Watch this brief interview with UC Cooperative Extension Specialist Ashraf El-kereamy as he discusses the performance of table grape varieties from trials with new nematode resistant and salt tolerant rootstocks. Read more in American Vineyard Magazine.
Please thank this video’s sponsor Suterra for their industry support.
UC Cooperative Extension and UC Davis will host a Healthy Soils Program field meeting on compost on Thursday, July 28th from 10:00am to 11:30am. The meeting will take place off of S. Landi Road, on Roberts Island in the Delta. Presentation topics include how to acquire compost, different types of compost, how compost can improve soil health and mitigate greenhouse gas emissions, and how to apply for cost-share funding. The meeting location is where we are trialing different rates of green waste compost application for potential soil health and alfalfa yield benefits. Preliminary results will be described. Attendance is free, and registration is not required. Continuing education credits will be offered (CCA and N management applications pending). The agenda is pasted below, and a downloadable version is attached. The UC Cooperative Extension programming appreciates your interest, and looks forward to connecting with you later this month!
Agenda
Work continues at the mechanical pruning trial site in Red Bluff. The trial, funded by the California Prune Board and led by Dr. Rich Rosecrance at Chico State, was initiated in 2019 and aims to identify lower cost pruning alternatives for growers without compromising yield or fruit quality. The study site is an orchard planted in 2011 at a spacing of 15’ x 18’ on Myrobalan seedling rootstock and irrigated with buried drip. This is a vigorous, well managed orchard with a history of producing 4-5 dry ton/acre. The study treatments are:
1. Fall: Grower standard — ladders and loppers pruning, no topping (i.e. ‘control’).
2. Spring: Topping and hedging both ways — cutting 5 sides of the canopy, with the tree row and across the tree row, plus topping (i.e. ‘boxed’).
3. Fall: Topping and hedging both ways — cutting 5 sides of the canopy, with the tree row and across the tree row, plus topping (i.e. ‘boxed’).
4. Spring: Hedging both sides of the tree row, no cross hedging — cutting 2 sides of the canopy, no topping (i.e. ‘hedged’).
5. Fall: Hedging both sides of the tree row, no cross hedging — cutting 2 sides of the canopy, no topping (i.e. ‘hedged’).
Several measurements are collected annually to assess the effects of the pruning treatments. Highlights of 2021 results and planned 2022 measurements include:
– Canopy volume was measured in May 2021. Trees boxed in spring were significantly smaller than the hand-pruned control. Trees boxed in fall or hedged in fall or spring did not differ significantly from the control.
– A bark canker pathogen survey (Cytospora, Botryosphaeria, etc.) was conducted to establish a baseline of pathogens present in the field. Several canker pathogens were found, and the control treatment had the shortest canker length. A more thorough evaluation of disease presence and severity will be performed in 2022.
– In 2021, a difference in severity of sunburn damage after extreme heat events was observed. The boxed treatments both had significantly less blue prune drop due to sunburn damage than the control or hedged treatments. This was surprising – fruit is typically exposed to higher light environments in the boxed trees. Though there is no definitive cause at the moment, it may be possible that bowing branches in the hedged treatments or reduced water stress in boxed trees due to smaller canopy size may have contributed. We will continue to assess these differences.
– 2021 treatment yields ranged between 3.0 and 4.3 dry ton marketable (A+B screens) yield per acre and no significant differences were found among the treatments in 2021 nor in cumulative yields (Table 1). Large fruit (A + B screens) comprised between 92% and 100% of the four-pound sample from all the treatments (Table 1). The spring hedged treatment did have significantly lower percentage of marketable (A+B screen) fruit than the control and fall boxed treatments.
— By Becky Wheeler-Dykes (Orchard Researcher, CSU Chico), Dr. Rich Rosecrance (Professor, College of Agriculture, CSU Chico), Luke Milliron (UCCE Farm Advisor Butte, Tehama & Glenn Counties), and Franz Niederholzer (UCCE Farm Advisor, Colusa & Sutter/Yuba Counties)
Public Policy Institute of California — California’s farmers are struggling to irrigate their crops during the current severe drought. At the same time, they’re in the early days of a major longer-term transition that will see them using less water overall to safeguard the long-term availability of groundwater, under the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). A significant amount of irrigated farmland in the Central Valley—including many fruit and nut trees—will need to come out of production over the next two decades to help bring local groundwater basins into balance. This fallowing will have both environmental and economic consequences. Converting formerly irrigated farmland into rangeland—one of its historical uses—is one possible alternative to fallowing. It would keep the land economically productive, and the transition might bring other benefits—including avoiding some of the negative consequences of fallowing.
We spoke with two experts about converting former orchards back into rangeland: University of California Cooperative Extension (UCCE) farm advisor Theresa Becchetti and UCCE county director and natural resources advisor Fadzayi Mashiri, who work in Stanislaus, Merced, and Mariposa Counties. They made it clear that establishing functioning rangelands on these lands will require coordination, complex decision-making, and concerted investment.
Will ranchers be interested in grazing their animals on fallowed orchards? What would be the consequences of such a transition?
Theresa Becchetti: There would definitely be interest in that. The Central Valley has a shortage of grazing lands available, and it gets competitive to find a lease. If there’s an opportunity, people will be waiting to fill it.
Fadzayi Mashiri: The downside is that growers will lose the high economic returns that come from almonds and other orchard crops. These production systems offer as much as 10 times more economic returns than rangelands. But if the alternative is fallow, then rangelands have several upsides. They support more plant diversity, which is really important, especially when talking about mitigating climate change and ecosystem function and stability. Rangelands also offer habitat for wildlife and impact hydrology. Our research shows that conventional almond orchard management can lead to soil compaction, which means less water infiltration rates into the soil.
What are some constraints to establishing functional rangeland on formerly irrigated cropland?
TB: For the land manager, the big thing is cost. If it’s trees, there’s the cost of pulling out those trees, chipping and hauling them offsite, or keeping them on-site. There’s the cost of removing all that black plastic drip irrigation tape. There are infrastructure costs: interior fencing would have been pulled out. Perimeter fences would likely need to be rebuilt. And you’d need to replace water troughs—they’ve all been removed from orchards. The land will probably need some inputs to give it more plant diversity and livestock forage options. One advantage is that orchards have gotten rid of one invasive grass that’s predominant on rangelands: Medusahead grass. So we could start from a cleaner slate.
FM: For ecologists, the issue is ecosystem integrity. We expect certain functions from rangelands, like plant diversity, water infiltration, and wildlife habitat. If orchards transition to rangelands, will we get those functions back? If so, at what level and how fast? We’ll definitely have to replant and add more species. We may not have the native grasses rangelands did historically, but we’d bring them closer to that by making sure diverse plant groups are represented.
Are environmental regulations—which are intended to protect the integrity of ecosystems—hampering important land use transitions?
TB: To me it’s not necessarily so much about regulations as policy. For example, for carbon-smart agriculture programs, the policy requires native perennial grasses on rangelands. But I’ve tried to plant natives and have not been successful—we just don’t get enough precipitation. I don’t think we can get back to perennials, even with a lot of inputs and herbicides. Policy changes that would allow more flexibility might help.
FM: We have to really pay attention to the intended use and select plant species that can meet it. We need to add enough diversity, including nitrogen-fixing plants, deep-rooted perennials, and annual plants that are adapted to the area. That diversity will prevent soil erosion, build soil carbon, and build ecosystem stability in the areas that we’re trying to restore.
What could make the transition from irrigated farmland to rangelands easier?
TB: We need to work on paying for things like wildlife habitat and plant diversity; that will help level the playing field a little bit. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has some incentives: if you manage transitioning land with seeding, rotational grazing, etc. to increase wildlife habitat and plant diversity, you can get a payment for Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP), but payments are not equivalent to profit from orchards. Are there opportunities for other payments for ecosystem services?
What’s the big picture takeaway?
FM: Landscape-level planning and climate-smart management strategies are needed because all these landscapes, although under the different land uses, are connected. Currently, we’re headed in the wrong direction. One piece of well-managed land will not help under these climatic conditions—we need more coordinated, integrated, and holistic efforts.
—By Caitlin Peterson, Public Policy Institute of California
Growers are excited to be gathering back in-person for the 56th annual Sweetpotato meeting held by the UC Cooperative Extension in the UCCE Classroom at 2145 Wardrobe Ave. in Merced, CA. The Sweetpotato Council of California will also be holding their business meeting right after. Due to current Covid rules, face masks will be required to be worn throughout the meeting. Attendees are invited to come and sign in at 7:30 a.m. and enjoy some coffee and Jantz Sweetpotato muffins. The meeting with end at noon with lunch. Presenters will include: UCCE Farm Advisor Scott Stoddard, Assistant Merced County Ag Commissioner Sean Runyon, Brian Hegland from Teleos Ag Solutions, Jill Silverman Hough from the Sweet Potato Council of California, Robert Drozdowski from AgriControl Technologies, and Darren Barfield from the Sweet Potato Council. DPR and CCA Continuing Education Credits have been requested. Click HERE for the full agenda.
The Napa Valley Farmworker Foundation (FWF) and Napa Valley Grapegrowers (NVG) are partnering with the University of California Cooperative Extension (UCCE) on a farmworker-focused, Job Satisfaction Survey. The outcome of the survey will be used to improve the well-being of farmworkers by promoting equitable working conditions.
“The Napa Valley Farmworker Foundation was established to support Napa County vineyard workers through education and professional development,” said Jennifer Putnam, CEO of the Napa Valley Grapegrowers and Napa Valley Farmworker Foundation, “so when the UCCE team approached us to support the survey, it was an immediate and natural decision.”
Throughout Napa, grape growers and vineyard managers are committed to developing highly skilled vineyard teams. Many growers are looking to enhance their already competitive wages with other valuable benefits, such as paid time for English classes and leadership training. The results generated from the UCCE Job Satisfaction Survey will help employers identify which benefits matter most to their teams.
“The inspiration [for the Job Satisfaction Survey] came from an interest in two areas. One was how to address the labor issues growers currently face, and the second was the numerous challenges farmworkers face that contribute to below average life outcomes as a population,” said Malcolm Hobbs, Staff Research Associate at UCCE, “We wanted to do a project that would be mutually beneficial to both parties. Measuring farmworker job satisfaction can help employers identify problems in their work environments so that they can be addressed and show them what they are doing well. There is a lot of research showing that improving job satisfaction in a directed manner can have many benefits for a company in terms of reducing turnover and absenteeism, lowering management costs, and boosting productivity. At the same time, improving job satisfaction can have a huge benefit for employee well-being in terms of health, life satisfaction, and financial security.”
The survey provides an employee assessment of their work environment, which can be used by managers to target strategies for elevating workplace experience. To ensure employees are comfortable responding, the survey is presented in Spanish by UCCE and the FWF as a neutral third party; all submissions are anonymous. Participating employers will receive results for their company, as well as aggregate results for all participating companies. In addition, educational resources to support recommendations will be created by the partners.
Hobbs emphasized, “It was also important to us that we avoid a completely top-down approach, where we or the employer decide what is best for the farmworker, and make sure workers are included in the process. Doing job satisfaction surveys allows the farmworkers to be consulted and give their view on what they want and need which they understand best. Done correctly, such surveys can help build a better dialogue and trust between workers and employers.”
For grape growers and vineyard managers interested in in the UCCE Job Satisfaction Survey, please visit the website to learn more and access the survey in English and Spanish.
About the Napa Valley Farmworker Foundation
Founded by the Napa Valley Grapegrowers in 2011, the mission of the Napa Valley Farmworker Foundation is to support and promote Napa Valley’s vineyard workersthrough education and professional development. The Napa Valley Farmworker Foundation is the only one of its kind in the United States, providing educational opportunities, advanced training programs, leadership and management classes, English literacy programs, and much more. To date, the Farmworker Foundation has offered education and professional development opportunities to more than 21,000 vineyard workers and their families. For more information, visit our website Napa Valley Farmworker Foundation and follow the Napa Valley Farmworker Foundation on Facebook and Instagram.
About the Napa Valley Grapegrowers
The Napa Valley Grapegrowers is a non-profit trade organization that has played a vital role in strengthening Napa Valley’s reputation as a world-class viticultural region for 45 years. Its mission is to preserve and promote Napa Valley’s world-class vineyards. NVG represents 685 Napa County grape growers and associated businesses. For more information, visit our website Napa Valley Grapegrowers and follow the Napa Valley Grapegrowers on Facebook and Instagram.
About the University of California Cooperative Extension
The University of California Cooperative Extension (UCCE) is part of the national Land Grant system, where selected public institutions of higher learning are charged with providing practical education to the public through various outreach efforts. Collaboration with Napa County and the Agricultural Commissioner’s Office is one of the outreach efforts. For more information visit the UCCE website.