Super PAC to Save Animals that Die in Wildfires, Part 2

Rachel Martin on Need for Super PAC to Save Forests, Wildlife, Ag

By Charmayne Hefley, Assistant Editor

Part 2: Animals Needlessly Die in Fires

We are continuing our three-part series with Rachel Martin, the national chairperson of Homeland Security for the National Federation of Republican Women (NFRW), who is urging the creation of a political action committee (super PAC) to save forests, wildlife, and ag suffering from limited water allocations during this extensive drought.

“Agricultural agencies aren’t the only entities suffering from the lack of water allocations,” Martin explained. “Other agencies are also suffering due to the environmental regulations that prevent forest maintenance, such as logging, thinning of the forests and controlled burns. Curtailment of forest maintenance leaves thousands of acres of forest, as well as wildlife, vulnerable to larger, more numerous, and containment-resistant wildfires each year.

“When law enforcement evacuates homes, they have to force people out,” Martin said. “People fight to come back into get their pets—their dogs, their cats, their horses, livestock and any other animals they may have. But, oftentimes, residents don’t have the means to haul their animals with them; they may not have horse trailers. Sometimes, animals actually run free up into the mountains and can’t readily be caught. As I was specifically told by some law enforcement officials, those animals end up dying in the fires.”

Martin realized that once animal lovers learn of the suffering caused by the environmental regulations, they might consider joining the fight against the environmentalists. “I’ve been working with animal organizations and animal lovers. I’m one myself. I have quite a few pets, and I grew up around horses. Animal organizations and animal lovers alike can get in on this fight against the environmentalists.”

“Environmentalists are trying to protect species that actually aren’t even on the protected list yet; they’re almost on the protected list,” Martin stated. “Yet, in doing so, they just keep getting further and further away with from their original goal of protecting endangered species and pristine forests. They’re getting away with a lot more through politicians, too.”

California Ag Today2016-05-31T19:28:05-07:00September 8th, 2015|

New Medfly Quarantine

A portion of San Diego County was placed under Medfly quarantine earlier this week following the detection of 4 adult Mediterranean fruit flies (Medflies) in the La Mesa area. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), the San Diego County Agricultural Commissioner, and CDFA are working collaboratively on this project.

The quarantine area in San Diego County measures 93 square miles, bordered on the north by Prospect Avenue; on the south by Mount Miguel Road; on the west by Fairmount Avenue; and on the east by Vista Grande Road. A link to the quarantine map may be found here: www.cdfa.ca.gov/plant/medfly/regulation.html.

To eradicate the infestation, the release of sterile male Medflies began on August 10, at a rate of 250,000 flies per square mile per week. The new release area is approximately 59 square miles. In addition, properties within 200 meters of detections are being treated with an organic formulation of Spinosad, which originates from naturally-occurring bacteria in soil, in order to eliminate any mated females and reduce the density of the population. Finally, fruit removal will occur within 100 meters of detection properties in order to remove any fruit infested with eggs and larvae.

The quarantine will affect any growers, wholesalers, and retailers of susceptible fruit in the area as well as local residents. Home gardeners are urged to consume homegrown produce on site and not move it from their property. These actions protect against the artificial spread of the infestation to nearby regions where it could affect California’s food supply and our backyard gardens and landscapes.

In the eradication program, sterile male Medflies are brought to San Diego County from the joint CDFA/USDA sterile insect rearing facility in Los Alamitos, which prepares sterile files for release everyday over the Los Angeles basin. The sterile release program has a proven track record of eradication in southern California. Sterile male flies mate with fertile female flies in the environment but produce no offspring. The Medfly population decreases as the wild flies reach the end of their natural life span with no offspring to replace them, ultimately resulting in the eradication of the pest.

The Medfly can infest more than 250 types of fruits and vegetables, causing severe impacts on California agricultural exports and backyard gardens alike. Residents who believe their fruits and vegetables are infested with fruit fly larvae are encouraged to call the state’s toll-free Pest Hotline at 1-800-491-1899.

