Ag Alert January 3, 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.

Scott, Shasta rivers State approves fourth year of water curtailments

Finishing the season Rice growers reflect on challenges of late harvest

Page 3

Page 8

www.cfbf.com • www.agalert.com JANUARY 3, 2024

Field Crops ® Vegetables ®

special reports

By Caleb Hampton With the New Year comes a slew of new state and federal policies designed to change the way farms and ranches in California operate. As of Jan. 1, several new laws and regulations will affect agriculture, natural resources and transportation. Recent criticism of California’s wa- ter-rights system by environmental groups led to the introduction last year of three water-rights “reform” bills in the state Legislature, one of which became law. Senate Bill 389, authored by state Sen. Ben Allen, D-Santa Monica, gives the California State Water Resources Control Board authority to investigate whether rights of a water user are valid and impose sanctions for unauthorized diversions. State law already allowed the water board to investigate the claims of water users in California and take action against unauthorized diversions. California Farm Bureau senior policy advocate Alexandra Biering explained that SB 389 “simply clar- ifies the water board’s powers.” While state law previously enabled the water board to investigate water rights only at the request of another water-rights holder, the new law allows the water board to investigate water rights at will. The bill also clears up a gray area in the state water code, authorizing the water board to inves- tigate California’s most senior water rights: pre-1914 and riparian rights. Biering said the bill includes provisions to ensure water rights are not investigated frivolously but “only when truly necessary.” California farmers may have greater access to useful technologies in the com- ing year. Signed in October, Assembly Bill 1016 authorized California’s Department of Pesticide Regulation to modernize the certification process for farmers to use drones to spray pesticides and beneficial biological treatments on their farms. The bill was authored by Assembly Member Reggie Jones-Sawyer, D-Los See LAWS, Page 15 New Year brings new laws, policies affecting farmers

Photo contest winner captures the harvest

specialty crops after an internship at Bowles Farming Co. in Los Banos and riding alongside her agronomist dad. She later realized how her photography can help share that on-farm perspective. Pricolo is the winner of the California Farm Bureau’s 2023 photo competition, which invited members to submit pho- tographs depicting farming and ranch- ing life in California. Her winning photo captured the hands-on harvesting tech- nique for watermelons in Los Banos.

Pricolo used a high shutter speed and natural backlighting to perfectly capture the harvest. “Especially in the ag industry, photog- raphy is a good way to advocate and show the rest of the world how the ag industry is done,” Pricolo said. “Without these people doing this manual labor, we wouldn’t be able to have successful farming to provide food for the world.” Other winning photos may be found on pages 10-13. From the Fields........................4-5 Vegetable.................................. 6-7 Field Crops...............................8-9 Photo Contest Winners.....10-13 Inside

By Caitlin Fillmore Cayden Pricolo, a plant and soil scienc- es major at Oklahoma State University, had an insider’s perspective on growing First Place Cayden Pricolo Merced County Farm Bureau 2023 2023

n e w s p a p e r

Published by

New overtime rule cut earnings for farm employees

By Bryan Little In 2016, when the California Legislature contemplated Assembly Bill 1066 to phase

Hill’s research, a spokesperson for the United Farm Workers offered a tepid de- fense of AB 1066: “We have an option to keep fighting for an agricultural economy in which workers are treated with dignity and have a real say.” Sadly, that is a unique piece of rhetorical art in defense of legislation that has result- ed in depriving agricultural workers of ac- tual earnings, which farm employees and their families depend on. A law that results in fewer working hours and less pay hardly offers anyone much dignity. It is also likely that the implementation of AB 1066 in the years after 2020 will show that its negative impacts have only been magnified in damage to rural economies and communities. These are communi- ties that have suffered the worst impacts of drought, flooding and COVID-19. They have faced housing shortages and high housing costs, healthcare shortages, un- derperforming public schools and under- funded public services. Following the implementation of AB 1066, emboldened labor advocates went on to pass AB 2183 in 2022. As a result, that union organizing legislation now deprives California agricultural employees of the right to a state-supervised, secret ballot elections. What will agricultural workers get? The opportunity to surrender 3% of their wages for union representation. Based on false promises of AB 1066, it is hard to imagine farm employees will see any rewards from AB 2183. Our agricultur- al workers and communities deserve bet- ter than dubious pledges and misguided legislation that fail to help anyone. (Bryan Little is director of employment policy for California Farm Bureau and chief operating officer of Farm Employers Labor Service, or FELS. He may be contacted at blittle@cfbf.com.)

out agricultural overtime rules in place since 1977, advocates for ag- riculture warned policymakers of adverse conse- quences for farm employers and em- ployees alike. But the bill’s au-

Bryan Little

thor, then-Assembly Member and now California Labor Federation President Lorena Gonzalez argued that the legis- lation would increase earnings and set a historic example for other states to follow. Seven years after Gov. Jerry Brown signed AB 1066 into law, the results are in. According to research from the University of California, Berkeley, agricultural work- ers have seen reduced work hours and less income since 2019 and 2020, when AB 1066 triggered the first adjustments to overtime rules for the largest, best-re- sourced California agricultural employers. Before AB 1066, farm employees were allowed to work up to 10 hours a day for six days a week before time-and-a-half over- time pay was required. In 2019, farms with 26 or more employ- ees were required under AB 1066 to pay overtime pay after 9 ½ hours in a workday or 55 hours in a workweek. Beginning in 2022, employers of 25 or more employees were required to pay overtime premiums after 8 hours in a day or 40 hours in a week. That standard is to kick in on Jan. 1, 2025, for employers with 25 or fewer workers. However, the eight-hour workday and 40-hour workweek fail to recognize the fundamental reality of agriculture. Farm

