Talk, Merely Talk

Farmer Hears Plenty of Talk But Sees No Action on Water Management

Erik Hansen

Erik Hansen, Legacy Farmer in Kings County

By Patrick Cavanaugh, Deputy Editor

Erik Hansen, a big legacy farmer down in the Tulare Lake Basin in Kings County, is quite frustrated by how the state’s freshwater has been managed this year. “The most important thing,” he said, “is that people realize politicians in this state do not have your best interests in mind when it comes to how the water is run. We have infrastructure that is out of date and needs to be improved, but they are not even using the existing infrastructure at the full capacity it should be used, even though we are in a water emergency.”

“Now there is just nobody who can tell me that that’s OK,” stated Hansen. “Plenty of people can talk around it; they can say, ‘environmental this’ and ‘environmental that.’ But in the end, we need to take a very hard look at how these decisions are being made at the top levels—where people should be losing their jobs in a big way. ‘Starting from the governor having to explain—How do you have a water emergency; yet your appointments at the State Water Resources Control Board are not running the water as they should?

Hansen expects water mismanagement will continue and worsen until the California public holds their feet to the fire. “It is a power move,” Hansen declared.”They are able to hold off one of our most precious resources in the state, and currently two thirds of the state is suffering for it. Northern California has plenty of water, and that is where all the votes are. They forgot about the southern two thirds, and there are plenty of people here who are not happy about it.”

Hansen recounted, “There are higher bills in just about every municipality. Wells are running dry. Certain areas of the state are completely dry to the point where they require 250 gallon totes of water by truck delivery. This is unsustainable, and hopefully the politicians in Northern California can understand that word.”

2016-05-31T19:24:05-07:00May 2nd, 2016|

California Groups Join National Effort to Reject TPP

California Farm and Rural Groups Join 160+ Organizations to Ask Congress to Reject TPP, Stand Up for Independent Farmers and Ranchers

The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) has become a divisive issue in the nation’s capital, and criticism intensified after 161 food, farm, faith and rural organizations, including 9 from California, sent a letter to Capitol Hill yesterday, April 27, 2016–urging lawmakers to reject the trade pact.

“The main beneficiaries of the TPP are the companies that buy, process and ship raw agricultural commodities, not the farmers who face real risks from rising import competition. TPP imports will compete against U.S. farmers who are facing declining farm prices that are projected to stay low for years,” the organizations wrote. California groups including Belcampo, California Dairy Campaign, California Farmers Union, Community Alliance with Family Farmers, Ecological Farming Association, Food & Water Watch, Rooted in Community, Rooted in Community Youth Food Justice Leadership Network and Roots of Change signed the letter.TPP madeInAmerica

The White House has promoted the TPP as an export-boon for farmers to generate support for the agreement, but past trade agreements have not always delivered on export promises, the letter noted. For example, the United States’ total combined exports of corn, soybeans and wheat have remained steady at about 100 million metric tons for the last 30 years despite a raft of free trade agreements since the mid-1990s.

“Trade deals do not just add new export markets – the flow of trade goes both ways – and the U.S. has committed to allowing significantly greater market access to imports under the TPP,” the groups explained. Especially “alarming” to the organizations is the agreement’s complete lack of enforceable provisions against currency manipulation, a substantial cause of America’s debilitating $531 billion trade imbalance.

California Dairy Campaign President Joe Augusto stated, “The Trans-Pacific Partnership will mean that imports from New Zealand and other countries will greatly increase, especially imports of concentrated dairy products. As more and more dairies in California go out of business, passage of the TPP will lead to a further decline in milk production across our state.”

The TPP poses particular risks for dairy farmers and cattle producers. The TPP dairy export opportunities were more modest than promised, but the TPP will likely increase imports of milk and whey protein concentrates from global dairy powerhouse New Zealand during a period of declining farmgate milk prices in the U.S. The United States imported nearly 2.3 billion pounds of beef from TPP partners but only exported about 1.2 billion pounds in 2015. The TPP will also increase beef and cattle imports while domestic cattle prices are plummeting.

