E.A.T. Foundation – Connects Us to Ag

Kelly Deming Giacomazzi on the E.A.T. Foundation

By Charmayne Hefley, Associate Editor

There is a disconnect between consumers and an understanding of where their food originates. Kelly Deming Giacomazzi is the executive coordinator for the Education and Agriculture Together Foundationbetter known as the E.A.T. Foundation—a Hanford-based nonprofit that bridges this disconnect by providing educators with hands-on learning tools to teaching their students how food and other agricultural products are produced.

“They teach their students that jeans don’t just come from Old Navy or Walmart,” Giacomazzi said, “and their daily food doesn’t come from the grocery store.”

Giacomazzi said the E.A.T. Foundation offers several workshops for educators, including a 3-day “Intro to Ag” program, during which educators from all over the state are hosted by local farm families. “This is where the hands-on learning takes place. For example, educators learn to drive a tractor, siphon-irrigate, spray for bugs with a Pest Control Advisor (PCA), and visit a dairy. In the past and occasionally now, we visit the UC Davis Veterinary Medicine Teaching and Research Center (VMTRC) and AgVentures! at the Heritage Complex, both of which are in Tulare County, to give teachers a brief overview of what agriculture is doing to provide food and clothes for people in the state and in the nation.”

Giacomazzi also said E.A.T. hosts a two-day workshop on water. “We tour a hydroelectric plant, a dam/reservoir area, and distribution centers,” Giacomazzi said. “We talk about water laws, environmental impacts, and farm efficiency as well.”

The Foundation also offers summer and fall harvest workshops, plus a career workshop. Giacomazzi stated, “Many scholarship funds are available for agriculture majors, yet there aren’t enough students majoring in this field.”

2016-05-31T19:28:04-07:00September 15th, 2015|

No-tillage Grows in California

The list of crops that have been successfully grown using no-tillage in California continues to increase with garbanzo beans being the latest addition, according to Jeffrey P. Mitchell, CE cropping systems specialist, University of California, Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources.

Harvest data from the Conservation Tillage Workgroup are now in for a 2015 garbanzo crop that was no-till seeded in January in the longstanding conservation agriculture systems study field in Five Points, CA, and these data indicate no difference in yield between the no-till with and without cover crop treatments and the standard till with and without cover crop systems. Garbanzo yields for the four systems averaged about 3,600 lbs / acre with no statistical differences seen between the four experimental treatments.

Other than an herbicide spraying in the fall of 2014 to knock down weeds, the no-tillage systems relied on zero tillage prior to seeding that was done with a John Deere 1730 6-row 30” planter. Conventional tillage consisting of several passes of a Wilcox Performer bed-shaping tillage implement was done to prepare planting beds in the standard tillage plots as would be commonly done in the region.

There is now a growing list of several crops, including processing tomatoes, cotton and dairy forage that have been successfully produced, both in research studies and on California farms, with economically viable yields using no-tillage seeding.

Additional information about this study is available at the Conservation Agriculture Systems Innovation Center (CASI) website and by contacting Jeff Mitchell at jpmitchell@ucdavis.edu.

Established in 1998, the Conservation Cropping Systems Workgroup is a diverse group of more than 1,500 farmer, University of California, California State University, USDA – NRCS, Resource Conservation District, public agency, private sector and environmental group members that have come together to promote conservation cropping systems in California.

Featured Photo Soure: Source: CASI (Conservation Agriculture Systems Innovation) Center, University of California, Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources

2016-05-31T19:28:05-07:00September 2nd, 2015|

High Pricing Keeps Tulare County Ag #1

Tulare County Ag Tops all Counties

By Laurie Greene, Editor

The 2014 crop report from Tulare County indicates another record-setting year. Marilyn Kinoshita, Tulare County Ag Commissioner, noted how well the dairy industry did, “30% of our overall value was actually milk, so dairy is incredibly important to our county. They had some good prices for most of the year. That is what brought up the value of milk to $2.5 billion. It is a significant increase over the prior year. A little bit more yield, but it is the price that kicked up well over two billion dollars.”

Tulare County Ag sales topped $8 billion in 2014, and the dairy industry overcame significant pricing obstacles to contribute to the County’s success.

Kinoshita continued, “We’ve got several classes of milk, and California producers are at a disadvantage to the other folks in Wisconsin or Nebraska, or wherever milk is produced. California producers feel singled out. They have their own system by the Secretary of Ag, so they have lobbied to get some hearings to be put under the federal system of pricing. California is lower than the federal standard.”

Citrus sales also played an important role in setting the new sales record, she said, “They had a really good year and went up considerably. So there is our number three crop. We are the nation’s number one citrus county. When our growers are having a good year, it benefits the county. We have 71 citrus packing sheds in our county and all the major juicing plants in California are right here.”

Kinoshita also mentioned some of the ways that citrus has become the number three crop, “It is sort of supply and demand, and great marketing. We ship to 90 different countries around the world. A portion of our production is exported.”

In 2014, livestock in general was up 40%, which also made an impact on sales in Tulare County, “You’ll find when you go to a grocery store that steaks, chicken, and turkey all cost more. So all of our species had an increase in price per unit for this crop reporting year.”

2016-05-31T19:28:06-07:00August 30th, 2015|

2014 Fresno County Crop Report Sets Record Production

2014 Fresno County Crop Report Sets Record Production — $7 billion+

Les Wright, Agricultural Commissioner/Sealer submitted the following information to Karen Ross, California Department of Food and Agriculture Secretary, TODAY accompanied by the 2014 Fresno County Crop Report showing record production.

It is my pleasure to submit the 2014 Fresno County Agricultural Crop and Livestock Report. This report is produced in accordance with Sections 2272 and 2279 of the California Food and Agriculture Code, and summarizes the acreage, production, and value of Fresno County’s agricultural products. The figures contained herein represent gross returns to the producer, and do not reflect actual net profit.

Jacobson, Wright and Matoian

Photo, from left, Ryan Jacobson, Fresno County Farm Bureau CEO, Les Wright, Fresno County Ag Commissioner and Richard Matoian, American Pistachio Growers Executive Director

This report is a testament to the resiliency and determination of the Fresno County agricultural industry. For the first time ever, the gross value of Fresno County agriculture exceeds seven billion dollars. Almonds remain the number one crop at a value of 1.3 billion dollars with grapes a close second at $905 million.

The total gross production value of Fresno County agricultural commodities in 2014 was $ 7,039,861,000, a 9.26 percent increase from the 2013 production value of $6,443,236,500.

Increases were seen in:

  • vegetable crops (0.47% = $5,599,000)
  • fruit and nut crops (13.16%= $422,664,000)
  • nursery products (46.89%= $20,022,000)
  • livestock and poultry (31.48% = $301,144,000)
  • livestock and poultry products (22.09% = $116,299,000
  • apiary (17.39% = $10,738,000)
  • industrial crops (107.05% = $3,795,500).

Decreases in:

  • field crops (-36.20%= -$149,822,000)
  • seed crops (-14.67%= -$5,823,000).

I would like to express my appreciation to the many producers, processors, and agencies, both private and public, who supported our efforts in producing this report. I would also like to thank all my staff, especially Fred Rinder, Scotti Walker, Angel Gibson, Vera Scott-Slater, and Billy Hopper. Without their hard work and valuable input this report would not be possible.

Pistachios, featured on the cover of the 2014 Fresno County Crop Report, were Fresno County’s seventh top crop last year, with a value of nearly $380 million dollars.

The top nut—and crop, for that matter—was almonds, followed by grapes, poultry, milk, cattle and calves, tomatoes, pistachios, garlic, peaches and cotton.

Also included in the report was this quote from President John F. Kennedy:

Our farmers deserve praise, not condemnation; and their efficiency should be cause for gratitude, not something for which they are penalized.

2016-05-31T19:28:06-07:00August 25th, 2015|

Chew on This Tour

Kyle Olguin and Sarah Weber on Chew On This Tour

 

By Charmayne Hefley, Associate Editor

To counter the abounding misconceptions surrounding agriculture, companies are fighting back through education. Kyle Olguin, assistant operations manager for Nutra Blend LLC, a company that specializes in manufacturing nutrients for the feed industry, said that Nutra Blend began a program called “Chew On This Tour” to educate consumers about common farming misconceptions.

For the tour, Olguin said, “we drive trucks around the country, trucks turned into movie theatres, and educate people on where their food comes from, the misconceptions about farming, what we [farmers] do in America, and how we have one of the safest food supplies in the world.”

Olguin said that the perception of agriculture among the masses is that Ag is unnecessary because of the existence of grocery stores.

“We are constantly being attacked by non-ag promoting groups that agriculture is bad,” Olguin said, “and now the perception is out there that agriculture doesn’t really provide anything good or that agriculture doesn’t really need to exist. We have grocery stores, and the general public does not understand the link between agriculture and farmers and those grocery stores.”

“So we decided to start a campaign, and we kicked it off in Oregon driving this truck around the U.S. and showing people one simple video.” Olguin said, “We ask people questions, like: How many eggs does a chicken lay? How many pounds of bacon do you get from one cow?”

Sarah Weber, a sales representative for Nutra Blend, said the next step for the program was to raise money for backpack programs linked with food banks.

“The second movement is ‘Drive to Feed Kids’,” Weber said, “a nonprofit program with our suppliers and vendors to work with our customers, in their own communities, to raise money for student backpack programs that are linked in with the food banks.”

Weber said, “Our third stage in this movement is the ‘Ivy League Farmer’,” Weber said, “which is a movie that has been produced and will air on network TV pending this fall. It is a reflection on a dairy farm and the positive influence the farm has on the community. It is a way for us to reach out to the public with an emotionally positive connection to educate them.”

 

2016-05-31T19:28:06-07:00August 24th, 2015|

#AgLaw: Country of Origin Labeling (COOL)

S.1844 – Voluntary Country of Origin Labeling for Beef, Pork and Chicken

Status:

Sen. John Hoeven, [R-ND] introduced S. 1844 on July 23, 2015 to amend the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 to provide for voluntary country of origin labeling for beef, pork, and chicken. The bill was read twice and referred to the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.

Description:
S. 1844 allows voluntary designation of country of origin labeling by packers of any raw single-ingredient beef, pork, or chicken product intended for retail sale as exclusively having a United States country of origin. No federal agency, state, or state agency may supercede this law by labeling beef, pork, or chicken for retail sale with a U.S. origin in a manner that is less stringent than, or inconsistent with, the federal requirements. S. 1844 does not affect any other federal marketing or regulatory program or similar state initiative.
2016-05-31T19:28:08-07:00August 2nd, 2015|

Happy Fourth to All

Our Third President on This Fourth of July

On this Fourth of July, it’s fitting to focus on Thomas Jefferson, the nation’s Agrarian President and signer of the Declaration of Independence 239 years ago.

Yes, our third President was Thomas Jefferson an agronomist, an educated man of the land. So, unique in his time, he believed in proper land stewardship for posterity.

Jefferson understood that humanity affected the environment, so he practiced crop rotation with an extensive seven-year plan, using wheat, turnips, corn, potatoes, peas, rye and clover, buckwheat, and livestock grazing.

He tested to determine the exact number of cattle required to fertilize a given area of land and compared grain yields on manure vs. unfertilized fields.

“Agriculture … is our wisest pursuit, because it will

in the end contribute most to real wealth, good

morals & happiness.”

 

Jefferson developed scientific plowing of “least resistance,” which lifted and turned the sod to a depth of about six inches, enabling farmers to contour-ridge erodible fields, plow out shallow ditches, and ridge poorly drained flat lands.

He terraced his vegetable garden, orchard, and vineyard sites, and planted native ground cover to stop erosion.

He conserved timber by not cutting trees for any purpose as long as cut wood was available.

As U.S. envoy to France, he sent seeds of various grasses, fruits and vegetables, acorns, olive plants to agricultural societies, farmers, and botanists back home.

He brought Italian rice to South Carolina, pecan trees to the eastern United States and was first to introduce Brussels sprouts, eggplant, cauliflower, and broccoli.

He encouraged agricultural societies, agricultural education and university-level research.

Jefferson kept extensive farm journals for nearly six decades on the 170 varieties of fruits and 330 different kinds of vegetables he cultivated, and on his experiments with viticulture and beer brewing.

Another July 4th notation

Presidents John Adams (who lived to 90 years old) and Thomas Jefferson (who lived to 82) both died on the same day July 4 1826, 50 years to the day of the signing of the signing of the Declaration of Independence.

 

Quote from © 2015 Thomas Jefferson Foundation

2016-05-31T19:28:12-07:00July 4th, 2015|

Ag Leader Paul Martin Inducted into Sonoma County Farm Bureau Hall of Fame

Paul Martin, a Petaluma rancher and agricultural leader who has dedicated his life to building bridges between farmers and regulatory agencies, will be honored at Sonoma County Farm Bureau’s “Love of the Land” celebration on July 16 at Richard’s Grove and Saralee’s Vineyard in Windsor, Calif.

Paul_Martin

Paul Martin (Sonoma County Farm Bureau)

Martin’s remarkable agricultural legacy has earned him a prominent place in Sonoma County Farm Bureau’s Hall of Fame. The annual award recognizes agricultural leaders who are a guiding force in preserving, protecting and propelling Sonoma County’s $4 billion farming industry. Martin joins legendary leaders in the Hall of Fame, like the late Saralee McClelland Kunde, who was the Saralee of Richard’s Grove and Saralee’s Vineyard; Gene Benedetti, who was founder of Clover Stornetta Farms; and Larry Bertolini, who was founder and president of Western Farm Center.

Martin is a former dairy rancher who had a second career as a representative for the dairy and agriculture industries. After selling his cows in the late 1990’s, Martin started working as field representative for Western United Dairymen, utilizing his knowledge of the dairy industry and his excellent communication skills to represent milk producers. After retiring from Western United Dairymen in 2012, he served a two-year stint as Gov. Jerry Brown’s Deputy Director in the Office of Business and Economic Development. Martin and his wife Jill have retired to their ranch in Two Rock.

Sangiacomo Family Photo

Sangiacomo Family Photo (Sonoma County Farm Bureau)

The Sonoma County Farm Bureau will also honor the Sangiacomo Family, a multi-generational Sonoma Valley family respected for their land stewardship, agriculture leadership and dedication to growing world-class grapes, as “Farm Family of the Year”. In addition, the Bureau will present the “Luther Burbank Conservation Award” to Harmony Farm Supply & Nursery in Sebastopol. The Farm Bureau refers to Harmony as, “It could easily be called the Institution of Organic & Sustainable Farming & Gardening, a revered center of learning that upholds an environmental ethic while helping growers produce crops the natural way.”

Harmony Farm Supply & Nursery (Sonoma County Farm Bureau)

Harmony

Love of the Land honors the stewards of the land and Sonoma County’s agricultural bounty. The event starts at 5 p.m. with a tasting of Sonoma County wine and food. A dinner featuring an array of Sonoma County grown products is at 7 p.m. The dinner will be followed by the awards presentation and live auction. The event is open to the public and anyone who wants to join in recognizing the stewards of Sonoma County’s working landscape.

Individual tickets are $65. Corporate sponsor tables for eight people are $1,250. General seating tables of eight are $700.

To make reservations, visit Sonoma County Farm Bureau or call 707-544-5575. Tickets are available until July 2 or until sold out.

 

2016-05-31T19:28:13-07:00June 21st, 2015|

Harris Farms Prepares For the Future

A Conversation with Steve Hamm, Controller of Harris Farms, Coalinga

CaliforniaAgToday: How long have you been working with Harris Farms?

Steve Hamm: I’ve been with Harris since December of 2013, so a year and a half. I have the freshest face on the farm!

CAT: That was the first year with zero water allocation; could that have been the worst time to start?

Hamm: I do not think it was a bad time to come in–even though 2013-2014 definitely was a hard hit, now look at 2015. I think it is an important time for me to be here. There are a lot of ways we used to do business that probably made sense under different scenarios. Now, whether we are looking at cost allocation or geographical diversification, we are thinking differently than before and challenging a lot of old assumptions, such as how much to plant, and how much water to carry over, and what are normal prices. A few years ago, people would laugh at $400-500/acre-foot of water; now you are paying triple that price.

CAT: Makes you think differently, doesn’t it?

Hamm: Everything is being challenged. I think when I started, it was a good time to ask questions–just within Harris Farms. Why do we do it this way, why do we do it that way? Have we considered this? And sometimes there is nothing you can really do to change, but other times, all it takes is really challenging old assumptions.

We are getting into some things we probably would not have considered a few years ago–just kind of the new reality. I really think about the future and making financial plans. Luckily, we are diversified, so if we don’t get Westside water, we’ll be OK. We’ve got the beef operation, plus hospitality with the Harris Ranch Inn & Restaurant in Coalinga, and other ranches for farming, so corporate will be OK. But looking at this farm here on the Westside, we’re all hoping next year the rains will come.

It reminds me of that old Jewish saying, “Next year…. in Jerusalem.” How many centuries did they say that before it happened? I wonder will the rains will come 2016? What if it is 2018? Are we preparing ourselves for that?

2016-05-31T19:28:14-07:00June 11th, 2015|

Sustainable Farming: Let’s Focus on a Farm’s Performance, Not its Size

In case you missed it, we are posting the article, “Let’s Focus on a Farm’s Performance, Not its Size,” with permission, from Environmental Defense Fund’s Growing Returns blog.

By  | BIO
Lettuce

Credit: Flickr user Dwight Sipler

What comes to mind when you think of a “family farm?” You’re probably picturing a bucolic spread of less than 100 acres, with a red barn, farmer in overalls, and cows grazing a big pasture. What about the phrase “corporate farm” or “?” Do you see a giant, impersonal and industrial-looking operation?

Unfortunately, these common (mis)perceptions are regularly promoted in everything from TV ads to online chats. But the reality is that “big” does not equate to “bad,” and “small” doesn’t necessarily mean “good” when it comes to sustainable farming. In fact, it’s the wrong debate altogether.

What really matters is performance, not size.

Today is National Agriculture Day, celebrated annually on March 18, and this year’s theme is sustaining future generations. If we’re going to meet the needs of a rapidly growing population, we’re going to need large and small farms alike. And no matter their size, they’ll need to minimize their impacts on the natural systems that sustain us all.

Addressing the myth

It’s a myth that large farms can’t be sustainable, just as it’s a myth that all family farms are small and better for the environment.

Take Christine Hamilton, for example, whose family farm produces corn, soybeans, winter wheat and cattle across 14,000 acres in South Dakota. For years she’s been participating in USDA conservation programs, using no-till practices, planting trees to limit erosion, and utilizing variable rate technologies to improve the environment and her yields.

There are also places like Fair Oaks Farms, which milks over 500 cows … an hour. To make their large operation more sustainable, Fair Oaks pumps methane from its livestock to an on-site natural gas station that compresses it into fuel for the farm’s fleet of 40 milk trucks.

Many small-farm operations implement sustainable practices as well. A perfect example is Full Belly Farms, a 400-acre organic farm in Northern California that won last year’s prestigious Leopold Conservation Award. But I’ve visited small farms where livestock roam freely into streams, soil erosion destroys riverbanks, and nutrient management plans are nonexistent.

Sharing responsibility4.1.1

In the U.S., agriculture already occupies 51 percent of our land, uses 80 percent of the [Nation’s consumptive*] water, and is responsible for 8 percent of our greenhouse gas emissions. And in the coming decades U.S. farms will be responsible for producing even more food. In order to make agriculture a plus for the environment, farm practices will need to change.

Of course, we have to keep in mind the context here. Mid-size and large-scale family farms account for 8 percent of U.S. farms but 60 percent of the value of production, so in order to bring sustainable agriculture to scale, they will have to do the bulk of the work. But small farms have a much higher share of production for specific commodities in the U.S. – they account for 56 percent of domestic poultry production, for example – so we’ll need their leadership, too.

Regardless of size, all farms need to:

  • Minimize the loss of nutrients and soil to air and water through nutrient optimization strategies such as conservation tillage.
  • Use water as efficiently as possible.
  • Improve soil health through strategies such as cover crops.
  • Avoid plowing up ecologically important lands.
  • Fence livestock out of streams and implement management plans to maintain healthy grazing lands and avoid overgrazing
  • Use strategically placed filters to capture excess nutrients.

It’s time we shift the public debate and get everyone on board the sustainability train. Arguing about a farm’s size won’t deliver environmental benefits. In the end, it’s all about performance.

_______________________________________

*“California Ag Today added Nation’s consumptive” from the original USDA text and offers the following definitions:

Consumptive water use” is a use of water that removes the water from the system so that it cannot be recovered for reuse by some other entity. Consumptive uses may be beneficial or non‐beneficial. A beneficial consumptive use would be crop evapotranspiration.

(Source: Agricultural Water Use in California: A 2011 Update 3 © Center for Irrigation Technology November 2011)

Evapotranspiration (ET) is the amount of water transpired by plants, retained in plant tissues, and evaporated from plant tissues and surrounding soil surfaces.

(Sources: (1) California Water Plan Update 2009 Glossary. Department of Water Resources. Resources Agency. State of California; (2) Agricultural Water Use in California: A 2011 Update 3 © Center for Irrigation Technology November 2011)

If the basis for the discussion is water consumptively used by only agricultural, municipal & industrial users, then agriculture’s share would be estimated in the range of 80 percent of the total. However, if the percentage is based on dedicated water, which includes environmental uses, then agriculture’s share is more in the range of 40 percent.

(Sources: (1) California Water Plan Update 2009 Glossary. Department of Water Resources. Resources Agency. State of California; (2) Agricultural Water Use in California: A 2011 Update 3 © Center for Irrigation Technology November 2011)

Dedicated water – as defined by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) is “water distributed among urban and agricultural uses, used for protecting and restoring the environment, or storage in surface water and groundwater reservoirs. In any year, some of the dedicated supply includes water that is used multiple times (reuse) and water held in storage from previous years. This is about 40 to 50 percent of the total annual water supply received from precipitation and imported from Colorado, Oregon, and Mexico.”

Context: Water Portfolio”1 (Source: Agricultural Water Use in California: A 2011 Update 3 © Center for Irrigation Technology November 2011)

Dedicated water includes water flowing in the Wild and Scenic Rivers. Many partially used or unrestricted rivers could have been significantly diverted for use by municipal & industrial and/or agriculture. However, these waters have been dedicated by law to the environment. Other examples of dedicated water are the 800,000 acre‐feet/year reallocated back to the environment by the Central Valley Project Improvement Act (CVPIA) and the 647,000 AF/year reallocated back for Trinity River restoration of that river’s fishery.

(Sources: (1) Record of Decision. Trinity River Mainstem Fishery Restoration. Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report. U.S. Department of the Interior. December 2000; (2) Westlands Water District vs. U.S. Department of Interior. Case Nos. 03‐15194, 03‐15289, 03‐15291 and 03‐15737. Argued and Submitted Feb. 9, 2004 ‐ July 13, 2004, United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit)

_______________________________________

The Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) works directly with businesses, government and communities to create lasting solutions to the most serious environmental problems. EDF’s Growing Returns Blog posts news about the organization’s goal of meeting growing demands for food in ways that improve the environment.

2016-05-31T19:30:26-07:00March 21st, 2015|
Go to Top