Ag Alert June 5, 2024

Ag Alert is the newspaper of the California Farm Bureau Federation, reaching Farm Bureau agricultural and collegiate members. Agricultural members are owners and decision-makers on California farms and ranches. The California Farm Bureau Federation is a non-governmental, non-profit, voluntary membership organization whose purpose is to protect and promote agricultural interests throughout the state of California and to find solutions to the problems of the farm, the farm home and the rural community. Farm Bureau is California's largest farm organization, comprised of 53 county Farm Bureaus. Farm Bureau strives to protect and improve the ability of farmers and ranchers engaged in production agriculture to provide a reliable supply of food and fiber through responsible stewardship of California's resources.

Seasonal pests Klamath Basin farmers brace for grasshoppers

Lettuce worries Old crop viruses return in new forms

Page 3

Page 6

www.cfbf.com • www.agalert.com JUNE 5, 2024

Field Crops Vegetables

special reports

By Caleb Hampton Imperial Valley farmers preparing to participate this summer in programs to conserve Colorado River water have had to put their plans on hold due to concerns from wildlife agencies that reduced water use could result in habitat loss for three endangered species that live in the region. After decades of drought and warnings that the river could run dry, California, Arizona and Nevada—the three states in the Colorado River’s Lower Basin—agreed last year to conserve 3 million acre-feet of water by the end of 2026. The short-term conservation effort is the largest ever on the Colorado River. It relies on Imperial Valley farmers, whose centu- ry-old water rights entitle them to more of the river than other users, to come up with about a quarter of the overall water savings. The Imperial Irrigation District pro- posed two programs farmers could vol- untarily participate in to conserve water in exchange for compensation. One program would use federal funds to expand an ex- isting program that pays farmers to install water-saving irrigation systems. The other would pay farmers to stop irrigating alfal- fa and other forage crops for 45-60 days during the summer, sacrificing some hay cuttings without killing the perennial crop. “I would think that there should be a sense of urgency to get this across the fin- ish line,” said Larry Cox, an Imperial Valley farmer, referring to clearance from govern- ment agencies to implement the programs. The conservation programs were pro- posed more than a year ago, and district officials told farmers they expected them to be authorized by this spring. But earlier this year, during the environmental review process, wildlife agencies requested a bi- ological consultation to ensure the pro- grams would not violate laws that prohibit killing or harming endangered species. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife declined interview requests. They said they See COLORADO, Page 12 Habitat concerns muddle Colorado River water plan

Apricot growers work to rebuild markets Leovigilda Velázquez picks apricots at Lucich Santos Farms in Stanislaus County. Some growers describe this year’s crop as slightly smaller than last year’s, when California harvested about 30,000 tons of the stone fruit. With processors and dry yards taking less fruit, more apricots are marketed fresh.

By Ching Lee After years of removing trees, California’s remaining apricot growers say they have found a balance between supply and de- mand, allowing the crop to be profitable. But the downward trend in production has reduced the sector to a fraction of what it once was, even though the Golden State remains the nation’s top producer of

apricots. The state harvested 5,300 acres of apricots last year, down from more than 15,000 acres in 2003. So many apricot orchards have vanished that even a slight increase in acreage could “bump you back up into an oversupply situation,” said Stanislaus County grower Daniel Bays, who serves as president of Apricot Producers of California. For this reason, growers wanting to get in the

business or expand their existing apricot plantings may want to think twice. “Our big challenge as an industry is to try and grow consumer demand before we go hog wild planting newer additional acres of apricots,” Bays said. Not that many growers are rushing into apricots. The delicate fruit remains labor-

See APRICOTS, Page 9

n e w s p a p e r

From the Fields........................4-5 Vegetables................................ 6-7 Field Crops..........................10-11 Classifieds........................... 17-19 Inside

Published by

Balanced approach can best protect Colorado River

By Mike Wade As the lifeblood of the arid American Southwest, the Colorado River stands as a symbol of vitality and a testament to the in- tricate balance between human necessity and environmental stewardship. Flowing through

reliable supplies for communities in exchange for financial support for on- farm conservation projects to help sustain America’s leading winter vegetable region. California, Arizona and Nevada have also committed to reducing Lower Basin water usage by up to 1.5 million acre-feet per year, more than enough to offset the 1.3 million acre-feet of structural deficit, or water lost from the system due to leaks in canals and evaporation. The Lower Basin plan is built on oper- ating the system as a whole and allocates additional water supply cuts, when need- ed, evenly across both basins triggered by the reductions in the combined storage of all seven reservoirs. These types of solu- tions would be an effective way to address dwindling Colorado River supplies across the Upper and Lower basins, as California has done successfully between agricultur- al and urban water users for more than three decades. The ramifications of a depleted Colorado River ripple far beyond its banks, impacting communities, economies and ecosystems that rely on its waters for survival. The Lower Basin Plan and 2003 agreement stand as examples of how par- ties can work together. As California Colorado River Commissioner and IID board member JB Hamby said in support of the Lower Basin alternative, “Each basin, state and sector must contribute to solving the challenges ahead. No one who benefits from the river can opt out of saving it.” That’s the kind of common sense the Colorado River needs. And our farm- ers are doing their part to protect this critical resource. (Mike Wade is executive director of the California Farm Water Coalition. He may be contacted at mwade@farmwater.org.)

seven U.S. states and Mexico, its waters sustain more than 40 mil- lion people, vast agricultural lands that feed much of America, tribal in- terests and a myr- iad of ecosystems.

