California Ag Network

Category: Non-Video

  • Western United Dairies Provides Recap on 
Stop 
QIP
 Quota 
Hearing

    Quota has been a real sensitive topic of contention over the past year for California dairy producers, and things seemed to really escalate right up to the World Ag Expo, when the United Dairy Families of California presented a five year plan to potentially terminate the California Quota Implementation Plan (QIP).  Things slowed down with the onset of the global COVID-19 pandemic, and the industry turned their attention to adapting all the changes that accompanied it.  However, following multiple attempts and petitions to order an immediate termination of QIP by a certain group of dairy producers, a quota hearing with CDFA finally occurred June 9-10th.

    Of this two-day virtual meeting, Western United Dairies’ Economist Annie AcMoody reported the following:

    The number of attendees fluctuated throughout the days, with a peak around 190 participants at one time. The total number of people who logged in at least for a little while is likely higher as people came and went during the proceeding. An Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) presided over the hearing and only he and a representative of the Attorney General’s Office were allowed to ask questions of presenters. Technical issues and background noises ranging from side conversations to lunch orders were an issue throughout the process, causing interruptions through many presentations.

    The hearing started with a presentation from Chip English (Stop QIP’s attorney) focusing on why there should be a producer referendum under Chapter 3.5. A presentation from an economist that prepared a report for them, Dr. Sundig, followed. Dr. Sundig focused on his analysis of why he thinks dairy farmers anticipated quota to go away (even before the petitions and the FMMO). The second team to take the virtual floor was Save QIP. Their attorney, Niall McCarthy, discussed the importance of quota and why a petition on Chapter 3.5 shouldn’t have any effect on the QIP. The economic consequences of eliminating quota were discussed further by an economist hired by the team, Lon Hatamiya. The third and last registered organization was United Dairy Families of California (UDFC). The group’s attorney, Megan Oliver Thompson, highlighted why a petition based on Chapter 3.5 is not the appropriate vehicle to get to an elimination of the QIP via referendum. Dino Giacomazzi, a representative of UDFC, spoke next to explain the process his organization went through, with the objective of arriving at a broad industry consensus. Most of you may recall the many meetings and surveys held last summer through early 2020 as part of this process. The three largest coops (CDI, DFA and LOL) as well as the three state trade associations (CDC, MPC and WUD) and Stop QIP actively participated in the process. As a result of the analysis and surveys, Dr. Bozic unveiled the survey–favored concept (a 5–year sunset) at the Farm Show in Tulare. Following that, UDFC sought signatures for a petition, which they delivered to the Secretary just days before the StopQIP hearing (read the announcement from the UDFC below for more details). CDFA has 90 days to verify whether the petition vas valid.

    Once organizations were done, individual commenters were allowed a maximum of 5 minutes each, which is not a very long time for such a complicated issue and when there are interruptions due to attendee muting issues. Passion and conviction were key features of dairy farmers’ testimony from both sides of the aisle. There is a lot at stake and the ten- sion was palpable during the full two–day process

    We added much information relevant to the proceedings at this link: westernuniteddairies.com/quota/ , including written statements submitted to CDFA. Now that the ALJ has heard all interested parties during the hearing and received all written statements, there is a ten–day period to file post–hearing briefs for those who requested it. After that, the ALJ will have to come to a decision on whether this should move to a producer referendum.

    California
 Dairy
 Organization
 Submits
 Quota
 Reform 
Petition
 to
 CDFA


    Dr. Marin Bozic

    The United Dairy Families of California (Dairy Families) submitted a petition to reform California’s historic quota program to the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA). The petition outlines a five–year sunset proposal, which was the result of a process that included input from hundreds of California dairy producers over several months of regional meetings. The organization facilitated an inclusive and transparent three–phase process led by Dr. Marin Bozic and Matt Gould that narrowed 11 initial reform proposals down to one. The Dairy Families’ petition calls for CDFA to bring the producer–generated idea to a referendum. “Dairy Families has worked diligently over the last year to gather input and elicit ideas from the entire producer community. We believe this petition represents the will of the dairy industry and the proper course of action would be to bring it to a vote of California Dairy Producers,” said Dairy Families Executive Committee Member Travis Kamper of Riverdale, CA. The plan would phase out the quota program over five years. The sunset plan proposes: 

    ● A Quota Implementation Plan sunset with the termination date of March 1, 2025

    ● Equalized regional quota adjusters of $1.43/cwt for all counties 

    ● A recommendation that the plan be implemented by a producer referendum.

    Dairy Families announced the sunset plan on February 11 at the Phase 4 meeting held during the World Ag Expo in Tulare, CA. The Dairy Families’ process was supported by the state’s three major dairy co–ops, California Dairies, Inc., Dairy Farmers of America, and Land O’Lakes, Inc., as well as the three trade groups, California Dairy Campaign, Milk Producers Council, and Western United Dairies. Stop QIP also participated in the process. UDFC formed in early 2019 in an effort to bring unity to an increasingly divided dairy community.

