Ag Alert May 22, 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.

Cotton plantings Acreage rebounds as growers embrace fiber

Ag Alert returns June 5 Ag Alert ® publishes 46 times a year and will be on hiatus next week (May 29). Our next issue will be published June 5. In the meantime, check the Ag Alert and California Farm Bureau websites at www.agalert.com and www.cfbf.com for breaking news.

Page 3

www.cfbf.com • www.agalert.com MAY 22, 2024

Trees & Vines Dairy & Livestock

special reports

By Christine Souza Farmers in San Diego County say pro- posed water quality regulations that es- tablish updated general waste discharge requirements for commercial agricultural operations are burdensome, costly and duplicate work by growers participating in other regulatory programs. Tasked with protecting water quality, the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board on March 29 released a proposed draft that creates new monitoring and reporting requirements for nitrogen ap- plications and removals. It also identifies paths to compliance for individuals or use of third-party programs to help farmers achieve the order’s objectives. Kari Fisher, senior counsel for the California Farm Bureau, said the draft or- der for the region stems from the state’s 2018 adoption of a precedential order that revised agricultural requirements for the Eastern San Joaquin River watershed and required all regional boards to update their irrigated lands programs. “This draft order would put farmers in the San Diego region under the preceden- tial Eastern San Joaquin regulations, which focus on nitrogen management, including irrigation and nutrient management plans, and looking at how much nitrogen stays in the soil after a crop is harvested,” said Fisher, who has been working on water quality regulations on behalf of the Farm Bureau since 2008. Valerie Mellano, consultant for the San Diego Region Irrigated Lands Group, part of the San Diego County Farm Bureau, said, “We’re a very different region, and they are trying to force another region’s regulations on us. “Many aspects of the draft order are really problematic because agriculture in East San Joaquin isn’t the same as it is in San Diego County,” she added, not- ing the average farm size in the region is 4 acres, whereas the average farm size in See REGULATIONS, Page 9 Proposed rules on water quality may overwhelm farmers

Bigger blueberry crop pressures markets At their Fresno County farm, growers Scott and Mandy Critchley show off their blueberry crop during harvest season. Statewide, production is estimated at a record 74.5 million pounds, according to the California Blueberry Commission. Harvest in the San Joaquin Valley is expected to run through June.

By Ching Lee Thanks to favorable growing conditions, California blueberry farmers appear on track to harvest what could be their largest crop ever. They are not alone. Greater produc- tion is also coming out of other blueber- ry-growing regions, flooding markets with the fruit and lowering prices for growers. “The price is not where we would

like to see it,” Fresno County grower Jon Marthedal said. “I think there’s a fair amount of fruit on the market, and there’s going to be more. Mexico is still sending quite a bit of fruit our direction.” California’s 2024 blueberry crop is esti- mated at 74.5 million pounds, with 53 mil- lion going to the fresh market and 21 mil- lion pounds going to processors, according to the California Blueberry Commission.

That’s up from last year’s 71 million pounds but down from an initial estimate of 80 million pounds, which was adjusted due to some rain damage during bud break that affected fruit set, said Todd Sanders, the commission’s executive director. State plantings are estimated at 8,900 acres, up from 8,750 acres last year, accord- ing to the commission.

See BLUEBERRIES, Page 13

n e w s p a p e r

Comment ......................................2 Trees & Vines........................... 6-7 Dairy & Livestock ............... 10-11 Classifieds........................... 18-19 Inside

Published by

Why zero-emission forklift rule is costly for farmers

By Colin Sueyres The cost of farming and ranching oper- ations—specifically moving hay, grain and produce—may be about to get a lot more expensive in our state. That will be

reduction goals while also protecting the goods-movement sector in critical indus- tries across the state from untenable costs. That alternative pathway would accom- plish the following: • Ensure that California has an accurate understanding of how forklifts are utilized within the state and how the rulemak- ing would affect real-world operations. Currently, there are no standardized data- bases within California to track actual fork- lift usage—leading CARB to significantly underestimate the true impact of the rule. • Increase standards for future nitrogen oxide, or NOx, forklift emissions that recog- nize trends in capture technology and allow California to still meet its federally mandat- ed emissions goals without a costly and inef- fective one-size-fits-all technology mandate. • Accelerate the phase-out of older, less efficient, higher emission pre-2011 forklifts to provide an immediate improvement in local air quality and reduce carbon intensity. Unlike other industries such as the tech sector, which can outsource manufactur- ing or even relocate to more affordable states, the agricultural industry is here to stay. If you are concerned about how the California Air Resources Board rule will impact your farming operations, I encour- age you to reach out to board members be- fore the June vote. I’m hopeful that, after hearing about real-world impacts of this regulation, the board is willing to come to the table and find a feasible and cost-effective way to meet our state’s ambitious air quality goals. To review the analysis and see additional information regarding the impact of this rule across California, visit westernpga. org/forklift. (Colin Sueyres is president and CEO of the Western Propane Gas Association. He can be reached at colin@westernpga.org.)

