Farm Bureau Policies 2022 was discovered after the producer had fulfilled the requirements of a pest, or disease, mitigation or prevention protocol that was established by the USDA or other federal authority. Commodityquarantine treatmentmethods shouldbe reviewed and researched tominimize crop damage.
Immediate action to create short-termsolutions is needed to facili- tate restorationof water supplies for impacted agricultural regions. In the development of California’s water resources, the vested rights of water usersmust be inviolate; contracts under this devel- opment between the state and agencies created under state law must be inviolate; andareas inwhichwater originatesmust not be deprivedof anyquantityandqualityof suchwaterneeded tosatisfy the beneficial requirements of such areas. TheWater Plan The present level of water development and transportation in California is not adequate to meet the present level of water use, includingprovision for outflowthrough thedeltamandatedby the State Water Resources Control Board and remedy of the ground- water overdraft in California. It should be a continuing responsibility of the state to pro- vide, or assist in providing, facilities for the development, con- veyance, conservation and utilization of water resources, and thereby make water available to meet the beneficial needs in all areas of the state. The California Water Plan (Plan), commonly referred to as Bulletin 160, provides for the orderly and coordinated control, protection, conservation, development andutilizationof thewater resources of the state, which is set forth and described in the Plan [Cal.Water Code § 10004(a)]. TheDepartment ofWater Resources (DWR) is to update the Plan on or before December 31 every five years, beginning in2003 [Cal.WaterCode§10004(b)(1)]. As part of this requirement, DWRmust include strategies including, but not limited to, the development of newwater storage facilities, water conservation, water recycling, desalination, conjunctive use, and water transfers thatmaybepursued tomeet the futurewater needs of the state [Cal. Water Code § 10004.5]. Aspart of updating thePlan,DWRshall conduct a study todeter- mine the amount of water needed tomeet the state’s future needs and to recommend programs, policies and facilities tomeet those needs [Cal. Water Code § 10004.6]. To assist in that investigation, theLegislatureadoptedAB2587 (2002) to theFoodandAgriculture Code, requiring the Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) to estimate food, fiber, livestock and other farmproducts produc- tion, as specified, and provide that information to DWR for esti- mating related water usage for inclusion in the Plan [Cal. Food and Agriculture Code § 411]. It is the Legislature’s stated intent that neither the state nor the nation should be allowed to become dependent upon a net import of foreign food, and that as the na- tion’spopulationgrows, California shouldproduceenough food to supply the state and also continue to supply the historical propor- tion of the nation’s food supply, approximately 25 percent of the nation’s table food [Cal. Food and Agriculture Code § 411, section 1 (1) and (2)]. We recommendadequate fundingbeprovided for theprepara- tion, and update every five years, of a food and fiber forecast by CDFA. The forecast should be based upon 20-year estimates and furnished toDWR for estimating relatedwater usage for inclusion in every Bulletin 160. We recommend review of all phases of the plan by the proper state agencies andurge appropriationandallocationof funds nec- essary for the completionof eachupdatedPlan, for timely submis- sion to the Legislature. We do not support user fees for funding these activities. We recommend that DWR adequately analyze and the Legislature authorize projects of statewide importance consis- tent with growth and change. We further recommend that the Legislature authorize immediate action where danger and dis- tress threaten. Priorities for Water Development and Transportation We recommend the highest priority be given to water devel- opment and transportation and support construction of the fol- lowing facilities: (1) Facilities in thedelta to improve the efficiencyofwater trans- fer and to reduce saltwater intrusion; (2)Additional storage toprovide increased reserves and toallow for flexibility in diverting from the delta; (3) Development of additional water supplies from streams in California by the most economically feasible projects, within the scopeof theCaliforniaWater Planand thepolicies of theCalifornia FarmBureau; and (4) Identificationanddevelopment of opportunities for ground- water banking, groundwater replenishment, groundwater re- charge, and conjunctive use. The least damaging conveyance systempractical, both in con- struction and operation, should be an integral part of any addi- tional water storage or supply project pertinent thereto. Any water development project should give high priority to the development and protection of agricultural land. Areas of Origin Counties, water districts or local agencies in areas of origin or natural service areas tributary thereto, should retain theprivileges
Wildlifeas ameans toencourage thepublic toalert theDepartment of FishandWildlife on illegal hunting and fishing activities by call- ing an 800 number. Game management properties, either state or federal, should be fully developed and utilized before additional privately owned land is acquired for such purposes. The need for such acquisition should be fully demonstrated and acquisitions should be limited to land best adapted to the purpose. Waterfowl Toprovidemaximumprotection to agriculture fromcropdam- age by migratory waterfowl, as well as an optimum harvest of birds, we urge the determination of a maximumnumber of birds to be maintained, and a zoning plan for the waterfowl flyway in California that wouldprovidehunting seasons basedona realistic recognition of the harvest of agricultural crops in the state and the traditional migration of the waterfowl. Supplementary feeding of waterfowl by or as authorized by the appropriate stateor federal agency shouldbepermitted toprevent cropdamagewhenever unusual cropor harvestingor other condi- tions warrant. Deer and ElkManagement In deer and elk management, we urge approval of any neces- sary legislation and the adoption of measures or programs by the state Fish and Game Commission and the department which will provide a realisticharvesting of deer andelk, bothbucks anddoes, consistent with sound game management practices, and which provide for private landowners to determine who is permitted to hunt on their respective lands. The determination by the Fish and Game Commission of deer and elk to be harvested and the method to be used should not be subject to veto by county boards of supervisors. We further urge increased informational and edu- cational programs by agencies and organizations concernedwith encouraging sound gamemanagement programs. Producers in the area of study should be included in themem- bership of advisory committees working with state or federal au- thorities in the development of programs or projects relating to wildlifemanagement. Depredation Compensation andManagement We supportmonetary compensation for cropor livestockdam- age or loss causedbymanagedand regulatedwildlife, andwildlife that agricultural operators areunable to legally controlwith theuse of anti-depredationmethods. Whenananimal is takenunderadepredationpermit inaremote area, the local warden should have some discretion over disposal of the carcass. We support the control of wild turkey populations through the use of depredation permits. (Rev. 2014) No. 266 Wolf Management CaliforniaDepartment of FishandWildlife shouldpromptlyde- velop, in coordinationwithproducers, property owners andother stakeholders, a wolf management plan that balances the needs of public safety, private property and the environment. No. 267 Livestock Depredation by Dogs State legislation should be enacted to permit local animal con- trol or humane society officers to impound and destroy dogs that pursue, wound, worry or kill livestock or poultry. We support the sponsorship of legislation to amend the California Food and Agricultural Code to include the recovery of attorney fees for the loss of livestock caused by dogs. (Rev. 2000)
Government initiatedpest eradicationprograms shouldbepaid for from general revenue funds. Efforts should be coordinated at all levels in order tominimize the costs of eradication programs. USDAshouldhave theprimary responsibility for issuingdepre- dation permits when necessary, to control migratory birds. Effectivemethods tocontrol cropdepredationbybirdsandother vertebratepests shouldbedevelopedandencouraged to conserve our energy and food supplies. Crop Health Strong, cooperative efforts areneeded toprotect California’s ag- ricultural industry frompotentiallydevastatingpests anddiseases. The state of California, through theCDFA shoulddevote adequate funds to support programs and efforts to fight against invasive species and diseases that may impact agricultural commodities currently and in the future. Indemnification We support the indemnification of crop losses when it can be documented that thequarantine requirements or treatmentmeth- ods are the basis for the loss. Whoever willfully uses material in violationof printed safety rules for thatmaterial, and thewrongful use results in cropquarantine, shouldbeheld initially responsible for indemnification of innocent victims of the quarantine. Anypersonor agencywillfully responsible for thedissemination of false informationregarding thenatureor extent of chemical con- taminationshouldbe responsible for resultingdamage. (Rev. 2016) No. 263 Strengthening State and National Exclusion Programs Funding should be provided for the operation of all state and national border inspection stations on a 24-hour and seven-days- a-week basis. Pest and disease detection and inspection activities at U.S. points-of-entry should be removed from the Department of Homeland Security and returned to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’sAnimal andPlantHealth InspectionService (APHIS). We support the removal of spending limitations caused by the present APHIS appropriations act. This will enable APHIS to conduct the strongest possible exclusionprogramat our national borders, airports and seaports. Inaddition, we urge theU.S. Postal Service to increase its cooperation with APHIS by conducting increased First-Class Mail inspections at high-risk entry points. We urge that Congress and APHIS work to increase penalties against casual andcommercial smugglingof agricultural products. Fines shouldbekeptwithin theAgriculturalQuarantine Inspection (AQI) system to be used for strengthening the program. It shouldbeunlawful for anyperson, firm, or corporation tosend viamail or package delivery service any package containing seed, plant, or plant productswithout plainlymarking the packagewith the following information: (1) Contains seed or plant material; (2)May be opened for agricultural inspection; (3) Shipper’s telephone number; and (4) Receiver’s telephone number. Penalties for private and commercial smuggling of agricultural products shouldbe severe enough toprevent smuggling. Failure to properlymarkpackages containing seeds, plants, or plantmaterial should be subject to a fine of not less than $1,000. Any e x c l u s i on p rog r am shou l d i nc l ude a pub l i c education component. We encourage the USDA to monitor state programs to ensure that each state applies sound science to any protocol deviation fromUSDA standards. (Rev. 2017) No. 264 Rodenticides We support the continued registration of compounds that are critical tools necessary to control rodents that threatenagriculture and the public health. We also support the use of public funds to conduct the studies andprovide thedata requiredby theEPA. If private funds areneed- ed, we support anequitable industry-wideassessment. (Rev. 2000) No. 265 Game Management We urge coordinated management and control of migratory waterfowl andwildgamebystateand federal authorities towardthe preventionof excessivegamedepredation toagricultural crops and towardaharvest ofwildlife, commensuratewithseasonal numbers, availability of food and capacity of refuge areas. We support theCALTIPprogramof theDepartment of Fishand
Water
No. 301 Water Resource Development
We support, as a high priority, all cost-effectivemeans ofmain- taining and improving existing water storage and conveyance in- frastructure in California. We support all cost-efficient means of increasing California’s water supply, including the construction of additional surface storage facilities, groundwater recharge projects, and water con- veyance improvements. Any water development project should facilitate the develop- ment and protection of agricultural land. Where water develop- ment ishinderedby lackof funding,we support cost sharing.Water development projects shouldbe cost effective andprovide afford- ablewater supplies for agricultural users inall regionsof California. There isaneedforcontinuingorderlydevelopmentofCalifornia’s water resources tomeet thegrowingneeds forwater in futureyears, as our population grows and our economy continues to expand.
January 26, 2022 Ag Alert 21
Powered by FlippingBook