  • Dr. Beth Grafton-Cardwell to Retire – Her View on 30 Years of Citrus IPM

    Through the years I have had many collaborators and numerous technical staff studying a wide variety of pests including California red scale, citricola scale, cottony cushion scale citrus cutworm, katydids, earwigs, Fuller rose beetle, citrus peelminer, citrus leafminer, citrus thrips, citrus red mite, snails, ants, aphids and Asian citrus psyllid as well as their natural enemies. In the early years, the main controls for these pests were organophosphate (OP) and carbamate insecticides. The initial research goal was to get these replaced with more selective insecticides that would allow natural enemies to participate in pest management. We successfully documented OP resistance in California red scale and citrus thrips and developed replacement insecticides that created a more balanced situation resulting in a reduction in pesticide use (as few as 4 treatments/year in the San Joaquin Valley). But alas, citrus IPM programs must change because new situations arise. For the citrus industry, the three drivers of change in the second half of my career have been drought exacerbating some pests, export countries demanding in- field treatments for insects as a replacement for Methyl Bromide (MeBr) fumigation, and the arrival of various invasive pests. These situations have provided me ample opportunities to work with regulators and the citrus industry and challenged my creative problem-solving abilities – never a dull moment.

    It is hard to say if the past 8-9 years of higher temperatures and on and off drought conditions are a permanent ‘climate’ change or are part of a cycle. However, they have certainly made California red scale more difficult to control. Growers have shifted from treating for California red scale once every other year to treating 3-4 times per year. Extra heat units have added an extra generation of scale per year and occasionally allowed scale development in winter. My research response has been to study and provide outreach on the use of California red scale pheromone disruption as an assist to reduce insecticide treatments. I am encouraged to hear reports of some acreage going back treatments every few years for California red scale.

    Export issues with S. Korea (Fuller rose beetle and California red scale) and with Australia and New Zealand (bean thrips and mites) began to crop up in the 2010s. In the past, shipments from California would be inspected at destination and, if there were any insects or mites of phytosanitary concern, the fruit would be fumigated with MeBr. With the worldwide reduction in MeBr use, there is now the expectation that California growers apply in-field treatments to eliminate these pests so fumigation at destination is not necessary. Complete disinfestation of an orchard is impossible to achieve so we launched studies on alternative fumigants and cold treatments that could be applied in California or during transport.

    Invasive pests such as glassy-winged sharpshooter, Diaprepes root weevil, citrus leafminer, and Asian citrus psyllid have been arriving regularly into California since about 2000. In each case, I evaluated chemical and biological controls, evaluated the level of damage they could inflict and conducted outreach to prepare the citrus industry. Of course, Asian citrus psyllid has been the most significant invasive pests because of its ability to transmit the bacterium that causes the deadly disease huanglongbing. My role has been to develop control strategies for growers around the state and assist them with their psyllid management programs.

    If I had to list the top three favorite projects of my career, they would be the following:

    1. Working with colleagues to survey 13 crops around the state to see what species of predatory mites are found and developing a ‘Key to the Phytoseiid Predatory Mites of California Crops’ (submitted for publication with UC ANR).

    2. Working with cottony cushion scale and predatory vedalia beetle and figuring out how to protect the vedalia from insect growth regulators by careful timing of the application of those pesticides. This is a great example of making an incompatible insecticide compatible with a sensitive natural enemy.

      3. Directing five technicians to scout 224 commercial citrus orchards around the state and see how grower applied pesticide treatments affect the psyllid populations. The results of this project led to strong recommendations for eradication and areawide psyllid treatment programs.

      For the past 14 years, all of this was accomplished while also acting as Director of the Lindcove Research and Extension Center. That position also had challenges with hiring and directing personnel, building facilities such as a laboratory, a greenhouse and a screenhouse structure, and attracting research and extension programs to the Center. It has been very rewarding to see the Center expand its capacity and reputation.

      Finally, I couldn’t have done any of this without the amazing technical staff and collaborators that have supported my projects for many years. I will miss the challenges of this job, but I expect to dip back in when needed at Lindcove and I look forward to new life challenges as I spend more time with my family and my community. 

  • Crop Residue Decisions Affect Soil Life

    In some ways, farming is like cooking. Cooking would be much easier if we could leave the kitchen after eating and not come back until we make the next meal. But someone needs to put away the leftovers, do the dishes, and clean up the table.

    Similarly, there’s work to do in farm fields after harvest and before planting the next spring.

    After harvest in the fall, farmers take the harvested crops to market or store them on their farm. They don’t take the whole plant from the field, though.

    The leftover parts of the plant, like the stalk and leaves from corn, remain in the field. This debris is called crop residue.

    Using no-till and prescribed fire management are two potential ways to manage crop residue. Both practices help keep organic matter and nitrogen in the soil. However, research was needed to understand how these two practices can affect long-term soil health.

    Lisa Fultz and her team want to help farmers determine the best way to manage their residue between growing seasons. To do this, her team decided to learn more about how no-till and prescribed fire management affect nutrients and microbes in the soil. Fultz is a researcher at Louisiana State University AgCenter.

    No-till is a practice where farmers plant directly into the crop debris from the previous year. Prescribed fires are used to purposely burn off the previous crop debris with controlled fire. “Both of these practices have minimal physical disturbance to the soil,” says Fultz.

    Both of these practices also come with drawbacks. No-till can cause poor conditions for crop growth like low spring temperatures and increased moisture, which promotes disease. Prescribed fire can leave bare soil vulnerable to erosion.

    The team focused the research on wheat and soybean rotations and continuous corn production systems. “These are common practices not only in the mid-south, but across many areas of the world,” explains Fultz.

    “Wheat and corn production leave behind residue,” she says. “Common practices, like conventional tillage, are highly disruptive. The need to identify viable conservation practices is growing in importance.”

    Crop residue and its degradation by soil microbes is an important part of the carbon cycle. Plants store carbon during the growing season, then microbes use the plant residue for food. The carbon then gets stored in the soil in a chemically stable form.

    “Fresh, green material in no-till fields is easy to breakdown and provides rich nutrients for soil microbes,” says Fultz. “Ash from burned residue is more chemically stable, but it doesn’t provide a nutrient source for microbes.”

    The team found that impacts from crop management practices, like crop rotation or fertilization, outweighed the influence of prescribed fire for residue management. Researchers found some decreases in microbial activity after yearly prescribed burns.

    Findings show prescribed fire had some possible short-term benefits for soil nutrient availability, but timing is crucial. Prescribed burning of wheat residue provided an increase of nitrogen for about 7 days. These benefits should be weighed against other possible impacts, like carbon dioxide production and crop yield.

    We still need to learn the long-term influence of prescribed fire on the soil biological community,” says Fultz. “While short-term impacts were measured, the long-term influence on soil nutrients, biological cycles and soil health are not known.”

    No two farm management systems are the same, and their success is defined by the user. Scientists continue to examine possible scenarios to provide accurate and sustainable recommendations to farmers.

    “I have always been interested in soil conservation and the potential it has to impact many facets of life,” says Fultz. “By improving soil health, we can improve air and water quality, store carbon, and provide stable resources for food production.”

    Read more about this work in Agrosystems, Geosciences & Environment. This research is supported by the Soybean and Forage Grain Research and Promotion Board.

    American Society of Agronomy, Soil Science Society of America, Crop Science Society of America: Collectively, these Societies represent more than 12,000 individual members around the world. The scientists’ memberships build collaborating partnerships in the agronomy, crops, and soils science fields for the advancement of knowledge.

  • Winery Employs New Strategy, Promotions to Adjust to Shifting Consumer Needs

    Fresno State Winery business and marketing manager Kevin Smith knows student-produced products have a special place in the hearts of Central Valley consumers, and he is finding ways to continue to serve the community during the national economic downturn.

    Since the COVID-19 pandemic’s changes to restaurant and store access, Smith sensed consumer needs were quickly changing so he created a host of new winery promotions. Shoppers have enjoyed $5 in-state shipping for any size purchase since then, as well as sales of up to 30% off on many favorite wines.

    While his wholesale wine sales have dropped by about 30%, direct sales have increased by about 500% as consumers have turned to shopping online. Not surprisingly, both promotions will continue indefinitely while supplies last.

    That shift has meant that about 90% of sales in recent months have come from direct orders over the phone or via the winery website, compared to the past, when 90% came from wholesale orders from stores and restaurants.

    “If you’re a wine consumer this is a great time,” Smith said. “There’s a lot of competition to deliver wine to your doorstep, or to other people as gifts, which is a big part of the market. We have spent much more attention on our website, social media and wine clubs to make it easier to shop and relate what makes us special.”

    The campus winery has previously relied largely on in-person sales on campus at the Gibson Farm Market; nearby off-campus outlets Save Mart Supermarket, Trader Joe’s, Costco and the Meat Market in Clovis; and other large wine and alcohol industry stores like BevMo and Total Wine. However, those off-campus relationships take time to nurture and order sizes can fluctuate based on space availability and competition.

    “The past few months can help smaller wineries that have strong ties to their customers and can ship directly to them, affordably,” Smith said. “The wine business has always been competitive, but we’re starting to see fewer buying channels, and retailers are a little more anxious to see their product move quicker. Some have turned to the larger conglomerates to fill larger parts of their selection, and rely less on smaller businesses, just like other parts of the economy.”

    The pandemic has not slowed production at the campus winery this spring, which has added new personal safety and social distancing measures. Students from the Viticulture and Enology Department have helped bottle 6,000 cases of 24 different varieties of wine over the course of four bottling dates this spring.

    Later this summer, the winery expects to do its first-ever canning of its Tailgate Red, White and Rosé series. The 12.6-ounce cans (375 milliliters) are about half the size of most bottles of wine, and will be available at the Gibson Farm Market and at Fresno State athletic events when they resume.

    The campus winery’s recent adaptations are also a credit to the arrival of Fresno State alumnus Tom Montgomery as its winemaker in August 2017. Thanks to his nearly 40 years of experience and connections with nationally-respected vineyards, the winery has expanded its line with vintages featuring grapes from other high-profile growing regions.

    Recent noteworthy Fresno State bottlings have included its Zinfandel from Napa Valley, Chardonnay from the Sonoma area, Sauvignon Blanc from the Russian River Valley, Sergeant Zinfandel from the Amador Valley and Petit Verdot and Petite Syrah from Contra Costa County.

    The remaining varieties of the 22 wines currently available are largely familiar. Nearly 60 percent of the winery’s fruit is sourced from the 120-acre campus vineyard, as well as from nearby Papagni, Saviez and Toca Madera vineyards.

    The Fresno State Winery, which opened in 1999, is a labor of love for students, staff, faculty and alumni who take pride in being a part of the first winery on a college campus, and still the largest.

    Its main mission is to encourage students to get hands-on training in all phases of processing, sales and marketing through classes and volunteer opportunities. A full-time intern, senior enology student Brenna Pratt is assisting Montgomery, and other part-time students like enology senior John Skrip help throughout the year.

    On the sales and marketing side, recent agricultural business graduate Natasha Milanez just finished her third year as a student assistant. Her lengthy job description includes helping manage orders and shipping; overseeing the website and wine club; confirming inventory; coordinating other clerical work and logistics; and assisting on wine processing days.

    Virtual classes have kept most other students at home since late March, but the Dinuba resident has still made the hour-long drive to work on campus every weekday. She plans on working full-time through mid-August to help manage the increased sales and keep the operation running smoothly.

    Among the recent promotions, she noted that many customers have taken advantage of the curbside pick-up option with their online orders. She also created and coordinated a multi-case delivery to her hometown through a local Facebook group page post.

    “I didn’t know much about wineries before I started,” Milanez said, “but I’ve picked up a lot of great skills, and I hope to do something similar for a career. One of the most enjoyable parts of the job is customer service. I know it’s not the favorite part of the job for some people, yet that’s how you develop your professionalism. Just like our customers, I’ve created a lot of friendships that are tied to our products, the campus and our staff. I want to leave a legacy that people will remember.”

    Smith, now in his seventh year with the winery, also enjoys that personal connection with customers and students, and is a three-time Fresno State graduate himself, with an MBA degree, a linguistics master’s degree and an economics bachelor’s degree.

    When the economy eventually improves, he anticipates recent consumer behavior might remain. Closer customer relationships can be maintained through social media and websites, while the winery would also have more direct data to better understand buyer preferences for future planning.

    “When you visit a website you can be drawn into the storytelling process, learn about the winery’s history and take in images of the vineyards and its operation,” Smith said. “Those aren’t things you see in a crowded store aisle when customers are more focused on prices and label designs. In the end, all businesses have to be ready to change, sometimes drastically during market disruptions, and how quickly you can adjust separates the leaders from the followers. Besides preparing tomorrow’s winemakers, our other main goal is to better connect with our customers and make the purchasing process easier and more fulfilling.”

  • Getting the Facts Straight About Dairy’s Global Carbon Footprint

    The following article was written in response to a recent report released by the Institute for Agriculture & Trade Policy — The dairy sector is committed to producing nutritious foods in environmentally sound and responsible ways.  As such, we welcome any opportunity to further the dialogue about solutions to climate change and creating a sustainable future for everyone. However, this report, while interesting, contains several inaccuracies and as such does not reflect the reality of the dairy sector.

    Environmental Impact

    Globally, all of agriculture accounts for 24% of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and within that dairy is responsible for 2.7%.  While the dairy sector is committed to sustainable development and decreasing our rate of emissions even further, this 2.7%  emissions rate must be put into the context of emissions from other sectors, such as energy – 25%, business – 21% and transport – 14%. Especially when considering the positive impact dairy has on livelihoods and nutrition.

    One of the key claims in this report is that the top 13 global dairy companies saw an 11% increase in GHG emissions between 2015 and 2017. This is misleading, as much of the increase can be accounted for by mergers and acquisitions by those companies. Annex 1 in the report even confirms this is simply an accounting change, and these are not new emissions.

    The United Nations (UN) Food and Agriculture Organization’s (FAO) 2019 report, “Climate Change and the Global Dairy Sector,” was referenced. Key information about that report was left out, including the fact that it was multi-stakeholder study written by FAO. FAO found that between 2005-2015, milk production increased 30% globally in order to meet growing consumer demand. Absolute emissions rose 18% and emissions per unit of product declined by 11%. Without improvements made by the sector, FAO noted that total emissions from dairy would have increased by nearly 38% globally over this period to deliver the same amount of product.

    The global dairy sector takes its environmental responsibilities seriously and has a number of programs in place including the Declaration of Rotterdam and the Dairy Sustainability Framework  to support increased knowledge, implementation of practices and progress measurement against  sustainability challenges.

    Sustainability

    In using terms like sustainability, a clear definition is essential. The UN determines sustainability must be based on three pillars: economic, social and environmental.

    The dairy sector helps to feed the world delivering vital nutrition in the form of high-quality protein and essential vitamins and minerals. Globally, dairy provides 5% of energy, 10% of protein and 9% of fat in the diet, as well as providing vital nutrients like calcium, iodine, B vitamins, zinc and phosphorus.

    This rich nutrition helps populations, particularly in developing nations, avoid malnutrition and poor health outcomes. Any food system which fails to deliver high-quality nutrition is one which is itself, unsustainable.

    Dairy provides for the livelihoods of 1 billion people worldwide: 600 million people living on dairy farms and a further 400 million relying on the full-time jobs created in support of the sector. There are 133 million dairy farms around the world, and 37 million of them are led by women. A sustainable dairy industry must also be one which provides a livelihood to farmers, processors and all others along the supply chain. If farmers were always paid below the cost of production as implied in this report, put simply – the industry would not exist, and production would not be increasing.

    Dairy Economics 

    Globally, the dairy sector is incredibly diverse, with only 0.3% of all farms having more than 100 cows. In fact, the average herd size for a dairy farm is 3 cows. It’s also important to note that the majority of milk globally is processed through co-operatives, which are owned by and run in the interests of farmers.

    A one-size-fits-all farming system cannot be implemented worldwide. Each type of farming system has its place and irrespective of size, if managed well can be efficient and drive sustainability. It cannot be assumed that smaller scale farming is more efficient and is somehow better at delivering sustainability improvements or economic returns. There is no correlation between scale of production unit, either at the farm or processor level, and environmental impact assessed per unit of production. This is determined by the quality of the equipment used and the management.

    Larger businesses achieve economies of scale in many ways including on GHG emissions, as there is greater use of technology.

    This report seems to argue against international trade in dairy products. However, international trade ensures consumers in countries that are not self-sufficient can access the nutrition they need. The alternative would be either higher food prices or lower nutrient intake.

    The dumping of milk in response to COVID-19 in some regions was a temporary phenomenon in response to extraordinary market disruption caused by the pandemic, the likes of which the world has not seen in a century. This can’t be used to provide any valuable insight into how the industry should operate long term and does a disservice to the dairy sector which continued in extremely difficult circumstances to provide highly nutritious food for the global population.

    It’s very easy to put out a report that criticizes and tries to paint a simple picture of a sector which doesn’t contain all of the nuances or realities of how the global dairy sector nourishes the world with nutrient-rich, safe foods and does so in a manner that strives for continued environmental improvements while providing livelihoods to a large percentage of the world’s population. —Dr. Judith Bryans, President of the International Dairy Federation, and Donald Moore, Executive Director, Global Dairy Platform

  • CA Winery Tasting Rooms Begin to Reopen in Time for Summer Sipping

    California wine lovers have good reason to raise their glasses; on June 12, wineries were given the green light by the state to reopen their tasting rooms to visitors in approved counties. Tasting room experiences will look a bit different this summer, but California wine country’s natural beauty and world-class wines are as spectacular as ever.

    Protecting the health and safety of their visitors and employees is a top priority for California vintners. Wineries have implemented stringent cleaning and sanitation protocols as well as employee wellness screenings and the use of face coverings among other practices.

    Visitors can expect to see several changes during their next California wine country excursion:

    • Visitor flow will be monitored. Vintners are limiting the number of guests who are allowed to visit at any one time. This helps wineries maintain physical distancing and creates a more intimate atmosphere for guests. They are also limiting group sizes.

    • Tables are spaced to meet the six-foot physical distancing requirements and give visitors plenty of room to relax and enjoy the experience.

    • Tastings are moving outdoors. California wine country is known for its gorgeous vineyards and beautiful winery estates, so it’s a great time to get outside and enjoy the views. Many wineries have moved tables outside to ensure proper spacing between tables or are offering outdoor-only tastings. Some are also featuring fresh-air activities such as private vineyard hikes and curated picnics. Check winery websites or call ahead for the latest offerings.

    • Tours have gone private. Wineries are limiting tour groups to members of the same household, so different parties will not be mixed together. This results in a more personalized experience for participants.

    • Masks are in fashion. Guests are asked to wear face coverings while checking in or when coming within six feet of winery staff and other guests. Masks are generally not required while seated or tasting.

    • Reservations are highly encouraged. To help control the flow of visitors, wineries are asking guests to book tasting appointments. Calling ahead also gives visitors the opportunity to find out about any special tastings or experiences the winery is offering. Guests should also check with wineries in advance for county-specific requirements. As always, please stay home and reschedule your visit if you or anyone in your party is unwell.

    If you can’t make it to a California winery this summer, many wineries are also continuing to offer virtual tastings and experiences which can be found at discovercaliforniawines.com. You can also recreate the experience at home with  Wine Country Table: With Recipes that Celebrate California’s Sustainable Harvest.

    Established in 1934, Wine Institute is the public policy advocacy group of more than 1,000 California wineries and affiliated businesses that initiates and advocates state, federal and international public policy to enhance the environment for the responsible production, consumption and enjoyment of wine. The organization works to enhance the economic and environmental health of the state through its leadership in sustainable winegrowing and a partnership with Visit California to showcase California’s wine and food offerings and the state as a top travel destination.

  • Reusing Chicken Litter Shows Benefits

    Chicken is the most consumed protein in the United States. According to the National Chicken Council, the U.S. produced more than 9.2 billion broiler chickens in 2019. US consumers spent more than 95 billion dollars on chicken products.

    All these broilers – chickens raised for meat – need millions of tons of litter, or bedding material. Reusing chicken litter can save costs. There exists some health and safety concerns though.

    A new study shows that the environment in reused poultry litter can deter growth of pathogens like Salmonella.

    “When you read or hear that broiler litter is reused to raise multiple flocks of chickens, the typical reaction is that it must be bad for food safety,” says Adelumola Oladeinde, a co-author of the recent study. “Our study demonstrates the exact opposite.”

    Oladeinde is a researcher at the USDA’s National Poultry Research Center in Athens. He and his colleagues found that ‘good’ bacteria in used poultry litter can hinder Salmonella growth.

    “It may be worthwhile to invest time and resources to characterize the bacteria in reused litter,” says Oladeinde. “We can develop the promising ones into beneficial microbes for better chicken gut health.”

    The study also explored litter characteristics, such as moisture and ammonia levels. These characteristics can dramatically affect the litter microbiome – the mix of bacteria, fungi, and viruses in litter.

    “Our findings provide new information on the relationship between the physical environment of broiler litter and its microbiome,” says Oladeinde. “Management techniques that account for both factors may help reduce Salmonella in chickens.”

    Chicken litter plays a big role in determining broiler health. After a broiler chick gets to a farm, it usually spends the next several weeks pecking and living on litter.

    In fact, chicks begin to eat litter even before eating from feeding troughs or drinking. The microbiome present in the litter likely become the ‘first settlers’ in the guts of the chicks.

    “These first microbes play a key role in determining gut health,” says Oladeinde. “Therefore, it is critical to determine what a beneficial litter microbiome looks like.”

    The team collected samples of reused poultry litter from the University of Georgia Poultry Research Center. The litter was used to raise three flocks of broiler chickens under conditions like those used in broiler farms. “Each sample represents a unique broiler litter environment,” says Oladeinde.

    In the lab, researchers measured characteristics of the litter samples. Then they added Salmonella to each sample. After that, the samples were tested for levels of Salmonella, other bacteria, and physical characteristics.

    Within two weeks of adding Salmonella, most samples developed predictable microbiomes. Certain microbes, such as Nocardiopsis bacteria, seemed to reduce growth of Salmonella.

    That makes sense, according to Oladeinde. Some species of Nocardiopsis bacteria are known to produce antibiotics and toxins. These compounds could be keeping Salmonella levels low in the litter samples.

    A key aspect of reusing broiler litter is how long to wait before reuse. This waiting period is called litter downtime.

    “For farmers, a shorter downtime will result in growing more birds through the year,” says Oladeinde. However, we know little about how downtime affects litter microbiome.

    Results from the study show that surveying levels of specific bacteria could help determine if litters have had enough downtime. That could be of big help to farmers.

    “Poultry litter is a complex environment to study,” says Oladeinde. “We showed that the reused litter after two weeks of downtime had a microbiome that was unfavorable to Salmonella.”

    Oladeinde aims to repeat these experiments with litter from various sources. He also wants to test for multiple Salmonella strains. “These studies will tell us about the underlying mechanisms behind reusing litter and reducing Salmonella,” he says.

    Read more about this research in Journal of Environmental Quality. This work was funded by the United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service.

  • NIFA Invests $4.8 Million to Train Ag Workforce Through Community Colleges

    Today, the National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) announced an investment of $4.8 million to support 12 projects that will offer workforce training by community colleges. These awards are made possible through the Agricultural and Food Research Initiative’s (AFRI) Agricultural Workforce Training program priority area. This is the first time that the NIFA has specifically targeted community colleges to increase training opportunities for the food and agricultural workforce sector.

    “Community colleges provide substantial workforce development throughout the nation,” said NIFA Director Scott Angle. “These awards will lead to workers earning a two-year degree or an industry-accepted credential, which will open better job opportunities in the food and agricultural sector.”

    The 12 awardees were selected from over 30 applications after and evaluated by a peer panel knowledgeable about both community colleges and workforce training. “The community colleges and cooperating Institutions range geographically from Rhode Island to Hawaii,” said Angle. “Training subject areas include improving worker skills in nursery production, pesticide application, aquaponics, hydraulic systems, leadership for workers in rural areas, and more.” While diverse in geography and subject matter, the successful projects have three things in common:

    1. Projects must result in needed workforce training at community colleges;
    2. Projects must provide experiential learning opportunities that allow students more time working in job simulation or ‘on-the-job’ training environments; and
    3. Trainees must either receive a two-year degree or an industry recognized credential that will improve their skillset and employability.

    The twelve organizations receiving the awards are:

    West Hills Community College; Coalinga, California – $500,000
    Dakota College at Bottineau; Bottineau, North Dakota – $500,000
    Virginia Cooperative Extension, Virginia Tech University; Blacksburg, Virginia – $500,000
    Michigan State University; East Lansing, Michigan – $499,999
    South Central College; North Mankato, Minnesota – $499,657
    Rhode Island Nursery and Landscape Institute; Kingston; Rhode Island – $499,654
    University of Hawaii Systems; Kahului, Hawaii – $498,759
    Cornell University; Ithaca, New York – $495,799
    Bismarck State College; Bismarck, North Dakota – $458,839
    Chemeketa Community College; Salem, Oregon – $273,295
    Pittsburg State University; Pittsburg, Kansas – $95,254
    Northeast Wisconsin Technical College, Green Bay, Wisconsin – $24,897

    Award grant details can be found on NIFA’s website.

    NIFA’s mission is to invest in and advance agricultural research, education, and extension to solve societal challenges. NIFA’s investments in transformative science directly support the long-term prosperity and global preeminence of U.S. agriculture. To learn more about NIFA’s impact on agricultural science, visit https://nifa.usda.gov/impacts, sign up for email updates or follow us on Twitter @USDA_NIFA, #NIFAimpacts.

  • Western Plant Materials Centers Working for Butterfly Conservation

    June is national pollinator month and a great time to recognize the importance of pollinators.  NRCS has numerous programs and conservation practices to benefit habitat for many pollinators, including honeybees, native bees, butterflies and other pollinators.  To best support the creation and management of butterfly habitat, it’s important to understand the special needs of butterflies. Plant Materials Centers (PMCs) in western states are actively studying butterfly habitat development practices and producing useful tools for NRCS field offices regarding butterfly conservation.

    Instead of having bee mouth parts, adult butterflies feed on nectar using a long straw-like tube called a proboscis.  For this reason, any pollinator habitat created with butterflies in mind, needs to include a suite of flowers known to produce nectar and not just pollen.  Western PMCs have developed a number of resources to help guide field offices in butterfly habitat design such as Idaho Plant Materials Technical Note 71: Monarch Butterfly Habitat: Development and Maintenance and Idaho Plant Materials Technical Note 73: Creation and Management of Utah Butterfly Habitat.

    Numerous butterfly species may soon warrant listing as a threatened or endangered species not only because plants for adults are less available, but also because host plant populations for larvae (caterpillars) are diminishing.  NRCS PMCs are directing their expertise to better understanding the production, establishment, and promotion of those plants critical to all stages in the life cycles of western butterflies.

    Monarch butterflies, for example, are perhaps the most iconic insect in North America; however, this species faces severe challenges.  Experts predict that Western monarch numbers have been steadily and dramatically decreasing since the 1980’s.  One of the factors linked to monarch declines is the reduction of available milkweed (Asclepias spp.) populations.  Adult monarchs will only lay eggs on milkweed plants, which comprise the sole food source for the developing larva.


    PMCs in California, Oregon, Montana and Idaho have been studying milkweed to determine best practices for habitat restoration and management.  The Aberdeen PMC in Idaho is investigating the propagation of milkweed via root or rhizome cuttings.  They have found that root cuttings of showy milkweed (A. speciosa) as small as 1/8” diameter can produce new plants.  This technique may provide an effective method to establish milkweed in native habitats as well as, home flower gardens.  Aberdeen PMC staff are conducting field burning treatments as part of a study investigating milkweed management for monarch butterfly habitat. Likewise, the Corvallis, Oregon and Lockeford, California PMCs are studying practices to establish and manage milkweed species in seed mixtures to produce optimum monarch habitat.  In Montana, the Bridger PMC worked collaboratively with the Teller Wildlife Refuge, Pheasants Forever, NRCS Hamilton Field Office, and the Montana State University Ag Experimental Station to establish a milkweed and pollinator planting to evaluate different milkweed planting methods.


    A further group of western butterflies that are threatened due to host plant population losses are the silverspots or fritillaries.  These beautiful checkered butterflies rely on violets (Viola spp.) to produce their offspring.  The Corvallis and Aberdeen PMCs are studying methods of violet seed and plant production to aid conservation efforts in critical habitats. In Corvallis, they published findings on practical solutions for seed production of early blue violet (V. adunca), while scientists at Aberdeen have begun investigating propagation and seed production of northern bog violet (V. nephrophylla).

    In addition to these specific activities, PMCs have developed several publications outlining management practices and species appropriate for butterfly habitat in the many ecoregions of the western states.  For more information, visit the website of the PMC in your area.

  • Stinknet is Spreading in Southern California

    Stinknet (Oncosiphon piluliferum, aka globe chamomile) is a winter annual that is spreading across Southern California and poses threats to wildlands, rangelands and agricultural areas. Stinknet was first found in western Riverside County in the early 1980’s. It slowly spread to surrounding areas and by the late 1990’s it was found in over a half dozen locations in Riverside and San Diego Counties. By this time, it had also spread to Phoenix. While stinknet has not been one of the fastest weeds to spread across the state (stinkwort, Dittrichia graveolens, is definitely a top contender for that spot, see here) it is now currently found in every county in Southern California (except Imperial, yet) with the largest infestations in Riverside and San Diego Counties. Stinknet continues to spread north across Los Angeles, the central valley and coast, and east across Arizona, it was also recently found in Las Vegas.  

    Identification

    Stinknet is easiest to identify when in flower. At flowering, it grows from several inches to 3 feet tall.

    Stinknet in full flower (Image credit: Chris McDonald)
    A closeup of stinknet flowers (Image Credit: Chris McDonald)

    Stinknet is closely related to the pineapple weeds (Matricaria spp., see here) and brass buttons (Cotula spp. see here and here), and resembles those more common weeds. The main difference is the flower of stinknet is very round, like a globe, (see above) while the flowers of pineapple weed and brass buttons tend to be slightly conical to half a sphere.

    Brass buttons (Cotula coronopifilia Image credit: Carol Witham)

    Pineapple weed and brass buttons also tend to grow more along the ground, and stinknet grows upright. Another diagnostic feature is that stinknet stinks. All plant parts have an unpleasant turpentine, pine or tar-like smell, and even very small plants have this smell. You can even smell the odor of a large field of stinknet when you are near a very large infestation.

    Successful Control Options

    Stinknet can be controlled with several herbicides that can be used in wildlands. Milestone (aminopyralid), Capstone (aminopyralid and triclopyr) and glyphosate are all highly effective at controlling stinknet, but only before the plants have flowered. Often if herbicides are applied after flowering, stinknet can finish flowering before the herbicides have killed the plant. Milestone and Capstone also provide season-long control of stinknet with suppression lasting up to and in some cases beyond 12 months. Several researchers, including myself, are working on other control measures and understanding its biology to better help managers control stinknet. Those projects should wrap up in the next year or two.

    What doesn’t work well at controlling stinknet? 

    Telar XP (chlorsulfuron) was not effective at controlling stinknet in Southern California. Transline (clopyralid) was inconsistent at controlling stinknet. Transline had shown promise of effective control in relatively dry years, but in other more wet years the treated plants were able to grow out of the treatment. Mechanical removal (mowing or string trimmers) has shown to be of limited effectiveness, mostly because the cut plants resprout and flower closer to the ground. Multiple cuttings close to the ground alleviate this problem and can provide good control, but a simple single cutting is not very effective. Stinkent can grow in dense patches so hand pulling will only work on a very small scale, and multiple sessions are needed. Stinknet is not palatable to livestock, so grazing will not be an effective management strategy and can make the problem worse.

    Threats to California Agriculture

    In Western Australia, stinknet is a problem weed in small grain crops. In both South Africa (the home range of stinknet) and Austrailia stinknet is a problem weed in rangelands too. This is because stinknet is unpalatable to many livestock. While stinknet is not currently known to be toxic, there are reports it can taint the meat and milk from those animals. If the patterns in Australia and South Africa hold in the US (and so far in a few observed cases it appears to be similar) and if stinknet continues to spread into rangelands and agricultural areas in California, then it will cause problems.

    EDRR

    Right now, the best way to keep stinknet from spreading locally in California is to identify early infestations and rapidly respond to those initial infestations. This strategy is called early detection and rapid response (EDRR). Fortunately, the largest stinknet populations are found in only a few locations in Riverside, San Bernardino and San Diego Counties. However, numerous small populations occur across Southern California. I have also noticed that very few stinknet patches decline in size, once stinknet colonizes a site it tends to expand, or even hold its ground during a drought. The areas with the earliest known stinknet populations, in both California and Arizona, now have large, very high-density patches. Those patches can be over a dozen and up to hundreds of acres in extent. Stinknet appears to be a strong competitor especially in disturbed areas, but also in undisturbed wildlands too, and can quickly become the dominant plant. It does this by creating numerous small patches and as those patches grow, they form large blankets carpeting acres or long strips along roads and trails. Stopping those small stinknet patches can prevent them from turning into large infestations.

    More information on stinknet will be available as our research progresses and we learn more about its biology, spread and controlling it. — By Chris McDonald, UCANR