Water Archives - Page 40 of 50 - California Agriculture News Today

Harlan Ranch Pushes Citrus Trees Due to No Water

Califonia Citrus Mutual Holds Press Conference at Harlan Ranch to Show Catastrophe

Kevin Severns, a citrus grower and manager of Orange Cove – Sanger Citrus Association and chairman of California Citrus Mutual, spoke to the crowd gathered at third-generation, family-owned Harlan Ranch, Clovis, CA, TODAY, “This is what a zero allocation looks like, folks, this is what zero allocation looks like.”

“Harlan Ranch and Orange Cove-Sanger Citrus have a long history together. Next year we will receive our lowest-ever deliveries from Harlan Ranch simply because of the number of trees are being pushed. Why are they being pushed? No water.

“This is an inexcusable situation and something we are desperate to do something about. Thankfully, this doesn’t have to be the end of the story. We can do something about this, and that’s what this is all about–to bring attention to both the plight and what can be done about it,” said Severns.

“The packing house that I manage is about 25 miles, as the crow flies, from where I’m standing, and the fruit from this ranch is delivered there along with fruit from the other growers who also own the packing house. It’s a cooperative of family farmers. We employ about 100 people directly in our packing house, and another 200 to 250 in the crews that pick, harvest and prune,” Severns said.

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:34:13-07:00July 30th, 2014|

Will Mandatory Water Conservation Regulation be Effective?

By Laurie Greene, Editor

As the agricultural sector does its part in coping with curtailed water allocations and conserving what remains, an emergency regulation to increase conservation practices for all Californians went into effect TODAY. The new mandatory water conservation regulation targets outdoor urban water use. In some areas of the state, 50 percent or more of daily water use is for lawns and outdoor landscaping. This regulation establishes the minimum level of activity that residents, businesses and water suppliers must meet as the drought deepens and will be in effect for 270 days unless extended or repealed.

The regulation, adopted by the State Water Board July 15, and approved by the Office of Administrative Law July 28, mandates minimum actions to conserve water supplies both for this year and into 2015. For more information please visit the Conservation Regulation Portal.

In “The Public Eye: Voluntary water conservation not effective, data show,” Matt Weiser and Phillip Reese confirm, “only mandatory conservation measures, backed by a threat of fines, seem to prompt consumers to save.”

They reported state water agencies used five percent less water (January-May 2014) under mandatory rules alone than the previous three-year average. Agencies under voluntary conservation measures increased water usage four percent over the same timeframe.

Most significantly, water agencies working under mandatory water conservation regulations used fourteen percent less water in May 2014; whereas, other agencies increased usage slightly. And, seventy-five percent of water districts north of the Grapevine reduced usage compared to previous years, while only thirty percent of those south showed reductions.

Now let’s put this into perspective, the authors say that, for instance, Santa Ana residents, each, consume 108 gallons of water daily versus Sacramento residents, who use 218 gallons each. Likewise, San Francisco residents increased their water consumption in May, but they use forty-nine gallons daily, and of course,they do not have substantial landscaping to nourish.

With this regulation, all Californians are expected to stop: washing down driveways and sidewalks; watering of outdoor landscapes that cause excess runoff; using a hose to wash a motor vehicle, unless the hose is fitted with a shut-off nozzle, and using potable water in a fountain or decorative water feature, unless the water is recirculated. The regulation makes an exception for health and safety circumstances.

Larger water suppliers are required to activate their Water Shortage Contingency Plan to a level where outdoor irrigation restrictions are mandatory. In communities where no water shortage contingency plan exists, the regulation requires that water suppliers either limit outdoor irrigation to twice a week or implement other comparable conservation actions. Finally, large urban water suppliers must report water use on a monthly basis to track progress beginning Aug. 15.

Local agencies could ask courts to fine water users up to $500 a day for failure to implement the conservation requirements of the regulation, in addition to their existing authorities and processes.