Supporters of Assembly Bill 1066 said California’s farm workforce would see higher paychecks under the new overtime law for agriculture. Instead, the bill resulted in decreased hours and income.

work is available to employees seasonal- ly—during planting, pruning, cultivation and harvesting—and for much of the year, not at all. The wisdom of allowing for overtime in agricultural employment after 10 hours a day for as many as six days in a workweek lies in the fundamental fact that agricul- tural employees need to work when work is available to them. For years, California wage-and-hour policy recognized this re- ality—until the passage of AB 1066. The research of Alexendra E. Hill of UC Berkeley confirms what the California Farm Bureau and other agriculture ad- vocates predicted at the time of AB 1066’s passage. The bill led to decreases in weekly working hours and earnings for California crop workers. The results are hardly an ex- ample for other states to follow. Hill noted that “these losses are consis- tent with employers restricting hours to avoid paying the higher overtime rates.”

Hill’s analysis is based on California agricultural employees’ self-report- ed working hours and earnings to the National Agricultural Worker Survey, a widely respected and long-running U.S. Department of Labor survey of agricultural employees’ working and living conditions. Hill’s analysis covers only the first two years of implementation of AB 1066. But, based on initial findings, employers in coming years will be hard-pressed to af- ford to pay overtime wages. Smaller farms can be expected to be even more careful to control overtime wage costs to remain competitive while producing in California. Any agricultural producer can tell you that farmers and ranchers don’t dictate the prices they can charge for their products. Markets that are beyond their control dic- tate that. As AB 1066 has added to produc- tion costs for agricultural producers, it has also harmed farm employees. Asked by a journalist for comment on

VOL. 51, NO. 1

January 3, 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.

Melanie Duval- Chief Marketing Officer

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

Peter Hecht- Chief Editor, Publications

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 January 3, 2024

State readopts curtailment for Scott, Shasta tributaries

graze our fall regrowth and drink out of our ditches in the fall.” Sari Sommarstrom, a retired watershed consultant and a founder of the Scott Valley Agriculture Water Alliance, told the board she wanted to set the record straight about board staff’s fish population data. “The state water board draft resolution facts do not support some of the find- ings,” Sommarstrom said, adding that Department of Fish and Wildlife reports contain more accurate data. “Asserting that steelhead adult returns

showed a record low in 2022 is disingenu- ous at best,” she said. “The department’s out migrant reports of juvenile steelhead leaving the river offer a more complete picture, and they also do not show a significant decline.” Many farmers, including Scott Valley rancher Theodora Johnson, a founder of the Scott Valley Agriculture Water Alliance, thanked the board for adopt- ing revisions to the curtailment regu- lation. These include helping irrigators improve groundwater through recharge

By Christine Souza Even though the clock doesn’t run out on winter for another eight weeks, state water officials are bracing for another dry year for the Scott and Shasta rivers in Siskiyou County. At its Dec. 19 meeting, the California State Water Resources Control Board unanimously readopted an emergen- cy drought regulation that curtails water rights in the Scott and Shasta rivers, affect- ing farmers and ranchers. The emergency regulation had expired last summer. Readopted every year since May 2021, when Gov. Gavin Newsom declared a drought emergency, the order limits sur- face-water diversions and groundwater pumping. It also prioritizes minimum flow recommendations from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife to protect threatened coho and other fish. The regulation ensures water supplies for human health and livestock and en- courages the use of voluntary efforts in lieu of curtailments. Individual groundwater users can enter a number of different local cooperative solutions to avoid curtailment. One example is a general water-use reduc- tion of 30% in the Scott River or 15% in the Shasta River. Speaking on behalf of affected farmers, Siskiyou County Farm Bureau President Ryan Walker discussed the ongoing water cutbacks, including in 2023, a year he said broke the cycle of drought but in which curtailments continued. Walker asked water board members to reconsider readopting the curtailment or- der. He told the board adopting the emer- gency order allows the state to sacrifice due process and environmental review in favor of single-species management. “The governor’s refusal to rescind his emergency drought declaration for the Scott and Shasta watersheds is nothing less than an authoritarian attempt to cir- cumvent the legal protections afforded to the citizens of California, including the

residents of Siskiyou County,” said Walker, a rancher from Montague. “California law imposes a public trust obligation on this board to fully review the impact of your actions on wildlife, including the sandhill cranes that feed in our irrigated pastures, the ducks that nest in our wetlands sup- ported by our irrigation, and the elk that

See RIVERS, Page 16

APPLY LESS, EXPECT MORE?

www.californiabountiful.com A Farm Bureau Production

An AgroLiquid crop nutrition plan offers lower use rates through the right custom formulas, deep agronomic knowledge and total customer support. AgroLiquid has precisely what it takes to help you achieve more with less.

Find an AgroLiquid dealer near you AgroLiquid.com

LOCAL STATIONS KVPT/18 Fresno/Visalia

Sun. 11:30 a.m.

Santa Barbara/ Sat.

6:30 p.m.

