PROPOSED DESALINATION PLANT IN SALINAS VALLEY

Salinas Valley Worried about Desal Plans

California American Water could threaten the ground water supply of the Salinas Valley where up to 60 percent of the vegetables and leafy greens are grown for the nation.

The water company, which serves about 100,000 people on the Monterey Peninsula, was ordered 20 years ago to reduce using their source of water from the Carmel River by 60 percent by 2016.

Norm Groot, executive director of the Monterey County Farm Bureau, commented, “They’re searching frantically to find an alternative source. Unfortunately, they have had twenty years to do that and the voters haven’t really been necessarily sympathetic and voted for their particular projects when proposed.”

“So, now we are to the point of looking at a desalination plant that is supposedly going to replace all that water from the Carmel River,” Groot said. “There are a number of issues there as well—not only the cost—but the energy footprint and a number of other things that really have some of the people here quite concerned right now.”

“The test well for the proposed desal plant may be fairy close to the shoreline,” Groot said, “but any water taken from that well could impact the Salinas Valley. I think our biggest concern is what is that cone of depression, which is a scientific term for the influence that a source water intake has in a particular area. And because of the confluence between the lower aquifer, the Salinas Valley Basin, and the shallow aquifer from which they propose to take the water, we really don’t know how large a cone of influence is going to be felt. And since the actual aquifer goes offshore quite a distance, there is potential for some sort of impact there.”

“We’ve been involved in the whole CPUC process for the Public Utilities Commission trying to insert our particular viewpoints into the process” Groot explained, “so that everyone is fully aware of the ramifications of placing the source water intakes over the aquifer. And what if pumping is determined to cause harm to source water that includes Salinas Valley, either brackish or fresh water?”

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-09-07T21:04:00-07:00January 9th, 2014|

After Tough Negotiation, Raisin Price Decided

Raisin Price Set At $1650 Per Ton

More Thompson Seedless Vineyards To Be Pushed

The Raisin Bargaining Association (RBA) announced that it has reached agreement with its signatory packers on the 2013-14 Natural Seedless raisin harvest announced field price. The price will be one thousand six hundred fifty dollars ($1,650.00) per ton or eighty-two and one half cents ($0.825) per pound. The price is calculated using the following formula:

Base price $1,457.00 $0.7285

Moisture @ 10% 80.00 .04

Maturity @ 75% 50.00 .025

Container rental 21.00 .0105

Transportation (minimum) 15.00 .0075

RAC assessment 14.00 .007

USDA inspection 13.00 .0065

2013 Announced RBA field price $1,650.00 per ton $0.825 per lb.

Raisin growers have sent a strong message to the industry that they prefer selling raisins on a 100% basis now and into the future. With that in mind, the Board of Directors of the Association worked diligently toward a compromise with their signatory packers to establish a fair price that reflects the additional California raisin production for this season.

The Raisin Administrative Committee (RAC) recently estimated the 2013 Natural Seedless raisin crop at 348,437 tons in comparison to deliveries of 311,090 tons last year. The $1,650 per ton price for the 2013 Natural Seedless raisin crop is a 13% reduction to last year but takes into account the additional crop that is estimated for production as well as the challenging market conditions that the industry will be facing.

The agreement calls for growers to be paid in three installments this year as opposed to four installments last season. 65% of the payment will be due fifteen (15) days after completion of delivery, 20% will be due to growers on or before February 28, 2014, and the final 15% will be payable on or before April 30, 2014.

In the past, grower reserve raisins generated funds to assist the industry in marketing additional production into world markets. The effort to sell this year’s additional production without reserve programs and the temporary elimination of state marketing and promotion funding are two reasons why the RAC assessment of fourteen dollars ($14) per ton has been included in the pricing formula. This will provide an opportunity for the industry to work together through the RAC in support of efforts to market 100% of each year’s crop without reserves.

As reported from the International Dried Grape Producing Countries Conference in October, there continue to be strong indicators that Turkey has a significantly smaller dried grape crop to market this coming season. California and Turkey are the two largest producers of dried grapes in the world. It was also reported that South Africa, Chile, and Argentina have suffered tremendous frost damage in their vineyards, which will severely limit their harvest, which begins in January. The ability to take full advantage of what appears to be a tremendous sales opportunity requires an announced field price.

The Raisin Bargaining Association Board of Directors understood the importance of establishing this important benchmark in a timely manner to sell the maximum amount of raisins this year. However, they are also well aware of the impact it has on the grower community. Labor, water, and energy costs have significantly increased for growers over the past twelve months further squeezing their bottom line margins. As agricultural resources in California are depleted, vineyard owners will continue to seek the best utilization of their land.