the outcome if the California Air Resources Board adopts its proposed rule to eliminate internal combus- tion engine, or ICE, forklifts across the state. The regula- tion, scheduled to

Colin Sueyres

be voted on June 27, would mandate that all Class IV cushion-tire combustion forklifts and the majority of Class V pneumatic-tire models be removed from existing fleets in favor of electric vehicles, namely forklifts powered by rechargeable batteries. Forklifts are essential for many ranch and farm operations. Yet under the pro- posed rule, there are no exemptions for small fleets of forklifts moving goods with- in the agricultural sector. The rule would impact leased forklifts and force all owners and operators to purchase zero-emission forklifts by 2026—regardless of whether their current fleet of internal-combustion forklifts is still in good working condition. The problem is exacerbated by the fact that there is not a 1:1 replacement, mean- ing farmers will have to purchase multiple electric forklifts to replace just one ICE forklift. This is because electric-vehicle forklifts require time to charge and cool and cannot run for 24 hours. Also, many EV forklifts cannot accommodate heavy loads like ICE forklifts can. There will be associated infrastructure costs as electric forklifts need to be stored and charged indoors and new structures

The California Air Resources Board is poised to adopt a new rule to eliminate internal combustion engine forklifts. The proposal would bring logistical burdens and added expenses for agriculture.

will need to be built, if not already avail- able. Importantly, there are no exemptions for agricultural use or feasibility. The Air Resources Board estimates that the number of impacted forklifts is approximately 95,000. However, an eco- nomic analysis by the Western Propane Gas Association found that the true num- ber is closer to 220,000 ICE forklifts, more than half of all forklifts in the state. The Western Propane analysis also found that, under the proposed new rule, costs to forklift owners and operators throughout the state could total up to $27 billion. These costs would include $10.2 billion for replacement of ICE forklifts even after factoring in salvage value and $4.6 bil- lion in lost utilization costs for the prema- ture retirement of currently functional ICE forklifts. In addition, charging station costs would exceed $6.3 billion to implement. It is important to note that these costs do not factor in the cost of building

power supply upgrades or infrastructure upgrades for the generation, transmission and delivery of electricity. In numerous regulatory decisions across California’s history, the governmental body in charge has recognized that dif- ferent regions or industries require differ- ent solutions. Unfortunately, the state Air Resource Board is moving forward with a one-size-fits-all rule that would set man- dates without regard to the size of the busi- ness or the nature of the work. Arguments regarding implementation from manufacturers, retailers, nonprof- its and more have been ignored or re- jected in favor of the board’s preferred technology solution. Fortunately, there is a cheaper, more feasible and effective way to meet the state’s air-quality goals. Western Propane Gas Association has proposed an alter- native pathway to compliance to ensure the state is meeting its greenhouse gas

VOL. 51, NO. 20

May 22, 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 May 22, 2024

Cotton makes a comeback as tomato acreage decreases

By Vicky Boyd California’s cotton acreage is expected to make a huge rebound this season, spurred by lower prices for competing crops and receding Tulare Lake levels. But pima cotton, the premium variety predominantly grown in the state, has its own market challenges and has endured depressed prices for more than two years. With a potentially larger crop this year, the outlook for a market bump isn’t good. “Pima has been really tough for grow- ers,” said Merced County farmer Aaron Barcellos, who farms diversified crops near Dos Palos. If growing conditions are ideal this summer, the pima crop could yield roughly 550,000 to 600,000 500-pound bales, adding more supply to an already sluggish market. “It would be really tough sledding, and we’re all really concerned,” Barcellos said. In its March 28 prospective plantings re- port, the U.S. Department of Agriculture National Agricultural Statistics Service forecast 160,000 acres of cotton in California this year, up from 99,000 acres in 2023, the lowest in state history. Based on an internal member sur- vey, the Fresno-based California Cotton

Ginners and Growers Association predicts even more cotton—166,000 acres—will be planted, said association President and CEO Roger Isom. Of that, 135,000 acres will be pima, also known as extra-long-staple, or ELS, varieties. The remainder is upland varieties. Unlike the rest of the U.S. Cotton Belt, most of the state’s upland cotton is grown for seed. Nationwide, growers are expected to plant about 10.6 million acres of mostly upland varieties this year, up about 4% from 2023, according to the USDA forecast. Isom pointed to two main reasons for the state’s expected larger cotton acreage this year: In 2023, processing tomato can- neries aggressively courted producers with record-high contracts of $138 per ton. This lured many away from cotton and into to- matoes, he said. But tomato canneries contracted for fewer acres at $112.50 per ton this year, and garlic prices are lower. This made cotton more attractive, Isom said. In addition, last year’s near-record rains and the reappearance of Tulare Lake flooded thousands of acres of histor- ic cotton ground. Water levels have since receded, opening much of that ground to planting again. Barcellos said he doubled his cotton

Cotton plants grow in a field in Merced County near Los Banos. California’s cotton crop is expected to surge this year as farmers switch to the fiber instead of growing processing tomatoes.

acres this year compared to 2023, because of economics and few alternative crop options. In addition, he lost a processing tomato contract. “I had to find something to do with that ground,” he said. Merced County farmer Cannon Michael, president of the family-owned

diversified Bowles Farming Co. near Los Banos, said his conventional cotton acres are up about 9% this year, while organic acres are up about 150%. He increased organic acreage because land he was transitioning to organic became certified this season.

