UC Davis Foundation Plant Services Serves the Ag Industry

UC Davis Foundation Plant Services, Critical Service to the Ag Industry

By Brian German, Associate Editor

UC Davis is home to Foundation Plant Services (FPS), a plant repository the world relies on for plant importation and quarantine, disease testing, virus elimination, and DNA identification services for a variety of plants and rootstocks. FPS also coordinates the release of UC-patented horticultural varieties and provides an essential link between researchers, nurseries and producers.

“Established at UC Davis in 1958, FPS has grown from a small kind-of-mom-and-pop scientific effort sourcing out cherry and grapevine cuttings that have been screened for virus to nurseries so that they could make better plants for growers,” said Deborah Golino, director of FPS since 1994. “FPS has grown to the point where it is a self-supporting center. We owe a lot to the growers and nursery industry that have supported us over these years,” she said.

Today FPS employs about 35 people on “soft money,” including scientists in the lab and people in the green houses, as well as propagators, and field workers. About 250 acres of various plantings—largely grapes of course—plus programs with strawberries and sweet potatoes that are mostly run in green houses,” noted Golino.

“All other programs circle around getting correctly identified, valuable commercial plant materials (cultivars). Many times, great people save varieties, and screening them for virus and making sure that commercial nurseries have that virus screened materials, so they can make plants for farmers that have the added productivity and sustainability that comes with clean material,” explained Golino.

FPS advances clean material in the lab by cutting out a meristem shoot tip and grow a plant from that. “Let’s say we have a valuable Chardonnay that came in from France. It’s a new clone and it has a couple of viruses in it. In a process that takes about a year, we take a micro-shoot tip culture and regenerate a plant,” Golino said. “For reasons that aren’t really fully understood, regenerating that plant from the tiny .5 millimeter piece gets rid of viruses. That’s our therapy, but what we give to most nurseries and growers who buy material from us is that little plant grown up in the field, and we might have hundreds or even thousand of cuttings of some root stocks.”

“The most common route for advancing a clean plant cultivar is by nurseries coming in to buy several hundred cuttings,” Golino explained, “and plant them in a field. Those plantings grow big mother plants from which they harvest more cuttings to be grown and eventually sold to growers. It’s a multi-year generational process.”

“We have over 900 cultivars of grapes and over 5,000 accessions because we have multiple clones of Chardonnay and Pinot Noir,” Golino said. “All of that material is improved by the technology we have used, technology that has been developed by other UC researchers to conduct DNA identification to ensure accuracy, which is part of the FPS mission.”

“That material is held as a trust to improve our agricultural offerings to growers of fruit trees and other crops,” Golino said. “Even though much of the material is not produced by UC growers and might even be produced by a Cornell or a Michigan breeder, it is still important to our agriculture here in California and across the country since the 2008 Farm Bill was passed. I think we owe Congressman Sam Farr (CA -20) a tribute for that. Since then, there has been money for the National Clean Plant Network with USDA’s Animal and Plant Inspection Service (APHIS) and they have funded about 20 clean plant centers around the country.”

“FPS certainly provides the highest level of screening in the world,” Golino stated, “and I think we might be the biggest too. In this modern world where margins are so thin, the universities are so tight for money for research and especially for teaching, and they have so many challenges taking care of those things, the experiment station does not have much money for service work, like the work that is done at FPS.”

“FPS conducts its work for industry, and that isn’t really directly relative to the university’s mission which has to be strictly accommodated. That is why California grape and fruit tree nurseries have assessed themselves to fund our programs since the mid 1980s,” said Golino. “And then we have the clean plant money on top of that, and our grape nurseries actually pay user fees on the plant material they make from our material. That keeps the doors open and keeps us doing world class work,” Golino said.

California Ag Today2021-05-12T11:05:49-07:00August 18th, 2016|

Duarte Nursery v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Update

PLF Attorney Reports Duarte Appeals Court Decision—Once Again

By Patrick Cavanaugh, Farm News Director

Damien Schiff, principal attorney at Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF) who has been representing the Duarte family in their legal battle with the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), provided this update after Judge Kimberly J. Mueller, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California dismissed their summary judgment motions on June 10, 2016, and ruled the Corps’ February 23, 2013 cease and desist order did not deprive Duarte of liberty or property. Schiff said his client’s next course of action is filing for an appeal of the judgment.

“It’s disappointing, in particular, because earlier in the case, we had received a very favorable decision from U.S. District Judge Lawrence K. Karlton, the original Federal Judge assigned to our case who ruled in our favor on our due process challenge to the Army Corps’ cease and desist order.” Judge Karlton retired from the bench in 2014 and passed away in 2015. “It was particularly disappointing to see Judge Mueller reverse Judge Karlton’s decision.”

“Launching the appeals process will take some time,” Schiff explained. “Unfortunately, the case is complicated because there are a lot of claims going on and not all of them have been resolved by Judge Mueller’s decisions. The general rule in Federal Court is that you cannot appeal until a final decision has been made that decides all the claims against all the parties.”

Damien M. Schiff, Principal Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation’s National Litigation Center

Considering the preponderance of hills and valleys across the United States, the magnitude of this case has growers—not just from California, but nationwide—concerned about the outcome and precedents resulting from this case, as well as the significance of future Army Corps-issued cease and assist orders. “It is an amazing assertion of power by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Corps,” Schiff said, “and I think that’s why we see not just farming groups and property rights groups, but also a majority of the states, challenging the Agency’s Waters of the U.S. (WOTUS) Rule.”

A significant point of contention in the case, Schiff explained, stems from Judge Mueller’s ruling that because the Duarte property had not seen any farming activity since 1998, the Clean Water Act’s farming exemption was no longer applicable. “That’s, in part, why we challenged the cease and assist orders,” said Schiff, “because the Corps issued this directive without giving any prior notice, much less any opportunity to present contrary information. The reality is, this property, and the other properties in the entire area, have traditionally been used for agriculture, and are, in fact, zoned for agricultural use.”

The Duarte case is so multifaceted,” Schiff said. “The land was always agricultural, and what was done on the property is consistent with normal agricultural farming practices; there is really nothing exceptional about what went on. What’s particularly problematic for the Corps here is that Duarte went above and beyond the call of duty by having a wetlands consultant ensure that all of the areas assessed to have vernal pool or wetlands characteristics were marked and avoided entirely.”

Whatever the outcome, the Duarte case will have far reaching effects on legal precedent throughout the agricultural community as well as on the cease and assist orders issued by the Army Corps to families throughout the country. “Surprisingly, there isn’t very much case law on what process, if any, is owed to the landowner before the agency issues these orders,” Schiff remarked. “However the Duarte case ends up, I think that will have to be litigated in other parts of the country.”

California Ag Today2021-05-12T11:05:50-07:00August 2nd, 2016|

WGA Conflicted on SCOTUS DACA Decision

Western Growers Association has Mixed Feelings on Recent Supreme Court DACA Decision

By Patrick Cavanaugh, Farm News Director

The 4-4 ruling on immigration reform last month by the Supreme Court of the United State’s (SCOTUS) affirmed the lower court’s injunction against President Obama’s executive order, which would have granted deportation deferrals and temporary legal work status to about five million undocumented immigrants. Tom Nassif, president and CEO of Western Growers Association (WGA), has been vocal about the need to establish some type of immigration reform.

Nassif compared the recent SCOTUS ruling to what happened when a 2013 U.S. Senate-endorsed bill that supported a pathway to citizenship was never passed in the U.S. House of Representatives. “The House did not want a pathway to citizenship,” said Nassif. “They were not even sure if they wanted a pathway to legalization. Most Republicans did not even want a border security bill in the House coming to the floor for a vote because they didn’t want any immigration reform—whatsoever.”

Nassif said, “The House was part of that Send-them-home! crowd that considered anything you did—even if it was putting them on probation—as amnesty. It is interesting that with the House doing nothing about immigration, what we have today is amnesty, because we’re not doing anything about it.”

Nassif expressed mixed feelings about the SCOTUS decision. “In a way, it disappointed us; in a way, it didn’t. It didn’t disappoint us because there was no requirement that people working in agriculture who might qualify for this Deferred Action For Childhood Arrivals (DACA) or Deferred Action for Parents of Americans (DAPA) would actually remain working in agriculture.”

To get a pathway under the Senate bill, farmworkers would have to stay in agriculture for a certain number of years, but they could eventually work in other industries. So if you have a choice of working in any industry, why would you go to work on the farm? But, in this instance, you would adversely affect other American jobs,” said Nassif.

Nassif said the motivation of the Obama administration is understandable due to the inability of Congress to compromise on immigration reform, yet Nassif maintains the Immigration Reform should not be done with Executive Orders as the President has done. Instead, Nassif stressed that Congress should take up Immigration Reform and pass it.

California Ag Today2016-08-04T15:40:15-07:00August 1st, 2016|

Pushing for Immigration Reform

The Unrelenting Push for Immigration Reform

By Laurie Greene, Editor

Tom Nassif, president and CEO of Western Growers Association is frustrated with the lack of immigration reform. “In 2013, we finally got a bill passed in the United States Senate. The reason we got it passed in the Senate is because we supported the pathway to citizenship; the other things we could work out,” Nassif said.

Tom Nassif, president and CEO of Western Growers Association

“However, in the United States House of Representatives,” Nassif continued, “they didn’t want a pathway to citizenship. They weren’t even sure if they wanted a pathway to legalization,” he noted.

“Most people didn’t even want a border security bill coming to the floor for a vote in the House because they didn’t want any immigration reform—whatsoever,” said Nassif. “They were part of that ‘send them home crowd.’ Anything you did, even if it was putting them on probation or fining them—whatever we did—was still considered amnesty. That is not amnesty. What we have today is amnesty because we’re not doing anything about it,” he argued.

Nassif had a mixed opinion on the recent Supreme Court of the United States’ 4-4 ruling against President Obama regarding his expansion of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA). “In a way, it disappointed us; in a way, it didn’t,” Nassif commented.

“The reason it didn’t disappoint us is because there was no requirement that the people working in agriculture who might qualify for DACA or DAPA would remain in agriculture. Under the Senate bill, to get a pathway, you had to stay in agriculture for a certain number of years. In this case, they could have gone to work in any industry. If you have the choice of working in industry, why would you work on the farm? The choice adds adversity and affects other American jobs,” said Nassif.

Immigration reform should not be done by executive order, according to Nassif, as President Obama was trying to do. “It should be done by the legislature. They have the responsibility and the duty to pass immigration reform,” he said.

California Ag Today2016-07-24T15:22:12-07:00July 20th, 2016|

Supreme Court Ruling on Immigration

Manuel Cunha Jr. Fires Off Letter RE: Supreme Court Ruling on Immigration

The following is a letter that Manuel Cunha, president of the Nisei Farmers League sent out about the Supreme Court ruling on immigration TODAY:

“As the president of the Nisei Farmers League, board member of the National Immigration Forum in Washington, D.C., chair of the Insure America Project, and as a farmer myself, I am deeply disappointed in the Supreme Court ruling that was announced TODAY. Their ruling provided no guidance nor direction to this Congress and ignored the safety of those affected by the ruling.

The 4-4 deadlock leaves in place an appeals court ruling blocking President Obama’s immigration plan. His plan would have allowed parents of citizens or of lawful permanent residents to apply for a program that would spare them from deportation and provide them with work permits.

Dignity, integrity and justice is what this country believes in and has made this country great. This country was built and strengthened by immigrants. Many of us today realize it was our parents and ancestors from other countries that brought us here. However, there are those that have forgotten, many of which are currently members of Congress.

This decision does not move us closer to immigration reform, but allows Congress to repeatedly refuse to support bipartisan legislation to update immigration laws. Congress continues to not deal with Immigration, but rather deal with their own party politics.

Millions of families will remain in limbo, and our system remains broken. The attention now turns to Senate and House Republicans to provide leadership on this issue. What is their solution to our broken immigration system? This escalates many of the problems that currently exist. Drug and human trafficking will continue, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids will not go away. Millions of immigrants living in the shadows is not the answer. Deportation of the people that clothe and feed us is shameful and not the answer.

We must remember that the “Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals,” DACA (Dreamers), is untouched. We need to focus on providing alternatives to the children who were brought here and have grown up here as Americans and identify themselves as Americans. The DACA program is still in play and we need to encourage those that are eligible to apply.”

California Ag Today2016-06-24T19:48:29-07:00June 23rd, 2016|

Common Sense ESA Enforcement

NCBA Calls for Common Sense ESA Enforcement and Critical Habitat Designations

By Brian German Associate Editor

The interpretation and impact of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) continues to be a concern for growers and ranchers. Ethan Lane, executive director for the Public Lands Council of the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, is working to inject more common sense into ESA enforcement.

“We’re spending a lot of time on the ESA. It’s an issue that impacts producers all over the West, and it’s starting to creep East as species like the northern long-eared bat and wolves” are added to the list. “So we’re engaging with Congress, talking about ways to improve the act and get it back to its original intention,” Lane said.

Lane addressed the difficulty in changing anything on the ESA, “Right now, because of outside litigation pressure, the ESA and its implementation is totally focused on listing. That’s because they’re completely swamped—the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) is totally swamped—responding to those listing petitions and subsequent lawsuits.”

Land, who has 18+ years of experience in natural resource and land use issues, commented that to ensure the act is appropriately enforced, “We need to transition back to a place where they can focus on listing, recovery and then delisting a species once those species have recovered. That’s going to take Congress probably getting involved and making sure to refine how those resources are spent and where the attention is placed inside the USFWS.”

Lane emphasized the importance of the ESA and the necessity to ensure it achieves its purpose. “There’s no secret, I don’t think, to anybody who pays attention to this issue,” Lane said. “The ESA is popular with the American people. I think we need to be realistic that we’re not going to be doing away with the ESA anytime soon, so we had better make sure it works for everybody.”

“The first step in doing that,” Lane explained, “is making sure that it is a fully-functioning act; because right now, it is really broken. So we’re putting our attention on solvable issues that people can get behind where we can build consensus and actually try to make some changes.”

As a result of a new rule concerning critical habit guidelines, Lane anticipates potential problems for California’s cattle industry. “There are more species than I can count that could potentially impact the cattle industry in California and beyond,” he said. “So right now, where the rubber meets the road, is in the expansion of critical habitat guidelines on behalf of USFWS. They’ve just released a new expanded rule definition on what constitutes critical habitat. This new designation includes areas that have the biological potential to support that habitat needed for a species’ survival,” he said.

California Ag Today2016-05-31T19:24:04-07:00May 10th, 2016|

TPP Must Pass

Kent Bacus: Congress Must Pass TPP To Help All Ag Exports

By Brian German, Associate Editor

The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade agreement has the potential to increase demand for U.S. food products among 500 million consumers in 11 Pacific Rim countries that are included in the partnership. Many of those ag products are from California, including beef.

Kent Bacus, director, International Trade and Market Access for National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA), said, “First and foremost, Congress needs to hear more from the people back home and they certainly need to hear from the business community.

Recently, we sent a letter to Capitol Hill urging a vote this year on TPP, that was signed by 225 agricultural associations and companies from all across the United States, from cows to cranberries,” stated Bacus. “We had a very diverse group of people on that letter. But, by and large, it really says, ‘It’s time to move. It’s time to stop finger-pointing. Its time to put our differences aside, and its time to move forward with TPP.’”

Kent Bacus, Director of International Trade for NCBA

Kent Bacus, Director of International Trade for National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA)

Bacus said passing TPP will greatly help California farmers and ranchers. “Unfortunately,” he explained, “we have a 38.5 percent tariff on our beef that goes into the Japanese market. TPP levels the playing field for us with our leading competitors for those Japanese consumers. Without that, we’re going to see our market share continue to drop in our leading export market. The benefits of this trade agreement far outweigh the status quo,” he said.

Noting opposition from both the right and the left, Bacus stated, “Politically this is an easy target to swing at because not a lot of people understand trade. So it’s important for us to tell the positive stories of trade, and for the beef industry, it is simple: Americans aren’t willing to pay a premium for cuts like the beef tongue or short ribs, much like our Japanese consumers will,” he said.

One key component of the TPP is the reduction in tariffs and other market barriers. Failing to get the agreement passed would essentially give other nations a competitive advantage in the international market. “In 2015 we sold $1.3 billion dollars worth of beef to the Japanese,” Bacus said. “But that was down nearly $300 million dollars from 2014 because our leading competitors, the Australians, had a trade agreement that went into effect giving them a 10+ percent tariff rate advantage over us into our leading export market.”

“So unless we want to level that playing field—if we are fine with the status quo,” Bacus said—then we’re going to lose that market. And we’re going to lose a lot of the value added that the market brings back to cow-calf producers and feeders, and everyone along the production chain.”

California Ag Today2021-05-12T11:17:13-07:00May 6th, 2016|

Costa: Westside Water Cut Unconscionable

Jim Costa: Water Allocation is Immoral

By Patrick Cavanaugh, Deputy Editor

Jim Costa, Congressman for the 16^th Congressional District of California that covers all of Merced County and parts of Fresno and Madera Counties and includes vast areas of agricultural land, is not happy with the water situation in California. Costa stated, “To be sure, we are still in a water crisis even though we have had some good [wet] months.”

“Sadly those good months have seen too much of that water going out to sea—as opposed to getting into the San Luis Reservoir and providing water for our Valley—whether for the East side or the Westside. It is a fight that I have been engaged in for years, but most recently, I have been trying to ensure that we are pumping at the maximum levels even under the flawed biological opinions that we are having to contend with.”

Costa explained that while the pumps have been turned up over the past month, sometimes to the maximum level, “the San Luis Reservoir is only 51% full, and now we are are still looking at a 5 percent water allocation for Federal water users. This has been avoidable, and it is unconscionable and immoral. Let me repeat that, it has been avoidable, and it is immoral and unconscionable that we, in fact, are in this predicament. It is largely because we have failed to take advantage of the El Niño months of December and January.”

Assessing our winter water losses,Costa remarked, “Since January 1st, we estimate that we have lost over 440,000 acre-feet of water. This freshwater—440,000 acre-feet—would make a big difference to our Valley, which has been water-starved from a combination of 4 years of drought, plus the flawed biological operations of the Federal and State Water Projects. So, we have to fix this broken water system, bottom line.”

California Ag Today2016-05-31T19:24:06-07:00April 15th, 2016|

National Association of State Departments of Agriculture Celebrates 100th Anniversary

House Agriculture Committee Chairman Conaway recognizes the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture on its 100th Anniversary

House Agriculture Committee Chairman K. Michael Conaway submitted the following remarks for the Congressional Record recognizing the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture on its 100th Anniversary.

Remarks as prepared:

“Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the 100th anniversary of the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture (NASDA). NASDA is a non-profit, non-partisan organization which represents the commissioners, secretaries, and directors of agriculture from all fifty states and four U.S. territories. The State departments of agriculture have served not only the farmers and ranchers of America, but also American consumers for a significant portion of our nation’s history.