Mike Wade

Yet, despite its crucial role, the Colorado River faces an unprecedented challenge: Its robust flow has dwindled, signaling a looming crisis for population centers and millions of acres of critical farmland de- pendent on the river. The Upper Colorado River Basin, con- sisting of Wyoming, Colorado, Utah and New Mexico, and the Lower Basin, com- prised of California, Arizona and Nevada, have a combined interest in solving the crisis, and everyone that relies on the river must be part of the effort to ensure its long- term viability. Since the passage of the 1922 Colorado River Compact, the river’s supplies have been equally divided between the Upper and Lower basins, each entitled to 7.5 mil- lion acre-feet, or 15 million acre-feet in to- tal. However, a recent study by researchers at the University of California, Los Angeles, Center for Climate Science indicated that the Colorado River has lost 10.3% of its run- off since 1880. Solving this requires a concerted effort to reduce demand on the river. And it must be done in a way that protects farm

An irrigation canal carries Colorado River water to farms in the Imperial Valley, America’s leading winter vegetable region. Water conservation measures by farmers are helping to protect the river.

production, which benefits Americans on a national level and sustains local econo- mies that depend on farms and farm-re- lated businesses. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, which oversees much of the river’s operation, is developing new guide- lines to manage the river after 2026, when the current guidelines expire. The Upper and Lower basins submitted competing alternatives earlier this year, with distinctly different approaches to the problem. The Upper Basin’s alternative centers on limiting releases from Lake Powell, which stretches from Southern Utah into Northern Arizona, to the Lower Basin. In other words, that means pinning the burden almost solely on the Lower Basin states should hydrological conditions worsen, while sparing Upper Basin states of additional water cuts. In contrast, the Lower Basin’s alternative looks at managing the system as a whole, as it was designed by the bureau, which built seven dams and reservoirs—Mead,

Havasu, Mohave, Powell, Navajo, Flaming Gorge and Blue Mesa—from 1931 to 1966. For Imperial Valley farmers, the Colorado River is their sole source of wa- ter, meaning that any reductions in water supply without the benefit of conservation programs would have a devastating effect on the regional economy. Still those farmers, who hold senior wa- ter rights to the Colorado River, have sacri- ficed, invested and innovated to save 7.75 million acre-feet of water during the last two decades. They have achieved water savings by largely switching to high-efficiency ir- rigation systems on thousands of acres of lettuce, broccoli, carrots, citrus and alfalfa. Importantly, they have been aided in their efforts by a 2003 agreement between the Imperial Irrigation District, the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, the Coachella Valley Water District and the San Diego County Water Authority. The landmark pact facilitated agricultural water transfers to ensure

VOL. 51, NO. 21

June 5, 2024

AG ALERT ® weekly newspaper is an official publication of the CALIFORNIA FARM BUREAU

www.agalert.com www.cfbf.com

@cafarmbureau @cafarmbureau @cafarmbureau

@calfarmbureau

Board of Directors (District 1) Ronnie Leimgruber; (2) Scott Hudson; (3) Mark Lopez; (4) Kevin Merrill; (5) Kevin Robertson; (6) Joey Airoso; (7) Lorna Roush; (8) April England; (9) Jay Mahil; (10) Jan Garrod; (11) Joe Martinez; (12) Paul Sanguinetti; (13) Jake Wenger; (14) Joe Fischer; (15) Clark Becker; (16) Garrett Driver; (17) Johnnie White; (18) Daniel Suenram; (19) Taylor Hagata; (20) Jim Morris; (21) Ronald Vevoda; (Young Farmers & Ranchers Committee Chair) Trelawney Bullis. Advisory Members Jenny Holtermann, Chair, CFB Rural Health Department, Glenda Humiston, University of California Cooperative Extension. Letters to the editor: Send to agalert@cfbf.com or Ag Alert, Attn: Editor, 2600 River Plaza Drive, Sacramento, CA 95833. Include name, address, phone number, email address; 250-word limit.

Peter Hecht- Chief Editor, Publications

ADVERTISING: Brock Tessandori- Business Development Manager (916) 561-5585 Antonio Muniz- Sales Coordinator Classifieds: (916) 561-5570 2600 River Plaza Dr., Sacramento, CA 95833. Represented in the East and Midwest by J.L. Farmakis, Inc. Eastern office: Bill Farmakis 48 Topfield Rd., Wilton, CT 06897 (203) 834-8832; Fax: (203) 834- 8825. Midwest office: Russ Parker, P.O. Box 7, Albia, IA 52531 (641) 946-7646, Bob Brunker, 8209 NW 81st Ct., Kansas City, MO 64152 (816) 746-8814, Jennifer Saylor, 8426 N. Winfield Ave., Kansas City, MO 64153 (816) 912-2804, Laura Rustmann, 901 Lands End Cir, St. Charles MO 63304, (636) 238-8548. AG ALERT (issn 0161-5408) is published weekly except weeks of Memorial Day, July 4, Thanksgiving,

Christmas; and with exceptions, by the California Farm Bureau, 2600 River Plaza Dr., Sacramento CA 95833 (telephone: (916) 561-5570). Periodicals postage paid at Sacramento, California. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to AG ALERT, 2600 River Plaza Dr., Sacramento, CA 95833. The California Farm Bureau does not assume responsibility for statements by advertisers or for products advertised in AG ALERT nor does the Federation assume responsibility for statements or expressions of opinion other than in editorials or in articles showing authorship by an officer, di- rector, or employee of the California Farm Bureau Federation or its affiliates. No alcohol, tobacco or political advertising will be accepted. Shannon Douglass, President Shaun Crook, First Vice President Ron Peterson, Second Vice President