KSBY/6

San Luis Obispo

SATELLITE TV RFD-TV: Dish Ch. 231, DirectTV Ch. 345

Sun. 8:00 a.m.*

*Times listed are Pacific Time

Now trending

@cabountiful

January 3, 2024 Ag Alert 3

From The Fields ®

From the Fields is a firsthand report featuring insights from farmers and ranchers across the Golden State, including members of the California Farm Bureau. If you would like to be a contributor to From the Fields, submit your name, county of membership and contact information to agalert@cfbf.com.

Photo/Ching Lee

Photo/Lori Eanes

Sean McCauley Contra Costa County olive and field crops farmer

Robert Criswell Santa Clara County Christmas tree farmer

I sold a lot of trees. A lot of people came out and had a lot of fun. We raised our price $10, but we’re still $20 below the national average for choose-and-cut farms. The weather was cooperative because we had dry weekends. I had the best selling crew I’ve ever had. I am going to stay in touch with them so they’ll come back next year. At times we could have had up to 400 or 500 people on the property at a time. The vast majority are well behaved. We had loads of Russians and Ukrainians. I talked to people from about four or five different parts of Russia, including Siberia. They celebrate Christmas on the 12th of January, so they’re coming out and getting a tree towards the end of my normal selling time. I think I sold my last tree a little bit before 3:30 in the afternoon on Christmas Eve. I left a couple of saws and put (the farm) on self-serve to where people can go out and cut a tree and then pass their payment through a slot in the window. Most people are very honest. A lot of people paid extra. I charged $80 a tree and often they would pay $100, which makes up for checks that were written on closed accounts or not sufficient funds. I made pages of notes and diagrams on how to improve things for next year. I used to think about starting to plant again in late January, early February, but I no longer have the space, and because I’ll be 80 years old in less than a month, I would be in my 90s by the time those trees got big enough to sell. If it weren’t raining, I’d be out collecting signs and putting them away. Instead, I’m playing hooky. I’m pretty dead tired. I usually take the whole month of January to relax and recharge.

We just finished harvesting our olive crop right before the rain. That was the last crop of the year that we brought in. It was a relatively good year. Tonnage- wise, we got in the upper quartile of what we typically get. We probably had 5% to 10% less tonnage than last year, which is not very much difference. But the crop was also later. We were probably two weeks to four weeks later on the har- vest schedule. This year was the latest to harvest. We had some challenges, but we got all the crop in. We had a good crop last year, but the fruit quality was just better this year. It was the best quality oil that we’ve had. In Northern California, we had a relatively mild summer. It didn’t get really hot for very long like it did last year, so our fruit didn’t ripen as fast. I believe we only had maybe three days in a row of hun- dred-degree weather, whereas last year, we were in hundred-degree weather for a month. Overall, the fruit ripened slower, and the quality of oil and polyphenol counts were higher. I think as the fruit ripened slower, it made a better quality oil. That was good news. Plus, the crop was decent. We believe weather and what went on in our climate this summer was a benefit for us. Last year, we planted about a thousand acres of wheat, which is the crop we harvested this year. Our problem was it was too wet. It was crazy rain. It was un- precedented up here. The amount of water we got was good, and the wheat that we got was good, but a lot of it got flooded out. We planted another thousand acres this year of dry-farm wheat. We’ll see what happens.

Jeremy Jensen Los Angeles County beekeeper

We are going through and grading all our beehives and getting ready for almond pollination. We have to go through and judge the size and quality of each colony so we can send the best quality colonies to the almond orchards. We’re starting to supplementally feed the bees to stimulate them. The bees can tell the days are get- ting longer, and they start growing. I’m excited about some new technology. There are sensors that can be put inside the beehives that try to re- motely predict hive strength. Some companies are even saying to the grower, “You can have a sensor in every beehive and know exactly how large the hives are before they even get to your orchard.” There are definitely a lot of skeptics. I’m interested to see what will pan out in a few years. Last year’s almond pollination season was horrendous. We had a long winter, so we got a late start and got out of the almonds later than usual. All of our pollination events, including almonds and avocados, took longer than anticipated because bloom was delayed. Because of the rain last year, the bees had a balanced diet and were healthier. We haven’t seen something like that in a decade. We had a great honey season. We harvested barrels of honey, and it was pedal to the met- al the whole way through. The almond sector has been having all kinds of issues, and this trickles down to beekeepers. We’ll see what happens this year because a lot of almond acres are going out of production. I’m not worried about performing pollination, but I am curious as to what the long-term outlook is for the almond industry in California. Pricing will be tricky this year because if the pollination rental price drops to $175 per hive, it may not be worth it for out-of- state beekeepers to truck bees across the country. We’re going to see how it all shakes out.

Photo/Courtesy of Jeremy Jensen

4 Ag Alert January 3, 2024

Billie Roney Tehama County rancher

Feed conditions in the mountains this year were phenomenal because of all the rain. The Debbie Downer part is we were not able to use all the feed because of the wolves. We had to leave early yet again. We had some cattle chased off. We left feed behind that would make you want to cry. We didn’t bring cattle home skinny, but we couldn’t stay. The biggest loss we have is not the individual animal but the lack of pounds we’re bringing home and the cows not breeding back the way they should because they’re getting run all over the place. We took our first cattle to Eagle Lake in late spring, and we had one cow killed up there, but it wasn’t confirmed it was a wolf. We rotate our allotments, and every single place we had our cattle, the wolves were there. We continued to move the cattle, and the wolves would follow. We continue to be in a study with Ken and Tina Tate (from the University of California, Davis). They put collars on our cattle to measure their stress levels. This is the second year we’ve done it. They have been out there living with not only our cattle but everybody else’s, so they know when a cow is being chased. They’ve been far more helpful than the state in helping us know when the wolves are after our cattle, because they can see what our cattle are doing by tracking our cows’ collars. They contact us immediately if they think some- thing’s wrong. They’re generally the first ones to find somebody’s dead animal. We’ve done a whole lot more business selling individual animals because we’ve been working hard on our genetics. Word of mouth on our carcass quality has gotten around, so we have plenty of individual sales. In the fu- ture, we think that’s how we might be able to slow down and still be able to recoup our costs.