In addition, Governor Brown has called on all Californians to reduce their water use by 20 percent and prevent water waste and has signed a bill that bars state homeowners associations and common interest developments, such as condominiums, from fining residents for drought-respectful brown lawns. As yet, all other homeowners are not protected.

Visit SaveOurH2O.org to find out how everyone can do their part; Drought.CA.Gov to learn more about how California is dealing with the effects of the drought, and Saveourh2o.org/report-water-waste to report state agency water waste.

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:34:13-07:00July 29th, 2014|

Drought to affect energy costs this year and next

By Christine Souza; Ag Alert

Although the amount of hydroelectricity generation is dropping along with reservoir levels during the lingering California drought, utility companies and state agencies predict adequate energy supplies for the remainder of the summer. But they say they expect the cost of electricity to increase.

“We’re going to have to purchase more replacement power on the open market—and that is generally more expensive—in order to meet all of our customers’ needs,” said Pacific Gas and Electric Co. spokeswoman Lynsey Paolo. “We’ve been trying to manage our reservoirs in a way that we’re keeping a reasonable supply so that we’ll have low-cost hydro available, but the overall impact is that there will be an impact on rates.”

Most of the energy used in California is produced within the state. More than half the energy used here comes from natural gas, followed by nuclear, large-scale hydroelectric facilities, renewable sources and a small percentage from coal. The California Independent System Operator, which operates the state’s high-voltage grid, said it is confident the state will have a secure supply this summer.

“The ISO forecasts that even under the most extreme weather scenarios studied, the state will have enough supply to meet its needs,” spokesman Steven Greenlee said. “Our biggest concern is wildfires that can trip transmission lines, which can make moving energy around difficult. Also, generation plants going off-line because of equipment problems are a concern.”

A reduced supply of hydroelectricity this year has been offset by an increase in renewable energy production, as well as out-of-state imports and increased use of gas power plants, he said.

A spokeswoman for the California Energy Commission, Lori Sinsley, said the mixture of replacement energy “is likely to be more expensive and have more air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions than hydropower.” She said higher power costs will be reflected in next year’s rates and, because most California hydropower is generated in Northern California, most of the impacts of its shortfall will be in that region, particularly in the Central Valley.

Karen Norene Mills, California Farm Bureau Federation associate counsel and director of public utilities, said it will be important for decision-makers “to recognize agricultural customers are uniquely impacted by the drought.”

With the drought reducing availability of surface water for irrigating crops, farmers have been pumping more groundwater to compensate—translating into higher energy loads and costs. The University of California, Davis, estimated last week that farmers could spend an additional $450 million in pumping costs this year.

“The complexity of electric ratemaking can create ripple effects in subsequent years as a result of the increased usage and costs,” Mills said.

San Joaquin County winegrape grower Brad Goehring said at this point in the season he must rely on groundwater for his winegrape crop, and the added pumping will result in higher electricity bills.

“We try diligently to use our pumps during the off-peak periods, but just recently we started irrigating on-peak (weekdays, noon to 6 p.m.) simply because there’s not enough hours in the day to run the pumps,” said Goehring, a PG&E customer. “In a drought year, we’ll have more pumps in that situation than in a normal year, because we have to make sure the vines’ needs are being met.”

Like many farmers, Goehring utilizes drip irrigation and relies on probes to measure soil moisture to ensure the winegrapes receive the appropriate amount of water. With the dry weather this year, he said he had to start irrigating earlier in the year.

Patrick Mullen, PG&E director of agricultural services, said the utility company has seen an overall 40 percent increase in pumping connections by its agricultural customers this year.

“Earlier this year, the volume of applications was 50 to 60 percent higher than the previous year. We’ve seen a substantial increase in the requests for new service in high ag areas,” Mullen said. “We’ve moved resources to those high ag areas, to directly address those increased applications for new services or to service more pumps or larger water pumps.”

In the Southern California Edison service area, Tulare County citrus grower Matthew Watkins of BeeSweet Citrus said he is using more energy to irrigate his crop.