California Ag Today2016-05-31T19:28:06-07:00August 21st, 2015|

Gladwin’s Final Year As A Farmer

Tonetta Simone Gladwin on Final Year as a Farmer

As the fourth-year drought continues, some farmers have conceded to the elements and the limited water allocations and have made the decision to make their final year in the farming business. Tonetta Simone Gladwin, the third generation owner of Passion Fruit Farms, a fig operation in Merced, Calif., said this year would be her last.

“As a third generation, I’m the last generation in my family. We’ve all farmed figs,” Gladwin said. “I don’t think Grandpa had any idea of the challenges we have to face today. Never did he think we’d have $10 per hour in labor wages, no water deliveries and some of the regulations we’ve had to face and overcome. These challenges are so different from those in his day.”

California Ag Today2016-05-31T19:28:06-07:00August 18th, 2015|

ALRB Pushes Worksite Access

ALRB Pushes Worksite Access in Upcoming Public Hearings

By Laurie Greene, Editor

Announced TODAY, The Agricultural Labor Relations Board ( ALRB) will be traveling to key agricultural areas in the state next month to hear comments from farmworkers, employers and the public on the ALRB’s proposed rule to permit ALRB staff worksite access to educate farmworkers and field supervisors about the rights and responsibilities provided by the Agricultural Labor Relations Act (Act).

The public hearings will be held in Fresno, Salinas, Santa Maria and Oxnard, from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. or until such time that all public testimony has been received.

Further information about the hearings appears at the end of this article.

THE PURPOSE OF THE ACT

The ALRB reports:

In 1975, the California State Legislature passed the Agricultural Labor Relations Act guaranteeing certain rights to California farm workers. The purpose of the Act is to “ensure peace in the agricultural fields by guaranteeing justice for all agricultural workers and stability in labor relations.” The Act states that it is the policy of the State of California to encourage and protect the right of farm workers to act together to help themselves, to engage in union organizational activity and to select their own representatives for the purpose of bargaining with their employer for a contract covering their wages, hours, and working conditions. The law prohibits the employers from interfering with these rights, protects the rights of workers to be free from restraint or coercion by unions or employers, and it prohibits unions from engaging in certain types of strikes and picketing.

The Agricultural Labor Relations Board is the agency which administers the Act and protects the rights of agricultural employees in various ways. For example, the Act creates a method by which workers may select a union or other representative to bargain with their employer if they wish. Agents of the Board conduct secret ballot elections to determine whether workers wish to be represented and if so, by whom. Also, the Act gives authority to the ALRB to investigate, process and take to trial employers or unions who engage in actions which the Act describes as “unfair labor practices” (ULPs). When Board employees conduct an investigation and obtain enough evidence to show that an unfair labor practice has been committed, a “complaint” is issued and a hearing is held at which each party has a right to present its side of the case. The Act guarantees the rights of employees to engage in, or to refrain from, union activities or “concerted activities,” such as acting together to help or protect each other in matters related to their employment.

ALRB HEARINGS AND LOCATIONS

Each facility will accommodate between 150-200 persons.
Spanish, Mixtec, Trique and Hmong interpreters will be available for language assistance. Other language services are available upon request.
The hearings will be recorded and an electronic copy of the transcript will be available.

FRESNO

Wednesday, September 9th

Doubletree by Hilton Fresno Convention Center 2233 Ventura Street, Salon C, Fresno (559) 268-1000

SALINAS

Monday, September 14th

Elks Lodge, 614 Airport Boulevard, Salinas (831) 424-8039

SANTA MARIA

Tuesday, September 15^th

Santa Maria Inn, 801 South Broadway Santa Maria (805) 628-7777

OXNARD

Wednesday, September 16th

Courtyard by Marriott, 600 E. Esplanade Drive Oxnard (805) 988-3600

You may contact the ALRB Executive Secretary’s Office at (916) 653-3741 or jbarbosa@alrb.ca.gov with any questions.

California Ag Today2016-05-31T19:28:07-07:00August 14th, 2015|

SCOTUS Raisin Reserve Decision

Grower Reflects on SCOTUS Raisin Reserve Decision

By Charmayne Hefley, Associate Editor

The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) recently decided that California raisins held in reserve during heavy crop years belong to the government (under the Fresno-based Raisin Administrative Committee (RAC), a federal marketing order), and the government should pay growers for these raisins. Directly overseen by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), the RAC, created in 1949, is led by 47 growers and a public member.

