SB 1 Is the Same Bad Legislation in a New Dress

SB 1: Bad legislation is bad legislation

Opinion From GVwire

By Bill McEwen

It doesn’t matter how many times you try to dress it up. Or bring it back with a new number.

SB 1 is not only redundant, anti-science, and a barrier to environmental progress, it would put a brake on California’s economy, too.

We’re talking about Senate Bill 1, which is officially titled the California Environmental, Public Health, and Workers Defense Act of 2019.

Senate President Pro Tem Toni Atkins (D-San Diego) says the bill is an “insurance policy against the exploitation of our natural resources and our people.”

Related Story: ‘Job Killer’ Bill Nears Final Vote. Who Supports, Who’s …

SB 1 Is Flawed Overreaction to Trump Administration

But, at its heart, SB 1 is a highly flawed overreaction to a Trump administration that many state Democratic leaders and their environmental allies have called “anti-science.”

If it passes the Legislature and is signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom, the bill would empower state agencies to adopt rules and regulations that they determine are more stringent than federal rules and regulations adopted after Jan. 19, 2017.Tuolumne River-Modesto Irrigation District

For the record: Donald Trump was sworn into office Jan. 20, 2017. That’s not a coincidence.

This bill has little to do with ensuring clean water and air, protecting wildlife, and standing up for workers. The real goal is to provide a legislative vehicle for Democratic lawmakers to polish their “Trump resistance” credentials ahead of the 2020 elections.

We are confident in saying that because many of California’s environmental and labor protections already are more stringent than their federal counterparts. Moreover, California has ample tools to fend off unwise decrees from the Trump administration.

This bill has little to do with ensuring clean water and air, protecting wildlife, and standing up for workers. The real goal is to provide a legislative vehicle for Democratic lawmakers to polish their “Trump resistance” credentials ahead of the 2020 elections.

SB 1 Rolls Back Scientific Advances

One big problem with SB 1 is that it would wipe out the gains the scientific community has made since 2017 in understanding what has contributed to the decline of the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. This new knowledge is opening the door to helping imperiled fished populations such as salmon while freeing water for cities and industries, including agriculture.

“Over the last 30 years, several fish species have continued to decline despite significant expenditures and diversion curtailments mandated by Endangered Species Act rulings,” writes Rick Gilmore, general manager of the Byron-Bethany Irrigation District spanning Alameda, Contra Costa, and San Joaquin counties.

“New procedures and agreements (negotiated by the Brown administration), which incorporate new species management science, are currently being incorporated and scrutinized by the federal and state fish agencies. These updated methods should be deployed and evaluated rather than stymied and derailed. The new science and better practices present the best available option for species recovery.”

And, although Atkins says revisions have allayed fears that voluntary environmental agreements praised statewide won’t be handcuffed by SB 1, the bill’s opponents rightfully continue to be skeptical of such claims.

Bill Is a ‘Job Killer’

SB 1 is not only redundant, anti-science, and a barrier to environmental progress, it would put the brakes on California’s economy, too.

“Due to costs and anticipated litigation associated with SB 1, companies doing business in the state would be hard-pressed to hire more workers or expand California operations,” says the California Chamber of Commerce, which calls the bill “a job killer.”

Earlier Version Died, So Should This One

Two years ago, then-state Senate President Pro Tem Kevin de León pushed SB 49, a bill nearly identical to SB 1. Just like Atkins’ bill, it passed the upper house. However, de León’s version nose-dived in the Assembly.

SB 1 deserves the same fate. It’s flawed legislation driven by a knee-jerk reaction to President Trump. And it’s bad for California — especially those inland regions, like the Valley, that Newsom has promised to help.

Newsom should weigh in immediately to fix SB 1’s substantial flaws. If it reaches his desk without those revisions, he should veto it.

https://gvwire.com/2019/07/24/editorial-sb-1-is-the-same-bad-legislation-in-a-new-dress/

2019-08-11T13:45:50-07:00August 11th, 2019|

Generic Pistachio Marketing Has Big Value

Analysis: Export Markets Shows Nearly $3 billion Post-Tariff Shipment Increase Resulting From U.S. Pistachio Industry’s Generic Program.

