MY JOB DEPENDS ON AG Broadens Ag Community on Facebook

“My Job Depends on Ag” Facebook Campaign Goes Big

By Patrick Cavanaugh, Associate Editor

It was a vision by Steve Malanca a tractor, salesman, and Erik Wilson, pest control operator and honeydew melon farmer, both working in around Dos Palos in Merced County.

Erik Wilson

“The fact that California agriculture is only 2 percent of the gross domestic product of the state was offensive to agriculture,” said Wilson. “because we all know it goes way beyond the gross receipts.”

Steve Malanca

Back in 2013 Malanca, an equipment salesman with Duetz Allis in Kerman, Calif., came up with a decal with the message: My Job Depends on Ag. He made a few for his friends who slapped them on their trucks.

“The phrase was inspired by a video done by Mike Wade, California Farm Water Coalition, in which he asked several people how they depended on ag for their job,” Malanca said.

Malanca was born and raised in Firebaugh, where his grandfather settled after emigrating from Italy. “My grandfather worked for Miller and Lux ranch, which was one of the largest ranches in the United States in the late 1800s,” he said.

“My father was born and raised on the West Side and was a cotton gin manager for Producers Cotton Oil Company. I have an older brother who is in the cantaloupe business longer than I have been in the farm equipment business. He is part owner of Westside Produce, and my younger brother is a shipping clerk there.

Producers Cotton Oil Company Plant Near Calwa, California

For the last 40 years, starting in Firebaugh, Malanca has been selling farm equipment. “That community has been tremendous to our family. Being involved in the equipment business, and talking to our customers about the trials and tribulations about water was an inspiration to put the ‘I Depend on Ag’ video together.

“There was a local Firebaugh farmer who made a brown ‘V’ decal that was a spinoff of the green ‘V’ of former Fresno State Bulldog coach Pat Hill, signifying the green valley. The brown V of course signified no water,” said Melena. “I expanded the idea and generated the ‘I Depend on Ag Decal’ about a month ago.

“Then Erik immediately suggested that we put it on Facebook, and the two ideas were married–and here we are,” said Malanca. As of the afternoon of June 6, the number of connections were close to 21,000 members!

“We did not want to have a Facebook with statistics on the importance of agriculture in California,” said Wilson. “I have a friend named Brian Ervin who is on Facebook, and he posted an item unrelated to the ‘I Depend on Ag’ concept. He wanted to know about other people’s California…Was it raining?…Was there hail on the ground? There was also an image of a guy loading a hay truck.”

“Instead of pushing out information, I got the idea of just letting everyone tell their own story,” Wilson said. “If people have a job that depends on ag, then we should let them tell their own story. Let people get involved. They own the page, and the stories have been wonderful. In fact, Steve and I have gotten choked up on some. People are saying are some things you’ve never heard of, and it’s really kind of historical,” he said.

“There are a lot of old methods of farming that have been forgotten that are now being introduced on the page,” said Wilson.

“Also, I have encouraged any group or person who disagrees with our philosophy and farming methods to open up the conversation, and not yell or get profane. This is what everyone America has been crying for from our politicians. So, we are going around them. This is how civilized adults get things done.”

“There have been comments from the organic crowd regarding images of sprayers working in fields. Now if they want organic food to eat, we will be happy to give it to them at a higher cost; organic production costs us more in time, money and trips across the field because the materials that we are permitted to use are not as affective,” said Wilson.

“We had a conversation with Western Growers on June 4 in which they asked if we were having to delete a lot of entries from people bashing the web page,” said Malanca. “And Erik, who moderates the page, said only three posts had to be deleted.”

“I may have deleted something prematurely because I thought a comment might go south too fast, but I just do not want the nastiness or personal attacks to take over, because it often happens if you do not moderate–even if it’s a friend–if they throw F-bombs, their entries will be deleted.”

“We are hearing from so many people who understand that ag is part of their job. We had a guy who works in the tortilla chip factory in Los Angeles who depends on ag for his job because all the corn that goes into the chips is grown in the San Joaquin Valley,” said Wilson.

“Flower shops are connecting in because flowers are agriculture. A lavender grower also posted a comment.”

Trucking companies are chiming as well. “If we can’t grow and sell it, then these boys can’t haul it,” noted Wilson. “And if we can get the trucking industry behind us since they do haul a lot of ag products, suddenly we are uniting an even larger segment of people who depend on agriculture,” said Malanca.

“I’d like to see these truckers and the guys on the docks get as passionate as we are, and maybe decide not to haul freight to areas that are complaining about farmers. They need to say, ‘if you want what we have, then turn the water on for the farmers.'”

“This is giving farmers a voice,” said Malanca. “And it’s something that has been missing.”

“Our wives have said that we are preaching to the choir, and I say that we need to rally and embolden every single person in the industry. I want to champion them as their story has not been told in the media–other than the agricultural media,” said Wilson.

“Many fragments have beentrying to get something done, but now we are seeing farmers really coming together on ‘I Depend on Ag.’ This is what we have been trying to do since the beginning of time,” said Malanca.

While the scope of the facebook page focuses on California, plans are germinating to roll out a national campaign. “After all, there are millions across the country who depend on agriculture,” said Wilson.

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:28:15-07:00June 6th, 2015|

Biomass Bill Passes Assembly

Biomass Bill (AB 590, Salas / Dahle) Protects Renewable Energy and Air Quality

SACRAMENTO – AB 590 will incentivize biomass utilization of agriculture waste and forest waste. The legislation will save jobs, divert biomass from landfills, and create renewable energy.