See COTTON, Page 4

Foundational mite control

gowanco.com

Envidor® is a registered trademark of Gowan Company, L.L.C. Always read and follow label directions

May 22, 2024 Ag Alert 3

Cotton Continued from Page 3

Michael said water supplies and com- modity prices were factors in growers’ de- cisions to plant cotton this season. “With tomato prices declining, there ar- en’t many good options, so growers are pick- ing cheaper crops to grow,” Michael said. Gary Martin, who farms tree and row crops near Firebaugh, said he increased his cotton acres by about 15% this year, adding he wasn’t able to plant some of his land last year due to flooding. Because pima requires a longer season to mature than upland varieties, growers try to plant by April 20. This year, Martin finished planting April 27. “I didn’t have a choice. What else are you going to plant?” he said. Much of the state’s cotton ground is served by south-of-delta water districts that are part of the federal Central Valley Project, which last month announced a 40% water allocation. This is despite full reservoirs and a slightly above-normal snowpack. CVP exchange contractors, which have senior water rights, will receive 100% allo- cations. Martin is in one of those districts and will receive full deliveries. The CVP announced an initial water allocation of 15% in mid-February as many growers were making planting plans. Without knowing whether that quantity would increase, Michael said

A tractor works a young cotton field in Merced County. Cotton is regarded as a less expensive crop to grow than processing tomatoes. Still, some cotton farmers are grappling with disappointing water deliveries, along with high interest rates and other market challenges.

many growers chose cotton, which is less expensive to plant and more drought tolerant than tomatoes. Because of its quality, California ELS cotton has historically earned substan- tially more per pound than upland variet- ies. California ELS is running about $2 per pound, which Barcellos said doesn’t even cover production costs. “Because of the regulations we have, we have higher costs of inputs, higher labor costs. It’s just really challenging,” he said. Barcellos pointed to reduced demand for home textiles, which include high-end

sheets and towels, for some of the market malaise. About 60% to 70% of the state’s ELS cotton goes into these products. “That market has just gone away with the recession and high interest rates,” he said. “People just aren’t buying high-dollar sheets and towels like they used to.” While the retail side has been OK, he said buyers are still purchasing hand to mouth. One of the challenges with pima, Martin said, is growers can’t lock in a price with a futures contract on one of the commodity trading platforms. This leaves them to take whatever price the market will offer at the

time they want to sell. “As far as new crop, we’re a little con- cerned once all of this increase of acreage gets out there and the effect it will have on the market,” Martin said. Although growers keep hoping sales and prices will rebound, Barcellos said they ha- ven’t seen it yet. When interest rates were much lower, it was easier to pencil out warehousing processed cotton bales until the market picked up. But he said interest rates topping 7% “really hurt.” (Vicky Boyd is a reporter in Modesto. She may be contacted at vlboyd@att.net.)

4 Ag Alert May 22, 2024

USDA: California almond crop may be second-largest

that the state’s bearing almond acreage decreased to 1.4 million acres, 600 fewer than last year. Turner outlined steps to grow markets for California’s $3.5 billion almond sector, including working to expand exports to India and key emerging markets, such as Indonesia, Turkey and Morocco. She also emphasized plans to develop and introduce more almond products, including oils, flours and pastas, for domestic consumers. “Demand for California almonds

around the globe continues to grow and our almond farmers constantly deliver on producing high-quality California al- monds to meet that demand,” Turner said. The USDA subjective almond produc- tion forecast is based on a survey of 500 growers and is conducted from April 19 to May 5. USDA’s 2024 California Almond Objective Report will be released July 10. This report is based on almond counts in some 1,000 orchards, using a more rigor- ous methodology to determine yield.

California’s 2024 almond crop is expect- ed to come in at 3 billion pounds, accord- ing to the U.S. Department of Agriculture National Agricultural Statistics Service. In its California Almond Forecast pub- lished May 10, the agency said this year’s harvest is expected to be 21% more than the 2.47 billion pounds produced in 2023. Total statewide almond production of 3 billion pounds would be the second-larg- est crop on record, with the highest being 3.1 billion pounds in 2020. The almond crop benefited from largely favorable weather, with mild conditions in February and March that helped boost honeybee pollination, USDA said. The agency noted that growing condi- tions were mostly favorable early in the season. Wet weather and warmer tem- peratures in April increased pest and dis- ease pressures, but there was “minimal to no threat of frost damage.” In addition, water allocations for California almond growers were “not an issue for the second year in a row” after three years of drought. Almond yield this year is estimated at 2,170 pounds per acre, which is 380 pounds more per acre than last year’s yield, the report added. “This larger crop estimate is what the in- dustry expected after a productive bloom this spring,” Clarice Turner, president and CEO of the Almond Board of California, said in a statement. “But it is also a testa- ment to the hard work done by almond farmers throughout California during dif- ficult times.” California almond growers have faced economic challenges in the past few years as the almond price has fallen from nearly $4 a pound a decade ago, to $2 a pound or less.