Monte Schutz, a Fresno County raisin grower, as well as chairman of the executive committee of the RAC, said the recent decision by SCOTUS doesn’t make any sense. “The biggest problem I had with the decision is when Justice Roberts stated very clearly that the government took ownership of the raisins, and that was just not true—growers maintained ownership throughout,” Schutz noted. “And the committee, which is made up of growers and handlers, had complete control over when they sold the raisins and for how much. So I think they were mistaken that the government took control; while the government oversees our federal marketing order, we as a committee had control.”

Explaining how he thinks the Supreme Court got it wrong, Schutz said, “Personally I think it may have been the USDA lawyers who just didn’t explain it. The system is a little complicated, and I wasn’t in the courtroom, but I’m afraid they did not explain it properly. How they could conclude the government owned the raisins–is just completely wrong.”

“For the last five years, we haven’t used the reserve program at all because we are in a better balance right now than we were 13 years ago. At that time, the reserve was a tool to take care of the excess supply. We haven’t had to use it for the last five years, and we don’t intend on using it any time in the future. Although I would still like to keep that tool available, unfortunately, the Supreme Court has taken it away from us,” Schutz said.

“Now when we need to put the raisins in reserve, we have to consider, I assume, that the grower has to be compensated for them. But I do not know how the government can tell you at what price; the market dictates the price. That was the problem back then; the market was in a tough situation due to the oversupply, so we had to take less for those reserve raisins,” Schutz said. “Those raisin growers were paid less, but raisin prices did not spiral downward and the industry was kept in balance.”

“Without the reserve program, the raisin price would have crashed, ending in a bigger disaster than what occurred.”

The Supreme Court reached its decision at the end of a long fight by raisin grower Marvin Horne, who held that he did not have to give his raisins to the reserve without fair compensation.

California Ag Today2016-05-31T19:28:07-07:00August 12th, 2015|

European Farmland Under Pressure

European Farmland under Pressure Due to Regulation and Diversion

By Laurie Greene, Editor

Jose Gomez Carrasco, executive sales manager for AGQ Labs and Technological Services based in Oxnard, is in charge of covering a large area that includes the U.S., Mexico and Central America. Noting global concern regarding how farmland is being used, particularly European farmland, Carrasco said, “There’s a growing population of around 150,000 or 170,000 new mouths every day to feed.” Carrasco said agricultural production on land designated for agricultural use in every country, worldwide, is being diverted to bio-ethanol, or bio-mass, or different renewable energy use, so the availability of agricultural products for food is diminishing.

Carrasco stated this progression needs to be moving in the opposite direction, “especially because there are other issues that are making production more challenging, such as water scarcity, soil erosion and the use and price of agro-chemicals, inputs and fertilizers, all of which are being controlled and monitored more and more.”

“The regulation of crop protection materials is intended to help everyone in the food supply chain,” he continued, “all the way from the grower to the consumer; however, sometimes these regulations can be quite burdensome.”

“In some cases regulations are not for the benefit of all,” Carrasco explained; “just for some. So in markets such as the European Union where the [maximum threshold] number of molecules registered has diminished from 1,000 to 300 or 400 in the last decade, we’re finding a lot of this regulation comes from Germany.” Carrasco said they are leaving a lot of farmers with no agro-chemicals in their arsenal, especially in Spain, Portugal, and Greece, all in southern Europe.

California Ag Today2016-05-31T19:28:07-07:00August 11th, 2015|

#AgLaw: Country of Origin Labeling (COOL)

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

Status:

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

Description:

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

California Ag Today2016-05-31T19:28:08-07:00August 2nd, 2015|

Alliance Against Food and Farmer Disparagement

The Alliance for Food and Farming Counters Food and Farmer Disparagement

By Patrick Cavanaugh, Laurie Greene and Courtney Steward, CaliforniaAgToday

Experts around the world agree that eating more fruits and vegetables is the best thing we can do to reduce disease, prevent obesity, and improve our health. But sometimes consumers need to know more about organic and conventional fruits and vegetables so they can make the right shopping choices for themselves and their families.