American Pistachio Growers’ (APG) efforts to reduce or eliminate trade barriers in several key overseas markets have been a significant boon to pistachio exports and to growers’ bottom-line. A new study, “An Analysis of the Effects of the American Pistachio Growers’ Program to Reduce/Eliminate Tariffs on U.S. Pistachios,” has quantified, for the first time, the direct benefit to the U.S. pistachio industry from APG’s strategic program to vanquish trade barriers.

The analysis from Dr. Dennis H. Tootelian, an emeritus Professor of Marketing, sought to determine what shipments of U.S. pistachios would have been if tariffs had not been lowered or eliminated in Israel, Mexico, China and Hong Kong, and the European Union which are the export markets prioritized for focus by APG. Many of his analyses centered on the period from 2009 through 2017 — the period in which tariffs were reduced in all five geographic areas.

Tootelian’s study showed that actual shipments of U.S. pistachios after the tariffs were reduced or eliminated for each export market were more than 2.3 billion pounds greater than what would have been expected had the tariffs remained in place. Equated in economic terms, the boost in export volume after the trade barriers had been removed amounted to nearly $3 billion greater value than what would have been expected had the tariffs remained in effect.

While Tootelian did not have any prior expectations of what his study would show, he was surprised by the findings.

“To see this kind of an increase in shipments on a before and after basis with the tariffs did surprise me. I did not expect this kind of result in the marketplace. These are not small numbers,” Tootelian said.   “What the data tell me is that there is latent demand for U.S. pistachios and once the tariffs come down, foreign markets want to buy them.”

Tootelian said the projected economic boon to U.S. growers is even more profound if the fluctuations in prices in China and Hong Kong were eliminated from the analysis.

“If you take the price fluctuations in China and Hong Kong out, the increase in value of pistachio shipments amounts to nearly $355 million more dollars per year — nearly $4.5 billion in total from the time when tariffs were in effect to after they were reduced or eliminated,” said Tootelian.

Data from the analysis estimated that more than 1.7 billion pounds of U.S. pistachios in total, or an average of more than 192 million pounds annually, may  have gone into storage if they were not diverted to other markets. While the effect of the projected added supply on the world market is unknown in terms of lower prices, Tootelian said that it would surely have had a detrimental impact on U.S. growers.

“It is unknown what that would have done to the price,” he said. “In order to divert from storage and into other markets, prices probably would have had to come down considerably and whether they would have been able to market that much supply is an unknown.”

Underlying Tootelian’s analysis is the fact that price is not the sole determinant of the volume of U.S. pistachio exports. He said when tariffs are lowered or eliminated, traditional economics would dictate that increased shipments would lead to lower prices, but his data show demand for U.S. pistachios in some key markets remained high in the post-tariff era.  Several factors, he said, appear to be in play.

“One is the reputation of U.S. pistachios, which carries a very positive market image with consumers and importers. Second, it could be the quality of the product is better or more consistent, or both, for what consumers can buy from other countries,” said Tootelian. “And third, there are a lot of reputable health studies that show nuts are healthy and nutritious.  APG has invested considerable resources raising consumer awareness of the healthful attributes of pistachios, and consumers appear to be willing to pay a higher price. That is pretty clear from the data.”

APG has aggressively worked in the halls of Congress, with U.S. trade officials and with foreign governmental bodies to alleviate burdensome trade barriers and create a more open market for U.S-grown pistachios.

“Quantifying the value of APG’s efforts to growers has been difficult up to now, but this new study gives us some tangible answers to the importance of the work we are doing on behalf of the U.S. pistachio industry,” said Richard Matoian, APG’s executive director. “Frankly, we were quite surprised at the magnitude of these numbers.  It’s our strong belief that whenever and wherever trade barriers exist to the free flow of American-grown pistachios around the world, we will confront them vigorously.”

In a postscript to his analysis, Tootelian added, “If I were a grower, I would be encouraging APG to be doing this more in other markets because the greater the demand there is for the product, the less goes into storage and that helps boost the price.”

2019-08-10T09:33:07-07:00August 10th, 2019|

China Threatens All US Agriculture

Trade War Escalates Into Worse Case Scenario

This week, China announced that state-owned companies have suspended purchases of U.S. agricultural products.  Additionally, China may impose import tariffs on newly purchased U.S. agricultural products after August 3. This announcement, so far, does not pre-empt purchases from non-state-owned enterprises.