California Ag Today editors spoke with Steven Spate, an RBA Grower representative, and a raisin grower. He said: “We are witnessing a large amount of raisin grape vineyards being removed (between 8,000 and 15,000 acres) from production this year in favor of more mechanized and profitable crops such as almonds, walnuts, and citrus.”

“Time will tell what impact this acreage reduction will have on the future of the California raisin industry but taking the necessary steps to market this year’s crop was extremely important for the Raisin Bargaining Association to accomplish. We are now counting on the California raisin packers to sell this crop to provide a better future for the remaining growers in our industry,” Spate said.

Spate added that processors thought the price should have been lower, but growers generally thought that shortages in Turkey and other areas should have boosted the price. “But still, there are excess raisins on the market and it has created a downswing in price.

Growers who are pushing out vineyards say that the lower price is only one factor that is in play. Chronic labor shortages are also encouraging growers to plant a less labor-intensive crop.

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-08-25T21:49:44-07:00November 26th, 2013|

CENTER FOR LAND-BASED LEARNING CELEBRATES 20TH ANNIVERSARY

Happy 20^th Anniversary!

CDFA Secretary Karen Ross reported TODAY, “I had the honor and pleasure to help celebrate the 20th anniversary of the Center for Land-Based Learning, a non-profit organization in Winters started by California State Board of Food and Agriculture president, Craig McNamara, and his wife, Julie, to help connect young people with nature and agriculture.”

“In the last two decades, the Center has become a force in this state for its extremely effective youth development and beginning farmer education,” Ross continued. “I want to commend Craig for his vision, passion and commitment of resources to make the Center an entity that touches so many people in such positive ways and is absolutely contributing to a better future for California agriculture.”

“Happy 20th Anniversary, Center for Land-Based Learning!”

_______________________________________

The Center for Land-Based Learning strives to inspire and motivate people of all ages, especially youth, to promote a healthy interplay between agriculture, nature and society through their own actions and as leaders in their communities.

The Center for Land-Based Learning envisions a world where there is meaningful appreciation and respect for our natural environment and for the land that produces our food and sustains our quality of life.

Patrick Cavanaugh2021-05-12T11:06:02-07:00October 26th, 2013|

TREE NUTS, EXCEPT PECANS, REMAIN STRONG IN EXPORTS

Tree Nuts, Still the 800-Pound Gorilla

Crash of the U.S. Pecan Market a Cautionary Tale, Says Rabobank

The export market for U.S. almonds, walnuts, pistachios and pecans continued to grow in 2012, reaching $6 billion dollars and accounting for over 60 percent of U.S. production. In its most recent report, “Riding The Growth Curve – Can U.S. Tree Nut Exports Continue to Defy Gravity?,” Rabobank questions whether this growth will continue. The author of the report, Karen Halliburton Barber, senior analyst, Produce for the Rabobank Food & Agribusiness Research and Advisory Group, says that it should, but that the industry shouldn’t rest on its laurels. “Assuming water limitations will not significantly restrict U.S. production, the U.S. tree nut sector still faces the fundamental uncertainty of when supply and demand will stabilize,” said Barber. “That said, the U.S. tree nut sector is in a good competitive position given its leadership in production and trading history.”In the report, Barber examines the main commodities making up the U.S. tree nut sector:

Almonds – “Here, the U.S. is the 800-pound gorilla and accounts for over 78 percent of total global production. This is where the U.S. is clearly in a good competitive position but needs to beware of the oversupply spiral.”

Pistachios – “Iran is slowing down, but they are not out. Water scarcity and weather have caused declines in production in recent years. However, new growth areas are cropping up and competition may heat up in the medium term.”

Walnuts – “This is the only sector where the U.S. is not the predominant global supplier. Although China is a net importer because of its large domestic demand, its share of global production is greater than that of the U.S., providing competition for U.S. walnuts in the Chinese market. An added risk factor is that Chile has begun to compete with the U.S. on quality in key growth markets.”

Pecans – “This segment is the cautionary tale of the report, warning of what could happen if the right factors line up at the same time. In 2012, the U.S. pecan market crashed. Now largely dependent on the global export market, U.S. pecans were hit with competitive pressures from South Africa, while at the same time dealing with lower yields because of weather challenges. The result of these factors was a 50 percent reduction in grower prices for pecans from July 2011 to January 2013.”

The report concludes by noting that the U.S. tree nut sector’s overdependence on the Chinese market poses the greatest challenge. Yet, U.S. producers are poised for growth over the longer term—both in China and globally. The strategy employed by the almond, walnut and pistachio industries of a more balanced buyer/supplier parity approach can help continue to moderate the risk.