California Farmers Union President Joaquin Contente stated, “Farmers in California are some of the most highly regulated in the world, and under the Trans-Pacific Partnership, they will have to compete against a flood of imports that do not meet the same high standards that farmers here are required to follow. Any potential export gains can be erased at any point when our competitors devalue their currency because currency manipulation is not addressed in the TPP. The TPP also does not crack down on the value-added taxes (VAT) that our competitors can impose which make our exports uncompetitive in other markets.”

The TPP also covers important agricultural policy areas such as investment, procurement, labeling, food safety, animal health and crop disease. The stringent rules and dispute system under the TPP make it easier to successfully challenge and overturn domestic laws, as happened last year to country of origin meat labels.

“The TPP will bring a wave of fruit and vegetable imports that will inundate farmers, consumers and inspectors,” said Food & Water Watch California Director Adam Scow. “The TPP benefits the biggest agribusiness and food companies at the expense of California communities that are trying to strengthen and rebuild local, sustainable food systems.”

The letter and complete list of signers can be read here.
http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/sites/default/files/farm-food_tpp_coalition_letter_4-27-16.pdf

California Farmers Union contact: Lynne McBride, 925-385-0217, lmcb44@comcast.net
California Dairy Campaign contact: Lynne McBride, 925-385-0217, lmcb44@comcast.net
Food & Water Watch contact: Adam Scow, ascow@fwwatch.org
_______________________________
See the California TPP website for the government’s perspective.
2021-05-12T11:17:13-07:00April 28th, 2016|

Tree Nut Theft Alert

Roger Isom Warns: Take Precautions to Thwart Tree Nut Theft

By Patrick Cavanaugh, Deputy Editor

 

Roger A. Isom, Western Agricultural Processors Association (WAPA) president and CEO, told CalAgToday, “Tree nut theft is still a serious issue this year, as it was last year. Folks behind the thefts have not been caught. We’ve had over 30 thefts in the last 6 months.”

There is good news. “We’ve had numerous attempts thwarted,” Isom commented, “because folks have started to implement some of the procedures that we talked about at our emergency Tree Nut Cargo Theft Summit back in December.” Following the successful Summit, nut theft legislation sponsored by the WAPA passed out of the Assembly Agriculture Committee unanimously. According to WAPA, AB 2805 (Olsen) would form a statewide California Agriculture Cargo Theft Crime Prevention Task Force with combined law enforcement services and support activities to fight agricultural cargo theft. Among the loads of tree nuts stolen was a load of almonds reportedly stolen during the Summit.”

Roger Isom, president and CEO, Western Processors Association

Roger Isom, president and CEO, Western Processors Association (source: LinkedIn)

Isom explained, “We brought experts in cargo theft from across the country to the training seminar held in mid-April in Modesto to make sure all members understood: What has happened? How are the thefts occurring? What have we learned from those thefts and the investigations? What can people do to prevent these thefts from happening at their locations?”

“What we’ve learned, for sure,” he explained, “is that if you do not implement the procedures, you will be hit. Following the December meeting, we’ve had companies hit by cargo theft; the [companies] that implemented the practices we talked about prevented thefts from occurring; those that did not have lost truckloads of tree nuts.”

Isom understands it is time consuming to follow the recommendations, and there is some cost associated with it. “You have to take the time to take pictures of the drivers,” he elaborated. “You have to fingerprint the drivers. You’ve got to make calls. You’ve got to make sure these truckloads of shipments have been placed at least 24 hours in advance. If there are driver changes, you cannot allow that. It takes some serious steps to prevent [theft].”

“We had one a few weeks ago,” Isom explained, “where they switched drivers and trucks—literally the day of [transport]. It ended up being OK, but the alarms went off. The next time it could be an actual fictitious pickup.”

Tracking a stolen truckload is difficult. Isom reported, “Typically they do get the license plate number. Prior to these thefts, they might have just asked the driver for the license plate number and taken his word for it. Maybe they would go to the extent of taking a picture of [the plate], but what if it is what they call a “cold plate”, a stolen plate?”

“In at least one of the thefts,” said Isom, “the license plates had been switched. The thieves literally stole somebody’s license plates off a pickup truck and put them on the truckload of nuts. Had someone in charge been educated on license plate numbers—just normal [information]—they may have easily discovered the plates were not valid; they were not applicable for a truck-tractor-trailer setup.

Isom remarked the thieves are clever. “Most occur on a Friday or just prior to a holiday,” he stated. “In some cases, the theft might not be discovered for 3 or 4 days. The damage depends on the value of the nuts at the time,” Isom said, “and are we talking about finished product? Has it been processed? Seasoned? But you’re talking a stolen value of at least $100k-$150k. That’s what makes it so attractive and why cargo theft is on the increase across the country.”

Furthermore, Isom stated, “We’ve been told by law enforcement that Los Angeles (LA) is now the highest cargo theft location in the world. It has increased dramatically in the last couple of years, and more so this past year. We did not see theft in tree nuts until recently. We had the occasional theft out-in-the-field or maybe at the huller—someone picks up a couple of trailers and tries to get rid of them—but not to this level, not this brazen, and not with finished product.

Cargo Theft Interdiction Program (CTIP) with the California Highway Patrol

Cargo Theft Interdiction Program (CTIP) with the California Highway Patrol

“Now it’s over 30 loads!” he said. “We’ve had almonds taken from 4 or 5 different locations; we’ve had walnuts; we’ve had pistachios from several different locations; and we’ve had cashews stolen. We didn’t even know there were cashews here in California, but they are imported and processed here in Fresno, and there have been multiple loads stolen.”

“Nobody is immune to it,” Isom commented. “Tree nuts are the preferred product right now compared to other cargo thefts—TVs, tires, or tablets. Tree nuts have no serial numbers; thieves can turn and burn them faster than you-know-what. The other attractive part about the tree nuts is you can also store them for while. You can hit the farmers’ markets just a little bit at a time. It’s easy.”

“This is not the common criminal,” Isom surmised. “This is something sophisticated. Look how they have hacked into the U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC) database to get this information. Look how shipping papers have been modified; they put their phone numbers on them, and it looks legitimate. We’ve had trucking companies’ identities stolen. They’re using their forms, their information, their drivers’ names, but it is somebody else doing this.”

“And trust me,” Isom added; “it’s not the guys just right along California State Highway 99 (‘the 99’), they’ll go to the smallest processor off the beaten path. They fool people with what looks like very legitimate paperwork. This isn’t something that somebody took a sharpie to; these look like legitimate shipping papers.”

Isom and WAPA are engaged with “all the law enforcement, not just the local county sheriffs, including the Cargo Theft Interdiction Program (CTIP) with the California Highway Patrol. We’ve got the U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) involved now. There are a lot of people on it, but, because of the value, it’s so attractive that we’ve got to make everybody is aware of this.”

“This is a new type of theft facing our industry,” warned Isom, ” and you have to do your due diligence. It takes somebody taking some time, and it is going to slow down shipments. There’s no doubt about it; you have to be prepared and aware.”

Through the use of fictitious pickup, even if the drivers are caught, Isom explained it’s not a felony anymore due to changes in California laws. “If you hold the driver at gunpoint,” he said, “and you basically carjack the truck; that’s a felony. So they’re basically saying that legally, the processor or handler voluntarily gave up the load. So it is not a felony; it’s a misdemeanor. So guys aren’t doing any state prison time. They’re doing a couple of weeks in county jail. With all the overcrowding, Boom, they’re gone; let them go.”

“Quite frankly,” Isom relayed, “the majority of the trucks end up in LA, so that’s where law enforcement finds the trucks. And that’s where they say the theft ‘happened.’ You can’t get the LA district attorney to prosecute these cases because they are too busy with murderers, rapists, and other—what they consider more serious—crimes than your voluntarily giving up a load, in their opinion. Even though some of these loads are worth half a million dollars.”

“But now we have the FBI involved,” Isom affirmed. “Thieves are now stealing on interstate highways; these are now federal crimes. There is certainly more teeth in federal law. When we catch these guys, they’ll be in federal prison, doing some serious time.”

(Featured Photo Source: USDA-NRCS)

2016-05-31T19:24:05-07:00April 26th, 2016|

California Women for Agriculture Anew

California Women for Agriculture Rebrands After Forty Years

By Charmayne Hefley, Associate Editor

 

Founded in 1975 in Coachella Valley to promote and develop the interest of women in a strong agriculture industry in California, California Women for Agriculture (CWA) marks its 41st year with a rebranding. Jeanette Lombardo, president of CWA, said, “The theme for this year is Innovate, Activate and Motivate. We are really taking a look at everything we do, and trying to change it for the better,” she said.