Last year, total almond plantings in the state dropped from 1.64 million acres to 1.55 million acres, the second consecutive decline. But actual bearing acreage inched up slightly in 2023.

USDA’s almond crop forecast came two weeks after Land IQ released its estimate

Venue ® Herbicide Gets the Weeds Others Miss

www.californiabountiful.com

LOCAL STATIONS

CITY

STATION

TIME

Glyphosate, Glufosinate, and Paraquat leave gaps in your weed control program for tree and vine crops. With Venue, you get fast, powerful control of troublesome broadleaf escapes including field bindweed, purslane, lambsquarters, and stinging nettle. Add the power of Venue to your tank this season, and get the weeds others miss. To learn more, contact your PCA or local Nichino sales representative.

Fresno

KPVT/18 Sun. 11:30am

Santa Barbara KSBY/6

Sun. 5pm

CABLE/SATELLITE

RFD-TV: Dish Ch. 231;

Sun. 8am (PT)

DirecTV Ch. 345

Check out our episode archive:

Now trending

@cabountiful

May 22, 2024 Ag Alert 5

A SPECIAL GROWERS’ REPORT OF AG ALERT ® CALIFORNIA Trees & Vines

Farm sells its ‘export-quality’ cherries to Americans By Ching Lee A crew loads harvested cherries from Chinchiolo Farming Co. in San Joaquin County during the 2023 season. The farm markets some of its “export-quality” fruit directly to U.S. customers through its website and ships the cherries to people’s homes.

the world, with Canada, South Korea, Mexico and Japan being leading export destinations, according to the California Cherry Board. That’s about 2.8 million 18-pound cartons of the stone fruit last year. Domestically, the Golden State remains the largest market for California cherries, gobbling up some 1.4 million cartons last year. Other top U.S. markets include New York, Florida, Texas and Pennsylvania. Chinchiolo said the idea for his direct-to-consumer business spawned during the early days of the pandemic in 2020 when logistics challenges and supply chain disruptions led to concerns about whether airlines would be able to fly the highly perishable fruit to places such as Japan, Hong Kong and Korea. “I thought, gosh, you better find another market for these cherries,” Chinchiolo recalled. Pivoting to direct sales was a common move for farms with perishable goods during the pandemic. Some developed their own websites to take customer orders. Others partnered with farms that already sold subscription produce boxes, offering either on-farm pickup or home delivery. While some of those farms have since gone back to marketing their crops through more traditional channels as life returned to normal, Chinchiolo has expanded his direct-sales cherry business. The bulk of his crop still goes to a traditional commercial packer, he said. But he’s also delivering to more homes and has maintained his U-pick business for people See CHERRIES, Page 7

Colleen White is serious about her produce selections. For example, she won’t buy oranges if she can’t smell a citrusy scent. Though she hunts for a good buy, she says she will pay a higher price for freshness and quality. When she saw a Facebook post last year that Chinchiolo Farming Co. in San Joaquin County was taking orders for farm-fresh cherries, she jumped on it, paying online for first dibs before the crop was even harvested. Store-bought cherries, she lamented, “don’t taste like cherries a lot of times,” either because they weren’t picked at peak ripeness or because supply chain hiccups degraded the fruit. The ones from the farm did not disappoint, as they were large, juicy and had the sweet- tart flavor she expected. “They were some of the best cherries I’d ever had,” she said. “They were gone in less than two days at my house. That’s why I would buy them again.” Fourth-generation farmer James Chinchiolo, who runs the Lodi-based farm, is working to reach more people like White—U.S. customers who are willing to pay a premium for what produce marketers call “export-quality” fruit. Instead of shipping those cherries to foreign markets—which pay top dollar for them—he’s setting aside some of the farm’s exportable cherries and delivering them directly to people’s doorsteps. “We’re providing the premium product that I’m accustomed to, that we know is here, but oftentimes, it gets exported to other markets,” Chinchiolo said. Nearly 30% of the state’s cherry crop is shipped—or, more accurately, flown—all over

6 Ag Alert May 22, 2024

Cherries Continued from Page 6

who want to visit the farm and pick their own cherries. “The response back from the consumer was so positive, it was clear to me that a mar- ket exists to deliver people premium cher- ries,” he said, adding that he thinks buying directly from farms also helps his customers connect with modern agriculture. To pull off the logistics of shipping people farm-fresh cherries that remain fresh when they get them, Chinchiolo looks to Jimmy Williams, the farm’s consulting operations manager. Before lending his expertise to Chinchiolo, Williams worked for years in export sales for a major cherry grower, packer, shipper and marketer in Stockton. Williams said American consumers still get “very good cherries in terms of flavor and eating quality.” But he acknowledged export cherries tend to be larger, with the desired color, sugars and firmness to en- sure they can make the trip and arrive in good condition. Chinchiolo Farming ships cherries to all 48 contiguous states with a minimum order of $60 for a 4-pound box. The fruit is packed and shipped the same day it’s picked, with harvest season typically running from mid- May to mid-June. To ensure freshness, the boxes are insulated and packed with ice gel and sent by next-day or two-day air, de- pending on customer preference, for states east of Utah or Colorado. Shipments to the