Patrick Cavanaugh2016-08-12T18:04:52-07:00September 25th, 2013|

ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT OVERREACHES HUMAN RIGHTS

The Endangered Species Act Turns 40

A Statement by Rob Rivett, President, Pacific Legal Foundation.

This year the Endangered Species Act turns 40. President Richard Nixon, on December 28, 1973, signed into law one of the nation’s most powerful environmental laws. The law vested authority in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to enforce a wave of new regulations, and create a new relationship between homo sapiens and other species.

Soon after its passage, the U.S. Supreme Court declared it the most comprehensive law ever passed for the protection of species and that ESA enforcement must occur “whatever the cost.” Federal officials have used their power under the Act to regulate private property as if it were public land.

The degree to which the ESA has been successful is a matter of debate. Of the estimated $3 billion of taxpayer funds necessary to fund the annual operation of the ESA, less than 1 percent of the species in North America have been recovered out of more than 1,400 that have been listed. One undebatable fact is the law has created a flood of lawsuits, those filed to seek government acts, and those filed to limit them.

Since its founding in 1973 — the same year the Endangered Species Act (ESA) was enacted — Pacific Legal Foundation has been America’s watchdog in the courts to check and reverse government abuse of this and other environmental laws.

PLF has enough experience with the ESA to know that a well-intentioned law can completely turn the tables on common sense, sound science, and the fundamental freedoms of people. PLF believes in responsible stewardship of our land, water, and air for the benefit of people, the environment, and the species that inhabit it. The trouble comes when a law designed to help species harms the people who care for the environment — including farmers, ranchers, and foresters — those living and working in America’s “environment.”

The protection of the environment is only one of many competing and important social values in America. In an orderly society, no single value can be exalted “whatever the cost.” Environmental laws can and must be administered so as to safeguard, and not thwart, fundamental human needs and rights. Therefore, Pacific Legal Foundation has assumed a leading role in protecting constitutionally established limits on governmental power and ensuring individual freedom.

Nearly 40 years after its enactment, the Federal Endangered Species Act remains one of the nation’s most potent threats to our constitutionally protected property rights. Crafted by the Congress with the noble goal of saving species from extinction, and helping them to return to health, the law today has led to controversy and regulatory creep across our nation’s landscape.

Because Pacific Legal Foundation supports a balanced approach to environmental regulations — like the ESA, we’re taking the opportunity in 2013 to examine aspects of the law, with particular emphasis on past and current cases we’ve litigated.

During the course of the year, this landing page will feature PLF opinion articles, videos, podcasts, and news and information about current PLF cases.  Whether you are part of the “regulated community” or just a concerned citizen who values liberty and a thriving environment, I invite you to check in regularly on this page to see our latest postings and to give us your feedback.

Of course, as a nonprofit legal charity, Pacific Legal Foundation welcomes your charitable donations.

If you believe, as we do, that in protecting our nation’s environment, our constitutional rights should not be threatened or endangered by government agencies and activist groups, I invite you to become a supporter of PLF’s legal program.

Patrick Cavanaugh2021-05-12T11:06:03-07:00August 22nd, 2013|

ANOTHER BIOLOGICAL OPINION CHALLENGE

New Biological Opinion for Yuba River Dams!

According to the Association of California Water Agencies, a federal court ordered a new biological opinion (BiOp) for Daguerre Point and Englebright Dams this week.

U.S. District Court Judge Morrison C. England set a May 12, 2014 due date for the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) to issue a new biological opinion, and told the federal government to not utilize the existing 2012 BiOp in the preparation of the new opinion or in any Federal Energy Regulatory Commission relicensing processes for the two dams.

Yuba County Water Agency, Nevada Irrigation District, Pacific Gas & Electric and other plaintiffs challenged the 2012 BiOp, which identified dam removal and other fish passage improvements as the preferred approaches to improve conditions for spring run Chinook salmon, steelhead and green sturgeon.

The local water agencies argued that fish passage improvements or dam removal would negatively impact water deliveries and hydropower generation, and imperil the award-winning Lower Yuba River Accord, a regional agreement benefitting agriculture and fisheries. Furthermore, the plaintiffs said the 2012 BiOp was flawed and violated key elements of the Federal Endangered Species Act and the Administrative Procedures Act.

England issued a stay of proceedings until the new biological opinion is done, and he denied a related lawsuit from a local environmental group seeking enforcement of the 2012 BiOp. He also ordered the Army Corps of Engineers, which maintains the two dams, to continue taking steps to improve fish habitat on the river.

Patrick Cavanaugh2021-05-12T11:06:03-07:00August 17th, 2013|