Agricultural CBP has the same regulations whatever port of entry you are using. The CBP agent has the same discretion to fine the person the same way in Dublin for misconduct as in the USA - and they do prosecute misconduct there at Dublin CBP, without doubt. Whether you are bringing undeclared Turkish rugs, cash over the limit, agricultural products or a whole bunch of heroin. .

Yes, but Dublin agriculture CBP is before you get on the aircraft and before Delta give you an apple. That's what I was asking, what's the difference between and apple from a Heathrow flight and one from a Dublin flight, apart from $500.

Oh, great point and in that case, it is the airline that has to declare the foods they are effectively "bringing into the USA." The airline definitely cannot carry prohibited items into a "CBP clean" aircraft without either proving those apples are OK for the USA, or bringing them from the US. They might not be doing this. Catering may be a grey area in an otherwise very clear policy. You may have found a loophole.

In fact, just had a supplementary thought about this. BA1. I assume* it's catered through ex-LCY. So an apple served on the LCY-SNN leg would have to be declared at CBP at SNN, but an apple served on the SNN-JFK leg could freely be taken into the States without declaration, despite coming from the same supplier at LCY.

*ok, my whole premise falls through if it's not through catered, but surely it must be.

I find it bizarre some on here expect Delta to serve US fruit on a flight from Europe. And for those who feel that the $500 fine is excessive, that’s the minimum for this offense, and it hasn’t gone up in the past 10 years to my knowledge.

I suspect we are not being given the full story here.

It is indisputable that it is illegal to bring fresh fruit (among other things) into the US without declaring them. From that, I am extrapolating that Ms Tadlock made a false declaration on her custom form and declared she had no fruit when, in fact, her carry on bag contained an apple.

Note that the source of the apple is immaterial. Also, it makes no difference how seemingly trivial the item it is. It boils down to this: Ms Tadlock was attempting to cross the US border with undeclared fresh fruit.

I can easily accept that Ms Tadlock possibly forgot she had the apple. Long haul travel is tiring, so it is very conceivable she forgot all about it. So, even as she filled out the declaration form and passed the various bins provided in the airport to dump restricted/banned items, she could still have forgotten all about the apple in her bag.

What isn't clear from the linked news report is why the agent didn't simply confiscate and destroy the apple, and why it escalated the way it did. In my experience, quarantine agents are not seeking to catch people who forget they have a trivial item in their carry on and to then fine them for it. Their bigger purpose and aim is to stop the import of items which may lead to harm to the agriculture industry. Penalties are for people who are intentionally trying break the law and as a result potentially cause serious damage to US agriculture.

It would be interesting to hear the agent's side of the story. I suspect more happened than the news report is telling us.

sergegva wrote:

wjcandee wrote:

Because "I forgot" really means, "I didn't respect you, or my legal obligations, enough to make the effort to check."

Wrong. "I forgot" means it's likely she just forgot.
If someone asks me "did you bring food with you", I'm gonna ask myself "Did I bring food as a souvenir or as a gift with me during my trip?". If I keep something that was given to me on the plane, I'll certainly put it, mentally, in another category, and won't think about it at all at the border.

It's not about "is an apple important or not", it's about "Is it gross negligence or an understandable oversight? I'm leaning towards the second option.

So there are two categories of food?

There are many categories of food. You can bring in bottled wine, packaged goods, most candy, etc. (i.e., things that are processed and treated) with little restriction.

Fresh produce, nuts, grains, and the like are all potential harbingers of pests and larva and the like that can do damage to agriculture in the country of arrival.

You think its a nuisance, but the California farmers who had to deal with the Med fly that was introduced would strongly disagree with you. Same with European citrus farmers dealing with strains of citrus canker.

Those are all food items that need to be claimed. A gift basket of wine and chocolates needs to be declared identically to an apple served on the plane. Whether the apple is allowed is immaterial. They both need to be declared.

Prost, that is really the point here. We do not need to be experts on food quarantine and everything. But we need to declare. This topic is complicated and passengers cannot be expected to understand anything except: declare, and no drugs (well, even that is a can of worms).

sergegva wrote:

wjcandee wrote:

Because "I forgot" really means, "I didn't respect you, or my legal obligations, enough to make the effort to check."

Wrong. "I forgot" means it's likely she just forgot.
If someone asks me "did you bring food with you", I'm gonna ask myself "Did I bring food as a souvenir or as a gift with me during my trip?". If I keep something that was given to me on the plane, I'll certainly put it, mentally, in another category, and won't think about it at all at the border.

It's not about "is an apple important or not", it's about "Is it gross negligence or an understandable oversight? I'm leaning towards the second option.

Well, despite the extremely-rude beginning to your post, I will respond. (Aggressively-contrarian opening statements like "Wrong." -- an approach that I'm pretty-confident you would be disinclined to say to me in person if we were both standing in, say, a bar -- make discourse on A.net very high-schoolish and unpleasant. I actually go back and look at my posts most of the time to make sure I don't come across that way.)

They don't ask you if you have imported food or foreign food or harmful food, they ask you if you have food. Any food at all.

I am perfectly-content to believe that this person didn't think of the apple while just blithely pushing buttons on the kiosk. But that's the point: had she made the effort to think for a moment, or check, before pushing said buttons, she wouldn't be in that predicament. And that it was her responsibility to do exactly-that.

She's using a "trusted traveler" system. She proved herself to be untrustworthy. And she is now complaining about the government treating her as untrustworthy. It's almost funny.

Something nobody else has mentioned: presumably Delta hands out thousands of pieces of fruit on international flights coming into that airport every day. People who, like her, are connecting to other flights.
How many "trusted travelers" in a year hit that checkpoint with a piece of said Delta fruit? I'm guessing that she's the exception rather than the rule.

Personally, I think this CBP agent did the country a favor because he picked exactly the right person to fine -- a person who has now made hundreds of thousands of travelers think twice before mindlessly claiming that they have no food to declare. Our agriculture is just a little safer today due to his actions.

atcsundevil wrote:

twicearound wrote:

atcsundevil wrote:

Of course there are. Many airports now have customs kiosks, but airlines still regularly distribute the I-94 (Customs Declaration) form. Generally, the only passengers who don't need to complete any forms are those enrolled in Global Entry. However, completing the customs declaration on the kiosk is in lieu of competing and submitting an I-94. Failure to declare goods on a kiosk is no different than failing to do so on a paper form. Because I have Global Entry, I've never used a customs kiosk, but if it's similar to the GE kiosks, it's just a simplified version of a customs declaration. There may not be as much detail as an I-94, but it's still the passenger's responsibility to know and understand what's required of them. These requirements are prominently displayed in inspection areas and in many inflight magazines, even if most passengers ignore them. Most people are let off with a warning in these instances, but that's at the discretion of the officer, and there may be other mitigating factors, like prior violations.

I-94 forms are the old white forms visa holders used to fill out before arrival.....discontinued years ago. The blue form pertaining to customs is the 6059b.

I corrected myself in my second post.

Meh, you may have incorrectly tried to correct yourself, I 94 forms are gone, as in discontinued, as in no longer in circulation. They don't exist. So no, airlines don't "regularly" distribute them.

The blue customs forms that is handed out to customers when there aren’t kiosks, or they are traveling with a visa is the CBP declaration form 6059B. Rolls off the tongue, doesn’t it?

wjcandee wrote:

They don't ask you if you have imported food or foreign food or harmful food, they ask you if you have food. Any food at all.

No, they don't. If you are going to present yourself as an expert in Customs procedures, you should get your facts straight. The exact requirement is:

To prevent the entry of dangerous agricultural pests and prohibited wildlife, the following are restricted:
Fruits, vegetables, plants, plant products, soil, meat, meat products, birds, snails, and other live animals or animal products.

Note that this isn't "Any food at all" but a rather limited subset of agricultural products that includes non-food items.

glbltrvlr wrote:

wjcandee wrote:

They don't ask you if you have imported food or foreign food or harmful food, they ask you if you have food. Any food at all.

No, they don't. If you are going to present yourself as an expert in Customs procedures, you should get your facts straight. The exact requirement is:

To prevent the entry of dangerous agricultural pests and prohibited wildlife, the following are restricted:
Fruits, vegetables, plants, plant products, soil, meat, meat products, birds, snails, and other live animals or animal products.

Note that this isn't "Any food at all" but a rather limited subset of agricultural products that includes non-food items.

But that's not what he said. He didn't say that all food is banned (which isn't true). He said that the question is about all food, which in my experience and apparently the experiences of others on the thread, is the question generally asked verbally. The customs form is closer to the regulation and asks about "fruits, vegetables, plants, seeds insects" and "meats."

She did nothing wrong by bringing the apple. She just failed to declare it when asked. In my experience you have two chances, once on the declaration form or kiosk and then again at secondary when the officer will ask you verbally "do you have anything to declare" or "do you have any food, etc.". They want you to declare it so they can make a determination if it is legal and safe to bring into the country and if any duty is required. That's their job. She said not at least once at the kiosk and most likely no again when pulled aside for screening by the officer. I don't have much sympathy for her.

nws2002 wrote:

...She said not at least once at the kiosk and most likely no again when pulled aside for screening by the officer. I don't have much sympathy for her.

If you see the notice posted, chance to amend statement is checked. That means she insisted she had nothing, which still was a negotiable situation if she was at least apologetic. Instead she started blaming Delta, bought herself an expensive Green Granny Smith which she cannot even eat.

$500 fine is not for the apple, it is for the attitude.

ASFlyer wrote:

I'm not shocked at the comments defending her on here - it seems nobody believes anyone should be responsible for themselves anymore as long as there's a corporation or someone with deep pockets you can sue. I'm surprised people remember to breathe on their own. This is ridiculous though - that Delta served apple slices is neither here nor there. They also serve salad, cheese, meats and other prohibited items. If you choose to put those things in your bag and try to take them in to a foreign country then that's on you. The rules are spelled out in black and white on the customs form - and they don't distinguish between food items from another country or those received on the airplane. The form simply asks if you're bringing any fruits, vegetables, meats, etc into the country. If, somehow, you thought that shouldn't include what you got on the plane then that's on you. Especially if you're part of a trusted traveler program. To me, that says that she travels frequently enough on international flights that she should know the rules. It also says to me that she agreed that violation of said rules was reason to take away her status in that program. She's at fault. Nobody else.

It is a single apple ffs. We act like she was running a smuggling operation here. $500 fine is absurd. Lets have some perspective.

ACDC8 wrote:

DfwRevolution wrote:

You do understand that international flights are catered locally? Delta isn't hauling apples overseas so they can serve American apples on the return trip

They do? How do we as regular common folk know this? I know many carriers stock up their catering at the point of origin. So how do I know which airline does and does not?

Why do you need to know the airline's caterer to answer the customs declaration truthfully? Anything crossing the border is entering from outside the country.

Jalap seemed to think there's an exception for produce distributed in-flight. As a point-of-fact, consumables are frequently - if not always - restocked with foreign goods while overseas.

I don’t get why people are angry at the government.

Probably because if the inconsistent enforcement. In Hawaii, the USDA (a federal agency like CBP) has amnesty bins at several airports. If you're bringing in or taking out uncleared fruit, you can toss it in the bin, and they will dispose of it, no harm no foul. If they actually catch something during the USA inspection of your luggage, its simply confiscated and thrown out, nothing more. The bottom line is that there was no real reason to fine her $500 over a single, simple apple.

IPFreely wrote:

jetwet1 wrote:

I am guessing she decided to show the agent who was boss, bad move.

She did? Then that was a bad move. Can you provide links to any quotes, articles, interviews, or statements confirming she tried to show the agent who was boss?

I doubt it. Jetwet1 wrote "I am guessing".

Remind me to invite you to my next party just in case any fun starts.

This is the most ridiculous thread ever.
Rules are rules, we all get it. Whether or not this passenger created a scene or not, who knows...that is always the standby argument for some people on this site even when the passenger is calm and collected, and it does nothing to change the point of the situation.

Apples are not allowed into the country, fine. However, where is the discretion here? An airline gives out an apple, in a sealed bag, and you throw it in your backpack or purse for later, then you face a $500 fine because you don't declare it? When I answer these questions upon re-entry to the USA, I am thinking about anything I may have brought with me from the country of origin, certainly not something handed to me by the airline. Doesn't anybody see how utterly ridiculous this situation is? Does Delta get fined for bringing dozens (hundreds?) of apple slice packets into the country too?
This is EXACTLY why people hate flying and one of the reasons why the US is starting to become a joke for international travelers.

Honestly, if CBP is serious about stopping illegal fruit and not just making a quick buck off some fines, they need to figure out why this happened. If I were them, I would be enquiring with the airline as to why they are handing out items onboard that are illegal for the country of origin. I'm not saying it is entirely DL's fault, but I really don't understand why they are GIVING OUT fruit on a flight without even a mention about how it needs to be declared, consumed and/or discarded before entry into the country. I have a big problem with this.

richierich, I think most people agree with you.

If the lady forgot, was reminded and acknowledged her error, she should not be fined $500. The officer should use discretion there.

What if she lied, was caught and threw it in the face officer, saying there's nothing you can do to me anyhow? I mean, she DID go out to the media and say this penalty is outrageous and that she is a victim. Are we to believe she said something different to the CBP officer?

What if I am pulled over going 75 in a 55, and I tell the officer "I drive at whatever speed I like. There is nothing you can do to me anyway. Stop bothering important people like me, you fool." How do you think that would go? Would the officer give me discretion? Should he/she?

I agree with the other poster that this $500 is the best fine CBP has done to a civilian in years, in terms of positive consequences for awareness.

wjcandee wrote:

IThe question on the Kiosk is simple: Do you have any food on you? YES/NO.

I'm pretty sure you are wrong on this. I'll have to look more carefully at the kiosk question next time I go through. I can definitively tell you, however, that that is NOT what the printed form says. The form asks if you are "bringing any <list of stuff>", which is not the same thing at all, and indeed I have always read it as "bringing from the flight origin." It doesn't even say "bringing into the country" or equivalent. If the CBP had meant to ask "are you carrying or packing any <list of stuff> ", they could and should have worded it that way.

Flighty wrote:

If the lady forgot, was reminded and acknowledged her error, she should not be fined $500. The officer should use discretion there.

What if she lied, was caught and threw it in the face officer, saying there's nothing you can do to me anyhow? I mean, she DID go out to the media and say this penalty is outrageous and that she is a victim. Are we to believe she said something different to the CBP officer?

What if I am pulled over going 75 in a 55, and I tell the officer "I drive at whatever speed I like. There is nothing you can do to me anyway. Stop bothering important people like me, you fool." How do you think that would go? Would the officer give me discretion? Should he/she?

There is no reason to think anything like that happened. If she "threw" the apple in the face of the officer, or got really angry, of course that might change the narrative, but then you'd be hearing about something else here. You're interpreting a situation without any factual support. Sure, she went to the media, but what other choice did she have - besides a lawyer who may end up costing far more than the $500 fine?

I'm simply saying that at face value, the situation is absurd. If there is more information that she was unreasonably rude (I mean, I would not exactly be thrilled with being threatened about a $500 fine) or flying off the handle, fine, but that's truly reading much further into this.

As for the awareness, that's a joke. Again, if they were serious about stopping illegal foods from entering the country, they should go after the source.

wjcandee wrote:

sergegva wrote:

wjcandee wrote:

Because "I forgot" really means, "I didn't respect you, or my legal obligations, enough to make the effort to check."

Wrong. "I forgot" means it's likely she just forgot.
If someone asks me "did you bring food with you", I'm gonna ask myself "Did I bring food as a souvenir or as a gift with me during my trip?". If I keep something that was given to me on the plane, I'll certainly put it, mentally, in another category, and won't think about it at all at the border.

It's not about "is an apple important or not", it's about "Is it gross negligence or an understandable oversight? I'm leaning towards the second option.

Well, despite the extremely-rude beginning to your post, I will respond. (Aggressively-contrarian opening statements like "Wrong." -- an approach that I'm pretty-confident you would be disinclined to say to me in person if we were both standing in, say, a bar -- make discourse on A.net very high-schoolish and unpleasant. I actually go back and look at my posts most of the time to make sure I don't come across that way.)

I don't see what's so aggressive about my answer? When you say "I forgot really means I didn't respect you (...)", you don't express a fact but an opinion, and rather directly. So I answered: In my opinion, it is wrong. In addition, with its invectives ("When ALL of you defenders..."), capital letters and underscores, your message is not exactly a model of restraint and moderation...!

Saying "If you forget something, it's because you didn't make the effort to think about it seriously" is already a strech. Saying "If you didn't think about it seriously, it means you didn't want to respect the rule" is anoter stretch. In my opinion, this case is simply an oversight in good faith, which has been severely punished.

By the way, sorry for my groping English, which perhaps partly explains the aggressive tone. If that's the case, I'm sorry.

Prost wrote:

So there are two categories of food?

No, I meant that it's not easy to classify an object received on board as "food that I'm importing". It takes a "brain gymnastic" that not everyone will get.

Aptivaboy wrote:

I don’t get why people are angry at the government.

Probably because if the inconsistent enforcement. In Hawaii, the USDA (a federal agency like CBP) has amnesty bins at several airports. If you're bringing in or taking out uncleared fruit, you can toss it in the bin, and they will dispose of it, no harm no foul. If they actually catch something during the USA inspection of your luggage, its simply confiscated and thrown out, nothing more. The bottom line is that there was no real reason to fine her $500 over a single, simple apple.

But that wouldn't have worked in this case. She didn't consider bringing a fruit given to her by the airline as being something that needs to be discarded.

jetblueguy22 wrote:

No wonder people get nervous at border checks.

I’ve flown internationally quite a few times and it never fails. I still get nervous and it’s because, like any job with authority, certain people like being in a place of power a little too much. What’s concerning to me is how many people on here seem to support authoritarianism. The customer is always wrong and deserves to have the maximum penalities thrown at her, apple or not.

Or, I could just bluntly say these “agents” suffer from little man syndrome and know once they leave the airport, they’re stripped of their power and no one cares about who or what they are.

ltbewr wrote:

Aptivaboy wrote:

I don’t get why people are angry at the government.

Probably because if the inconsistent enforcement. In Hawaii, the USDA (a federal agency like CBP) has amnesty bins at several airports. If you're bringing in or taking out uncleared fruit, you can toss it in the bin, and they will dispose of it, no harm no foul. If they actually catch something during the USA inspection of your luggage, its simply confiscated and thrown out, nothing more. The bottom line is that there was no real reason to fine her $500 over a single, simple apple.

I have seen 'amnesty bins' on approach to Immigration and Customs at airports in the USA and elsewhere to give you a last chance to dispose of food products that are banned.

Now here is a question, what if the person is transferring at a USA airport from one international flight to another in a 'sterile' connection where don't have to go through Immigration and Customs ? Would a person have to turn in any un-allowed food items ?

There is no “Sterile” connection in the US from International to Internatinal. Everyone arriving needs to go through arrival procedures.

Aptivaboy wrote:

I don’t get why people are angry at the government.

Probably because if the inconsistent enforcement. In Hawaii, the USDA (a federal agency like CBP) has amnesty bins at several airports. If you're bringing in or taking out uncleared fruit, you can toss it in the bin, and they will dispose of it, no harm no foul. If they actually catch something during the USA inspection of your luggage, its simply confiscated and thrown out, nothing more. The bottom line is that there was no real reason to fine her $500 over a single, simple apple.

I have seen 'amnesty bins' on approach to Immigration and Customs at airports in the USA and elsewhere to give you a last chance to dispose of food products that are banned.

Now here is a question, what if the person is transferring at a USA airport from one international flight to another in a 'sterile' connection where don't have to go through Immigration and Customs ? Would a person have to turn in any un-allowed food items ?

ltbewr wrote:

Aptivaboy wrote:

I don’t get why people are angry at the government.

Probably because if the inconsistent enforcement. In Hawaii, the USDA (a federal agency like CBP) has amnesty bins at several airports. If you're bringing in or taking out uncleared fruit, you can toss it in the bin, and they will dispose of it, no harm no foul. If they actually catch something during the USA inspection of your luggage, its simply confiscated and thrown out, nothing more. The bottom line is that there was no real reason to fine her $500 over a single, simple apple.

I have seen 'amnesty bins' on approach to Immigration and Customs at airports in the USA and elsewhere to give you a last chance to dispose of food products that are banned.

Now here is a question, what if the person is transferring at a USA airport from one international flight to another in a 'sterile' connection where don't have to go through Immigration and Customs ? Would a person have to turn in any un-allowed food items ?

Is there such a sterile environment in the US? As far as I can tell, in the US, a passenger always has to clear immigration and customs before connecting.

And agreed on the wildly inconsistent reporting. This whole fruit scenario happens quite frequently and 99% of the time, customs will just ask the passenger to throw away or eat the fruit and move on. I've never heard of customs actually fining someone for this. It happens all the time. Passengers will forget that they put fruit into their belongings until a dog catches it. This is normal stuff. It makes no sense to randomly fine someone when usually there is no fine. I myself have been in this woman's exact scenario. In my case, I flat out forgot that I had a piece of fruit in my carryon bag. One of the dog's caught me and the customs agent politely asked if I wanted to eat it or throw it away. They then scanned my bag again and I moved on. So if I were that woman, I too would be upset given that customs normally will not fine someone.

cirrusdragoon wrote:

She is totally culpable for her own actions. Sorry sally, you don’t get a free pass for ignorance.

Geez. I love the armchair "law and order" guys. $500 is excessive for an apple that her airline brought from France.

The comments here are plain stupid and seem to ignore the fact that there are rules regarding the importation of foodstuffs for a reason. The risk of the introduction of pests into the US stream of commerce is extremely high and can cause hundreds of billions of dollars in damage to the economy.

Australia and New Zealand are extremely strict about this, so this isn't an American issue. Just look at all the brown tree snakes that have basically wiped out the native animal population on Guam. I bet the residents there are hoping for some strict enforcement. Look at the Northern Snakeheads that are now all over the Potomac River and are busily choking out the large-mouth and small-mouth bass that exist in the river. Look at the citrus canker spread which is currently hitting citrus crops in the USA and Brazil. Most of these infestations are a result of little monsters hitching a ride in transported foodstuffs.

About a month ago, some mature adult male Khapra beetles, some larvae, and some beetle carcasses were discovered at BWI in a sack of rice that someone had tried to covertly import into the USA. Its one of the most destructive pests around but has been kept out of the USA so far. I bet that passenger was feeling rather cautions about his/her rice but then could have unleashed a s**tstorm of agricultural mess unto the USA.

It matters not where the apple came from. It matters not that it was a French apple; nor would it have mattered if it was an American Granny Smith that got commingled with other apples. Any farm product that comes into the USA - regardless of its origin has to be inspected and assessed for possible contaminants.

Police and CBP have the discretion to assess fines, issue warnings, or look the other way. Just because CBP chose to crack down on the passenger doesn't mean that 1) they're wrong in doing so and 2) the passenger wasn't wrong in failing to declare an item that is clearly identified as being one that must be declared to CBP upon entry.

As of a few weeks ago, the Global Entry kiosks allow you to answer "No to all questions below." Frequent travelers certainly appreciate that, but maybe that option needs to be removed to force an answer for each question? Nah, people will just skip down and answer to no to each question without reading.

glbltrvlr wrote:

As of a few weeks ago, the Global Entry kiosks allow you to answer "No to all questions below." Frequent travelers certainly appreciate that, but maybe that option needs to be removed to force an answer for each question? Nah, people will just skip down and answer to no to each question without reading.

Well, this lady doesn't have to worry about that any more. Her GE status has been revoked.
The fact that there are any consequences here beyond throwing the apple out are disgusting to me.

Old version: "Do you have any fruits, plants, food..."

New version: "Do you have any fruits, vegetables, plants, nuts, meats or meat products..."

Note the very first item listed in the question.

And she thinks that Delta should put a warning note in the bag with the piece of fruit? The million warning signs and amnesty bins between the kiosk and the dude aren't enough? I'm just not buying the effort to deflect blame.

Seriously -- what should the warning note in the bag say? Maybe, "WARNING. This apple is a piece of fruit. If you choose not to eat it now, but rather to carry it off the plane in your bag, be sure to declare it."

And you know what she would say in that case: "I didn't open the bag." or "I didn't read the note."

At some point, the responsibility is hers, plain and simple.