A fourth-generation farmer, James Chinchiolo runs Blooms Cherries, a part of Chinchiolo Farming Co. in San Joaquin County that delivers fresh-picked cherries to U.S. customers. He also maintains a U-pick operation in Lodi.

west and within California go by overnight FedEx truck. The farm replaces orders that arrive in suboptimal condition due to shipping de- lays, which has been rare, Williams said, adding, “it’s basically 100% satisfaction guaranteed.” He said Chinchiolo’s di- rect-sales business has opened his eyes to what people are willing to pay for specialty products such as cherries. If people pay a high price at the store for fruit that doesn’t taste very good, Williams said, “they feel like they didn’t get their

money’s worth.” Chinchiolo’s customers have shown that “people are willing to pay a premium as long as you send them fruit that merits the premium,” he said, adding that he hopes the farm sets a new trend. Customer White said she thinks there are more people like her. She pointed to people who learned to cook during the pandemic “and who figured out that the better and fresher the ingredients are, the better your recipe turns out.” She said she thinks selling directly to customers is “a viable way for smaller

farms to get their produce to people with- out having to deal with wholesalers”—and it would allow farmers to get a better price for their crop. “I want to get the best ingredients I can possibly get for my money,” White said, “and if that means buying directly from a family farmer, I don’t mind doing that, especially if the money is going into my local economy.” (Ching Lee is assistant editor of Ag Alert and may be contacted at clee@cfbf.com. This story first appeared in the Spring 2024 issue of California Bountiful ® magazine.)

Reduces Sunburn, Scald & Heat Stress Improves Photosynthetic Activity Improves Osmoregulation Foliar & Chemigation Application No Visual Residue Easy to Mix & Apply

This year start early with a planned approach. Eckosil Shield alleviates abiotic stress in the plant, temperature fluctuations, and stress caused by drought, to reduce sunburn and improve quality and yield. Solar Protectant & Heat Stress Solution Sunburn Hurts... Your Bottom Line

CANOPY MANAGEMENT SIMPLIFIED: OXBO 610 DUAL VINEYARD MECHANIZATION

Operates up to 3 MPH & covers up to 30 acres per day Precise: pristine thinning and suckering, without damaging vines or irrigation lines Versatile: year-round vineyard management with multiple attachments

www.sym-agro.com

OXBO.COM

May 22, 2024 Ag Alert 7

Farm Bureau at work California Farm Bureau’s government affairs team is at the Capitol, advocating for farmers, ranchers and agriculture’s future. Here are some key issues Farm Bureau is focused on this week.

State budget Gov. Gavin Newsom has released his revised state budget, which is customarily issued in May of each year based on up- dated revenue. The May revision identified a budget shortfall of $44.9 billion, $7 billion more than the deficit projection offered in January.

The administration and the California Legislature passed an early-action budget package in April, which included $17.3 billion in budget cuts. Under the budget revision, the state must still resolve a re- maining $27.6 billion deficit. Another neg- ative budget balance—projected at $33.1 billion—looms for the 2025-26 fiscal year.

The May revise included a $500 mil- lion cut in discretionary spending to sup- port the Sites Reservoir project north of Sacramento, a project strongly supported by the California Farm Bureau. However, the funding cut would not impact the proj- ect’s funding under the 2014 Proposition 1 ballot initiative.

“We are grateful that state funding awarded to Sites under Proposition 1 remains in place,” said California Farm Bureau President Shannon Douglass. “We urge the administration to restore the $500 million as soon as possible to ensure mini- mal delays on this generational investment in water resilience.” In presenting the budget plan, includ- ing proposed spending cuts, Newsom said California should live within its means and avoid raising taxes. Yet the governor’s plan includes an in- crease in the mill tax levied on pesticides to address the budget deficit of the California Department of Pesticide Regulation. The plan calls for raising the mill tax from 21 mills to 28.6 mills during a three-year peri- od. That would amount to a $33 million tax increase for California agriculture. “We agree with Gov. Newsom that there should be no new tax increases,” Douglass said. “That is why we oppose any move by the Department of Pesticide Regulation to increase the mill tax. “This tax increase directly impacts farm- ers and ranchers who purchase crop pro- tection materials,” she added. “Raising the mill tax would also increase costs of pro- ducing food for Californians and burden families with still higher food prices at the grocery store.” Land use Proposed state legislation that would have reduced contract cancellation pen- alties for owners of Williamson Act land who want to convert farmland for wind or solar energy projects stalled in the Assembly Committee on Appropriations, meaning it is dead for the remainder of the legislative session. Assembly Bill 2528, by Assembly Member Joaquin Arambula, D-Fresno, would have cut Williamson Act contract cancellation fees from 12.5% of the fair market value of the land to 6.25% for agricultural property owners lacking permanent access to sufficient water for farming. The California Farm Bureau and the Rural County Representatives of California opposed the bill, arguing the legislation could permanently remove farmland from production. Technology Assembly Bill 1969, by Assembly Member Gregg Hart, D-Santa Barbara, and sponsored by the California Farm Bureau, was held in the Assembly Committee on Appropriations and won’t be passed this legislative session. The bill would have required the California Air Resources Board to include drone technology in its off-road equip- ment grant program that provides incen- tives for the purchase of electrical farm equipment. This would have involved updating a website and program docu- ments and allowed drone equipment to qualify for incentives, providing farmers, ranchers and applicators with point-of- sale deductions.

