Pear Meeting is in Hopland, Calif.

PEAR ORCHARD SYSTEMS FIELD MEETING

An upcoming Meeting for the California Pear Industry is scheduled for Tuesday, October 22, 10:00 a.m. to Noon at the Shadowbrook Farms, 13850 Old River Road, Hopland

Meeting speakers include: Rachel Elkins, Pomology Farm Advisor, U.C. Cooperative Extension Kurt Ashurst, host grower; Bruce Lampinen, Extension Orchard Management Specialist and Ted DeJong, Professor/ CE Pomologist, UC Davis; Todd Einhorn, Assistant Professor, Oregon State University Mid-Columbia Agricultural Research and Extension Center (MCAREC), Hood River; Stefano Musacchi, Associate Professor, Washington State University – Tree Fruit Research and Extension Center (TFREC), Wenatchee

AGENDA

• Welcome and overview of California collaborative pear systems trials

• 2013 NC-140 ‘Bartlett’ Pear Systems Trial  Planted May 1-2, 2013; trees from Willow Drive Nursery, Ephrata, WA Training systems: “V”, tall spindle, bi-axis, 2-leader, completely unpruned (unreplicated) In-row spacing: 3’, 4.5’, 6’. Between row spacing: 12’ Rootstocks: OHxF 69, OHxF 87, Pyro 2-33

• Fire blight Resistant Pear Selections  2013 selections from Dr. Richard Bell, USDA-ARS, Kearneysville, WVA Planted May 16, 2013 and headed to 30”; all on OHxF 87.Other locations: Sacramento Delta (Chuck Ingels), Hood River (Todd Einhorn);  Wenatchee (Kate Evans); Michigan (2 sites) (Bill Shane); West Virginia (R. Bell)  

The Organizers wish to thank the following for helping with this meeting.

 Kurt Ashurst and crew, Shadowbrook Farms, A&P Ag Structures, Visalia, Willow Drive Nursery, Ephrata, WA, Adams County Nursery and  California Pear Advisory Board for partial funding.

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:44:20-07:00October 17th, 2013|

VOLUNTARY BELL PEPPER RECALL

Orange County Produce, LLC Voluntarily Recalls Bell Peppers

Orange County Produce, LLC (OC Produce) is voluntarily working with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and California Department of Public Health (CDPH) to coordinate a recall of fresh red and green Bell Peppers for potential Salmonella contamination. The FDA has advised that a random sample of OC Produce Bell peppers has tested positive for Salmonella.

The product is typically sold to retail, food service, and farmer’s market level in bulk weight and has no retail packaging associated with it. All retail suppliers that received these affected lots have been notified and were directed to immediately remove and destroy any remaining product in their inventories.

This recall was the result of a random sampling event on September 25, 2013 by the USDA which revealed the presence of Salmonella on some of the product. OC Produce’s recall and traceability program enabled the company to quickly identify the company field and harvest dates of the affected product, which originated in Southern California.

The red and green Bell Pepper recall is limited to 3 lots (Lot # SB 7 920, 923, 924) containing 1,208 25# cartons of peppers. The source of the contamination is unknown. The lots were distributed to farmer’s markets and wholesale food service within Southern California between September 21 and September 24, 2013.

No illnesses have been reported to date. Other than the red and green Bell peppers described above, no other OC Produce product has been affected by this recall.

OC Produce has ceased the distribution and harvest of product from the implicated field while the FDA, the California Department of Public Health and the company continue their investigation into the source of the contamination.

In a statement by Orange County Produce, OC Produce “is proud of its longstanding reputation for safety and quality throughout its operations and has taken immediate precautionary measures to protect public health by issuing this voluntary recall and removing product from the market. OC Produce takes its food safety responsibilities very seriously and is working diligently to investigate and prevent any further occurrence.”

Consumers who purchased the above described Bell peppers between the dates of September 21 and October 5, 2013 should contact the store, restaurant or farmers market from where they purchased the product and inquire as to whether the affected product was sold by that store, restaurant or farmers market location. If so, the customer should discard or return any unused product to that store for a refund.

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:44:20-07:00October 17th, 2013|

NEW CATTLE THEFT LAW

Brown Signs Livestock Theft Bill

GovernorJerry Brown has signed the California Cattlemen’s Association-backed bill to crack down on livestock thefts.