Photo/Kathy Coatney

TRAVEL WITH FARM BUREAU

FEBRUARY 1-4, 2024 • RSVP BY JANUARY 5, 2024 Join California Farm Bureau for an exciting and exclusive trip exploring Mexico’s flourishing wine region. Attendees will see the differences between California winegrape growing and Mexican production during different wine tastings and vineyard tours, taste local authentic farm to fork cuisine, and experience local Mexican culture during this multiday trip. MEXICO’S EXPERIENCE WINE REGION — VALLE DE GUADALUPE

Visit cfbf.com/farmpac to learn more and to purchase your spot. For questions, or to reserve your spot, contact Steven Fenaroli, sfenaroli@cfbf.com

COST: Trip includes private, secure transportation from SAN to VDG and back, meals, hotel accommodations, tours and tastings and different activities during the trip.

• $2,500 per person • $4,000 per couple

January 3, 2024 Ag Alert 5

CALIFORNIA

Vegetables A SPECIAL GROWERS’ REPORT OF AG ALERT ®

Prior to planting lettuce in this Salinas Valley field, soil is treated with steam. Experiments by University of California researchers show that steam may be as effective as fumigants to control weeds.

UC highlights new technology to battle pests, weeds By Bob Johnson

The figures for production cost in that study were derived from interviews with vegetable growers in Monterey, Santa Cruz and San Benito counties. Steam treating a band of soil along the seed line can rid the planting bed of pathogens and viable weed seeds. Applying a spot treatment to the area where the crop is planted reduces the need for steam by 93%, Fennimore said. “With a 4- to 5-inch band, we’re treating the weeds that are most expensive to remove by hand,” Fennimore said. “Steam reduced hand weeding, improved lettuce vigor compared to Kerb and also helped to control pythium wilt.” In the 2023 trials, the application of a band of steam 4 inches wide and 5 inches deep reduced purslane weeds in the seed line by 99%, shepherd’s purse by 88% and little mallow by 42%. “It’s not knockout, but it’s pretty good,” Fennimore said. “Steam also worked with onions. There were fewer weeds and more large onions than with Dacthal.” UC researchers are studying whether the band-steaming alternative offers some control of fusarium wilt in lettuce. “A French machine makes steam that is 400 degrees Fahrenheit, which disperses better in the soil,” Fennimore said.

California vegetable growers may benefit from new and improved technologies that allow them to manage pests and weeds, while reducing reliance on pesticide applications. Rather than hand weeding, steam treatment of a band of soil along the seed line may be an economical way to manage weeds in lettuce and reduce the need for chemical fu- migation, according to researchers at the University of California Cooperative Extension, who led presentations on integrated pest management at a meeting last month in Salinas. “In vegetable crops, we have a shortage of new registered herbicides. We have to create our own technology,” said Steve Fennimore, a UCCE vegetable weed specialist in Salinas. “We use Kerb, which was registered in 1972, and Dacthal, which was registered when (Dwight D.) Eisenhower was president.” Previous UC experiments have shown steam to be as effective as any fumigant in man- aging weeds or pathogens in vegetables, he said. The problem is treating the entire bed with steam is too slow and expensive to be a viable alternative. “There are engineering solutions to make steam viable for weed control,” said Fennimore, who studies chemical and nonchemical methods of weed control with the objective of reducing costs and to develop automated weeding systems to mitigate labor challenges. Hand weeding iceberg lettuce costs an average of $635 an acre, according to a 2023 UCCE study on the sample costs to produce and harvest film-wrapped iceberg lettuce.

See TECHNOLOGY, Page 7

6 Ag Alert January 3, 2024

Fennimore is also working with a self-propelled machine that can steam- treat a band along the seed line in beds that are 40,42, 80 or 84 inches wide. Other researchers at the meeting shared other new technology that may help vegeta- ble growers achieve better weed control with reduced reliance on chemical herbicides. Spinach growers, who face the chal- lenge of removing weeds in beds planted so densely they create a carpet of spinach, may also benefit. A laser reduced spinach weeds by 80% to 85%,” Fennimore said. The laser machine uses cameras and software to distinguish small weeds from young vegetable seedlings and removes the weeds with precisely targeted lasers, he added. In another experiment, researchers said releasing beneficial insects from drones shows promising results to help manage thrips. The beneficial insects are applied using drones equipped with cylinders that release the small insects uniformly as the drone makes passes across the field. Use of drones can save money and im- prove uniformity compared to releasing the beneficials by hand while slowly walk- ing across the field. Western flower thrips are a threat to let- tuce because after the tiny insects feed on a Technology Continued from Page 6

In a trial conducted by University of California researchers, a drone releases beneficial insects over a vegetable applications have been used to manage thrips, which can spread the impatiens necrotic spot virus in lettuce. field in Monterey County. The aerial

plant infected with impatiens necrotic spot virus, they can transmit the destructive dis- ease to other plants they feed on. “These drones have cylinders that rotate and release green lacewings and predato- ry mites,” said Addie Abrams, a UC Davis postgraduate researcher in the lab of UCCE entomology specialist Ian Grettenberger. “We released them in insectary or noncrop areas. The data will be available soon.”

UC researchers noted that precision ap- plicators show promise. Putting the mate- rial directly on small plants improves tar- geted insecticide use while maintaining pest control. “A precision sprayer only applies the spray in a targeted band,” Abrams said. “This technology allows us to concentrate product on the plant.” Precision technology has been tested

with systemic materials used to control aphids that are taken up by young let- tuce plants. Seedlings in the studies were treated with insecticides spirotetramat or Movento, and thiamethoxam or Mentara, which are taken up by the plant to provide long-term aphid control. (Bob Johnson is a reporter in Monterey County. He may be contacted at bjohn11135@gmail.com.)

presents

April 9 - 11, 2024 | The Meritage Resort & Spa | Napa, CA

January 3, 2024 Ag Alert 7

CALIFORNIA

Field Crops A SPECIAL GROWERS’ REPORT OF AG ALERT ®

A combine cuts a field of Calrose rice near Arbuckle. Rice harvest statewide averaged about 10 days later than normal. Growers had more ground to cover, with acreage nearly double from 2022.

Later rice harvest deals minor yield, quality impacts By Vicky Boyd Winter and spring rains brought welcome drought relief in 2023, but they caused rice growers to get a late start planting, and the delay rippled through harvest. About half the 2023 rice crop was planted on ground that had been fallowed in 2022 because of lack of water. Normally, Linquist said, growers experience higher yields after fallowing. But that didn’t appear to be the case this season.

Based on anecdotal information, Linquist estimated the 2023 statewide average yield was about 86 hundredweights per acre, down slightly from 87.6 cwt. per acre in 2022. For the season after fallowing, Linquist said UC recommends reducing nitrogen fertilizer. Although many growers followed those guidelines, he said rice fertility needs may need to be revisited, particularly how it affects standability. When rice plants fall, or lodge, harvest becomes slower and more difficult and grain may be lost, reducing overall yield. Mike Dewitt, who farms near Robbins, described the 2023 season as “nothing spectac- ular.” There were no unusual heat spells, no abnormal pest outbreaks, and his yields were about average. Dewitt said he had circled Oct. 2 on his calendar as his historic harvest start date. But he didn’t actually start cutting until Oct. 13, and he finished Nov. 8. “When you start pushing past Halloween, you start getting nervous,” he said about the increased potential for storms. The region received some rain Oct. 22 that stopped harvest for a few days, but Dewitt said it didn’t have a major impact. See RICE, Page 9

“It was a late-planted year, with only about half of the crop planted by May 18,” said Bruce Linquist, University of California Cooperative Extension rice specialist. “That’s about a week late. Rains delayed planting, and it had effects on yields going forward. Harvest was about 10 days later than usual.” Add relatively cool weather in late summer and early fall, and many rice producers said their grain moisture levels appeared stuck or were slow to drop to the desirable 18% to 20% harvest levels. During an average year, the season from planting to harvest spans 145 to 150 days. In 2023, Linquist said, it was 152 days. “We had late planting and late harvest,” he said. “We had more M-211, and that’s a late-season variety. We had a lot of rains during harvest—not much each time but enough. Later rains stopped harvest for a day or two, and cool temperatures and little north wind meant it took longer to get the crop out.” The U.S. Department of Agriculture Farm Service Agency reported the state’s growers planted about 501,200 acres of rice in 2023. That’s nearly double the acres planted in 2022 when drought reduced surface water deliveries to nearly zero mostly on the Sacramento Valley’s west side.

8 Ag Alert January 3, 2024

Rice Continued from Page 8

As he cut his later-planted fields, he said he was concerned about milling quality, or the percent of whole kernels that net growers higher payment. Milling quality often decreases as rice is left in the field longer than normal and grains are exposed to the elements. While his overall per-acre yields were down about 5% in his later-planted fields, Dewitt said his quality did not drop. He had the short-season Calrose variety M-105 and the most commonly planted Calrose variety, M-206. Drew Rudd, who farms with his family near Gridley, said he experienced a similar season with spring rains delaying ground preparation. He ended up eliminating steps and made one pass with a tri-plane leveler “because it was such a short win- dow. It worked out OK.” In 2022, drought-induced water cut- backs meant the Rudds planted only about 65% of their acreage. With full water deliv- eries in 2023, they planted all their ground to M-105, M-206 and a bit of the late-ma- turing M-209 between May 15-29. As with many other growers, the pre- dominately mild growing conditions during the summer pushed the Rudds’ harvest into late October. “For the first time in our life, we were considering applying salt,” Rudd said about using sodium chlorate to speed drying. “We didn’t have to because we received a freeze

Cooler weather this year meant rice didn’t mature and dry as quickly, pushing harvest back several days in the Sacramento Valley. The extended harvest came a year after severe drought forced many growers to fallow acreage due to lack of water deliveries.

about the 26nd of October, followed by two days of north winds, and our rice literally dropped seven to eight points of moisture. So far, the quality looks good. Our yields are off five sacks on average.” Charley Mathews, who farms near Marysville, also planted late and didn’t finish harvest until Nov. 7. “I didn’t think it was ever going to end,” he said. “Wet conditions delayed maturity.

We had equipment failures, and it was very challenging. Once you start late, you’re kind of stuck in that cycle.” Mathews had M-206 and M-401, a long-season premium medium-grain vari- ety. Although his overall yields were down 2% to 5%, he said he was surprised by the good milling quality. “We got very lucky,” Mathews said, considering some of the rice was harvested

above optimum moisture levels. The improved quality also was a pleasant change from 2022, when an early September heat wave caused widespread chalk, consid- ered a quality defect that results in dockage. Mathews said he is involved with two rice dryers that were still running in early December to handle high-moisture rice. (Vicky Boyd is a reporter in Modesto. She may be contacted at vlboyd@att.net.)

January 3, 2024 Ag Alert 9

of farm life

Winning photos showcase variety of agricultural lifestyles

Story by Caitlin Fillmore

From sleepless nights during the ground-shaking almond harvest to long days cultivating thousands of acres, the winning images from the 42nd annual California Farm Bureau Photo Contest depict the real daily lives of people within our state’s diverse agricultural sector. Two of the photos were captured within days of each other—one showing a dairy cow standing in fresh snow and the other a bundle of just-harvested flowers against a lush, mountainous landscape.

The variety of California farming and ranching lifestyles came through in these stunning photographs. The contest is open to amateur photographers who are Farm Bureau members. Cash prizes were given to the adult winners and to the Budding Artists under age 14, in a category sponsored by the California Foundation for Agriculture in the Classroom.

2023

Second Place Ismael (Mel) Resendiz San Diego County Farm Bureau

Mel Resendiz can’t possibly choose from among the more than 300 varieties of protea flowers curated over 30 years at Resendiz Brothers farm in Fallbrook. “I keep every one. When people ask me what’s my favorite, I say, ‘All of them,’” Resendiz said. But he will admit he was particularly inspired to capture the first harvest of the Lady Di protea, one of the newest varieties on his 250-acre flower farm in the Pauma Valley. Protea flowers are some of the oldest flowers on Earth and grow on steep hillsides. As one of the workers scaled the hill with fresh Lady Di blooms on his shoulder and the Palomar Mountain in the background, Resendiz had to pull out his iPhone.

10 Ag Alert January 3, 2024

Third Place Mishael McDougal Sacramento County Farm Bureau

Mishael McDougal, a classroom educator with the Dairy Council of California, wanted to capture this photogenic, 4-year-old Jersey cow, whom she calls Valentine. Valentine features unique markings—a perfect heart shape on her forehead—and maybe a new way to view dairies, McDougal said. Valentine joins McDougal for nutrition education classes at local elementary schools. Valentine lives at Rachelle’s Jerseys, a fourth-generation, 2,000-head dairy in Visalia. “She’s pretty laid-back. It didn’t take too many tries to capture (this image),” McDougal said. “I think it’s an inspiring but also relaxing depiction of dairy farm life.” Fourth Place Timothy Danley Glenn County Farm Bureau Timothy Danley is a fifth-generation farmer who embraces technology to help him tell stories about modern farm life, including this drone shot of Danley’s father working lime into the soil. “Farmers tend to be secluded home bodies. (Photography) makes it easier to explain what we do and exactly what goes into it,” Danley said. This minimalistic shot reminds Danley of water confluence, where two bodies of water mix and combine colors, and clearly depicts agricultural advances over time. “My grandfather used horse-drawn harvesters for rice. Now we can cover hundreds of acres a day. I want people to look and realize one person can get so much done.”

January 3, 2024 Ag Alert 11

Honorable mentions

Mary Ann Renner Humboldt County Farm Bureau

Jocelyn Brown Nevada County Farm Bureau

It’s not every day that snow blankets the notoriously green landscapes in Ferndale, where Mary Ann Renner and her husband have operated a 350- head organic dairy farm for 42 years. A blanket of fresh snow last January inspired Renner to pick up her Canon camera and telephoto lens. While the image of the rustic wood barn and posing cow look like a postcard, Renner said she hopes her photos provide a real view into country life. “It’s not just a photo shoot. Every day our cows are out on pasture. This is how we raise our animals. It’s a great way of life.”

This “goat stampede” was captured on a cool, cloudy day in Rough and Ready. “That’s a real place,” confirmed Jocelyn Brown, owner of Restoration Land and Livestock, a prescriptive grazing company. Brown’s herd of 40 Boer, Savanna and Kiko goats is hired to graze on properties to help reduce fire fuel load and chew troublesome vines. Instead of providing meat or milk for cheese or soaps, the goats “eat for a living,” and Brown works to spread awareness of this other job for goats. “I want people to see goats as useful workers. They have something to contribute.”

Stan Grosz Fresno County Farm Bureau

Mariah Earl Solano County Farm Bureau

As Stan Grosz prepared to retire to his 20-acre raisin and cherry operation outside of Fresno, he dreamed of quiet mornings like this one: “feel-good time,” as he calls it. Grosz’s raisins are seen during harvest with his neighbor’s almond trees beyond, as the harvest moon sets in the background. “In this area, raisins and almonds are it, man,” Grosz said. “I wanted to show them both and represent what our area is like.” Grosz captured the peaceful scene one day before the photo contest deadline.

Mariah Earl’s photo depicts the next generation of family farmers learning the ins and outs of agricultural life. Earl’s family moved to a 5-acre parcel about 20 years ago, cultivating a large garden and adding chickens and sheep five years ago. “We have been trying to learn more about being self-sufficient and teaching my kids that you can grow your own food,” Earl said. Another fun farm lesson? Helping Grandpa drive the tractor in the front yard, of which Earl snagged a candid photo in portrait mode on her iPhone 13 Pro.

12 Ag Alert January 3, 2024

Honorable mentions

Ashley Carreiro Fresno County Farm Bureau

Larry Speed Stanislaus County Farm Bureau

Ashley Carreiro grew up around sheep, watching shearing in the spring and feeding baby lambs in the fall. “Now, I’m taking my two daughters to do the same thing,” she said. For Carreiro’s winning photo, a different type of fluffy substance caught her eye. With her ISO on its lowest setting, Carreiro focused on the emerging buds of cotton on a friend’s farm in Riverdale during a scenic sunset. In addition to being featured in Ag Alert ® and California Bountiful ® magazine as a winner, her photos also appear as artwork in the farm insurance agency where she works.

Larry Speed carefully set up his tripod to catch this shot of a nighttime harvest of almonds, using a long exposure and careful timing to capture the shaking of the trees. But he didn’t have to set any alarm to get this photo—he was already awake. “When they’re shaking the trees, well, it shakes our house,” said Speed, who lives on part of a 400-acre almond farm called Superior Fruit Ranch. Speed makes the best of the shaking season, using photography to share the “round-the-clock, necessary things that farmers do to get done what needs to get done.”

Budding Artists

First Place Ashley Jansen, age 12 Colusa County Farm Bureau

Second Place Natalie Webb, age 10 Sonoma County Farm Bureau

Ashley Jansen knows the extensive history of her family farm, first acquired via a land grant 150 years ago. The land is now primarily used to grow almonds instead of the sugar beets of yesteryear, she said. The almond orchards surround Ashley’s house, bursting with blooms and perfect for a scenic walk with Sydney, her dog. While strolling the orchards with Sydney, Ashley stopped to focus on the delicate white blooms when a pollinating bee entered her shot. Even though she took the photo, Ashley gives credit to Sydney, who “led me to the perfect photo opportunity.”

Super fans of this photo contest will recognize this budding photographer, who earns accolades for her artwork for the fourth straight year. Natalie, who lives in St. Helena in Napa County, focused on the vibrantly green “baby grapes” in the vineyard behind her house, which she passes every day on the way to school. It took time to find the most photogenic bunch, said Natalie, who hunted throughout the vineyard before finding this shot. Natalie stays in the moment while shooting photos, relying on spontaneity and her mom’s iPhone. Natalie said she hopes to get her own iPhone someday.

January 3, 2024 Ag Alert 13

CIMIS REPORT | www.cimis.water.ca.gov

CALIFORNIA IRRIGATION MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM

For the week of December 21 - December 27, 2023 ETO (INCHES/WEEK)

YEAR

3.0

THIS YEAR

2.5

LAST YEAR AVERAGE YEAR

2.0

1.5

1.0

0.5

0.0

MACDOEL II (236)

BIGGS (244)

DAVIS (06)

MANTECA (70)

FRESNO (80)

SALINAS-SOUTH (214)

FIVE POINTS (2)

SHAFTER (5)

IMPERIAL (87)

THIS YEAR LAST YEAR AVG. YEAR % FROM AVG.

0.16 0.15 0.21 -24

0.16 0.18 0.27 -42

0.29 0.08 0.28 4

0.23 0.06 0.21 0

0.20 0.11 0.21 -10

0.42 0.33 0.42 -1

0.21 0.01 0.28 -12

0.24 0.08 0.28 -13

0.36 0.54 0.49 -28

W eekly reference evapotranspiration (ETo) is the rate of water use (evapotranspiration—the sum of soil evaporation and crop transpiration) for healthy pasture grass. Multiplying ETo by the appropriate “crop coefficient” gives estimates of the ET for other crops. For example, assume ETo on June 15 is 0.267 inches and the crop coefficient for corn on that day is 1.1. Multiplying ETo by the coefficient (0.26 inches x 1.1) results in a corn ET of 0.29 inches. This

information is useful in determining the amount and timing of irriga- tion water. Contact Richard Snyder, UC Davis, for information on coefficients, 530-752-4628. The 10 graphs provide weekly ETo rates for selected areas for average year, last year and this year. The ETo information is provided by the California Irrigation Management Information System (CIMIS) of the California Department of Water Resources.

For information contact the DWR district office or DWR state headquarters:

SACRAMENTO HEADQUARTERS: 916-651-9679 • 916-651-7218

NORTHERN REGION: Red Bluff 530-529-7301

NORTH CENTRAL REGION: West Sacramento 916-376-9630

SOUTH CENTRAL REGION:

SOUTHERN REGION:

Fresno 559-230-3334

Glendale 818-500-1645 x247 or x243

Agricultural Market Review Quotations are the latest available for the week ending December 29, 2023 Year Ago

Week Ago Latest Week

Livestock

Slaughter Steers – 5-Area Average Select & Choice, 1150–1460 lbs., $/cwt. Hogs – Average hog, 51-52% lean, Iowa-Minn. market, $/cwt. Slaughter Lambs – $ per cwt. 125–175 lbs. National weekly live sales Field crops – basis prompt shipment Cotton – ¢ per lb., Middling 1 3/32” Fresno spot market Corn – U.S. No. 2 yellow $/bu. trucked Alfalfa Hay – $ per ton, quality * , FOB Region 1, Northern Inter-mountain

170-171

No quote

155

71.35

77.41

64.09

223-237

170-213

146-216

85.14

No quote

79.37

No quote

Region 2, Sacramento Valley

No quote 16.50 (P, per bale)

No quote

Region 3, Northern San Joaquin Valley

No quote

218-220 (P)

No quote

Region 4, Central San Joaquin Valley

No quote

250 (P)

No quote

Region 5, Southern California

No quote 19.50 (P, per bale)

No quote

Region 6, Southeast Interior

No quote

190-210 (P)

No quote

Rice – Milled #1 Head, FOB No. Calif. mills Medium grain, $ per cwt.

No quote

Provided by the California Farm Bureau as a service to Farm Bureau members. Information supplied by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Market News Branch. * ADF=Acid detergent fiber; (S) = Supreme/<27%ADF; (P) = Premium/27-29; (G) = Good/29-32; (F) = Fair/32-35.

14 Ag Alert January 3, 2024

Laws Continued from Page 1

non-renewed have sought coverage under the California FAIR Plan, the state’s insurer of last resort. However, FAIR Plan policies are intended only as a temporary option. The policies are expensive and do not pro- vide comprehensive coverage. To help policyholders leave the FAIR Plan, the program has a clearinghouse where insurance companies can browse policies and make coverage offers. Currently, the clearinghouse lists only residential policies, not commercial ones, preventing farmers from bringing all their properties back under the same, compet- itive insurance policy. Under SB 505, commercial policies will be added to the FAIR Plan clearinghouse. Last year, after several major insurance companies stopped or limited their writing of new policies in California due to wild- fire risk, state Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara announced California will loosen some regulations in exchange for a commitment from insurance companies to provide coverage to property owners in fire-prone areas. The insurance commissioner estimat- ed it would take at least a year to reform the state’s regulatory requirements. “This isn’t going to happen overnight,” Reardon said, adding that the state government has “made a commitment that the (insurance) companies will be back.” Several regulations from the California Air Resources Board will impact truck-

ing operations this year. The mandates are part of a broader effort announced by Gov. Gavin Newsom in 2020 to reduce vehicle emissions. The Advanced Clean Fleets regulation was adopted last year. The landmark rule will phase out most diesel trucks in California over the next two decades, be- ginning this year. It also applies to tractors that weigh more than 8,500 pounds. All companies with 50 or more vehicles or at least $50 million in annual revenues and to all federal agencies, such as the U.S. Postal Service, are subject to the rule. Agricultural and trucking industry groups raised concerns that the rule could have unintended consequences if the elec- trical grid, vehicle technology or charging infrastructure for zero-emission vehicles are not in place before companies are forced to transition. “We are extremely concerned that the proposed ACF rule will be unworkable in the real world and could result in com- promising the delivery of essential goods and services to Californians,” a coalition of commercial, transportation and ag- ricultural organizations, including the California Farm Bureau, wrote in a letter to the air resources board. For now, business owners can contin- ue to operate their diesel trucks, but the rule requires that fleets start phasing in zero-emission vehicles this year either by replacing any decommissioned trucks

with electric vehicles or by converting at least 10% of their fleet to zero-emission vehicles by 2025. “There is a big infrastructure problem,” said Katie Little, senior policy advocate for the California Farm Bureau. “There isn’t even enough charging capacity in urban areas let alone rural areas.” Little added that shipping delays caused by insufficient infrastructure could be di- sastrous due to the nature of agricultural freight. “We can’t have tomatoes, milk or livestock sitting in the sun,” she said. “Our goods are perishable.” The rule includes exemptions for infra- structure and supply delays, but the bur- den is on the business owner to apply for a waiver. Another new rule from the air resources board, called Clean Truck Check, is aimed at ensuring heavy-duty vehicles are prop- erly maintained and not producing more emissions than they should. This rule went into effect Oct. 1. It requires vehicle own- ers to enter their vehicles in a Clean Truck Check database and pay an annual fee of $30 per vehicle. As of Jan. 1, all trucks in California must have proof of compliance with the rule to continue operating. Beginning in July, the rule will require vehicle owners to conduct emissions testing, similar to a smog test, every two years. Agricultural vehicles must get tested every year. See LAWS, Page 16

Angeles, and sponsored by the California Farm Bureau. It was spearheaded by San Diego County farmer Al Stehly after he encountered a burdensome regulatory process when trying to get certified to use drones to apply pesticides on his vineyards. Farmers worldwide have used drones to improve worker safety, lower costs, con- serve water and increase crop yields. “The technology allows you to use (ap- plications) in areas where you previous- ly couldn’t because it’s so targeted,” said Christopher Reardon, government affairs director for the California Farm Bureau. “This bill is a very good thing.” Farmers will likely see changes to prop- erty insurance options this year, though not immediately. Another bill sponsored by the Farm Bureau, Senate Bill 505, will take effect “on or after” July 1. The bill, authored by state Sen. Susan Rubio, D-Baldwin Park, was created to improve commercial property insurance options for people who have lost coverage due to wildfire risk. In recent years, cancellations of insur- ance policies in fire-prone areas have dealt a blow to farm businesses. Without insur- ance, farmers and ranchers may not be el- igible for the loans they need to purchase the properties, structures or equipment they need to run their business. Many farmers whose policies were

January 3, 2024 Ag Alert 15

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