“Biomass power generation is a clean and efficient way to produce renewable energy and help improve our air. In fact, the Delano biomass facility has helped reduce 96 percent of the pollutants released from open-field burning. This facility alone converts 300,000 tons of agricultural waste per year into clean, renewable energy.” said Assemblymember Salas. “AB 590 provides the necessary structure and resources to protect and incentivize biomass power in California.”

Farms in Kern and Tulare Counties generate over 580,000 tons of woody waste annually, mostly from almond, peach, and nectarine orchards. In the past, most of this material has been burned openly in the fields. Open burning of wood residues produces up to 100 times more greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions than biomass power plants, which convert wood into renewable energy. The Delano biomass facility reduces 96 percent of the pollutants released in open-field burning; leading local air quality management officials to call Covanta Delano “a stationary air pollution control device.”

In addition to air quality benefits, the biomass plants produce a steady flow of reliable, renewable, baseload electric power regardless of natural external conditions, like wind, sun and water flow. The plants also help ensure that the state meets its current renewable energy portfolio standard of 33 percent by the 2020 statutory deadline.

“In the past few years we have seen the catastrophic results of forests that are too loaded with forest fuels. The people of my district have lived in a cloud of smoke, as thousands of acres have burned destroying lives, property, critical animal habitat, ruining our watersheds and wasting valuable resources,” said Assemblyman Dahle. “I introduced AB 590 to address this crisis. The bill is now on to the Senate with bipartisan support from the Assembly, where I hope to see it receive the same support.”

Currently, California biomass plants use more than eight million tons of wood waste as fuel. About 3.7 million tons represent urban wood waste kept out of landfills, helping local governments meet disposal mandates.

Biomass plants across the state employ approximately 700 people directly, as well as 1,000 to 1,500 other workers in dedicated indirect jobs. Many are in economically hard-pressed rural communities where the plants are one of the largest private employers.

Unfortunately, the 25 plants that convert biomass waste into energy are at serious risk of closure without decisive action by the State Legislature and the Governor. In the past year, five plants closed. AB 590 would allocate part of the state’s Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF) revenue to defer the costs of operating these plants.

###

Assemblymember Salas represents part of the City of Bakersfield, the cities of Arvin, Avenal, Corcoran, Delano, Hanford, Lemoore, McFarland, Shafter, Wasco, and the communities of Armona, Buttonwillow, Home Garden, Kettleman City, Lamont, Lost Hills, Stratford and Weedpatch

Assemblymember Dahle represents Alturas, Anderson, Butte County (Portions), Colfax, Dunsmuir, Grass Valley, Lassen County, Modoc County, Montague, Mount Shasta, Nevada City, Nevada County, Placer County (Portions), Plumas County, Portola, Redding, Shasta County, Shasta Lake, Sierra County, Siskiyou County, Truckee, Weed, Yreka

(Photo: Covanta Biomass Plant, Delano, CA)

Contact: Jillian Rice. (661) 335-0302

California Ag Today2016-05-31T19:28:15-07:00June 4th, 2015|

International Trade Tariffs Must Be Lowered

For California Ag Especially, International Trade Tariffs Must Be Lowered

By Laurie Greene, Editor, CaliforniaAgToday.com

USDA Foreign Agriculture Service Associate Administrator Janet Nuzum recently met with agricultural commodity representatives at the California Center for International Trade Development (CITD) in Fresno.

Nuzum spoke about both the opportunities California agricultural groups face as well as key problems they encounter in international trade. She said, “The strength of California agriculture can sometimes appear to be its weakness, in this sense: California is, of course, the largest agricultural state in the United States. It’s also incredibly diverse compared to other parts of the United States. And, because of that diversity, it faces a wider variety of challenges and problems in global trading.

“If there were less diversity, there might be fewer problems,” said Nuzum. “But, with greater presence in the marketplace, having a wider diversity of products or types of products, and whether their product is fresh or processed, California growers and exporters and government officials and regulators face a very challenging set of circumstances, particularly with international trade tariffs.”

Nuzum said that is both the good news and challenging news—all in one. “You’ve got a rich agricultural economy,” she elaborated, and you’ve got a lot of natural resources which are not necessarily found in other parts of the United States. This enables the industry to offer a very rich plate of different kinds of agricultural products. There are some products, and I am thinking about tree nuts now, in which California represents the majority of world production or world trade. So, other consumers around the world are dependent on having that American product, that Californian product, out there in the marketplace,” she said.

Nuzum said because California’s diverse produce is exported around the world, international trade discussions need to come to fruition to lower foreign trade barriers. “Our tariffs, both agricultural and non-agricultural, are much lower than other countries we trade with. That is one reason it is so important to negotiate these trade agreements—to reduce these other tariffs to zero, or at least to our levels,” she said.

(Photo credit: The Busy Port of Oakland, Flickr)

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:28:15-07:00June 2nd, 2015|

Henry Perea Honored

Ag Council Recognizes Assemblyman Henry Perea with Influential Legislator Award

During its annual Legislative Day held this week, Agricultural Council of California (Ag Council) recognized Assemblyman Henry T. Perea (D-Fresno) with the inaugural Influential Legislator Award.

“Assemblyman Perea personifies what is good in a political leader,” said Emily Rooney, President of Ag Council. “He has found ways to collaborate on issues that have allowed him to help his constituents, but have also been good policy for the entire state. And, even on issues where we may not agree, he always maintains an open door policy to Ag Council and its members.”

