Fighting ACP in California

Fighting ACP In California to Stay Well Ahead of HLB

By Patrick Cavanaugh, Deputy Editor

With more than 275,000 acres of citrus trees in California, keeping the Asian Citrus Psyllid (ACP) out of groves is a serious concern. Bob Blakely, vice president of California Citrus Mutual, based in Exeter, talked to California Ag Today about how growers are fighting ACP in California.

“We’ve been very proactive, ever since the first psyllid was found here back in 2008. We already had an action plan in place when that psyllid was found. We have engaged with and educated the public and the media, and we have very good cooperation with the state’s citizens,” Blakely said.

Tamarixia radiata (female); Mark Lewis, UC Riverside Center for Invasive Species Research

Blakely noted the industry is using a variety of methods, “We are usually able to go in and treat urban areas in Southern California, where ACP is now endemic, with crop protection materials. If we determine we cannot control it with pesticides, we implement a new biological program by releasing the parasitoid Tamarixia (a tiny non-native wasp) in residential areas. The new wasp is becoming well-established, and we are hoping the species will help manage ACP populations.”

“We hope to prevent ACP from creating the type of damage seen in Florida, where the citrus industry has been reduced by 50%,” said Blakely. “We are way ahead of the game here in California. We have managed to slow ACP spread in commercial areas in order stay ahead of the spread of the HLB disease the bug carries. We hope a reasonable cure can be found so we can prevent the kind of devastation we are witnessing in some other states.”

California Ag Today2016-05-31T19:27:10-07:00September 18th, 2015|

Citrus Growers Determined to Succeed

Frustrated Citrus Growers Are Determined to Succeed

By Patrick Cavanaugh, Deputy Editor

While farmers have been dealing with some tough times, Bob Blakely, vice president of California Citrus Mutual is optimistic about future generations of citrus growers, “Perceptions and attitudes are really all over the board; we’ve got growers who are really frustrated and ready to throw it in. But most growers are staying in, thinking they can still make it in the citrus industry.”

“California growers are known for their tenacity in the face of challenges,” Blakely commented. “It’s exciting to see young farmers come on, even though they continue to fight the regulatory battles and higher farming costs. But these young guys have the same determination the prior generation had when they started. So, I am optimistic about the future of the citrus industry in California.”

One of the major threats to citrus is the Asian Citrus Psyllid (ACP) and its potential to spread the disease Huanglongbing (HLB), as it has in Florida and Texas. “We are very concerned about the recent HLB finds. Here again, they have been discovered in residential areas, which is no surprise to us. That is typically where diseases first show up. At the present time, the ACP are contained. We are starting to delimit that area, and residents are very cooperative in allowing those trees to be removed.”

Download the Save Our Citrus App

There is now an iPhone app to help California residents identify signs of the Asian citrus psyllid and HLB, and easily report findings to agriculture officials. Download the free app in the iTunes store.

California Ag Today2016-05-31T19:28:04-07:00September 11th, 2015|

New UC IPM Program Director

Jim Farrar Named Director of UC Statewide IPM Management Program

By Pam Kan-Rice, UCANR Assistant Director, News and Information Outreach

Jim Farrar has been named director of the Statewide Integrated Pest Management Program for the University of California’s Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources. He will begin as new uc ipm program director on Oct. 1.

UC IPM works with growers and residents to protect human health and the environment by reducing risks caused by pests and pest management practices.

Farrar is currently director of the Western IPM Center, where he has served since 2013. He succeeds Kassim Al-Khatib, UC IPM director since 2009, who is transitioning to a UC Cooperative Extension specialist position located in the Department of Plant Sciences at UC Davis. There Al-Khatib will focus on his research in weed management.

“UC IPM is a widely recognized national leader in integrated pest management,” Farrar said. “I am excited to continue efforts to make IPM the standard practice for managing pests in agriculture, communities and natural areas in California.”

Prior to joining the Western IPM Center, Farrar was a professor of plant pathology in the Department of Plant Science at California State University, Fresno for 12 years.

At Fresno State, Farrar received three teaching awards. He taught courses in plant pathology, plant nematology, diagnosis and control of plant diseases, crop improvement, aspects of crop productivity, mycology, sustainable agriculture and advanced pest management. His research centered on fungal diseases of vegetable crops, including management strategies for cavity spot of carrot. During his Fresno State tenure, he served four years as chair of the Department of Plant Science and a year as interim chair of the Department of Food Science and Nutrition.

From 1995 to 1997, Farrar taught in the Botany Department at Weber State University in Ogden, Utah. At Weber State, he conducted research on rock cress plants infected with a rust fungus that causes false-flowers. This rust is closely related to a species that is a potential biological control agent for dyer’s woad (Isatis tinctoris), an invasive weed.

Farrar has published scientific papers, extension newsletter articles, and articles in agricultural industry magazines. He also wrote a chapter in the book Tomato Health Management and five disease descriptions in the book Compendium of Umbelliferous Crop Diseases. He recently completed a three-year term as senior editor for feature articles in the journal Plant Disease and was senior editor for the online journal Plant Health Progress for three years. Farrar is a member of the American Phytopathological Society and the Pacific Division of the American Phytopathological Society.

The Wisconsin native completed his Ph.D. in botany and B.S. in plant pathology at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, and his M.S. in plant pathology at UC Davis.

California Ag Today2016-05-31T19:28:05-07:00September 10th, 2015|

EWG’s “Dirty Dozen” Contradicts Its Own “Food Scores”

Teresa Thorne Speaks Against EWG’s “Dirty Dozen” List

By Charmayne Hefley, Associate Editor

There are constant concerns plaguing consumers about the safety of the foods they eat. As a result, consumers turn to the internet as a way to educate themselves, and oftentimes visit sites such as the Environmental Working Group (EWG) for information. Teresa Thorne of the Alliance for Food and Farming (AFF) said EWG is self-contradictory in its statements of food safety.

“Nine months ago, the Environmental Working Group released the Food Scores database which ranks organic and conventional fruits and vegetables among the best foods for consumers and urges them to eat more,” Thorne said.

And, EWG published the following statement on its website:

No, eat your fruits and vegetables! The health benefits of a diet rich in fruits and vegetables outweigh the risks of pesticide exposure. Eating conventionally grown produce is far better than skipping fruits and vegetables.

“So it’s ironic that four or five months later,” Thorne continued, “they released their Dirty Dozen list again and called those same conventionally grown fruits and vegetables they just said were safe and that consumers should be eat more of, ‘dirty’ and ‘toxin-laden’ in the new release.”

In addition, EWG reports widespread pesticide contamination among many conventionally grown fruits and vegetables with the explanation that a number of pesticides are EPA-approved for each crop, pesticides have been detected in produce and the USDA data reflects these findings. Elsewhere on their website, EWG acknowledges nearly all analyzed samples (99%) did not contain pesticide residues above legal limits—U.S. EPA safety levels or tolerances. EWG counters with an unsupported statement that ‘legal isn’t always safe’.

When the EWG released their food scores database, the AFF commended the group on finally adopting the same message as health experts. Thorne said AFF requested the EWG stop confusing consumers through their ‘Dirty Dozen’ list.

“We called on EWG when they published the Food Scores database to stop issuing the Dirty Dozen list,” Thorne said. “It’s conflicting information and it only confuses consumers.”

Thorne said not only do decades of scientific research back up the safety of consuming conventionally grown produce, the research shows that eating more fruits and vegetables in general prevents disease and premature death.

AFF reports on its website:

Recent research has shown that around 29% of consumers are not purchasing fruits and vegetables due to concerns about pesticide residues. Further, the Centers for Disease Control recently issued a report that consumption of fruits and vegetables continues to decline.

EWG proclaims, “We definitely recommend eating produce from the Dirty Dozen™ list rather than foods or snacks that are not as healthful, such as fat-, sugar- or additive-laden processed products.” Nonetheless, the deterrent name of their list remains unchanged.

“There’s so much research out there,” Thorne said, “that shows the benefit of eating more fruits and vegetables in your diet—both organic and conventionally grown produce. That’s what the message should be for consumers instead of this conflicting information on safe vs. not safe. It’s really inaccurate and unfair. Conventional and organic fruits and vegetables are safe. We should all be eating more. Let’s work together to get that message out to consumers.”

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:28:05-07:00September 10th, 2015|

A Thought on Sustainability

Scott Steinmaus on Getting the Sustainability Message Out

By Charmayne Hefley, Producer and Associate Broadcaster

When considering the longevity of a farmer’s land, the question of the sustainability of modern day farming practices is often raised. Scott Steinmaus, professor and department head of the Horticulture and Crop Science Department at Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, said that it is important to get the message out to consumers that farmers are sustainable because their land is the future for their own children.

“Farmers are sustainable,” Steinmaus said, “even when the general public might say that unsustainable activities might include pesticide applications. There’s no farmer out there who wants to spray pesticides—it costs money. And they don’t want to hand off their land having exposed it to something that’s not sustainable. They have a piece of land, something they value and cherish, and they want to hand it off to their sons or daughters.”

Steinmaus said it is important for consumers to realize that farmers are humans too, and they care about the health of the planet in a way that more directly relates to their careers.

Steinmaus believes it is important for consumers “to understand that direct connection farmers have with the earth, to realize that farmers are humans too, with kids of their own, and to acknowledge that farmers care about the planet more than a lot of urbanites might do themselves. There’s nothing more important than sustainability—minimizing all farm inputs for safe, acceptable food production.”

California Ag Today2016-05-31T19:28:06-07:00August 20th, 2015|

European Farmland Under Pressure

European Farmland under Pressure Due to Regulation and Diversion

By Laurie Greene, Editor

Jose Gomez Carrasco, executive sales manager for AGQ Labs and Technological Services based in Oxnard, is in charge of covering a large area that includes the U.S., Mexico and Central America. Noting global concern regarding how farmland is being used, particularly European farmland, Carrasco said, “There’s a growing population of around 150,000 or 170,000 new mouths every day to feed.” Carrasco said agricultural production on land designated for agricultural use in every country, worldwide, is being diverted to bio-ethanol, or bio-mass, or different renewable energy use, so the availability of agricultural products for food is diminishing.

Carrasco stated this progression needs to be moving in the opposite direction, “especially because there are other issues that are making production more challenging, such as water scarcity, soil erosion and the use and price of agro-chemicals, inputs and fertilizers, all of which are being controlled and monitored more and more.”

“The regulation of crop protection materials is intended to help everyone in the food supply chain,” he continued, “all the way from the grower to the consumer; however, sometimes these regulations can be quite burdensome.”

“In some cases regulations are not for the benefit of all,” Carrasco explained; “just for some. So in markets such as the European Union where the [maximum threshold] number of molecules registered has diminished from 1,000 to 300 or 400 in the last decade, we’re finding a lot of this regulation comes from Germany.” Carrasco said they are leaving a lot of farmers with no agro-chemicals in their arsenal, especially in Spain, Portugal, and Greece, all in southern Europe.

California Ag Today2016-05-31T19:28:07-07:00August 11th, 2015|

#AgLaw: Safe and Accurate Food Labeling – GMOs

H.R.1599 – Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act of 2015

Status/Next Steps:

H.R. 1599, the Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act of 2015 passed the House of Representatives on July 23, 2015 by a recorded vote: 275 – 150. H.R. 1599 has been received in the Senate, read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.

Description:

Sponsored by Rep. Mike Pompeo [R-KS], this bill amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to require the developer of a bioengineered organism intended as food to submit a premarket biotechnology notification to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). A “bioengineered organism” (commonly called a “genetically modified organism” or “GMO”) is a plant or part of a plant that has been modified through recombinant DNA techniques in a way that could not be obtained using conventional breeding techniques.

The developer must determine, and the FDA approve, that the GMO food is as safe as a comparable non-GMO food. If the FDA discovers a material difference between these two foods, the FDA can specify labeling that informs consumers of the difference.

A food can be labelled as “non-GMO” only if the ingredients are subject to certain supply chain process controls. No food label can suggest that non-GMO foods are safer than GMO foods. A food can be labeled as non-GMO even if it is produced with a GMO processing aid or enzyme or derived from animals fed GMO feed or given GMO drugs.

The FDA must allow, but not require, GMO food to be labeled as GMO.
The FDA must regulate the use of “natural” on food labels.
This bill amends the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 to require the Agricultural Marketing Service to establish a program to certify non-GMO food.
This bill preempts state and local restrictions on GMOs or GMO food and labeling requirements for GMOs, GMO food, non-GMO food, or “natural” food.

California Ag Today2016-05-31T19:28:08-07:00August 5th, 2015|

Subsurface Drip in Alfalfa

Subsurface Drip in Alfalfa–A Growing Interest

By Laurie Greene, Editor

Dan Putnam is a faculty member and Cooperative Extension specialist at UC Davis with a statewide responsibility for alfalfa and forage crops. He said there has been an increased interest in subsurface drip irrigation in alfalfa, which is usually flood-irrigated. Alfalfa is a key forage source for the state’s top agricultural product, dairy, to the tune of more than $7 billion per year.

“It does come with some challenges,” but he said, “the growers who have really treated this as an educational experience are continually learning how to manage this system; not only the gophers, but the irrigation management component as well. To establish a crop with drip irrigation, growers need to plant in early fall and use sprinklers to germinate the seeds. A lot of growers fail on agronomic issues, like not planting at the right time of year rather than on drip irrigation issues,” Putnam said.

Putnam noted that growers are more interested in learning about subsurface drip irrigation because of increased yields. “I think over time, we are going to see a greater adaptation of this technology in California,” Putnam explained, “particularly in areas that have very high yield potential. For example, in the San Joaquin Valley and the Imperial low desert areas where the crop is actually capable of 12-16 ton yields, our yields average about 7-8 tons per acre. And so,” he added, “we do have a yield potential that we are unable to achieve, and part of that is in the limitation of surface irrigation.”

Putnam also noted one advantage of drip irrigation is efficient nutrient delivery, which in turn fosters increased uniformity across the system. “Growers can ‘spoon-feed’ the crop rather than inefficiently apply it on the surface,” stated Putnam. “I think a lot of growers have figured this out, although alfalfa does not have a nitrogen issue. Nevertheless, we have to apply significant phosphorous, potassium and several other nutrients in some deficient soils.”

As with most things, there are drawbacks, and Putnam outlined two. “One is an increased cost of the drip line and filtration system,” Putnam said. “Growers who are considering subsurface drip need to wrestle with the cost to be sure they can increase yields enough to justify the cost. In most cases, growers have been able to substantially increase yields in their systems to pay for the $1500-2500 per acre upfront investment in the technology,” he said.

“The other drawback is maintenance,” Putnam continued, “particularly with regard to rodent infestations. We’ve seen gophers, in particular, ground squirrels and meadow voles absolutely devastate drip-irrigation fields. As our vertebrate pest specialist at UC Davis says, ‘It is essentially an ideal habitat for gophers as they have plenty of food, plenty of shelter, plenty of water, and they are able to reproduce pretty readily.’ ”

“You should consider this system only if you are willing to accept a very high level of maintenance and no tolerance for rodent infestation because, if left unchecked, they will chew on the tapes and ruin the system,” he said.

Putnam reported there are strategies to get around gophers and other rodent issues, “You have start clean and do some deep tillage. We also recommend retaining the capability of flood irrigation in those fields to use once in a while because it reaches the furrows very effectively,” he noted.

For those gophers, Putnam recommends every trick in the book. “There are traps organic farmers are able to use, flood irrigation, and boxes to help control the population,” Putnam said. “There are products available for baiting and other types of control measures that should be used. It is really too expensive a system to allow the gophers to have their way with it, so we need to have a high level of management,” he concluded.

California Ag Today2016-07-30T21:43:15-07:00August 3rd, 2015|

Alliance Against Food and Farmer Disparagement

The Alliance for Food and Farming Counters Food and Farmer Disparagement

By Patrick Cavanaugh, Laurie Greene and Courtney Steward, CaliforniaAgToday

Experts around the world agree that eating more fruits and vegetables is the best thing we can do to reduce disease, prevent obesity, and improve our health. But sometimes consumers need to know more about organic and conventional fruits and vegetables so they can make the right shopping choices for themselves and their families.

The Alliance for Food and Farming (AFF), based in Watsonville, is a non-profit organization comprised of both organic and conventional farmers that delivers credible information to consumers about the safety of organic and conventional fruits and vegetables.

According to Teresa Thorne, with AFF, “Many organizations such as Friends of the Earth (FOE), and the Environmental Working Group (EWG) are at odds with AFF for providing science-based and peer-reviewed information to consumers so they can make good shopping choices for their families.”

“Whether consumers purchase organic or conventional produce, both are safe,” Thorne said. “Health experts say simply that we should be eating more. Decades of nutrition science and health experts everywhere support the recommendation to eat more organic and conventional produce every day for better health. So, it is a little puzzling why FOE and some of the other activist groups would be concerned about that message. But, apparently they are.”

“So, what we are trying to do,” explained Thorne “is present accurate and more balanced information for consumers. Our Board of Directors, nearly 7 years ago, established that calling our healthy and safe produce “dirty” or “toxic” has to stop. We are not going to allow the disparagement of these nutritious products and the disparagement of the farmers who are working hard every single day to provide these healthy products to consumers, to stand.”

Thorne said, “So, AFF got in gear to stop it, largely by going toe-to-toe with the EWG’s so-called ‘Dirty Dozen’ list—one of the main vehicles of product disparagement. Not long ago, when the EWG published the list, nearly all newspapers, television networks and cable channels gave it widespread media coverage in major media markets and publications.”

AFF has achieved some success by introducing peer-reviewed science from experts into consumer media, with the credible message that both organic and conventional produce are safe, healthful, and people should eat more of them every day. “Just in the course of the last six years of the campaign,” said Thorne, “we’ve seen coverage of the EWR list diminish to the extent that in 2015, only one daily newspaper in Ohio covered the story. So their message is mostly limited to blogs for those who are very friendly to their message.”

Aside from the “Dirty Dozen” list, the EWG website does support the same scientific research as the Alliance:

Should we eat more fruits and vegetables?

…The health benefits of a diet rich in fruits and vegetables outweigh the risks of pesticide exposure. Eating conventionally grown produce is far better than skipping fruits and vegetables. And with EWG’s Shopper’s Guide™, consumers don’t have to choose between pesticides and healthy diets.

Do all these pesticides mean I shouldn’t eat fruits and vegetables?

No, eat your fruits and vegetables! The health benefits of a diet rich in fruits and vegetables outweigh the risks of pesticide exposure. Use EWG’s Shopper’s Guide™ to reduce your exposures as much as possible, but eating conventionally grown produce is better than not eating fruits and vegetables at all.

Shouldn’t I try to buy everything organic?

EWG recommends buying organic whenever possible.

…However, we know that organics are not accessible or affordable for everyone, so we created the Shopper’s Guide™ to help consumers make the healthiest choices given their circumstances.

…EWG always recommends eating fruits and vegetables, even conventionally grown, over processed foods and other less healthy alternatives.

AFF claims on its website:

We have an obesity epidemic and current media and internet reporting is increasing fears consumers have about eating fruits and vegetables and is lowering the faith people have in the government regulations implemented to protect them. It is inaccurate to suggest that organic is the only safe choice when it comes to selecting safe fruits and vegetables; because there is no scientific consensus to substantiate this claim.

-See more at the Alliance’s website, SafeFruitsandVeggies.com.

Thorne believes the Alliance’s success has lead to another activist group, Friends of the Earth (FOE), taking them on. Thorne said FOE is trying to discredit the Alliance by calling it a “front group”.

In its “Spinning Food” report, published in June 2015, the FOE reports:

While the Alliance presents itself as a science-based resource on the safety of organic and conventional produce, its funding comes from trade groups for industrially grown apples, citrus, pears and grapes, among other industry groups.

The “leading corporate Board Members or Donors” of the Alliance are listed as:

-California Farm Bureau Federation

-Western Growers

-Produce Marketing Association

Wikipedia defines a front organization as “any entity set up by and controlled by another organization, such as intelligence agencies, organized crime groups, banned organizations, religious or political groups, advocacy groups, or corporations. Front organizations can act for the parent group without the actions being attributed to the parent group.”

Thorne stated, “We’re not a front group. We are who we are—very transparent. The entire tax return is posted on the “About Us” section of the AFF website, as well as:

Who is Behind the Alliance for Food and Farming? and How is the Alliance for Food and Farming funded?

“But they never attack the scientific content we present,” stated Thorne, “and that really underscores our science is good and solid. They only try to discredit the organization itself with those unfounded ‘front group’ allegations.”

California Ag Today2016-05-31T19:28:08-07:00July 31st, 2015|

California Safe Soil Honored

California Safe Soil Honored By Forbes Reinventing America

By Patrick Cavanaugh, Associate Editor, California Ag Today

At the recent invitation-only Forbes Ag Tech Summit “Reinventing America: The AgTech Summit” in Salinas, California Safe Soil (CSS) was awarded the Thrive Accelerator Sustainability Award. The Thrive Accelerator program is a highly selective mentorship and investment program for technology-enabled startups in precision agriculture.

Mark Bauer, California Safe Soil

Mark Bauer, director of business development for CSS said, “Forbes just started this process over a year ago when they interviewed over 100 companies throughout the world. About three months ago they notified us we were among the top ten finalists, and today we found out we won the Sustainability Award! So we are extremely pleased and quite honored to receive that award, ” said Bauer.

California Safe Soil, based in West Sacramento, is a fresh food recycler that increases a farm’s productivity at a low cost, while helping to improve the environment. The company converts food that supermarkets cannot sell or donate into its Harvest to Harvest (H2H) fertilizer which promotes sustainable agriculture by returning nutrients to the soil and increasing plant vigor and crop yield.

“We think it is really important to find sustainable solutions in agriculture today,” Bauer explained. “We have partnered with Save Mart Supermarkets because Save Mart recognized the value of our process. We take all of the organic food waste that Save Mart can’t sell or donate, interrupt that trip to the landfill, and we put it through a three-hour enzymatic-digestion process that takes all the available food energy and forms it into small particles that growers apply to the roots of their crops through their existing drip lines.”

Bauer noted, “We are seeing terrific response in a number of crops, especially with strawberries, raspberries and processing tomatoes. We are growing thousands of acres of almond trees right now and seeing great results. We’ve been working in the areas of leafy greens as well growing broccoli, cabbage and lettuce crops,” he said.

California Safe Soil (CSS)

“The H2H material moves with the irrigation water through the drip or micro-sprinklers and supercharges the soil microbes,” Bauer explained. “After it goes through our process, the H2H material is composed amino acids, fatty acids and simple sugars–not what plants eat, but what soil biology needs. H2H is the food for the microbiology of the soil; it makes the micronutrients and macronutrients in the soil more available to the plant,” he said.

CSS’s unique full-cycle process assists supermarket customers in recycling their organics, improving store hygiene, and reducing costs. In addition, H2H is a safe, low-cost, high-volume and high-quality liquid fertilizer that helps agricultural customers save money, increase crop yield, and reduce nitrate runoff. These benefits deliver improved quality in air, water, and soil environments, while employing safe, efficient, and effective solutions.

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:28:09-07:00July 27th, 2015|