Christine Souza- Assistant Editor

Ching Lee- Assistant Editor

Caleb Hampton- Assistant Editor

Shawn Collins- Production Designer

Paula Erath- Graphic Designer

GENERAL INFORMATION: (916) 561-5570

agalert@cfbf.com

Printed on Recycled Paper

BPA Business Publication Member

2 Ag Alert June 5, 2024

Anxiety rises as grasshopper season begins in North State

By Kathy Coatney Swarms of grasshoppers and Mormon crickets, which travel great distances and destroy crops in their path, are expected to make another unwelcome appearance this year. University of California Cooperative Extension farm advisors say the grasshop- pers, which lay eggs in the fall and begin hatching by summer, are usually more iso- lated to rangeland and irrigated pasture than irrigated row crops. However, exacerbated by dry condi- tions, farmers in Siskiyou and Modoc counties have reported tens of millions of dollars in crop losses during the past sev- eral years due to damage caused by the feeding grasshoppers and crickets. Klamath Basin farmers and ranchers say several grasshopper species destroyed hay, onions and other irrigated crops last year, after the insects left dry wildlife refuges in search of food. Growers say they are anxious this sea- son, since there could be billions of eggs waiting to hatch. Grasshoppers do not like water or wet conditions, so growers are hoping that early rains may have helped in destroying the eggs. Tulelake farmer John Crawford said the

grasshoppers last year damaged his alfalfa and two barley fields, including one organ- ic and one conventional. The convention- al barley was treated and lost some yield. An organic insecticide was applied to the organic barley, but the material had little impact on the grasshoppers. Crawford said he lost 80% of the crop. “I’ve seen a dozen serious grasshopper outbreaks in my lifetime, but I’ve never seen anything that even came close to rivaling last year,” Crawford said. “It was just far beyond anything that we’ve ever had before.” The worst of the grasshopper invasion, he said, came mid-July during the second cutting of alfalfa. The hay came back after irrigation, and by the time growers did a third cutting, the grasshoppers had moved on, Crawford said. Laura Snell, UCCE livestock and nat- ural resource advisor in Modoc County, agreed that rain and cold weather can drown the eggs. “Most of the time, the grasshoppers lay their eggs in drier areas,” Snell said. “If those dry areas are flooded or have a particularly cold, wet winter, populations definitely can be affected.” However, she said, “we did not receive

Affected by crop damages caused by grasshoppers and Mormon crickets in the past few years, farmers are hopeful that excess water this year kills the eggs, reducing the population.

enough cold weather to deter them at all.” In fact, she has already seen significant populations of grasshoppers hatching in the Tulelake area and the lower elevations of Modoc County. Snell said there are two conventional treatments available for grasshoppers. The most effective treatment kills them in the hopper stage before they can fly. She added, “There is a lot more effectiveness if they are in what’s called an early instar,” or developmental phase for the insects. As grasshoppers go through seven levels

of molting and shed their exoskeleton, Snell said the critical stage to treat is when the grasshoppers don’t have wings and aren’t flying. “They are particularly susceptible to chemical applications, and it is when they are eating the most,” Snell said. “For the spray to be effective, they need to consume the grass that’s been sprayed, so you want to be in those early stages when they’re eat- ing a lot of grass.” Crawford said “there are a lot of See GRASSHOPPERS, Page 19

June 5, 2024 Ag Alert 3

From the Fields ®

To contribute to From the Fields, submit your name, county of membership and contact information to agalert@cfbf.com.

Brandon Fawaz Siskiyou County hay farmer

Paul Sanguinetti San Joaquin County farmer

We are in the middle of our first cutting. We’ll probably get three cuttings. Overall, quality is up from what we’ve seen in the last couple of years. Some are just starting, almost ending or in the middle of their first hay cutting. Last year, we didn’t start until mid-June. The year before, the start was June 19, which was really delayed. This year, everything is much earlier with alfalfa and orchard grass, even grain crops. I thought we had an ideal spring last year, but the plants did not do well com- pared to expectations. This year, I didn’t think it was that much different, but everything is doing much better. The hay markets are down. I do not do a lot of export hay, but it’s my under- standing the export market drives a very large portion of the California hay market. China is currently the No. 1 importer of hay and is not buying right now. In general, there’s not a lot of nearby markets, so we’re limited by the location and infrastruc- ture. We don’t have a lot of infrastructure to hold grain, sunflowers and corn silage. It appears to be a very good water year compared to what we’ve seen in the past. Some of our seasonal creeks ran better last year, and certain ones are running better this year. But we’ll know more in August and September. We have a good snowpack, but the Scott River watershed is still under an emergency drought declaration, which gives the state the ability to establish and maintain instream flows. If the state water board feels the flow level is too low, it will is- sue an order to curtail groundwater pumping. Many have found that reducing groundwater pumping does not drastically improve river flow. There have been no curtailments this year. Some entered into a local cooperative solution where they made certain concessions upfront about reduced usage for more water certainty later in the year.

I planted barley last year but decided to plant it again this year because the input costs are less. It is a crop that we don’t have to irrigate, so we save money. It yields about as good as wheat and brings in about the same amount of money. It’s one of the crops I can produce a little cheaper. We’ve got some corn planted. We don’t know if we’re going to harvest it or chop it. If we can’t get $50 to cut it for silage, we’ll probably harvest it. My boys are growing processing tomatoes. Farmers have cut back on acreage because canneries have cut back. One bright area is we planted some large lima beans. The price per sack is pretty good, so if we get a halfway decent crop, they’ll make some money. There are a lot of crops that make money, but you’ve got to have a contract, and there’s only so much of that out there. Walnuts are not very good, and I don’t see a very big crop this year. Last year, there was a nice, big crop. Last fall, I removed some walnut trees. I might take more out this fall if things don’t improve. The almond crop looks good. The talk is that the almond price may be a little stronger, so almond growers are in a little better position than walnut growers. Our input costs went up about three or four years ago. It was higher two years ago. Our labor costs are up because of the minimum wage increase. Fertilizers and chemical costs are about like they were last year, which was already twice what I was paying five or six years ago. People don’t realize that when you raise the minimum wage, you raise the cost of everything, and all those costs, such as for fuel and chemicals, are passed on. I’m not in the kind of business where I can pass it on.

Neil Nagata San Diego County farmer

We are finishing up the berry season, so both blueberries and strawberries are coming to an end. We are still picking the last of the strawberries and blueberries, but things are winding down. Everything is pretty much ending our season, and we are getting ready to do it again. We are making plans for next season and slowing down in the berry fruits. Within a short amount of time, we will be knocking everything over—not the blueberries, but the strawber- ries—and then getting the fields prepared to be ready to plant in late September or early October. There is a lot more planning than actual activity as we get ready to prepare the fields for the next season. The berry market was tough this year. Early strawberries were pretty good, but the rains that started in December and went all the way until April held us back. We had a lot of rain, so there were definitely challenges with disease and fruit quality. But overall, production was de- cent even in spite of those problems. For blueberries, the markets weren’t as good. We had a lot of competition coming out of Mexico right in our window, so it has been more and more challenging for the blueberries. For cherimoya, we are pruning the trees back and getting ready for next season. This year, we didn’t have any problems with sourcing employees, so we were able to meet our needs. Costs keep going up, which is a challenge. With all the rain, the conditions required a lot more weeding, so there was a lot more maintenance around the farm, which added to our costs.

4 Ag Alert June 5, 2024

Insights from farmers and ranchers across the Golden State, including members of the California Farm Bureau.

Lorna Roush Fresno County farmer

As we move into summer, we are prepping almond floors and checking drip hoses for repairs needed. Coyotes tend to be harmful to the hoses year-round. The floors for the al- monds are scraped, berms sprayed and ready for flood irrigation prior to harvest. This helps with dust control and leveling. Dead trees and branches are being removed for ease of har- vest equipment. Harvest equipment has been gone through and is ready for final prepara- tions before harvest. We remain cautiously optimistic about almond prices having a slight uptick. It is definitely a waiting game. We just planted a new field of the Shasta variety, which seems to do well in our area. Our area does have fair water levels, but we are working hard at staying compliant. Pistachios are extremely quiet right now. Prep work is complete until it is time for last-min- ute needs as harvest approaches. Our crop is on the mend and coming back strong with our team’s attention. We have multiple varieties of winegrapes, including barbera, French colombard, rubired, muscat, pinot gris and primitivo. We chose not to replant chardonnay as contracts are not secure. Winegrapes are being watched closely for mildew. Water schedules and fungicide applications are critical as wineries are stringently evaluating fruit. Exact irrigation sched- ules are critical to make fruit as precise to the winery specifications as possible. As we work through prepping floors in the vineyards, we also go through with cane cutters to prep the plant for best possible fruit growth. Water remains at the forefront of every farmer’s mind. We are working to remain good stewards. Our family has been farming for 138 years on the same land. If we are not doing due diligence, we would not be having productive crops. Our soil health is our main concern. Thinking this should be a very busy time of year is an understatement. This is the calm be- fore the storm.

CALIFORNIA Small Agricultural Business Drought and Flood Relief Grant application portal powered by lendistry

Help your business grow beyond H2O The California Small Agricultural Business Drought & Flood Relief Grant Program provides relief to small agricultural businesses that experienced a decline in annual gross receipts or gross profits due to drought conditions. The California Small Agricultural Business Drought & Flood Relief Grant Program is administered by the California Office of the Small Business Advocate (CalOSBA). Applications for Drought Group 3 are now OPEN Apply Today! Grants up to $100,000 for Small Agricultural Businesses and Farmers who experienced drought conditions.

Visit CADroughtFloodRelief.com/Drought For more information!

June 5, 2024 Ag Alert 5

CALIFORNIA

Vegetables A SPECIAL GROWERS’ REPORT OF AG ALERT ®

In the Salinas Valley, University of California researchers are working to develop plant resistance to new evolutions of longstanding crop diseases in lettuce, including Fusarium, Verticillium and Pythium.

Emerging virus variants are testing lettuce growers By Bob Johnson

Riverside County. “However, its incidence and severity have recently increased in coastal production areas.” Putnam was among other researchers who reported on lettuce disease developments and mitigation efforts during the 2024 California Leafy Greens Research Conference in Pismo Beach and submitted papers on study findings. He said researchers are conducting an updated assessment on emerging Fusarium pathogens in the coastal vegetable region. Identifying the latest strain of Fusarium and finding sources of genetic resistance are essential, he said, because the disease survives in the soil for years, and once it infects a plant, there is little that can be done. According to UC pest management guidelines, the Fusarium pathogen “causes a disease only in lettuce but may be sustained on the roots of many plants.” Once introduced into a field, the fungus will probably remain indefinitely, the guidelines noted.

Central Coast lettuce growers are contending with new variants of destructive crop diseases that have been around for decades but have evolved to complicate efforts to control them. New races of Fusarium and Verticillium make management of the diseases more chal- lenging for vegetable growers, while researchers continue to probe the relationship be- tween various diseases and the mysterious outbreaks of Pythium in many Salinas Valley lettuce fields. One persistent plant disease, Fusarium wilt, is familiar to growers in the Central Valley and warmer areas of Monterey County. Now, a new race of the pathogen, which causes lettuce seedlings to wilt and die, has been found in lettuce fields. “Fusarium wilt of lettuce, caused by the soil inhabiting fungus Fusarium oxysporum, has historically posed a pest challenge in California’s fall-to-spring production regions,” said Alex Putnam, University of California Cooperative Extension plant pathologist based in

See LETTUCE, Page 7

6 Ag Alert June 5, 2024

Lettuce Continued from Page 6

noted that they discovered “a novel race variant” characterized by its resistance to the Banchu Red Fire lettuce variety and susceptibility to the commercial cultivar San Miguel. In a survey of 23 lettuce culti- var locations, Putnam said, “we observed visible symptoms of either internal vas- cular discoloration or external root rot at all locations.” He said the discoloration was indicative of Fusarium or Verticillium wilt, and the root rot was evidence suggesting the pres- ence of Pythium wilt, a pathogen that can survive in the soil without a host plant. It enters lettuce plants through the roots and causes the crop to wilt and die. Studies of the new Fusarium race and its possible connection to Pythium continue. “In many cases, lab analyses couldn’t confirm the suspected disease based on visual symptoms,” Putnam said. “Ongoing work aims to further confirm the novel race variant and evaluate isolates from more locations.” He said an “analysis of Fusarium- Pythium coinfections is ongoing.” Researchers say they are making progress on detecting Pythium in the soil before it infects lettuce and aim to someday predict whether there is enough Pythium in the ground to be problematic for lettuce crops. (Bob Johnson is a reporter in Monterey County. He may be contacted at bjohn11135@gmail.com.)

UCCE plant pathologist Krishna Subbarao, based in Davis, is heading efforts to contain new varieties of Verticillium wilt. After the disease was first discovered in lettuce 30 years ago, researchers found sources of genetic resistance to race 1 of the disease, which causes leaves to turn yellow and die. Researchers found sources of resistance to Verticillium race 1 in the La Brillante let- tuce variety, and that resistance is available in commercial lettuce varieties. But races 2 and 3 of the disease have developed and spread in the Salinas Valley. Now, grow- ers must manage for three races of lettuce Verticillium, and plant breeders struggle to keep up with the disease. Subbarao screened lettuce varieties for resistance to Verticillium found in Watsonville and areas of the Salinas Valley, from Salinas south to King City. He said efforts are continuing to find lettuce variet- ies for sources of resistance to Verticillium races 2 and 3. The pathogen that causes Verticillium has long been an issue in strawberries, artichokes and spinach. It began spread- ing in lettuce fields after strawberry growers stopped fumigating their soil with a combination of chloropicrin and methyl bromide. The pathogenic fungus, Verticillium

A lettuce field is infected with Verticillium wilt, for which no effective treatment exists once the pathogen spreads. Researchers are also targeting Pythium wilt, which can live in the soil without a plant host and later infect lettuce through the roots.

dahliae, “infects and damages numerous crops, including artichoke, spinach and strawberry,” according to the UC pest man- agement guidelines, which said the patho- gen “can persist in the soil for an almost indefinite period of time.” Putnam said there is concern that Fusarium may also be associated with Pythium wilt, a water mold that has

increased in Salinas Valley lettuce during the past five years. “It’s unclear whether Fusarium is im- pacting the impatiens necrotic spot vi- rus-Pythium wilt epidemic,” which has devastated coastal lettuce crops in recent years, Putnam said. Researchers have collected 278 Fusarium isolates from 47 locations. He

Enter FOR A Chance to Win Cash Prizes!

Submit your dog’s photo and tell us why your dog is an integral part of your farm or ranch.

Grand prize $1,000 1st runner-up $500 2nd runner-up $250 3rd runner-up $100

Enter the contest today: cfbf.com/farmdog Contest open until June 28

The contest is open only to Farm Bureau members. Applicants who are not Farm Bureau members can visit cfbf.com/join to learn about becoming a member.

June 5, 2024 Ag Alert 7

Receive a $500 Exclusive Cash Reward *

Farm Bureau Members Receive $500 * toward an Eligible New F-150 ® Lightning ® , Super Duty ® , F-150, Ranger ® or Maverick ®

FORD SUPER DUTY

FORD F-150 LIGHTNING

FORD F-150

FORD RANGER

FORD MAVERICK

*Farm Bureau Exclusive Cash Reward is exclusively for active Farm Bureau members who are residents of the United States. $500 Exclusive Cash Reward on the purchase or lease of an eligible new 2023/2024/2025 Ford Maverick, Ranger, F-150, Super Duty or F-150 Lightning. This incentive is not available on Ranger Raptor ® , F-150 Raptor, F-650 ® and F-750 ® Super Duty. This offer may not be used in conjunction with most other Ford Motor Company private incentives or AXZD-Plans. Some customer and purchase eligibility restrictions apply. Must be a Farm Bureau member for 30 consecutive days prior to purchase or lease and take new retail delivery from an authorized Ford Dealer’s stock by January 2, 2025. See your authorized Ford Dealer for qualifications and complete details. Note to dealer: Claim in VINCENT using #32286. Visit FordRecognizesU.com/FarmBureau today for complete offer details!

BAKERSFIELD JIM BURKE FORD 661-328-3600 www.jimburkeford.com COLUSA HOBLIT MOTORS FORD 530-458-2151 www.hoblitford.com CORNING CORNING FORD 530-824-5434 www.corningford.com ELK GROVE ELK GROVE FORD 916-478-7000 www.elkgroveford.com EUREKA HARPER MOTORS 707-443-7311 www.harpermotors.com FAIRFIELD FORD FAIRFIELD 707-421-3300 www.fordfairfield.com GRIDLEY GRIDLEY COUNTRY FORD 530-846-4724 www.gridleyfordsite.com

FORD F-150 LIGHTNING HOLLISTER GREENWOOD FORD 831-637-4461 www.teamgreenwoodford.com LIVERMORE LIVERMORE FORD LINCOLN 925-294-7700 www.livermoreford.net MADERA MADERA FORD 559-674-6771 www.maderaford.com MERCED RAZZARI FORD 209-383-3673 www.fordrazzari.com MORGAN HILL THE FORD STORE MORGAN HILL 833-548-4419 www.fordstoremorganhill.com OAKDALE HAIDLEN FORD 209-847-0356 www.haidlenford.net OXNARD ENVISION FORD LINCOLN OF OXNARD 805-716-5447 www.envisionfordoxnard.com

REDDING CROWN FORD 530-241-4321 www.crownmotorsredding.com RIVERSIDE

Receive a $500 Exclusive Cash Reward * FRITTS FORD 951-687-2121 www.frittsford.com ROSEVILLE FUTURE FORD LINCOLN ROSEVILLE 866-415-4719 www.futureford.com

Farm Bureau Members Receive $500 * toward an Eligible New F-150 ® Lightning ® , Super Duty ® , F-150, Ranger ® or Maverick ® SANTA ROSA HANSEL FORD 707-623-1426 www.hanselford.com TULARE WILL TIESIERA FORD, INC. 559-688-7471 www.willtiesieraford.com

FORD SUPER DUTY

FORD F-150

FORD RANGER

FORD MAVERICK

Apricots Continued from Page 1

the business altogether. After he sold his bakery about a year ago, Lester removed his apricot orchard, as the bakery was a key outlet for the crop. He now leases the ground to a row-crop farmer. “We used to cut and dry a lot of them and sell them at our bakery,” he said. “That used to be a big market of ours. We’d have people coming from all over trying our apricot pies.” With minimum wage going up, he said the labor-intensive crop no longer made sense, let alone trying to find people willing to do the work or who have knowledge to do it. Even if harvest can be done by ma- chine, which he said “doesn’t do a super great job,” the trees still must be pruned by hand every year. Going forward, Stanislaus County grower Bays said he thinks the industry can do a better job marketing apricots to rebuild some of the processed market, such as by promoting the fruit’s health benefits. Producers have started a social media campaign with recipes and videos on how to use canned apricots, he noted. He pointed to the various products the al- mond sector has created to market the tree nut—from almond milk to almond butter to almond flour. “Thirty years ago, no one thought about or used almonds in that way,” said Bays, an almond grower himself. “All it takes is being able to get the right kind of product or use for apricots.” (Ching Lee is an assistant editor of Ag Alert. She may be contacted at clee@cfbf.com.)

intensive and costly to grow and pick, most of it still done by hand. For years, California growers—who produce 90% of the nation’s supply—have been losing markets to imports, especially dried apricots from Turkey. Falling consumption of canned fruit led to closures of canneries, which still buy a major portion of the crop. Most of the state’s apricots have tradi- tionally gone to processing—for canning, freezing, drying, juice, jams and other products. But fresh-market volume has grown. In 2021 and 2022, for example, the share of fresh-market apricots surpassed processed fruit, according to estimates from Apricot Producers of California, which negotiates prices for growers. Despite gains in the fresh market and rising consumer interest in locally grown produce, Bays said the diminished pro- cessed market has made growing the sector more untenable. As it is, the U.S. Department of Agriculture already buys a significant share of the canned and frozen products for school lunches, food banks and other assistance programs to help keep inventories in balance. “I don’t know that it’ll ever rebound back to what the industry was 40 or 50 years ago,” Bays said, though he added he sees some opportunities for growth. “A lot of that depends on our food system, consum- ers and how people are going to eat and what they’re going to eat.” With the price of almonds and walnuts trending lower in recent years, Bays said there’s renewed interest in tree fruit, with farmers diversifying or increasing plant- ings of other types of permanent crops, including apricots and other stone fruit. The key is to have “smart, slow, sustainable growth,” he said. Apricot acreage on his farm has stayed at about 400, making him one of the state’s largest growers. His family used to farm more than 1,500 acres in the early 1990s. With less fruit going to processing, fo- cus has been on the fresh market. But the apricot’s fragile nature and short shelf life have been its Achilles’ heel. When apri- cots are canned, dried or frozen, the fruit can be picked ripe with its high sugar and flavor preserved. “It’s very difficult to get a ripe apricot to the store that’s got good flavor and still have it look visually appealing,” Bays said. Dave Santos, co-owner of Lucich Santos Farms and Blossom Hill Packing in Patterson, said his farm continues to work with nurseries and plant breeders to test

Dave Santos, an apricot grower and packer in Patterson, examines a bin of mid-season apricots. Growers say harvest of the Patterson, the state’s leading variety, is expected to start in mid-June.

new varieties, noting some of the current ones on the market are much improved. When he started in the business in the ear- ly ‘70s, he said, “there was a joke that you could eat the apricot and chew on the box, and they would have about the same flavor.” “Today, we’re working on fruit that tastes good, that matures well, has high brix and is something that the consumer will want to buy and come back and buy again,” he said. His farm used to send 90% to 98% of its apricots to processing. As canneries dis- appeared, “we were some of the people that got left out, not having a home for our apricots,” Santos said. He and his partner started packing their own fruit, eventually building a small packing shed in 1978. That business continues to grow, Santos said, these days packing 250,000 to 300,000 boxes of conventional apricots and some 100,000 boxes of organic apricots annually. The farm grows 14 varieties of apricots on about 700 acres, with 70% of the fruit going to the fresh market. The rest is shipped to Del Monte, Pacific Coast Producers and Del Mar Food Products for canning and freezing. Smaller growers such as Jason Bremmer, who farms 6 acres of apricots in Colusa County, have managed to remain profit- able by selling fresh apricots at peak ripe- ness—the way they’re meant to be eaten, he said. But that means having only three to five days to get rid of the fruit once it’s picked. He sells most of it at his farm stand, with the rest going to a local school district and two stores. Some of his farm stand customers come from as far away as Los Angeles, Oregon and Washington to load up on apricots, he said. “We have people drive in and out of our

place even when apricots aren’t ready be- cause they want apricots,” Bremmer said. “People really like our apricots, and they continue to come every year.” It wasn’t always this way. Before he took over the 20-acre farm more than 20 years ago, it used to be all apricots. The previous owner sold the crop to packers and juic- ers. But those markets have dwindled, he said. That’s why he turned 12 acres into al- monds and switched to selling the apricots retail, which fetches a higher price. Other longtime growers such as Stan Lester of Yolo County have gotten out of

AG LOAN SOLUTIONS for farmers, processors, shippers and others in the agribusiness sector. Need help with completing lender’s documents or have loan questions? We provide farm loan consulting and document prep services. Financial statements, balance sheets, profit & loss, cash flow, break-even analysis and other forms as needed. 20+ years ag lending experience. Call 530-570-8769 or visit www.agrificonsulting.com

June 5, 2024 Ag Alert 9

CALIFORNIA

Field Crops A SPECIAL GROWERS’ REPORT OF AG ALERT ®

With one effective insecticide available to farmers to combat the Western alfalfa weevil, right, University of California researchers say winter sheep grazing of alfalfa may be a way to control the pest, which causes considerable crop damage.

Advisor studies alternatives to treat pests in alfalfa By Bob Johnson

the next couple of years.” Western alfalfa weevils were first detected in Utah in 1904 and have since spread to cause damage throughout the Western states. Growers started applying hydrocarbon insecticides to control weevils in 1946, but by 1962 resistant pest populations began to appear. Beginning in 1969, the pesticide Furadan was used to control weevils and aphids. Resistance was not a problem with Furadan, but in 2009 regulators canceled its use in alfalfa. Since then, in addition to Steward, growers have used various pyrethroids and organo- phosphates, but resistance to these materials has developed. “Where they have been applying these products year after year, they are down to 15% control at best. It’s not a good picture,” Rethwisch said. The material Steward could also lose its effectiveness over time, he said, if resistance to the chemistry develops. Resistant weevil populations mate with susceptible weevils, which spreads the resis- tance to more fields, he said. One remedy, Rethwisch said, is employing sheep for winter grazing, which has been See ALFALFA, Page 11

With fewer pest control treatments available and as materials lose their efficacy, grow- ers are teaming up with researchers at the University of California to identify solutions to control weevils and aphids that threaten the alfalfa crop. “Alfalfa weevils oversummer as adults and lay eggs in the spring or late fall, depending on the strain,” said Michael Rethwisch, a UC Cooperative Extension farm advisor in Riverside County. “The eggs hatch, and the larvae feed on the alfalfa. This reduces the quality and reduces the yield.” In a presentation about management of California alfalfa pests as part of a UC Integrated Pest Management lecture series, Rethwisch said only one insecticide is reliably effective against Western alfalfa weevils. And help is not on the way, he added. “Steward (insecticide treatment) is the only thing getting better than 80% control of re- sistant weevil populations,” Rethwisch said. He noted the active ingredient in the product is an oxadiazine pesticide called Indoxacarb. “That basically leaves us with one product that can be used,” he said. “That’s dis- concerting because there’s nothing on the near horizon that’s going to be there in

10 Ag Alert June 5, 2024

Alfalfa Continued from Page 10

shown to reduce alfalfa weevil larvae while also managing winter weeds. “In areas of Southern California, we can ‘sheep off’ the fields in February,” Rethwisch said, referring to the widely used sheep grazing practice. “The trouble is there are not enough sheep to go around, and there can be hoof damage after the rains,” Rethwisch said. Another management tool available to growers is to adjust their cutting schedule to deprive weevils of the best areas in the canopy to lay eggs. “Some people will do an early harvest to remove stems large enough for oviposi- tion,” Rethwisch said. Weevils tend to be an issue in the low desert in June and July, and in the inter- mountain region from April to June, or even as late as September. “What you’re going to see depends on where you are,” Rethwisch said. “Alfalfa weevils live up to three years; this is not a one and done.” The problem often multiplies, he add- ed, because the presence of weevils often means there is another destructive pest in the field. “Weevils are often accompanied by aphid infestations, and dealing with aphids is much more complex than weevils,” Rethwisch said. “We can have multiple

University of California researchers say weevil damage in alfalfa is usually accompanied by aphid infestations, which reduce yields.

aphid species that respond to insecticides differently in a field at the same time, and we can have multiple generations during a cutting cycle.” The most destructive aphid may be the blue alfalfa aphid, which injects a toxin that can kill smaller plants and reduce the yield of larger ones. “We are seeing multiple biotypes of blue alfalfa aphids, and some of them have in- secticide resistance,” Rethwisch said. This pest is, unfortunately, more mobile than weevils. When populations are very

high or when the alfalfa plant weakens, the aphids develop wings and take flight. “It can do some pretty big damage for us real quickly when they fly in,” Rethwisch said. Crop losses from weevils and the blue alfalfa aphids that often accompany them can be as much as 1,000 pounds an acre in the low desert and up to 2,400 pounds an acre in the intermountain region near the Oregon border. “It’s not unusual for us to see over a half-ton yield decrease from blue alfalfa

aphids,” Rethwisch said. Some widely used materials are of little help against this pest because they knock down populations of the large seven-spot- ted ladybug that provides biological con- trol, he added. “The pyrethroids did not give us much better control than the untreated plots because they killed off some of the benefi- cials,” Rethwisch said. (Bob Johnson is a reporter in Monterey County. He may be contacted at bjohn11135@gmail.com.)

CULTIVATING SUCCESS

Unlock Your Potential with Ag Alert! A recent study reveals that growers are more than twice as likely to take action after reading Ag Alert compared to other California ag publications. Ready to Learn More? Email btessandori@cfbf.com

Brought to you by:

*Readership Study conducted by Readex Research

June 5, 2024 Ag Alert 11

Colorado Continued from Page 1

we had some conservation goals that we will not be meeting this year because of the delayed implementation.” The deficit irrigation program was initial- ly slated to begin June 1. The program could still be authorized this year, but farmers said the later in the summer it gets, the harder it would likely be to solicit participation. “Every day the odds diminish of us having a deficit irrigation program this year,” said Mark McBroom, who chairs IID’s Agricultural Water Advisory Committee and grows citrus fruit, alfalfa and other crops. McBroom said the delayed implemen- tation of Imperial Valley conservation programs had complicated cropping de- cisions for some farmers. “It puts every- body in a quandary,” he said. “There are so many intangibles connected to this deficit irrigation plan.” Land leases, which often begin and end in July, as well as crop planning, ground rotation and budgeting water use for the year, could all be affected by a farmer’s par- ticipation in the program. “You’ve got a pretty good amount of farmers that have been underfarming based on this expectation of a deficit-ir- rigation program,” McBroom said, adding that he held off on possibly planting more Bermuda grass this spring due to plans to participate in such a program. The deficit irrigation program would pay

farmers to forfeit a portion of their yearly water allotment. But the exact amount can- not be determined in advance, McBroom explained, so some farmers began the year using less water than usual to ensure they would have enough left in their allotment after the program concludes for fall and winter crops. Because of existing water agreements that pass on the Imperial Valley’s “un- derrun” to urban users in Southern California, the water savings generated by underfarming will not bolster river supplies. “It benefits no one here locally,” McBroom said. Cox, who also serves on the water ad- visory committee, said last week he was advising farmers to plan for the possibil- ity of a deficit-irrigation plan beginning in July or August, but to also have a back- up plan if the program is not authorized this year. Meanwhile, IID officials and state law- makers have sought solutions to enable the conservation effort to get underway. In February, the irrigation district spon- sored state legislation, Assembly Bill 2610, that would allow Fish and Wildlife to au- thorize the “take,” or killing, of endangered species resulting from the implementa- tion of IID conservation programs that are part of the Lower Basin’s short-term plan to protect the Colorado River. The bill, authored by Eduardo Garcia,

D-Coachella, would extend an author- ity already given to the department to permit the take of endangered species resulting from water transfers from the Imperial Valley to San Diego under a 2003 deal. It would also unlock $175 million in federal funds—tied to the completion of water conservation—for habitat restoration projects at the Salton Sea. The bill passed the Assembly last month with bipartisan support. “Assemblyman Garcia’s legislative sup- port means we have the opportunity to more quickly materialize conservation programs that growers are ready to sign up for while protecting the Colorado River and ensuring the full extent of fed- eral dollars are used to fund habitat and air quality projects at the Salton Sea,” JB Hamby, California’s Colorado River com- missioner and IID vice president, said in a statement. IID officials said they did not believe the water reductions anticipated from the programs—up to 800,000 acre-feet over three years—would result in habitat loss for the pupfish or bird species. According to Shields, an IID analysis found the con- servation program would not have a great- er impact on the Salton Sea than happens from normal year-to-year variability in drainage flows. (Caleb Hampton is an assistant editor of Ag Alert. He may be contacted at champton@cfbf.com.)

could not estimate how long it might take to conclude the environmental reviews. “We appreciate and support the critical need to conserve and reduce Colorado River water usage,” Tim Daly, information officer for CDFW, said in a statement. “We look forward to continued and active en- gagement with the many partners at the table to evaluate final environmental re- view proposals.” Michelle Helms, public affairs offi- cer for the Bureau of Reclamation, said in a statement that the department was consulting with other federal and state agencies to assess the environmental ef- fects of reduced irrigation, “including po- tential impacts to the endangered Desert Pupfish that live in the drain system lead- ing to the Salton Sea.” The inland sea has been fed for decades by runoff from Imperial Valley farms and is shrinking as farmers cut back on water use. Two endangered bird species—the California black rail and the Yuma clapper rail, which live in the marshes at the edge of the Salton Sea—were also included in the consultation, the Desert Sun reported. It is not unusual that environmental re- views for large water transfers or conserva- tion programs take years to complete, “but we also know that this is a short-term com- mitment,” IID Water Manager Tina Shields said in an interview in March. “Obviously,

Having the safety talk with your kids isn’t just important— it’s essential. In 2023, 19% of deaths in off-highway vehicle (OHV) accidents were children under 16, with only 2% wearing helmets. 1 This alarming statistic prompted Nationwide to launch the Let’s Champion Rider Safety SM campaign, providing tips and resources for effective safety discussions and protection for young riders. Let’s work together to help save lives and teach everyone to ride like a champion.

Let’s talk about ATV safety

Learn more at Nationwide.com/ATVsafety

Scan code to get safety tips for your young riders.

1 U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission.

Nationwide and the Nationwide N and Eagle and Let’s champion rider safety are service marks of Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company. The Farm Bureau, FB and the FB National logo are trademarks of the American Farm Bureau Federation and are used with permission under license by Nationwide. © 2024 Nationwide (05/24)

12 Ag Alert June 5, 2024

Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 Page 9 Page 10 Page 11 Page 12 Page 13 Page 14 Page 15 Page 16 Page 17 Page 18 Page 19 Page 20