“The majority of our increased energy costs are resulting from lack of district water, so we’re having to run more wells, more often,” Watkins said. “We’re drilling wells; we need to put pumps in some and are ordering power, which takes months. Depending on the horsepower and the load, it can be relatively inexpensive or it can be really expensive.”

Citrus grower Larry Peltzer of Ivanhoe said underground water tables are dropping, requiring more energy to bring water to the surface.

To help reduce cost, Peltzer switched to a time-of-use rate schedule, a structure that charges for energy depending on the time of day and the season the energy is used. He said the change resulted in an average energy-use savings of 15 percent for his ranch.

Watkins said BeeSweet plans to take advantage of Edison’s pump retrofit program next year.

“Edison has their pump incentive program where they do rebates on pump retrofits. The main issue there is Edison does a pump test and they are backed up quite a bit,” Watkins said. “I want to do all of the pump tests this year, so that next year I can do some major repairs and a new pump test and get some of those rebates.”

Southern California Edison spokesman Cal Rossi said that during this drought year, the utility will ensure quick response to the needs of its agricultural customers, knowing that that “could make the difference between a successful harvest and losing their crops.”

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:34:13-07:00July 28th, 2014|

Farmers Markets Try to Weather the Drought

Source: Ching Lee; Ag Alert

With summer harvest in full swing and farmers markets brimming with the usual variety of produce, the effects of the drought may not be immediately apparent to shoppers–but farmers who work those markets tell a different story.

Kern County farmer Greg Tesch, who works five farmers markets in his region and runs three of them, relies entirely on surface water to farm more than 70 different fruits, vegetables, herbs and cut flowers. Tesch said he’s not selling his usual array of products this year.

He said he couldn’t plant strawberries last fall because the canal that feeds his farm went dry in August. Half his cherry trees did not survive, so he had fewer cherries to sell. And because he did not have water deliveries until mid-March, he was unable to plant certain crops on time, missing an important early-season niche.

“We’re typically able to sell things that are slightly out of season,” he said. “The water wasn’t available, so we had to plant when a lot of other people planted, and so there is less demand for our product at farmers markets, as well as wholesale.”

He said the late start also forced him to lower his prices because he now faces “a glut of produce all at one time” and “competing against stores in the wrong time of year.”

Looking ahead, Tesch said he plans to scale back his vegetable production and plant more deep-rooted crops, most likely cherries on drought-tolerant rootstocks. He said he wants to grow crops that mature in the spring, which he acknowledged will affect his farmers-market business.

Some farmers who have better access to water were not necessarily spared from impacts of the drought. In San Diego County, Eli Hofshi, who uses mainly municipal water for irrigation, said he has stopped watering his winter vegetables and will not harvest them because his water bills have become unaffordable.

He said while certain crops such as tomatoes, squash and trees can handle some water stress, vegetables such as cauliflower, broccoli and Brussels sprouts become too bitter if not irrigated. In hindsight, he said he should not have planted the winter vegetables.

“We just didn’t realize it was going to be this costly,” he said. “We planted them last fall and they’ve just now started to produce. So it was a bad mistake. It’s been a double loss by putting the water in, doing the labor.”

With the loss of product, Hofshi said he’s had to buy from other farmers to fill in at his farm stand, but he’s not able to do that at the farmers market, where he’s taking a loss, despite raising prices.

“People are definitely balking at the prices right now,” he said. “They don’t like to pay (more). But we absolutely had to do it, with the cost of water and not to mention we’ve had a minimum-wage increase.”

Fresno County blueberry farmer Kim Sorensen, whose season ended earlier this month, said she also had to raise prices this year—by about 8 percent—to cover some of her higher production costs from having to pump water during the winter. While her customers noticed the price increase, she said most of them understood.

“We lost a little business I think, but not a tremendous amount just because most of what we do is in more affluent areas,” she said.

Farms in other parts of the state where there’s more water also reported increased production costs, with some having to reduce their production or not grow more thirsty crops in order to save water.

