USDA Disaster Assistance to Help Thousands of Honeybee, Livestock and Farm-Raised Fish Producers

The USDA announced that nearly 2,500 applicants will receive disaster assistance through the Emergency Assistance for Livestock, Honeybees, and Farm-Raised Fish Program (ELAP) for losses suffered from October 1, 2011, through September  30, 2013.

The program, re-authorized by the 2014 Farm Bill, provides disaster relief to livestock, honeybee, and farm-raised fish producers not covered by other agricultural disaster assistance programs. Eligible losses may include excessive heat or winds, flooding, blizzards, hail, wildfires, lightning strikes, volcanic eruptions, and diseases, or in the case of honeybees, losses due to colony collapse disorder. Beekeepers, most of whom suffered honeybee colony losses, represent more than half of ELAP recipients.

“As promised, we’re making sure that thousands of producers who suffered through two and a half difficult years without Farm Bill assistance, are getting some relief,” said Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack. “Once the Farm Bill was restored, not only did we implement the disaster assistance programs in record time, we’re issuing payments less than three months after the enrollment deadline. The funds will hopefully help producers with some of the financial losses they sustained during that time.”

The Farm Bill caps ELAP disaster funding at $20 million per federal fiscal year. To accommodate the number of requests, which exceeded funds available for each of the affected years, payments will be reduced to ensure that all eligible applicants receive a prorated share of assistance.

ELAP was made possible through the 2014 Farm Bill, which builds on historic economic gains in rural America over the past five years, while achieving meaningful reform and billions of dollars in savings for the taxpayer. Since enactment, USDA has made significant progress to implement each provision of this critical legislation, including providing disaster relief to farmers and ranchers; strengthening risk management tools; expanding access to rural credit; funding critical research; establishing innovative public-private conservation partnerships; developing new markets for rural-made products; and investing in infrastructure, housing and community facilities to help improve quality of life in rural America. For more information, visit  www.usda.gov/farmbill.

To learn more about USDA Farm Service Agency (FSA) disaster assistance programs, visit the FSA factsheet page at  www.fsa.usda.gov/factsheets or contact your local FSA office at http://go.usa.gov/pYV3.

2016-05-31T19:32:13-07:00December 1st, 2014|

Negative Outlook for California Dairies

Lower prices = troubling news for California’s Dairies

Rob Vandenhueval, manager of the Milk Producers Council, an organization of California dairy farmers, which advocates on federal, state and local issues on behalf of its members, noted that dairy prices are very low in the international markets—spelling problems in the near future for California dairies.

“We are looking at a future that includes significantly lower milk prices than we have been experiencing for much of 2014, and a large driver of that…the international market for dairy is down significantly from the highs of 6-9 months ago. In the months looking out into the future, we’re going to see milk prices in California, probably $17, $16, $15 spreads per hundredweight.

Vandenheuvel noted that dairymen and women can find some relief from the lower pricies: “Take look at this margin protection program that just came out of the 2014 Farm Bill, and it provides an opportunity to at least give yourself some safety net protection against falling milk prices. It’s going to cost you a premium as a dairy farmer, and you’ll have to sign up by December 5th, but at least it gives you some opportunity to get some relief directly from the government when these prices fall. Last time around, we only had the Milk Income Loss Contract (MILC ) program which was just not responsive to large Western-style dairies. So that’s the best tool you’ve got right now to fight volatility in the industry.”

Sign up today at your local County Farm Services Agency.

2016-05-31T19:32:13-07:00November 30th, 2014|

California Gas Tax to Affect Ag and All Residents

New gas tax threatens to eliminate benefit of lower fuel costs to California farmers and consumers

In an effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020, California state legislators passed a gas tax law known as AB 32. Starting in 2015, the law’s penalty on carbon emissions will apply to all cars and trucks in the state, meaning that everyone who fills up will pay more. Exactly how much more? Nobody knows yet. It could be as high as 50 cents per gallon with at least a 15-cent increase, beginning in 2015.

Joel Nelsen, president of California Citrus Mutual, keeps a sharp eye on legislation that hurts agriculture. He commented, “It’s scheduled, unfortunately, to be implemented, but at what level we don’t know. Assembly member Jim Patterson (R-23rd District) and Senator Andy Vidak (R-Hanford) are going to initiate some additional publicity on it, and they are going to introduce legislation in January to carefully analyze the California Environmental Protection Agency’s Air Resources Board (ARB) is implementation of the gas tax.”

“Both Patterson and Vidak recognize, as do we all, that the additional dollars in everyone’s pocket relative to lower fuel prices, help the economy. People have more disposable income, whether they are purchasing fresh fruits and vegetables or something for the holidays; lower fuel costs make consumers’ expenditures higher because they have more dollars,” noted Nelsen. “By implementing this gas tax, you’re going to stifle this economic spurt that we typically see in the last few months of the calendar year. Jim and Andy, I think, are aware of that.”

“It’s an adverse tax in that it just goes to the general fund, with no redeeming value. You know, we already pay a tax that on gasoline that goes to roads and transportation.  We pay a tax on cans and bottles that we buy at the supermarket that goes to recycling,” said Nelsen. “When we pay this gas tax, it’s just going to the general fund for a group of individuals to parse out–whether we reap any benefit or not. So this is not a healthy economic approach in my estimation, and this is why we’ll be supporting the Senator and Assemblyman in what they are doing.”

“The governor endorses it because it creates a larger fund for him to underwrite the high-speed rail program.The governor feels that high speed rail helps with cleaner air because it will take more cars off the road as more people ride the train,” Nelsen said. “The newly-generated gas tax dollars thus become a subsidy for high speed rail.”

Nelson said the the ARB has some leeway to decide the size of the gas tax.

“Here we are, all of the sudden we are reaping something positive, paying a whole heck of a lot less for our fuel, and the state wants to make it that much more expensive,” said Nelsen.

 

 

2016-05-31T19:32:13-07:00November 29th, 2014|

National Cattleman’s Foundation Offering Beef Industry Scholarships

Scholarships Available for Students Pursuing Careers in Beef Industry

Application Deadline is December 19, 2014

It was announced TODAY that applications for 2015-16 beef industry scholarships sponsored by the CME Group are now being accepted. Ten scholarships of $1,500 each will be awarded to outstanding students pursuing careers in the beef industry.

Students studying education, communication, production, research or other areas related to the beef industry should consider applying for the scholarship. Applicants must be a graduating high school senior or full-time undergraduate student enrolled at a two or four year college.

The National Cattlemen’s Foundation administers the scholarship program. Applicants for the 2015-16 beef industry scholarships will be required to write a one page letter expressing future career goals related to the beef industry. They also must write a 750 word essay describing an issue in the beef industry and offering solutions to this problem.

Applications should be submitted by December 19, 2014 and sent to National Cattlemen’s Foundation, 9110 E. Nichols Ave., Suite 300, Centennial, CO 80112. The winning recipients will be announced on January 15, 2015.

Click here for the winners of the 2014 National Cattleman’s Foundation beef industry scholarships.

 

According to their website, CME Group, is the world’s leading and most diverse derivatives marketplace and where the world comes to manage risk. CME Group exchanges offer a wide range of global benchmark products across all major asset classes, including futures and options based on interest rates, equity indexes, foreign exchange, energy, agricultural commodities, metals, weather and real estate.

The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) has represented America’s cattle producers since 1898, preserving the heritage and strength of the industry through education and public policy. As the largest association of cattle producers, NCBA works to create new markets and increase demand for beef. 

2016-05-31T19:32:13-07:00November 26th, 2014|

California Turkey Industry Enjoys Excellent Year

California Turkey Producers and Processors Offer Wide Variety to Consumers and Benefit From Steady High Prices

For the last two weeks, grocery store meat departments have been catering to consumers looking for the perfect turkey.

According to Bill Mattos, President of the Modesto-based California Poultry Federation, it has been a great year for California turkey producers:

“This is probably one of the best years for turkey in many, many years for the farmer and the processor. The consumer still gets a bargain every Thanksgiving even though prices this year are higher [as] there are less turkeys in the nation. California fresh turkey was sold out from our processors two weeks before Thanksgiving. So, we were urging everyone who wanted California fresh turkey to get their order in early, and they may still be able to do that. The California farmer is offering everything from fresh and natural to organic to free range; you can find just about everything in your supermarket. It will be a very good year for turkey, and it will be a good year for chickens coming up as well. We look forward to 2015 because we think it will be even better than 2014.”

Mattos said that the turkey industry was careful to avoid oversupply, “The turkey industry didn’t grow crazy, and prices stayed at a pretty good level. They didn’t all start growing like farmers do sometimes as they all get into the business when prices are good. Turkey farmers held back and kept their supply even; however,  with very high beef, pork and other meat prices at this time of year, people look at turkey and even chicken as a bargain.”

As we all sit around the table with friends and family this Thanksgiving, we can be thankful for the California turkey producers and processors, as well as the farmers and farm workers who provide so much for the seasonal meals.

2016-05-31T19:32:13-07:00November 24th, 2014|

Western United Dairymen Statement on Executive Immigration Action

 State Needs Immigration Action for Year-Round Labor

 

Yesterday, President Obama announced a series of executive immigration actions intended to provide relief from deportation and work authority to certain individuals who are not legally present in the U.S. The specific implications for agriculture are difficult to assess, but it is clear President Obama’s executive action is limited and only proposes temporary relief.

WUD firmly believes that Congressional action is the only true path to a comprehensive solution for the current broken immigration system. For example, farmers with year-round labor needs are ineligible to participate in any existing program because the law requires the job to be seasonal and the worker to be temporary. Legislation appears to be the only way to eliminate this challenge to our country’s food security.

The consequences of labor instability and Congressional inaction to address it have been severe.  We are committed to achieving a fair legislative solution that most importantly, legalizes the current workforce and provides a stable, legal, year-round workforce moving forward. Our dairy families depend on these experienced employees who understand the needs of our dairy farms and herds.

WUD is a voluntary membership organization representing more than 60% of the milk produced in California. Membership benefits include resources in labor law, environmental regulations and pricing issues. Members decide the direction of state and federal legislative efforts affecting the dairy industry.

 

2016-05-31T19:32:14-07:00November 22nd, 2014|

Cost of Thanksgiving Dinner Rises, But is Still Under $50 For 10 People

Let’s All Remember and Give Thanks to Farmers and Farmworkers Who Provide Us with Food for our Thanksgiving Celebration

The American Farm Bureau Federation’s 29th annual informal price survey of classic items found on the Thanksgiving Day dinner table indicates the average cost of this year’s feast for 10 is $49.41, a 37-cent increase from last year’s average of $49.04.

The big ticket item – a 16-pound turkey – came in at $21.65 this year. That’s roughly $1.35 per pound, a decrease of less than 1 cent per pound, or a total of 11 cents per whole turkey, compared to 2013.

“Turkey production has been somewhat lower this year and wholesale prices are a little higher, but consumers should find an adequate supply of birds at their local grocery store,” AFBF Deputy Chief Economist John Anderson said. Some grocers may use turkeys as “loss leaders,” a common strategy deployed to entice shoppers to come through the doors and buy other popular Thanksgiving foods.

The AFBF survey shopping list includes turkey, bread stuffing, sweet potatoes, rolls with butter, peas, cranberries, a relish tray of carrots and celery, pumpkin pie with whipped cream, and beverages of coffee and milk, all in quantities sufficient to serve a family of 10. There is also plenty for leftovers.

Foods showing the largest increases this year were sweet potatoes, dairy products and pumpkin pie mix. Sweet potatoes came in at $3.56 for three pounds. A half pint of whipping cream was $2.00; one gallon of whole milk, $3.76; and a 30-ounce can of pumpkin pie mix, $3.12. A one-pound relish tray of carrots and celery ($.82) and one pound of green peas ($1.55) also increased in price. A combined group of miscellaneous items, including coffee and ingredients necessary to prepare the meal (butter, evaporated milk, onions, eggs, sugar and flour) rose to $3.48.

In addition to the turkey, other items that declined modestly in price included a 14-ounce package of cubed bread stuffing, $2.54; 12 ounces of fresh cranberries, $2.34; two nine-inch pie shells, $2.42; and a dozen brown-n-serve rolls, $2.17.

The average cost of the dinner has remained around $49 since 2011.

“America’s farmers and ranchers remain committed to continuously improving the way they grow food for our tables, both for everyday meals and special occasions like Thanksgiving dinner that many of us look forward to all year,” Anderson said. “We are blessed to be able to provide a special holiday meal for 10 people for about $5.00 per serving – less than the cost of most fast food meals.”

The stable average price reported this year by Farm Bureau for a classic Thanksgiving dinner tracks closely with the government’s Consumer Price Index for food eaten at home (available online at http://www.bls.gov/news.release/cpi.nr0.htm), which indicates a 3-percent increase compared to a year ago.

A total of 179 volunteer shoppers checked prices at grocery stores in 35 states. Farm Bureau volunteer shoppers are asked to look for the best possible prices, without taking advantage of special promotional coupons or purchase deals, such as spending $50 and receiving a free turkey.

Shoppers with an eye for bargains in all areas of the country should be able to purchase individual menu items at prices comparable to the Farm Bureau survey averages. Another option for busy families without a lot of time to cook is ready-to-eat Thanksgiving meals for up to 10 people, with all the trimmings, which are available at many supermarkets and take-out restaurants for around $50 to $75.

The AFBF survey was first conducted in 1986. While Farm Bureau does not make any scientific claims about the data, it is an informal gauge of price trends around the nation. Farm Bureau’s survey menu has remained unchanged since 1986 to allow for consistent price comparisons.

Source: Cyndie Sirekis,  AFBF Director of Internal Communications

2016-05-31T19:32:14-07:00November 20th, 2014|

SURPRISE: EWG recommends Fruits & Vegetables – Conventional or Organic

EWG to Continue Publishing  “Dirty Dozen” List of Conventional Produce

By Laurie Greene; CalAgToday Editor, Reporter

This week, Marilyn Dolan, the Executive Director of the Alliance For Food and Farming[1] (AFF) sent a letter to Environmental Working Group[2] (EWG) President Ken Cook requesting they discontinue their annual release of the so-called “dirty dozen” list. Scott Faber, EWG’s Vice President of Government Affairs responded online TODAY that “EWG’s top shelf advice is to eat your fruits and veggies. But, as EWG’s research shows, not all veggies are the same, and some have more pesticide residues than others. That’s why we will ignore the call to discontinue publishing our Shopper’s Guide.”Food Scoring Factors

This correspondence comes following EWG’s statement that organic and conventional produce are best foods for consumers and that organization’s new and strongly worded recommendation about the need for increased consumption of all fruits and vegetables – whether they are organically or conventionally grown. The statement accompanied the release of EWG’s Food Scores: Rate Your Plate, an easy-to-use food database and mobile app on October 27, 2014 that rates and shares information for more than 80,000 foods from about 1,500 brands in a simple, searchable, online format. “The new database is the most comprehensive food-rating database available to consumers,” EWG said in a statement. “Its scoring system factors in not only nutrition, but also ingredients of concern, such as food additives, and contaminants. It also estimates the degree to which foods have been processed.”

Each year, EWG publishes Shopper’s Guide To Pesticides In Produce “to help consumers find conventional fruits and vegetables with low concentrations of pesticide residues,” explained Sonya Lunder, EWG’s senior analyst and principle author of the report.  “If a particular item is likely to be high in pesticides, people can go for organic.”

While the annual Shopper’s Guide features a “Clean Fifteen” section of conventional produce with the least amount of pesticide residues, it is famous for its annual “Dirty Dozen” list of the most pesticide-contaminated produce and its Dirty Dozen™ Plus” highlights hot peppers and leafy greens – kale and collard greens – often tainted with unusually hazardous pesticides. The Alliance for Food and Fiber has worked hard to debunk the dirty dozen list,” said Dolan, “with good scientific evidence that even though produce may have crop protection product residues on a small percentage of the total volume of produce, the residue is far less than FDA standards.”

Here is the letter from AFF to EWG, in its entirety.

Mr. Cook:AFF

We noted your organization’s acknowledgment in the “Food Scores” database that both conventional and organic fruits and vegetables should be considered best food choices for consumers.  We also saw the Environmental Working Group’s new and very strong statement concerning the need to increase daily produce consumption for most Americans now posted on your website. 

As you are well aware, our organization, the Alliance for Food and Farming (AFF), has repeatedly requested that you discontinue the publication of your annual “dirty dozen” list because it is misleading to consumers, is not peer-reviewed and is not based on real risk.  The conventional and organic fruit and vegetable farmers we represent produce a very safe product that experts around the world agree we should all be eating more of for better health.  In addition, the USDA, FDA and EPA all clearly state that residues do not pose a food safety concern.

For these reasons, along with EWG’s new and strong acknowledgement of the health and safety of conventional produce, the AFF renews its call for your organization to end your annual release of the “dirty dozen” list.

While there is still much information to come with respect to the validity and credibility of your new “Food Scores” report, we are pleased to see that, for produce, this new report supports decades of nutritional studies showing the health benefits of a diet rich in fruits and vegetables – regardless of whether they are organic or conventional. We are sure you would agree that it is illogical for your organization to urge consumers to eat more conventional produce while simultaneously mislabeling these safe and healthy foods “dirty,” “toxic laden,” and “contaminated” among other things.

Therefore we ask you to stop unfairly disparaging conventionally grown fruits and vegetables with your annual “dirty dozen” list release.  Instead, please continue on the positive path you’ve established with your new statement urging increased consumption. That is the right message for consumers and also meets your organization’s stated objective to “empower people to live healthier lives.”

We look forward to hearing from you regarding your future intentions for the so-called “dirty dozen” list.

Sincerely,

Marilyn Dolan, Executive Director, Alliance for Food and Farming

 

Here is the Scott Faber, EWG’s Vice President of Government Affairs’s response to AFF TODAY in its entirety:

Food industry lobbyists are none too pleased with EWG’s new scoring system for foods, accusing EWG’s Food Scores of:

         “Misinformation”

EWG

         “Void of scientific rigor”

         “Inaccurate and misleading information”

         “Extreme and scientifically unfounded views”

Seems like we hit a nerve.

Apparently, helping consumers identify those foods with too much fat, sugar and salt  — as well as foods with unregulated food chemicals or too much mercury – is giving Big Food’s hired guns indigestion.

Of course, food manufacturers don’t like scoring systems like NuVal or Guiding Stars, so it’s no surprise they are already attacking Food Scores.

Could it be that so many packaged foods score poorly?

Here’s what we found: far too many packaged foods have too much sugar, salt and fat and many foods contain chemicals or other ingredients of concern.  Overall, 25 percent of the 80,000 products we reviewed received and 8, 9 or 10. (For EWG, less is more: the best foods score a 1, while the worst foods score a 10.)  

Big Food’s lobbyists contend that we relied upon “isolated studies” to include added sugars and some low-calorie sweeteners in our scores. By “isolated studies,” they mean peer-reviewed research by the Institute of Medicine, the health arm of the National Academy of Sciences.

Big Food’s lobbyists also claim that we used “online sources” to address the risks posed by arsenic and other food contaminants. By  “online sources,” they mean the Food and Drug Administration.

In fact, our scoring system is based upon hundreds of studies conducted by leading experts, including those at the World Health Organization. And, unlike industry-funded studies of food chemicals, the studies that served as our references are available for everyone to see.

Big Food’s lobbyists are especially peeved that EWG recognized that organic foods score better than conventional foods.

Well, duh. Unlike so-called “natural” foods peddled by food giants, certified organic foods cannot be produced with toxic pesticides, antibiotics and hormones. The U.S. Department of Agriculture has even stricter rules when it comes to what can go into “flavors.”  Nor can organic food use genetically engineered ingredients, though GE content doesn’t factor into our scoring system.

Even fruit and vegetable lobbyists took time to bash EWG’s new food scoring tool.  Top scores for actual fruits and vegetables weren’t enough for the Alliance for Food and Farming, a trade association that represents conventional produce growers, which accused EWG of making “disparaging, inaccurate safety claims” in our Shopper’s Guide to Pesticides in Produce. This is the same group that blamed EWG for scaring people away from healthy food and spent $180,000 of your tax dollars erroneously claiming the Shopper’s Guide discourages people from eating their fruits and veggies.

As regular users of the Shopper’s Guide know, EWG’s  top shelf advice is to eat your fruits and veggies. But, as EWG’s research shows, not all veggies are the same, and some have more pesticide residues than others. That’s why we will ignore the call to discontinue publishing our Shopper’s Guide.

It seems that some food and farm lobbyists can’t handle the food truth.

LessIsMore

[1]AFF, a non-profit organization comprised of approximately 50 agriculture associations, commodity groups and individual growers/shippers who represent farms of all sizes and includes conventional and organic production, works to provide a voice for farmers to communicate their commitment to food safety and land stewardship. Through outreach to the media and consumers, the Alliance provides information and scientific analyses on many food safety subjects, including foodborne illness and pesticide use, among others. “The Alliance for Food and Fiber has worked hard to debunk the dirty dozen list with good scientific evidence that even though produce may have crop protection product residues on a small percentage of the total volume of produce, the residue is far less than FDA standards.”

[2]The Environmental Working Group http://www.ewg.org/about-us, a non-profit, non-partisan organization dedicated to protecting human health and the environment, aims to empower people to live healthier lives in a healthier environment by driving consumer choice and civic action with:

  • game-changing investigations, research and debate on toxics and environmental health, food and agriculture, and water and energy
  • a team of scientists, policy experts, lawyers, communication experts and programmers who stand up for public health when government or industry won’t.
2016-05-31T19:32:17-07:00October 30th, 2014|

USDA Extends Dairy Margin Protection Program Deadlines

USDA is extending the deadlines for the Dairy Margin Protection Program. Farmers now have until Dec. 5, 2014, to enroll in the voluntary program, established by the 2014 Farm Bill. Coverage election in subsequent years will take place from July 1 through September 30.

The program provides financial assistance to participating farmers when the margin – the difference between the price of milk and feed costs – falls below the coverage level selected by the farmer.

Producers are encouraged to use the online Margin Protection Program Decision tool at www.fsa.usda.gov/mpptool to calculate the best levels of coverage for their dairy operation. The secure website can be accessed via computer, smartphone or tablet.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) also extended the opportunity for public comments on both the Margin Protection Program and the Dairy Product Donation Program until Dec. 15, 2014Comments can be submitted to USDA via the regulations.gov website at http://go.usa.gov/GJSA.

The Dairy Product Donation Program (DPDP), authorized by the 2014 Farm Bill through Dec. 31, 2018, addresses low margins for dairy operations by using Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) funds to purchase dairy products for donation to public and private nonprofit organizations that provide nutrition assistance to low-income populations. Purchases are only made by USDA during periods of low margins. No enrollment is required for dairy operators to benefit from the DPDP. The Farm Service Agency (FSA) and the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) will administer DPDP if ever triggered.

2016-05-31T19:32:17-07:00October 30th, 2014|

Upcoming CDFA Meeting to Discuss Dairy Digester Research Program

Dairy Digesters Are Needed to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions

The California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) is developing a new program, the Dairy Digester Research and Development Program, authorized by the Budget Act of 2014 (Chapter 25, Statutes of 2014). CDFA was appropriated $12 million dollars from the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund to provide financial assistance for the installation of dairy digesters in California, which will result in reduced greenhouse gas emissions.

CDFA will administer the program in two phases, beginning with Phase I, Dairy Digester Development and Phase II, Research. An estimated $11 million in competitive grant funding will be awarded to provide financial assistance for the implementation of dairy digesters that result in reduced greenhouse gas emissions and provide other environmental benefits (Phase I). An estimated $500,000 will be made available for research and demonstration projects that improve the economic performance of dairy digesters (Phase II).

Three public stakeholder meetings have been scheduled in November 2014 to explain the new program and to receive comments and suggestions. These public meetings will be held on the following dates and at the following locations:

Thursday, November 6, 2014 – 2:30 p.m. – 5:30 p.m.

University of California Cooperative Extension Stanislaus County

3800 Cornucopia Way

Room: HI

Modesto, CA 95358

 

Monday, November 10, 2014 – 1:00 p.m. – 4:00 p.m.

University of California Cooperative Extension Tulare County

4437 S. Laspina Street (Across the street from World Ag Expo)

Room: Tulare County Agricultural Building Auditorium

Tulare, CA 93274

 

Thursday, November 13, 2014 – 1:00 p.m. – 4:00 p.m. Includes Webinar access!

California Department of Food and Agriculture

1220 N Street Room: Auditorium

Sacramento, CA 95814

 

The meeting on November 13 will include a webinar to allow remote attendance.

 

More information about this program is available on the CDFA Environmental Stewardship websiteFor additional information on dairy digesters, click on: California EPA Digesters and California EPA Anaerobic Digestion.

2016-05-31T19:32:18-07:00October 28th, 2014|
Go to Top