0 % 0 % UP TO UP TO

72 months 1 CASH BACK 2 72 months 1 CASH BACK 2

FOR UP TO FOR UP TO

On select compact tractors. OR $4,500 On select compact tractors. OR $4,500

Get in. Get ready. Get rolling. A New Holland WORKMASTER™ or Boomer™ Series compact tractor is reliable, powerful, and easy-to-operate. It’s also a great value, so you can get the job done—and tame even tough ones— without breaking the bank. Get ready to roll into another season and save. Get in. Get ready. Get rolling. A New Holland WORKMASTER™ or Boomer™ Series compact tractor is reliable, powerful, and easy-to-operate. It’s also a great value, so you can get the job done—and tame even tough ones— without breaking the bank. Get ready to roll into another season and save. Hurry, offer ends June 30, 2024. Stop in today for complete details or visit nhoffers.com

Hurry, offer ends June 30, 2024. Stop in today for complete details or visit nhoffers.com

FAIRFIELD GARTON TRACTOR INC. 707-425-9545 www.gartontractor.com FONTANA SCOTT EQUIPMENT 909-822-2200 www.scottequip.com

FRESNO GARTON TRACTOR INC. 559-485-9090 www.gartontractor.com MADERA GARTON TRACTOR INC. 559-674-2496 www.gartontractor.com MERCED N&S TRACTOR 209-383-5888 www.nstractor.com

MODESTO GARTON TRACTOR INC. 209-538-0911 www.gartontractor.com NEWMAN GARTON TRACTOR INC. 209-862-3760 www.gartontractor.com SANTA ROSA GARTON TRACTOR INC. 707-586-1790 www.gartontractor.com

SANTE FE SPRINGS SCOTT EQUIPMENT 562-777-0775 www.scottequip.com STOCKTON GARTON TRACTOR INC. 209-948-5401 www.gartontractor.com STRATFORD N&S TRACTOR 559-947-3301 www.nstractor.com

TEMECULA SCOTT EQUIPMENT 951-355-3085 www.scottequip.com TULARE GARTON TRACTOR INC. 559-686-0054 www.gartontractor.com TURLOCK GARTON TRACTOR INC. 209-632-3931 www.gartontractor.com

UKIAH GARTON TRACTOR INC. 707-468-5880 www.gartontractor.com WOODLAND GARTON TRACTOR INC. 530-615-2828 www.gartontractor.com

1 For commercial use only. Customer participation subject to credit qualification and approval by CNH Industrial Capital America LLC. See your participating New Holland dealer for details and eligibility requirements. Eligible equipment limited to dealer inventory in stock. Previous retail sales are not eligible. Down payment may be required. Offer good through June 30, 2024. Not all customers or applicants may qualify for this rate or term. CNH Industrial Capital America LLC standard terms and conditions will apply. This transaction will be unconditionally interest free. ²For commercial use only. See your participating New Holland dealer for details and eligibility requirements. Cash back applied at time of sale. Offer is nontransferable. Offer ends June 30, 2024. Offer subject to change or cancellation without notice. ©2024 CNH Industrial America LLC. All rights reserved. CNH Capital and New Holland are trademarks registered in the United States and many other countries, owned by or licensed to CNH Industrial N.V., its subsidiaries or affiliates. 1 For commercial use only. Customer participation subject to credit qualification and approval by CNH Industrial Capital America LLC. See your participating New Holland dealer for details and eligibility requirements. Eligible equipment limited to dealer inventory in stock. Previous retail sales are not eligible. Down payment may be required. Offer good through June 30, 2024. Not all customers or applicants may qualify for this rate or term. CNH Industrial Capital America LLC standard terms and conditions will apply. This transaction will be unconditionally interest free. ²For commercial use only. See your participating New Holland dealer for details and eligibility requirements. Cash back applied at time of sale. Offer is nontransferable. Offer ends June 30, 2024. Offer subject to change or cancellation without notice. ©2024 CNH Industrial America LLC. All rights reserved. CNH Capital and New Holland are trademarks registered in the United States and many other countries, owned by or licensed to CNH Industrial N.V., its subsidiaries or affiliates.

8 Ag Alert May 22, 2024

Regulations Continued from Page 1 the Central Valley is more than 200 acres. “Our farms are interspersed with hous- ing developments and other business- es—golf courses, parks and everything else that could potentially contribute to nitrogen loading into the watersheds,” Mellano said. “The farmer could be grow- ing in the middle of these land uses, yet the assumption is made that the farmer is contributing the nitrogen.” Farmers say they are concerned about the new draft regulations, which add new nitrogen requirements. One challenge, Mellano said, relates to the lack of data on the standard level of nitrogen applied and nitrogen removed after harvest, which are based on crop type. “This (nitrogen level standard) is known for crops like almonds and pistachios, but there’s so many specialty crops grown here in small quantities, it really becomes quite a challenge,” Mellano said. “It would take many years to do all the research to get the nutrient requirements for all these crops.” The requirements proposed in the draft order are in addition to the county’s agricultural water quality program that inspects agricultural operations for com- pliance with existing total maximum dai- ly loads, or TMDLs. The program seeks to prevent pollutants from agricultural

operations from entering the county’s storm drain system and waterways. “We have a problem with the bench- marks that are set here in San Diego County for, say, nitrogen in the water,” said San Diego County farmer Enrico Ferro. “Even pristine, untouched parts of the water system are already at the bench- mark, and once there is any human activi- ty, you’re going to exceed the benchmark, so we’re already set up for failure.” The acceptable nitrogen level in the county is 1 milligram per liter, which is 10 times cleaner than the statewide drinking water standard of 10 milligrams per liter, Mellano said. “If someone purchases water from the district to water their plants and it is at 2 milligrams per liter, for example, it already exceeds the benchmark before that water ever touches the ground, so it is an impossible standard that we are expected to meet,” Mellano said. “We’re expected to basically clean up the water once we buy it. That is one of the funda- mental problems.” In comments sent to the regional board, an affected San Diego County nursery operator questioned the need for the water quality protection plan as proposed in the order, “since most of the items in the plan we already document

and are being inspected by other agen- cies.” This includes inspections and re- porting related to a stormwater program and a hazardous materials program overseen by the county, and pesticide inspection and reporting by the state Department of Pesticide Regulation. The nursery operator added, “We all want to be in compliance, but our com- pany does not have the time nor the man- power to be filling out pages of info repeat- edly for different agencies.” The San Diego County Farm Bureau, which manages the third-party San Diego Region Irrigated Lands Group, provides af- fected members in San Diego, Orange and southern Riverside counties with monitor- ing and reporting services. Ferro, who is chair of the group’s board of directors, said the nonprofit helps farm- ers share the cost of compliance. For indi- viduals working directly with the regional board, he said, compliance costs are exces- sive, between $20,000 and $30,000 annual- ly for testing and reporting. “We are very efficient and have cre- ated a really good system that is afford- able to comply with the ag order,” Ferro said of the irrigated lands group. “But this new ag order might just blow all that out of the water.” Regional board staff “has been very

amenable to working with us,” Mellano said, adding she is concerned enforce- ment agencies do not often understand the impacts on those affected by the reg- ulations. “They have to fulfill their pro- gram because it is the mandate that they are given, but they don’t really recognize what is at stake for the people they are bringing this upon.” Public comments for the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board draft order are due May 28. However, regional board staff said last week it plans to recommend the regional board postpone the comment period until the California State Water Resources Control Board convenes on the issue. Last week, the state water board an- nounced plans to convene a second agricultural expert panel to reassess statewide nitrogen requirements. “The state water board has issued pro- posed questions for the second statewide agricultural expert panel and is seeking names or expertise areas of who to put on the panel,” Fisher said. Learn more at www.waterboards.ca.gov/ public_notices/comments/docs/2024/ notice-ag-expert-panel-051324.pdf. (Christine Souza is an assistant editor of Ag Alert. She may be contacted at csouza@cfbf.com.)

Tuesday, June 4, 2024, from 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. Sheraton Grand Sacramento Rightsizing California for New Growth and Opportunities

The theme "Rightsizing California Agriculture for New Growth and Opportunities" will be discussed, focusing on adapting to labor trends, regulations, increased fruit and vegetable consumption, on- farm technology innovations, and external influences affecting the future of food and agriculture sustainability.

JOIN US

May 22, 2024 Ag Alert 9

A SPECIAL PRODUCERS’ REPORT OF AG ALERT ® CALIFORNIA Dairy & Livestock

These cattle at the University of California Sierra Foothill Research Extension Center in Browns Valley are part of a study on administering an ionophore feed additive, monensin, to promote weight gain. The Yuba County property facilitates cattle ranching research, hosting livestock and researchers for as many as 20 study projects at any given time during the year.