San Joaquin County farmer Beatriz Jimenez said she didn’t grow as much okra, eggplant and peppers. Cesar Cuebas, who works for Perry’s Garden Highway Gardens in Sacramento County, said the farm cut at least 30 percent of its production of crops such as sweet corn, tomatoes, peppers and watermelon. And El Dorado County farmer Patrick Hoover said he restricted water on some of his crops, such as apples, and may have smaller fruit this year.

“The drought is not just about water,” said Dan Best, general counsel of the California Federation of Certified Farmers Markets, noting that the warm winter did not give trees such as cherries enough chill hours to set fruit, leaving many growers with a very small crop or nothing to sell.

But for the most part, farmers-market managers reported little change in the amount and variety of products selling at their markets, and said any price increases have been minimal.

Joe Schirmer, who grows a variety of vegetables in Santa Cruz County, said warm, sunny winter weather increased patron attendance at farmers markets, which was good for business. With access to adequate groundwater supplies, he said he was able to extend his growing season during the winter.

“Things really were productive in the wintertime, so we actually did pretty well because of the drought,” he said.

And while having to irrigate through the winter definitely increased his costs, he said the extra production and sales probably resulted in a net gain for his farm.

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:34:14-07:00July 23rd, 2014|

UC Davis Drought Study Assesses Current Losses and Potential Future Impacts

Source: CDFA

A new report from the University of California, Davis, shows that California agriculture is weathering its worst drought in decades due to groundwater reserves, but the nation’s produce basket may come up dry in the future if it continues to treat those reserves like an unlimited savings account.

The UC Davis Center for Watershed Sciences study, released today at a press briefing in Washington, D.C., updates estimates on the drought’s effects on Central Valley farm production, presents new data on the state’s coastal and southern farm areas, and forecasts the drought’s economic fallout through 2016.

The study found that the drought — the third most severe on record — is responsible for the greatest water loss ever seen in California agriculture, with river water for Central Valley farms reduced by roughly one-third. Groundwater pumping is expected to replace most river water losses, with some areas more than doubling their pumping rate over the previous year, the study said. More than 80 percent of this replacement pumping occurs in the San Joaquin Valley and Tulare Basin.

The results highlight California agriculture’s economic resilience and vulnerabilities to drought and underscore the state’s reliance on groundwater to cope with droughts. “California’s agricultural economy overall is doing remarkably well, thanks mostly to groundwater reserves,” said Jay Lund, a co-author of the study and director of the university’s Center for Watershed Sciences. “But we expect substantial local and regional economic and employment impacts. We need to treat that groundwater well so it will be there for future droughts.”

Other key findings of the drought’s effects in 2014:

Direct costs to agriculture total $1.5 billion (revenue losses of $1 billion and $0.5 billion in additional pumping costs). This net revenue loss is about 3 percent of the state’s total agricultural value.
The total statewide economic cost of the 2014 drought is $2.2 billion.
The loss of 17,100 seasonal and part-time jobs related to agriculture represents 3.8 percent of farm unemployment.
428,000 acres, or 5 percent, of irrigated cropland is going out of production in the Central Valley, Central Coast and Southern California due to the drought.
The Central Valley is hardest hit, particularly the Tulare Basin, with projected losses of $810 million, or 2.3 percent, in crop revenue; $203 million in dairy and livestock value; and $453 million in additional well-pumping costs.
Agriculture on the Central Coast and in Southern California will be less affected by this year’s drought, with about 19,150 acres fallowed, $10 million in lost crop revenue and $6.3 million in additional pumping costs.
Overdraft of groundwater is expected to cause additional wells in the Tulare Basin to run dry if the drought continues.
The drought is likely to continue through 2015, regardless of El Niño conditions.
Consumer food prices will be largely unaffected. Higher prices at the grocery store of high-value California crops like nuts, wine grapes and dairy foods are driven more by market demand than by the drought.

If the drought continues for two more years, groundwater reserves will continue to be used to replace surface water losses, the study said. Pumping ability will slowly decrease, while costs and losses will slowly increase due to groundwater depletion. California is the only state without a framework for groundwater management.

“We have to do a better job of managing groundwater basins to secure the future of agriculture in California,” said Karen Ross, Secretary of the California Department of Food and Agriculture, which largely funded the UC Davis study. “That’s why we’ve developed the California Water Action Plan and a proposal for local, sustainable groundwater management.”

Failure to replenish groundwater in wet years continues to reduce groundwater availability to sustain agriculture during drought — particularly more profitable permanent crops, like almonds and grapes — a situation lead author Richard Howitt of UC Davis called a “slow-moving train wreck.”

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:34:15-07:00July 22nd, 2014|

USDA Secretary Brings Water Assistance on Valley Visit

USDA Provides Water Assistance Aid to 73,000 Rural Californians Impacted by Drought

FARMERSVILLE, Calif., July 18, 2014 -USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack today announced USDA is providing $9.7 million in emergency water assistance to 73,000 residents in 11 California counties experiencing the driest year on record.

“This drought is devastating those who live, work and raise their families in much of rural California,” Vilsack said. “It is threatening the survival of whole communities and livelihoods of folks throughout the state. From Siskiyou County in the north to Kern County in the south, this disaster is crippling communities up and down the 600-mile spine of California.

“The emergency water grants we are announcing today are triple the amount we committed to when President Obama and I visited the state earlier this year,” Vilsack added. “I am proud of the work USDA Rural Development staff in California and Washington, D.C., have done to get this funding to those in need and the work they have done with municipal leaders in these rural communities to help residents, businesses and agricultural producers.”

Agricultural Secretary Tom Vilsack

Extreme weather, such as the intense drought occurring in the western United States, is putting a strain on water supplies. The Obama Administration is committed to increasing investments in the nation’s water infrastructure to mitigate the impact of climate change and to ensure that all Americans have adequate, safe and reliable water supplies. The National Climate Assessment released earlier this year illustrates the impact of climate change across the country.

This announcement is part of broader Obama Administration efforts to help those impacted by the drought. Through the National Drought Resilience Partnership, launched as part of President Obama’s Climate Action Plan, federal agencies are working closely with states, local governments, agriculture and other partners on a coordinated response.

The 25 rural California communities are being helped by funding provided through USDA’s Emergency Community Water Assistance Grant (ECWAG) program. This program helps rural communities that have experienced a significant decline in the quantity or quality of drinking water due to an emergency. In January, USDA streamlined the program’s application process to expedite emergency water assistance to communities in need, particularly in drought-impacted areas.

In addition to support from the ECWAG program, USDA is helping rural communities meet their water needs through Water and Waste Disposal loans and grants and Special Evaluation Assistance for Rural Communities and Households (SEARCH) grants. USDA Rural Development has also approved grant funding to establish a revolving fund to provide low-interest loans to rural homeowners for household water wells.

For example, the small community of Cameron Creek Colony in Tulare County is struggling due to severe drought. About 10 percent of its residents have no access to water because their wells have run dry. Others have only intermittent access.

The city of Farmersville, Calif., is receiving a $500,000 ECWAG grant to construct pipelines connecting Cameron Creek Colony to the Farmersville water main and linking residents to the water system. This will provide much-needed relief throughout the community.

The grants announced today are contingent upon the recipients meeting the terms of the grant agreement.

Since the start of the Obama Administration, USDA Rural Development has invested more than $310 million to help 345,000 rural Californians receive improved water or wastewater services.

As California suffers through this drought, the Administration has taken action to help those struggling to cope with the hardships it has caused, including:

Designated 57 counties as disaster areas, making farmers and ranchers eligible for emergency loans.
Targeted $25 million from the Environmental Quality Incentives Program to help farmers and ranchers implement conservation practices to conserve water, protect fields from erosion and improve access to water for livestock.
Invested $5 million in emergency watershed protection.
Provided $7.6 million to livestock producers through the cost-sharing Emergency Conservation Program.
Invested $750,000 to reduce aquatic weeds clogging irrigation screens, pumps and canals in the Sacramento and San Joaquin River delta.
Set aside $3.3 million of a $30 million national investment to mitigate wildfire threats, protect water resources and provide habitat for at-risk species.
Made continuing research investments in water conservation and use efficiency, as well as capacity grants for the University of California’s Institute for Water Resources.
Established a network of climate hubs, including a sub-hub in Davis, for risk adaptation and mitigation to climate change.
President Obama’s plan for rural America has brought about historic investment and resulted in stronger rural communities. Under the President’s leadership, these investments in housing, community facilities, businesses and infrastructure have empowered rural America to continue leading the way – strengthening America’s economy, small towns and rural communities. USDA’s investments in rural communities support the rural way of life that stands as the backbone of our American values.

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:34:15-07:00July 18th, 2014|

Debate Heats up on Proposed EPA Water-Quality Rule

Source: Kate Campbell; Ag Alert

Discussion has intensified about proposed changes to the Federal Clean Water Act. As farmers and ranchers express increasing concern about enhanced permitting requirements, land-use restrictions and legal liability that the proposal could cause, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency launched its own campaign to defend the proposal.

Agricultural leaders want the EPA to scrap the proposed rule changes, terming them a poorly orchestrated attempt to expand agency jurisdiction. The proposed rule was published in April, and remains open to public comment until October.

County Farm Bureaus in California are joining the national push to have the proposed rule changes withdrawn, reaching out to members of the state’s congressional delegation and urging the proposal be stopped.

Meanwhile, the EPA called its proposals merely an effort to clarify regulatory jurisdiction, which was called for in two U.S. Supreme Court decisions that ruled against the agency’s attempt to expand its jurisdiction over “waters of the United States.” EPA said the proposed rule would have minimal economic impact and would not affect many acres—only about 1,300 acres nationwide.

The American Farm Bureau Federation called that assertion “laughable,” considering the amount of land nationwide that has the capacity to retain seasonal moisture, a condition covered by the proposed rule. Under the proposal, legal experts say, wet spots could be deemed “waters of the U.S.”

AFBF said the EPA effort to expand its jurisdictional authority over most types of waters and lands is regulatory overreach that has the potential to impose costly and time-consuming federal permit requirements, as well as place limits on routine farming practices, such as building a fence across a ditch or pulling weeds. Essentially, EPA has proposed regulations that fundamentally redefine “waters of the U.S.” and eliminate the term “navigable” from the law, AFBF said.

“We’re urging Congress to take a look at the proposed rules and we’re urging the agency to withdraw both of them,” California Farm Bureau Federation Federal Policy Manager Rayne Pegg said, referring to both the main EPA proposal redefining “waters of the U.S.” and an “interpretive rule” that focuses on agricultural activities.

Pegg stressed that farmers recognize the need to protect water quality, and already abide by a number of water-quality regulations.

“Adding another layer of regulation does not mean you will get better results,” she said. “Instead, the rule will create more paperwork. It’s a poorly conceived rule. EPA should meet with farmers and listen to its own Scientific Advisory Board to craft something that is practical.”

There are a number of things going on in Congress right now related to these rules, she said, and CFBF has been responding to questions from members of congressional committees—including the House Appropriations Committee, which is considering legislation to remove funding for implementation of the proposed waters of the U.S. rule.

In response to the uproar over the proposal, EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy took to the road last week—touring a Missouri farm and meeting with a number of Kansas farm groups. She acknowledged during a lunch discussion with agricultural leaders the waters of the U.S. proposal has “fallen flat on its face.”

But during a speech in Kansas City, she charged that the EPA proposal has been beset by “D.C. myths.”

“Misinformation is becoming the story, while the legitimate, serious issues that we need to talk about are taking the back seat,” McCarthy said.

At the same time McCarthy visited the Midwest, the Natural Resources Defense Council—an environmental organization—took out advertisements supporting the EPA proposal.

Confusion about what the proposed rule may actually cover and conflicting interpretations of the rule changes may leave political leaders with the impression the proposal is benign and that farmers don’t need to worry, said CFBF associate counsel Kari Fisher.

“EPA would like political leaders and the public to believe that all farmers need to do is go ahead with normal farming practices and not worry about the proposed changes,” she said. “Unfortunately, that’s incorrect.”

Fisher said the interpretive rule on agriculture would require certain farming practices—such as putting in a new fence or maintaining a ditch—to comply with U.S. Department of Agriculture standards administered by the Natural Resources Conservation Service. She noted that the interpretive rule would apply only to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, which covers dredging and infilling land that could affect wetlands.

But the proposed rule to expand the definition of “navigable waters” applies to the entire Clean Water Act, she said, and would expand EPA jurisdiction over water.

“If the proposed rule redefining waters of the U.S. is adopted, farmers with land that features a depression or low spot that’s adjacent to a tributary flowing to navigable water could be brought under the rule’s jurisdiction,” Fisher said.

Although the interpretive rule might provide a limited layer of protection for farming and ranching activities from the need to obtain Section 404 permits, she said, “it will not provide protection from other necessary Clean Water Act permits, such as those for the discharge of pollutants.”

Farm Bureau leaders continue to urge members to help prevent the proposed rule from becoming final by commenting about the impact the proposal would have on their farms and ranches.

Information from EPA on the proposed changes to the CWA can be found online at www2.epa.gov/uswaters. Background information on the issue from AFBF is online at http://ditchtherule.fb.org/.

For information on arranging local farm tours, grower roundtables and informational meetings with members and staff of California’s congressional delegation, contact county Farm Bureau offices or the CFBF Federal Policy Division at 916-561-5610.

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-08-03T21:07:42-07:00July 18th, 2014|

Water Quantity, Quality Affect Melon Crops

Source: Steve Adler; Ag Alert

With severe shortages of surface water affecting key Central Valley production regions, melon growers say both water supply and quality will affect their final crop yields this year. As they ship cantaloupes, watermelons and other melons to supermarkets around the country, every grower in the Central Valley is talking about the water shortage.

There have been some acreage reductions because of lack of surface water, particularly on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley, but most melon growers have wells on their farms to irrigate their fields. Because of the salinity of much of that groundwater, however, melon growers report lower yields in many fields.

In addition, growers said they have found it necessary to sink their wells deeper as underground aquifers decline, and farmers report that some wells have run dry.

The annual melon harvest begins in the Imperial Valley and the neighboring Yuma Valley in Arizona in early to mid-May, then progresses north through the San Joaquin Valley.

Melon yields in Imperial and Yuma were lower than normal this year, growers said, because many of the fields were hit with mosaic viruses.

“We fought mosaic in the melons this year that was aggravated by the strong winds that came in later than normal throughout April and much of May,” Imperial County farmer Joe Colace Jr. said. “The size early on was about a half to full size smaller than what we are accustomed to getting from our early crop, but after about the second week, our sizes improved and we were fine for the balance of the season.”

Due to the lack of water in the Bakersfield area, Colace said his farm decided not to plant melons there as it typically does, choosing instead to extend the season in the Imperial Valley, where water was more available.

Sal Alaniz, director of harvest and quality control for Westside Produce in Firebaugh, said they have about 2,500 acres of melons that will be harvested through October. Their plantings are down about 300 acres this year due to water shortages and quality, he said. The farm is using only groundwater this year and its quality has affected some fields.

“We’re using groundwater that is lower in quality and higher in salts, and that affects the quantity,” Alaniz said, adding that melon quality is good, but yields are expected to be only average.

Westside Produce started its melon harvest on June 27, about eight to 10 days earlier than normal due to warm spring weather, Alaniz said. Harvest crews will go through the fields several times, choosing the ripe melons and leaving the immature ones to be harvested later.

Alaniz said the farm uses drip irrigation, which allows for water to be applied when the plants need it while still providing the ability to move harvest equipment through the field. He noted that drip irrigation does bring extra expenses, “due to the labor and need for filters.”

So far, Alaniz said he has had no problem filling harvest crews. About 80 percent of the workers return each year for the melon harvest, he said, while noting that labor could get tighter as other melon growers begin their harvests. Each machine moving through the field employs a crew of 21 plus a foreman.

For cantaloupes, newly adopted mandatory food safety and trace-back requirements took effect last year, following a vote by melon growers.

“The new food safety and trace-back rules are working fine,” Colace said. “Anytime there is something new or a new application, there is always that learning curve. We are through that learning curve, and we are very consistent and satisfied with all of the food safety requirements. The rules are specific to the cantaloupes, but if we have customers who request this on other melons, we are in a position to do that as well.”

The program operates with oversight from the California Department of Food and Agriculture and utilizes auditors trained by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

“We are very pleased that all handlers achieved certification last year,” said Garrett Patricio, vice president of operations at Westside Produce and chairman of the California Cantaloupe Advisory Board marketing committee. He said this season’s audits are currently ongoing and that any new handlers will be added to the certified list as soon as their audits are complete.

In 2013, California growers produced cantaloupes on about 36,000 acres. Farmers also grew 10,500 acres of honeydew melons and 10,000 acres of watermelons last year, along with smaller plantings of a variety of other melons.

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:34:16-07:00July 16th, 2014|

California Water Feeds Our Communities Tackles Rural Hunger

California Water Feeds Our Communities, a grassroots effort consisting of local businesses, service organizations and farmers, has partnered to help our communities who are suffering from the lack of water. As the summer progresses and less water is available, the need for resources will increase.

Community Food Bank CEO Andy Souza explained, “Our rural communities are suffering, and as we are challenged to keep up with the food lines at distribution sites, the generosity of our community can help us bridge the gap with financial and food donations.”

Local grower Sarah Woolf said, “This event is an ideal opportunity for our community to participate in helping those who are hardest hit by the drought. These are people whose livelihood depends upon a vibrant agricultural industry.”

The current zero water allocation for most of the Central Valley and the severe statewide drought is the inspiration for this event. The success of our state is tied to water which produces not only food but jobs and spurs the economy.

Promoting the need for food donations brings necessary focus on water and demonstrates how our state’s future depends upon a reliable water supply. Those wishing to donate can do so by phoning the Community Food Bank at 559-237-3663 ext. 113 or online at their website at: http://communityfoodbank.net/HowToHelp.aspx.

California Water Feeds Our Communities is a grassroots effort to raise the awareness of the important role that water plays in California agriculture and everyday life. The drought has directly impacted our communities, farm workers and farmers. Many are devastated by the lack of water.

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:34:16-07:00July 16th, 2014|

Deadline Extended by Two Weeks for State Water Efficiency & Enhancement Program

The California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) has extended its deadline for applications for the State Water Efficiency and Enhancement Program (SWEEP) by two weeks, until July 29, 2014.

An estimated $10 million in competitive grant funding, authorized by emergency drought legislation (Senate Bill 103), will be awarded to provide financial assistance to agricultural operations for implementation of water conservation measures that result in increased water efficiency and reduced greenhouse gas emissions.

Applications must be submitted electronically using FAAST by Tuesday, July 29, 2014 at 5:00 p.m. PST.

Applicants must access the Application Guidelines for detailed information and program requirements. To streamline and expedite the application process, CDFA is partnering with the State Water Resources Control Board, which hosts an online application using the Financial Assistance Application Submittal Tool (FAAST).

All applicants must register for a FAAST account at https://faast.waterboards.ca.gov.

Prospective applicants may contact CDFA’s Grants Office at grants@cdfa.ca.gov with general program questions.

Governor Brown has called on all Californians to reduce their water use by 20 percent and prevent water waste – visit SaveOurH2O.org to find out how everyone can do their part, and visit Drought.CA.Gov to learn more about how California is dealing with the effects of the drought.

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-05-31T19:34:16-07:00July 15th, 2014|

Previous 394041 Next