The Alliance for Food and Farming (AFF), based in Watsonville, is a non-profit organization comprised of both organic and conventional farmers that delivers credible information to consumers about the safety of organic and conventional fruits and vegetables.

According to Teresa Thorne, with AFF, “Many organizations such as Friends of the Earth (FOE), and the Environmental Working Group (EWG) are at odds with AFF for providing science-based and peer-reviewed information to consumers so they can make good shopping choices for their families.”

“Whether consumers purchase organic or conventional produce, both are safe,” Thorne said. “Health experts say simply that we should be eating more. Decades of nutrition science and health experts everywhere support the recommendation to eat more organic and conventional produce every day for better health. So, it is a little puzzling why FOE and some of the other activist groups would be concerned about that message. But, apparently they are.”

“So, what we are trying to do,” explained Thorne “is present accurate and more balanced information for consumers. Our Board of Directors, nearly 7 years ago, established that calling our healthy and safe produce “dirty” or “toxic” has to stop. We are not going to allow the disparagement of these nutritious products and the disparagement of the farmers who are working hard every single day to provide these healthy products to consumers, to stand.”

Thorne said, “So, AFF got in gear to stop it, largely by going toe-to-toe with the EWG’s so-called ‘Dirty Dozen’ list—one of the main vehicles of product disparagement. Not long ago, when the EWG published the list, nearly all newspapers, television networks and cable channels gave it widespread media coverage in major media markets and publications.”

AFF has achieved some success by introducing peer-reviewed science from experts into consumer media, with the credible message that both organic and conventional produce are safe, healthful, and people should eat more of them every day. “Just in the course of the last six years of the campaign,” said Thorne, “we’ve seen coverage of the EWR list diminish to the extent that in 2015, only one daily newspaper in Ohio covered the story. So their message is mostly limited to blogs for those who are very friendly to their message.”

Aside from the “Dirty Dozen” list, the EWG website does support the same scientific research as the Alliance:

Should we eat more fruits and vegetables?

…The health benefits of a diet rich in fruits and vegetables outweigh the risks of pesticide exposure. Eating conventionally grown produce is far better than skipping fruits and vegetables. And with EWG’s Shopper’s Guide™, consumers don’t have to choose between pesticides and healthy diets.

Do all these pesticides mean I shouldn’t eat fruits and vegetables?

No, eat your fruits and vegetables! The health benefits of a diet rich in fruits and vegetables outweigh the risks of pesticide exposure. Use EWG’s Shopper’s Guide™ to reduce your exposures as much as possible, but eating conventionally grown produce is better than not eating fruits and vegetables at all.

Shouldn’t I try to buy everything organic?

EWG recommends buying organic whenever possible.

…However, we know that organics are not accessible or affordable for everyone, so we created the Shopper’s Guide™ to help consumers make the healthiest choices given their circumstances.

…EWG always recommends eating fruits and vegetables, even conventionally grown, over processed foods and other less healthy alternatives.

AFF claims on its website:

We have an obesity epidemic and current media and internet reporting is increasing fears consumers have about eating fruits and vegetables and is lowering the faith people have in the government regulations implemented to protect them. It is inaccurate to suggest that organic is the only safe choice when it comes to selecting safe fruits and vegetables; because there is no scientific consensus to substantiate this claim.

-See more at the Alliance’s website, SafeFruitsandVeggies.com.

Thorne believes the Alliance’s success has lead to another activist group, Friends of the Earth (FOE), taking them on. Thorne said FOE is trying to discredit the Alliance by calling it a “front group”.

In its “Spinning Food” report, published in June 2015, the FOE reports:

While the Alliance presents itself as a science-based resource on the safety of organic and conventional produce, its funding comes from trade groups for industrially grown apples, citrus, pears and grapes, among other industry groups.

