Category: Featured Post

  • DPR Announces Voluntary Cancellation of Paraquat Products

    The California Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR) announced that all manufacturers of pesticide products containing the active ingredient paraquat-dichloride (paraquat) have voluntarily cancelled their product registrations, beginning the phase-out of the use of paraquat in California.

    “For years, communities have fought to end the use of paraquat, a weedkiller associated with negative impacts to human health and wildlife,” said California Secretary for Environmental Protection Yana Garcia. “California will keep moving toward pest management practices that protect health and our ecosystems.”

    DPR initiated the reevaluation of paraquat in November 2024, aligning with requirements in Food & Agricultural Code (FAC) section 14086, and released two preliminary scientific assessments the following month. DPR’s preliminary reports identified a potential association between paraquat exposure and thyroid impacts and birth defects. The reports also indicated paraquat may adversely affect other organisms, with the most significant risks to birds.

    “We need the right data to identify where there are risks to people and the environment,” said DPR Director Karen Morrison. “This is a cornerstone of our continuous evaluation process to respond to evolving science on the impacts of pesticides.”

    Reevaluation gives DPR the authority to require registrants – the companies that make pesticides – to develop and submit new scientific studies needed to fully understand emerging risks that were unknown at the time of registration.  For paraquat, DPR invoked this reevaluation authority to require registrants to submit scientific data by June 5, 2026, to address newly identified gaps in DPR’s human health toxicology database, among other requirements. In lieu of providing required data, companies began voluntarily cancelling registration of paraquat pesticide products in California in April, with the last registrant voluntarily cancelling its registration on Aug. 6.

    Under California law, DPR-licensed dealers may continue to possess and sell pesticides that were voluntarily canceled for up to two years following the effective date of each product’s cancellation. Growers who continue to use these products must act in accordance with all applicable label directions, use requirements, and state and federal regulations.

    Paraquat reevaluation is part of a series of actions at the department to continuously evaluate and mitigate pesticide impacts. Status updates for other actions and pesticide active ingredients and classes under evaluation can be found on DPR’s Continuous Evaluation and Mitigation Update webpage.

    DPR provides funding to research alternatives to pesticides and to increase access to safe, effective sustainable pest management (SPM) through its annual SPM Grants program. The 2027 priority areas include projects that are likely to decrease usage of pesticides prioritized for mitigation or evaluation by DPR, such as paraquat, and those that offer alternatives to weed management. The current application period is open through Sept. 1.

    “To realize systemwide change in California, DPR plays a critical role in supporting additional research and outreach to move the state towards safer, more sustainable pest management approaches,” said Director Morrison. “As growers transition from the use of paraquat, the department will leverage available tools to support the use of effective alternatives and foster SPM.”

    Story contributed by the California Department of Pesticide Regulation

  • Common Tree Disease May Contribute to Reduced Orchard Longevity

    Recent studies conducted by scientists at UCCE and CSU Bakersfield demonstrate that a common disease prevalent in vineyards and orchards may impact long-term orchard longevity of almonds in the southern San Joaquin Valley.  Almond orchards with a high incidence of crown gall, a disease caused by a ubiquitous soilborne pathogen, exhibit high rates of tree failure caused by a newly identified wood rotting disease.

    Crown gall is common in walnut and almond orchards and can be readily identified by the tumors it induces on the roots and crowns of trees. Unless severe, crown gall generally does not cause tree mortality, but may limit tree size, thus affecting overall yield.  Growers with crown gall-affected orchards often replant young trees that exhibit girdling by the tumors but leave mature trees untreated. Within the past decade, however, growers have noticed heightened prevalence of tree mortality due to butt rot in crown gall-affected almond orchards. The butt rot disease is caused by an introduced fungal pathogen, Ganoderma adspersum, that was first reported in California in 2016.

    From 2024 through 2026, UCCE researchers have surveyed over 23,000 almond trees in Kern and Tulare Counties, documenting prevalence of both butt rot and crown gall.  Molecular identification of the butt rot pathogen in each surveyed orchard was conducted by scientists at CSU Bakersfield. The study found that Ganoderma adspersum was the only species of Ganoderma isolated in all surveyed orchards. Additionally, the results indicated that orchards with crown gall were six times more likely to have butt rot disease. Trees with historic or active signs of butt rot also exhibited 1.5 times the mortality rate of healthy trees over a 26-month survey period.

    The results of this work demonstrate that the introduction of the new butt rot pathogen may elevate the importance of crown gall as a predictor of orchard longevity. The implication of this finding is that the planting of crown gall-free rootstocks during orchard establishment may be key to future reduction of risk from G. adspersum. Similarly, Mohammad Yaghmour and Elizabeth Fichtner, Farm Advisors in Kern and Tulare Counties, respectively, found that crown gall was also associated with increased incidence of thousand cankers disease on walnut.  Fichtner has also reported that crown gall is related to heightened root predation by ten-lined June beetle on walnut.

    The current study was conducted with support from the Almond Board of California and as a collaborative effort between UCCE scientists including Elizabeth Fichtner, Santosh Bhandari, Mohammad Yaghmour, and Raymond Mireles, and CSU Bakersfield Professor Isolde Francis and Chance Kophamer, graduate student. — Story by Elizabeth J. Fichtner, UC Ag and Natural Resources

  • Blue Diamond Releases Crop Progress Report

    Blue Diamond Growers release its monthly crop progress report, noting that harvesting conditions began earlier this year due to the impact of the weather.

    Warm summer temperatures dominated the conditions in California’s Central Valley during much of July, with a significant heat wave developing during the final week of the period. Daily maximum temperatures ranged predominately between the mid- and upper 90’s to just over 100 degrees with highest temperatures reported in the southern San Joaquin Valley. Morning lows exhibited greater variability, with readings ranging from the low 50’s to lower 70’s, depending on the degree of cloud cover each morning. Temperatures were amplified by monsoonal moisture traveling northward, bringing occasionally cloudy skies and increased humidity. Increasing daytime temperatures materialized in the final days of the period, marking the start of a significant heat wave. Temperatures were reported to be between 102 to 105 degrees, with higher temperatures forecast for the first week of August.

    The annual return of summertime monsoon flows stirred a bit of apprehension among California’s almond growers, as memories of the challenging 2025 harvest season were rekindled. With that in mind, growers and huller/sheller operators alike worked to complete final pre-harvest tasks during July, focusing on crop maturity that is running well ahead of normal.

    Insect and vegetation management were prime considerations during the period. As noted in our previous report, treatments to protect early harvesting varieties from damage by navel orangeworm were initiated in June, causing the early or advanced crop and pest development. As the crop continues to develop, secondary treatments, intended to catch the insect’s next generation and protect mid and later maturing varieties, were completed in July. As a reflection of the year’s advanced crop development, second treatments have been conducted in roughly the same time frame that initial applications would have been in “normal” years.

    As for other pest issues, observers are reporting increased population of web-spinning mites in the Sacramento and southern San Joaquin Valleys. Control at this stage of crop development presents several challenges and the forecast heat wave promises to expand existing infestations. Treatments targeting almond-damaging ant species have also been performed, including second applications in cases with particularly high populations.

    Observers are reporting widespread instances of red blotch infections in orchards throughout the Central Valley. As may be seen in the photo accompanying this report, if untreated, red blotch can cause severe foliar damage. However, symptoms of this new fungal disease do not appear until 30 to 40 days after infection. Easily spread by airborne spores that are activated by rain events, and potentially by irrigation, this disease spread from a single orchard in Merced County in 2024 to most of the Central Valley by 2025. Orchards that did not receive adequate protection, or any treatments at all are presenting significant symptoms, with the worst infections beginning to defoliate the trees. This is especially problematic in orchards that have been abandoned. Leaf rust, which follows a similar symptomology, has also been observed.

    After delaying or deferring mower passes during the growing season to control costs, vegetation management on the orchard floor became particularly important during the period. Growers must provide for a clean, firm soil surface within the orchard middles (the area between the tree rows), to facilitate an efficient harvest. Where warranted, treatments to control weed regrowth, followed by flail mowers running close to the soil surface, provide the best conditions for a clean harvest.

    Crop maturity also made irrigation management a focal point. Machinery passing through the orchards must be timed between irrigations to prevent rutting of the surface. For those working to employ regulated deficit irrigation (RDI) described in our previous report, the hotter temperatures complicate grower decisions. Under RDI, growers reduce irrigation to one-half of the orchard’s consumptive use for a two-week period at the initiation of hull split. Keeping in mind that water consumption increases as temperatures rise, in extreme cases, normal irrigation scheduling can result in one-half of consumptive use. For those with orchards ready for harvest, water must also be withheld to prevent bark damage during shaking.

    Owing to the advanced crop maturity, harvest operations of the 2026 crop were launched in mid-July. Observers reported the shakers entered the first orchard on July 10 in western Colusa County. Shakers began working in other advanced plantings along the west side of the Sacramento and San Joaquin valleys during the week of July 12 and the first crop to be picked up was delivered to huller/shellers during the week of July 19. For those along the east side and along the Highway 99 corridor, shaking of advanced blocks is expected to begin during the first week of August.

    Growers and observers have noted that hulls have begun splitting in several pollinator varieties, indicating a potentially compressed harvest. However, how the crop will flow though huller/shellers will be determined as more crop arrives in the first weeks of August. Observers have noted thick hulls in many orchards that can potentially reduce flow rates during hulling.

    Story by Mel Machado, Blue Diamond Growers

  • Madera County Seeks Pistachio Grower Input

    The Madera County Ag Commissioner’s office is gathering data to determine if the pistachio crop has been damaged due to weather and pollination earlier this year. They are hearing reports of low yields and lots of blanks in the current pistachio crop and would appreicate the filling out of this survey form.

    The survey form can be downloaded here.

  • Can Vineyard ‘Mothballing’ Help Growers Weather Wine Market Collapse?

    Oversupply of grapes, plummeting consumer demand and skyrocketing production costs have led the wine industry to a crisis point.

    “We have an economic downturn in the wine-grape market, and it is considerably worse or more intense compared to the historical ones within the memory of professionals active in viticulture right now,” said Christopher Chen, University of California Cooperative Extension viticulture advisor for Mendocino, Sonoma and Lake counties.

    The severity of the situation has forced growers to consider a new way to weather the storm – vineyard “mothballing.” Also called idling or resting, it entails maintaining the vines with minimal labor and inputs (and not harvesting the fruit), with an eye toward rapidly ramping up production in the future.

    During hard times, growers typically have two choices, either pull out their vines entirely and replant when the market improves or continue farming as usual, but at a loss. Mothballing might be attractive to some growers – such as those who want to preserve heritage vines – as a “middle road” approach.

    The challenge at present, though, is the lack of a roadmap.

    “I have not seen any good information on mothballing as a practice,” said Chase Thornhill, owner and general manager of Mendocino Wine Company in Ukiah. “I don’t know that there’s any information in the viticulture books on what to do if you’re tight on cash and the industry has collapsed. It doesn’t exist, and the industry really needs that playbook.”

    While Chen observes that mothballing is still relatively rare, he said interest has grown dramatically. Virtually unheard of in his area three years ago, mothballing-type practices can now be seen in about 1 out of 20 vineyards.

    According to Chen, mothballing was first done at scale in Australia, where growers rode out a severe downturn in the early 2000s. Very little academic research on the approach was conducted at that time, however, and now Chen is trying to fill in the gaps.

    In 2025, he launched a study to systematically research the effects of mothballing. At four locations growing cabernet sauvignon and chardonnay in Sonoma and Mendocino counties, Chen is looking at the impacts of different “intensities” of mothballing with varying levels of irrigation and maintenance.

    After collecting preliminary data last year, Chen and the collaborating managers plan to continue mothballing in 2026 and 2027 before attempting to return the vineyards to full production by 2029.

    Growers Must Weigh Costs and Benefits

    Before choosing to mothball, of course, growers need the math to pencil out. At a basic level, that means estimating how much money they would save in vineyard management costs – and then how much it’s going to cost to “correct” the planned reduction in vineyard management as they return to production.

    “That ‘cost now’ versus ‘expenses later’ calculation really determines whether it’s worth it or not to do mothballing,” Chen said. “That’s my primary concern.”

    In his study, Chen is looking at costs and consequences of varying levels of mothballing intensity: 1) doing nothing except pest and disease management; 2) managing pests/disease and also pruning to keep the vines in shape; and 3) continuing to farm but without the “extraneous” practices intended to make the fruit appealing to buyers.

    Last year, Chen studied a site at Mendocino Wine Company, where Thornhill chose a mothballing strategy with very little intervention – just irrigating, spraying for powdery mildew and rolling down cover crops into thatched “mats” on the ground (to reduce fire risks and protect the soil).

    For Thornhill, it was a matter of simple economics. At the beginning of 2025, he knew that he was going to be unable to sell his fruit.

    “If you’re not covering the farming costs with what you’re going to produce and then sell, you’re losing money,” said Thornhill, who has worked in the wine industry for 20 years. “And who can afford to lose money, especially now? That would risk jobs and risk the total enterprise.”

    Estimating that it would cost $30K to $60K per acre to replant, Thornhill did not want to sacrifice his vines’ many future years of productive life just to save some money in the short term.

    “We’ve got to strike a balance between preserving the asset – and not losing our shirt on that preservation,” said Thornhill, adding that he has returned those blocks to production and is waiting to evaluate the harvest later this year.

    Pests Surge, Berries Shrink in First Year

    In the first year of his research, Chen already has made several significant observations. First, he wanted to see if pests would immediately return to the vineyard if a grower stopped managing the canopy and applying pesticides as they would under normal production – or whether there would still be some degree of control due to previous treatments.

    “There isn’t,” Chen said. “We did see – immediately in the first year – a 44% increase in leaf hoppers, which is an easy way to count how many flying insect pests there are in the vineyard more generally.”

    Secondly, on a more positive note, Chen observed that there didn’t appear to be any additional water stress on the vine as a result of not pruning or managing the canopy.

    And third, he saw that berry development slowed under mothballing conditions. By eschewing pruning, there were more shoots and clusters and thus more berries, but they were smaller and with less sugar accumulation.

    “If you plan to do this, you have to plan to not harvest,” Chen advised. “You can’t try to harvest because the quality of the fruit is not going to be typically acceptable to most wineries.”

    Disease and Pest Management Must Continue

    Another point of emphasis for viticulture experts is that growers must not consider mothballing a passive practice. George Zhuang, UCCE viticulture advisor for Fresno County, said his biggest worry with mothballing is potential neglect of pest and disease management due to a grower’s “laser-focus” on cutting costs.

    “My concern is that the pest and disease issue becomes so enormous that when you decide to bring the vineyard back, it might not be possible,” said Zhuang, highlighting vine mealybug as one prominent threat.

    Chen echoed that sentiment, emphasizing that mothballing is an active management process – and not a “set it and forget it” approach.

    “You do have to go out and make sure that the pests and diseases are under control because that is a regulatory issue with the state and the county governments, and you will get fined and penalized for becoming a pest nuisance if you’re not careful,” said Chen. He added that growers should inform their neighbors that they are mothballing and not abandoning their vineyard, as the appearance of the vines and land look virtually identical under both conditions.

    Furthermore, instead of cutting water and fertilizer “cold turkey” to a vineyard’s mothballed state, Chen recommends that growers gradually taper their applications.

    “The vines acclimate to those inputs year to year, so if they’re used to getting irrigation at high volumes every year, and if you stop water, you will cause permanent damage to those grapevines,” Chen warned.

    Conversely, as a vineyard manager ramps up to normal production levels, they should not go to full irrigation right away, as that would cause unruly growth requiring intensive labor to correct, control and train.

    Lastly, Chen advises growers to develop a year-by-year plan for mothballing their vineyards and returning them to full production. Based on their best prediction for future market conditions, they should devise a “reentry timeframe.”

    “Plan when you are going to come back into production so that you can properly manage the resources and the vine health and the pruning and recovery period so that when you come back, it’s ready to go – rather than running into a bunch of walls,” he said.

    Funding Needed for Research

    Chen noted that mothballing might be a realistic option only for smaller operations, which are common in his region and encompass 15 to 40 acres on average. Many wine grape growers in the San Joaquin Valley, in contrast, farm hundreds of acres – making mothballing logistically more difficult and economically less viable.

    Zhuang said growers also have to consider the opportunity costs of mothballing, especially in parts of the state where they could replace wine grapes with crops such as vegetables, almonds, pistachios or citrus. “If you do have a plan B, maybe vineyard mothballing is not really beneficial for you,” he said.

    Chen and Zhuang said further economic analyses are needed for growers to make the best financial decisions. In addition to analyzing those tradeoffs, Chen hopes to examine the chemistry of the fruit throughout the mothballing process (Brix/sugar concentration and pH) and the practice’s effects on wine quality and taste.

    While Chen is monitoring for leafhoppers, glassy-winged sharpshooters and other insects, he does not have funding to do spore counts for powdery mildew and Botrytis, two of the major fungal pathogens in vineyards. He would also like to examine impacts on soil health.

    Although Chen is grateful for “in-kind” support from vineyard owners for access to study sites, he has not received external funds for this research to date. And to Thornhill and his peers in the wine industry, Chen’s “playbook” is a vital piece of information for growers, who are most concerned about the time to recovery after mothballing.

    “I think that the general reaction is: ‘Wait a minute, what’s going to happen?’ If we don’t farm this year, does that mean that it’s going take us three years to get back to full capacity, just as if we were planting a new vineyard? Is it going to take two years? Just one?” Thornhill explained. “We just don’t know.”

    By Mike Hsu, UC Ag and Natural Resources

  • Blueberry Convention Coming to Monterey

    The Blueberry Convention is the largest gathering of the blueberry industry in the U.S. — and this year’s event is packed with insights, connections and experiences designed to help move the industry forward.

    Guests will be able to:

    • Get the latest category data, insights and economic outlooks to guide your operations.
    • See how the Blueberries GO BIG campaign is driving demand.
    • Learn about the organizations’ health research focus on cognitive health.
    • Experience the energy of the Blueberry Boost Accelerator live pitch competition.
    • Join the USHBC Council and NABC Board meetings on Wednesday.

    New for 2026 

    The USHBC and NABC are bringing some new features and opportunities to Monterey this year. Here’s a sneak peek at what’s ahead:

    Tech Tuesday 

    Explore emerging and advancing technologies shaping the future of the blueberry industry during this special education session organized by the BerrySmart Technology Task Force. Over the course of two hours, attendees will gain insight into innovations, tools and ideas designed to support on-farm efficiency, data-driven decision-making and long-term industry progress.

    Blueberry Night at the Monterey Bay Aquarium

    A one-of-a-kind strolling dinner as the blueberry industry takes over the aquarium. Enjoy chef-curated food stations, coastal views and access to incredible exhibits — all in a vibrant setting designed for connection and celebration.

    Meet, Eat and Explore 

    An open lunch in the heart of the convention action. With seating throughout the common areas near Blueberry Lane and Blueberry Row, it’s the perfect chance to grab a bite, connect with exhibitors and spend time with fellow attendees.

    Blueberry Boardroom

    The Blueberry Boardroom will offer a dedicated space to meet with colleagues, host team conversations or hold business meetings throughout the event. Advance booking is encouraged.

    Blueberries & Beyond: A Central Coast Tour 

    The convention will wrap up with an on-the-ground look at agriculture in the Monterey area. This industry tour will give guests the opportunity to explore blueberry-related production, while also experiencing the broader agricultural landscape of California’s Central Coast.

    Guests also have access to favorites from past events, including the Blueberry Boost Accelerator live pitch competition (back by popular demand), the NABC Awards and the USHBC Elizabeth White Award, the BerryFit Club 5k and yoga, keynotes and education sessions.

    Story contributed by the U.S. Highbush Blueberry Council and the North American Blueberry Council

  • Mysterious Virus Affects Melons

    ARS researchers have found a new virus playing hide and seek with the melon industry. In 2023, unusual symptoms of infection were observed in melon and watermelon plants from Arizona and California. ARS scientists in Salinas sampled infected plants and used gene sequencing technology to identify the culprit as watermelon chlorotic stunt virus (WmCSV).

    This virus is transmitted by whiteflies and can cause significant yield loss — particularly in watermelon —but it also infects all types of cucurbit (melon, pumpkin, squash and cucumber) crops. WmCSV joins an existing virus complex causing yield impacts for production of melon and watermelon in the southwestern United States. This is the first time WmCSV has been identified in cucurbit plants in the Western Hemisphere. As a result, the cucurbit industry was notified of the threat posed by this virus, and they are taking efforts to keep it from being transported to other regions of the United States. — Story contributed by the USDA Ag Research Service

  • IDFA Supports USMCA Review

    The International Dairy Foods Association (IDFA) is in Mexico City this week to support ongoing review of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA). Becky Rasdall Vargas, IDFA’s senior vice president of trade and workforce, is engaging with U.S. government officials and industry stakeholders to advance IDFA’s priorities: preserve USMCA and strengthen it for dairy.

    “USMCA is essential to the competitiveness of the U.S. dairy industry and to the strength of North America’s agricultural economy,” said Michael Dykes, president and CEO of IDFA. “As the review process moves forward, we support U.S. negotiators efforts to resolve outstanding dairy commitments and preserve this agreement that is so vital to the economic growth, investment and long-term certainty for U.S. dairy processors and consumers across the region.”

    Mexico is the largest export destination for U.S. dairy products, buying $2.57b of U.S. dairy exports in 2025. As part of the review process, IDFA has consistently advocated for addressing current USMCA commitments that have not been implemented. IDFA has advocated preserving the agreement for the continued stability and growth of the U.S. dairy sector in North America.

    “The USMCA review presents the best opportunity U.S. dairy has had in six years to take a fresh look at and build on the strong trading relationship we have with Mexico,” said Rasdall Vargas. “While USMCA dairy trade issues commonly focus on Canada, ultimately, every trade relationship has areas to improve upon, and Mexico is no different.  IDFA appreciates Mexico’s constructive engagement in negotiations and looks forward to supporting a positive and speedy conclusion of the USMCA review with Mexico.”

    To learn more about IDFA’s trade policy priorities and advocacy efforts, visit www.idfa.org. — Story contributed by the International Dairy Foods Association

  • UC Offers Toddlers Free Milk for Study

    Two-year-old children who drink cow’s milk are being sought to participate in a 12-month study by the UC Nutrition Policy Institute, a part of University of California Agriculture and Natural Resources. Milk will be provided for free to participants in the Milk Type in Toddlers Study, or “Milk TOT” study, being conducted in Northern California, the San Francisco Bay Area and the Central Valley.

    “I enrolled my child in the Milk TOT study because we need more data-driven evidence to help us make informed decisions,” said one participant. “I feel good about my family making this contribution to pediatricians and families — and we get free milk.”

    Milk provides children with calcium, protein and vitamin D, which are essential for health and brain development. In the U.S., the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends that children switch from whole milk to low-fat or nonfat milk after age 2 to reduce their intake of saturated fat and calories.

    However, the latest Dietary Guidelines for Americans have changed. The guidelines — issued by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and USDA — emphasize whole milk for children of all ages.

    “The truth is that we need more research to understand which milk type is best for young children,” said Kassandra Bacon, NPI project policy analyst. “The purpose of this UC study is to see how the type of milk toddlers drink affects their health, growth and development.”

    Researchers with the Nutrition Policy Institute are recruiting children ages 23 to 30 months old. Approximately 500 toddlers will be randomly assigned to drink either whole fat or 1% fat milk starting at age 2. The scientists will assess the toddlers’ diet, health and developmental outcomes.

    “We will follow each participant for one year, collecting baseline and follow-up data,” said Ryan Williams, a NPI project policy analyst and registered dietitian who is involved in the research.

    For 12 months, the scientists will measure each child’s height, weight, waist and head circumference. They will ask the parents what else the toddlers eat. They also will ask parents to visit a designated lab to check their child’s blood profile — lipids, cholesterol, insulin resistance and vitamin D — cognitive development and gut microbiome diversity.

    “I was a bit nervous as toddlers usually did not like the (blood) draws, but the study booked an appointment for me and the process was quick and easy,” said a participating parent.

    The assigned milk type will be delivered to participants free of charge via a grocery delivery service. Parents will receive advice from a registered dietitian to support healthy milk consumption as part of a balanced diet. Participants will also receive monthly newsletters with general health tips and earn up to $275 in gift cards by completing the study.

    “It has been very swift and easy,” said a participating parent in the San Francisco Bay Area. “The milk comes regularly, and you can even choose a delivery window that works for you.”

    Another parent said, “Very simple, easy, and added bonus of having a nutritionist to ask questions to, plus monthly handouts.”

    Participants for the milk study must meet these requirements:

    • Child must be 23 to 30 months old and have public or private medical insurance
    • Child’s parent/legal guardian must be 18 years or older
    • Child must live with the participating parent/legal guardian in one of the 21 designated counties (see list below) for the next year
    • Child’s parent or guardian must speak English or Spanish

    Children are ineligible for the study if they are:

    • lactose intolerant
    • allergic to milk protein

    Lorrene Ritchie, emeritus UC Cooperative Extension nutrition specialist and former NPI director, and Anisha Patel, pediatrician at Stanford Medicine Children’s Health and professor in the Division of General Pediatrics at Stanford University, are the principal investigators for the study. The research is primarily funded by a grant from the National Institutes for Health with additional support from the California Dairy Research Foundation.

    The study is recruiting participants in the 21 counties below:

    • Alameda
    • Butte
    • Contra Costa
    • El Dorado
    • Lassen
    • Marin
    • Monterey
    • Placer
    • Sacramento
    • San Benito
    • San Francisco
    • San Joaquin
    • San Mateo
    • Santa Clara
    • Santa Cruz
    • Shasta
    • Solano
    • Sonoma
    • Sutter
    • Yolo
    • Yuba

    For more information about the research and to sign up for the study, visit https://npi.ucanr.edu/milk.

    Story contributed by the UC Ag and Natural Resources

  • Groundwater Challenges for Small-Scale Farmers Expose Risks

    Small farms across the state may not be able to comply with groundwater regulations and stay in business, according to a new report analyzing the impact of California’s Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) on small-scale farms.

    In the first-ever assessment of small farmer consideration in California groundwater regulations, researchers at the University of California Small Farms Network and the Community Alliance with Family Farmers document the challenges facing small-scale farms with groundwater regulations.

    The report “Managing Groundwater with Small Farms in Mind: Risks, Barriers and Opportunities in the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act” (PDF) warns that farmers need an approach that helps them understand and adapt to the new regulations — while safeguarding their ability to grow food for California consumers.

    “Our state’s small-scale farmers face disproportionate risks and barriers with SGMA implementation,” said Catherine Van Dyke, director of water policy at Community Alliance with Family Farmers, a nonprofit that aims to build sustainable food and farming systems. “The future of groundwater management in California will be measured not only by hydrologic indicators but also by whether California’s agricultural communities remain viable and resilient long-term.”

    Based on three years of statewide outreach, surveys, policy document review and engagement with small farmers, the report highlights the value of small-scale farms in California’s priority water basins located in the San Joaquin Valley, Sacramento Valley, Central Coast, North Coast and Southern California regions.

    In these geographically and economically diverse regions, researchers identified farmers whose groundwater use is limited and contribution to basin-wide overdraft is minimal and therefore warrant reasonable accommodations in groundwater management policies.

    Groundwater is a hidden resource that is key to small farms’ survival. Farmers irrigate crops in winter months with surface water from the season’s snowpack that reaches streams and rivers, then in summer months from wells that draw up groundwater from aquifers.

    In 2026, groundwater will be even more critical due to climate volatility and the extremely low snowpack from the Sierra Mountains. While surface reservoirs can be filled in a season, it takes decades or longer to replenish groundwater. Serious impacts from overpumping include the surface of land sinking (subsidence), water quality problems, vulnerability to seawater intrusion and risk of more wells going dry from lowering groundwater levels.

    Although SGMA (passed in 2014) is a necessary step towards ending decades of unsustainable groundwater pumping, the research views the widespread loss of small farms as an emerging undesirable result not due exclusively to overdraft but also from lack of groundwater management tailored to the needs of small farms.

    “Many small farmers are navigating volatile markets, rising costs, labor challenges and complex regulations,” said Ngodoo Atume, SGMA small farms technical assistance coordinator with the UC Small Farms Network, a part of UC Agriculture and Natural Resources. “New groundwater restrictions and compliance costs could be the last straw, unintentionally putting these farmers at risk of going out of business because they often have fewer financial resources, less technical capacity and fewer options to adapt.”

    The report proposes 50 actionable recommendations to protect small farms while valuing these farms as part of long-term groundwater management. In addition, the authors identify four opportunities for action across state agencies:

    • Identify small-scale farmers locally
    • Coordinate and act to keep small farmers in business
    • Implement actions that support small-scale farmers in groundwater management decisions
    • Support equitable transition pathways

    Key takeaways are available for Californian communities (PDF), Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (PDF) and State Agencies (PDF).

    Report authors Catherine Van Dyke and Ngodoo Atume will present findings from the report during upcoming webinars hosted by Maven’s Notebook (August 4) and the Berkeley Food Institute (September 16).

    UC Small Farms Network and CAFF are partners of the California Department of Water Resources Underrepresented Communities, California Tribes, and Small Farmers Groundwater Technical Assistance Program, which aims to support small farms with groundwater technical assistance.

    Their report does not reflect official positions or regulatory standards applied or used by the Department of Water Resources when administering its functions under SGMA. Contact sgma@caff.org and sgma@ucanr.edu for more information on groundwater technical assistance for small farmers.

    Story contributed by the Community Alliance with Family Farmers and UC Small Farms Network