The bill by Assemblyman Frank Bigelow (R-O’Neals) will devote as much as $5,000 from each fine to the state Bureau of Livestock Identification to bolster theft investigations.

Earlier this year, lawmakers removed a provision to allow prosecutors to seek jail time for repeat offenders because concerns about prison overcrowding threatened to stall the bill. The bill came as the state reported that 1,110 head of cattle were stolen in California last year.

(Source: Western United Dairymen’sCalifornia Dairy Industry Headline News, Capital Press)

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:44:20-07:00October 16th, 2013|

ALLEN-DIAZ TO BECOME BEE LADY TO HELP WITH SCHOLARSHIPS

Allen-Diaz promises to Wear Bees

To Raise Scholarship Dollars for UC Students

Barbara Allen-Diaz, a top administrator in the University of California, has vowed to create a big buzz — a big buzz with bees — if she can raise $2500 by Oct. 31 for UC’s “Promise for Education” campaign, aimed at providing scholarships for UC students in need of financial help.

Allen-Diaz, vice president for UC Agriculture and Natural Resources (UC ANR), has agreed to participate in a stunt with thousands of buzzing honey bees clustered on either a UC ANR T-shirt or on a UC ANR banner in a project coordinated by the world-renowned bee wrangler Norm Gary, UC Davis emeritus professor of entomology.

Allen-Diaz holds several other titles: director of the Agricultural Experiment Station, director of Cooperative Extension, and professor and Russell Rustici Chair in Rangeland Management at UC Berkeley. But next spring, she will become “The Bee Lady” or “The Bee-liever,” surrounded by thousands of buzzing honey bees.

And, if the UC ANR administrator raises $5,000, she’s promised to eat insect larvae to promote awareness of alternative protein sources. (To donate, see http://promises.promiseforeducation.org/vpanr)

Allen-Diaz has never intentionally been near a cluster of bees. “I have to say that most of the bee interactions that I’ve had in the past have been stepping on them barefoot on the lawn as a child in Edmonds, Wash.; jumping off a rock wall into a bee hive as a child – 11 stings on my neck and face; and trying to control meat-eating wasps (protecting her families’ hands, faces and legs) at our Oregon home,” she said.

“That said, I am a true believer in the importance of honey bees and the importance of bees as pollinators in our agricultural and wild ecosystems,” Allen-Diaz said. “The health of agriculture and the health of the planet depend on the health and survival of our honey bees. I am very much looking forward to meeting Norm Gary and will participate with fascination as he ‘wrangles’ these bees. I hope they like me as much as Norm! And I hope that I am able to raise some dollars to support undergraduate education at UC.

Norm Gary said he will set up the project sometime in the spring, when the weather warms and the bees begin their annual population build-up.

Gary, who turns 80 in November, retired in 1994 from UC Davis after a 32-year academic career. He also retired this year as a bee wrangler and as a 66-year beekeeper, but “I’m coming out of retirement to help with this cause,” he said.

“Bees are not inclined to sting if they are well-fed, happy and content and are ‘under the influence’ of powerful synthetic queen bee odors — pheromones — which tend to pacify them,” Gary said.

While at UC Davis, he formulated a pheromone solution that is very effective in controlling bee behavior. Bees, attracted to pheromones, cluster on the drops of pheromones, whether it be a sign, a t-shirt or a plastic flower.

“Bees wrangled by this procedure have no inclination to sting,” he said. “Stinging behavior occurs naturally near the hive in defense of the entire colony not for the defense of the individual bee, because bees that sting die within hours. Using this approach I have had as many as a million bees clustered on six people simultaneously.”

“Most people fear bees,” Gary acknowledged. “They think bees ‘want’ to sting them. Wrong! They sting only when the nest or colony is attacked or disturbed or when they are trapped in a physical situation where they are crushed.”

Over the last four decades, Gary has trained bees to perform action scenes in movies, television shows and commercials. Among his credits are 18 films, including “Fried Green Tomatoes.” “My Girl,” “The X Files,” “Terror Out of the Sky,” “Invasion of the Bee Girls” and “Candyman” and the sequels. He appeared on more than 70 television shows, including the Johnny Carson and Jay Leno late night shows. He starred as the first guest on the TV show “That’s Incredible” and returned for four additional shows.

Gary holds a Guinness Book of World Records for most bees (109) in his mouth; he trained the bees to fly into his mouth to collect food from a small sponge saturated with his patented artificial nectar. He kept the bees inside his closed mouth for 10 seconds.

The retired bee scientist is the author of the popular book, “Honey Bee Hobbyist: The Care and Keeping of Bees,” now in its second printing. During his academic career, he published more 100 peer-reviewed scientific papers and four book chapters.

Gary, who received his doctorate in apiculture from Cornell University in 1959, is known internationally for his bee research. He was the first to document reproductive behavior of honey bees on film and the first to discover queen bee sex attractant pheromones. He invented a magnetic retrieval capture/recapture system for studying the foraging activities of bees, documenting the distribution and flight range in the field. His other studies revolved around honey bee pollination of agricultural crops, stinging and defensive behavior, and the effects of pesticides on foraging activities, among dozens of others.

A professional jazz and Dixieland musician, Gary is also known for playing the “B-flat clarinet” while covered from head to toe with bees. He continues to play professionally in the Sacramento area—minus the bees.

“I’m looking forward to the big buzz next spring,” he said. “I promise it will be un-bee-lievable.”

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:44:20-07:00October 16th, 2013|

Monterey County Herald Op-Ed

Secretary Ross Co-Authors Op-ed

On Farms and Food Banks

By Karen Ross and Sue Sigler

It’s another day at Ocean Mist Farms in Castroville, and work crews are picking broccoli and cauliflower for two clients — with one harvest bin for retail customers and another for the state’s food banks. It’s a prime example of California farmers and ranchers doing their share to help people in need, a need that continues to grow.

One in six Americans — nearly 47 million people — and one in four children are food-insecure and must rely upon others to help them get enough to eat. In California, more than 4 million people don’t know where their next meal is coming from. In Monterey County, more than 67,000 people are food insecure.

As our nation faces epidemic rates of diet-related diseases, we have developed a deeper understanding of the value of high-quality food. Food banks around the state place a high value on distributing fresh fruits and vegetables to people in need.

Ocean Mist Farms is a stalwart supporter, contributing more than 1 million pounds of produce last year to a California Association of Food Banks (CAFB) program called Farm to Family. Not far away, a Watsonville farming operation, Driscoll Berries, donated 4 million pounds of berries last year to local food banks. This year, the state’s farmers and ranchers are expected to donate approximately 135 million pounds of product to food banks through the Farm to Family program alone. Many support other outstanding efforts, such as Ag Against Hunger in Monterey County, which provides well over 11 million pounds of produce to food banks and distribution agencies each year.

As advocates for food banks, we’re hoping the numbers will increase. One measure that may help is legislation passed last year to create a state tax credit for 10 percent of the inventoried value of fresh fruit and vegetable donations to food banks. If growers have product available but not a workable logistical operation for donations, CAFB may be able to provide funding to cover picking and pack-out costs.

CAFB is committed to moving product quickly from farm or packing house, helping to free dock, cooler and warehouse space. This can reduce farmer costs by eliminating dumping fees and allowing coolers to be emptied and turned off, saving energy costs. When a donation is accepted, CAFB provides reliable on-time pick up from a professional carrier. CAFB can move truckloads of inventory within 24 to 48 hours. Regular weekly pickups can also be scheduled.

State board (of food and agriculture) members, many of them farmers, are making contributions and encouraging friends, neighbors and associates to join in. J. Miles Reiter, CEO of Driscoll, says the objective is to get nutritious foods to people rather than the landfill.

The process is simple, said Fresno County almond grower and state board member Marvin Meyers.

“We just called our handler, told him how much product we wanted to contribute, and that was all there was to it,” he said.

We envision a day when farmers plant a small percentage of their crop for the benefit of those in need. With a streamlined food bank system in place, the availability of a tax credit and the ability to help cover some production costs, we hope all farmers and ranchers will consider joining us.

Karen Ross is California secretary of food and agriculture. Sue Sigler is executive director of the California Association of Food Banks. More information: cafoodbanks.org or, for the Farm to Family Program, SteveLinkhart@cafoodbanks.org

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:44:20-07:00October 16th, 2013|

INTERVIEW WITH DAN GERAWAN

UFW and ALRB Want to Impose Contract on Gerawan Employees

“The UFW won an election to represent Gerawan workers 23 years ago; but then, after only one bargaining session, the union disappeared and hasn’t been heard from in 20 years,” Gerawan Farming said in a recent statement. “Last October, the union reappeared and is using decade-old legislation to now impose a contract on the employer and the employees without a vote.”

California Ag Today associate editor Laurie Greene interviewed Dan Gerawan this week on what he is going through regarding the UFW and ALRB.

Greene: Please introduce your company’s products, # employees, etc.

Dan Gerawan: Gerawan Farming Inc., which grows and ships under the Prima label, is the world’s largest peach grower and employs about 3,000 workers. The company also farms table grapes, nectarines, and plums. We are a family-owned and operated company. Despite our size, I farm with my father, Ray, my brother, Mike, and my wife, Norma. We are very hands-on; this is what we do.

Greene: There are press reports that Gerawan is having a dispute with the UFW. What is that dispute?

Gerawan: We are not having a dispute with the UFW. Our employees are having a dispute. As a company, our dispute is with the state government that is trying to force a contract on us without giving the workers an opportunity to vote. People need to understand that this is not a normal union situation; it has to do with a law being used for something it was never meant for.

Greene: What is your stance on employees having a vote?

Gerawan: We believe the employees should have a vote, and they have made it known they want a vote. They are not saying how they will vote; they just want a vote. When they often express their opinions to us, we stop them and say, “Don’t tell us your preference; we support your right to vote, that’s enough. Everything else is your choice.”

Greene: Can you describe the chronology of your circumstances with the UFW and ALRB?

Gerawan: We lost an election with the UFW in 1990. We had our only bargaining session in 1995. There was never a contract, and the union failed to continue bargaining. The union disappeared; they abandoned our workers.

To this day, we don’t know why. They have told us, “We have no legal obligation to tell you.” We responded, “But you do have a moral obligation. How can you come back after 20 years and tell our workers that you want 3% of their money or you are going to fire them?”

The UFW wrote us a letter in October 2012 saying, “We’re ready to negotiate.” At the time, we couldn’t believe it since the employees didn’t even know they were represented by the union and had been working quite happily earning the industry’s highest wages. But then attorneys explained to us that the UFW would force us into a mandatory process where the state would actually impose the contract on us and our employees, and we would have no right to opt out.

So, the UFW pretended to negotiate for a while. After just eight brief bargaining sessions over a three-month period, during which the UFW never made an economic proposal, the UFW suddenly asked the government to step in to write and impose a contract us.

Greene: Can you explain the Mandatory Mediation Law?

Gerawan: In 2002, the state legislature passed an amendment to 1975’s Agricultural Labor Relations Act. That amendment allowed for mandatory mediation to be imposed in ag labor situations. However, ‘mediation’ is a misnomer; it is really mandatory arbitration. The legislature passed the law in response to a few employers, including one employer (not us) who supposedly dragged out negotiations for many years, 20 years in that particular case.

When the legislature passed that 2002 law, their thought was that that if an employee votes for a union, they are voting for a contract. However, in most industries, employees vote for representation and negotiation for a contract. This is not a normal situation where the union comes in to negotiate, with power, backing up the workers, and then the two parties negotiate a mutual agreement. This is the union invoking a law that allows the state to literally force a contract on the employer and employees.

Keep in mind that the law was meant to remedy dragged-out negotiations. There were no negotiations here to drag out; the union had disappeared. There is nothing in the legislative history that shows the law was to be used in these situations. The UFW’s and ALRB’s stance is basically, “The letter of the law… says if you failed to reach an ‘agreement,’ we can invoke this.” We responded, “That implies that you tried to reach an agreement. You guys never tried. You went away.” Their response, “Well the law doesn’t say we had to try, so we are using that law now to impose a contract.”

Greene: How do you respond to ALRB’s accusations of coercion and forgeries?

Gerawan: The Company has done nothing to coerce any signatures. We do not know anything about forgeries. We don’t know how many there supposedly are. We don’t know who caused those forgeries, and by that I mean I don’t know if they are saying we caused them or the union caused them.

It doesn’t take any coercion for the highest paid employees in the industry to realize that it is wrong for a union to come back after a twenty-year absence and tell them they will take 3% of their pay or fire them—without a vote. Not even a vote to ratify any contract that might happen.

After hearing this for a few months and being harassed at their homes multiple times by UFW people, the employees, on their own, began a decertification effort. They started a petition and turned it in to the ALRB. Immediately, the UFW started filing unfair labor practice charges against us saying that we were coercing our employees. That is silly.

We did not coerce, and in fact we invited ALRB to go out to our fields to make sure the workers understood they have the right to vote however they want. The ALRB did that.

We also did that. My wife, Norma, and I met with all the employees and told them, “Do whatever you want, choose however you want to choose. But congratulations on having achieved that right through your petition. We are not asking how you will vote.”

Greene: Could the signatures have been forged after you submitted them?

Gerawan: I really don’t know. All I know is thousands of signatures apparently were delivered.

Keep in mind, the union does not want the employees to have a choice, and they are fighting hard to stop the employees from having a choice, especially when the adjudicating agency has shown overwhelming bias against the employer and the employees.

The ALRB’s role, under the Agriculture Labor Relations Act, is to protect employees’ rights as a whole and to cause peace in the fields (which we had before the UFW and ALRB came into the situation). So why is the ALRB stopping the employees from having their vote just because of a relatively few questionable signatures from an unknown source?

After all, this is merely a vote.

We need to keep in mind that this is a declining union that has been gone for twenty years, has done nothing for these workers, and has returned only to pick the pockets of the industry’s highest paid workers and not even allow them to have a vote. I think it is unconscionable that the ALRB has done nothing to stop it, but in fact has taken every opportunity to accommodate this travesty.

Greene: Gerawan Farming has claimed that the ruling by Silas Shawver, regional director of ALRB, failed to provide a count of signatures filed, the number needed for a vote, and the number judged invalid.

Gerawan: This is correct. The ALRB blocked the election citing forgeries and coercion. Mr. Shawver is refusing to give out any information.

My wife and I informed our employees that the ALRB regional director in Visalia canceled their vote because supposedly we and the management of our company coerced our workers’ signatures. Our employees told me flat out that the only coercion has come from UFW and ALRB themselves.”

To continue this interview, please press “more” below!

Greene: What is behind the ALRB’s finding that Gerawan directly assisted the petitioner and others in the decertification effort?

Gerawan: We have not directly assisted the petitioner. So, what the ALRB is saying is not true. It is simply did not happen.

When the employees turned in their petition, the ALRB did not announce an election. The employees got very upset and demonstrated at the ALRB office in Visalia to demand their right to vote.

ALRB did not respond, but subsequently cancelled the vote, citing forgeries and coercion. The regional director is refusing to give out any information.

So, on September 30,over 1,500 of our employees reacted by going on strike to protest the ALRB’s and UFW’s cancellation of the vote. We thought we’d be harvesting peaches and grapes that day, but we didn’t.

Greene: Did Gerawan support the stoppage?

Gerawan: Oh no, we did not support the stoppage. We support the workers’ right to choose. But we did not want to see work stopped because we had fruit to harvest that day. But because the workers did stop, the cost for us was significant.

Greene: In a statement you said, “It is unfortunate that our employees felt they needed to take such a drastic action to have their voices heard. We are still hopeful that [the board] will protect the workers’ right to choose.” Are employees grateful for your company’s advocacy or opposed?

Gerawan: The employees have told us that they are grateful that we support their right to choose. At no time have we ever expressed a preference to them one way or the other. We want them to choose.

Greene: What rights do the UFW and ALRB have?

Gerawan: The UFW itself doesn’t have much power because they have such a small membership and are declining, but they have been handed an inordinate amount of power by the legislature. With such power, the UFW no longer needs workers’ support. They no longer need to organize the way a normal union organizes. Their members are created by legislation, not a vote.

We are about to have a contract literally written for us by a state agency and imposed on us. No one signs anything. Neither we nor our employees can opt out.

This type of ag labor unrest hasn’t happened since the 60’s and 70’s, and back then it was completely the opposite of what’s happening now. Back then, the workers wanted union and government protections. Now, the workers are fighting to be free from union coercion and government imposition. It’s hard to believe that the very law that was created to protect farm worker rights is now being used to rob those workers of their rights.

Greene: Why do you think the UFW is targeting Gerawan Farms?

Gerawan: I think they are going after the old abandoned elections.

We have the highest paid employees in the table grapes and tree fruit industry. No one disputes that, not even the union.

By the way, the union has no contracts with table grapes or stone fruit farm employees, and they have not been able to secure any. The last contract they had was with a Hanford farmer, and after a few years, those workers voted to throw the union out.

Clearly we are the biggest target, especially for a union that now is barely 3,000 members. If they prevail against our employees, this would double their size. Overnight, the majority of UFW members will be co-opted members created by legislative fiat, not by worker choice. The UFW needs this badly because their expenses exceed their income, and this is all public knowledge.

Greene: What is the employer mandated to do?

Gerawan: To live within the terms of the contract. There will be no other option. As an example of what the imposed contract will do, it will throw out our meritocracy, which has been an important part of our success, and replace it with seniority. That’s something we specifically told the ALRB arbitrator would harm us.

We made it clear to the ALRB, “Do not mess with that. We have been a shining example of success in creating high wages in an industry that has had a lot of failures. Don’t mess with our formula for success, please.” They completely ignored our plea.

Imagine any business having a contract written by the state and imposed on them–wages, working conditions and everything else. It’s hard to believe that it is actually happening, especially when we’re already paying the highest wages and benefits.

Greene: Did they have to prove any wrongdoing to do this?

Gerawan: To invoke mandatory mediation there has to be an unfair labor practice. We were found guilty of an unfair labor practice in the 1990s after the election. I think it was for laying off a crew at the end of the season.

Now that the union has come back, we have more unfair labor practice allegations. For example, for the buses to Sacramento, that we had nothing to do with, we have an unfair labor practice charge against us. For the employee walk out, that we had nothing to do with and which cost us a huge amount of money, we have an unfair labor charge against us.

Who adjudicates them? The ALRB. A charge does not mean you are truly guilty of doing something; it only means that the union has accused you of something.

Greene: What are your other unfair labor practice charges?

Gerawan: There have been many. It seems to be part of the game. For example, last October, when the union came in, we felt compelled to let our employees know about this. With our lawyers’ review, we sent our employees a letter with the facts only, but we received an unfair labor practice charge just for that.

So, because the UFW suddenly decides to reappear after being gone twenty years, we can no longer communicate with our employees?

Once the union files an unfair labor practice charge, the ALRB investigates, which takes months. Then, they will often side with the union against the employer and file official changes, which will eventually be heard by an administrative law judge. It could be a year or more before the facts come out. Meanwhile, the ALRB and UFW use those charges to damage your reputation, even though there has been no proper discovery or hearing.

Plus, if the unfair labor charge is used to block an election, and the investigation takes months, then the available time window for the election will probably lapse, and the employees’ right to a vote will be taken away from them. The system actually seems designed for that to happen.

Greene: Is there a pattern of unfair labor practices against you?

Gerawan: They come in batches. We got seven a few days ago for the bus trip, the strike, for whatever they conjure up. The unfair labor practice charges are just one or two sentences. From the union standpoint, they fill out a form, and then ALRB does the rest. ALRB sends their team of investigators out to “prove or disprove the unfair labor practice,” but I do not think they want to disprove anything. The ALRB has shown a clear pattern of wanting to rob our employees of their right to choose.

Greene: Gerawan is well known in taking good care of their employees. With this in mind, what could the UFW offer that is missing?

Gerawan: First of all, wage-wise, we are far above the rest of the industry. In fact, many in the industry have told me that they cannot believe that this is happening to the company that pays the highest wages and offers the best working conditions.

So what could the UFW possibly offer? Whatever it is that the state feels it can force the grower to pay whether or not it makes sense or is viable for the business. Again, this is not a normal situation where union organizers represent workers at the bargaining table.

Greene: What is it like for your employees?

Gerawan: The employees have told me that they cannot believe this is happening to them. They say they left Mexico because of things like this. They said, “You wait Dan, we’re going to have a vote.” I said, guys, I hope you do, but you may not have the chance. The employees said, “What do you mean? This is America! When the state hears that all we want is to vote, then they will understand.”

I had to tell them that I was sorry that this it is such a tragedy. We all assume that we will have the simple basic right to vote, but apparently that’s not how it is anymore.

Greene: You have met with Sylvia Torres-Guillén, the general counsel with the California ALRB. How did your conversation go with her?

Gerawan: Yes, my wife and I met her during one of our hearings. She was very cordial. We both had just heard my attorney tell the Judge that ALRB was so biased that it would never let our workers have a vote. We told her that we hoped that she would prove my attorney wrong because our employees need her help to protect their right to vote.

She said she would let them vote if… at which point I politely interrupted and pleaded to her that it was her responsibility to get rid of the “if,” and to make sure the rights of the workers were protected so that peace would be restored to our fields.

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-10-25T21:53:22-07:00October 14th, 2013|

YOU-PICK-IT AT APPLE HILL

–>

Plenty of Time to Visit Apple Hill and Pick Apples

The Apple Hill Growers Association (AHGA), located in Camino, Cedar Grove, Placerville and Pollock Pines, CA, was once a fledgling association comprised of 5 ranches.

Growers on these ranches began with a well-founded hope in strong families and a future in farming traditions. Many of the original families have passed those traditions on to the next generations.

The Association will be celebrating 50 years in 2014 and has over 50 ranches including fruit growers, bake shops, wineries, a micro-brewery, a spa and Christmas tree growers.

“Thoughts of the spring blossom season in our orchards, fields and vineyards sustain us during the long winters and give time for planning improvements for the coming season,” said Lynn Larsen, AHGA President. “As the summer season approaches, we welcome our new and returning guests that visit our year-round wineries, brewery and fruit stands.

Fresh local berries, cherries, pears, peaches and a large variety of fabulous apples supply us with fruits from May through December. Fall pumpkins and gourds color the way to the Christmas season that opens with choosing a fresh tree from our many tree growers.” Larsen also suggests visitors will enjoy the beautiful scenic drive on country roads that lead to all of the activities offered.

California Ag Today staff makes an annual pilgrimage to Apple Hill to pick apples, and we highly recommend a visit.

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:44:20-07:00October 14th, 2013|

Farm Bill Conference Committee Named

Boehner Names Californian Rep. Jeff Denham

As Part of Farm Bill Conf. Committee

WASHINGTON, DC – House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) TODAY named the following House Republican negotiators to serve on the House-Senate Conference Committee charged with resolving differences between the House and Senate-passed Farm Bills:

“The Farm Bill extension measures passed by the House include much-needed reforms that cut spending and help strengthen our agriculture and food stamp programs. I’m confident that the negotiating team named today will do an excellent job of ushering these reforms through Congress and to the president’s desk, and I thank each of them for their willingness to serve.”

NOTE: Here are the House Republicans the Speaker is naming to serve on the House-Senate conference committee:

Leadership conferee:

• Rep. Steve Southerland (R-FL)

House Agriculture Committee conferees:

• Rep. Frank D. Lucas (R-OK), chairman of the House Agriculture Committee

• Rep. Steve King (R-IA)

• Rep. Randy Neugebauer (R-TX)

• Rep. Mike Rogers (R-AL)

• Rep. Mike Conaway (R-TX)

• Rep. Glenn ‘GT’ Thompson (R-PA)

• Rep. Austin Scott (R-GA)

• Rep. Rick Crawford (R-AR)

• Rep. Martha Roby (R-AL)

• Rep. Kristi Noem (R-SD)

• Rep. Jeff Denham (R-CA)

• Rep. Rodney Davis (R-IL)

House Foreign Affairs Committee conferees:

• Rep. Ed Royce (R-CA), chairman

• Rep. Tom Marino (R-PA)

House Ways & Means Committee conferees:

• Rep. Dave Camp (R-MI), chairman

• Rep. Sam Johnson (R-TX)

– See more at: http://www.speaker.gov/press-release/speaker-boehner-

Denham’s Remarks Following Appointment:

U.S. Representative Jeff Denham (R-Turlock) issued the following statement after being appointed to the conference between the House and Senate on the 2013 Farm Bill:

“I am honored to have been appointed to the Farm Bill Conference Committee. As an almond farmer and representative of California’s Central Valley, where agriculture is one of the primary drivers of the local economy, I know how vital the Farm Bill is to farmers and ranchers, not to mention to the American people who rely on a safe and affordable food supply. The Farm Bill represents significant reforms to long established programs, and I look forward to working with Senate counterparts to produce a final product that will give American growers and producers a competitive and productive global edge while saving taxpayers money.”

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:44:20-07:00October 12th, 2013|

FARM BILL FOR FINAL FACE-OFF

On Table are Food Stamps, Anti-Hunger Program, Crop Insurance

Reuters reported TODAY the final stage of the long-delayed U.S. farm bill is about to begin, but drafting a legislative compromise between the Senate and House of Representatives is still hampered by deep partisan divisions over cuts in food stamps for the poor.

Lawmakers in the House agreed on today to open negotiations with the Senate over a final version of the five-year, $500 billion bill. Its salient agricultural initiative, but one that is mostly not controversial, is an expansion of federally subsidized crop insurance by 10 percent.

The major dispute in the bill is food stamps, which help low-income Americans, mostly children, the elderly or disabled, to buy food. The latest figures show a near-record 47.8 million people received benefits averaging $133 a month.

The Republican-controlled House wants to cut the major U.S. anti-hunger program by $39 billion over a decade, nearly 10 times the reduction proposed by the Democrat-run Senate. The tighter eligibility rules in the House plan would cut 4 million people from the program in 2014.

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor was the leading proponent of the cuts. Virginia Foxx, a North Carolina Republican said, “We believe by reforming food stamps we will save the program for the truly needy,”

House Democrats regard the Republicans as putting an undue burden on recipients.

Jim Clyburn of South Carolina cited language to require food stamp applicants to take a drug test and suggested, “You ought to test all those people getting farm subsidies and see if they are deserving of federal benefits.”

In a tactical move, House Republicans would split the farm bill in two for review in the future. The food stamp program would be considered every three years, while agricultural programs would be on a five-year cycle.

Conservatives say it will be easier to win reforms under that format. Nutrition and farm subsidy programs have been tied together since the 1970s, creating a coalition of farm-state and urban lawmakers.

Colin Peterson of Minnesota, the Democratic leader on the House Agriculture Committee, said the division could mean the end of farm bills, as they have been known until now.

“We need a full conference to work out some big differences,” conceded Frank Lucas, chairman of the House Agriculture Committee.

Congress is a year behind schedule in writing a successor to the 2008 farm law, which expired a year ago and was revived early this year. It died again at the same time the government went into a partial shutdown.

“The big question is if we’re going to get a new farm bill,” said Craig Cox of the Environmental Working Group. “I think there’s a long way to go from where we are today to a farm bill that can pass on the floor of the Senate and the House.”

Democrats voted en masse against food stamp cuts. Tea Party-influenced Republicans assured defeat of the original House farm bill in June because they wanted deeper cuts than the $20 billion proposed. It was the first time the House defeated a farm bill.

Among agricultural provisions, the most contentious are likely to be Senate proposals to require farmers to practice soil conservation to qualify for premium subsidies on crop insurance, and to require the wealthiest growers, with more than $750,000 adjusted gross income a year, to pay a larger share of the premium. The House has rejected similar ideas.

Crop insurance is the largest part of the farm safety net, costing about $9 billion a year.

Source: Reuters

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:44:20-07:00October 12th, 2013|

LOW CORN PRICE MAY HELP DAIRIES IN SHORT TERM

Corn Closed Friday at Its

Lowest Price in 37 Months

In news that could help the ailing California Dairy Industry, the Wall Street Journal reported TODAY that corn closed at its lowest price in 37 months as farmers speed the harvest of what is forecast to be a record crop, boosting availability for processors of food, ethanol and animal feed.

Wheat also declined while soybean prices gained slightly. U.S. corn growers are expected to harvest 13.8 billion bushels this year, the most ever, as yields increase by 26% to 155.3 bushels an acre, according to the Department of Agriculture.

Dry weather in the past week and little rain in the next 72 hours will allow farm-ers to accelerate the harvest, replenishing stockpiles for commercial users and exporters of the grain.

Yields for corn that has been harvested in the U.S. are also coming in better than forecast earlier this year, analysts said. Analysts surveyed by Dow Jones Newswires said they expect yields to total 156.8 bushels an acre, up from USDA’s outlook.

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:44:21-07:00October 12th, 2013|

Previous 147148149 Next