The “leading corporate Board Members or Donors” of the Alliance are listed as:

-California Farm Bureau Federation

-Western Growers

-Produce Marketing Association

Wikipedia defines a front organization as “any entity set up by and controlled by another organization, such as intelligence agencies, organized crime groups, banned organizations, religious or political groups, advocacy groups, or corporations. Front organizations can act for the parent group without the actions being attributed to the parent group.”

Thorne stated, “We’re not a front group. We are who we are—very transparent. The entire tax return is posted on the “About Us” section of the AFF website, as well as:

Who is Behind the Alliance for Food and Farming? and How is the Alliance for Food and Farming funded?

“But they never attack the scientific content we present,” stated Thorne, “and that really underscores our science is good and solid. They only try to discredit the organization itself with those unfounded ‘front group’ allegations.”

California Ag Today2016-05-31T19:28:08-07:00July 31st, 2015|

Grape Harvester Safety

Grape Harvester Worker Safety

By Charmayne Hefley, Associate Editor, California Ag Today

Worker safety is top-of-mind for agriculture, and a special raisin and wine grape mechanical safety training event was held in the Fresno County town of Easton. Grape harvester safety suggestions were conveyed in both English and Spanish to more than 150 attendees.

Ryan Jacobsen, CEO of the Fresno County Farm Bureau, one of the event sponsors, said, “It’s no secret, grapes are one of the top crops here is Fresno County. So this raisin and wine grape mechanical harvest safety training is really just to make sure that all of our employers and employees have a safe harvest.”

“They’re working with some machinery that is used only during the harvest time,” said Jacobsen, “which is only a six-week to eight-week period of time. So we just want to get more familiarized with safety as the upcoming season approaches.”

“Most importantly,” Jacobsen continued, “farmers and farmworkers are working a lot of long hours during the harvest season, and this is just a constant reminder that safety is the number one priority. It’s most important that our folks go home safe every evening,” Jacobsen said.

Clint Erling, and his employer, Kingsburg Cultivator, also known as KCI Equipment, which manufactures vineyard equipment such as mechanical raisin harvest machines and almond harvesting equipment, wants to make sure everybody’s safe and gets to go home at night. “Some of this equipment can be extremely dangerous,” Erling explained, “so we engineer guards for areas of the machine to increase worker safety, while maintaining the machine’s effectiveness in the field.”

Worker safety is important to Erling, even after the sale. “We go to the field and work with farmworkers during the harvest or on any projects they’ve got going on,” he said.

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:28:09-07:00July 23rd, 2015|

Location! Location! Location!

UC ANR Research and Extension Centers Strategically Located

By Charmayne Hefly, Assistant Editor, California Ag Today

Bill Frost is the director of the University of California, Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources’ Research and Extension Center System that has nine different research and extension centers located throughout the state.

UC ANR Research and Extension Center System

Describing the strategy in their geographic placement, Frost said, “We have located them in different growing zones, climates and environments. We have chosen everything from the desert region in El Centro, to cropland here in Kearney, to livestock grazing in both our Hopland and Sierra Foothill Research and Extension Centers, all the way up to Intermountain in Tulelake, where we research potatoes, garlic and crops that can be grown in that fairly short growing season.”

The goal, according to Frost, is to solve local issues from a local or regional perspective. “Each one of our centers has different environments, crops and pest issues to address,” he explained. “These diverse locations are critically important to us because we can do localized, applied research and get useful information out to people, whether they are homeowners in their gardens or growers managing a thousand acres of a crop.”

Frost noted the UCANR Research and Extension Center System has been actively seeking new personnel to better meet the needs of growers. “Just in the last four years,” he said, “we’ve hired almost one hundred new cooperative extension advisors and specialists around the state—many of whom are housed here at the Kearney Research and Extension Center. They are also housed on UC campuses and in our county Cooperative Extension offices.”

Frost commented, “We continue to be relevant. We continue to do cutting-edge applied research. Our programs provide information to everyone; from our youth development program in 4-H and our nutrition education, to master gardener programs that help homeowners with pest problems and water management.”

“And of course, we serve the agricultural community. We have a lot of good research going on and we’re generating lot of good information in commodity production, pest management and water management,” Frost said.

The nine UC ANR Research and Extension Stations are: