Planting Seeds - Food & Farming News from CDFA

A video for #PollinatorWeek2020 – CDFA’s Bee Safe Program

National Pollinator Week is June 22-28, 2020

Many of our crops are dependent on pollinators. CDFA’s Bee Safe Program protects beekeepers and bees from a number of issues, such as theft, pests and lack of forage. Check out this video for details!

Posted in Pollinators | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Farmworkers in the Land of Plenty – A digital exhibit from the California State Archives

California is one of the largest agricultural producing regions in the world generating billions of dollars in revenue every year. Farmworkers have come to California from various parts of the world to plant, care for, and harvest the crops of the Golden State. Workers have faced harsh working conditions, low wages, and little recognition for their crucial contributions. As a result, farmworkers, advocates, and community leaders have organized to work toward the betterment of working and living conditions for farmworkers. The fight for these rights began in the 19th Century and continues to this day.

Agricultural operations in California date back to statehood in 1850 and consisted of large ranches and farms which grew wheat, barley, and other grain crops. During the 1850s-1880s, growers and farmers employed a limited farm worker population, but implemented the use of tractor and mechanized harvesting processes. The images below feature two examples of crops being harvested in the late 19th and early 20th Centuries.

Starting in the late 1800s, many farming operations in California expanded to the include the cultivation of fruits and nuts. Improvements in irrigation, the use of pesticides, and the demand of specialty crops gave rise to an increased demand for labor. Growers benefited from cheap foreign labor as Chinese, Japanese, Sikh, Filipino, Southern European, and Mexican workers came to California to fill the labor demand, which continued to grow in the early 1900s. The images below depict farmworkers harvesting and preparing crops for shipment in the early 1900s.

In the early 1940’s, the agricultural labor demand continued to increase and the United States experienced an influx of Mexican farmworkers into the country under the Bracero Program. This program, created under the Mexican Farm Labor Program Agreement, was initially set up to address labor shortages during World War II, but would remain in place for more than 20 years. Under this program, Mexican farmworkers were provided with sanitary and free housing, satisfactory and affordable meals, free transportation back to Mexico at the end of their term, and a minimum wage of thirty cents per hour. Despite the protections set forth by the program, racial discrimination prevailed, and farmworkers continued to work under poor working conditions while growers benefited from the cheap foreign labor. The Bracero Program ended on December 31, 1964 and over the course of the program, millions of men migrated to the United States to participate in the program as guest workers.

Beginning in 1952, guest workers were also hired under the H-2 Program. This program created under the Immigration and Nationality Act, employed limited groups of temporary foreign nationals, many of which were employed in the agriculture industry. In 1969, over 69,000 visas were issued to foreign workers –the peak of its usage. In 1986, the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) created the H-2A visa for agricultural workers, but they have significantly declined in recent years.

As California’s agriculture industry grew, labor rights became increasingly important. Harsh working conditions, including long hours, low wages, and poor-quality housing led to workers organizing to advocate for their rights. Workers faced additional challenges through language barriers, racial discrimination, and growers forcing them to pay commission or inflated prices for basic necessity at company stores. The Oxnard Strike (1903), Wheatland Hop Riot (1913), the cotton strikes (1930s), and others were important steps moving California toward expanded farmworker rights.

Several labor organizations were born out of movements for stronger farmworker rights. Perhaps the most recognized of these is the United Farm Workers of America (UFW). Created in the late-1960s through a merger of the Agricultural Workers Organization Committee (AWOC) and the National Farm Workers Association (NFWA), UFW successfully advocated for improved working conditions and higher pay through organized strikes, nonviolent protests, marches, and rallies to focus national attention to the plight of farmworkers.

Several well-known labor leaders emerged in the 1960s, including Larry Itliong, Cesar Chavez, and Dolores Huerta, among others. These leaders worked to negotiate labor contracts and reduce pesticide exposure for workers, with their hard work paving the way for legislative action and the 1975 Agricultural Labor Relations Act, which permitted farmworkers to collectively bargain. Chavez, Itliong, and Huerta, combined their knowledge of labor organizing and activism and created the pioneering agricultural labor union, the United Farm Workers.

In September 1965, the NFWA and AWOC, then later UFW, organized the Delano Grape Strike to demand the federal minimum wage for farmworkers. Grassroots efforts led to a successful five-year consumer boycott on non-union grapes and more than 2,000 farmworkers striking, highlighting the plight of farmworkers in California and gaining national attention. This put pressure on growers and state officials to take action. In the fall of 1969, the California Assembly Committee on Agriculture and the California Assembly Committee on Labor Relations, held hearings in Palm Springs and Bakersfield, to hear grievances and testimony from growers and farmworkers regarding the need for state legislation that would allow farmworkers to unionize. Larry Itliong, Dolores Huerta, and Cesar Chavez played instrumental roles in organizing farm laborers in California’s Central Valley. Their experience as leaders and activist eventually led to the Creation of the United Farm Workers of America, an organization that put the plight of farmworkers on national headlines.

Shortly thereafter, In 1975, the California Legislature passed the Agricultural Labor Relations Act (ALRA), to, “ensure peace in the fields of California by guaranteeing justice for all agricultural workers and stability in agricultural labor relations.” The law, the first of its kind, created the Agricultural Labor Relations Board to administer the Act, allowed workers to bargain with their employer, engage or refuse to engage in union activities, allowed union officials access to grower’s fields, established a method for speedy elections, and provided remedies for workers who are unfairly fired or punished, including back pay. In the first few months after the law went into effect, there were 429 elections involving 50,000 voting farmworkers. By comparison in fiscal year 2017-2018, only one certification election was conducted. Changes in agriculture and labor have significantly impacted the amount of elections held in the present.

Progress toward stronger farmworker rights has continued into the 21st Century. Increasingly, the dangers of heat stress and continuously unfair wages have gained public attention leading to legislative action. In 2005, the California Legislature passed some of the most stringent heat laws in the nation. The law was revised in 2015, requiring employers to pay workers for recovery periods. In 2016, California passed AB 1066 which extended overtime pay to farmworkers who worked more than 8 hours a day or 40 hours a week. These pieces of legislation have been crucial steps toward the further protection of farmworkers, and workers, advocates, and community leaders continue to work to expand these protections.

Link to presentation by California State Archives

Posted in Farm Labor | Leave a comment

People, Agriculture, and Water in California – from California WaterBlog

Farmworker housing in Corcoran, California, 1940

by Jay Lund

Agriculture is California’s predominant use of managed water.  Agriculture and water together are a foundation for California’s rural economy.  Although most agriculture is economically-motivated and commercially-organized, the sociology and anthropology of agriculture and agricultural labor are basic for the well-being of millions of people, and the success and failure of rural, agricultural, and water and environmental policies.

The economic, ethnic, and class disparities and opportunity inequalities in urban life are urgent problems today.  Similar problems continue to exist in the structure of rural communities.  These rural problems often are more dire and difficult because the lower densities of rural settlement make these problems harder to observe, bring greater difficulties for organization, information, and logistics, and increase per-capita expenses for actions that provide services (water, education, transportation, housing, and all manner of human services).  The anthropologist Walter Goldschmidt observed these difficulties in California’s San Joaquin Valley in the 1940s (as John Steinbeck did in the 1930s).

Most serious social scientists and policy wonks of California agriculture (and agriculture in general) have read Walter Goldschmidt’s As You Sow (1947).  Those who haven’t should.

Despite decades of subsequent research, much of this work could be written and read insightfully today, and it retains much influence, as seen in Mark Arax’s recent history of California’s water development (2019).

Some, of many, points made in Goldschmidt’s book include:

  • History, expectations, and economic structure have implications for local social structure and the experience and opportunities of people individually and as social groups. The San Joaquin Valley’s social structures arose and arise from a history of demographic, economic, and social transitions built around migrations, farming, and perceived economic opportunities.  Goldschmidt discusses how these transitions often involved efforts to limit opportunities for some groups, particularly individuals and groups providing farm labor.
  • The book is a nice example of a fairly classical anthropological/ethnographic approach to studying social structure and public policy issues, showing how social scientists have long produced insightful results for policy problems, in this case on social, economic, and policy implications of modernization in agriculture and the urbanization of agriculture and rural life. (Feel free to comment on this post with citations and links to additional great examples – a few appear under further reading.)
  • The original presentation of what became the “Goldschmidt hypothesis,” that areas dominated by family farms tend to have more desirable socioeconomic conditions than industrial farming areas. This idea has been both supported and not supported by many more recent studies (cited under further readings), and might be less relevant today as remaining commercial family farms have grown in industrial scale since the 1940s.
  • The importance of effective local social and governmental organization and expectations for providing good schools, social services (human services, police, etc.) and infrastructure services (water, sewer, transportation, housing, energy, and solid waste). This applies for everyone, everywhere and at all times, I think.
  • Fundamental objectives of policy – these seem eternal and relate to more than just rural and agricultural policy (p. 254): “Three fundamental principles must underlie any constructive farm policy consistent with American democratic tradition:
    • The full utilization of American productive capacity to insure the welfare of all the people and the strength of our nation;
    • The preservation of our national resources to insure that maximum production can continue without loss from earlier exploitation of the land;
    • The promotion of equity and opportunity for those whose life work is devoted to the production of agricultural commodities.”
  • One footnote I enjoyed were references to the scholarly work of Clark Kerr on farm labor and policy in the 1930s. Clark Kerr went on to oversee the progressive transformation of the University of California in the 1960s as UC President.

This is another great book on California, agriculture, and water (one of many).  It nicely focuses on people, and some of the most economically and socially underprivileged people in California, then and now.  These places, and their like, still exist with social and economic structures that affect human health, well-being, and water management (Ramsey 2020).  Struggles to better achieve the universal political and economic objectives summarized by Goldschmidt in 1947 continue.

Considering people in agriculture is among the hardest and most central issues as California works to adapt agriculture to reduce groundwater overdraft and contamination, manage the Delta more sustainably, improve rural water services, protect ecosystem health, and improve rural life and opportunities.

As I read recently, “Read old to stay sharp.”  And then read some more.

Jay Lund is a Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering at the University of California – Davis. 

See the original post on California WaterBlog.

Posted in Drought | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

Join CDFA in Celebration of National Pollinator Week, June 22-28, 2020

In honor of National Pollinator Week, California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) Secretary Karen Ross will kick off a webinar on Thursday, June 25, 2020 entitled, “California’s Efforts to Restore and Protect Pollinator Populations.” The webinar, set for 10-11:30 a.m. PT, will feature a panel of experts discussing pollinators in California’s agricultural and native ecosystems.

“Pollinators – including bees, birds, butterflies and bats – keep our natural and agricultural systems productive and play a key role in maintaining biodiversity,” said Secretary Ross. “Many pollinator species are suffering due to climate change, loss of habitat and other challenges, but we’re pleased to share the many efforts taking place across California to protect these valuable ecological contributors.”

Specifically, webinar presentations will address the critical roles of native bees, honeybees and monarch butterflies, the challenges they face and efforts to restore and enhance their populations. Secretary Ross will be joined by representatives from California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), CDFA’s Bee Safe Program, UC Davis’ Department of Entomology, Almond Board of California, California Association of Resource Conservation Districts and The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation. To register, visit: https://register.gotowebinar.com/register/7851430422347775502.

Also as part of this week’s celebration, CDFA will release three new videos on its @ClimateSmartNews Twitter feed. The videos feature pollinators and healthy soils (above), CDFA’s Bee Safe Program and, in partnership with CDFW, supporting native pollinator habitats.

Posted in Healthy soils, Pollinators | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Workplace COVID-19 Outbreak Guidance for Employers from the California Department of Public Health

​Memo from State Public Health officer Dr. Sonia Y. Angell:

This checklist is intended for use by employers experiencing an outbreak of COVID-19 in their workplace. Employers should be proactive and keep in mind that identification of even a single positive case among employees may quickly develop into an outbreak. As outbreak circumstances and work practices vary, employers may need assistance from their local health department (LHD) to plan and coordinate a response to the outbreak that meets the needs of the workplace.

This guidance is not intended for use in managing or preventing outbreaks in healthcare, congregate living settings, or other workplaces where the California Aerosol Transmissible Diseases (ATD) standard applies.

Employers should also consult:

utbreak Management

Outbreak Management

Employers should prepare for identification of COVID-19 outbreaks in their workplace.

  • Designate a workplace infection prevention coordinator to implement COVID-19 infection prevention procedures and to manage COVID-related issues among employees.
  • Instruct employees to stay home and report to the employer if they are having symptoms of COVID-19, were diagnosed with COVID-19, or are awaiting test results for COVID-19.
    • Symptoms of COVID-19 include fever, chills, shaking chills, cough, difficulty breathing, sore throat, body or muscle aches, loss of taste or smell, loss of appetite, diarrhea, or loss of appetite.
    • Develop mechanisms for tracking suspected and confirmed cases among employees.
    • Ensure that sick leave policies are sufficiently generous and flexible to enable employees who are sick to stay home without penalty.
      • California has additional services for employees, including supplemental paid sick leave for food sector workers at companies with 500 or more employees nationwide.
      • The Families First Coronavirus Response Act requires certain employers to provide employees with paid sick leave or expanded family and medical leave for specified reasons related to COVID-19.
      • Some cities and counties require employers to provide sick leave benefits to workers.
  • Identify contact information for the local health department (LHD) in the jurisdiction where the workplace is located.

Employers should prepare to share information with the LHD and other stakeholders.

  • Notify the LHD where the workplace is located if there is a known or suspected outbreak in the workplace or if there is a laboratory confirmed cases of COVID-19 at the workplace.
  • The LHD in the jurisdiction where the workplace is located may have specific criteria for outbreak reporting requirements. Employers should follow the specific instructions of their LHD, if available.
  • LHDs regularly transmit and protect confidential health information. Securely sharing confidential information about employees with COVID-19 is critical for the LHD to provide comprehensive support to the employer and protect the health of the community.
  • Employees in a workplace may live in counties/jurisdictions outside of where the workplace is located. When there is an outbreak in a workplace, employers should contact the LHD in any jurisdiction where a COVID-19 positive employee resides and let them know about the outbreak.
    • Typically, the LHD in the jurisdiction where the workplace is located gives guidance to the employer on managing the outbreak.
  • Communicate with the LHD on how frequently the LHD expects updates from the employer on newly identified cases and symptomatic employees in the workplace.
    • Determine how this information will be shared (e.g., telephone, fax directed to a specified person, secure e-mail)
  • Share a roster of all employees with the LHD in the jurisdiction where the workplace is located.
    • Employer may be asked by LHD to provide additional information on the employees, including job description, location, work schedule, city and county of residence, and other details that could help inform the investigation and determine which other employees in the workplace may be at risk of COVID-19 infection.
  • If employees in a facility are unionized, identify a union contact and clarify the role the union can play in communication with employees. If employees in a facility are not unionized, identify an employee representative to serve as a point of contact for the LHD.
  • If the facility uses contract or temporary employees, identify who should communicate information and instructions on the outbreak to these individuals.
    • The host employer should notify temporary, contract, or other agencies that have employees in the workplace of the outbreak.
    • All employees in the workplace, regardless of employment arrangement, should follow all instructions for infection prevention and outbreak management measures from the host employer, the LHD where the workplace is located, and the LHD where they reside.

Understand requirements for reporting employee cases to Cal/OSHA.

  • Any serious injury, illness, or death occurring in any place of employment or in connection with any employment must be reported by the employer to the local Cal/OSHA district office immediately. For COVID-19, this includes inpatient hospitalizations and deaths among employees.
  • Employers should report serious injury, illness, and death, including hospitalization and death from COVID-19, even if work-relatedness is uncertain.
  • Cal/OSHA prefers calls by phone but will also accept email reports (Cal/OSHA Accident Report inbox). Details on reportingcontact information for district offices, and the Title 8 section 342 requirement are available online.

Identify additional employee cases and close contacts of cases to control further spread in the workplace.

  • Testing all employees in a workplace should be the first strategy considered for identification of additional cases. Testing may be done at a single point in time or at repeated intervals.
    • Employers should seek guidance from the LHD when developing a testing strategy, including how testing can be arranged and how to prioritize testing of employees (i.e., testing close contacts of laboratory-confirmed cases first).
    • Employers should offer on-site COVID-19 testing of employees or otherwise arrange for testing through the company’s occupational or general medical services provider. The employer is responsible for ensuring all employees are offered and provided testing. Employers should also provide information to employees who may prefer to contact their personal medical provider or visit a CA Coronavirus Testing Task Force site for testing. LHDs may also be able to help facilitate testing options, if needed.
  • When testing all employees is not available or not recommended by the LHD, consider alternative methods for controlling the outbreak, in consultation with the LHD, including but not limited to tracing all close contacts of confirmed cases and instructing those individuals to quarantine or temporarily closing the workplace and quarantining all employees.
  • Conduct contact tracing and quarantining of close contacts of confirmed cases in the workplace.
    • Employer should provide information to the LHD on the confirmed COVID-19 case employees in the workplace, including job titles, work areas, close contacts in the workplace, dates of symptom onset, and shifts worked while infectious.
    • Establish if the employer, LHD, or both will conduct interviews of the cases to determine their close contacts.
    • Close contacts should be instructed to quarantine at home for 14 days from their last known contact with the employee with COVID-19. Close contacts should be tested for COVID-19 when possible.
    • A close contact is someone who spent 15 minutes or more within 6 feet of an individual with COVID-19 infection during their infectious period, which includes, at a minimum, the 48 hours before the individual developed symptoms.
    • Interview employees with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 by phone to determine when their symptoms began, the shifts they worked during their infectious period, and to identify other employees with whom they had close contact during their infectious period.
    • Use employment records to verify shifts worked during the infectious period and other employees who may have worked closely with them during that time period.
    • While at home, close contacts should self-monitor daily for COVID-19 symptoms (e.g., fever, chills, shaking chills, cough, difficulty breathing, sore throat, congestion or runny nose, fatigue, body or muscle aches, loss of taste or smell, nausea or vomiting, diarrhea, loss of appetite).

Notification and management of employees

  • Employers must maintain confidentiality of employees with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 infection when communicating with other employees.
  • Employers should notify all employees who were potentially exposed to the individuals with COVID-19. Employers should provide any healthcare consultations needed to advise workers regarding their exposure, which may be especially important for those with high-risk medical conditions (e.g., immune compromise or pregnancy).
  • Close contacts of cases should be given instructions on home quarantine and symptom monitoring, and COVID-19 testing as described in step #4.
  • Provide any employees who are sent home before or during a shift with information about what to expect after they are sent home (e.g., instructions about testing, sick leave rights under federal, state, and local laws and company policies, return-to-work requirements, etc.).
  • In some outbreaks, but not all, employees who were never symptomatic and did not have close contact with any of the laboratory confirmed cases may continue to work, as long as the employer has implemented all control measures as recommended by public health authorities, Cal/OSHA, or other regulatory bodies. The LHD will make this determination based on strategies being used to control the outbreak and identify new cases.

Determine when it is appropriate for cases and contacts of cases to return to work

  • Consult with the LHD and most recent CDC guidance for when a confirmed case may be released from home isolation and return to work. The local health department may recommend a strategy for return to work similar to the following, although some variation may occur by jurisdiction and outbreak.

Read the complete memo at the California Department of Public Health web site

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Man arrested for allegedly stealing beehives in California and other states – from the Associated Press via the Mercury News

A man who stole dozens of beehives across the West has been arrested in Washington state, the Lincoln County Sheriff’s Office (WA) said. The bees could be worth more than $200,000.

“The case has the potential of over 30 victims spread across California, Idaho, Montana, Oregon and Washington,” the Sheriff’s Office told the Bellingham Herald.

Perry David Bayes, 56, was arrested and charged with possession of stolen property in the first degree, which is a class B felony, according to officials. It was not immediately known if he has a lawyer.

The investigation began after the Sheriff’s Office received a report from a beekeeper whose bees were taken.

“The victim went to retrieve his hives and they were gone,” Lincoln County officials said. “The investigation soon led to some tips and the ‘sting’ was set up, resulting in the arrest and a ‘very sweet’ ending.”

A “beekeeper chop shop” is common in California and other parts of the country, the Sheriff’s Office said.

Beehives can mysteriously disappear overnight. In 2017, a man was accused of stealing nearly $1 million worth of hives from almond orchards, The Associated Press reported.

“Bees are big money,” Sgt. Arley Terrence of the Fresno County Sheriff’s Office agriculture crimes unit told the AP in 2017. “There’s a lot of motive to steal.”

Link to story on Mercury News web site.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

State Board of Food and Ag member Jeff Huckaby named Organic Farmer of the Year – from The Packer

Jeff Huckaby

By Chris Koger

Jeff Huckaby, president of Grimmway Farms and Cal-Organic Farms (and member of the California State Board of Food and Agriculture), has been named the Organic Trade Association’s Organic Farmer of the Year.

Huckaby has grown Cal-Organic’s production from several hundred acres to more than 45,000 acres of organic vegetables in California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia and Washington. More than 65 different vegetables are sold under the Cal-Organic brand, according to a news release from the organic association.

He started organic farming in 1999 as Grimmway’s farm manager, and took over all of Grimmway’s organic production throughout California in 2000. A year later, Huckaby became general manager of Cal-Organic Farm when it was purchased by Grimmway, according to the release.

With Huckaby in the role of organic visionary for the company, it now supplies all of Costco in the U.S. and several other countries, and he has helped other retailers offer year-round organic programs. Over the years, he has educated buyers and presented at many retailer produce training programs, spoken at conferences and U.S. Department of Agricultural meetings and testified in Congress about organic production.

“His expertise in organic farming has been tapped by regulators, trade associations, elected officials, California Department of Food and Agriculture, and USDA for input into all areas of organic production,” according to the trade association’s release.

Huckaby said his passion for organic farming spans four generations of his family and he’s accepting the award on behalf of the company’s dedicated farmers. The Organic Trade Association also noted the support he’s given the association and its affiliate, The Organic Center.

“Over these years, I’ve witnessed the commitment, hard work and downright grit among all members of this community who are fighting to ensure a bright future for organic in the U.S.,” Huckaby said in the release. “I am deeply proud to help lead in this charge and pave the way for the next generation of farmers.”

Link to story in The Packer

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Visit CDFA website for latest COVID-19 worker safety resources

Did you know that the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) offers Coronavirus (COVID-19) Resources for Food and Agriculture via a web page that is updated regularly? This is part of CDFA’s continuous effort to provide food and agriculture workers and employers with access to the latest information.

Latest updates to the Worker Safety section (www.cdfa.ca.gov/coronavirus/#WorkerSafety) include:

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has updated its Guidance for Agriculture Workers and Employers to include an Agricultural Employer Checklist for Creating a COVID-19 Assessment and Control Plan.

The CDC also now offers guidance on the appropriate use of testing for SARS-CoV-2 and a Testing Strategy for Coronavirus (COVID-19) in High-Density Critical Infrastructure Workplaces after a COVID-19 Case Is Identified, illustrated by a testing strategy flow diagram.

CalOSHA offers COVID-19 Infection Prevention for Agricultural Employers and Employees (Spanish) (Chinese) (Vietnamese), as well as a COVID-19 Daily Checklist for Agricultural Employers (Spanish) and a COVID-19 General Checklist for Agricultural Employers (Spanish).

CalOSHA also offers a video, COVID-19 Infection Prevention Guidance for Agricultural Workers (Spanish) (Mixteco). For these and many more resources that are updated regularly, please visit www.cdfa.ca.gov/coronavirus/

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Equity and Access in Agriculture: Report of California’s Farmer Equity Act

By CDFA secretary Karen Ross

Diversity – and our pride in that diversity – are California hallmarks. For generations, Californians have boldly lived true stories of strength and perseverance toward a better life for themselves, their families and their communities. The current events in further pursuit of those goals align with California’s values, and the California Department of Food and Agriculture is proud to play a role for our farmers and ranchers from across the racial, ethnic and gender spectrum.

In 2017, a bill authored by Assemblymember Cecilia Aguilar-Curry to enhance farmer equity was signed into law. The Farmer Equity Act, also known as AB 1348, recognizes that California’s farmers and ranchers are made up of a diverse group of people who have not all had equal access to resourc­es and information in order to successfully run their businesses. The law aims to change that definitively by making sure that socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers have equal access to assistance programs.

The legislation called for CDFA to produce a Farmer Equity Report, which is now complete and identifies four key challenges facing socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers.

·         Land tenure

·         Language

·         Engagement with agriculture industry and boards/commissions

·         Access to available resources and programs

The assessments and recommendations in the report are already translating into action: in addition to conducting research and writing the report in 2019, CDFA’s Farm Equity Advisor has created a Farmer Resource Portal, has assisted with public outreach and engagement strategies with organizations working directly with socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers, and has also assisted in revising and refining several grant programs to be more accessible to organizations working in severely disadvantaged communities and with farmers of color.

Through this report and the continued work of CDFA’s Farm Equity Advisor and all CDFA staff, the agency will continue to im­prove and enhance our services and support for socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers. We want to see all who are engaged in the agriculture industry thrive and be part of a sustainable future. That vision requires that farmers have access to the best resources and technology, have equal voices and representation in decision-making processes, and are afforded equal access to information about regulations and opportunities that affect their businesses. The challenges outlined in the report are also very important reminders to consider during the current COVID-19 crisis, as many socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers struggle to adapt to the pandemic.

This report is by no means a stand-alone solution to the barriers that exist for socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers, but it is an honest and forthright assessment of key disadvantages and the corresponding improvements and corrections that move us toward balance, fairness and equity in our agricultural industry. Please consider this a report of assessment and progress, with the full knowledge, especially in light of recent events, that there is much work still to be done. 

Posted in Uncategorized | 4 Comments

Getting local food from farm to table – from the Santa Rosa Press Democrat

By Tawny Tesconi, executive director, Sonoma County Farm Bureau

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought with it hardship and tragedy. As a community, we are adapting to a new normal that includes social distancing and the shuttering of local businesses and restaurants. We are gathering at home for meals more often. Thankfully, in Sonoma County, we have a diverse, safe and abundant local food supply that residents can rely on even while so much of the economy is shut down.

Daily, farmers and ranchers are producing crops, but how do these products become food for your family? Many crops need to be processed before they can be consumed. Processing facilities provide the necessary link between the producer and the consumer, and local processing facilities are crucial to a consistent food supply and to food security.

To sell meat and other processed products, farmers need access to appropriately scaled processing facilities with the technology and food safety protocols needed to prepare products safely, consistently and to customer specifications. We are fortunate to have three milk processing facilities in our county that provide meal-ready dairy products. But for other agricultural products, we aren’t so fortunate.

Many local farmers and ranchers drive multiple hours to reach the nearest U.S. Department of Agriculture- approved facility to get their protein crops processed.

Because of our value-added, grass-fed, free-range production model in Northern California, these producers may only have a few head of livestock or poultry to harvest in one week. This equates to high transportation costs, lost production hours and escalated opportunity costs for farmers.

More importantly, it’s a weak link in our food chain armor. Residents who value locally grown food are held hostage to distant processing facilities that may not always be available or willing to customize processing for Sonoma County consumers.

Sonoma County farmers want to supply fresh food to their neighbors, but without a reliable food chain, specifically processing, there are no guarantees. The more steps there are between you and your food’s source, the more chances there are for a breakdown in the chain.

Aren’t we seeing it now with the COVID-19 pandemic? Food grown in distant locations has the potential for safety issues at harvesting, washing, shipping and distribution. Now, more than ever, our community is recognizing and appreciating a stable, local food supply as one of our greatest assets and sources of resiliency.

All of us who embrace our local agriculture industry need to stand behind efforts to enhance processing facilities in our county.

Although the current crisis has elevated concern for the availability of animal products, we need to recognize that a concerted effort to support fruit and vegetable processing facilities regionally also is needed.

For several crops, we have processing facilities that have been working for us for generations, but as regulations change and these plants age, costly improvements need to be made. We cannot allow zoning requirements, NIMBYism or inflated development costs to stand in the way of our basic need to have food available for our families.

Work to provide processing options for our local farmers has been ongoing for many months prior to this pandemic. However, with escalated concerns brought on by the crisis, in the coming months you will see government, business groups, farmers and ranchers working together to fix this Achilles’ heel in our food chain. Everyone in Northern California must support this effort for the future of agriculture and the well-being of our families.

Link to article in Santa Rosa Press Democrat

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment