California Agriculture News Archives - Page 127 of 175

CAL POLY FLOAT WINS INNOVATION AWARD AT ROSE PARADE

Cal Poly “California Grown” Float Wins Innovation Award at Rose Parade – From the California Cut Flower Commission

A team of 60 Cal Poly college students took home the coveted Crystal City Innovation Award at this year’s Rose Parade in Pasadena, posted by Kasey Cronquist on CDFA Tuesday. The Innovation Award is given to the float that reflects the best use of imagination & innovation to advance the art of float building.

Cronquist, CEO/Ambassador of the California Cut Flower Commission, believes there are three reasons why Cal Poly’s float entry, “Bedtime Buccaneers,” was deserving of an award for their imagination and innovation: design, flower choices and student team.

“This year’s float design was not only pleasing to the eye, but it was built with some very creative animation,” said Cronquist. “Not only were they able to make their bed appear to rock back and forth in that sea of Iris and have canons appearing to fire from under a quilt of roses, but they were also able to make the Iris have a rippling effect that made the Iris appear even more like the ocean it represented.”

“With over 14,000 stems, no other Rose Parade float had as many home grown roses as Cal Poly’s float,” Cronquist stated. “I know for certain that the origin of flowers used in their design was not a criteria for the Innovation Award. However, it should be. Cal Poly’s commitment to become a certified “CA Grown” float was a great example of the team’s imagination and innovation,” indicating their unique perspective among the floats; “the average team in the parade sourced their roses, carnations and chrysanthemums from South America. However, due to the impact imports have had on our domestic flower farms in the past 20 years, Cal Poly’s team had to think creatively on how to ensure that their design would maintain a threshold of 85% or better fresh cut flowers from California.” In fact their float was pushing 95%.”

“Personally,” Cronquist shared, “I believe the fact that this team is a volunteer team of college students makes their entry the most compelling story in the parade. Due to the noisy nature of media coverage during the run up to the rose parade, this is a story that doesn’t receive the kind of attention it deserves. What an accomplishment for a team of young people, competing with corporate titans likes Dole Foods, Honda, etc., to walk away with one of the most coveted of float awards, the Crystal City Innovation Award, while also being ‘CA Grown’ Certified.”

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:41:16-07:00January 9th, 2014|

California Ag News SJV Grape Symposium Focuses on Raisins

San Joaquin Valley Grape Symposium Focused On Raisins

Over the last 10 years, Fresno County farmers have reported increasing raisin moth populations in organic raisin vineyards. Addressing this concern at the SJV Grape Symposium TODAY was Kent Daane, UC Cooperative Extension specialist in the Department of Environmental Science, Policy and Management at UC Berkeley.

Daane and other UC Researchers updates growers and PCAs on the pest’s biology, management and damage at the San Joaquin Valley Grape Symposium.

Daane and his research associates followed moth populations in organic and conventional fields to document this observed change and determine if there were any specific causes for increases in raisin moth densities.

In a 2013 season study entomologists found that spring to early summer pheromone trap catches of raisin moths were prevalent across numerous vineyards, regardless of management practices. However, overall seasonal damage in 2013 was low.

“The primary difference between vineyard sites with or without raisin moth damage appeared to be well-timed and effective insecticide sprays,” Daane said. “One problem for organic sites may be the availability of insecticide materials that have long enough residual activity to control the larvae of adult moths entering the vineyard, and once the larvae are deep inside the grape cluster they are difficult to control.”

In addition to Daane’s report, the San Joaquin Valley Grape Symposium included the following research updates:

• Rootstocks for raisin production by Sonet Von Zyl, Fresno State University 

• Raisin production canopy management by Matthew Fidelibus, UC Cooperative Extension specialist in the Department of Viticulture and Enology at UC Davis, based at the UC Kearney Ag REC in Parlier 

• Raisin grape breeding program by Craig Ledbetter, USDA Agricultural Research Service, based in Parlier 

• Economics of producing raisins, by Annette Levi, Fresno State University 

• Grapevine trunk diseases and grower survey

California Ag Today Editors have included the following presentations in more detail.

Von Zyl spoke about her work in evaluating nematode resistant rootstocks for use with early ripening raisin varieties grown for dried on the vine raisin production

“DOV raisin production relies on two essential components: 1) early maturing varieties and 2) new trellis systems developed specifically for DOV production,” Von Zyl said. Currently two varieties are used for DOV production on high capacity systems namely Fiesta and Selma Pete. New vineyards for raisin production are being planted to one of these varieties due to their comparable production to Thompson Seedless. Both ripen earlier than Thompson Seedless and have potential for mechanical harvesting when DOV farmed. Fiesta has increased slowly since its release because itwas thought to have a large seed trace.

This has since been proven incorrect and plantings stand at 12,685 bearing and non-bearing acres (California Agricultural Statistics Service, 2010). Selma Pete acreage stands at 3,143 total (bearing and non-bearing) but interest is high for this variety specifically for DOV production using the open gable trellis system. In 2010, 6,716 acres of Fiesta and 1,245 acres of Selma Pete were produced using an overhead trellis system. It is conceivable that these two varieties may become thestandards for DOV raisin production as older Thompson Seedless vineyards get removed.

Unlike traditional raisin production, trellis systems are vital to the success of DOV raisin production. Currently, two trellis systems are most prevalent among DOV growers, the open gable and the overhead trellis systems. The basic principle of the open gable trellis (syn: Y-trellis) maintains the fruit on both sides of the trellis after cane severing. In traditional raisin production vineyards, vines are head–trained, but for DOV production it is more desirable to train vines as bilateral, quadrilateral cordons or a split head to facilitate cane severance and pruning.

Freedom and1103 Paulsen are rootstocks which are commercially available that have some resistance to nematodes and are considered high vigor stocks. The use of rootstocks that impart vigor and have nematode resistance will be important in DOV vineyard establishment.

Establishing a DOV vineyard is costly. Setbacks due to weak vines, which do not fill the trellis system, cost growers time and money. It is conceivable that rootstocks will play an important role in new DOV vineyards. Some of the rootstocks previously mentioned, are currently being evaluated under DOV raisin production using a south–side trellis system.

Matthew Fidelibus, Extension Specialist, Department of Viticulture and Enology UC, Davis spoke about the Impact of canopy management practices on the fruitfulness, yield, and quality ofdry–on– vine raisin grapes on open gable trellis systems

Most modern dry–on–vine (DOV) raisin vineyards in California have an overhead arbor or an open gable trellis system. The overhead arbor has a slightly greater yield potential than the open gable, but is more costly to install and requires morespecialized farming and harvest equipment than theopen gable. Approximately 1/3 of Selma Pete vineyards areon an overhead trellis system (USDA NASS 2012); most of the rest are on an open gable.

The original open gable DOV trellis is comprised of steel posts topped at 4.5 ft with 6 ft–wide V- shaped steel cross arm assemblies supporting six fruiting wires, three on each side). The bottom two wires on each cross arm support fruiting canes. Cordon support wires are affixed immediately below the base of thecross arm assemblies, and a vertical one foot tall post extension is mounted in the centerof the cross arm assembly to support a foliage catch wire. In spring, moveable rake wires are pulled toward the center of the trellis, thus gathering the renewal shoots emerging from spurs and guiding them toward the center of the trellis where they can be supported by the center–mounted foliage catch wire.

Fruiting canes of vines subjected to the center-divided canopy management system are tied to both cross-arms creating a balanced crop load on the trellis, and helping to provide a physical separation of the renewal shoots from the fruitingshoots on canes. Canopy management practices such as the separation of renewal and fruiting zones may increase productivity if theypromote the exposure of renewal shoots to sunlight (Shaulis and May, 1971). Christensen (1979) showed that Thompson Seedless canes originating from renewal shoots that grew under sun-exposed conditions, “sun canes”, had better bud break than shade canes, andthe shoots from sun canes were more vigorous and productive than shoots from shade canes.

The specific benefit that center–divided canopies, or other possible canopy division practices, may have on the exposure of renewal shoots to sunlight, or on bud fruitfulness, has not been determined for Fiesta or Selma Pete on open gable DOV trellises. Such information is needed to help growers understand which elements of the original open gable design concept are critical to ensuring high yields.

Since the open gable trellis was commercialized, growers and trellis companies have significantly modified or omitted several of theoriginal trellis design features and canopy management practices for various reasons including: to reduce the cost of trellis materials, facilitate pruning, more distinctly separate thefruiting and renewal zones, and to enable the vines to be harvested with smaller, less expensive, andmore widely available, machines. Vineyard trellis systems with a narrower cross arm span have also been modified with a narrower cross arm angle, with many also having a substantially lowered cordon wire. These changes were mounted foliage catch wireand rake wires, thus reducing the cost of trellis materials and installation. Without catch wires, the renewal shoots cannot be guided into the center of the trellis, but the canopy can still be separated into renewal and fruiting zones by pruning in such a

way that canes and spurs are on separate cordons, a pruning style known aswithin–row-alternate- bearing (WRAB) or, more commonly, as the ‘Peacock’ method, after the person who invented this pruning style (Peacock and Swanson, Fidelibus et al. 2007; Figure 3).

Clearly, themove to DOV has inspired creative canopy management practices, but reports of disappointing or declining yields may indicate that someof the practices being implemented may be undesirable. Poor performance may be related to some of the trellis design and vine training changes described above, but the fact that multiple changes were often implemented at once makes it difficult to determine which factor or factors maybe most important. Therefore, we have begun work to determine how different trellis designs and canopy management practices may affect canopy structure, light environment, and productivity of ‘Selma Pete’ and ‘Fiesta’ grapevines on open gable trellises.

Kearney canopy separation trial. Canopy separation methodaffected the number of leaf layers and the proportion of the leaves on the exterior of the vine canopies (Table 1). The canopies of all vines had similar numbers of horizontal leaf layers when measured in July, but vines with non–divided and center–divided canopies had fewer exterior leaves, horizontally and vertically, and more leaf layers, vertically, than vines with WRAB canopies (Table 1). Fewer leaf layers should improve light levels in the canopy, an effect that could promote bud fruitfulness and budbreak, and having more leaves on theexterior of the canopy is also desirable as exterior leaves have the greatest photosynthetic capacity due to their better sunlight exposure.

Canopy separation practices, especially WRAB, increased light intensity in the renewal zoneearly in the season, but as thecanopy developed over time, differences between treatments, with respect to light intensity, diminished. (Figure 4). Renewal shoots growing under better light exposure could form dormant buds with greater fruitfulness than those from renewal shoots grown under lower light intensities, and shoots exposed to high light levels generally have lower rates of bud necrosis over winter than shoots exposed to low light conditions. Increased bud fruitfulness and improved budbreak could potentially increase vine yields.

Vines with center–divided, or non–divided, canopies may retain fruiting canes and spurs on any cordon (A). Vines with canopies separated in the Within–Row–Alternate–Bearing (WRAB) style are pruned so that all the canes are on the cordons between two adjacent vines, with spurs on the othercordons, and fruiting and renewal sections thus alternating down the vine rows (B).

Larry Williams, Department of Viticulture and Enology UC Davis discussed a brief review of mineral nutrition of grapevines and fertilization guidelines for California Vineyards.

Determination of N fertilizer amounts

Once the decision has been made to fertilize the vineyard, theappropriate amount of fertilizer should be applied. Mineral nutrient budgets (i.e. the amount of nutrients the vine needs for proper growth and development) have been established in various studies around the world. It was determined that Thompson Seedless grapevines needed approximately 39 kg N ha–1 (~ 35 lbs N acre–1) for the leaves, 11 kg N ha–1 (10.7 lbs N acre–1) for the stems (main axis of the shoot) and 34 kg N ha–1 (~ 30 lbs N acre–1) for the fruit (Williams, 1987). The vineyard density in that study was 1120 vines per hectare (454vines per acre; 12’ rows x 8’ vine spacings) and the trellis system was a 0.45 m crossarm. The total N (found in the fruit at harvest, leaves as they fell from thevine and pruning wood) in wine grape vineyards using a VSP trellis system varied from 24 to 65 kg N ha–1 (21 – 58 lbs N acre–1) over a three year period (L.E. Williams, unpublished data). The differences in N per hectare (acre) in that study were primarily due to differences in row spacing and final yield.

In anotherstudy (Williams, 1991) it was determined that Thompsons Seedless leaves contained greater than 22 kg N ha–1 (~ 19 lbs N acre–1) after they fell from the vine and the canes at pruning contained approximately 17 kg N ha–1 (~ 15 lbs N acre–1). These values are comparable to other studies using Thompson Seedless. The results from both studies mentioned above (Williams, 1987; 1991) would indicate that there is a considerable amount of N in both the leaves and canes of a vine and that when both are incorporated into the soil after leaf fall and pruning would contribute to the soil’s organic matterand the availability of N in subsequent years. Theauthor has found that N from both leaves that fell from the vine after harvest and prunings incorporated into thesoil is taken up the following growing season (unpublished data). Another interesting aspect of those two studies would be the difference in N within the leaves of thevines at harvest (39 kg N ha–1) and leaves after they’ve fallen from the vine (22 kg N ha–1). The difference in theamount of N in the leaves between the two (~ 15 lbs N/acre) would theoretically be the amount of Nremobilized out the leaves during senescence after harvest and put into thevine’s N storage pool (~20% of the seasonal total N demand by the vine) indicating the importance of leaves as a source of N for recycling within the vine. A study is currently underway by the author (funding provided by the American Vineyard Foundation, California Table Grape Commission and California Raisin Marketing Board) to provide better metrics for the remobilization of N out of the leaves after harvest and back into the permanent structures of thevine (N storage reserves). Data should be finalized by the Spring of 2014.

The amountof K needed for growth of grapevines also has been determined. In the same vineyard used above to develop a N budget for Thompson Seedless grapevines, aK budget was developed (Williams et al., 1987). Leaves, stems andfruit needed approximately 13, 29 and 50 kg K ha–1 (~ 11, 26 and 44 lbs K acre–1), respectively, during the growing season. The amount of K in theleaves and canes at the end ofthe season were equivalent to 9 and 12 kg K ha–1. The amount of Kfound in the fruit at harvest, leaves as they fell from thevine and canes at pruning for two wine grape cultivars, on different rootstocks and at different locations ranged from 25 to 67 kg K ha–1 (22 – 60 lbs K acre–1) over a three year period (L.E. Williams, unpublished data). Differences among K per unit land area were dueto same factors as discussed in the preceding paragraph for N in that study.

The aboveinformation in this section illustrates that there can be significant variation in the requirements of N and K per vineyard. This is due to differences in row spacings, trellis types, yield and overall growth of individual vines. Much of theN and K in the leaves and canes are returned to the soil forpossible futureuse. Therefore, a better wayin determining the fertilizer demands of a vineyard would be to calculate theamount of that nutrient removed in the fruit at harvest

Kinds of fertilizers

The choiceof N fertilizers for raisin vineyards in California can be based mostly upon cost (Christensen and Peacock, 2000). The same mayapply for table grape and winegrape growers. The nitrate form of N allows the fertilizer to be available to the vines shortly after an application while the ammonium and urea forms require their transformation to nitrate in the soil profile. The liquid forms of N fertilizers are gaining

in popularity due to their ease of handling and application via drip irrigation (fertigation). Many raisin and table grape growers will use farm manure as a source of N, with its application occurring during the dormant portion of the growing season. Lastly, the acidification potential of N fertilizers should be considered in a management program particularly in acid soils. This characteristic of N fertilizers has been outlined (Christensen and Peacock, 2000).

It has been concluded that one form of K fertilizer offers no advantage over the other forms (Christensen and Peacock, 2000). Thus cost may play a major role in determining which kind to use in California and whether it is to be used in a fertigation program. For vineyards with Mg deficiencies thechoice of a fertilizer would probably be magnesium sulfate. The two micronutrients mostly commonly needed in California vineyards are zinc and boron. Foliar and soil applications of the two fertilizers have been usedin California (Christensenet al., 1982). Soil applications of Zn are more effective under drip than furrow irrigation. Research has shown that neutral– or basic–Zn products are the most effective Zn fertilizers (Christensen and Peacock, 2000).

Timing of fertilization events

Nitrogen and potassium are required by the grapevine throughout its growth cycle. It has been shown that the major sink (the organ that requires the most of a particular mineral nutrient) forN is the leaves whilethe fruit is the major sink for K (Williams, 1987; Williams et al., 1987; Williams and Biscay, 1991). Approximately, two–thirds ofthe vine’s annual requirement forN occurs between budbreak and several weeks after berry set. This is the period when the canopy is formed by the vine. The remaining third of the vine’s annual requirement of N goes to the fruit after berry set. It should be pointed out that a portion of the N requirements of a grapevine could be derived from N reserves in the roots and other permanent structures of the vine.

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:41:17-07:00January 9th, 2014|

FDA CREATES LIST OF U.S. MILK EXPORTERS TO CHINA

FDA Establishes List of Approved U.S. Milk Exporters to China

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced yesterday that it is establishing a list of U.S. milk product manufacturers and processors interested in exporting milk products to China. FDA is taking this step to help U.S. manufacturers comply with new requirements of the Chinese government for the importation of milk products into China. China has advised that milk products (a category which, in this case, does not include raw milk) from firms not on the list could be prevented from entering commerce in China.

To be considered for the list, which is voluntary, firms cannot be subject to any pending judicial enforcement action or a pending FDA warning letter, and would need to have had one of the following:

FDA inspection within 3 years
Inclusion on the Interstate Milk Shippers List (IMS list)
Inclusion on the U.S. Department of Agriculture list, Dairy Plants Surveyed and Approved for USDA Grading Service (“USDA list”)

FDA will update the list quarterly andwhenever a firm is removed from the list due to a pending judicial enforcement action, or a pending warning letter. FDA intends to notify the firm of FDA’s findings and, as appropriate, FDA’s intent to remove the firm from the FDA list. FDA will also post the list to its website and provide the list directly to the Chinese government, which may post some or all of the information contained in the list on its own website.

In December of each even-numbered year, FDA intends to send a letter to manufacturers that are on the list, requesting that they update the information initially provided and indicate whether they wish to continue being listed.

Firms may apply to be on the list beginning January 7, 2014. The first posting of the list and notification to China will occur on or about April 30, 2014.

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:41:17-07:00January 8th, 2014|

USDA HOSTS 2014 AGRICULTURAL OUTLOOK FORUM IN FEBRUARY

USDA Announces Speakers for the 2014 Agricultural Outlook Forum

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) TODAY announced speakers for the 2014 Agricultural Outlook Forum, “The Changing Face of Agriculture,” to be held from Feb. 20-21 at the Crystal Gateway Marriott Hotel, Arlington, VA.

Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack will moderate two general session panels on the Future of Agriculture. Among the speakers, panelists are Cathy Burns, President of the Produce Marketing Association; Michael O’Gorman, Executive Director of the Farmer Veteran Coalition; Greg Wegis, who operates a 17,600-acre vegetable and nut farm in California; Joseph Glauber, USDA’s Chief Economist; Michael Froman, U.S. Trade Representative; and Dr. Roger Clemens – Chief Scientific Officer for ETHorn and Adjunct Professor of Pharmacology and Pharmaceutical Sciences at USC, Los Angeles, CA. There will also be 95 experts in breakout sessions.

USDA’s first release of preliminary data from the new Census of Agriculture will occur at the Forum; panelists will cover the latest information on land tenure and demographic and production trends.

USDA has hosted the Agricultural Outlook Forum since 1923 to provide farmers and ranchers, government, and agribusinesses with sound information for decision-making. Attendees are expected to include members of farm organizations, food and fiber firms, academia, foreign governments, and the news media.

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:41:17-07:00January 8th, 2014|

HOW ZERO WATER WILL HURT LATINO FARM EMPLOYEES

Editor’s Note: Below are exclusive audio reports on how Latino Farm Employees would be hurt due to a possible zero water allocation in Federal Water Districts. It could mean the end of what they have been striving for—the American Dream.

We want to thank the good folks at Agro-Culture Liquid Fertilizers for sponsoring this series.

PART 1 — How Latino farm employees suffer with low water allocations. In this report Maria Hernandez, of Los Gatos Tomatoes, Huron; Hortencia Solario, Harris-Wolf Farms almond processing near Huron; and Jesus Cuevas, with Woolf Farming in Huron share the frustration of fish being more important than humans.

Photo is of Hortencia Solario

PART 2 — Farm workers’ children are often college educated. This extraordinary fact is a testament that they want to achieve the American Dream, which could all be dashed with zero water deliveries in 2014. This report features Jesus Cuevas, Woolf Farming; Maria Hernandez, Los Gatos Tomatoes; and Hortencia Solariowith Harris-Woolf Farms. All farming operations are in Western Fresno County and will be severely impacted due to reduced or zero water deliveries.

Photo is of Maria Hernandez

PART 3 — There is real fear that the loss of water in 2014 will harm the livelihoods of Latino farm employee families throughout California’s Central Valley. In this report you will hear from Jesus Cuevas, who oversees processing tomatoes for Woolf Farming, based in Huron; Stuart Woolf, president of Woolf Farming; and Hortencia Solario, who works for Harris-Woolf Farms, an almond processor.

Photo is of Jesus Cuevas

PART 4 — Zero water deliveries will cause an unstable economic future and devastate communities. Plus, hear Juan Guadian’s opinion on how humans are more important than fish.

PART 5 — If zero water allocation shifts farming to other countries, there will be food safety issues. This report features Guillermo Gutierrez, a ranch foreman with Hammonds Ranch near Firebaugh in Western Fresno County; and Jesus Cuevas, who heads up tomato production for Woolf Farming in Huron, also in Western Fresno County.

Photo is of Guillermo Gutierrez

PART 6 — A flawed biological opinion is causing 1000’s of Latinos to be laid off work. This report features Raul Enriques, who manages permanent crops for Harris Farms, and William Bourdeau, Executive Vice President of Harris Farms, based in Coalinga, Calif.

Photo is of Raul Enriques

PART 7 — Esmael Reyes works for Harris Farms near Coalinga in Western Fresno County. He came to the Central Valley by way of Texas in 1966 when he was 8 years old. As the irrigation foreman for Harris Farms, Reyes knows all too well the effect of not having enough water for crops. Reyes also comments on how zero water can cause food insecurity.

PART 8 –The Westside will receive severely reduced water allocations for the foreseeable future, which will lead to food lines and devastated communities. This report features: William Bourdeau, Executive Vice President of Harris Farms near Coalinga; Shawn Coburn a diversified farmer near Firebaugh; and Jesus Cuevas who oversees the cannery tomato acreage for Woolf Farming near Huron.

Photo is of Shawn Coburn

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:41:17-07:00January 7th, 2014|

USDA PROVIDES ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS TO FOOD BANKS

USDA Purchased Crops for Needy Families and Urges Farm Bill Passage

Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack TODAY announced the USDA’S intent to purchase up to $126.4 million worth of fruit and vegetable products, to be distributed to needy families under The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP).

“Food distribution programs are a vital part of our Nation’s nutrition safety net, and today’s food purchases will give communities additional means to help those in need,” Vilsack said. “A comprehensive Farm Bill is absolutely critical to these efforts, and Congress should adequately support feeding programs for American families by passing a new Farm Bill as soon as possible.”

The USDA purchase is part of the surplus removal program that helps stabilize prices in agricultural commodity markets by balancing supply and demand, while providing healthy food to soup kitchens, food pantries, and community action agencies across the country.

USDA’s purchases will include tart cherries, processed apples, cranberries, fresh tomatoes, wild blueberries, and raisins, and expand efforts to provide high-quality, wholesome, domestically produced foods.

A recent analysis found that TEFAP foods achieved a score 89 out of 100 on the Health Eating Index, a measure of diet quality based on the Federal Dietary Guidelines for Americans.

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:41:18-07:00January 6th, 2014|

LIMITING LEGAL EXPOSURE IN RECALLS Webinar

United Fresh Webinar Series: Strategies for Limiting Your Legal Exposure in Recalls

United Fresh members and the produce industry are invited to register for this webinar, hosted by the United Fresh Grower-Shipper Board. The “Strategies for Limiting Your Legal Exposure in Recalls” webinar on Thursday, January 16, 2014 from 2 pm to 3 pm US/Eastern, will help produce companies understand the legal consequences from foodborne illness outbreaks and recall events and identify strategies to avoid staggering financial losses and criminal charges in the future. The webinar is part of United’s group of Recall Ready programs and services.

In this timely one-hour webinar, attorneys David Durkin and Danny Gurwitz examine the scope of America’s food safety laws, review real-world case studies showing successful legal strategies, and address the most critical civil and criminal liability issues facing fresh produce companies today.

David Durkin is a principal at Olsson Frank Weeda Terman Bode Matz PC. Mr. Durkin’s practice concentrates on federal civil and criminal litigation and administrative proceedings, including court challenges to FDA, USDA, and DEA regulatory and enforcement initiatives.

Danny Gurwitz is a partner at Atlas Hall, and represented Frontera Produce in litigation concerning the recall of contaminated Rocky Ford cantaloupes in 2011. Mr. Gurwitz has litigated products liability claims; food borne contamination; insurance coverage disputes, and many other types of cases.

Registration is complimentary for United Fresh members and $50 for non-members, and includes one connection to the web and one reserved phone telephone line for the audio portion.

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:41:18-07:00January 6th, 2014|

USDA PROPOSES SALMONELLA GUIDELINE FOR HOG SLAUGHTER FACILITIES

USDA Invites Comments on Salmonella Best Practices Guideline for Hog Slaughter Facilities

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) issued TODAY a Notice of Availability and Opportunity for Comments on its Compliance Guideline for Controlling Salmonella in hog slaughter facilities.

The guidance provides information on best practices that may be applied at a hog slaughter facility to prevent, eliminate, or reduce levels of Salmonella on hogs at all stages of slaughter and dressing. This guideline will help hog slaughter establishments better comply with the relevant regulatory requirements.

FSIS invites interested persons to submit comments on this notice until March 7, 2014.

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:42:22-07:00January 6th, 2014|

FDA WILL AGAIN REVISE FSMA LANGUAGE

FDA Revises Key Provisions of

Proposed FSMA Affecting Farmers

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced TODAY that they will propose revised rule language and open another comment period on two Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) rules, Produce Safety and Preventive Controls for Human Food. FDA anticipates rule language to be published by early summer 2014 to be followed by a public comment period.

The changes encompass key provisions associated with water quality standards and testing, standards for using raw manure and compost, certain requirements affecting mixed-used facilities, and procedures for withdrawing the qualified exemption for certain farms. Additional revisions may follow FDA’s initial review of the over 25,000 comments received on these two proposed food safety rules.

“Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food, and Markets (VAAFM) is a strong advocate of food safety for both consumers and producers. It’s absolutely critical that the rules are written right to begin with.” said Secretary Chuck Ross. “We will closely examine the revised proposed rules from FDA to ensure that this second round best fits the community-based, diversified agriculture that is so essential to Vermont and New England.”

FSMA remains the most sweeping reform of our nation’s food safety laws in more than 70 years and was signed into law by President Obama on January 4, 2011. FSMA aims to ensure the U.S. food supply is safe by shifting the focus from responding to contamination to preventing it.

The Standards for the Growing, Harvesting, Packing, and Holding of Produce rule, published January 2013, proposes enforceable safety standards for the production and harvesting of produce on farms.

The Current Good Manufacturing Practices and Hazard Analysis and Risk-Based Preventive Controls for Human Food rule, published January 2013, would require makers of food to be sold in the United States, whether produced at a foreign- or domestic-based facility, to develop a formal plan for preventing food products from causing foodborne illness.

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:42:22-07:00January 6th, 2014|

Could Calif. Dairy Climate Really be Improving?

A New Year…So What’s On The Agenda?

By Rob Vandenheuvel, General Manager of the Milk Producers Council

2013 is now officially in the books, and we have embarked on 2014. There seems to be a cautious optimism in the air, with dairy markets at historically strong levels and prices for some of the primary feed commodities – particularly corn – down significantly from recent highs.

Photo: The Shelby Report

Of course, in an industry with markets as volatile as the dairy industry, we’ve seen this before, but for some reason, this time feels different. After five years of mostly struggles in the industry – particularly here in California – it seems that we are on the verge of “turning the page” and setting on a better course. What happens in the coming days and months will determine whether that actually happens.

Reports indicate that a Farm Bill is close to being completed, perhaps even this month.

This has been several years in the making, but it appears that we are on the verge of fundamentally reforming our dairy safety net programs. Of course, it doesn’t solve every problem our industry faces, but it solves one of the biggest: providing dairy farmers – both large and small – with a meaningful option to protect against prolonged market downturns.

And if Congress can read through the propaganda constantly churned out by nation’s processors, who’s main goal in this debate has been to keep milk as cheap as possible, we may have a stand-by Market Stabilization Program that helps shorten those market downturns in the first place, which is ultimately the best outcome for our industry.

A Federal Milk Market Order in California appears to be moving forward at a rapid pace.

Of course, it’s a lengthy process that will certainly not be completed in 2014, but nonetheless, after trying every method possible to get the much needed changes to the California system – whether through administrative hearings, legislation, or even a lawsuit – California dairy families appear to be very focused on going down this path to a Federal Order.

Producers certainly have questions about this process, many of those focused on how it will handle our State quota program or how the pooling rules will be different. While we don’t know all the answers yet, they are certainly all solvable issues, and I expect that the coming months will bring a lot of clarity to this process.

While those two items appear to be on the fast track in the near term, there are other issues that MPC and others will certainly be involved with as well.

It looks like Congress is planning to take a serious look at the nation’s corn-based ethanol policies.

This is an issue that’s been brewing for years, and with a bipartisan Senate bill introduced late last year and a comparable House bill planned soon, the issue is poised for a serious discussion in 2014. Of course, given the impact this policy has had on feed commodity process, MPC and many others have been involved in this debate for years.

But more recently, the ethanol policies have grown to a point where it is actually mandating a volume of ethanol that isn’t even feasible to blend with our nation’s fuel supply, given current market conditions. We saw preliminary action by EPA late last year to start correcting this problem, but it’s anticipated that Congress will debate/discuss more fundamental changes in the coming months.

Immigration, as in years past, continues to be on Congress’s agenda as well.

Last year, we saw significant progress, with the Senate approving a bold, comprehensive plan that includes much needed changes for dairy and other agriculture. However, that effort has been stalled in the House of Representatives, where there seems to be political problems with taking up immigration in a comprehensive manner. They have been saying they prefer a piecemeal approach, dealing with the major immigration issues one-by-one. Given that it’s an election year, it’s tough to know whether a year from now we’ll have seen any progress, but this is certainly an important issue for dairy farmers around the country, and as such is a major priority for us all.

Finally, there is some increasing chatter about tax reform in Congress.

As I wrote above, given that it’s an election year, I’m not sure how realistic the prospects are, and President Obama recently nominated the chief tax policy writer in the Senate – Sen. Max Baucus from Montana – to serve as the U.S. Ambassador to China. However, one issue that has come up as part of a potential tax reform package is the removal of the “cash-basis accounting” option for the largest farmers. As you all know, cash-basis accounting is a key component of the tax-planning methods used by U.S. farmers, so dairy and other agriculture interests will obviously be closely watching this debate.

While the items above would certainly keep any industry busy all year, we know that this is not an all-inclusive list. Whether it’s a California bill aimed at micro-managing the way farmers care for their animals, or helping to get ready for the implementation of Obamacare (at least the implementation on businesses; I’ve already been forced to get my individual Obamacare plan), there is never a dull moment in this industry. Let’s hope that 2014 brings continues strong dairy markets and at least the first two items above.

It should go without saying that it’s a whole lot easier to tackle the other items on the agenda if we’ve at least got the tools to help your dairy maintain profitability long-term. And of course without sustained profitability, the other issues are moot anyway.

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:42:22-07:00January 4th, 2014|

Previous 126127128 Next

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

California Ag News…
At Your Fingertips!

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

California Ag News… At Your Fingertips!

California Ag News…
At Your Fingertips!