Foothill center offers vital grounds for cattle studies By John Watson

optimize cattle distribution on rangeland? The study, a part of UC Davis graduate Maggie Creamer’s doctoral dissertation, investi- gated the consistency of grazing patterns across two summers among 50 2- to 8-year-old pregnant Angus and Hereford beef cows, all fitted with GPS collars. Over two summers, they roamed 625 acres of grasslands and treed areas, elevation of which ranged from 600 to 2,020 feet. The results show animals that were generally calmer—for example, when being handled or going through a chute—tended to graze more widely than animals that were skittish and nervous. Those grazing behaviors remained largely unchanged when a water site incentive was introduced at higher elevation in year two. “Before opting for expensive interventions to get cattle to graze a different way, ranchers might want to explore this topic,” said Creamer, who now works as a postdoctoral scholar in North Carolina. Kristina Horback, an associate professor at the UC Davis Department of Animal Science, joined Creamer in presenting their findings in a study published in February in the journal Applied Animal Behaviour Science. She explained that fertile areas for further study in- clude the role that genetics and breeds might play in determining personality traits, along with investigations involving different landscapes and analyses of individual behavior when the animal is handled.

During the summers of 2021 and 2022, as cattle roamed pastures and shaded woods of the University of California Sierra Foothill Research and Extension Center in Browns Valley, a UC Davis research team closely monitored potential ties between each animal’s personality and its grazing habits. The project, resulting in a peer-reviewed paper published this past February, was just one of hundreds of studies conducted at the center in Yuba County during the past six decades. Stretching across more than 5,700 acres of river, grassland, oak woodland and riparian habitat, the center supports research on beef cattle production, nutrition and health, range- land water quality management, oak woodland restoration, native plant conservation and invasive plant management, among other related topics. A hefty percentage of the studies the center supports aims to make cattle ranching more productive and profitable. The cattle personality study, for instance, looked at benefits of matching herds to land- scape. It analyzed whether selecting or subdividing herds by personality type could serve as an alternative to placing expensive incentives in undergrazed—and often higher-ele- vation—parts of the pasture, trying to lure herds to those spots. The study hypothesis: There might be little need for water, mineral supplements, fencing or other incentive methods in undergrazed pastureland if the herd comprises very active, hill-climbing animals to begin with. In other words, could consideration of personalities

See CENTER, Page 11

10 Ag Alert May 22, 2024

Center Continued from Page 10

Formed in the 1960s as one of nine such units administered by UC Agriculture and Natural Resources, the Sierra research center provides a setting that, at any given time, supports some 20 research projects. Current studies include an investigation into the most effective ways to administer daily doses of the ionophore monensin, with the goal of increased cattle weight gain. Monensin encourages bacteria shift of rumen microbes that increase the pro- duction of propionic acid, which in turn enhances weight gain through more ef- ficient conversion of feed to volatile fatty acids. A dose of 50 milligrams a day has proven to improve weight gain, and some studies have shown more gains with rates up to 200 milligrams a day. The problem is underconsumption: Because monensin isn’t very palatable, it’s difficult to entice cattle to consume the higher doses. The study used 140 cattle to analyze multiple consumption rates of two alternative dosage methods: free-choice loose mineral and salt blocks. Results will be tabulated this summer. “We have to bring the cattle in every 45 days and change pastures seasonally, which is more than we could ask of local cooperators,” said co-principal investigator Josh Davy, in a nod to the center’s ability to navigate constraints faced by commercial growers or landowners.

John Angelos, chair of the University of

California, Davis, School of Veterinary Medicine, checks on a cow at the Sierra Foothill Research and Extension Center as part of an ongoing study on boosting immune systems to combat pinkeye, a common eye affliction in cattle.

“The center’s staff members always cre- ate a positive working environment for col- laboration and good solutions,” he added. Another current project deals with a type of seaweed, Asparagopsis taxiformis, known to reduce methane production in cattle by up to 90%. With some similarities to the monensin project, the primary ob- jective of this study is to validate a practical method through which a seaweed supple- ment can be fed to range livestock. Ongoing studies also include a proj- ect that explores augmenting cattle im- mune systems to combat pinkeye, the most common eye disease of cattle in the United States.

For the project, cattle consume iodine in the form of ethylenediamine dihydro- iodide, or EDDI, which supplements a naturally occurring immune mechanism, resulting in a potent antibacterial and an- tiviral compound. The goal is to determine whether feeding iodine via a mineral mix using EDDI can achieve iodine target con- centrations in tears to inactivate the bacte- rium that causes pinkeye. The Sierra Foothill Research and Extension Center includes 160 acres of irrigated pasture, 270 acres of long-term ungrazed oak woodland and 200 acres of control-burned rangeland annually. Its rolling to steeper-sloping terrain ranges

from 220 to 2,020 feet above sea level, with access to the Yuba River and six small per- manent streams. Research requests for land, labor and facilities are screened by a research advisory committee. “SFREC is one of the jewels of the UC system,” said Anthony O’Geen, a UC Cooperative Extension soil resource specialist. “It’s a beautiful place with managed and pristine ecosystems, re- sourceful staff to support research and outreach and wonderful soils. It’s the per- fect natural laboratory.” (John Watson is a reporter in Nevada County. He may be contacted at john. watson@comcast.net.)

May 22, 2024 Ag Alert 11

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