The Chinese Ministry of Commerce says that this action is in retaliation for the proposed ten percent tariffs announced by the U.S. on $300 billion of Chinese imports, which may be in place on September 1.

A trade meeting between US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and Chinese officials was held last week in China. The goal of the meeting was to restart the trade negotiations that had ended in May. Another meeting is planned for early September.

In 2017, California farmers/ranchers exported $2.27 billion in agricultural products to China/Hong Kong. The market ranked third for California farm exports, behind the European Union ($3.4 billion) and Canada ($3.3 billion).

Top California farm exports to China in 2017 were:

Pistachios – $663.3 millionAlmonds – $500.8 millionWine – $185.3 millionDairy and products – $174.9 millionOranges and products – $123.8 million

The full list can be found here, on Page 11 of the 15-page PDF file. 
Lastly, USDA recently rolled out updated trade data that indicated the U.S. exported $19.5 billion of agricultural products to China in 2017.  As a result of retaliatory tariffs, agricultural exports were reduced to $9.1 billion in 2018 and have continued to decline, with a $1.3 billion drop in the first half of 2019. 
Source: CFBF Federal Policy Division
2019-08-11T13:43:26-07:00August 8th, 2019|

Almond Harvest Underway

A Whole Lot of Almond Shaking is Going On Throughout California

By Patrick Cavanaugh, Editor

It’s a busy time of year for the almond industry as harvest is going strong. It starts in Kern county and moves all the way north or Chico. It will take nearly two months to get across 1.4 million acres, and it’s going to be about a 2.2 billion pound crop, which is down 3.5% from 2018 where the production was about 2.28 billion pounds. It was less than ideal weather conditions in the spring, which caused us dip in production.

However California remains the best place in the world to grow almonds. It’s all about the Mediterranean climate in California— long hot summers with the rain and cold in the winter, ideal for almond trees.

Navel Orangeworm is a critical pest in almonds, pistachios and in a lesser way for walnuts. And they continue to be a significant pest during  almond harvest season as the adult moths can lay eggs, which can pupate later in almonds turning them off-grade. Once shaking is done and the almonds are picked up out of the field, it’s important to get that crop out of the orchard as soon as possible to minimize navel orange worm infestation.

Almonds are the first tree nut to be harvested. Later on, pistachios will start, following that we’ll be walnuts.

 

2019-08-08T10:54:00-07:00August 7th, 2019|

Westlands Water District Helps Mendota Boys/Girls Club Stay Open

Westlands Board of Directors Contribute $36,000 To keep Club Open

Edited By Patrick Cavanaugh

Recently, Westlands Water District Board of Directors voted unanimously to contribute $36,000 to the Boys & Girls Club of Mendota. In a letter to Westlands’ Board, Kathryn Weakland of the Boys & Girls Club explained that without immediate funding the Club was at risk of closing,

“The shortfall is due to: increased operating costs, minimum wage increases and lack of sustainable funding sources.” Robert Silva, the Mayor of the City of Mendota, addressed the Board during the meeting expressing the importance of the Boys & Girls Club providing services to children in the City. Westlands Water District Board President Don Peracchi thanked Mayor Silva, City Manager Cristian Gonzales and the Boys & Girls Club of Mendota for allowing Westlands the opportunity to support the community.

Robert Silva, mayor of Mendota

Robert Silva, Mendota Mayor

The Boy & Girls Club of Mendota serves over 300 children, 95 percent of whom live in public housing near the club. All the children served have families residing well below poverty level, with an average income of $16,000 a year. Approximately 85 percent of the children served by the club have a parent or parents who work for farmers in Westlands. The Club provides a safe and welcoming space for children to learn, grow, play and are provided with nutritious meals daily.

Tom Birmingham, general manager of Westlands, expressed the need to support the children who attend the Boys & Girls Club of Mendota, and he noted this was one means of mitigating socioeconomic impacts resulting from the District having retired approximately 40,000 acres of land near the City of Mendota. The Boys & Girls Club of Mendota is continuing to work diligently to establish relationships with potential donors and create a fundraiser, intended to ensure annual contributions keeping the Club operational.

“We are so thankful to Westlands Water District Board of Directors for this generous gift to keep the doors of the Mendota Club open to children who rely on the services, positive environment and diversified educational programs provided by the Club every day,” said BGCFC Kathryn Weakland, VP of Development. “We are still working to secure permanent funding, but this will help us seek the right opportunities in the meantime.”

2019-08-02T13:58:34-07:00August 2nd, 2019|

Employee Satisfaction is Key

Farm Employee Satisfaction: It’s Not Money, It’s Respect

By Jessica Theisman, Associate Editor

Showing respect to your field and farm workers and can really pay off. According to Raul Calvo of Employers Services, he’s all about leadership, management development, human resources, and employee relations training. Calvo described a situation recently in the central valley. It was a farm operation with two Labor contractors contributing.

California Fresh Fruit Association

California farm workers harvesting tree fruit

The employees from both farm labor contractors are interested in the same thing. “We want more money and we want more benefits. We want to improve our lives.’ So, they all wanted this,” said Calvo. The UFW union showed up and was able to latch on some of the employees of one of the Labor contractors.

“The UFW was able to convince almost all of the employees from farm labor contractor one to walk out of the field,” he said. These employees basically went on strike until they get higher pay. After seeing one group walk, Calvo decided to talk to employees from another company to see their views on the subject. “It got down to yes, we want a better life. Yes, we would like this company to pay us more and to give us more benefits, but we’re willing to give them the benefit of the doubt,” Calvo said.

The other companies treated their employees with respect and that is why they did not walk out. The company relates to their employees and treats them as individuals.

2019-07-31T21:12:33-07:00July 30th, 2019|

Calif. Dairy Organizations Collaborate Regarding Quota Program

Groups Launch Exploratory Effort to Solicit and Analyze Proposals

News Release

Recently, the United Dairy Families of California, California Dairies, Inc., Land O’Lakes, Inc., Dairy Farmers of America, and the STOP QIP organization announced a multi-phase process aimed at soliciting and analyzing industry input on California’s historic quota program.

Included in this process is a series of meetings, starting later this month, open to all dairy producers and interested parties. These meetings are intended to solicit various pathways for the state’s quota program.

1) This multi-phase process includes three key parts: The Think Tank, Producer Feedback, and Analysis.

2) The Think Tank phase is for information-gathering from various segments of the dairy industry. This will include the meetings identified below, where producers will be able to voice their opinion and contribute ideas or concepts.

3) The Producer Feedback phase will allow producers to comment and challenge the ideas developed in the Think Tank phase.

In the Analysis phase, dominant ideas from the Producer Feedback phase will be analyzed for economic impacts, and legal pathways to adoption will be determined.

This process will be implemented with the assistance of dairy industry economist Dr. Marin Bozic and dairy market analyst Matt Gould. Dr. Bozic and Mr. Gould will be conducting an economic analysis of the proposed ideas.

The first series of meetings associated with the Think Tank phase are as follows:

● Tuesday, July 30 – 2 pm to 4 pm – Embassy Suites, Ontario

● Wednesday, July 31 – 9 am to 11 am – Heritage Complex, Tulare

● Wednesday, July 31 – 2 pm to 4 pm – Turlock Ballroom

● Thursday, August 1 – 9 am to 11 am – Washoe House, Petaluma

Meeting space is limited. All participants are strongly encouraged to register at

www.dairyfamilies.org/events

2021-05-12T11:17:08-07:00July 24th, 2019|

Annual Alfalfa and Forage Field Day Sept. 19

Mark Your Calendars for the Annual Alfalfa and Forage Field Day

By Mikenzi Meyers, Contributing Editor

The Annual Alfalfa and Forage Field Day is fast approaching, and it’s one you won’t want to miss! The field day will be held on Thursday, September 19th at the UC Kearney Agricultural Research and Extension Center, and cover a variety of topics from forages to crops.

Nicholas Clark, certified Crop and Farm Advisor in Agronomy and Nutrient Management for the University of California Cooperative Extension (Kings, Tulare and Fresno), is eager to spread the word and increase attendance for what is sure to be an educational day for all attendees.

“We try to make it a very comprehensive program in terms of covering the bases of different forages that are popular or emerging in popularity in the southern portion of the San Joaquin Valley,” Clark explained.

Although alfalfa and other forages are on the forefront of the event, Clark added that management practices, silage crops, and possibly also sugar beets are up for discussion.

Make sure to mark your calendars for the Annual Alfalfa and Forage Field Day on Thursday, September 19th at the UC Kearney Agricultural Research and Extension Center.

2019-07-23T16:59:43-07:00July 23rd, 2019|

Activist Groups Promote Fear on Consumer Food Choices

Activists Driving Consumers to Organic Food Only—Beyond Consumer Affordability

By Safe Fruits and Veggies

Despite recent and repeated calls by scientists and nutritionists to increase efforts to improve consumption, activist groups have created and promoted new webpages and infographics designed to raise fears among consumers about the safety of the more affordable and accessible fruits and vegetables.

These groups continue to ignore peer-reviewed research, which has shown these tactics don’t just negatively impact consumers’ purchasing decisions regarding conventionally grown produce—consumers’ reluctance also includes purchasing of organic produce as well. In other words, the work of these activists isn’t meeting their goal of driving consumers toward organics and maybe driving them away from produce altogether. How crazy is this?

Let’s review just some of the study findings, which have been released during the time these groups chose to create and promote new fear-based content:

“Prescriptions” for healthy foods could save more than $100 billion in healthcare costs. The healthy foods included fruits and veggies plus seafood, whole grains, and plant oils. The study concluded: “These new findings support the concept of ‘Food is Medicine.’”

Eating and drinking better, including increasing consumption of fruits and veggies, could prevent one in five deaths around the world. The study concluded: “Our findings show that suboptimal diet is responsible for more deaths than any other risks globally, including tobacco smoking, highlighting the urgent need for improving human diet across nations.”

Low fruit and veggie consumption resulted in an estimated three million deaths from heart disease or stroke. “Our findings indicate the need for population-based efforts to increase fruit and vegetable consumption throughout the world.” Click here to continue reading and to “like” and share this blog post.

2021-05-12T11:05:02-07:00July 19th, 2019|

Food Safety Inspections Coming

Operations with More than $500,000 Are First

By Patrick Cavanaugh, Editor

Shelly Phillips is with the CDFA’s Produce Safety Program and supervises four inspectors with the eventual hiring of six more. She spoke about what to expect during a food safety inspection of farm operations at the recent Safe Food Alliance Conference in Monterey.

“These will not be surprise inspections. We will be calling and letting growers know that we want to inspect the operation and scheduling an appointment,” Phillips said.

From that point, an inspector will be following up with the farmer with logistic questions such as: “What are you growing?”, “When are you harvesting?”, and “What is the best time in terms of coming out to the operation?”

The goal is to have the inspection be collaborative between the farmer and inspector. It needs to be done during harvesting and handling conditions.

If an operation is unwilling or unresponsive, there could be an unannounced inspection.

“If we have called a grower three or four times and there are no return calls, and we have tried to reschedule multiple times, we may do an unannounced inspection because there might be a reason for the push back,” Phillips explained.

Also, if there are uncorrected produce safety issues, there could be an unannounced follow-up inspection.

“This will happen if we have been out to a farm under an announced inspection and there have been corrective actions that need to be observed, and there needs to be a follow-up; then there could be an unannounced inspection,” Phillips said. “We can also come out in response to a complaint or a foodborne outbreak investigation.”

Arriving On The Farm

“Let’s say the inspector arrives on a Tuesday … his or her identification will be shown, as well as a notice of inspection,” Phillips said. “They will want to speak to someone who is directly in charge. That person will be a farm manager or food safety manager, instead of someone not responsible for anything on a day-to-day basis.”

The inspector will explain the scope of the inspection based on what the grower is doing on the operation.

“If the grower is harvesting or packing, then we will be looking at that. We also want to see the grower training, [and] health and hygiene records.”

There is no set time length for the inspections, as it will depend on the size of the farming operation, as well as what the farm has prepared ahead of time for the inspector. Being prepared means having all food safety records available, and knowing where all water sources are. Also, if there are many observations that need to be corrected, then that could extend the inspection time.

2021-05-12T11:01:47-07:00July 16th, 2019|
Go to Top