Lombardo said there are currently 20 chapters with 2000-plus members across the state. Guided by five principle objectives, CWA aims to speak on behalf of agriculture in an intelligent, informative, direct and truthful manner; to keep members informed about pertinent legislative activities; to collaborate in support of agricultural issues and challenges; to improve the public image of farmers; and to develop a rapport with consumers, educators, and governmental & business leaders in communities throughout the State.

The wonderful thing about our organization is the age range,” Lombardo said, “from very young to very old. And the older ladies are wiser ladies, as I like to say; they provide mentoring capabilities to the younger folks who are coming in. And the younger folks are seeking leadership, personal growth, and network and industry knowledge,” Lombardo said.

Likewise, Lombardo said, young CWA members have been reverse-mentoring mentors on matters such as social media, “It is a wonderful thing and my goal is to have chapters in every county,” she noted.

2016-05-31T19:24:06-07:00April 22nd, 2016|

Winegrape Quality In SJV

Nat DiBuduo: Valley Winegrape Growers Must Produce Quality

By Laurie Greene, Editor

Nat DiBuduo, president of Fresno-based Allied Grape Growers believes there are good opportunities for Central San Joaquin Valley winegrape growers. “I think the San Joaquin Valley [winegrape growing industry] will survive because growers are working at producing winegrapes at a higher quality and at a higher price,” said DiBuduo.

“Overall, I think the industry is doing well,” stated DiBuduo, “and we just have to work with our San Joaquin Valley growers to produce a better quality grape. It’s like a chicken and an egg; they’ve got to be able to get paid for that better quality. And of course, growers need a solid contract with a good price to make it worthwhile,” he noted.Allied Grape Growers logo

DiBuduo noted that the Bureau of Reclamation’s initial announcement at the beginning of this month that federal water users will receive merely a five percent water allocation, fortunately, does not affect many of his grower-members. “Most Allied growers are not Westside growers; but they will be severely affected by the groundwater regulations soon to be in place.”

DiBuduo explained the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act is predicted to create major issues for production agriculture. “Oh yes, we’ve got guys who have sold their property because they didn’t have enough groundwater,” he said.

2016-05-31T19:24:06-07:00April 21st, 2016|

ALRB Discharges Farmworker Vote, Part 2 Exclusive Interview with Attorney Raimondo

Anthony Raimondo, “Let the People Vote!”

 

In an exclusive interview with Fresno attorney Anthony Raimondo, California Ag Today’s Patrick Cavanaugh discussed the significance to farmworkers of yesterday’s Agricultural Labor Relations Board (ALRB) decision to “set aside” Gerawan farmworker votes from the ALRB-sanctioned November 2013 election to decertify the UFW. Raimondo is the attorney for the UFW union decertification petitioner, Silvia Lopez, an employee of Gerawan Farming, a Fresno County diversified tree fruit operation.

California Ag Today: The central California agricultural industry is flabbergasted this week following the California Agricultural Labor Relations Board’s decision to set aside—and not count—the ballots of 2,600 Gerawan farmworkers cast in 2013. What is your take on this decision?

Anthony Raimondo, Fresno County-based attorney

Anthony Raimondo, Fresno County-based attorney

Raimondo: It is unfair because from the outset, we have argued all along that this entire process has been unfair and has denied the workers their “day in court” and their due process. From the first day that Silvia Lopez walked into the ALRB office in Visalia, the greatest opposition to her filing for an election has been the ALRB itself.

We had a judge who couldn’t stay awake for the hearing. We have board members who are—shall we say at the least—biased. In the case of ALRB board member, Genevieve Shiroma, we have a person whose entire career is intertwined with the UFW’s primary paid lobbyist. There’s no way these folks can be objective in a case that has this kind of stakes in the UFW.

And this case is all about money. If they can get a contract with Gerawan, the UFW will essentially double its revenue and double its membership overnight.

California Ag Today: What is at stake for the UFW?

Raimondo: There is a clear reason why the State would end up spending $10 million on this case: They want to silence these workers and save the UFW. There is no union organizing in the field; the UFW has abandoned organizing. They’re not out there getting the workers to support and join the union.

They’re in the courtroom and in the back halls of Sacramento, making deals to take control of these workers’ future, whether the workers want it or not.

Ag LawCalifornia Ag Today: In denying the ballot votes to be counted, the ALRB said it was unfair that the employer—Gerawan in this case—gave the workers a pay raise without permission of the state government or the UFW.

Raimondo: But even with this illegitimate process, the only thing that the Board actually found was that the employer violated the law—not the workers.

So the Board is going to punish the employees by destroying their ballots, like some sort of third-world dictator. What control does the farmworker have over what the company does? What can the workers do to protect their right to vote if their right to vote can be thwarted by what a third party—the company—does?

The workers’ right to vote shouldn’t be in the hands of the company, or of the union, or of anybody else. The California Constitution says that when people cast votes in our state, those votes must be counted. That’s apparently true, unless you’re a farmworker.

California Ag Today: And the agricultural industry is asking, “How can the State of California and the state ALRB get away with this?”

Raimondo: It’s appalling what they’ve done here. It really is appalling. They’ve decided that the best way to control the behavior of an employer is to punish the workers who have no control over that employer.

You know there’s no reason that, if they believe that that election was tainted, they can’t run another election. I’ve spoken to Silvia, and Silvia’s not afraid of letting the people vote. I wonder if the UFW is as brave.

Let the people vote.

California Ag Today: Is the ALRB and the UFW requesting a new vote?

Raimondo: No, they want the farmworkers to stand off to the side and be quiet while the UFW makes the deal through political moves to take their money.

California Ag Today: What’s next?

Raimondo: We are planning, on Silvia’s behalf, to file briefs in the ongoing mandatory arbitration case that is sitting before the California Supreme Court. The UFW has a brief due and the Court has not yet set a hearing date.

We’re hoping that the Supreme Court will be kind enough to give us the opportunity to speak in that case, as the Court of Appeal did. So that case still provides us with a very real chance to vindicate the workers’ rights.

In the election case that was just decided, we are planning on filing a petition for reconsideration with the Board. We think that they need to think twice before they destroy people’s ballots.

California Ag Today: The ballots have not been destroyed at this point, right?

Raimondo: We don’t know. That’s a question only the ALRB can answer.

From my view, I would hope that they were not rushing to have a bonfire today.

I would think that because these votes are precious and irreplaceable, the Board would show the restraint to withhold taking any action on the ballots until the parties have had the opportunity to pursue the various legal options that we have to challenge this decision and make sure they are doing the right thing.

_______________

Resources:

ALRB Decision and Order Case No. 2013-RD-003-VIS, 39 ALRB No. 20, April 15, 2016)

Agricultural Labor Relations Act Employee Questions & Answers ELECTIONS

Petitioner Silvia Lopez’s Petition to Disqualify Board Member Shiroma, ALRB Case No. 2013-RD-003-VIS (39 ALRB No. 20)

California LABOR CODE SECTION 1140-1140.4

Pick Justice

2016-05-31T19:24:06-07:00April 19th, 2016|

ALRB Discharges Farmworker Vote, Part 1

ALRB Abolishes Gerawan Farmworker Vote

By Laurie Greene, Editor

The Ninth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States pays tribute to “unenumerated” rights of citizens—rights not specified—such as the right to travel, to vote, to keep personal matters private and to make important decisions about one’s health care or body, as upheld by the Supreme Court over the years. Likewise, the cherished American legal notion of “No taxation without representation,” generally attributed to James Otis embraces “actual representation” over “virtual representation.”

Yet, Court documents issued on Friday, April 15, 2016, by the Agricultural Labor Relations Board (ALRB) upheld the September 17, 2015 decision by Mark R. Soble, Administrative Law Judge, ALRB, to set aside farmworkers’ ballots in a 2013 election to decertify mandated representation by the United Farm Workers of America (UFW).

The following paraphrased issues were among ALRB findings:

–Gerawan Farming committed unfair labor practices under California Labor Code section 1153 by providing unlawful assistance to the decertification effort against the UFW, directly soliciting grievances and granting employees a wage increase.

-Petitioner Silvia Lopez, a Gerawan farmworker, solicited and received an unlawful donation from an association of which Gerawan was a member.

The ALRB concluded these unlawful actions (a) make it impossible to know if the signatures collected represent the workers’ true sentiments and (b) created an environment, which would have made it impossible for true employee free choice when it came time to vote.

“As a result of the employer’s unlawful support and assistance,” Judge Soble, in September 2015, called for “setting aside the decertification election and dismissing the decertification petition. Given that the unlawful conduct tainted the entire decertification process, any election results would not sufficiently reflect the unrestrained free expression of the bargaining unit members.”

Thus, the UFW, voted in by Gerawan farmworkers in a runoff election in 1990, certified by the ALRB in 1992, never reached a contract to represent the farmworkers in wage negotiations with their employer, and did not collect dues from or provide services for the farmworkers, reportedly among the highest paid in the industry, effectively abandoned the Gerawan farmworkers. 

When the California State Legislature amended the Agricultural Labor Relations Act in 2002 and 2011 to allow and to accelerate the process for imposed mandatory mediation and conciliation for a union contract, UFW offered a new contract proposal—after having abandoned the Gerawan farmworkers from 1995 and 2012.

Despite a lower court’s rejection of the so-called mandatory mediation and conciliation provision, the ALRB appears to have been successful in forcing UFW representation and mandatory dues collection on current Gerawan employees, after 25 years of ineffective UFW involvement that encompassed about 18 years of no involvement whatsoever—and certainly without counting their votes.

Click here to read, “ALRB DISCHARGES FARMWORKER VOTE, PART 2 – EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW WITH ATTORNEY RAIMONDO: LET THE PEOPLE VOTE!”

2016-05-31T19:24:06-07:00April 19th, 2016|

AB-1513 Tough on Piece-Rate

Challenge to Farmworker Piece-Rate Pay May Actually Depress Wages

By Brian German, Associate Editor

Assembly Bill No. 1513 requires employees who are paid on a piece-rate basis to be compensated separately for rest and recovery breaks, and to be paid an hourly wage for non-productive time under the employer’s control, according to Anthony Raimondo, a Fresno-based attorney who has represented farmers and farm labor contractors since 2001.

Raimondo contends that while the bill was designed with the best intentions, its application may be detrimental to farmworkers. “The State of California believes that if piece-rate workers are not paid additional hourly wages for their ten minute breaks, they are being cheated,” Raimondo explained, “even though, every single day, every worker in California on a-piece rate basis always makes above minimum wage for the hours they work on that day.”CA Legislature

Raimondo, who has assisted employers with strategic planning and labor relations and who regularly defends wage claims before the California Labor Commission, elaborated on why farmworkers prefer piece-rate compensation. “You won’t see a day in our fields where a worker on piece-rate’s total earnings total less than what he would have made hourly on a minimum wage. That is why the unintended consequences of these laws will be to depress worker’s wages,” said Raimondo.

“It is why workers demand piece-rate from us; they don’t want hourly wages. Because we work in market-based commodities, the more the employer can tie earnings to production, the higher the wages that employer can deliver to the worker. They are both benefitting from an economic bargain that generates revenue through the ranch for both the employer and the employee. When compensation is tied to production, everybody makes more money,” he noted.

2016-05-31T19:24:06-07:00April 19th, 2016|

Costa: Westside Water Cut Unconscionable

Jim Costa: Water Allocation is Immoral

By Patrick Cavanaugh, Deputy Editor

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

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

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

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

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

Dirty Dozen…Really?

Dirty Dozen Does Disservice

 

Following the April 12, 2016 release of the Environmental Working Group’s (EWG) annual Dirty Dozen list, Teresa Thorne, a spokesperson with the Watsonville-based Alliance For Food and Farming, a non-profit organization which exists to deliver credible information to consumers about the safety of fruits and vegetables, conversed with California Ag Today’s Patrick Cavanaugh, farm news director and deputy editor,

California Ag Today: Let’s talk a little about the Dirty Dozen list that the EWG just published for 2016.

Thorne: They’ve been doing this for 20 years now, and it is concerning to us because they’re putting out misinformation about the safety of conventionally grown produce. We know that the products on this list are among the most popular among families, especially children. EWG targets them, and their efforts really scare moms and consumers away from conventionally grown. It makes no sense to us; I mean, both organic and conventionally grown are very safe. We should all be consuming more every day for better health. That’s really the message for consumers. This list—all it does is serve to confuse people.

California Ag Today: It’s all a big scare tactic to try to get everybody to think that only organic food is safe, right?

Thorne: We strongly believe that organic food is very safe, but we maintain the same for conventional. And it’s interesting also too, because in a recent study that really focused on Manhattan, the researchers found—and we did blog about this—that organic was not as available as they had previously thought. So, what happens to the mom who wants to buy strawberries for her child’s lunch, but only conventional strawberries are available? Now she’s scared because of what EWG has stated in really inflammatory language this year—over the top. Now what is she supposed to do? Her store doesn’t carry organic strawberries. Availability is very much an issue, as well accessibility and affordability. Conventionally grown still is the most accessible and affordable [produce]. So, to scare people away from that really does a disservice to consumers.

California Ag Today: Yes, and food safety experts from the USDA and California Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR), a department of the California Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), agree that any small risk from the trace [below legal thresholds set by the EPA] levels of pesticides found in fresh produce should not keep you from the health benefits of a diet rich in fruits and vegetables. DPR tracks food for pesticide residues, and they find 99 percent of all the fruits and vegetables grown in California—whether they’re organic or conventional—are safe to eat and we should be eating more of them.

Thorne: Absolutely, and that’s what’s also interesting; EWG—and we’ve called them on this in the past and they still have not changed—does not link, in their report, directly to USDA studies. They state over and over that they base their results on this USDA Agricultural Marketing pesticide data program (USDA PDP), but they don’t link to it. In what world do you not link to a study that, you basically state, you base your entire Dirty Dozen list upon? We find that quite odd.

We think the reason they don’t link is this simple: People will see that the USDA clearly states that residues do not pose a food safety concern. And that is in direct contrast to what [the EWG is] saying.

California Ag Today: Of course, if we wash the fruits and vegetables we eat, it helps. We should always wash produce to get the dirt off and talk about food safety in our own kitchens.

SafeFruitsandVeggies logoThorne: That’s right. Conventional and organic alike, wash them before you eat them. It’s a healthful habit that everybody should follow for various reasons. And the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) clearly states that you can reduce or eliminate any residues that may be present on fruits and vegetables, simply by washing.

California Ag Today: One last question, Teresa. You’ve been terrific. The EWG has been losing some strength in their message over the years because the media is getting sharper and better at challenging the contradictions in their reports. We’ve got the Alliance for Food and Farming’s new SafeFruitsAndVeggies website now, and you guys are reaching out to the media, saying “Let’s be reasonable; let’s look at this from a scientific point of view, not an emotional point of view.” Do you want to comment on that? While they’re not being picked up as much anymore, they keep trying, now with strawberries at the top of the list, right?Strawberries1

Thorne: Yes, we think they’re using the tactic of putting another kid-popular fruit to re-spark interest. In fact, we predicted it in a blog a few weeks ago, in which we said interest from the media is declining because more reporters and bloggers are actually reading the USDA PDP report, seeing what it says. So, we actually predicted in our blog that they would do something like this. Our number one prediction was they would have a new number one on their list, and it would, of course, be a kid-popular fruit.

So, it will be interesting to see. We’re still early on in the process to see if they have had any success with that, but we believe that that was a tactic [EWG] tried to employ to revive very lagging media coverage on this list. They used to enjoy widespread media coverage back in the day.

__________________________

Resources:

Setting Tolerances for Pesticide Residues in Foods, United States EPA

Pesticide info: What You Should Know About Pesticides, “Pesticides and Food: How We Test for Safety,” California Department of Pesticide Regulation

The Pesticide Data Program: Helping Monitor the Safety of America’s Food Supply, USDA Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS)

Pesticide Residue Calculator, Alliance for Food and Farming

2021-05-12T11:03:02-07:00April 14th, 2016|

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

(We do not share your data with anybody, and only use it for its intended purpose)

California Ag News…
At Your Fingertips!

Unable to load Tweets

Copyright 2021 California Ag Today | CaliforniaAgToday.com owned and operated by Californians.

Website Designed by Desert Tech Pros

Copyright 2021 California Ag Today | CaliforniaAgToday.com owned and operated by Californians.

Website Designed by Desert Tech Pros

Go to Top