“NASDA is a highly effective association which serves to grow and enhance agriculture by forging partnerships and creating consensus to achieve sound policy outcomes between state departments of agriculture, the federal government, and stakeholders. These partnerships are apparent in the halls of almost every office building in the District of Columbia. I rely on the hard working men and woman in the Texas Department of Agriculture to provide me with perspectives on how federal policy is impacting boots on the ground agriculture. I’m sure my colleagues rely on their state department of agriculture in similar ways.

“NASDA is an active partner with the United States Department of Agriculture through a longstanding cooperative agreement to employ a nationwide network of enumerators in support of the mission of the National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS). The data collected through this partnership informs a broad spectrum of legislative and regulatory initiatives, including farm programs under the jurisdiction of the Committee on Agriculture which I have the honor to chair.

“NASDA and its members likewise play a critical role informing Congress and the executive branch regarding the operation of federal and state programs covering everything from animal and plant health, food safety and marketing, nutrition, and literally hundreds of other consumer services.

“NASDA exists to amplify the unique voice of all state departments of agriculture. NASDA Members are able to amplify their national voice by achieving consensus on otherwise contentious issues such as threatened and endangered species, agriculture labor, and water quality.

“Mr. Speaker, I join the members and stakeholders of NASDA in celebrating their 100th year of advocating for American agriculture. I wish NASDA many more years of public service to American agriculture at the critical nexus of state and federal policy.”

California Ag Today2016-05-31T19:24:13-07:00February 2nd, 2016|

CENSUS OF AGRICULTURE UNDER SCRUTINY

HOUSE PANEL EXAMINES USE OF CENSUS OF AGRICULTURE

The United States House of Representatives Agriculture Committee’s Subcommittee on Biotechnology, Horticulture and Research held a hearing on December 9, 2015, to discuss the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) use of the Census of Agriculture authority to acquire farmer’s personal financial information. The Census of Agriculture is conducted every five years and is widely considered to be an important tool in developing strong agricultural policy. The Census is used by economists; state, local, and federal policy-makers; financial analysts; and farmers themselves.

However, in January 2015, the Agriculture Committee received correspondence from farmers and ranchers concerned that the USDA’s National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) improperly used the Census of Agriculture authority to conduct a mandatory survey entitled Tenure, Ownership, and Transition of Agricultural Land (TOTAL). The TOTAL survey is a combination of what was previously the Agricultural Economics and Land Ownership Survey (AELOS), which was traditionally conducted as a follow-on Census of Agriculture survey, and the Agricultural Resource Management Survey (ARMS III), which has been prior to this year conducted by the Economic Research Service as a voluntary, academic survey. Members of the committee primarily expressed concerns regarding the compulsory aspect of the expanded TOTAL survey, which inquired about all aspects of an operator’s personal financial portfolio as well as all aspects of farm related income and expenses.

“The most recent version of the TOTAL survey is extremely time-consuming, burdensome and over-broad in nature, and I’m concerned with the potentially negative effects this mandatory survey will have on farmers’ willingness to participate in the Census of Agriculture,” said subcommittee chair Rep. Rodney Davis, R-Ill., Chairman of the Subcommittee on Biotechnology, Horticulture, and Research. “It cannot be overstated how important the information in the Ag Census is for developing strong agricultural policy, rural development, farmland assessment, and the practices of many other sectors that serve farmers and ranchers. It guides our decision-making process, helps us determine what, if any, changes must be made to better serve and provide for farmers and ranchers, and gives us the ability to run farm programs and implement the Farm Bill,” said Davis.

“Data and information gained from the Census of Agriculture is important to every sector of the agriculture industry,” said Agriculture Committee Chairman K. Michael Conaway, “especially for lawmakers as we write and oversee the Farm Bill. However, the most recent version of the mandatory TOTAL survey is unnecessarily complex, intrusive and requires valuable time that farmers would otherwise spend operating their businesses. I hope today’s hearing shed light on the importance of quickly resolving this matter.”

Source: United States House of Representatives Agriculture Committee’s Subcommittee on Biotechnology, Horticulture and Research

California Ag Today2016-05-31T19:27:01-07:00December 15th, 2015|