Since coming into office in 2010, Perea has tackled some of California’s toughest issues head-on, including water policy. His district represents the heart of agriculture in California, and as a moderate Democrat he’s been sensitive to not only how important the industry is to the economy, but also in providing employment to many of his constituents.

Ag Council Chairman, Brendon Flynn, a farmer with Sunsweet Growers and Assemblyman Henry T. Perea (D-Fresno)

“Assemblyman Perea was a leading advocate for securing the $2.7 billion in funding for water storage in the 2014 water bond package. At the same time, he spoke out against the overly burdensome Sustainable Groundwater Management Act last year, demonstrating the he truly understands that a healthy ag economy is good for the entire state of California,” said Brendon Flynn, Chairman of Ag Council who presented the award to Perea.

Perea’s leadership has made impacts in several areas of agricultural policy. He is currently serving as the Assembly Ag Committee Chair, and has embraced that role by seeking to learn more about California’s number one industry. Assemblyman Perea has authored a bill to help fix some of the implementation issues with last year’s groundwater legislation. In 2013, he brought together a diverse coalition to pass Assembly Bill 8, which provides funds to help lower costs for farmers who choose cleaner burning vehicles.

“This award was created to recognize legislators who might go outside of traditional roles, whether they be Republican or Democrat, and do what is actually best for the state, its residents, and the future of agriculture,” added Rooney.

Assemblyman Perea received the Influential Legislator Award during the Ag Council Annual Legislative Day in Sacramento. This award will be given on an annual basis to legislators who embody that same collaborative approach to finding positive outcomes for agriculture and all of California.

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:28:16-07:00May 29th, 2015|

A Call for Common Sense Water Management

California Water Management Dilemma

By Lawrence H. Easterling, Jr.

Larry Easterling makes a comment at a recent pistachio growers meeting.

We are witnessing the dismantling of the California water conveyance system that supplies drinking water for 25 million California residents and four million acres of prime farmland in the San Joaquin Valley.

Our water resources are being “Withheld” from the very people of this state who have shown what “Free Enterprise” can do not only for the well-being of all in California, but the entire nation. Unfortunately, several major environmental groups and complacent politicians are killing the freedoms that have been the bulwark of success in California. Let me explain.

Water is our most valuable renewable resource and Mother Nature gives it to California in copious amounts during most years. What we do with that water—water management—is critical to the future of the Golden State.

On average, 200.0 million acre-feet of water a year blankets our state. One acre-foot is equal to 325,851 gallons of water. Of that precipitation, 75% originates north of the Sacramento River. The other 25% falls in central and southern California.

The water that is not manageable by us is 120.0 million acre-feet. Some of it evaporates, but most of it settles into the ground, fills lakes, and what remains heads for the Pacific Ocean. The balance of the water is called “directable” surface water (80,000,000 acre-feet) and this is where we have the opportunity to put it to its best and proper use.

By 2005, according to the Department of Water Resources, 48% of that directable water went to the environment, 41% to agriculture and the remaining 11% to rural areas. This balance of such a precious resource seemed at the time to be equitable to all parties, thanks to the ingenuity of our forefathers in the 20^th century. Their foresight gave us a water conveyance system second to none in the entire world.

California’s water conveyance system had four major objectives:

To provide reliable water deliveries to 25 million people to avoid water shortages that would otherwise exist and continually plague two-thirds of the California population.
To support four million acres in central California of what the National Geographic Magazine proclaimed to be the most productive farmland in the world.
To reinforce our natural environment.
To recharge our groundwater supplies.

Some distinctions should be made here as to how much directable water we are actually concerned about. At full capacity, the two California water conveyance systems—the State Water Project (SWP) and the federal Central Valley Project (CVP)—deliver water from northern California to southern and central California. Each system, the CVP and the SWP, has the capacity to each deliver 4.0 million acre-feet water each year. However, this water delivery capacity has never been tested. The record shows that in the years prior to 2005, the average total delivery COMBINED for both projects was 5.4 million acre-feet per year. The ultimate users of this water went to agriculture (60%) and the rural population (40%).

The volume of water available, on average, from the Sacramento River, including the San Joaquin River, is 30.3 million acre-feet. It is from this volume of water that the 5.4 million acre-feet are sent south.

In 2007, several environmental organizations led by Natural Resources Defense Council took the Department of Water Resources to court to compel the court to enforce the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The court ruling to enforce this law declared that the giant water export pumps that raise the water from the Delta into the California Aqueduct were cut back because it was suspect that the pumps were killing too many delta smelt, an endangered species.

Even in flood years restricted pumping has reduced the water flow to a fraction of the contracted normal flow. Henceforth, since 2007, our water deliveries to urban and agricultural areas have been severely compromised.

The enforcement of these laws is now negating the four major functions of the giant California water conveyance system outlined with the possible exception of the natural environment. Now mind you, this water comes from northern California where 75% of the rain in California falls, averaging over 50 inches a year. Central and southern California “average” less than 15 inches a year.

During the seven years from 2007 through 2014, average deliveries to farms have been reduced to less than one acre-foot per year. Most agricultural crops require 3 ½ acre-feet of water per year. Today, without recourse, these farms are left with barely enough water to keep their plants alive. As for the hardship visited upon 25 million consumers, the Metropolitan Water District (MWD) in southern California is a good example.

The MWD services 19 million accounts, and prior to 2007, was receiving 40% of its water from the SWP. That water source has now only been able to supply approximately 10% of their needs. Consequently, due to seeking other sources to replace their water losses, rate increases to their customers over the years 2007 to 2014 have doubled. On top of all these setbacks, Mother Nature now has shown us her own drought versus our manufactured water crisis. All the way through this synthetic drought, the average rate of precipitation at the source of our water in northern California has been 45 inches each year.

In order to survive, those of us who must have an adequate supply of water to sustain us have been forced to pump more groundwater and/or purchase water from farmers who idle farmland and transfer their water to areas severely threatened with water shortages. For some of those lucky enough to find water for sale, the cost of water has become a severe financial burden. Where farms in the Central Valley were, prior to 2007, paying just under $100 per acre-foot, today if a willing seller can be found, the price can range anywhere from $1,000 to over $2,000 per acre-foot. In many such cases, water costs can exceed all other cultural costs combined. Likewise, the aquifer has dropped every year since 2007 due to frantic attempts by farmers to supplement the critical loss of surface water.

WHAT MUST BE DONE:

The effects of water deprivation over an eight-year period by a man-made drought capped by one of nature’s real droughts, is wrecking havoc with the nation’s food supply. The state of California is now in the grips of the Law of Diminishing Returns and is incapable of averting a disaster due to environmental regulations. Consequently, this country’s NATIONAL SECURITY is being compromised. CONGRESS MUST ACT NOW before further damage is done. These actions need to be taken:

1. The Endangered Species Act (ESA) must be excluded from jurisdiction over the pumps, which move northern water to central and southern California. The pumps are presently operating at about 15% of their capacity. This measure should be permanent and under the management of the Department of Water Resources (DWR).

2. The Endangered Species Act needs to be revised in order to “protect all species”, including humans, from collateral damage due to methods employed to save one species that results in severe damage to other species. This would be implemented through a biological opinion that would INCLUDE a list of all species that would be adversely affected by the METHOD employed to protect one specific species. This measure would make right just one of the irregularities in this flawed law, which attracts litigation like bees to honey. The law does not need to be struck down, simply rewritten to safeguard “all” species, including human beings.

3. California’s magnificent water distribution and conveyance system has no peer in this world. It is a remarkable feat of engineering admired by those who have come from far and near to marvel at its accomplishment. Yet, by environmental fiat, it has been reduced to a token of its capabilities. “Directable” water in California originally ceded one-third of its 80,000,000 acre-feet to the environment.

Today, according to the DWR, the environment now takes, not one-third, but 50% of the direct able water, leaving the rest to urban and farming communities. This is not what the original framers envisioned, but under the DWR, its control has been gradually diluted by federal agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and one of its extensions known as the STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD (SWRCB). THIS FIVE PERSON-BOARD IS STAFFED WITH ENVIRONMENTALISTS, such as their chairwoman, Felicia Marcos, a Governor Brown-appointee, whose professional background includes eight years with the EPA and five years with the radical Natural Resources Defense Council.

The influence of these federal agencies, backed by political power brokers’ lobbyists, has tilted the water distribution of surface water away from its original intended users. In essence, the environmentalists now control California’s surface water; and now, with the passage of the recent 7.5 billion dollar Water Bond, they will control our groundwater as well. If the water agencies do not perform with the desired results, the bottom-line is that final control will go to the SWRCB.

The ship of state now needs to be righted; it is drifting far off course. First of all, the EPA must be brought to heel. For a federal agency, it exerts far too much power. And, in so doing, has completely distorted California’s surface water delivery system. Next, the SWRCB must either be eliminated with FULL CONTROL restored to the Department of Water Resources, or completely reorganized as an ADVISORY BOARD to the DWR where ALL recipients of the surface water system would be represented. A ten-board membership might be in order, with a director and the nine remaining seats divided into three equal parts by experienced personnel in agriculture, city water management, and the environment, i.e., three persons from each classification and residents of northern, central and southern California.

4. Finally, one in every ten workers in California is either directly, or indirectly dependent upon the health of our vast agricultural industry.

It is time to step forward and reveal, with facts and figures, the house of cards that water management in this state has become. Likewise, those 25 million people in southern California, such as the MWD’s 19 million users who once got 40% of their water from the giant conveyance system, deserve to get that water back.

With years of a man-made drought compounded by a natural drought now in the eighth year, there is ample information available through various farm county records to quantify in lost dollars the cumulative effect of, (1) lost production due to forced fallowing of land, (2) water costs that are now ten times what they were prior to 2007, and (3) the heavy burden economically of converting hardworking farm labor to the welfare roles where some Central Valley towns are now approaching 50% unemployment. Combined, these costs will be in the billions of dollars, bloating further our California deficit.

The goal of society has always been to improve the human condition and for one generation to leave a better world for the next. The visionaries of the 20^th century got it right. They delivered in spades to us, the beneficiaries, a modern miracle. It is a water conveyance system like none other to serve all the people of California. Where are those visionaries now? Rather than embrace the gifts of a reliable source of precious water, they proceed to dismantle the entire system. It is because of the system that California feeds the nation. This is not just a California crisis. It is one that will affect the entire nation. Look upon it as a national security threat and demand that our leaders do what is right for the vast majority of this country’s people.

Lawrence H. Easterling, Jr. Administrator, Kettleman Pistachio Growers and Director, American Pistachio Growers

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-08-03T21:05:15-07:00May 18th, 2015|

Court Awards Right to Choose to Gerawan Farming and its Farmworkers

By Laurie Greene, Editor, and Patrick Cavanaugh, News Director

Gerawan Farming, a major family-owned and operated tree fruit and grape operation in Fresno and Madera Counties, established in 1938, and its farmworkers were victorious yesterday when a panel of 5th District California Court of Appeal judges in Fresno ruled the California Agricultural Labor Relations Board (ALRB) violated the law when it forced Gerawan into a statutory Mandatory Mediation and Conciliation (MMC) process with the United Farm Workers of America (UFW) to reach terms in a collective bargaining agreement.

The Court’s decision, filed May 14, 2015, states:

UFW was certified as the employees’ bargaining representative in 1992, but after engaging in initial discussions with Gerawan, disappeared from the scene for nearly two decades. In late 2012, UFW returned and both parties renewed negotiations. A few months later, at UFW’s request, the ALRB (the Board) ordered the parties to a statutory MMC process pursuant to Labor Code section 1164 et seq.1.

Under the MMC process, if a 30-day mediation period does not succeed in producing a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) by voluntary agreement, the mediator decides what the terms of the CBA should be and reports that determination to the Board. Once the mediator’s report becomes the final order of the Board, the report establishes the terms of an imposed CBA to which the parties are bound.

Following the ALRB’s final order adopting the mediator’s report, Gerawan Farming challenged the validity of the order and the MMC process on both statutory and constitutional grounds.

Over the last two years since, the UFW and Gerawan have been mired in a legal battle over who has the authority to represent the nearly 3,000 Gerawan fieldworkers in contract negotiations with Gerawan Farms, the union or the fieldworkers themselves.

A union contract was never implemented by Gerawan employees in the 1990’s, nor did the UFW collect dues and represent the employees in negotiations. Gerawan employees worked hard to advocate and petition (twice) to hold an ALRB-sanctioned election to decertify the union. The decertification election was held in November 2013; however, the ALRB impounded the ballots, and has not counted the votes to date.

Paul Bower, an attorney representing Sylvia Lopez, a Gerawan employee who helped lead the anti-union drive, said, “Gerawan workers are joyful over the decision.”

Here are excepts from the Court Decision:

Among Gerawan’s claims is the contention that UFW’s lengthy absence resulted in an abandonment of its status as the employee’s bargaining representative. We agree with Gerawan’s statutory argument that it should have been given an opportunity to prove abandonment to the Board once UFW requested the MMC process.

More fundamentally, we agree with Gerawan’s constitutional arguments that the MMC statute violates equal protection principles and constitutes an improper delegation of legislative authority.

Where a union has arguably abandoned the employees but later returns to invoke the MMC process, that situation may create a crisis of representation. It is clear that the employees’ right to a representative of their own choosing would be seriously jeopardized in the situation of abandonment by a union where, as here, the absentee union suddenly reappeared on the scene to demand the MMC process.

A union that has had little or no contact with the employees or the employer over many years (here, decades) would be unlikely to have an adequate working knowledge of the employees’ situation or their wishes. From the employees’ standpoint, that union would be reappearing on the scene as something of a stranger.

Most importantly, during the union’s long absence, the employees’ working conditions, wages and attitude toward the union (if they even knew they had a union) may have significantly changed over the years. Indeed, it may be the case that the employees do not want to be represented by that union or any other union, which Gerawan asserts was the situation here.

[Under the MMC process,] “a collective bargaining agreement will be imposed whether the employees want it or not; and it will be imposed with the formerly absent union, whether the employees want its representation or not.” Accordingly, it is appropriate to allow the employer to raise the abandonment issue at that stage, because only that result will preserve the ALRA’s purpose of protecting the employees’ right to choose.

UFW officials said they would appeal the Court’s decision.

California Ag Today2016-05-31T19:30:24-07:00May 16th, 2015|

Top Ten Issues Facing Ag

The Top Ten Issues Facing Agriculture:

California Fresh Fruit Association’s Bedwell Lays Them Out

By Patrick Cavanaugh, California Ag Today

For the first time in nearly eight decades, the California Fresh Fruit Association met in San Diego to carry on all the traditions established over the previous 79 years by the organization originally known as the California Grape & Tree Fruit League.

“How does that feel?” said President Barry Bedwell as he addressed a big part of his membership. “For the most part, I think the feedback has been more than positive. As we explain the rationale behind the name change and why we have moved from a very dear moniker, if you will, for an association that has such a great history, I think it is altogether fitting and proper to recognize our position in the state of California,” said Bedwell.

The Association covers the state from Lake County in the North to the Coachella Valley in the South, and represents 13 commodities with a combined value of $2.5 billion.

“The new name transition has gone very well,” noted Bedwell. “And as we look at 2015, I think it is a ‘schizophrenic’ time for agriculture. On the one hand, as our chairman, David Jackson, pointed out, economically, things look very strong for most commodities.”

“However, here we are in a situation of increasing anxiety. If you look at the feedback every year on our top ten issues, you can see the concentration of issues that are not simply operational in scope. They may be historic in impact when talking about water availability and groundwater management, as we move forward,” said Bedwell. “The availability of water, along with the availability of labor, are simply game changers. They can change things overnight. And I think, inherently, farmers understand that and all of you in this room working together as a supply chain understand that.”

Bedwell then announced his traditional Top Ten Issues Affecting Ag and the association and discussed how they changed from the prior year:

#10 Workers’ Compensation costs. We bought up our partnership with Zenith Insurance. It’s about how to run programs more efficiently to save you money, but we understand that when it comes to the issue of worker’s comp, it is the issue of the legislature changing the laws to benefit certain classes of participants that leads to higher costs that render our competitiveness more difficult.

#9 Invasive Pest Issues. Look no further than what’s happening with the citrus industry and their struggle agains HLB and the idea of the Citrus psyllid continually being found in new counties throughout the state. Pests for us on one hand are more associated with things like the European Grapevine Moth, where we have done a good job, made progress, and have a chance at eradication, but pests are always on our minds because we are only one quarantine away from not being able to ship our fruit, and we understand that.

#8 Water Quality. We hear so much about water availability, but creeping up into our mindset as well, is water quality because we know we have issues with salts and nitrates in the Valley. How does agriculture get involved with this? It continues to be an issue.

#7 Groundwater Management Legislation. We saw on our list—for the first—groundwater management legislation. This is potentially a game changer. We just had a meeting with some of you in Visalia with the California Water Foundation. They are trying to explain the timeframe for this new law, and quite frankly, the more you learn about it, the more you have to be concerned about any potential outcome other than the scope of agriculture in the state of California.

Because what they are saying in an almost commonsense contradiction is that this has nothing to do with your water rights. Those don’t change, but we may limit the amount of water you can use. That is a tough one to figure out at times, but that is potentially where we are headed in the fourth year of the drought. As you hear the vernacular in Sacramento, the mindset begins to change from one of, ‘Maybe we’ll get rain this year,’ to ‘Maybe we are in the fourth year of a ten-year drought.’ So all of the sudden, the mindset begins to change to more management of water. This is a major concern.

#6 Labor Costs. Knowing and trying to educate legislators about the fact that seventy to perhaps eighty percent of our variable costs as farmers is tied up with labor because we deal with the most labor-intense costs possible with our 13 commodities. I don’t look at any as being machine harvested or machine pruned. So, every time there’s a good-will gesture of, ‘Boy, we should move that minimum wage up,’ we try to explain to people we don’t pay minimum wage. Wages are higher; but incrementally, all of our sectors move up, whether you are a tractor driver or an irrigator, and that has a major impact on our ability to compete on a world-wide basis. And you start to see the labor influence spilling into Baja, California.

As you read recently, workers there are demonstrating because they are making about $8/day, and we are probably more about $12/hour for seasonal labor. But we still have to compete with those instances, so labor is always going to be a concern. We always talk about labor laws and regulations.

#5 Agriculture Labor Relations Act. A year ago at this time, we talked about a case involving one of our members, Gerawan, and the United Farm Workers (UFW), who won an election back in 1990, disappeared for 22 years, then showed up again last summer. The UFW said, “We are the certified representatives for the employees, we’re now here, we want our contract.” The catch was that the employees said: “We don’t know anything about you; we don’t know why we should pay you three percent of our wages for dues.”

That situation resulted in a hearing beginning on September 29th. At that time, the hearing was in front of an administrative law judge in Fresno, and was scheduled to go for ten weeks. Those ten weeks finished up about two weeks ago—after 23 weeks had past. That’s incredible, to think, we have heard it cost as high as 7 million dollars to have that administrative hearing, all paid by California taxpayers.

This is not really how the law was intended to benefit the workers. So, as we move forward, we are always going to see efforts by organized labor to change the law to change the scale for their benefit. We saw it last year with SB 25, which really tried to create a perpetual mandatory mediation situation.

We have to continually push back on these bills. The most effective way to do that is to communicate the voices of those impacted, and in this case it is the employees. And so we have tried very hard to create a relationship with the members on the Agricultural Labor Relations Board, and a couple of weeks ago when we were in Sacramento, we had dinner with two of the three board members. And I know the chairman spent most of the time speaking with Harold McClarty, president of HMC Farms, so I know we are in good shape. It is really about relationships and that is what we continue to work on.

#4 Healthcare Mandates. What is happening with the Affordable Care Act, and how is impacting you?

We saw some very practical instances last year where many of our members who use farm-labor contractors were approached. And the labor contractors said, “Well, because of the Affordable Care Act, I’m going to have to raise my rates from $0.70 to $1.10/hour. But under closer examination, we said: “Well—hold it. What percent of your workforce really has to be covered under the Act?” In many cases we found that it certainly wasn’t 100 percent; it was sometimes closer to 10 percent. So we are trying to help administer the understanding of that Act for the best benefit of our members.

#3 The Continuing Need for Immigration Reform. It hasn’t gone away. I am so pleased to have Tom Stenzel, president of the United Fresh Produce Association, here with us today, along with his Board chairman Ron Carkoski, because we work very closely on these national issues with Tom and Ron. And our voice is still there. Our level of frustration has grown because as we entered this legislative session in Congress, guess what? What did we hear most about? E-Verify; the Legal Workforce Act; and the concern that we have documented workers. We don’t disagree with that. We think that’s a great idea, but you don’t put the cart in front of the horse; you don’t do E-Verify before you create a system for a legal workforce. That’s a very simple message we are trying to get to the leaders in Congress, and Tom and Ron do an absolutely fantastic job in helping to get that message across.

#2 Food Safety. Last July, I received a phone call from one of our members on a Saturday. It was hard to gauge the impact at the time, because that member said, “I want to let you know that we had four peaches show up in Australia, and there was an indication of Listeria.” Now in Australia, there is technically a tolerance for Listeria, and these were such low levels of Listeria, that that shipment was released.

It went on its way with no issues. But under further examination, Listeria was discovered in the plant. As the U.S. and FDA have no tolerance for Listeria and as U.S. law requires, there was a recall. This was not a small recall. It was a period from June 1st to, I think, July 17th. That is a huge amount of product.

During that time, there were no confirmed illnesses. That doesn’t mean there weren’t claims, because once you start a recall and information goes out to the public, there will be plenty of claims. But from an association point-of-view, how do we react and plan for the future with regard to food safety? Because all of the sudden, the perception of tree fruit in this instance, and peaches and nectarines, in particular, being a low-risk commodity, has changed.

Is it really a low-risk commodity? Absolutely, it is a low-risk commodity. But are we immune? Absolutely not. We found out that we have food safety issues, like so many other fresh produce commodities. We had to communicate the right way not only to the segment of our members who were involved. Many of them were, quite frankly, in a state of denial, saying, “This shouldn’t be happening.” Well it happened.

But I want to applaud the industry, and especially our leadership Association, who said, “We have to do the right thing. We have to communicate our concern. We have to be positive about this.” They not only moved forward with our membership aspect, but they also created the partnership with the Center for Produce Safety in Davis to develop the best possible practices as we move ahead.

Food safety was further complicated late in the year because of the apple recall. Now those were candied apples, they had caramel on them. But as you can see, the fact is the Listeria found was attributable to the apples, not the coating. Again, we had an industry that thought, quite rightfully, they were low-risk. And once again, we are learning we are not immune. As we move ahead, food safety is going to be a very important component of our work as an Association.

We have created a food safety sub-committee, chaired by George Nicolate.

#1 Can anybody guess? Water. From our perspective, there are three general areas of water we have to focus on. Number one, the Water Bond, and what happened last summer. It is a very good success story, in that we were able, with the help of individuals in the legislature, to maximize the amount of dollars in that bond for above-ground storage. But in Sacramento today, there are challenges and perceptions regarding dams. People have mindsets that unfortunately go to the extreme and in many case, dams is one of those.

I can guarantee that through the efforts of people who were involved in our Association and through the Agricultural President’s Council, we were able to move up what was first a $2 billion proposal, then $2.5, then $2.7, with a commitment for a subsequent legislation on Cross-Valley conveyance in Kern County.

This was a major accomplishment, but as accomplishments go, unless you follow-through, you’re never going to realize the results. And I think George Soares, attorney with Kahn, Soares, and Conway in Sacramento, said it best when he said, “As these things happen, amnesia sets in with people very quickly. And all the sudden the people with whom you were discussing above-ground storage with will start to say, ‘Well, you know the bond says it doesn’t have to be above-ground storage; maybe we could do local projects, regional projects, or maybe we can do underground banking.’”

Our message has been very clear, “No, the deal that was made was on two above-ground storage units, and the fact is that these will be decided by water commissioners. There are public benefit formulas, and those projects should be at the top. And until they are disqualified, they should be the first two that are qualified.”

As we were up in Sacramento a couple weeks ago, I think there was frustration among our participants as we heard the governor’s point person on water start to demonstrate that amnesia right in front of us. And that was a concern.

Number one, we have to push the true intent of the water bond to the finish line.

Number two, we have to have input into the groundwater management regulations a process that will require regulations sustainable management agencies for local water agencies. This is a very complicated issue. It’s very difficult to talk about what sustainability is. When they set baselines to talk about the ability to use groundwater, it is vital that we have the opportunity to give our input to stress the importance of sustainability and to emphasize that human health also involves vibrant farms and the employment of individuals. We have to have those concepts melded together.

Lastly we have the long-term issues of water conveyance in the state. If we are going to remain the agricultural giant that we are with the, I believe, all time record in 2014, we are going to have to find a more efficient way to move water, whether is that is the governor’s BDC plan, which doesn’t appear to be gaining traction, or not. But longer-term, members have said, “We are not against moving excess water South. We have to make sure the health of the Delta is maintained. We have to respect environmental laws, but we have to respect the impact of agriculture on our quality of life. So, water is at the forefront.

So, how’s the association doing? Very well. Financially we are on strong terms, I feel very good about our name change and our voluntary leadership moving ahead. I think we can take confidence in looking ahead at the future for this Association.

In summary, I just want to reiterate my thanks for being able to work for production agriculture. It is frustrating at times. It’s always difficult. Working with people who sometimes don’t understand, … it reminds me of the saying that I read in the paper yesterday and need to share with you. It is by Mark Twain, who said, “You never want to get into an argument with a stupid person, they will simply drag you down to their level, and then beat you with experience.”

Many times, in the world of public policy, that’s what we’re are dealing with at times. But we tend to look at it as an opportunity to educate as well as advocate. Those are two separate things, you have to be good at both of them, and I think our leadership does a very good job with them.

Bedwell gave special thanks to this year’s Chairman David Jackson and his wife Gale. He also reached out to thank his staff for the great job they are doing back at the office and in the field.

For more information, go to: California Fresh Fruit Association.

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:30:24-07:00May 14th, 2015|

Mario Santoyo On Allocating Enviromental Water to Cities and Farms

All Sectors Of California Have Had to Reduce Water Usage, Except the Environment

By Kyle Buchoff, Correspondent

Mario Santoyo is the Assistant General Manager of the Friant Water Authority as well the Executive Director of the Latino Water Coalition. He suggests the environment give up some of its water, like the other sectors in California, to free up supply for cities and farms that are suffering this year.

He told California Ag Today, “This is the fourth year of a serious drought and the second year of what I call ‘double zeros,’ meaning zero water allocation on the West Side and zero allocation on the East Side of the Central San Joaquin Valley. Historically, a year of double zeros has never happened, much less a second year of it. This translates to the worst possible condtion for agriculture in the Central Valley—ever,” Santoyo said.

“At this point there is clearly nothing we can do relating to Mother Nature; she’s going to do what she’s going to do. But the fact is, it is not just Mother Nature causing this drought; human involvement in the operations and management of water has resulted in this level of crisis,” he said.

Santoyo emphasized that the environment must be considered in any water usage allotment, but “to the degree that there are no requirements to justify the level of the water that it needs, unlike municipal and agricultural allocations, that is not reasonable,” Santoyo noted.

“So as we move further down the drought road in terms of farmer hardship, we’ve tried to appeal to policymakers to rethink how environmental water is being used. We’ve talked to legislators in Washington D.C. and we are talking with the Governor Brown.”

“The governor has implemented a 25 percent water reduction for municipalities, and of course you cannot receive less than a zero water allocation for agriculture, so a similar cutback to environmental water use is warranted,” Santoyo said. “It is very reasonable, given the dire circumstances we all face, that everyone share in the pain. Reductions in environmental water could be reallocated to the communities and farms to ease at least some of the pain.”

Santoyo hopes that state and federal legislators will help to reallocate some of the water supply this summer.

California Ag Today2016-05-31T19:30:25-07:00May 12th, 2015|

Nimitz Nematicide Now Registered In California Fruiting Vegetables

New Nematicide is A Game Changer for Vegetable Growers

ADAMA, a world leader in customer-focused agricultural solutions, announced today that NIMITZ nematicide received state registration in California for use on tomatoes, peppers, okra, eggplant, cucumbers, watermelons, cantaloupe and squash.

NIMITZ, a revolutionary product, delivers an unmatched combination of efficacy, simplicity and safety for control of plant-parasitic nematodes on commercial vegetables.

With its fast-acting and unique mode of action, NIMITZ raises industry standards. As a truer, more complete contact nematicide, it also fills a void in the absence of methyl bromide.

Power of simplicity

NIMITZ represents the first new chemical nematicide to be introduced in more than 20 years. The product’s label carries the least restrictive signal word – ‘Caution’.

In contrast to fumigant nematicides, NIMITZ simplifies nematode management by lessening complex handling practices and application restrictions. The result is no Fumigant Management Plans, no 24-hour field monitoring, no buffer zones, no re-entry interval (REI), no specialized equipment and minimal personal protective equipment (PPE).

“NIMITZ is a contact nematicide, not a fumigant,” says Herb Young, ADAMA brand leader. “And because of its residual activity, NIMITZ’s control of nematodes often exceeds the commercial standards. The distinct advantage over other nematicides is that it frees growers from complications, liabilities, and dangers associated with fumigants.”

A better solution

As a non-gas formulation, the active ingredient in NIMITZ is distributed through the soil and into contact with nematodes through irrigation or rainfall. Unlike older chemistries, there is no mandatory tarping or specialized machinery requirement. Applications may include broadcast or banding with mechanical incorporation or through drip-injection.

As a ‘true nematicide’, NIMITZ causes irreversible nematicidal activity which results in pest mortality within 48 hours of application, rather than temporary nematostatic (immobilizing) activity as seen with organophosphates and carbamate nematicides.

“NMITZ is lethal to nematodes. As a result, we see greatly improved root health all season which leads to yield enhancement,” says Young.

The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) wrote in the Federal Docket on July 24, 2014 that, “Fluensulfone (NIMITZ) represents a safer alternative for nematode control with a new mode of action and a much simpler and straightforward product label.”

A secondary crop tier has been submitted to the EPA for future registration on potatoes, strawberries, carrots, tobacco and turf.

As new tool for California vegetable growers, NIMITZ has the potential to bring safety and simplicity to the nematode control arena which is constantly under increasing regulatory pressure.

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:30:27-07:00March 16th, 2015|

Western Water Bill Critically Needed

Endangered Species Act Has Gone too Far

By Patrick Cavanaugh

Bob Schramm is with Schramm Williams and Associates, a Washington, DC-based law firm that works closely with many agricultural commodity groups. Schramm understands the water problems in California, especially reduced surface water deliveries due to the Endangered Species Act (ESA). He thinks a western water bill–instead of just a California water bill–would help improve the dire water situation.

And while California legislators have tried to pass bills to adjust the ESA to allow human survival to be considered before fish, the efforts often do not get much attention.

Schramm believes an improved strategy would bring more attention to a bill if it were coming from several western states–and not just California–as a unified western water bill.

“There are several reasons why we’re going to have a western water bill. California needs the other states, the other senators, and the other House members,” said Schramm, “because their states are also having problems. Arizona’s having problems, Nevada’s having problems, so it is just natural that there is going to be a western water bill,” he noted.

“It is obviously going to help California, and perhaps with more numbers, we might be able to persuade the Eastern members of Congress to understand that the Endangered Species Act has gone too far and was never really intended to have these consequences,” said Schramm.

When asked if it were possible to have a national water bill to bring sense to the Endangered Species Act, he replied, “Absolutely. It is essential that we involve the whole nation on a water bill, but probably the highest area of focus is the where we have drought today.”

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:30:29-07:00March 2nd, 2015|

Previous 192021 Next