id
stringlengths 30
34
| text
stringlengths 0
68.5k
| industry_type
stringclasses 1
value |
|---|---|---|
2017-17/0142/en_head.json.gz/16120 | Contact DURANGO HERALD - Aug 22, '07 PRODUCED WITH PASSION "Heart and Soil" documentary celebrates local food and farmers. By Karla Sluis. A few generations ago, most people knew how to produce dinner from seeds and animals, today not so much. "One hundred years ago, everyone was self-sufficient with cows, a garden,chickens" said a farmer in a new Durango area documentary. "Now we depend on 90 percent of our food being shipped in, and that has changed the face of agriculture." Following growing interest in "localvore" eating habits, Durango filmmaker Mara LeGrand hopes to re-educate people about the origins of dinner. Her documentary "Heart & Soil" centers on the importance of buying and growing local food. It shows the landscape and lives of farmers in the Southwest, along with farmers markets and farm to school programs. The project began as a simple local TV piece on the Durango Farmer's Market. After LeGrand began going behind the scenes at the farms, she discovered more. "There was so much to learn and see" she said. "The farmers here aren't country bumpkins. They are wise and guirky and informed. There's a lot of awareness and collective consciousness." A promotional clip of the film showed many scenes and people Duragoans may recognize. Including shots of the Durango Farmers Market. Jeff Mannix with his longhorn cattle, and farmers working at Regional Agricultural Supply. "I'm not going to get rich growing food" said a RAS farmer in one clip. "It's just the right thing to do." The film will be shown as a sneak preview Sunday to honor local farmers. LeGrand said. It's not a true premiere because she is working to get the documentary into "green" film festivals and recoup the $20,000 and 14 months spent filming. The film "may have a life in the education system, after the festivals," she said. The film touches on topics that are controversial in modern agriculture, such as water rights, shipping methods that burn fossil fuels and corporate livestock farms. But LeGrand said she worked to keep the tone positive. "I want to support community and not create divisions. I don't want cattle ranchers who have been here for generations to be perceived as villains." LeGrand, a resident for 16 years, formerly owned an Ayurvedic health retreat in town with a holistic approach to nutrition. Her background frames a personal view of farming. "I think the film shows small-scale, sustainable farms as the answer to a changing industry. People in the film speak about how the land is generous, how they're connected to the plants, how farms are a cycle of life." LeGrand, a former photojournalist, said making "Heart & Soil" was a challenge. "Video is different." It's about getting audio right, and there was a lot to pay attention to. You think about snapping pictures,but you have to hold the camera longer to capture the full range of expressions. But the film is not just talking heads. There's lots of lively activity." LeGrand also has done screenwriting and helped other people create films. She went through the documentary process on a fukn she was a writer and public health worker on in Nepal. The film explored an East-meets West approach to food, herbs and medicine. "Heart & Soil" took on a life of it's own for LeGrand. I came from a background of nutrition and the helping people restore their health through the nourishment and healing power, nature brings. But I didn't know I was going to make a film about that. It just evolved. I think when we're paying attention, we are called to do things." Sneak Preview. The local-food documentary "Heart and Soil" will be shown at 6:30p.m. sunday at the Smiley Theatre, 1309 East Third Ave. in Durango. There will be a panel of local speakers after the film. Tickets......... ©2007-2008 Skydancer Productions, LLC | 农业 |
2017-17/0142/en_head.json.gz/16951 | Little regulation for small fertilizer plants
Sat Apr 20th, 2013 9:41pmNews Associated Press
There were no sprinklers. No firewalls. No water deluge systems. Safety inspections were rare at the fertilizer company in West, Texas, that exploded and killed at least 14 people this week.
This is not unusual.
Small fertilizer plants nationwide fall under the purview of several government agencies, each with a specific concern and none required to coordinate with others on what they have found.
The small distributors — there are as many of 1,150 in Texas alone — are part of a regulatory system that focuses on large installations and industries, though many of the small plants contain enough agricultural chemicals to fuel a major explosion. The plant in West had ammonium nitrate, the chemical used to build the bomb that blew up the Alfred P. Murrah building in Oklahoma City in 1995, killing 168 people. They were also authorized to handle up to 54,000 pounds of anhydrous ammonia, a substance the Texas environmental agency considers flammable and potentially toxic.
“This type of facility is a minor source of air emissions,” said Ramiro Garcia, the head of enforcement and compliance at the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality.
“So the inspections are complaint driven. We usually look at more of the major facilities.”
No federal agency determines how close a facility handling potentially dangerous substances can be to population centers, and in many states, including Texas, many of these decisions are left up to local zoning authorities. And in Texas, the state’s minimal approach to zoning puts plants just yards away from schools, houses and other populated areas, as was the case in West.
That plant received a special permit because it was located less than 3,000 feet from a school. The damage from the blast destroyed an apartment complex, nursing home and houses in a four-block area.
State and federal investigators have not yet determined the cause of the disaster, which occurred Wednesday night after a fire broke out at the site after work hours. The explosion that followed could be heard miles away and was so powerful it registered as a small earthquake.
The West Fertilizer Co. stored, distributed and blended fertilizers, including anhydrous ammonia and ammonium nitrate, for use by farmers around the Central Texas community. The plant opened in 1962 outside the rural town of 2,800, but development gradually crept closer. An apartment complex, a nursing home and a middle school were built within a few blocks. Wednesday night, residents and rescue workers tried to evacuate the area as the fire consumed the plant.
Donald Adair, the plant’s owner, said Friday, he was cooperating with the investigation, and expressed sympathy for the victims.
Over the years, the fertilizer company was fined and cited for violations by federal and state agencies.
Last summer, the U.S. Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration assessed a $10,000 fine against West for improperly labeling storage tanks and preparing to transfer chemicals without a security plan. The company paid $5,250 after reporting it had corrected the problems.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency also cited the plant for not having an up-to-date risk management plan. That problem was also resolved, and the company submitted a new plan in 2011. That plan, however, said the company did not believe it was storing or handling any flammable substances, and didn’t list fire or an explosion as a danger.
David Gray, an EPA spokesman in Dallas, said the company’s plan identified a worst-case scenario as an accidental release of all 54,000 pounds of anhydrous ammonia, which at room temperature is a gas.
“This scenario is a plausible worse-case scenario as gaseous anhydrous ammonia can be lethal,” Gray said.
The risk management plan also did not cite a possible explosion of ammonium nitrate, the solid granular fertilizer stored at the site. But that would not be unusual, he said, because ammonium nitrate is not regulated under the Clean Air Act.
The plant’s plan said there was no risk of fire or explosion, and noted they had no sprinklers, water deluge or other safety mechanisms installed.
“We do not yet know what happened at this facility. The ongoing investigation will inform us on the plan’s adequacy,” Gray said.
The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality also dealt with the company, and issued a permit for handling anhydrous ammonia — which requires safety equipment the company had told the EPA it didn’t have. But TCEQ acknowledged it may never have checked to confirm the equipment was there.
“It’s a minor source under the Clean Air Act so it doesn’t get much scrutiny at all,” said Neil Carman, a Sierra Club clean air expert and chemist who used to work for the TCEQ.
The company’s last contact with regulation may have come as recently as April 5, when the Office of the State Chemist inspected the plant. But that agency focuses mostly on ensuring that commercial fertilizers are properly labeled and blended, said Roger Hoestenbach, the office’s associate director. His inspectors found no problems, he said, but they would not have checked for safety systems such as sprinklers. That office also provided the company with the required license to store and handle ammonia nitrate, and renewed it in September after a summer inspection, he said.
Many other towns in Texas have small fertilizer distributors operating under similar regulations near populated areas.
Matt Murray, owner of ABC Fertilizer and Supply in Corsicana, bought his facility about 15 years ago. It sits in an industrial zone in the town of about 23,700 people, but in a community barely five miles long, it is still not far from the population center, he said. “Every little community, town that’s in Texas, has one of these,” he said.
Murray’s facility also has a state license to sell ammonium nitrate.
Even though Murray said he has discussed an evacuation plan with his local fire chief, there is nothing in writing. And he isn’t required to have a formal plan. That may be changing now, he said. “It’s been something that’s been brewing for years and years, ever since Oklahoma,” he said. | 农业 |
2017-17/0142/en_head.json.gz/17133 | NEWS / FEATURES
Marriage of Minds, Wines
By Karl Klooster
Winegrowing and winemaking are careers in which success is dependent on the mastery of specific, demanding disciplines.
The notion of growing great grapes to create wondrous wine is wrapped in a cachet bordering on the romantic. But in reality, it represents an ongoing effort to gain knowledge, acquire experience, overcome obstacles and strive for perfection. Success requires a patient and abiding attitude, along with long hours and a lot of hard work.
As a result, it’s relatively rare to encounter two halves of a couple who have both risen to positions of respect and admiration for their achievements as winemakers. Winery-owning couples who carry out responsibilities complementing each other are far more common.
How Anna Matzinger and Michael Davies manage to remain on parallel tracks has the makings of a case study in compatibility. Consider what these two, both in their early 40s, have already accomplished:
Matzinger worked at Archery Summit in the Dundee Hills for 14 years. Along the way, she was promoted from assistant winemaker to head winemaker and co-general manager. During that time, Archery Summit established a reputation as one of Oregon’s top Pinot Noir producers. Heaped with accolades and awards year after year, the brand has truly reached the “summit.”
Meanwhile, Davies was rising to the top at Oregon’s largest winery, A to Z Wineworks/Rex Hill (REX HILL) Vineyards in the Chehalem Mountains. He accepted the head winemaker reins from owner Sam Tannahill and now oversees production of nearly 300,000 cases a year.
In 2006, the two decided to launch their own brand, Matzinger-Davies, as a side project. They married in 2005, so you might regard it as a wedding gift to each other. But the truth is, the desire to have a wine you can call your own runs deep in the Oregon wine industry.
Scores of small, limited-production labels and brands have been developed as special projects, never intended to grow to large proportions. One might say that “This wine is mine” is a badge of honor.
But two veteran winemakers working side by side to create the best product they can, at a point where they no longer need to prove themselves, merits special attention.
Both have devoted years of focused energy on making wines that express individual style while retaining a strong sense of place. In that regard, Pinot Noir possesses the greatest potential of all the noble grape varieties. Matzinger described their collaboration this way:
“Do we always agree? No.
“Do we always choose the path of least resistance, because it’s the easiest way to find consensus? No.
“We get there by respecting each other’s opinion and valuing each other’s contribution. With luck, the result is expressive, thought-provoking, delicious wine that we’re proud to share with others.”
They make such a limited quantity of wine under their own brand that it’s essentially a hand sell. A few selected wine merchants and restaurants backed by direct sales in the tasting room and over the Internet, does the trick.
Annually, they produce 200 cases of Pinot Noir, 220 cases of Gorge-sourced Sauvignon Blanc, 50 cases of Gorge-sourced Grenache and 60 cases of Chardonnay. The sum total of their “on-the-side” winery operation, then, runs 530 cases.
All it takes is a taste or two to know what they’ve captured in those 6,360 bottles. Each one has its own special tale to tell. In the process, they frame the narrative of the story of how this couple came together to ultimately create such enological gems.
The Pinot Noir comes from two small, family-owned vineyards in the Eola-Amity Hills AVA — Poco and Three Trees — and the blend is sublime. Fresh fruit and acidity intertwine with bramble and earthiness backed by solid but supple tannins.
Recognizing the under-appreciated yet outstanding attributes of the Columbia Gorge AVA, the couple source their Sauvignon Blanc and Grenache from Garnier Vineyards, near Mosier, 11 miles west of The Dalles.
The Sauvignon Blanc is more Bordeaux-like than Loire, displaying hints of hay and minerality, with a clean, citrusy palate and subtle but distinctive fruit.
A major surprise comes when you lift a glass of the Grenache to your nose. Grapey, juicy, jammy aromas leap out and shout “Grand Cru Beaujolais!” That is atypical and exhilarating. The experience returns to earth with a warm, textured taste that speaks of the southern Rhone.
The Chardonnay is the couple’s wild card, so to speak. Each year they seek out fruit from a different source. For 2010, it was the Chehalem Mountains, resulting in a softly varietal and well-balanced middleweight.
In the spirit that symbolizes the Oregon industry’s sharing and mutual support, A to Z’s owners have allowed Matzinger and Davies to make their wines at its winery since 2006.
The original catalyst for Matzinger and Davies uniting was — no surprise — wine. By the time they met, both were already committed to pursuing a career focused on the fermentation of great grape juice.
Matzinger grew up in Idaho. After graduating from Evergreen State College in Olympia, she worked for the U.S. Forest Service. Eventually, she found her way to California’s Napa Valley, where she landed a job at the Beringer Vineyards lab in 1994.
Davies is a New Zealander by birth and, self-admittedly, inclination. You’ll have ask him exactly what that means, but my suspicion is it has something to do with clean, green, natural, uncrowded and so forth. He spent three years in Scandinavia and the United Kingdom pursuing different interests, including running a bungee-jumping company, before returning to New Zealand. He became hooked on wine and winemaking after working the 1997 crush in Marlborough.
Matzinger traveled to New Zealand to work the 1997 crush. Davies was studying viticulture and enology at the time at Lincoln University, near Christchurch, but their paths didn’t cross in New Zealand. They met in California in late 1998, when both attended an intern party at Sonoma County’s Quivira Winery.
“I met this tall, Nordic-looking blonde,” Davies recalled. “It made me wonder why none of the Norwegian women I knew caught my attention like Anna did.” Matzinger had a job scheduled at Australia’s Hunter Valley for the 1999 harvest, and she persuaded Davies to join her. They then went to New Zealand to undertake some winter pruning — remember, winter runs June to September in the Southern Hemisphere.
It was on to Oregon in the fall of 1999. Thanks to Cheryl Francis and Sam Tannahill, Davies landed at Chehalem Winery and Matzinger at Archery Summit.
Six years later, in the fall of 2005, Davies had just returned from working the harvest at Gevrey-Chambertin in Burgundy. As a lark, he proposed they go camping on Mount Hood. At the campsite, he stopped and opened his backpack,” Matzinger recalled. “He pulled out a T-shirt that read, ‘Finally, he asked me.’ Then he pulled out another one that read, “She said yes.”
They now have two children, Otto, 7, and Elsa, 4. Both attend the McMinnville Montessori School, which their parents think is making them far too smart. Matzinger now fills her days further developing Matzinger-Davies Wines, a small bit of consulting and spending more time with the little ones.
“Taking care of them is my most important job,” she said.
“Sometimes, we play restaurant, and Elsa is the waitress. When she asks, ‘Would you like the Chardonnay, Mommy?’ I just crack up.” | 农业 |
2017-17/0142/en_head.json.gz/18741 | Why you should invest in Turkish agriculture
Agriculture is one of the main economic sectors in Turkey which is important for foreign investors, interested in doing business in this country, due to the solid economic growth in the recent years. Nearly 10% of the Turkish GDP comes from agriculture which is also an important source for employment. Turkey is well-known as a major producer of fruits and vegetables and a part of them is exported mainly to the EU countries.
Almost half of the lands in Turkey – 39 million hectares - are for agriculture and nearly a quarter of the active population is involved in agricultural activities. In Turkey, there are nearly three million agricultural holdings and most of them are small and owned by families. Agriculture had remained one of the most important economic activities in Turkey due to the favorable climate.
There is an increasing demand for agricultural products both inside and outside Turkey due to the young Turkish population, who needs a wide diversity of food, and the global demand in countries all over Europe.
Turkey has become the leader in the top of the world growers of figs, raisins and hazelnuts and is among the biggest suppliers of milk in the region. This country has become one of the top exporters of agricultural products in Europe (especially the eastern part), Middle East and Africa (the north part).
Advantages for foreign investors
Low costs for workforce in agriculture, advantageous regulations and taxes and incentives offered by the Turkish authorities are a few important aspects for a foreign investor who thinks of opening a business or a company in the agriculture.
Important opportunities for foreign entrepreneurs are in the following fields of agriculture:
- fruit and vegetables to be processed;
- milk and diary sector
- livestock.
The authorities in Turkey intend to expand the production of fruits and vegetables and they expect foreign entrepreneurs to invest in this sector which has an important potential for the next years. The government supported the investments in irrigation and infrastructure and the foreign direct investments in agriculture increased to over $ 2 bn in 2012.
The foreign entrepreneurs who have already invested in Turkish agriculture are satisfied with the well trained workforce and the low costs for salaries.
If you are interested in opening a company in Turkey and start doing business in agriculture, you can contact our agents in company formation. | 农业 |
2017-17/0142/en_head.json.gz/19318 | California State Water Project boosts irrigation allotment Apr 18, 2017 Even with effective synthetic alternatives Sulfur remains a relevant tool for controlling powdery mildew Apr 12, 2017 With buds pushing in late March, start of San Joaquin Valley wine grape crop follows normal timing Apr 12, 2017 Walnut growers responsible for ensuring clean water use on operation Apr 05, 2017 Regulatory>Legislative Australian energy tree may carry biofuel bounty for US growers
Recognizing the need to limit acres for biofuel and a desire to lower the cost of biofuel production and increase yields, farmers have been looking at Australian pongamia trees.
Pongamias produce seeds containing 30 to 40 percent oil, and are becoming a popular oilseed choice for biofuel production, capturing the attention of U.S. growers. Logan Hawkes | Jan 31, 2012
As global petroleum resources decline and the cost of imported oil escalates, agriculture producers around the world have been researching and testing food and non-food biofuels as an alternative to meet the growing demand for energy.
Biodiesel is experiencing a historic surge worldwide and a rapid expansion in production capacity is being observed not only in developed countries such as Germany, Italy, France, and the United States but also in developing countries such as Brazil, Argentina, and Indonesia. Interest in and expansion of renewable fuel production has been fostered by mandates and financial incentives offered by governments, like the Obama Administration’s Renewable Fuels Standard requiring the production of 36 billion gallons of biofuels by 2022.
The push for biofuels got its big start with President Bush's plan for biofuels from crops in 2007, and ethanol is now big business. By 2009 just over 25 percent of U.S. grain crops was being used to create ethanol for cars. But while the idea of crops-for-fuel is not new, research and experience is slowing interest in ethanol produced from corn, sorghum, sugarcane, and other traditional food and non-food crops as more attention is being focused on oilseed as a better, lower-cost alternative that uses less land traditionally dedicated to food crops.
Recognizing the need to limit acres for biofuel and a desire to lower the cost of biofuel production and increase yields, potential growers have been taking at look at alternative oilseed crops including sunflower, canola, flax, soybean, castor and camelina. In India and Australia, a legume, Pongamiapinnata, a tree that produces seeds containing 30 to 40 percent oil, is becoming a popular oilseed choice for biofuel production and has captured the attention of U.S. growers.
Tom Schenk, a farm land broker by trade and now business development director for a Bioenergy firm, was so impressed with the “energy tree” that he has been involved in establishing test groves across Texas to determine the tree’s adaptability to the Texas environment.
“While we are in the early stages of our research and development in Texas, we are most pleased with results. Pongamia is tolerant to saline and alkaline soils, it can withstand harsh climates and marginal land and is one of the few nitrogen-fixing trees producing seeds containing 30 to 40 percent oil,” he says.
Schenk has been instrumental in helping to establish a grove of some 30,000 trees near San Isidro, Texas, west of Zapata and north of Edinburg in the Lower Rio Grande Valley. In addition, groves of pongamia have been planted near El Campo. He says industry interest in Texas has been sparked as well as evidenced by Formosa Plastics leasing land to test plant the trees.
“This is a hearty tree with a 30-foot tap root. It can tolerate extreme temperatures and harsh sunlight, and the seed that it develops can be harvested with a nut shaker, and a peanut sheller and soybean crusher do a good job preparing the seed for biofuel application,” he says.
The seed cake from production can be used as a high nitrogen fertilizer and when blended with soybean is a high protein animal feed.
“Since this legume fixes nitrogen in soil, we discovered early on that grasses beneath the trees last year were lush and green, and cows from an adjacent pasture had broken through a fence and were grazing on it at a time when almost all forage had been grazed out or destroyed from the drought, so we’re talking about an energy crop that can offer added benefit to growers,” he said.
Since pongamia fixes nitrogen in the soil, Schenk says growers could intercrop with faster growing grasses before the canopy eventually restricts sunlight exposure.
Pongamia seed oil as a bio- fuel has physical properties very similar to conventional diesel. Emission properties, however, are cleaner for biofuel than for conventional diesel. It has no polyaromatic compounds and features reduced toxic smoke and soot emissions. In addition, the same oil is used as fuel for cooking and the oil is also used as a lubricant, water-paint binder, pesticide, and in soap making and tanning industries in other countries.
In India, where the tree is extensively used as an energy crop, dried leaves are used as an insect repellent in stored grains. The press cake, when applied to the soil, has pesticidal value, particularly against nematodes.
“Looking at the current policy for promotion of biofuels, pongamia seems to be more promising than other feedstock and we’re hopeful our trial will demonstrate its adaptation to large scale production in Texas,” Schenk adds.
As with any other tree crop, pongamia requires 4 to 5 years before the tree is mature enough to be commercially harvested. However, it is also a fast growing tree and tree life can extend far beyond 50 years.
“The advantages are many and the results are promising,” Schenk says.
Schenk is affiliated with Terviva Bioenergy as director of business development, a bioenergy firm promoting the product nationwide as an alternative energy crop. More information is available at http://terviva.com/index.php.
RelatedWith new farm bill looming, next agriculture census critically importantApr 17, 2017MWD could put up money to kick start Sites Reservoir projectApr 11, 2017Dairy industry asks Trump for helpApr 07, 2017Ag Chairman Conaway takes on intelligence dutiesApr 07, 2017 Load More | 农业 |
2017-17/0142/en_head.json.gz/19890 | Home » Blogs » Weekly News Update on the Americas's blog Mexico: Monsanto to start commercial GMO planting
Submitted by Weekly News Update on the Americas on Mon, 02/20/2012 - 19:25 Mexico Theater
After a decade of small-scale experimental planting, biotech multinationals are now free to start commercial development of transgenic corn in Mexico. On Dec. 31 the government's Secretariat of Agriculture, Cattle Raising, Rural Development, Fishing and Food (SAGARPA) quietly lifted the last barrier to the use of genetically modified organisms (GMO) for corn sold to consumers. The Missouri-based biotech giant Monsanto will lead the way by sowing 63 hectares in the northern state of Sinaloa, to be followed with genetically modified corn in other northern states: Chihuahua, Coahuila, Durango and Sonora. Sowing in Tamaulipas will begin a little later, bringing the total land under cultivation to 1,000 hectares, and commercial production is eventually to include some 2 million hectares. Other multinationals—Bayer AG, Dow Chemical Company, Pioneer Hi-Bred (owned by DuPont) and Syngenta AG—apparently will be involved in the project, with public relations handled by a Mexican firm, AgroBIO México. The left-leaning Mexican daily La Jornada devoted a three-part series, starting on Feb. 13, to the change in policy; otherwise it seems to have received little coverage in the media.
As with the experimental planting over the past decade, the commercial transgenic corn will be grown mostly in the relatively arid north, where the government claims there are few native varieties of corn at risk of being contaminated. Corn diversity is a major concern in Mexico, where the crop was first cultivated; the country now has 52 to 70 different varieties. But even the small quantity of experimental transgenic corn that was grown under controlled conditions in the north may have spread as far as the southern state of Oaxaca. Evidence of transgenic corn was found there as early as 2000, according to a 2001 article in the US journal Nature by University of California Berkeley microbiologist Ignacio Chapela and then-graduate student David Quist. The biotech industry responded with a campaign to discredit the article and its authors, but the main contention was confirmed by a later study.
GMO proponents claim the benefits of transgenic crops outweigh the threat to biodiversity. Elena Álvarez Bullya, a biologist at the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM) and president of the Union of Socially Committed Scientists, counters that the industry has had 20 years to prove that it could dramatically improve food production. "Globally, there are more hungry people than there were two decades ago," she told La Jornada. She noted that in the US transgenic planting is becoming more costly as weeds develop resistance to the herbicide glyphosate (sold by Monsanto as Roundup); one of the benefits of transgenic crops was supposed to be that the herbicide could be used on weeds without harming the crops. The industry "wants to present itself as leading edge," Álvarez Bullya said, "but it's already an obsolete technology." (LJ, Feb. 13, LJ, Feb. 14)
From Weekly News Update on the Americas, Feb. 19.
See our last posts on Mexico and the global struggle against GMOs.
Weekly News Update on the Americas's blog | 农业 |
2017-17/0142/en_head.json.gz/19916 | Overweight and obesity in young Greek men
Obes Rev. 2007 Oct 24; [Epub ahead of print]Prevalence of overweight and obesity in young Greek men. Papadimitriou A, Fytanidis G, Papadimitriou DT, Priftis KN, Nicolaidou P, Fretzayas A. We determined the prevalence of overweight and obesity in young Greek men in 2006 and examined variations related to their place of residence and educational level. Body height and weight were measured in 2568 conscripts of the Greek army, aged 19-26 years. The calculated body mass index (BMI, kg m(-2)) was correlated to their socio-demographic characteristics, i.e. level of education and place of residence (urban or rural). Overweight and obesity were defined according to the World Health Organization classification. Mean BMI (standard deviation) of the conscripts was 24.7 (4.2). The prevalence of overweight (30 > BMI >/= 25 kg m(-2)) was 28.5% and correlated positively with a higher educational level, whereas the prevalence of obesity (BMI >/= 30 kg m(-2)) was 10.4% and correlated positively with a lower educational level. Our data were compared with those of similar studies performed in the years 1969: BMI 23.8 (1.4) (P < 0.0001) and 1990: BMI 23.8 (2.9) (P < 0.0001), showing a positive secular trend for BMI in Greek conscripts in the last 16 years. In conclusion, we documented an alarmingly high prevalence of overweight and obesity among young Greek men. Link
anthropometry,
Long Live the 28th October 1940
How humans became warlike altruists
Via Yann, I am alerted to a new Science report on the evolution of parochial altruism. The authors describe how hypothetical genes for parochialism (P) and altruism (A) could have co-evolved. Parochial altruists (PA) risk death in combat with other groups. How could the PA combination evolve? The authors suggest that PA fighters do risk death, but in conflicts between groups, it is the groups with more PAs that have a higher chance of winning. Thus, while parochial altruists are selected against (because they risk their lives for their group), they are also selected for (because they kill off more members of less-PA groups in violent conflicts). Moreover, the losing side's numbers are replenished by conquerors' genes (thus becoming more PA).The authors contend that archeologically-derived estimates of group warfare are consistent with their scenario for the evolution parochial altruism. One would think that other, more recent, historical examples could also be used, e.g., between city-state warfare in classical Greece. The paper's innovation is that a seemingly "irrational" behavior from selfish genes' point of view could nonetheless evolve. The genes that cause their bearers to die in patriotic battles may die, but their competing alleles on the losing side may suffer more.Science 26 October 2007:Vol. 318. no. 5850, pp. 636 - 640DOI: 10.1126/science.1144237The Coevolution of Parochial Altruism and WarJung-Kyoo Choi1 and Samuel Bowles2*Altruism—benefiting fellow group members at a cost to oneself—and parochialism—hostility toward individuals not of one's own ethnic, racial, or other group—are common human behaviors. The intersection of the two—which we term "parochial altruism"—is puzzling from an evolutionary perspective because altruistic or parochial behavior reduces one's payoffs by comparison to what one would gain by eschewing these behaviors. But parochial altruism could have evolved if parochialism promoted intergroup hostilities and the combination of altruism and parochialism contributed to success in these conflicts. Our game-theoretic analysis and agent-based simulations show that under conditions likely to have been experienced by late Pleistocene and early Holocene humans, neither parochialism nor altruism would have been viable singly, but by promoting group conflict, they could have evolved jointly.Link
altruism,
Domestication of barley
Genetics. 2007 Oct 18; [Epub ahead of print]Molecular phylogeography of domesticated barley traces expansion of agriculture in the Old World.Saisho D, Purugganan M. Okayama University. Barley (Hordeum vulgare ssp. vulgare) was first cultivated 10,500 years ago in the Fertile Crescent and is one of the founder crops of Eurasian agriculture. Phylogeographic analysis of five nuclear loci and morphological assessment of two traits in >250 domesticated barley accessions reveals that landraces found in South and East Asia are genetically distinct from those in Europe and North Africa. A Bayesian population structure assessment method indicates that barley accessions are subdivided into 6 clusters, and that barley landraces from 10 different geographical regions of Eurasia and North Africa show distinct patterns of distribution across these clusters. Using haplotype frequency data, it appears that the Europe/North Africa landraces are most similar to the Near East population (FST = 0.15) as well as wild barley (FST = 0.11) and are strongly differentiated from all other Asian populations (FST = 0.34 to 0.74). A neighbor-joining analysis using these FST estimates also supports a division between Europe, North African and Near East barley types from more easterly Asian accessions. There is also differentiation in the presence of a naked caryopsis and spikelet row number between eastern and western barley accessions. The data support the differential migration of barley from two domestication events that led to the origin of barley - one in the Fertile Crescent and another further east, possibly at the eastern edge of the Iranian Plateau - with European and North African barley largely originating from the former while much of Asian barley arising from the latter. This suggests that cultural diffusion or independent innovation are responsible for the expansion of agriculture to areas of South and East Asia during the Neolithic Revolution.Link
Domestication,
On the James Watson Black IQ controversy
There are two issues regarding the recent controversy started by James Watson's comments about the intelligence of Africans.The scientist, who won the Nobel prize for his part in discovering the structure of DNA, was quoted in an interview in The Sunday Times saying he was “inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa” because “all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours - whereas all the testing says not really.”The first issue is that Watson's statements, whether one agrees with them or not should not be punished, and represent a valid stance to the problem of population differences in intelligence. Of course institutions (such as the Cold Spring Harbor lab) have the right to choose who works for them, but they also have the responsibility to foster free speech.One would be sympathetic to CSH's condemnation of Watson if it was done on scientific grounds. For example, a scientist denying the fact of evolution could not reasonably expect to have no reprecussions in his career. Institutions are expected to make sure they don't promote bad science, which is not necessarily unorthodox science (which should be encouraged), but rather unargued or anti-empirical science.However, CSH's stance has been motivated by political or social considerations. How could it be otherwise, since the identification of intelligence-fostering genes differentiating populations has not come about yet. The prudent stance is to be agnostic about this issue, until such genes are discovered, or their continued non-discovery makes one doubtful of their existence.The second issue is that Watson's factual comments are entirely accurate! Sub-Saharan Africans do indeed have lower intelligence than people in western societies. That is an observable fact (fact F). What is not certain is whether or not this fact is due to inherent genetic deficiencies (position A) or due to environmental or socio-cultural problems (position B). Social policies should take into account F while the scientists figure out whether A or B explains F.As an analogy, a cook has to take into account that his knife is blunt before he figures out whether it is blunt because it was made poorly or from repeated use.According to Watson:A priori, there is no firm reason to anticipate that the intellectual abilities of people geographically separated during their evolution should prove to have evolved identically. Our wanting to reserve equal powers of reason as some universal heritage of mankind will not be enough to make it so.Once again, Watson's comments are reasonable. Notably they do not identify which populations may have inherent (evolutionary) differences in intelligence, nor do they attempt to quantify the importance of such differences. They simply state the -a priori sensible- stance of a scientist that a phenomenon (e.g., the evolution of cognitive ability) would not have proceeded in the same way under different circumstances.UPDATE: A post-controversy article by James Watson in the Independent. Excerpt:We do not yet adequately understand the way in which the different environments in the world have selected over time the genes which determine our capacity to do different things. The overwhelming desire of society today is to assume that equal powers of reason are a universal heritage of humanity. It may well be. But simply wanting this to be the case is not enough. This is not science.
IQ,
Negroid,
Limitations of genetic ancestry testing
From the EurekAlert release about an upcoming Science article:Some of the tests’ limitations identified by Bolnick and her co-authors include:Most tests trace only a few of your ancestors and a small portion of your DNA,Tests are unlikely to identify all of the groups or locations around the world where a test-taker’s relatives are found,Tests may report false negatives or false positives,Limited sample databases mean test results are subject to misinterpretation,There is no clear connection between DNA and racial/ethnic identity,Tests cannot determine exactly where ancestors lived or what ethnic identity they held.
Neanderthals had same version of FOXP2 "language gene" as modern humans
Via National Geographic:A team of European researchers tested Neandertal bones recovered from a Spanish cave for a certain gene, called FOXP2, that has been dubbed "the speech and language gene."It's the only gene known so far that plays a key role in language. When mutated, the gene primarily affects language without affecting other abilities.The new study suggests that Neandertals (often spelled Neanderthals) had the same version of this gene that modern humans share—a different version than is found in chimpanzees and other apes."From the point of this gene, there is no reason to think that Neandertals did not have language as we do," said the study's lead author, Johannes Krause of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany."Of course many genes are involved in language, so we can't say from this result alone that Neandertals spoke just as modern humans do," Krause added.
FOXP2,
Genome-wide detection of positive selection
Nature 449, 913-918 (18 October 2007) | doi:10.1038/nature06250; Received 8 August 2007; Accepted 13 September 2007Genome-wide detection and characterization of positive selection in human populationsPardis C. Sabeti et al.With the advent of dense maps of human genetic variation, it is now possible to detect positive natural selection across the human genome. Here we report an analysis of over 3 million polymorphisms from the International HapMap Project Phase 2 (HapMap2)1. We used 'long-range haplotype' methods, which were developed to identify alleles segregating in a population that have undergone recent selection2, and we also developed new methods that are based on cross-population comparisons to discover alleles that have swept to near-fixation within a population. The analysis reveals more than 300 strong candidate regions. Focusing on the strongest 22 regions, we develop a heuristic for scrutinizing these regions to identify candidate targets of selection. In a complementary analysis, we identify 26 non-synonymous, coding, single nucleotide polymorphisms showing regional evidence of positive selection. Examination of these candidates highlights three cases in which two genes in a common biological process have apparently undergone positive selection in the same population:LARGE and DMD, both related to infection by the Lassa virus3, in West Africa;SLC24A5 and SLC45A2, both involved in skin pigmentation4, 5, in Europe; and EDAR and EDA2R, both involved in development of hair follicles6, in Asia.Link
HapMap,
Pigmentation,
Conservation of frequently used words in Indo-European languages
I wonder what implications -if any- this finding has on attempts to date the PIE language before the dispersal of its speakers. After all, PIE is constructed based on words found in several (at least two) daughter languages, and thus will tend to use words that are conserved more (since they have survived in more than one language). The implication of this article is that conserved words are replaced at a slower rate. Hence, it is important to take into account the rates of evolution of different terms when trying to figure out how long ago two languages shared a common ancestor.Nature 449, 717-720 (11 October 2007) | doi:10.1038/nature06176; Received 30 April 2007; Accepted 17 August 2007Frequency of word-use predicts rates of lexical evolution throughout Indo-European historyMark Pagel et al.Greek speakers say "ουρα", Germans "schwanz" and the French "queue" to describe what English speakers call a 'tail', but all of these languages use a related form of 'two' to describe the number after one. Among more than 100 Indo-European languages and dialects, the words for some meanings (such as 'tail') evolve rapidly, being expressed across languages by dozens of unrelated words, while others evolve much more slowly—such as the number 'two', for which all Indo-European language speakers use the same related word-form1. No general linguistic mechanism has been advanced to explain this striking variation in rates of lexical replacement among meanings. Here we use four large and divergent language corpora (English2, Spanish3, Russian4 and Greek5) and a comparative database of 200 fundamental vocabulary meanings in 87 Indo-European languages6 to show that the frequency with which these words are used in modern language predicts their rate of replacement over thousands of years of Indo-European language evolution. Across all 200 meanings, frequently used words evolve at slower rates and infrequently used words evolve more rapidly. This relationship holds separately and identically across parts of speech for each of the four language corpora, and accounts for approximately 50% of the variation in historical rates of lexical replacement. We propose that the frequency with which specific words are used in everyday language exerts a general and law-like influence on their rates of evolution. Our findings are consistent with social models of word change that emphasize the role of selection, and suggest that owing to the ways that humans use language, some words will evolve slowly and others rapidly across all languages.Link
Y chromosomes from the Gulf of Oman
European Journal of Human Genetics advance online publication 10 October 2007; doi: 10.1038/sj.ejhg.5201934Y-chromosome diversity characterizes the Gulf of OmanAlicia M CadenasAbstractArabia has served as a strategic crossroads for human disseminations, providing a natural connection between the distant populations of China and India in the east to the western civilizations along the Mediterranean. To explore this region's critical role in the migratory episodes leaving Africa to Eurasia and back, high-resolution Y-chromosome analysis of males from the United Arab Emirates (164), Qatar (72) and Yemen (62) was performed. The role of the Levant in the Neolithic dispersal of the E3b1-M35 sublineages is supported by the data, and the distribution and STR-based analyses of J1-M267 representatives points to their spread from the north, most likely during the Neolithic. With the exception of Yemen, southern Arabia, South Iran and South Pakistan display high diversity in their Y-haplogroup substructure possibly a result of gene flow along the coastal crescent-shaped corridor of the Gulf of Oman facilitating human dispersals. Elevated rates of consanguinity may have had an impact in Yemen and Qatar, which experience significant heterozygote deficiencies at various hypervariable autosomal STR loci.Link
Consanguinity,
J1,
Oman,
TEDtalk by Zeresenay Alemseged
An interesting talk (video) by a paleoanthropologist working in Ethiopia:About this TalkPaleoanthropologist Zeresenay Alemseged is looking for the roots of humanity in Ethiopia's badlands. Here he talks about what he has found -- including the oldest skeleton yet discovered of a hominid child -- and how Africa holds the clues to what makes us human.About Zeresenay AlemsegedZeresenay "Zeray" Alemseged digs in the Ethiopian desert, looking for the earliest signs of humanity. His most exciting find: the 3.3-million-year-old bones of Selam, a 3-year-old hominid child, from the species Australopithecus afarensis.Lots more TEDtalks if you love science.
Neanderthals of the East
A new paper from Svante Paabo's team that shows that Neanderthals may have lived further to the east that can be assumed based on paleoanthropological evidence. Roughly speaking, to identify some remains as Neanderthals, anthropologists have to detect features belonging to the "constellation of features" typical of that species. However, when the material is limited in quantity, one cannot do this: most of the Neanderthal-identifying features are missing! Obviously, this is not a problem with DNA methods, since DNA can be extracted from small bone and tooth fragments.Nature advance online publication 30 September 2007 | doi:10.1038/nature06193Neanderthals in central Asia and SiberiaJohannes Krause et al.Morphological traits typical of Neanderthals began to appear in European hominids at least 400,000 years ago1 and about 150,000 years ago2 in western Asia. After their initial appearance, such traits increased in frequency and the extent to which they are expressed until they disappeared shortly after 30,000 years ago. However, because most fossil hominid remains are fragmentary, it can be difficult or impossible to determine unambiguously whether a fossil is of Neanderthal origin. This limits the ability to determine when and where Neanderthals lived. To determine how far to the east Neanderthals ranged, we determined mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) sequences from hominid remains found in Uzbekistan and in the Altai region of southern Siberia. Here we show that the DNA sequences from these fossils fall within the European Neanderthal mtDNA variation. Thus, the geographic range of Neanderthals is likely to have extended at least 2,000 km further to the east than commonly assumed.Link
Neanderthals had same version of FOXP2 "language g...
Conservation of frequently used words in Indo-Euro... | 农业 |
2017-17/0142/en_head.json.gz/21182 | How SVLC Protects Land
Agricultural Easements
Map of Properties
How SVLC Protects Land Conservation Easements
A conservation easement is a legal agreement between a landowner and a land conservancy (a private, non-profit organization) or government agency that permanently limits uses of the land in order to protect its conservation values. It allows the owner to continue to own and use their land and to sell it or pass it on to heirs.
Purple Owls clover, a source food for the threatened Bay Checkerspot butterfly
When a farmer or rancher donates a conservation easement to a land conservancy, they give up some of the rights associated with the land. For example, they might give up the right to build additional structures,while retaining the right to grow crops. Future owners also will be bound by the easement's terms. The land conservancy is responsible for making sure the easement terms are followed. In Santa Clara County, most agricultural conservation easements have been purchased rather than donated from the land owner. In these cases, the landowner receives payment for the appraised value and can use those funds in whatever way they choose. Conservation easements offer great flexibility. An easement on property containing wildlife habitat might prohibit any development, for example, while one on a farm might allow continued farming and the building of additional agricultural structures. An easement may apply to just a portion of the property, and need not require public access. If the donation benefits the public by permanently protecting important conservation resources and meets other federal tax code requirements--it can qualify as a tax-deductible charitable donation. The amount of the donation is the difference between the land's value with the easement and its value without the easement. Prime grazing land for locally produced beef
Also, conservation easements can be essential for passing land on to the next generation. By removing the land's development potential, the easement lowers its market value, which in turn lowers estate tax. Whether the easement is donated during life or by will, it can make a critical difference in the heir’s ability to keep the land intact. As mentioned above, a landowner often decides to sell a conservation easement rather than donating it. Currently, SVLC is seeking land owners with prime agricultural lands that they would like to keep farming. If you are aware of a landowner in this situation, please call Craige Edgerton, Executive Director at 408- 406-1102 to see if that particular piece of land qualifies.
The Silicon Valley Land Conservancy also owns about 220 acres of land outright. The lands currently owned are for the protection of both plant and animal species that are endangered or threatened. These lands were donated to SVLC as mitigation for power plants in San Jose. Some of the protected species are: Copyright © 2015 Silicon Valley Land Conservancy. All Rights Reserved | 农业 |
2017-17/0142/en_head.json.gz/21198 | COTTON SPIN: Will the boom in U.S. cotton exports continue? Apr 21, 2017 USDA announces 2017 cotton loan rate differentials Apr 18, 2017 With new farm bill looming, next agriculture census critically important Apr 17, 2017 2020 Strategic Plan Positions Peanuts for Optimistic Future Apr 19, 2017 South Texas cotton off to good start in '03
Cecil H. Yancy Jr. Farm Press Editorial Staff | Jun 05, 2003
The cotton crop is off to its best start since 1988 in the Rio Grande Valley, giving South Texas farmers a reason to feel optimistic about their prospects after coming off a tough year in 2002. “We've had a good spring and it's past replanting time,” says Sam Simmons of Harlingen. He and other South Texas producers toured the offices of Cotton Incorporated in Cary, N.C., recently, where the Southwest Farm Press caught up with them. An April hailstorm knocked down some of the stand, but overall the crop is off to a good start. Producers in the Rio Grande Valley shoot to have their crop planted in early February to make the crop by September. Last year, late plantings as well as a rainfall deficit, a fourth of the normal amount, hurt yields. Growers in the area had the second lowest bale production level on record. The irrigated crop suffered because growers couldn't get water from Mexico. Simmons produced a little more than 1 bale of cotton to the acre. “This year I'm much more optimistic,” he says. “This is best start we've had since 1988.” Mark Willis of Raymondville is another producer who's off to a good start. The April hailstorm took out about 100 acres of cotton on his operation, but the soil moisture levels are good. On the down side, boll weevils earlier in the year were being trapped in larger numbers than they were last year. Simmons says he sprays 12 times in the irrigated crop. Despite the problems with rainfall, Willis had a good year last season, producing yields of more than 2 bales per acre under irrigation. He grows 2,500 acres of cotton. Willis says he doesn't watch the markets like he used to. “At 65 cents, you don't have any LDP,” he says. He grows grain sorghum in rotation with cotton. [email protected] | 农业 |
2017-17/0142/en_head.json.gz/21246 | Follow @thecattlesite News & Analysis Features Markets & Reports Sustainability Knowledge Centre Directory Events Our Shop News National Bans on GM Food, Feed Imports Rejected07 September 2015 EU - The agriculture committee rejected the European Commission's draft law that would give member states the power to restrict or prohibit the use of EU-approved GM food or feed on their territory.The committee feared that arbitrary national bans could distort competition on the EU's single market and jeopardise the Union's food production sectors, which are heavily dependent on imports of GM feed.
The agriculture committee's opinion, adopted by 28 votes in favour to eight against, with six abstentions, will now be scrutinised by the environment committee, which has the lead on this file, before the European Parliament as a whole votes on the matter.
"Today's vote in the agriculture committee sends a clear message: the Commission's proposal to allow member states to decide whether or not to restrict or ban the use of GM food and feed on their territory must be rejected.
"We have not been building the EU's single market to let arbitrary political decisions distort it completely," said the draftsman of the opinion, Albert Dess (MEP from Germany for the European People's Party).
"The Commission's approach is completely unrealistic. We have many sectors in the EU that rely to a great extent on imports of GM feed and would not be able to survive if it is banned.
"If we allowed this, then all animal food production in the EU would be at stake, which could make us much more dependent on food imports from third countries that do not necessarily respect our high production standards. And we certainly want to avoid this," he added.
The environment committee will adopt its position at its meeting on 12 and 13 October. Parliament could then scrutinise the proposal at the 26-29 October plenary session in Strasbourg.
TheCattleSite News Desk Feed/Nutrition/Forage, Policy and Regulatory, General Share This | 农业 |
2017-17/0142/en_head.json.gz/22128 | Seed farming: The sesame solution
Description: Santos Machado takes off his baseball cap and wipes the sweat off his brow. It’s early August and Machado is lying on his back on the dirt driveway of his 3½-hectare farm in León, Nicaragua, halfway underneath his sembrador – a large seed and fertilizer dispenser meant to be hitched behind a pair of oxen. Date: 01 August 2008
Author: Greg Amos
Source: BC Business
Santos Machado takes off his baseball cap and wipes the sweat off his brow. It’s early August and Machado is lying on his back on the dirt driveway of his 3½-hectare farm in León, Nicaragua, halfway underneath his sembrador – a large seed and fertilizer dispenser meant to be hitched behind a pair of oxen. He takes a breather before torquing a wrench to make adjustments to the machine. Fruit trees shade the yard from the hot midday sun while a half dozen pigs loiter nearby in a swale of cool mud. The sound of Machado’s two young children, helping their mother grind coffee beans, can be heard from inside the family’s partially walled home. Machado is getting ready to plant a new sesame crop. In a few days, he’ll use the sembrador – bought with help from a Canadian-funded aid project called Produmer – to plant seeds for their future.
Machado is one of more than 800 Nicaraguan farmers being helped by this unglamorous but progressive initiative – one that’s showing measurable results and attracting investors and philanthropists from across North America. Produmer is managed by the Mennonite Economic Development Associates (MEDA), a not-for-profit organization, and gets funding from private investors and the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA). Its focus is small – the tiny sesame seed – but its ambitions are large: to bring financial independence to farming families who have been frequent victims of indiscriminate natural disasters and unforgiving world markets. Produmer takes a different approach than that of a typical development project, where money and technology are dumped into countries without collaborating with the people meant to benefit. Instead, it hinges on the idea that poor farmers are perfectly capable of taking responsibility for improving their own lives – so long as they can access the necessary cash, equipment and training.
As far as needy locales go, Nicaragua is near the top of the list. While the World Bank reports that the country’s economy is slowly growing and stabilizing, it remains one of the poorest countries in Central America, with the third-lowest per-capita income in the Western Hemisphere. Almost 70 per cent of rural Nicaraguans still live in poverty. Farmers have worked at organizing themselves here, bartering collectively in co-ops to gain some leverage when they sell their goods, but many still distrust the handful of exporting companies that dominate their commodity markets. Bank loans that could allow them to grow out of their dependent positions are extremely hard to come by.“It was eye-opening how these people are denied funds,” says John Toews, owner of Oakhill Enterprises, an Abbotsford home-building company, and an investor in MEDA’s work. He took part in a MEDA-sponsored tour of Nicaragua in early April, visiting rural communities north of León. “These are hard-working, family-oriented people, and sesame seeds are their main income.” Toews invested $25,000 into MEDA’s microfinance program, which enables farmers to access small loans for equipment and training, and he expects to net a seven per cent return in five years. (Ninety-seven per cent of MEDA’s microfinance loans have been repaid.) MEDA holds that a business-like approach is better than straight charity – a key reason why the organization has attracted the support of private investors such as Toews.
MEDA has been doing development work in Nicaragua since 1990 and started the Produmer project specifically to assist farmers in 2001. After four years of working with various crops, MEDA determined that sesame was the best fit for the people, the land and the economy. Produmer program director Keith Poe, an American raised in Nicaragua, knows first-hand that sesame is a hardy crop that can tolerate fierce rains and poor soil and has a strong natural resistance to pests. “Sesame is something that will last forever here because it’s easy to grow and it doesn’t take much money to start,” he says. It takes a lot of manual labour, he adds, but requires neither irrigation nor vast tracts of land and can be grown where coffee can’t. It bucks the trend of industrialized agriculture by suiting the land it grows on, and small growers benefit the most from it.The grain arrived in Latin America from Asia via Spanish conquistadors and is now found wherever hamburger buns, sushi or tahini exist. The worldwide sesame market is sizeable and growing rapidly, driven by the expanding middle class in India and China and a growing international appetite for hamburgers. Worldwide trade was valued at $850 million last year, up 70 per cent since 1993. In 2006 Nicaragua’s sesame industry exported 3,000 tonnes within Central America and to Japan and Europe.
Since 2001 MEDA has managed to convert $2.8 million in CIDA money into training and development for Nicaraguan sesame farmers, with the goal of keeping them prosperous in perpetuity. But to get the benefit out of sesame, funding and expertise had to get into the hands of farmers. According to CIDA’s head of aid in Nicaragua, the agency turned to the Mennonite organization because “there was no local agency that could provide sesame farmers with comprehensive support.” (Another reason for the hands-on approach is that corruption is endemic in Nicaragua: the country ranks 123rd out of 179 nations in Transparency International’s 2007 Corruption Perceptions Index.)
Farmers under Produmer boosted their production of conventional sesame by 68 per cent between 2006 and 2007, although those gains took a heavy hit from Hurricane Felix. But it’s not a project for the unmotivated: those who don’t buy into the methods taught in Produmer’s classrooms are cut off from further assistance. So far, about 24 per cent of the initial farmers have been turfed. The 825 who remain are scattered over 300 kilometres of coastal plains, punctuated by half a dozen dormant volcanoes, and last year their gross incomes went up 24 per cent. That’s the kind of return Toews says he wants from his investment. “It’s important the money helps other people, rather than just having it grow for myself,” he says. “Microfinance is not there to make money on the backs of the poor.”
In the village of Malpaisillo, three hours down a pothole-ridden highway from León, farmers such as Carmelo Silva plant their sesame seeds using oxen and local labourers. As a result of Produmer’s training, Silva now plants only certified seeds, which guarantee a high yield and which buyers welcome as a sign of quality. “Buyers don’t even bother offering low prices for my crops anymore,” he says with a smile. After weeks of 15-hour days in the field, Silva will harvest his plants by machete, pile the stalks together in clusters, whack the sun-dried seeds out of their pods and sell them to a buyer pre-arranged through his co-op.
Luis de la Cruz Sotelo, the soft-spoken president of the farmers’ co-op in Las Lomas, in northwest Nicaragua, is equally upbeat. “It’s 100 per cent easier to make money now,” says Sotelo, 49. Twenty years ago, he scraped by on rented land, but today he owns several acres and adds more land each year. Rather than focusing on creating value-added sesame products – which would depend on Nicaragua’s unstable manufacturing infrastructure – Produmer is helping farmers establish a stable niche in the sometimes volatile global sesame markets now dominated by China, India and Myanmar (Burma). One way to do that, as Sotelo discovered, is to go organic.“If you want to sell, you go conventional. But if you want to keep your money, you go organic,” says Sotelo, referring to the lower costs of pesticide-free production and higher prices fetched by the organic product. The three-year wait for certification made for some lean times, he says, but it was worth it: Sotelo and other organic farmers saw their incomes soar by 69 per cent between 2005 and 2006. Hugo Ramon Moreno, a Nicaraguan agronomist working for MEDA, points out that the new techniques are making a difference, as he tours farms around León. “Farmers weren’t using their land that well, the seeds were of low quality and chemical products were destroying the land,” he says. “Now Produmer is providing us with an answer for all these problems.”
This is the kind of slow and steady progress many foreign aid projects assume the rural poor won’t wait for, says a Vancouver expert on international development. “There may be a perception that the poor don’t think about the future,” says Hisham Zerriffi, an assistant professor at UBC’s Liu Institute for Global Issues. “But a stakeholder is not just some farmer who sits back and receives foreign aid, then goes back to doing what he did before.” Zerriffi says MEDA carefully considered the amount of time farmers are willing to forego present value in favour of future cash flow and financial stability. By providing the farmers with classroom and in-the-field instruction on how to properly plant, thin, fertilize and control weeds, Zerriffi says, the project also avoids a “technology dump” problem, which occurs when foreign aid agencies pick up and leave after introducing new technology. Having provided training specifically on growing sesame since 2005 – training that augments farmers’ traditional knowledge – Produmer has, according to Zerriffi, established a succession plan for when the project ends, likely near the end of 2008.
Nicaraguan farmers have received foreign aid before, but success on this scale is new, and some sesame farmers fear the end of MEDA’s involvement as advisor, advocate and agent. They feel it will be difficult to tap into the competitive world sesame market without MEDA’s assistance. At the 2006 Baking Association of Canada conference, a Nicaraguan delegation was unable to wean Canadian importers away from cheaper conventional sesame from India. That said, MEDA’s $3-million microfinance treasury will remain after Produmer is gone, with the goal of growing into a stable source of financing far into the future. Larger institutional investors are also starting to come on board.
Indeed, the Nicaraguan farmers have already proven they can weather the most severe of storms. Last September’s Category 5 Hurricane Felix (and ensuing rains) destroyed some 31 per cent of the sesame fields planted under Produmer – and yet many farmers still turned a profit due to the higher quality of plants that survived. Now they’re using the funds to invest in their futures by buying equipment, building sturdier homes and sending their children to school. In a country with a history of disasters, both acts of God and man-made, it’s only natural for there to be some trepidation about the future. But as they begin to take over their own finances, technology and training, farmers such as Santos Machado, Carmelo Silva and Luis de la Cruz Sotelo are starting to believe that they can make it on their own.
Greg Amos is a 2007 graduate of Langara College’s School of Journalism and the first winner of the CIDA-Langara Journalism-International Development Scholarship, which provided funds and support to research and write extensively on Canadian international development abroad.Please click here to view original article. | 农业 |
2017-17/0142/en_head.json.gz/23059 | 7 Foods We Should Be Eating But Aren't
Dina Spector
The standard American diet needs to be revamped. Aside from eating more fruits and vegetables and less sugar, there are many less mainstream (and often misunderstood) foods that we should be eating — either for health, environmental, or economic reasons — but are not.
Here's a short list.
1. Lionfish
Lionfish are native to the western Pacific Ocean, but have found their way into the Caribbean, Atlantic, and the Gulf of Mexico, creating chaos in those waters by devouring anything and everything in its path.
The best way to control the lionfish population — which scientists say will continue to grow uncontrollably — is to eat them.
The red-and-white-striped fish are prized in the aquarium trade. Experts blame the ocean invasion on a two-decade-old practice of dumping unwanted aquarium fish into the water. Although lionfish have venomous dorsal fins that can be painful to humans if stung, the meat is edible. It's tasty, too.
National Geographic describes lionfish as having "moist, buttery meat that is often compared to hogfish, one of the most popular reef fish served in restaurants."
Fishermen in Florida are trying to build a commercial market for lionfish, which are mostly caught in lobster traps. Divers can also spear the fish.
Following an aggressive "Eat Lionfish" campaign launched by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in 2010, many restaurants have started putting lionfish on their menus. For home chefs, there's also a Lionfish Cookbook.
2. Goat
Goat is the most widely-consumed red meat in the world, a staple of Middle Eastern and Asian countries where large herds can graze on mountainous pastures. Ounce-for-ounce, goat meat has less fat and calories than poultry, beef, or pork. But within the United States, goat meat is still a rare sight in mainstream grocery stores.
As Andrew Zimmern, the host of the Travel Channel's "Bizarre Foods," explained to The Baltimore Sun last May: "It's delicious, and it's inexpensive, but goat is like soccer in America. It's growing. We like it, but we don't get it."
Goats have long been perceived as the low-class animal of agricultural world, according to J.J. Jones, an agricultural economist at Oklahoma State University."Up until the '90s, when you pictured a goat, you pictured one of the billy goats, with the horns standing on top your car hood, eating a tin can," he said.
Although the demand for goat meat has risen with a growth in U.S. ethnic populations, it's still an underexploited meat. (The United States Department of Agriculture doesn't even track U.S. goat consumption). One problem is that goats are not ideal for factory farming. A 70-pound goat will yield around 35 pounds of meat (50% of the animal), whereas a 1,100-pound beef cow will yield 700 pounds of meat (around 60% of the animal), says Jones, who has his own farm.
There's also a perception that has to be changed. "People think of [goat] as an exotic meat," David Martin, the owner of a goat-meat distributor in Georgia told The Economist.
In taste, goat is similar to wild game such as deer. According to Washington Post writers Mark Scarbrough and Bruce Weinstein, goat meat is "neither buttery nor beef-tenderloin tender, but it offers a wider palette for culinary foreplay in the kitchen."
You can grind it, or eat the chops or loin.
3. Bugs
Roughly two billion people around the world, mostly in tropical regions, consume insects as a viable protein source. But in the United States, edible insects like beetles, wasps, caterpillars, grasshoppers, and worms, have yet to shed their "yuck" factor.
In May of this year, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization reported that eating bugs could reduce world hunger (insects are easy to raise and there are lots of them), help the environment (insects use less water than pigs or cows and feed on waste materials), and provide a good source of nutrition (insects are packed with protein).
At home, there is growing interest in specialty items like granola bars made with cricket flour and scientists are working on creative recipes to make insects more appetizing. Insect farming, however, is not a big business and "consumer disgust" is still a barrier to getting Americans to regularly eat insects.
4. Beans
Beans are cheap, easy to prepare, and have a long shelf-life. Yet most Americans don't get enough of these nutrient-dense legumes in their diet, a panel of experts said last year at the Institute of Food Technologists' Wellness 12 meeting.
Edible dry beans include pinto beans, black beans, garbanzo beans (chickpeas), kidney beans, and many other varieties. A serving of dry beans is rich in B-vitamins, iron, calcium, fiber, protein, and is low in sodium and calories.
Beans are a unique food. Under the 2010 Dietary Guidelines for Americans, beans are listed as either a vegetable or a protein (with the exception of green beans which are grouped with other vegetables). Many consumers still don't realize that beans are a vegetable.
Consumption of white beans, like navy beans, Great Northern beans and lima, is now less than half of what it was in the 1960s, according to the USDA. Nonwhite beans have followed a similar pattern.
5. The Buffaloberry
The buffaloberry — a slightly sour fruit that is roughly the size of a currant — could be the next "superfruit," according to researchers who recently published their findings in the Journal of Food Science.
The little-known berry has historically been eaten by Native Americans and flourishes on the marginal lands of Indian reservations in North and South Dakota.
New research shows that the buffaloberry contains high amounts of lycopene, an antioxidant that appears to lower the risk of certain types of cancers. Lycopene is one of the pigments that also gives tomatoes and bell peppers their deep red colors. According to the study, the lycopene content of buffaloberries tends to be "high in comparison to tomatoes and other commercially available fruit."
On top of the health benefits, buffaloberries can thrive pretty much anywhere (even in dry environments with poor soil quality), making it a potentially valuable food crop, according to the study.
6. Seaweed
Sushi may be making steady strides on the American dining scene, but seaweed consumption is still "minimal" compared to Asian countries, a study in the journal Trends in Food Science & Technology reported in 2012.
Our oceans are full of seaweed, the name for countless species of marine plants and algae. Although molecules from seaweed have traditionally been used as a thickening agent in food, the edible red, brown, and green varieties are gaining attention as a good source of vitamins, minerals, fiber, calcium, and protein. A popular red seaweed, better known as nori, can contain as much as 47% protein, according to a study published in the Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. If prepared with just a light amount of olive oil, seaweed is also low in calories and fat.
Raw seaweed still isn't easy to find in the regular supermarket here in the U.S., though the nutrient-dense food is increasingly being sold as a convenient dried or roasted snack.
"There's a whole world of algae out there that can be developed," Ole Mouritsen, a professor from the University of Southern Denmark told BBC News. In 2011, Mouritsen authored a study describing new ways to enhance the flavor of seaweed as the product finds its way into Western cuisine.
There are some concerns about arsenic in seaweed, namely hijiki, a type of seaweed that is distinguished by its black and shredded appearance and is not used in rolling sushi.
7. Fruit and vegetable skins
The skin, cores, or stalks of fruits and vegetables — parts that we normally throw away — can be full of nutrients. Take the hairy skin of a kiwifruit, which is completely edible and "contains three times the antioxidants of the pulp," according to Marilyn Glenville, former president of the Food and Health Forum at the Royal Society of Medicine.
Glenville told The Daily Mail that the brown fuzz "also fights off bugs such as Staphylococcus and E-coli, which are responsible for food poisoning."
To make the skin easier to eat (it is slightly tart and some people might not like the texture), the California Kiwifruit Commission suggests leaving the skin on and slicing the fruit into thin pieces, so you only get a small amount of skin with each bite.
Potato skins, orange peels (an unpeeled orange can be thrown into a juicer), and broccoli stalks are also good sources of nutrition.See Also:This Tiny Berry Is Being Called The Next SuperfruitResearcher Explains The One Big Problem Plaguing Polar BearsOne Of The World's Most Poisonous Creatures Is Now On Display In NYCSEE ALSO: 7 Superfoods That Will Take Your Health To The Next Level | 农业 |
2017-17/0142/en_head.json.gz/23232 | California State Water Project boosts irrigation allotment Apr 18, 2017 Even with effective synthetic alternatives Sulfur remains a relevant tool for controlling powdery mildew Apr 12, 2017 With buds pushing in late March, start of San Joaquin Valley wine grape crop follows normal timing Apr 12, 2017 Walnut growers responsible for ensuring clean water use on operation Apr 05, 2017 Huffman’s bill out of step with ag’s biotechnology
Richard Cornett | May 17, 2007
Freshman California Assemblyman Jared Huffman has resurrected a failed bill of two years ago, AB 541, that is a colossally bad piece of legislation that would impact researchers, seed and biotech companies, and plant breeders, as well as farmers and consumers in general. In 2005, Assemblyman John Laird introduced a similar measure aimed at holding makers of genetically engineered crops (GE) liable for damages. Fortunately, it died in the Assembly. So, here we are, a couple of years down the road, and we are being forced to revisit the issue being pushed by the Democrat from San Rafael. The Laird legislation was bad then, and Huffman’s version is equally bad now. For now, the bill has been put on hold in the Assembly Agriculture Committee, but agriculture will have to revisit it again early next year. In essence, the measure creates a series of obstacles to agricultural research and practices that employ gene-splicing technology — the most precise, predictable, and reliable techniques for the genetic improvement of plants. Besides holding manufacturers developing GE crops liable for damage if their work becomes present in nearby fields, the legislation would ban open-field production of GE crops in the development of medications; would require growers to give county ag commissioners at least 30 days notice before engaging in open-field development of other GE plants; and would establish a GE crop registration process so that non-GE farmers can reduce the chance of crop “contamination.” Further, the language establishes “strict liability” on manufacturers of agricultural bio traits. Strict liability has always been reserved for inherently dangerous products — such as the making of explosives or the keeping of a boa constrictor as a pet. It has no place in agriculture. Huffman says the reason this topic has been resurrected is directly linked to an incident last year in which an experimental form of rice showed up in grain elevators in Arkansas, Missouri, and Louisiana. The freshman lawmaker says AB 541 is necessary to protect California farmers against significant losses if their conventional or organic crops are ruined by GE plants, seeds or pollen. Huffman fails to realize that current legal recourse is available and works for growers. This bill would impose liability on the manufacturer of a safe, legal, government-sanctioned product, based on activity that could only occur long after the product left the manufacturer’s care and control. Additionally, no U.S. grower has been sued because they were unknowingly growing crops containing biotech traits. Only the most egregious cases of patent infringement have resulted in lawsuits. During the past decade, only 90 lawsuits have been pursued against farmers for patent infringement, in contrast to millions of farmers (in the U.S.) who have planted GE crops. Regarding a crop registration process, there is no need to establish a burdensome bureaucratic registration process for a problem that doesn’t exist. Talking to your neighbors about their planting intentions is the best way to reduce the chance of GE traits turning up in your crops. And, it’s well worth noting, that only three biotech crops — corn, cotton, and alfalfa — are grown on any significant acreage in California. Organic production for each of these is on a tiny amount of land, and the National Organic Standard does not ban trace amounts of biotech products in organic crops. As to the obstacle AB 541 poses for the future development of medicines, no less a personage than Dr. Henry I. Miller, a physician and fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution and author of the popular book “The Frankenfood Myth,” had this to say in a recent news article: “The legislation prohibits ‘the production of a pharmaceutical crop’ in open fields in a plant species ‘commonly produced for use as food for humans and animals.’ This might sound plausible, but it is a perfect example of the kind of inflexible, one-size-fits-all regulation that ignores the science and can do incalculable damage to ‘biopharming,’ one of biotech’s most important applications.” Miller adds, “The concept of biopharming is not new. Many common medicines, such as codeine, morphine and the anti-cancer drug Taxol have long been purified from plants. But biopharming’s great promise lies in using the techniques of gene-splicing to make old plants do radically new things.” He sums up AB 541: “In other words, in defiance of science and common sense, the California bill creates a regulatory scheme in which the degree of governmental scrutiny and intrusion is inversely proportional to the likely risk.” | 农业 |
2017-17/0142/en_head.json.gz/23311 | Climate Policy Initiative and University of Palangka Raya Support Indonesian Forest Production and Protection Program with Funding from the Norwegian Government
June 28, 2013 JAKARTA, INDONESIA – Today, Climate Policy Initiative (CPI), a global advisory and analysis organization, and the University of Palangka Raya (UNPAR), announced an analytical program to support the sustainable oil palm pilot project in Central Kalimantan, Indonesia. The Production and Protection program is funded through an initial three-year, $1.6 million grant from the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation.
CPI and UNPAR will use the funds in partnership with local stakeholders to support the Government of Central Kalimantan’s vision for strong green growth underpinned by a high-yield, low environmental-impact oil palm sector.
Research will be conducted locally by teams at a new Centre of Excellence, based in the Faculty of Agriculture at UNPAR, in close consultation with communities, businesses, and government decision makers, to identify options that increase agricultural productivity, expand the use of degraded lands, and protect high conservation value areas. The initiative’s first three-year phase will focus on building robust evidence and technical capacity to support government-led efforts to implement its plans for a sustainable oil palm sector. By focusing learning around a pilot project, the initiative aims to demonstrate piece-by-piece what it takes to de-risk investments in oil palm across entire landscapes and ensure that communities, local decision makers, businesses, and small holders all benefit from economic growth and development.
“Through this partnership with Climate Policy Initiative, UNPAR hopes to develop a model for achieving Central Kalimantan’s goals of strong economic growth for businesses and communities, while protecting valuable natural resources, that can be used for a model for other regions in Indonesia,” said Dr. Yusurum Jagau, Dean of Agriculture. “We look forward to working with CPI to provide robust analysis that will support Central Kalimantan’s Green Growth Strategy, increase output of its most important agricultural product, palm oil, relocate palm oil production onto suitable low-carbon lands, and maintain critical natural resources necessary for future economic development.”
The program builds from a foundation that includes Central Kalimantan’s action plan for green house gasses, REDD+ strategy (Strategy to Reduce Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation), the province’s groundbreaking regulation on sustainable palm oil, and the Governor’s own roadmap to achieve sustainable palm oil. The Governor of Central Kalimantan has also created a working group consisting of government, business, academia, and civil society representatives who will advise the local government on policy to achieve green growth with palm oil.
“The right policies and programs are essential to drive investment in ways that optimize Indonesia’s natural resources and underpin long-term growth and prosperity,” said Thomas C. Heller, Executive Director of CPI. CPI’s Indonesia program is led by Jane Wilkinson, an expert in climate finance and REDD+, who has lived and worked in Indonesia.
Central Kalimantan is one of Indonesia’s largest provinces with 7.75 million hectares of forest and some of the largest expanses of tropical peatlands in the world. These areas are not only home to Indonesia’s unique biodiversity but they also provide ecosystem services such as fresh water and livelihoods to communities, and maintain a substantial carbon stock.
As a first step in the analysis, CPI has published a summary of natural capital assessment, which may inform spatial planning in the region. For more information, visit www.ClimatePolicyInitiative.org and www.UPR.ac.id
University of Palangka Raya is the first and oldest state university in Central Kalimantan. UNPAR provides policy and technical support to the Central Kalimantan provincial government, including through the development of policy briefs that led to the province’s sustainable palm oil regulations and the Regional Action Plan for GHG Mitigation.
Climate Policy Initiative is an analysis and advisory organization that works to improve the most important energy and land use policies in the world. An independent, not-for-profit organization supported in part by a grant from the Open Society Foundations, CPI has offices and programs in Brazil, China, Europe, India, Indonesia, and the United States.
Climate Policy Initiative
Email: [email protected] | 农业 |
2017-17/0142/en_head.json.gz/23358 | Mark Uchanski (foreground), a horticulturalist in NMSU’s Department of Plant and Environmental Sciences, discusses winter planting issues with PES graduate student Juliette Enfield (right) and undergraduate Daniel Schoderbek in mid-November. They are working with a number of other NMSU students and faculty members based in Las Cruces and Alcalde, as well as outside collaborators from New Mexico and southern Colorado, to compare the viability of three hoop house designs for winter vegetable production in the Southwest. Hoop House Designs Being Tested For Winter Vegetable Production
Jay Rodman, NMSU News Center •
December 6, 2011 Late October and mid-November might seem late to be planting salad greens in New Mexico, but a group of New Mexico State University faculty members, students and farm crew were not deterred by custom.
For the third year in a row, they were starting rows of Trout’s Back lettuce and Bloomsdale spinach from seed in a dozen hoop houses, also known as passive-solar high tunnels. Six of the structures are located at NMSU’s Leyendecker Plant Science Research Center south of Las Cruces and the other six are at NMSU’s Sustainable Agriculture Science Center at Alcalde, north of Santa Fe.
When the last of this crop is harvested in late winter or early spring, it will provide the final data in a three-year study of the viability of these low-budget greenhouses for New Mexico small producers who want to grow vegetables in the winter.
This project, titled “Winter Production of Leafy Greens in the Southwestern U.S.A. Using High Tunnels,” actually involves 18 hoop houses—in addition to the ones at the two agricultural science centers, there is one at each of six cooperator sites in New Mexico, Arizona and Colorado. The project is funded by a $194,000 grant from USDA’s Western division of the Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education program.
The project’s lead researcher is Steve Guldan, agronomist in the Department of Plant and Environmental Sciences and the superintendent of the Alcalde science center.
“During an advisory committee meeting a few years ago, Don Bustos, a successful small-scale grower, recommended that more research was needed on year-round vegetable production,” said Guldan. “I felt that the USDA’s Western SARE program was an ideal source of potential funding for research on this topic.”
The project team includes three other faculty members and five Extension specialists from NMSU, plus a Colorado State University Extension agent from La Plata County. Two NMSU graduate students are intimately involved in the project, as well, and will be using data from the study in their master’s theses.
“The main goal of the project is to determine the best way for growers who want to engage in winter vegetable production to provide for direct markets such as restaurants, year-round farmers’ markets, community-supported agriculture projects, and maybe even schools,” said Guldan. “But we want to do it in a way that doesn’t require expensive heated structures—and to see if the types of passive solar structures in this study can provide the winter growing environment for some cold-hardy vegetables like lettuce and spinach.”
Juliette Enfield is a master’s student in PES who has participated in the project since its inception. “We’re growing lettuce and spinach because they’re two crops that are always in demand, and they’re good things to grow in a hoop house because they’re the most efficient use of space,” she said. “If you plant something like tomatoes, a lot of the space is being used for vegetation, not the actual product that you sell.”
“We have two replications of three different designs of hoop house at each of the two science centers,” said team member Mark Uchanski, a horticulturalist in the Department of Plant and Environmental Sciences and Enfield’s advisor. “The low design is a single layer of plastic covering up the frame of the hoop house. The medium end design is a single layer covered with a second layer, and a fan to blow air between the layers to provide insulation. And then the final, and high-end, design adds several 55-gallon drums, painted black, inside the hoop house that allow for the capture of heat energy during the day and then the re-release of that heat energy at night.”
Del Jimenez, NMSU Extension agriculture specialist with the Rural Agricultural Improvement and Public Affairs Project, has been developing low-cost hoop houses for several years and came up with the basic designs used in the study. The structures measure 16 by 32 feet and feature PVC pipe frames and translucent plastic sheeting. They are equipped with overhead sprinkler systems.
Evaluation of the three designs involves analysis of the productivity of the two crops, measured in pounds of harvest, for each of the three years of the study. Productivity will be correlated with the type of house, the planting date and the location.
Fine tuning of the productivity analysis will involve temperature and moisture data. Each house contains equipment to monitor and log six data points of inside and outside air and soil temperature, sampled every 30 minutes between planting and final harvest.
It isn’t enough to show that a good crop can be grown under New Mexico’s winter conditions. The hoop-house approach must make economic sense, as well.
Evaluating the viability of hoop houses for actual producers involves weighing the costs of growing the vegetables, including the investment of building and maintaining an appropriately designed hoop house, against the anticipated income from the produce. That’s the focus of Connie Falk, a professor in the Department of Agricultural Economics and Agricultural Business, and her graduate student Emmanuel Hecher.
“The economic analysis involves a risk simulation model, which estimates the probability of the returns from selling each crop in each of the designs at each site, exceeding zero,” said Falk. “We examine the probability of returns being positive for a range of possible prices observed during the experiment in different markets. The first-year analysis indicates that the probability of positive returns in Alcalde for all prices is lower than in Las Cruces.”
When Falk and Hecher complete that analysis, farmers will be able to make an economically prudent decision about whether to build a hoop house and which model to select for their climate zone.
While definitive conclusions won’t be available until after data from the 2011-12 harvest have been analyzed, some tentative conclusions can be gleaned from first- and second-year data.
For one thing, yields were higher for both lettuce and spinach crops planted in October, as compared with the crops planted in November. This was attributed to the longer days and warmer temperatures during the October crop’s germination period.
In terms of which model hoop house makes sense for which climate zones, the preliminary report suggests that while the high-end version with two layers of plastic and the heat-conserving barrels kept the inside temperature closer to the optimum for production of these crops, the total production at the Leyendecker site was actually higher in the double-layer hoop houses without the barrels.
As with much NMSU research, this project is expected to offer benefits on many levels. The researchers are breaking new ground with the help of their students, for whom it is a great learning experience. The collaborating producers are not only learning as they go; Uchanski reports that some are also growing other vegetables, including bell peppers and radishes, during the rest of the year.
And the state’s economy stands to benefit in the long run, as the results of the study help other producers increase their production by incorporating the optimal hoop house into their operations.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OcjQc0ejAt8[/youtube]
Download Today! Related ArticlesYou Want Our Native Identity? Take ItFighting Against Fracking In ColombiaLand Defenders In War and Peace Hold the Line Against Historical ExtinctionIndian Gaming Saw Record Revenues in 2015 to Become Top Casino SectorIndigenous Scholars Endorse D.C. March for ScienceTags climate. Comments are closed.
Send this to friendYour emailRecipient emailYour messageHi, I thought you might find this interesting:Hoop House Designs Being Tested For Winter Vegetable Production URL: https://indiancountrymedianetwork.com/news/hoop-house-designs-being-tested-for-winter-vegetable-production/SendCancel | 农业 |
2017-17/0142/en_head.json.gz/24578 | John Kufuor helps transform Ghana into a model for African agriculture Former President John Kufuor cut the number of hungry people in half through by using innovative ways to help farmers. By
Dana Drugmand, Nourishing the Planet
Former president of Ghana John Kufuor recently was awarded the World Food Prize for his work in dramatically improving food production in his small Africa country, where the number of hungry people was cut in half.
ISSOUF SANOGO/AFP/Getty Images/Newscom/File View Caption About video ads
of In a report by the International Food Policy Research Institute, former President of Ghana John Kufuor describes the incredible transformation his country underwent during the first decade of the new millennium. Under Kufuor’s presidency, the number of hungry people in Ghana was cut in half. The poverty rate, which had been at 51.7 percent in 1991, had shrunk to 26.5 percent in 2008. Ghana’s transformation over the past decade has made it one of the more politically stable countries in Africa, and, as President Kufuor writes, Ghana has “made some of the greatest progress in reducing hunger, poverty, and malnutrition.”Kufuor, a recently announced recipient of the 2011 World Food Prize, served as Ghana’s democratically elected president from 2001-2009. In the opening of the report, titled “Ghana’s Transformation,” he writes, “When I became Ghana’s President in 2000, my country needed solutions for hunger, malnutrition, and a host of other problems.” Recommended:
Kufuor found agriculture to be a catalyst for these solutions. Agriculture is critical to Ghana’s economy, as some 60 percent of the country’s population depends directly on rural agriculture. Kufuor’s administration worked to harness an agriculture transformation to strengthen the nation’s economy.
Ghana is the world’s second-largest exporter of cocoa, and under Kufuor’s administration, cocoa production in Ghana doubled between 2002 and 2005. The government helped educate cocoa farmers on best practices and increased farmers’ share of the international export price from 40 percent up to 70 percent as an incentive to increase production.In addition to increasing crop yields, the government helped transform agriculture in Ghana by supporting irrigation, improved seeds and crop diversification, building feeder roads, silos, and cold stores for horticultural crops, and making tractors more affordable for farmers. The government also helped increase school enrollment by launching a program to give schoolchildren a daily hot, nutritious meal made from locally produced food.In the end of the report, Kufuor highlights the need to empower farmers and fight widespread global hunger. “But in a world as technologically advanced as ours, widespread hunger is not justice. Farmers must be transformed by educating and empowering them.… A healthy and happy future for mankind demands such farmers because food is the most basic of needs. It decides not just the health of individuals but also the health of communities.”Dana Drugmand is a research intern with the Nourishing the Planet project.To purchase your own copy of State of the World 2011: Innovations that Nourish the Planet, please click HERE. And to watch the one minute book trailer, click HERE.• This article originally appeared on the blog Nourishing the Planet, produced by the Worldwatch Institute.
West Africa Rising: Ghana looks to fix its floundering fisheries
West Africa Rising: Mobile-phone banking making slow but steady inroads
Will sky-high cocoa prices lift West African farmers? | 农业 |
2017-17/0142/en_head.json.gz/24658 | Home > News > Consumer Trends
Global Greening
During the past 30 years, environmental issues and awareness have evolved from a futuristic horror-fantasy to a documentary of real and tangible concerns that affect everyone. We are bombarded with news of global warming, vanishing species, compromised water systems, contaminated foods and the dangers of using fossil fuels. Environmental awareness takes many forms, and ironically, increasing environmental awareness has led to conflicts within the environmentally "green" groups.
Within the food industry, there are natural and organic food manufacturers as well as those that are quasi organic. Consumers of organic or natural foods are, in many cases, offended at the direction the movement has gone. The "big boys" such as General Mills, Kraft, Wal-Mart and others have joined the movement because they see markets for the products. Growth in this segment has exceeded 10% per annum for the past decade.
Issues that affect the environment have become essential to food manufacturers. Such concerns involve food, packaging, energy systems and attitudes. It involves recycling, reuse, choice, image, sustainability, economics, education and even ecoterrorism.
FOOD AND BEVERAGES. Organic food sales have steadily increased during the past decade. This signals a commitment on all levels of the food chain to the movement. Growers, bakers and dairies must take steps to ensure that what they produce meets the criteria established for organic foods and ingredients in their markets.
According to information provided by Elizabeth Sloan, Ph.D., president of Sloan Trends and Solutions, Escondido, CA, approximately 170 countries have some definition of organic. Codex Alimentarius established a guideline for organic foods. The document, entitled "Guidelines for the Production, Processing and Labeling of Organically Produced Foods" and also known as GL32 – 1999, was last revised in 2007. Aims of the guidelines are to:
Protect consumers against deception and fraud in the marketplace and unsubstantiated claims
Protect producers of organic produce against misrepresentations of other agricultural produce as organic
Ensure all stages of production, preparation, storage, transport and marketing are subject to inspection and comply with the guidelines
Harmonize provisions for the production, certification, identification and labeling of organically grown produce
Provide international guidelines for organic food control systems to facilitate recognition of national systems as equivalent for purposes of import
Maintain and enhance organic agricultural systems in each country and to contribute to local and global preservation
Codex documents are, as stated above, guidelines. The organization hopes the guidelines will be adopted as national standards to ensure international harmonization. However, definitions of organic still vary from country to country. The documents may be accessed at http://www.codexalimentarius.net/download/standards/360/CXG_032e.pdf.
Reviewing current and projected sales of organic foods and beverages Europe is the leader in organic food consumption. However, the US Agency for International Development and nongovernment organizations from Europe have been quite active in developing nations on the African continent and elsewhere to create and implement organic farming operations as a means for building value-added exports. These and other growers must meet the European standards for organic and be certified to ensure they are using good agricultural practices to assure food safety.
The driving force behind the growth of organic foods is the belief they are healthier and better for you. This is especially true among women shopping for their families. Issues such as producing without pesticides and hormones play a major role in people’s decisions to buy organic. It is also a sign of the influence of organic foods advocates on well-educated persons. Many seem to believe that conventionally produced products are "loaded" with pesticides, hormones and chemicals.
PACKAGING. Food packaging has been a lightening rod around the world for many years. There is a belief that food packaging makes up most of what goes into our landfills. According to T.W. Downes, Ph.D., retired professor, Michigan State School of Packaging, East Lansing, MI, this is patently false.
There has been a greater push throughout the world to ensure that food packaging is reused. Europe is again the leader in this area. German packaging regulations are designed to ensure that most packaging is reused. The German laws were implemented in three phases during the early 1990s and updated and enhanced throughout the decade.
The burden of recycling and disposal is on the processor packaging the products. If packages cannot be recycled or reused, the processor will be accountable. This law has proved unpopular with other European Union (EU) members, although the EU as a whole acknowledges the importance of reuse and recycling. According to some experts, this program "can be considered to be successful in reducing waste, spurring the redesign of packaging to be more environmentally sustainable, and increases refilling and recycling." This is not to say that there are not problems. There are issues with recycling plastics, plus the German market for recycled products is not good.
WATER AND WASTEWATER. Water is essential for all life and many processing systems. Water systems can become contaminated with chemicals or pathogens. Parts of the central US had a major problem in the recent past with Cryptosporidium parvum after floods swamped a water treatment plant.
The Rhine River, which serves as a highway and drinking water source for much of Europe, was closed because of chemical spills, as was the Songhua River in China in late 2005. In the Chinese situation, an explosion at a chemical plant resulted in huge quantities of benzene and nitrobenzene being released into the river.
The oceans are also a concern. A Feb. 15, report in Science stated that "Overfishing, pollution, climate change and other human activities are threatening nearly every ocean and heavily affecting more than 40% of them." The work was coauthored by Dennis Heinemann, Ph.D., senior scientist, at Ocean Conservancy, Washington, DC.
There are concerns about not only the quality of water but also its quantity. It was recently reported that major US lakes such as Powell and Mead, which double as electric power generators, could dry up by 2021. This would have enormous impact on the Southwest and Southern California. The Aral Sea in Central Asia has already suffered such a fate. Aquifers throughout the world are reportedly not being recharged at the same rate that water is being withdrawn.
To ensure steady supplies of fresh water, some countries have constructed desalinization plants. Desalination separates saline water into two products: fresh water and water containing the concentrated salts, or brine. Such separation can be accomplished by a number of processes. The three most common processes are distillation, electrodialysis and reverse osmosis. Distillation works by heating salty water to produce water vapor that is then condensed to form fresh water. Both the electrodialysis and the reverse osmosis processes use membranes to separate salts from water.
Among the places where these plants have been constructed are the United Arab Emirates, which has the largest facility in the world; Singapore; Israel; Perth, Australia; and several places in the US. The main drawback is these facilities are expensive to build and operate, which precludes their construction in some areas where they would be most needed.
Water and water conservation are issues that food processors around the world must address. In countries with rigid environmental standards such as the US, Canada, Japan, Australia and New Zealand as well as several countries in Europe food processors must not only monitor water use, but they must also monitor discharges.
Many processors also treat their water. Treated water can be discharged into community systems, or if the operation is in rural areas and the water is free of hazardous material, that water may be used to irrigate fields. Local authorities routinely monitor plant effluent and in some places have no problem shutting down operations that lose control of their discharges.
A good example of how a food processing facility can handle and treat water was described in the November 2007 issue of Baking & Snack. The newly built Kettle Foods plant in Beloit, WI, filters and treats 1.65 mil gal of water per day. Of course, building a "greenfield" plant with this in mind is much easier than retrofitting an older facility.
ENERGY AND POWER. Energy may be the top concern the world over. Although temperatures on earth have cycled throughout the years, most people now agree that our world is warming. One of the main causes of this is burning fossil fuels with the subsequent release of carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, into the environment.
The Kyoto Protocol was established to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by industrialized nations throughout the world. The US has not signed this agreement. China and India, which are the largest polluters, are not bound by the agreement. China continues to build coal-burning power plants, which are terrible polluters, but its economy is booming, and it is rich in coal.
The use of fossil fuels raises several questions beyond carbon dioxide. Prices of crude oil now range above $110 per barrel, so fuel costs must be considered in the equations of processors the world over. Fossil fuels are also a finite resource. These factors drive work in alternative energy sources (wind, water, solar and nuclear) and in the area of renewable fuel sources.
Rising fuel prices also push equipment manufacturers to design and build more energy-efficient processing equipment. Better insulation, using or burning waste gases and more efficient heat-transfer systems are all ways to reduce operating costs.
Europeans are the "greenest of the green" when it comes to environmental awareness and recycling, yet they also are the largest users of nuclear power. Nuclear plants produce few emissions and are generally clean. Hot water is generated as a byproduct of the process. The big concern is what to do with spent nuclear rods.
At this moment, 35% of all the energy in Europe is generated by nuclear power plants. France gets 78.5% of its energy from this source. The US lags far behind, and it has been years since the US brought a nuclear plant online.
More and more countries are looking to use alternative sources of energy generation. Among the countries that established facilities to harness wind are Germany, Spain, Denmark, Ireland, The Netherlands, the United Kingdom, the US, Greece, Italy, Sweden, Turkey, Morocco and Egypt.
Perhaps the most well-known and used form of alternative energy is solar power. Processors around the globe that receive lots of sun often install solar collectors to augment existing power sources or to power a given part of a plant. As one drives around, it is more and more common to see solar collectors on plant roofs.
Several types of solar energy systems are used including solar heating, solar conversion and photovoltaic conversation.
The simplest systems are solar heating. These employ the following types of collectors: transpired air, flat-plate, evacuated-tube and concentrating.
The hot button at this time, however, is biofuels, which are fuels from plant sources. Ethanol is the most well-known biofuel. It burns cleaner than gasoline, can be manufactured from any carbohydrate source and can help reduce dependence on oil, especially when one considers that much of the world’s oil reserves are in volatile areas such as the Middle East, Venezuela, Angola and Nigeria.
Biofuels are not a panacea, however. Their production is energy intensive, the total energy in a unit of ethanol is less than that of a similar unit of diesel or petrol, and changes in production patterns whereby products like corn are grown for ethanol instead of food or feed can adversely affect whole industries. As corn or other grains have been diverted to fuel production, it has affected grain and food prices, which has rippled into other areas.
Brazil has committed to producing ethanol from sugar cane. The ethanol is used to fuel 40% of the automobiles throughout the country. According to printed sources, sugar cane has several advantages over corn. Ethanol yields from sugar cane are twice that of corn. However, there is a potential devastating impact on the soil and the rainforest.
QUO VADIS? Environmental awareness is here to stay. In most places throughout the world, people seem to understand that taking care of the earth will help sustain life as we know it. Poor countries have other concerns, however. Putting food on the table and ensuring that there is clean water trump environmental awareness. Growing worldwide commitment to "green" will escalate as developing countries continue to create the infrastructure and implement human welfare programs.
In the more affluent areas of the world, green is synonymous with doing business. These wealthy nations are the ones who will need to drive the green revolution in developing countries. To do this, they need to show people in poorer nations that such ideas are not an affectation of the wealthy but a program that will benefit them and their children. | 农业 |
2017-17/0142/en_head.json.gz/24768 | IUFUniting Food, Farm and Hotel Workers World-WideTata Pulls out of Singur but Struggle Continues for Rural Poor Posted to the IUF website 13-Oct-2008 Share this article.
Sustained protests by agricultural workers, sharecroppers and small farmers have forced Tata Motors to abandon planned production of its low-cost Nano automobile on prime farmland seized by the state government over 2 years ago in Singur, West Bengal, near Kolkota (click here for background). With the still unfinished Singur site under seige and over a dozen states competing for the project, Tata Motors on October 7 signed an agreement with the state government of Gujarat to locate production on land near Ahmedabad.
To read the press reports (Indian and international), the mass protests were hastily organized by the Trinamool Congress Party, opportunistically riding a wave of primitive anti-industrialism as the plant neared completion. But since May 2006, agricultural workers, sharecroppers and small farmers have resisted the state "Left Front" government's project to evict some 6,000 poor families from 420 hectares of farmland to make way for the ultra-cheap "people's car". The government, for its part, has not hesitated to label the grassroots leaders - including the IUF-affiliated agricultural workers' union PBKMS - as agents of US imperialism, becoming more strident in its calumnies as the movement showed its staying power and capacity for mobilization in the face of massive repression. Tata has finally abandoned Nano production in West Bengal, but it hasn't abandoned Singur. The struggle continues, and it is important to set the record straight.
Neither PBKMS nor its trade union allies, nor the broad based (and rigorously non-party) Save Farmlands Committee which grouped the mass resistance are opposed to industry. All recognize the vital need for industrialization and job creation in manufacturing. The issues at the heart of the struggle have rather concerned democracy, transparency and the defense of agriculture and rural livelihoods. Once Tata Motors definitively declared that it was pulling out of Singur, the abundance of offers it received from rival state governments proved what the citizens of Singur have maintained from the outset: that it was easily possible to find a site for motor production which would not destroy productive agricultural land and the livelihoods of tens of thousands. Tata demanded and received 420 hectares, though only a tenth of that was required for the factory. The factory would have employed 2,000 workers, while many thousands of Singur residents still stand to lose their land and livelihood, including agricultural labourers, marginal peasants, sharecroppers, cottage industry and other rural workers. Tata still holds the land, which was leased for a pittance, a fraction of what Tata is paying in Gujarat. The West Bengal government is insisting that the land must be used for industry, justifying their plans by the fact that a number of farmers have received financial compensation. Singur's rural poor therefore continue their struggle for justice.
Farmers owning some 40% of the land seized for Tata have continued to reject conversion to industry and are refusing compensation. The proposed compensation schemes for sharecroppers and landless agricultural workers, the majority of whom are women, are ridiculously inadequate. And land on which industrial construction has already taken place must be restored for agricultural production. Safeguarding farmland from industrial pollution is also an urgent priority. The Singur struggle offers a unique opportunity for democratic negotiation to determine the conditions under which farmland is utilized - as a public good, in defense of rights (including the right to food), or in defense of profit for the few. Historically, small producers and the landless have been ruthlessly eliminated, enclosed and expropriated using violence, physical and economic, to make way for industry and agribusiness. Singur now offers the possibility of a democratic alternative.
On October 14-15, a delegation from Singur including PBKMS will be meeting with the President and Prime Minister of India to present the case for government support for that alternative. PBKMS and the Save Farmlands Committee are demanding: the return to farmers who have rejected compensation of all land and its restoration to fertile condition
decent compensation for the loss of land and livelihood to sharecroppers and landless rural workers
safeguards to protect fertile agricultural land in Singur and its surrounding areas
You can support their struggle - now and in the days to follow - by clicking here to send a message of support to the federal government of India. Copies will automatically be sent to the government of West Bengal and to Tata Motors. | 农业 |
2017-17/0142/en_head.json.gz/24867 | A walk through the tea estates of Darjeeling
By Lhendup G Bhutia
A new book, considered to be one of the first on Darjeeling tea, looks into what makes the tea grown in that area special, as politics, social mores and cultural heterogeneity mix to form an interesting brewIn the well-illustrated The Darjeeling Tea Book, author Gillian Wright tells the fascinating story of tea plantations in Darjeeling, from how they were first planted by the British to compete with Chinese tea, to the auction houses of today, where strangely, the Japanese and Americans (hitherto considered a non-tea drinking nation) are emerging as big tea markets, while bringing the 'Queen of the Hills' and its people alive.Women workers in a factory sorting tea. Pics/Michel von Boch (Excerpted with permission from Penguin Books India from The Darjeeling Tea Book by Gillian Wright) As the book describes, by early 19th century, tea had become big business in England, with the East India Company buying it from the Chinese. However, as relations with the Chinese soured, the British tried to grow their own tea -- one attempt even being to send a Scottish botanist to surreptitiously research on how the Chinese grew their tea, and then using the same means to grow it in India. Out of such many attempts across India, Darjeeling's proved the most promising.Wright points out that during every flush (twice a year) only the most tender leaf is picked, with the result that while the tea produced per acre here is much less than any other region, its quality is unmatched. In an interview with Sunday MiD DAY, Wright talks about why Darjeeling tea is a living heritage, many of its bushes over hundreds of years old; the political movements in the region and what it feels like to be within a tea plantation, where all you can see is a carpet of tea bushes and the Himalayas.How did the book come about?Anand Vardhan Kanoria, the owner of Avongrove Tea, a tea estate that was shut for over 20 years and only recently revived, was surprised to know that no book had ever been written on the Darjeeling tea. He asked me to take on this project, and I jumped at it. What kind of research did you have to do for the book?I twice travelled for long periods to Darjeeling, making my base in Avongrove and later in the Planter's Club in Darjeeling (a club of tea planters, that was, before independence, the hub of all social life for the British). Apart from that I did a lot of reading about the history and process of tea making, in libraries in Delhi, and later, London. However, not everything is well in the plantations.Yes, many problems have cropped in the last few years. The climate is not what it used to be; it is much warmer now, there are long periods of drought. There have been instances of hailstorms, where hails a little smaller than tennis balls fell for over forty-five minutes, ruining the tea. Apart from that, politically, whatever happens in the region, it is reflected in the plantations. The locals' demand for a separate statehood has led to frequent lockdowns and strikes. What are your views on the political movement in the hills?Well, locals have a grouse that not much development has happened in the hills. For instance, there are no universities, not even an ICU in a hospital. But it is important to see who carries this movement forward. What do you think will happen to the tea estate in the future?Many children of tea pickers, because of the education they have received from schools set up there, don't want to work as tea pickers. They are ambitious and want to move to the cities. Some have become managers themselves.But there are bright spots too. Many tea estates are moving to organic methods of planting, and though owners still live far away from the hills, they are more professional and entrepreneurial than say, the owners right after independence, who were only trying to make as much money as possible without caring for the workers or the plantations. Also, some tea estates are moving to a stakeholder pattern, where workers on the plantation have a stake in the plantation and tea produced. Many owners scoff at the idea, but there are others who are slowly opening up to it.The Darjeeling Tea Book by Gillian Wright; Penguin Enterprise. Priced at Rs 1,499. Available at select bookstores
The Darjeeling Tea Book
Gillian Wright
Previous Story'I couldn't live a day without my wife and son'Next Story Venky's doesn't plan to sell Blackburn Rovers 'for a long time' | 农业 |
2017-17/0143/en_head.json.gz/634 | TAIPEI AIR STATION
Hsinchu 新竹市 Home Intro The Aandahl Family of Hsinchu
This beautiful valley near Chutung, east of Hsinchu, shows the very best of rural Taiwan in the 1950s. The terraced rice paddies are flooded as the green rice plantings take root. They have only recently been transferred from a seedling paddy to the main paddies. Several farm house clusters dot the valley so richly framed by the hills in the background. Following a very successful land reform program in the early 1950s, many farmers now owned their own land. Farms were small and the maximum holding for any one individual was limited to 5 acres. In northern Taiwan, where this photograph was taken in c.1957, two rice crops per year were the norm. In southern Taiwan, where it was much hotter, three rice crops per year could be grown.
A typical Taiwan farm yard scene near Nantou, south of Taichung, taken of June 28, 1955, as the rice in the foreground matures to being nearly ready for harvesting. Farm house complexes had living quarters and sheds to store farming tools and animals as well as a large flat and hard courtyard area, either dried mud or concrete, that was used to dry the harvest on. This farm also had a water wheel, likely for irrigation purposes as the rice paddies required a lot of water. Most rural communities had electricity, as evidenced here by the utility poles.
The first stage of the rice growing process was to plow the paddy fields. Here a young boy guides a water buffalo pulling a single plow to prepare a paddy field for planting. After plowing, the field would then be flooded and smoothed out to accept the new rice seedlings which would be transplanted from a starter paddy. This photograph was taken c.1956 near Hsinpu, a small rural town located to the north and east of Hsinchu and famous for its oranges.
This photograph taken in 1957 of the upper portion of the large coastal plain in Ilan county in northeastern Taiwan shows the flooded rice paddy fields in their initial stages of growth after planting. Toward the coast to the right side of the photograph is a train headed toward Toucheng station to the north of Ilan city. In the background off the coast of northeastern Taiwan is Turtle Island. Only some 68 miles (110km) beyond this coastline is located Yonaguni Island, the westernmost island in Japan and part of the Ryukyu chain that includes Okinawa. Not many people know that a part of Japan is closer to Taiwan than mainland China 90 to 110 miles across the Taiwan Strait from the western side of the island. Taiwan was a Japanese colony from 1895 to 1945.
Harvesting was a largely manual process. Women generally cut the mature rice at the bottom of the stalk just above the ground. Men then put the rice stalks into a foot powered threshing machine that removed the grains of rice from the stalks. The stalks were then bundled to be further used in wide variety of ways. In the background of this photograph, taken in 1958, is the new Lutheran church in Chutung, east of Hsinchu, that was featured in the Other Churches section.
Home Intro Next | 农业 |
2017-17/0143/en_head.json.gz/858 | Biotech benefits ag, environment, consumers
The public readily accepts biotechnology in science and medicine, but when it comes to agriculture it's a different story. Biotechnology has brought numerous benefits to farmers and consumers, and thousands of studies support the safety of food from GMO crops. But many people don't understand the technology. Carol Ryan DumasCapital Press
Published on March 1, 2014 7:40PM
Last changed on March 3, 2014 10:08AM
BURLEY, Idaho — Technology is accepted in every aspect of people’s lives, and biotechnology has been widely used and accepted in science and medicine for years.But when it comes to biotechnology in agriculture, the public — due to its growing disconnect from agriculture — is frightened that food is being altered, said Nancy Vosnidue, Monsanto’s scientific communications manager, during the 2014 Idaho Hay and Forage conference in Burley on Friday, Feb. 28.But food from genetically modified crops is exactly the same as food from conventional crops, she said.Biotechnology isn’t new to agriculture. It has been researched for 30 years, and genetically modified crops have been grown commercially for 18 years, with zero food-safety issues, she said.“Everything we eat today (is) the product of some sort of mutation,” she said.Resin for cheese making and yeast to make bread and beer are produced using biotechnology, which is simply putting one organism into another, she said.Biotechnology is the same tool used to create insulin for diabetics. Human DNA sequence is inserted into a particular strain of E. coli bacteria to produce the synthetic insulin, she said.Crop biotechnology is an extension of plant breeding, which has been taking place in some fashion for centuries. In the 1700s, farmers and scientists were cross breeding plants for new traits. In the 1940s, researchers used mutagenesis through chemicals and radiation to alter the makeup of seeds. In the 1990s, the first GMO crops were introduced to the marketplace, she said.Biotechnology is just a faster, more precise process of plant breeding and is one of the only ways the world is going to produce more food, feed and fiber for a growing middle class and a growing population, she said.Genetic modification is a well thought-out process, thoroughly researched and tested. It’s safe and healthy and provides a reliable food supply. It takes about 13 years, $125 million and extensive studies by USDA, the Environmental Protection Agency and academia to bring a GMO seed to market, she said.Consumers aren’t asking how biotechnology works; they’re asking if it is safe, she said.Thousands of academic studies on food from GMO crops support the safety of those foods, which is the most regulated and tested thing in society, she said.Today, GMO crops are grown on about 4 billion acres worldwide since 1996 and are approved for planting or importing in 63 countries. Biotechnology has improved yields and, in some cases, nutrition, she said.Increase in yields for GMO corn, cotton and soybeans has been phenomenal. Between 1996 and 2011, corn production increased 195 million metric tons, soybeans increased 110 million metric tons, and cotton lint increased 15.9 million metric tons in the U.S. alone, she said.Maintaining those yields with non-GMO seed would require almost 40 million additional acres, the amount of total farmland planted to major crops in Illinois and Indiana combined, she said.With more people to feed and less arable land per capita, biotechnology is crucial to agriculture. Climate change, bringing pests and weeds to new areas and water shortages and excesses, will also add to the need for farmland to become more productive.At the same time, environmental concerns are growing, and biotechnology reduces the use of herbicides and pesticides and agriculture’s carbon footprint, she said.At the end of the day, Monsanto and other biotech ag companies are enabling agriculture with safe, affordable, sustainable production of food, she said. | 农业 |
2017-17/0143/en_head.json.gz/1529 | California State Water Project boosts irrigation allotment Apr 18, 2017 Even with effective synthetic alternatives Sulfur remains a relevant tool for controlling powdery mildew Apr 12, 2017 With buds pushing in late March, start of San Joaquin Valley wine grape crop follows normal timing Apr 12, 2017 Walnut growers responsible for ensuring clean water use on operation Apr 05, 2017 DWR named ‘Climate Action Leader’
The California Climate Action Registry (CCAR) has named the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) a “Climate Action Leader.” CCAR is a non-profit organization formed by the state of California to serve as a voluntary registry to encourage GHG emissions reductions. CCAR member organizations earn the recognition by calculating, disclosing, and independently verifying greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. “The governor (Schwarzenegger) has made it clear that state agencies must lead by example in the battle against climate change,” said DWR Director Lester Snow. Measuring and verifying DWR’s carbon footprint is a major first step in achieving significant reductions in carbon emissions, Snow says. “DWR is absolutely committed to minimizing the carbon footprint of its operations and has an aggressive plan in place to meet greenhouse gas reduction goals,” Snow said. DWR voluntarily measured its 2007 GHG emissions which totaled 3.24 million metric tons. The majority of DWR’s GHG emissions come from the power to operate the State Water Project (SWP), which delivers water to 25 million Californians and irrigates 700,000 acres of agricultural land. In a given year over half of the power used by the SWP to deliver water comes from zero-carbon hydroelectricity. DWR is taking aggressive actions to reduce its carbon footprint, including equipment and pumping refurbishments to increase efficiency, the inclusion of additional renewables into the power portfolio of the SWP, and other activities. | 农业 |
2017-17/0143/en_head.json.gz/2117 | In defense of organics
Deputy Editor Radha Marcum
When Michelle Obama planted an organic garden at the White House this spring—and President Obama appointed organic-advocate Kathleen Merrigan as Deputy Secretary of Agriculture—organic farmers and food activists let out a collective cheer. What victories! And yet, listening to friends, coworkers, and the media over the ensuing months, it was clear to me that there is still a great deal of confusion—dare I say hesitancy?—over organics. Reports on food safety, disquieting environmental news, a rough economy—even the inspiring local-food movement sweeping the U.S.—make choices complicated.
If all of the noise leaves you a bit befuddled, you’re not alone. Every week as I navigate the aisles of the local natural foods store, I consider the effects on personal and environmental health—and the ethical implications—of the many foods my family and I love. Should I buy organic if it isn’t locally produced? Is it worth the extra cost? Seeking a clearer picture, I reached out to experts in the field. What did they think about some of the tough issues and prevailing skepticism surrounding organic? And does organic really live up to its promises? Here’s what I learned.
ORGANIC \OR-GA-NIK\
of, relating to, yielding, or involving the use of food produced with the use of feed or fertilizer of plant or animal origin without employment of chemically formulated fertilizers, growth stimulants, antibiotics, or pesticides. Source: By permission. From Merriam Webster’s Online Dictionary2009 by Merriam-Webster, Inc. (merriam-webster.com).
The assumption: Organic is not budget-friendly. It’s “elitist.”
While it will always be hard for most of us to justify dropping $16.99 on a jar of organic almond butter, shoppers have so many more choices than they did a decade ago, says Laura Batcha, director of marketing at the Organic Trade Association. “You can find a ‘value’ option without ever leaving organic,” says Batcha. For example, private-label products such as those in the Whole Foods 365 Organic or Safeway’s O Organics lines offer organic at a lower price than name brands. And many organic companies now offer deals through organic coupons. (Check out Delicious Living's coupon portal.) And if you’re truly strapped for cash, try honoring organic just for the “dirty dozen." See The New Dirty Dozen.
Beyond the price at the checkout stand, it’s shortsighted to ignore the hidden cost to the environment and your health that comes with conventional agriculture, says Jake Blehm, director of operations at the Rodale Institute, a nonprofit that studies organic farming techniques and the effects of organic farming in the U.S. and other countries. “When a pesticide is sprayed, it kills bugs, then it kills fish, it gets into drinking water, and it eventually affects our health,” he says. Most surface waters are now polluted and agriculture is the number one polluter, says Mark Van Horn, Director of Organic Farming at the University of California–Davis. “We’re losing a lot of pollinators [such as native bees, butterflies, moths, and beetles]. It’s possible that’s because of pesticides,” Van Horn says.
Those environmental and health costs aren’t reflected in the price of synthetic pesticides, Blehm explains, and therefore they aren’t reflected in the price of conventionally grown foods. Looked at this way, he says, organic food is actually cheaper. “When regular milk is $2.99 and organic is 35 cents more, you have to ask: What’s it worth to you, to your kids, to not be getting sublethal doses of pesticides?” says Blehm. See Pesticides and Your Health.
Still, in terms of availability and affordability (why some dub it “elitist”), organic does have growing to do. “We need to engage with urban gardeners and farmers and policy action groups to ensure that low-income neighborhoods are able to grow, buy, and sell organics,” says Bob Scowcroft, director of the Organic Farming Research Foundation. “We need to work across cultures, in multiple languages, to understand each other’s needs.” This is starting to happen, he says. We’re beginning to see urban planners, food security activists, organizations devoted to hunger and obesity issues, and organic activists working together.
The assumption: “Sustainable,” “natural,” “organic” … it all means the same thing.
Buzzwords like natural and sustainable tend to get lumped in with certifications, such as organic or cruelty-free. But natural and sustainable, as well as other terms like local, lack adequate definition and have little, if any, regulation to back them up. “USDA Organic is something you can trust because you can define it. The organic standards [set by the National Organic Program] are uniform,” says Batcha. As for local, “it can mean ‘made in the USA’ or it can mean it’s grown across the street. It’s totally subjective,” says Myra Goodman, co-founder of Earthbound Farm based in San Juan Bautista, California.
Perhaps because USDA Organic-certified products have gotten well into the mainstream in recent years (even Walmart has become a significant purveyor of organic goods), and because organic is big business (organic food and beverage sales reached $21.2 billion dollars last year, according to Nutrition Business Journal) some at the heart of the organic movement feel standards are too easily weakened by big business or that government regulations don’t go far enough to address current food-system woes, asking questions such as: Should relatively large-scale organic producers (the so-called “big box” operations) still be considered organic? What if cows aren’t let out to pasture or, worse, workers aren’t paid fairly? And can organic products imported from other countries be trusted?
“Organic deserves this kind of citizen inquiry, and we should feel good that there are whistle blowers out there,” says Scowcroft. “If someone is cutting corners, let’s shed light on that.” But he underscores that organic, unlike many others, is a regulated term. “You have a pretty clear idea of how that food was grown and what you’re eating.” See “A Brief History of Organic.”
The assumption: In terms of the environment, it’s more important to buy local than to buy organic.
The reality >>
Thanks to author Michael Pollan’s eye-opening Omnivore’s Dilemma and a host of other books about local eating, food miles are on everyone’s minds these days. And for good reason: On average, food travels 1,300 to 2,000 miles from farm to plate. But choosing local alone can’t solve our fossil-fuel and CO2 woes, say researchers. Only 11 percent of a food’s carbon footprint is tied to transport. The remainder is almost entirely associated with growing, processing, and packaging the food, which in the case of conventional agriculture includes copious amounts of fossil fuel-derived fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides.
Organic farming takes those nonrenewable petroleum products out of the equation (instead it relies on cover crops and organic fertilizers to boost productivity, and nonpetroleum-based pest and weed management tools). But newly published research from the Rodale Institute points to an even bigger potential environmental benefit of organic farming: carbon sequestration.
Looking at nearly three decades of research, Jeff Moyer, farm director of the Rodale Institute and Chairman of the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB), and other scientists such as David Pimentel at Cornell have found that healthy, microbe-rich soil bolstered by organic farming methods has the ability to remove CO2 (the most prevalent greenhouse gas) from the air—and lots of it. “By increasing and replenishing biodiversity in the soil we can sequester carbon at a greater rate than we originally thought possible,” says Moyer. An acre of organic cropland can take approximately 7,000 pounds of carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere each year. Multiply that by the 434 million acres of U.S. cropland and it becomes the equivalent of eliminating emissions from 217 million cars (nearly 88 percent of cars in the U.S. today).
How does dirt become a carbon-sequestering tool? By using cover crops, organic compost, and chemical-free pest and weed control practices, organic farming actively builds biodiversity in the soil. In fact, if you took the microscopic fungi living in a teaspoon of soil from organically managed farmland and placed them end-to-end, the resulting chain would stretch hundreds of yards, says Moyer, many times more than conventionally farmed soil, which has been bombarded with synthetic pesticides and highly concentrated nitrogen. The fungi and other living organisms abundant in organic soils naturally pull carbon from the air and store it in the soil where it is retained for decades. Scientists have found that, at worst, some Midwestern soils have gone from 20 percent carbon to between 1 and 2 percent carbon in the last 60 years alone.
The bottom line, carbon aside? “Just because a food is local doesn’t mean it wasn’t sprayed with chemicals,” says Scowcroft. “Those chemicals are local to somewhere,” he says. “There are thousands and thousands of chemicals not being used on organic farms.” (See Pesticides and Your Health for an update on some of the worst offenders.) “Chemical companies are very much in favor of the local movement because it takes the focus off of how the food is grown,” says Moyer. “We’d like people to support local farmers,” he says. “At the same time, we want those farms to be organic. Let’s have a voice in how those farms are being managed.”
Source URL: http://deliciousliving.com/agriculture/defense-organics | 农业 |
2017-17/0143/en_head.json.gz/2211 | Farming and Fracking Don’t Mix: A Farmer Speaks Out
By Kai Olson-Sawyer |
Tweet Caption Natural gas exploratory well from Maverick Video Productions.
Natural gas exploratory well on the property next door to Greg Swartz's Willow Wisp Organic Farm. Photo and video from Maverick Video Productions. Gallery photos courtesy of Greg Swartz. Imagine that you live on a productive, award-winning 12-acre organic farm. The 50-plus vegetables and herbs you grow depend entirely on the uncompromised health and integrity of your soil, water and air. You've invested so much time and sweat, not to mention money, into the farm that reflects your values, including your respect for the natural world.
Now imagine that a natural gas well is set up in plain sight from your front porch on a neighbor’s adjacent property. This rig is exploring for natural gas with the intent to use the extraction method called high-volume, slick-water hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking.” The process blasts open fissures in underground shale-rock formations by injecting a high pressure combination of fluids, chemicals and proppants (each company’s formula is a closely guarded secret including some known carcinogens like benzene), causing the fossil fuel to flow to the production well. From years of studying fracking, you know that the gas and oil companies' claims of safety and minimal environmental impacts are suspect because wherever fracking goes, human health risks and pollution tend to follow.
Greg Swartz, owner of Willow Wisp Organic Farm, doesn’t need to imagine this scenario because he and his family are embroiled in this situation. His farm, located a few miles from the Delaware River in northern Pennsylvania, places him squarely in the middle of a heated debate taking place not just in the state, but throughout the country. What further complicates matters for fracking in that region is the great Delaware River Basin provides drinking water to over 15 million people in cities like New York City, Philadelphia, Allentown, Camden, New Jersey, and many other smaller localities. The Delaware River Basin Commission, a four-state, five-member body that governs the river and basin, currently has a fracking moratorium while they complete a final set of rules on the extraction process for this extremely sensitive watershed.
I mean, after several years of looking into this, my basic conclusion is this: That high-volume slick-water hydraulic fracturing and food production are not compatible land uses. You can’t have the two coexisting; it doesn’t work.
The debate raging around fracking is very familiar to Greg: Fracking offers a potential economic boost, particularly for landowners, like some of his neighbors, who have signed leases with natural gas companies, but carries with it potential health and safety hazards and environmental degradation. As a landowner and a productive farmer, Greg knows the intrinsic value of his land, air and water for his livelihood now and into the future.
Listen to my interview with Greg as he shares his experiences, his deep commitment to his farm, his views on the fundamental role of property rights in the debate and his concern about the specter of fracking that threatens the very existence of his farm. Below you can get a taste of our compelling conversation. You can also download a podcast of the full conversation or the full transcript. Also, see a video interview of Greg Swartz on his beautiful farm, courtesy of Maverick Video Productions.
What are the concerns that you have with fracking, being that it’s on your doorstep, and with regards to your land, particularly as a productive organic farmer?
Yeah, I mean, after several years of looking into this, my basic conclusion is this: That high-volume slick-water hydraulic fracturing and food production are not compatible land uses. You can’t have the two coexisting; it doesn’t work. And here are the reasons: First of all, there is a significant risk of surface water and groundwater contamination, both during drilling processes as well as the hydraulic fracturing as well as during the movement of the fracking wastewater. There are massive amounts of contaminated water that is involved in this process; anywhere from three to five million gallons per fracked well. So in terms of the actual penetration of the earth, the mixing of the different strata of the earth, and then the injection of these unregulated chemicals into the earth, there is so many possibilities for A, human error; B, human – how do I say it, error on purpose, I'm not quite sure what the right way to say that is.
It must really concern you as a farmer yourself and then also as an organic farmer where you really have high standards and meet certifications and that sort of thing. So how is the potential fracking on an adjoining property affecting buyers of your produce right now, or shares of CSA, that sort of thing?
Yes, right now we haven’t had that impact. I did hear, kind of through the grapevine, a little bit of people starting to be concerned last year with the drilling of this test well. But again, it wasn’t fracked so it didn’t quite hit that threshold. So when it actually happens, there’s two things that are going to happen. There may be the customer fallout, but more likely than that, before that point is, I have to make a decision about the safety of the food that we sell. And even before that I have to make a decision about it being safe to live here for myself, my wife, and my two and a half year old son. And it’s going to be really hard to identify what that threshold is.
You know, two years ago, just before we invested another six figures in infrastructure here on the farm, my wife, Tannis and I had that conversation. It was either, we get out now, right this minute, don’t do anything else here and leave. Or we invest that six figures, do it for as long as we can, and while we're doing it, fight as much as we can to regulate this thing. So here we are, we've invested a bunch of money, a lot of time, a lot of the assets are not recoverable. Some of the things, like a tractor, we can bring that with us. But investing in our soil, which is the core principle of organic farming, we can’t take that with us. We can’t take a fence with us, etc. You know, we definitely put stuff down that we can’t take, but we just made the decision that we had to do it. We have to, we are here, we've got to do it. We've got to grow food for our community. Each of us have invested many, many years, more than a decade in the community. We have strong connections, great friends, strong business connections. You know, it’s our home, it’s the right place to be and we weren’t willing to walk away. All of that said though, we're still kind of like on the edge, like at any time, once the regulatory landscapes changes, once they actually, once the gas companies get everything in a row and start drilling, we're going to have to make that choice and do it, and leave. And I don’t think our neighbors really get it.
Greg Swartz’s list of notable hydraulic fracturing watchdog organizations working to protect the Delaware River and River Basin: Delaware Riverkeeper Network
Damascus Citizens for Sustainability
Catskill Mountainkeeper
© 2011 GRACE Communications Foundation
fossil fuels groundwater heroes nexus wastewater water quality water regulation Responses to "Farming and Fracking Don’t Mix: A Farmer Speaks Out"
whats crohns disease
04.21.2012 We are a bunch of volunteers and opening a brand new scheme in our community. Your site offered us with useful info to work on. You’ve performed a formidable activity and our whole neighborhood shall be thankful to you.
Kai Olson-Sawyer
05.18.2011 @ Adron and Mary - Thanks for commenting on what must be a difficult subject for you. As a PA native with family still residing in the state, I know that fracking is THE local issue commanding attention. This is particularly true in your area which is bei
Adron and Mary
05.17.2011 We are experiencing the exact same dilemma, being growers five miles south of Dimock PA with a two and a half year old daughter. This is a great injustice and after all of the concerned growers and consumers go to Vermont to escape the experiment what wil
05.14.2011 Oh, Greg... I am so sorry. I remember how happy and excited you were when you bought fenceposts from us to fence the land to start your farm! Oh, how I wish that those fenceposts could keep pollution from invading your farm, but, I know that, once on the surface and in the atmosphere and water, this filth contaminates us all! That’s why I, too, am working to end the practice of hydrofracking world-wide and usher in the age of energy from renewable resources. Thanks so much for sharing your story.
Mark Zeslitz
05.13.2011 Thanks so much for your thoughts on this important issue
05.12.2011 @ Tara - I, too, am very interested in hearing from landowners that sign mineral right leases with oil and gas companies. In the interview, Greg mentions his neighbor’s beliefs and rationales for natural gas extraction on his property. What it comes down Tara
05.12.2011 It would be interesting to hear the other side of the story from the land owner that allowed the Natural Gas company to perform fracking on their property. Do they know the understand the concern?
05.12.2011 On my recent comment correction the last word :fracking it printed frocking as I fat fingered the keyboard
05.12.2011 That’s really terrible- I pray that ppl increase environmental awareness relying more on solar energy and wind energy. Food comes first since it consists of the basic 3 human needs: food clean and pure+ clean drinking water+ safety. All else on the pyramid consists of greed rather than need. I will remember to light an incense of prayer for the success in setting the ignorant mind of some to a greater common sense. Humans in that respect can be less cognizant of survival than certain animal species. Keep the faith and hopefully the stupor will be slapped out of them by Divine Law and a permanent halt put to fracking
We need to make sure you're a human and not a spambot. Please answer the following question. What is 14 + 16 equal to? By submitting a comment here you grant us a perpetual license to reproduce your words and name/website in attribution.
Videos Podcasts
Farming and Fracking Don\'t Mix: Farmer, Greg Swartz, Speaks Out
Download | Sign-up for our newsletters! | 农业 |
2017-17/0143/en_head.json.gz/2405 | ENVIRONMENTAL FORUM
Sustainable Biosphere
Obama & Renewable Energy
Solar & Wind Power
Carbon Emission Initiatives
Alternative Renewable Fuels
Organic Agricultural Products
We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children
Native American Proverb
There are no passengers on Spaceship Earth. We are all crew. Marshall McLuhan, 1964
It is not the strongest of the species that survives,
nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change. Charles Darwin
ONE BIOSPHERE ENVIRONMENTAL FORUM
WE EMBRACE ALTERNATIVE RENEWABLE FUELS AND GREEN SOLUTIONS FOR SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES
OUR STORY One Biosphere is an alliance of people and organizations who are united to preserve the quality of our global environment through our forum and publications, education, advocacy, research and communications among our members and partners.
Agriculture and Biodiversity
The relentless increase in human population on the globe, which is predicted to reach 8 billion by 2025 will have a fundamental impact on biodiversity due to the need for food, water and other resources, thereby, straining our natural resources. Building the infrastructure to support the global population will reduce biodiversity. More intensive agricultural production will reduce genetic diversity of crops and livestock. The geographic spread of agriculture in developing countries with an increase of over 100 million hectares by 2030 will include lands of high biodiversity value.
Genetic resources and the control of ecosystem services impact agriculture, which depends upon biodiversity. Agriculture is a primary cause of genetic and species loss and alteration of natural habitats. In order to meet increasing global food requirements, we will need greater efficiency and geographic spread of new expertise. Farmers need greater efficient use of inputs, including more efficient breeds and crops, agrochemicals, energy and water. We will also need to convert wider land areas to cultivation. The risk is that these changes may negatively affect biodiversity. Reduced diversity in agricultural ecosystems may threaten the ecosystem forces required to support agriculture, including pollination and increases in soil nutrient levels.
The globalization of agriculture and quick-fix agricultural policies are primary causes of the reduction in species and ecosystem services. In particular, globalization causes major changes in the location and methods of food and other agricultural commodity production. Global demand for high value commodities such as soybeans, palm oil, coffee, cotton and biofuels has generated widespread habitat conversion and ecosystem withdrawal. The extensive change from diverse, small farms to large-scale mono culture enterprises continues apace. Moreover, globalization has concentrated and stepped up production on productive lands, thereby slowing the rate of deforestation. The concentration of modern agriculture on the most productive soils has resulted in rejection of marginal agriculture and speeding forest recovery in many countries.
Links Between Biodiversity and Agriculture
Agriculture is defined broadly to include crops and agro-forestry products, livestock and managed fisheries production. There are roughly 270,000 known species of higher plants, of which about 10,000-15,000 are edible and 7,000 are used in agriculture. However, increased globalization has reduced the varieties used in agricultural systems. For example, only 14 animal species account for 90 per cent of all livestock production and only 30 crops dominate global agriculture and provide roughly 90 per cent of the calories consumed by the world's population. Despite its critical importance in supporting civilization, agriculture is the chief driver of genetic erosion, species loss and conversion of natural habitats around the world.
Cultivated and wild biodiversity provide services necessary for agriculture. Agricultural producers such as commercial, small farm, pastoral and agro-forestry systems use these services. For example, nitrogen-fixing legume trees are used in maize farming systems of Africa to assist local farmers to increase maize production without investing in fertilizers. Environmental benefits are also derived through carbon sequestration and firewood production.
One mode of increasing agricultural production is through habitat conversion. Several hundred thousand km2 of land have been converted to agricultural use in the tropics. However, a large proportion of this land is of marginal use for agriculture. This creates an inefficient use of resources resulting in degradation of land and ecosystem services. Roughly 1.5 billion humans or 1/2 of the world's total work force and 1/4 of the global population either work in agriculture or their economic survival is linked to it and women make up the majority of agricultural workers. When agriculture on marginal lands is decreased and these lands are managed, ecosystems recover. For example, forests have expanded in parts of Europe, North America, Japan, China, India, Viet Nam, New Zealand and Latin America.
Satisfying global food requirements involves serious challenges and will require either greater efficiency or more land to increase agricultural productivity. Efficiency tends to be achieved by concentration upon only a few varieties. This approach is usually achieved by increasing inputs, particularly technology, agrochemicals, energy and water. These inputs generally create negative impacts on biodiversity.
On the other hand, agriculture may be extended to new land areas through habitat conversion. Agricultural expansion involves converting land for the cultivation of major commodities such as soybeans in Latin America and the Caribbean, palm oil and rubber in Asia and the Pacific and coffee in Africa, Latin America and Asia. It is exacerbated by the introduction of new export markets. In Brazil, the land area for growing soybeans for export to China grew from 117 000 km2 in 1994 to 210 000 km2 in 2003. During that period, world consumption of soybeans and soybean products doubled. This trend continues unabated.
The prime agricultural biotechnology innovation during the past 20 years has been the use of transgenic or living modified organisms to provide new attributes in different crops and breeds. The technology is relatively new and major research and funds are being invested to create value for human well-being and business value. Research has concentrated upon reducing the effect of pests and diseases. Scientists have established that genetic modification may lessen the need for pesticides and herbicides to grow crops including cotton and maize. Global production of genetically modified crops (GMO), including maize, soybeans and cotton has been estimated to include almost 1,000,000 km2.
The use of GM crops has become quite controversial, particularly in relation to the indeterminate impacts on ecosystems through naturalization in the landscape and human health. There are concerns about how GM crops will impact poor people whose lives depend on traditional agricultural practices. Further research, monitoring and laws are required to ensure negative impacts are avoided. Protocols on Biosafety have been adopted under the CBD to develop a global framework for managing and regulating living modified organisms.
Great attention has been given to the impact of climate change on agriculture. Concerns include the timing of growth and maturing of crops, and the impacts on pollinators, water resources and the distribution of rainfall. Other issues involve changes in market structures, yields for different crops and strains and the impacts of intense weather events on traditional methods and economies. In some areas, particularly where low temperature is an inhibiting factor, agricultural productivity could improve with global warming. In other areas, where water and heat are restrictive factors, productivity may be seriously reduced.
Changed production practices and loss of diversity in agro-ecosystems may damage ecosystem services required to maintain agriculture. Although some crops that supply a significant proportion of the world's food staples do not require animal pollination such as rice and maize, the decline of pollinators will have long-term consequences for crops that serve as important sources of nutrients and minerals, including fruit trees and vegetables in many parts of the world.
Genetic attrition, loss of local species and loss of cultural traditions are often closely intertwined. While rates of genetic attrition are not well understand, attrition often occurs during the transition from traditional to commercially developed varieties. In crop and livestock structures in the developing world, genetic attrition reduces subsistence farming options for lessening the impact of environmental change and lessening vulnerability in marginal habitats or agricultural systems that experience acute weather conditions such as arid and semi-arid lands of Africa and India.
Implications for Agricultural Technologies and Policy
Agricultural research and development has made advances in integrating conservation and development to alleviate biodiversity loss, reverse land degradation and improve environmental sustainability.
Innovative agricultural practices enhance production and at the same time conserve native biodiversity. Biodiversity-positive practices by integrating trees on farms (agro-forestry), conservation agriculture, organic agriculture and integrated pest management facilitate the sustainability of production sites. Agro-forestry offers an excellent opportunity for achieving biodiversity conservation and sustainability in production sites in 3 ways: (a) reducing pressure on natural forests, (b) providing habitat for native plant and animal species and (c) serving as an effective land use in disjointed sites.
Integrated land management approaches offer ecosystem flexibility through communication procedures that engage and empower farmers, support local institutions and create options for value-added income. These advances offer prospects for restoring degraded lands to enhance habitat connectivity and ecosystem processes. In the tropical forest margins, where slash-and-burn farming is a major cause of deforestation, knowledge of land-use dynamics has helped to identify practical options that are profitable for small-scale farmers and at the same time environmentally sustainable.
A major challenge to global implementation of these approaches is the lack of policies that integrate rural and agricultural policies with the protection of biodiversity and ecosystem services. Natural resource management and eco-agriculture innovations must be amalgamated with long-term biodiversity and ecosystem needs.
Substantial plant genetic resource collections for food and agriculture are maintained internationally through the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) system. These institutional gene banks safeguard germplasm (inherited qualities of an organism).
Farmers contribute at the local level to maintain viability of diverse species through innovative partnerships including scientific research group and local communities. For instance, in Peru, this approach generates income for the farmers while conserving genetic variability and helping improve local ecological knowledge.
Agricultural Policy Options and Governance Initiatives
Local and community initiatives are essential to support agricultural efforts to maintain biodiversity. Community initiatives are problematic because they are based on localized diversity, instead of homogeneity and mass production. Development of accepted standards and certification of production methods offers producers stronger influence and value in the global market.
More progress is necessary to institutionalize a multi-faceted approach to production systems and monitor its effects. Techniques advocating reduced pesticide or herbicide use need to be adopted in more countries and the importance of ecosystem services by ecologically oriented agricultural systems is being adopted slowly. Increased research and adoption of techniques such as integrated pest management may reduce chemical usage while providing biodiversity conservation services. Remedial measures to restore productivity to degraded lands are not implemented on the scale required. The ecosystem approach provides a framework for practices such as riparian buffer systems to support biodiversity conservation, and assist in water management.
Legislation and policies regarding land tenure and land use practices are essential to adopting biodiversity methods and technology options in agriculture. It is essential to adopt practical solutions to reduce the impact of agriculture on biodiversity within supportive policies that cover commercial and small-scale agricultural production.
Continuing international negotiations address imbalanced markets, subsidies and property rights that impact agricultural land uses. It is essential to implement agreements creating tangible impact on biodiversity and agriculture, especially in developing countries.
Organic Agricultural Products - Coffee & Cocoa Plantations
Organic agricultural products, such as bird-friendly coffee and cocoa plantations that promote self-sustaining production, are examples of sustainable products. Coffee and cocoa are global commodities. Shade grown coffee refers to the way coffee has been traditionally farmed. For generations, coffee shrubs have been planted in the shade of tall trees so that traditional coffee plantations constitute excellent environments for birds and other forest-dwelling wildlife.
Over the past 4 decades, 1/2 of the traditional Latin American shade-grown coffee farms have been converted to sun coffee farms to increase production. This newer method requires clearing the shade trees and growing coffee plants under virtually maximum sun conditions. These requirements also necessitate use of agro-chemicals such as synthetic fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides to compensate for the effects of eliminating the shaded agro-forestry environment.
Sun coffee may create higher yields and more profits for farmers. Coffee farmers feel pressure to abandon the traditional growing practices. Unless these farmers can earn higher short-term gains from traditional coffee cultivation, there is minimal incentive for them to maintain refuges for biodiversity.
Monoculture of coffee in a farm causes pests such as the coffee bean borer to multiply. Large amounts of pesticides and insecticides such as benzene hexachloride and copper fungicide are used to control the pests and leads to pesticide contamination of the coffee beans. Because of the high pesticide use, many coffee bean supplies do not meet the U.S. EPA coffee standards and coffee has become one of the highest chemically treated crops in the world. There have been chemical poisoning cases among farm workers and due to the high production costs, many farmers cannot survive growing coffee.
Shady growing conditions create a cooler setting so the growth of the bean is slower, thereby creating a denser, harder bean which coffee experts prefer for quality coffee. Coffee grown in shady conditions has improved acidity, aroma, body and aftertaste. As more consumers demand shade-grown coffee and pay more to enjoy better tasting coffee, these ecologically sensitive farmers are rewarded in their marketplace. Hence, for supporting these ecologically beneficial practices, the farmers and consumers appreciate that they are facilitating bird conservation, a healthy environment and the livelihood of many small-scale farm owners.
Shade coffee plantations provide habitat for migratory birds, many insects, orchids, mammals, reptiles, amphibians, and other inhabitants of tropical forests. Shade trees provide nutrients and suppress weeds, thereby eliminating the need for chemical fertilizers and herbicides and lowering farming costs. Farmers may harvest shade coffee and a variety of fruits, firewood, lumber and medicines from the shade trees. These products make farm families less vulnerable to coffee price fluctuations on the world market.
Self-sustaining products must be cost-effective in the local and broader marketplace and comply with international trade regulations and other requirements. These policy areas must also be amended to recognize the priority of environmental needs.
Worldwide, large cocoa plantations are suffering from fungal and viral diseases and insects. These large farms are carved out of rain forests, which exposes the cocoa tree to full sunlight and makes them vulnerable to disease and pests. In addition, clearing of the rain forests to plant more cocoa trees removes a multitude of bird, lizards and insect species.
Costa Rica, Brazil, other parts of South America and West Africa have experienced cocoa crop devastation from fungus and black pod disease that may cause a 75% crop loss. These diseases threaten to wipe out the cocoa industry. Sustainable farming of cocoa has been carried out on many small farms in the cocoa tree's natural habitat under partial shade of the rain forest. These small cocoa farms do not utilize pesticides, fungicides or fertilizers to keep the trees healthy.
As cocoa trees are returned to the natural shade of the rain forest, the biodiverse ecosystem returns and sustains cocoa trees, together with the species of plants, animals and insects that protect them from diseases. Researchers, conservation groups and the chocolate industry believe that increasing the number of sustainable farms, rather than creating more costly and unsustainable plantations, will satisfy the world-wide demand for chocolate.
Our Email: [email protected] | HOME | About Us | Membership | Online Store | Terms & Conditions | Privacy Policy | Links | Contact Us |
© Copyright One Biosphere. All rights reserved | 农业 |
2017-17/0143/en_head.json.gz/2628 | U.S. Department of Transportation Reinforces Commitment to No New Regulations for America's Agricultural Community
By: Ray LaHood
Date: Aug. 10, 2011 Location: Washington, DC The U.S. Department of Transportation's Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) announced today that it has no intention to propose new regulations governing the transport of agricultural products. The agency also released guidance designed to make sure states clearly understand the common sense exemptions that allow farmers, their employees, and their families to accomplish their day-to-day work and transport their products to market. After hearing from concerned farmers earlier this year, FMCSA initiated this review to make sure states don't go overboard in enforcing regulations on agricultural operators, and to ensure consistent access to exemptions for farmers. No regulations will be proposed for any new safety requirements or changes to the rules governing the transport of agricultural products, farm machinery, or farm supplies to or from a farm. "We have no intention of instituting onerous regulations on the hardworking farmers who feed our country and fuel our economy," said Secretary Ray LaHood. "Farmers deserve to know that reasonable, common sense exemptions will continue to be consistently available to agricultural operations across the country, and that's why we released this guidance." This guidance -- which does not impose any new rules on farmers -- follows the Federal Register public notice which FMCSA issued on May 31, 2011, asking farmers, farm organizations and the public to give input on the agency's longstanding safety rules.
"We want to make it absolutely clear that farmers will not be subjected to new and impractical safety regulations," said U.S. Transportation Deputy Secretary John Porcari. "The farm community can be confident that states will continue to follow the regulatory exemptions for farmers that have always worked so well."
"FMCSA is pleased with the input we've received from the agricultural community and members of Congress. We received about 1700 comments and the vast majority called for us to preserve the guidance that leaves states to carry out the farm exceptions as they have for many years." said FMCSA Administrator Anne Ferro. "We want to make crystal clear that we are not imposing any new regulations."
Earlier this year, farm groups came to FMCSA with concerns that some states might not allow exemptions to Commercial Drivers License (CDL) requirements for certain farm operations using "crop-share" leasing.
When FMCSA investigated, there appeared to be wide differences among states in how the "for-hire" and related agricultural exceptions were being applied. In order to ensure consistency, FMCSA asked state officials to cease all new entrant safety audits on farmers engaged in "crop-share" leasing and issued the public notice soliciting input that would provide insight on the complex use of farm equipment on public roads. The guidance released today, which is based on that input, clarifies three critical issues:
* Interstate vs. intrastate commerce. Since the difference between the two has been determined by the U.S. Supreme Court and other Federal courts, FMCSA has limited flexibility to provide additional guidelines. The Agency has concluded that new regulatory guidance concerning the distinction between interstate and intrastate commerce is not necessary. Generally, the states and the industry have a common understanding on this point. To the extent that fact-specific questions arise, the Agency will work with the States and the industry to provide a clarification for the specific scenario. * Commercial Driver's License. Federal regulations allow states to make exceptions to Commercial Driver's License (CDL) regulations for certain farm vehicle drivers such as farm employees and family members, as long as their vehicles are not used by "for-hire" motor carriers. Some states have questioned whether this exemption applies to drivers who work for "crop share" or similar arrangements. FMCSA's notice includes guidance to ensure consistent application of the exemption. After considering the public comments, the Agency has determined that farmers who rent their land for a share of the crops and haul their own and the landlord's crops to market should have access to the agricultural CDL exemptions given by the states. * Implements of Husbandry. In a perfect world, farm vehicles would only operate on farms, while commercial trucks would operate on public roads. The reality is that farm equipment that is not designed or intended for everyday use on public roads is often used for short trips at limited speeds. This creates a gray area for classification. After considering the public comments, FMCSA has determined that most States have already adopted common sense enforcement practices that allow farmers to safely move equipment to and from their fields. In areas where farm implements are common, the enforcement community and the agricultural community have achieved a mutual understanding of which safety regulations should apply to farm equipment on their public roads.
FMCSA is committed to the safety of our highways and the long-term success of America's agricultural industry. To learn more about federal safety regulations that impact the transportation of agricultural products and equipment, please visit the FMCSA website at www.fmcsa.dot.gov.
Source: http://www.dot.gov/affairs/2011/fmcsa2411.html | 农业 |
2017-17/0143/en_head.json.gz/2780 | Farm families need to plan for next generation
More and more, woman are returning to the farm — and taking charge. This is part of the generational shift agricultural economists talk about.
Published on November 1, 2013 12:11PM
Buy this photo Molly Pearmine McCarger returned to the family farm after a stint teaching. Marie Bowers returned to her family’s farm after working in agricultural finance.So did Macey Wessels, who managed a blueberry farm and processing plant.More and more, women are returning to the family farm and taking charge.This is part of the generational shift that agricultural economists talk about. As America’s farmers grow older — the average age is 57 — the younger generation must pick up the mantle. As the older generation considers passing along the family farm, all options must be considered.These days, daughters can be as likely to take over the farm as the sons.That’s as it should be. Farms are businesses that require knowledge of agriculture, finance, mechanics and many other fields. Whether that person is male or female is beside the point. Farming is an equal-opportunity profession.One of the most difficult problems facing any farm family can be summed up in a single word: succession. That’s when a farmer approaching retirement age faces the question of what to do with the farm. Sometimes the farm has been built from scratch. Other times, it is a multi-generational operation. Either way, the farmer, along with the family, need to come up with a plan for the next generation. In some families, the custom called for the oldest son to take over the farm. In others, the son — or daughter — with the most interest was designated. In some others, each child received an equal share of the farm.These and many other alternatives emerge during a discussion of succession plans. Almost all of them can have pitfalls if all the aspects are not considered. For example, a farmer may give an equal share to each child with the provision that one of them will buy out the others. But if the plan is not properly drawn up, the child still on the farm may have to take out a loan or sell part of the farm to do that. In some cases that can put the farm in a precarious financial position.In still other cases, there’s no plan at all, and family members, under the worst of circumstances, must figure out what to do.But just as no two families are the same, no two succession plans are the same.Whether a daughter or a son ends up on the farm, all family members must be on board and treated fairly. Marketplace | 农业 |
2017-17/0143/en_head.json.gz/2942 | New tree fruit association will expand services
HomeLegal & RegulatoryTradePeopleMarketingNewsGeraldine WarnerDecember 2014 IssueNew tree fruit association will expand services Growers’ advocate ends 42-year career 2014 Silver Apple Award goes to Jerry Haak New tree fruit association will expand services
Jon DeVaney will represent the industry in the legislative arena. Geraldine Warner // Nov 28, 2014 // Legal & Regulatory // Marketing // News // People // Trade Jon DeVaney
The new Washington Tree Fruit Association plans to expand its services to the industry, says President Jon DeVaney, who will be busy working on legislative affairs in the state capital of Olympia in the coming session.
The merger of four organizations will be complete when the association absorbs the Washington State Horticultural Association after the annual hort meeting in early December. The Washington Growers Clearing House Association, Yakima Growers-Shippers Association, and Wenatchee Valley Traffic Association merged at the end of August.
The association’s annual budget will be $1.5 million, which is about $250,000 less than the combined budgets of the organizations it is replacing. It will be funded by dues of 3/4 cent per 40-pound equivalent box on apples, pears, cherries, and soft fruit. Packers will remit the dues directly to the association. Growers will not be able to opt out of paying dues, though they can ask to be removed from the mailing list.
“To have growers automatically be members, unless they choose not to be affiliated by saying, ‘Take me off your list,’ means we maximize the political influence by saying we represent all the growers of the industry, and all the packers, and all the marketers,” he said.
DeVaney said the new association will not just maintain services that the other organizations provided but will improve on them. He expects that the association will provide more data to producers and expand its educational role. It will also play a more proactive role in state legislative and regulatory affairs so that it’s not just pushing back on issues that could have a negative impact, but is asking for improvements to rules and regulations.
Ranie Haas joined the staff in October in the new position of director of regulatory and industry affairs. DeVaney will head the legislative effort, working—at least for the first session—with Jim Halstrom, a longtime contract lobbyist for the Hort Association, and Dave Ducharme, lobbyist for the Growers-Shippers Association in Olympia.
“I’ll spend some time on going to Olympia to identify priorities and explaining the industry’s position on issues that come up,” he said.
DeVaney, 43, has considerable experience in legislative affairs. He grew up in Washington’s Kitsap County and finished high school in Kennewick, where his parents still live. He has a bachelor’s degree in history from the University of Washington and a master’s degree in history at Georgetown University in Washington D.C.
“I was in a PhD program, and then I realized that was a good route to unemployment,” he said. “The academic job market was not that strong.”
In 1995, while DeVaney was pondering over what else he might do, Doc Hastings was elected to the House of Representatives from Washington’s fourth congressional district. DeVaney got a job first as an intern and then as a legislative assistant with Hastings in Washington, D.C., and transferred to the Yakima, Washington, district office in 2000.
Two years later, he joined the staff of the Northwest Horticultural Council as director of legislative and regulatory affairs. He left in 2003 to rejoin Hasting’s staff and help run George Bush’s re-election effort. In 2005, he took a political appointment as Washington State’s director of Rural Development, which is part of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The agency’s many programs included building farmworker housing, helping to build rural infrastructure, and providing loans to businesses to produce value-added agriculture products.
“But, all good things come to an end, including presidential administrations,” DeVaney said, “And 2009 was not a good time to be a Republican or unemployed.”
Hastings had been appointed a ranking member of the House’s Natural Resources Committee, so DeVaney returned to work at Hastings’ office in Washington, D.C., though his home was in Yakima. His wife, Karen, who was caring for their two young sons, was not interested in relocating to the capital. When Keith Mathews left as manager of the Yakima Valley Growers-Shippers Association, DeVaney successfully applied. He was appointed president of the Tree Fruit Association last summer.
DeVaney said state legislators need to be aware that the tree fruit industry is a huge benefit to the state’s economy and not one they should take for granted. If they make policy decisions that harm the industry, many thousands of jobs could be in jeopardy.
He’s concerned about how the legislature plans to pay for education and road maintenance, for example.
“They’re looking for billions of additional dollars to fund education and other priorities,” he said. “Our industry can’t easily absorb a lot of additional costs when we’re trying to market a large crop in a competitive environment.
“If they make regulations that are difficult or expensive to comply with, we could find ourselves at a competitive disadvantage very quickly and lose a lot of market share. International and domestic consumers love our products, but they’re sensitive to price.”
He’s particularly concerned that the state might increase gas taxes to compensate for a shortfall in revenues because of more fuel-efficient vehicles or introduce a carbon cap-and-trade scheme or carbon tax. About 97 percent of Washington’s apples are shipped out of state.
He pointed out that the industry has become even more reliant on trucks for shipping fruit to market since rail capacity has been declining at the same time as crop volumes have been increasing.
“Having the transportation to move that crop is very important,” he said. “It’s a concern because we’re not easily going to switch to electrically powered vehicles.” •
Ranie Haas joins new association
Ranie Hass
Ranie Haas has joined the Washington State Tree Fruit Association as director of regulatory and industry affairs. She will focus on how the various state agencies are implementing regulations that impact the tree fruit industry.
Haas grew up on an orchard in Wapato, Washington. After earning a bachelor’s degree in political science from Central Washington University in 1997, she worked at Congressman Doc Hasting’s office in Yakima for six years. She then worked in hop purchasing for Anheuser-Busch and most recently was a sales assistant for Washington Fruit and Produce Company.
By Geraldine Warner|2014-11-28T15:19:03+00:00November 28th, 2014|December 2014 Issue, Geraldine Warner, Legal & Regulatory, Marketing, News, People, Trade| About the Author: Geraldine Warner
Geraldine Warner was the editor of Good Fruit Grower from 1992-2015. During her tenure, she planned and prepared editorial content, wrote for the magazine, and managed the editorial team.
Read her stories: Story Index Related Posts
Washington’s 2015 drought losses estimated at $700 million
Northwest pear growers will continue marketing order
Young grower mixes new ideas with 125-year-old traditions
I-9 form gets ‘smart’
Together on tour – Gallery
Good Fruit Grower2017-04-19T13:35:13+00:00How to manage weeds and nitrogen in organic orchardsApril 19th, 2017|0 CommentsManaging weeds and maintaining nitrogen in organic apple production is an expensive and labor-intensive task.
In short, it isn’t easy. Organic growers everywhere struggle to adequately
Melissa Hansen2017-04-03T08:40:52+00:00How’s the quality of your water?April 3rd, 2017|0 CommentsResearch helps to develop guidelines for dealing with salinity, sodicity in the vineyard.Blogs | 农业 |
2017-17/0128/en_head.json.gz/19329 | Analysis Your Balance +tax
The world's most important hamburger
By: Gwynne Dyer Posted: 08/7/2013 1:00 AM | Comments: Tweet Post Reddit ShareThis Print
This article was published 6/8/2013 (1355 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current. The most important hamburger in the history of the world was cooked (but only half-eaten) in London on Monday. It was grown in a lab, not cut from a cow, and it tasted, well, not quite good enough to fool the experts, but then they forgot the ketchup, mustard, cheese, onion, bacon, tomato and lettuce. Not to mention the fries."I miss the fat. There's a leanness to it," said food writer Josh Schonwald, "but the general bite feels like a hamburger." Austrian food critic Hanni Ruetzler agreed: "It's not that juicy, but the consistency is perfect. This is meat to me. It's not falling apart; it's really something to bite on." Even in a blind tasting, she added, she would say it was real meat and not a soya copy.
Of course she would. It WAS real meat, grown from a cow's stem cells just like the flesh of its own body. It tasted lean because the stem cells the experimenters used were only programmed to make muscle tissue, not fat. (They're working on that). The real test was whether tens of billions of lab-grown muscle cells could be organized into something with the consistency of proper meat, not mush, and the lab-burger passed that test with flying colours.But why would anybody want to pass that test? What's wrong with just eating cows -- and sheep and pigs and chickens? Far beyond the objections of vegetarians and animal-rights activists, what's wrong with eating "natural" meat is there are too many of us eating too much of it, and we're running out of land to grow it on."Right now, we are using 70 per cent of all our agricultural capacity to grow meat through livestock," Professor Mark Post, the lead researcher, told The Independent at a conference in Vancouver last year. "You are going to need alternatives. If we don't do anything, meat will become a luxury food and will become very expensive..."Livestock also contributes a lot to greenhouse-gas emissions, more so than our entire transport system," explained Post, a medical physiologist at Maastricht University in the Netherlands. "Livestock produces 39 per cent of global methane, five per cent of the CO2 and 40 per cent of the nitrous oxide. Eventually, we will have an eco-tax on meat." On meat raised in the open air, that is, whereas meat grown in the lab is a potentially inexhaustible resource, and it does far less environmental damage.According to an Oxford University study published in 2011, a tonne of "cultured" beef would require 99 per cent less land and between 82 and 96 per cent less water than its "natural" rival, and would produce between 78 and 95 per cent less greenhouse gas. It would also use 45 per cent less energy.These are seriously impressive numbers. If Post's process can scale up successfully, then in 10 or 20 years we could be producing enough meat for a growing global population even though many people are eating more meat per capita as their incomes rise. Moreover, we would be able to turn most of that 70 per cent of agricultural land back into forest and prairie or switch it to growing grain for human consumption."There are basically three things that can happen going forward," said Google co-founder Sergey Brin, who bankrolled Post's research. "One is that we can all become vegetarian. I don't think that's really likely. The second is we ignore the issues, and that leads to continued environmental harm. The third option is we do something new."So let's assume you can produce this beef in industrial quantities, complete with fat cells so it tastes just like the meat that comes from the slaughterhouse. Could you get people to buy it?No problem. Just price it about 20 per cent cheaper than the "real thing." Those of us who are keeping up with the Joneses will buy the premium product; the rest of us will buy the one that's just as good but costs less.Oh, and why didn't they eat the whole hamburger on Monday? Because there was no way you could share what was left equally between so many journalists, and they sometimes get quite nasty if they're thwarted. So Mark Post said he'd take it home to his children. Gwynne Dyer is an independent journalist whose articles are published in 45 countries. Related Items
By Gwynne Dyer
Just add onions | 农业 |
2017-17/0128/en_head.json.gz/20824 | We support a resilient & equitable food system on Martha’s Vineyard by providing food and agriculture education and developing infrastructure to make a year-round local food system viable. Join Us Facebook Join Us Island Grown Schools Our StoryStaff & BoardResources
Our staff is responsible for bringing our mission into the community through our education programs, food system work and farmer outreach. Rebecca Haag Executive Director Rebecca Haag is a long-time social justice advocate with extensive experience in creating, building and transforming organizations. She was most recently the CEO of the AIDS Action Committee of MA, and has served on many nonprofit and business boards. She has been an executive in the government, business and nonprofit sectors, always motivated to identify and solve critical problems and seize opportunities.
For example, working with the Obama Administration, Rebecca helped lead the effort to create the first ever National AIDS Strategy with measureable goals, objectives and timelines. In another leadership position, she help launch the American Business Collaboration for Quality Care, raising over $150M from Fortune 500 companies to invest nationwide in community-based programs for childcare, after school programs and elder care. She received numerous national recognition and awards for both efforts. Working with the IGI board, colleagues and community partners, Rebecca envisions building a safe, sustainable and equitable food system for the Island. She has a BA from Wells College in Economics, MBA from Boston University and honorary PhD in human services from Simmons University. She currently serves on the Board of Trustees of Eastern Bank and is a trusted advisor to several regional nonprofit organizations. Contact: [email protected]
Noli Taylor Community Food Education Director Noli graduated from Haverford College in 1999 with a degree in urban studies and environmental science. Since then, she has done environmental and agricultural advocacy and organizing work with non-profits and community groups from Philadelphia to Seattle, Albuquerque to Kauai. She began working on agriculture issues in Hawaii, organizing around genetic engineering and community food security, and helped launch IGS in 2007. She is also a mother of two young children and lives with her family in Aquinnah. Contact: [email protected]
Keith Wilda Farm Hub Director Over the past 20 years Keith has worked as an educator and researcher, through extension work at the University of Massachusetts, as general manager of two of the largest aquaculture and aquaponics facilities in the country and as a consultant. Keith lives with his wife Reagan and has three daughters, Ella and twins Morgan and Addison. Contact: [email protected]
Matthew Dix Poultry Program Leader Matthew has a passion for intensive small scale agriculture and has been growing and processing chickens using the mobile unit since its early days in 2007. Matthew and his wife Rebecca live in Chilmark with their three children where they have owned and operated North Tabor Farm since 1994. Contact: [email protected]
Jamie Tara O'Gorman Gleaning Program Leader Jamie began gleaning as a volunteer and became Program Leader in 2011, when she expanded the scope of the program. Growing up in rural Nova Scotia gave Jamie a deep nature connection and insight into issues of consumerism and waste. When IGI began, Jamie was working at Native Earth Teaching Farm, giving farm tours, spinning wool, and growing in the community garden while homeschooling. Since that time, she has witnessed, with amazement, the growth and revival of a robust local food system on Martha's Vineyard. Jamie now runs Quanaimes Gardens - a small farm in Chilmark with fruit trees, berries, flowers, chickens, goats, and annual vegetables. Contact: [email protected]
Emily Armstrong Development Manager Emily has done food systems education and worked on farms since 2008, and brings a deep love of the island's agricultural heritage to her work with Island Grown. Together with her husband Taz and son Theo she grows a large vegetable garden and raises most of her own meat. Emily founded the preschool program for Island Grown Schools in 2012. Contact: [email protected]
Sophie Abrams Island Food Rescue Program Manager Sophie Abrams was born and raised on the Island of Martha’s Vineyard. After graduating from the University of Vermont with a BA in Sociology and a minor in Environmental Studies, she lived in Colorado, Wyoming, California, and Costa Rica. She returned to the east coast to attend Marlboro Graduate School where she earned an MBA in Managing for Sustainability. Since moving back to the Island in 2011 she has worked in renewable energy, affordable housing, and is now the Project Manager of the Island-Wide Organics Feasibility Study and Program Manager of Island Food Rescue. Building on her graduate school thesis project of studying the feasibility of composting food waste on the Island, she is living out her dream of making the Island more self-sufficient by processing food waste locally. Contact: [email protected]
Natalie Poole Administrative Assistant Natalie was born and raised on Martha’s Vineyard and graduated from MVRHS. During her senior year she did a mentorship with Island Grown Schools and helped build and maintain the high school’s garden. She attended Bridgewater State University and graduated in 2016 with a degree in business management and minor in health services management. Outside of the office you can find Natalie reading a book or baking in her kitchen. Contact: [email protected]
Taz Armstrong Greenhouse Manager Taz has worked in agriculture since he came to the island in 2009. In 2010 he started working with IGI's poultry crew, since then he has helped with almost all of IGI's various programs. He manages the greenhouse at Thimble Farm. Taz enjoys raising and butchering rabbits and ducks. Contact: [email protected]
Alex Parris Assistant Greenhouse Manager Alex Parris is a graduate of Stockbridge School of Agriculture and UMASS Amherst where he majored in Sustainable Horticulture and Plant Soil and Insect Sciences and acquired an A.S. and B.S. in them respectively. He has a primary interest in closed-loop environmental systems as well as food production and spends his time gardening and tending to his aquariums and terrestrial enclosures. Contact: [email protected]
Marissa Quell Greenhouse Technician Marissa is originally from Fort Worth, Texas and moved to Massachusetts to do research with the New England Aquarium in order to complete her Master's degree in Aquaculture. Her primary interests involve breeding aquarium fishes and ocean conservation. Marissa also volunteers at the Felix Neck Wildlife Sanctuary where she cares for and collects animals from Sengekontacket Pond. She lives with her wife, Brit, and their French Bulldog, Franklin in West Tisbury. Contact: [email protected]
Kaila Allen-Posin Island Grown Schools Program Leader Kaila Allen-Posin has been working with Island Grown Schools since 2010. She began her work as an IGS coordinator, bringing island students in grades K-12 into the school gardens and onto local farms to explore where their food comes from. While she was going through her MEd program at Antioch New England, she created the Island Grown Schools curriculum toolkit, an online resource that connects IGS lessons to national and state standards. She lives with her husband and two children on the Allen Farm, from where much of her inspiration and appreciation for the work of Island Grown Schools comes. Contact: [email protected]
We are grateful for the service of our wonderful volunteer board members!
Randi Baird President Randi is a Martha’s Vineyard based editorial and commercial photographer specializing in food, lifestyle and portrait work. For over 25 years, she has used her photographs as a means for communication, education and social change. Her images have received worldwide attention and have been distributed by the Associated Press, United Press International, published in Food + Wine, Edible Manhattan, and Edible Vineyard. She is a regular contributor to Martha’s Vineyard Magazine. Her first Cookbook, Simple Green Suppers, published by Roost Books, is due out this year. Randi is a founding member of Island Grown Initiative and has been active with the organization since its inception. She lives in West Tisbury with her husband and two sons. Mary Kenworth Clerk Mary co-owns and operates State Road Restaurant in West Tisbury and Beach Road Restaurant in Vineyard Haven. Both restaurants are dedicated to supporting the local food shed and sourcing from Island farmers, fisherman and food artisans. Mary lives in Vineyard Haven with her husband Jackson and their two Irish Terriers, Berto and Daphne. Simon Athearn Treasurer Simon Athearn Lives in West Tisbury in his Great Grandparents farmhouse, with his wife Robyn, and their children Rose and Ignatius who are the 12th generation of Athearn’s on the Island. Simon is the CEO of Morning Glory Farm, working alongside his parents, and his brother Daniel. Schooled first as a pastry chef, Simon left the west coast to return home to work on the family farm. Simon is an aspiring English tea rose gardener, vegetable fanatic, trumpet player, and enjoys spending time on the Tisbury Great Pond with his family. Karen Davis Board Member Karen has been an educator for 40 years, starting at the Chilmark Community Center summer program in the 1970s. She has gardened & homesteaded for the last 36 years, and runs a small farm raising organic grass fed beef, hay and maple syrup in central Mass with her husband Dave. They come as often as possible to Martha’s Vineyard to see their son Jake, his wife and their children. Lindsey Scott Board Member Lindsey is the Executive Director of MVYouth, a community fund established to support island organizations serving children and teens, and provide college scholarships to high school seniors. Lindsey brings a background in non-profit work, education and animal farming to IGI. Lindsey created Cinema Circus for the MV Film Festival, and established an elementary art program at the Charter School. She serves on the School Advisory Council for the Chilmark School and on the Board of the Chilmark Preschool. Lindsey and her husband Josh also run the animal enterprises of Beetlebung Farm with their two children. They raise local beef, pork and lamb. Lynne Whiting Board Member In the 1970s, Lynne taught at the Island Children School. She worked for MVCS Early Childhood Programs in the 1980s supervising Family Day Care providers and establishing the then new Center. She also taught at the WT School and Chilmark Schools until 2001. In 2002, she began to establish programs for the Education Department at the MV Museum, including work on the whaling website: girlonawhaleship.org. Lynne has served as a Trustee of the WT Library, on the Board at the MV Historical Society (now MVM), as a patient volunteer for Hospice of MV and most recently as Vice Chair of the WT Library Foundation. Lynne lives on the Whiting Farm, where her husband Allen’s family have shepherded sheep for generations. She considers herself a backyard farmer tending their family garden, while her children have raised pigs and chickens. Sarah McKay Board Member Sarah grew up in rural Northern Ireland and graduated first in class from the University of Ulster at Magee College with a B.A in Business Enterprise Development. As a Fulbright Scholar Sarah attended U’Mass Amherst and graduated with a Masters in Regional Planning. Her interest in community economic development led her to the Martha’s Vineyard Commission where she worked as an intern while completing graduate school. Sarah became involved in the local food system through her role as store manager for Cronig’s Markets for over 15 years. She is currently the Executive Director of the Martha's Vineyard Community Horse Center. Sarah lives in West Tisbury with her husband Tim. Albert O. Fischer Board Member Albert is an 11th generation islander who grew up on a farm in Chilmark. Two years after graduating from the MVRHS, he was drafted and served in Vietnam. He was wounded three times while in combat, awarded a purple heart and two bronze stars. For a few years after the war he fished on commercial boats, dragging, lobstering and sword fishing. He has been an estate manager for the past 40 years. Albert is a gatherer at heart and loves living off the land, growing vegetables, hunting and harvesting fish and shellfish from the Island’s waters. He has four grown children and lives in West Tisbury with his wife. Albert is an avid photographer. Mitzi Pratt Board Member Mitzi Pratt is a hand bookbinder from Aquinnah. She has been a key participant in a number of notable efforts to protect and improve Martha’s Vineyard’s fragile environmental, economic and social structure, including The Moshup Trail Conservation Project, the acquisition and restoration of the Vanderhoop Homestead, and most recently, the acclaimed relocation of the Gay Head Lighthouse. Mitzi is a current member of Aquinnah’s Housing Committee, Conservation Committee, and Community Preservation Committee. She has previously served on the Aquinnah Arts Council and the boards of The Polly Hill Arboretum, The Friends of Family Planning, and Conway & Pratt Projects Inc, based in New York City. A long time supporter of locally raised food with an abiding concern for social justice she is delighted to be joining the IGI team. Allen Rugg Board Member Allen Rugg practiced law as a civil litigator and trial lawyer in Washington, DC and Boston for over forty years. Allen and his wife, Suzanne Boyer, live in Aquinnah with their golden retriever, Henry. They have an adult daughter, Aubyn, son in law, Andre, and two grandchildren. Allen sits on the Finance Committee of Aquinnah. Founding Executive Director
Ali Berlow Ali Berlow is the founding executive director of Island Grown Initiative. She resigned in January 2011 to return to food writing.
Ali's first book, The Mobile Poultry Slaughterhouse: Building a Humane Chicken Processing Unit to Strengthen Your Local Food System, was published in 2013 by Storey Publishing. Temple Grandin wrote the foreword. It is a step-by-step practical guide depicting IGI's poultry program. It addresses the scarcity of humane slaughterhouses available to small-scale farmers in the US and how to overcome the barriers to building one.
Her most recent book, The Food Activist Handbook; Big & Small Things You Can Do to Help Provide Fresh, Healthy Food for Your Community, also from Storey Publishing, is described as the 'Our Bodies Our Selves' of food activism by New York Times best selling author, Alice Randall, in the foreword. Additional praise comes from Michael Pollan who tweeted "Just what the food movement needs now: The Food Activist Handbook, for anyone hoping to build a local food system, by @AliBerlow. Well done!" and Civil Eats named it one of the Best Food and Farm Books of 2015. Ali is the co-publisher of Edible Vineyard magazine with her husband Sam Berlow. She is a co-host of WCAI's Local Food Report and is launching The Gleaning - a radio focused multi-media production company about food. She lives in West Tisbury, MA and Putney, VT.
Ali is a sought after speaker about food activism, humane slaughter and what we can do to help create a just, equitable and fair food system for all. Visit her website for all speaking engagements. Contact: [email protected] | 农业 |
2017-17/0128/en_head.json.gz/21019 | Alternative Livestock and Aquaculture
Explore Government
Alsike Clover Poisoning, Photosensitization or Photodermatitis in Horses
White Dutch or Common White
Summary and Recommendations
Alsike clover (Trifolium hybridum) is found most frequently in the farming areas of northern Canada but has been included in a number of commonly used pasture mixes. This plant is adapted to cool climates and heavy, poorly drained clay soils. It grows 15-30 inches in height with a small ½-inch diameter pink flower, which forms at the ends of secondary branches from the main stem. It should be differentiated from red clover, which has a larger flower, hairy stems and leaves and a white inverted "V" on the leaf similar to the white clovers.
Alsike clover is know to cause two syndromes, photosensitization and big liver syndrome. The original condition was described by Dr. Schofield, former Dean of the Ontario Veterinary College (1). Although the toxicity has been described for 70 years, the actual toxin is unknown. Horses show the photosensitization syndrome with short-term exposure, while liver damage and enlargement is usually associated with long-term exposure. This problem has occurred mainly in horses and, occasionally, in cattle. There is also a potential for nitrate poisoning with alsike clover (2).
small ½-inch pink flower
grows 15-30 inches high
no white "V" on the leaves
The more common and acute lesions related to alsike clover are photosensitization characterized by "reddening of the skin under the influence of sunlight, followed by either superficial or deep dry necrosis of the skin or by edematous swelling and serous discharge," resulting in crusty inflamed areas, especially in the unpigmented pink-skinned areas of the face. Kingsbury also describes "symptoms of nervous and digestive disorders," including colic and diarrhea and oral lesions related to alsike clover poisoning (3). Horses that are not outside during the day, blanketed while outside, or have minimum exposure to ultraviolet light may not show the hair loss and crusty inflamed skin typical of photosensitization. In these cases, a slight edema of the skin may be the only noticeable sign. Close observation of the oral mucosa of the mouth and under the tongue may reveal peticheal haemorrhage and linear ulcers. Diarrhea and colic may also be experienced.
The longer-term consequence of alsike clover consumption is "big liver syndrome", appearing as a progressive destruction of the liver with increased connective tissue (biliary cirrhosis). It appears that this is related to the accumulation of a yet unidentified toxin. The primary tests for evaluating liver function and hepatic disease measure the serum enzyme activity of aspartate amino transferase (AST), gamma glutamyl transferase (GGT), sorbitol dehydrogenase (SDH) and lactic dehydrogenase - 5 (LDH-5). Liver biopsy may be required to characterize the degree and type of liver damage and provide a prognosis.
Veterinarians will need to differentiate between alsike clover poisoning and other types of photosensitization by walking horse pastures and examining hay for potential photodynamic agent-containing plants. Photodynamic agents in certain plants accumulate in the liver and react with ultraviolet light to cause the dermatitis. This is commonly seen in pyrrolizidine alkaloid-containing plants, such as tansy ragwort, groundsel, fiddleneck, common heliotrope, vipers bugloss (blue weed), and rattlebox. Phenothiazine-derived anthelmintics, sulfonamides, and tetracyclines have also been associated with this condition. Descriptions and images of many of these plants can be viewed by accessing the Canadian Poisonous Plants Information System.
The following general descriptions of the non toxic white and red clovers will help veterinarians and horse owners distinguish them from alsike clover.
low-growing plant (less than 5 inches)
leaves and flowers rise from a horizontal creeping stem
leaves have an inverted white "V"
White Dutch or common white clover (Trifolium repens) is a low-growing plant (less than 5 inches) which grows well in pastures. Ladino clover is a taller improved white clover. It grows to 12-15 inches in height with a 3/4 to 1-inch diameter white flower. The white clovers grow from a creeping stem. Leaves and flowers rise individually from the horizontal stem. The leaves have an inverted white "V".
3/4 to 1-inch rose-purple flowers
grows 12 - 15" in height
leaves and flowers rise from a vertical stem
leaves and stems are hairy
leaves have a white "V"
Red clover (Trifolium pratense) is a biennial, which means it will live for about two years and then will die off unless it is allowed to re-seed itself. The stem is vertical with leaves and flowers rising from the stem. It grows to 12-15 inches in height with 3/4 to 1-inch diameter rose-purple to magenta flowers. The stems and leaves are hairy. The hairs form a fine dust when cured for hay. The leaves are green with a white "V".
Summary and Recommendations:
Alsike clover poisoning does not appear to occur all the time. It may be that a fungus growing on the plant creates a mycotoxin or the plant creates or accumulates a toxin under certain environmental growing conditions. However, until the toxin and the circumstances affecting the accumulation of the toxin are discovered;
Alsike clover should not be fed to horses in greater than 5% of the feed.
Seed mixes intended for horse pastures and hay should not contain alsike clover.
Horse owners should be able to recognize the different clovers so that alsike clover poisoning can be prevented.
Rooney JR, Robertson JL. Equine Pathology. Ames: Iowa State University Press, 1996: p110.
Munro DB. Canadian Poisonous Plants Information System. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. Kingsbury JM. Poisonous Plants of the Unites States and Canada. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc., 1964:358-360.
Dr. B. Wright - Veterinary Scientist, Equine and Alternative Livestock/OMAFRA | 农业 |
2017-17/0128/en_head.json.gz/21187 | The Energy Content of Horse Feeds
By Shannon Pratt-Phillips, MSc, PhD
Digestive System Metabolism Grains Hay Print Email
The use of calories in equine nutrition is twofold: We discuss how many calories are required in a given day and how many calories are in feed.
Understanding the concept of weight management requires an understanding of energy. Very often horse owners confuse the term “energy” with “spirit” or “activity level.” As it relates to nutrition, however, energy refers to calories, which are units of energy (described further below). And with respect to weight management, if any animal takes in more calories than it expends, it will gain weight (mostly as fat); if it expends more calories than it takes in, it will lose weight.
So what is a calorie? A calorie is defined as the energy required to heat one gram of water one degree centigrade. One calorie is a very small amount of energy; for instance, a 500 kg horse trotting for one minute burns 56,000 calories. Because a calorie is such a small unit of energy, most feeds and requirements are reported in kilocalories (kcal, where 1 kcal = 1,000 calories) or even megacalories (Mcal, where 1 Mcal = 1,000 kcal). To put it in perspective, humans refer to Calories (note the capital “C”), which actually represent kilocalories. Most equine diets are built on the range of megacalories. For example, a mature horse might require 16 Mcal of energy per day. In Europe and elsewhere in the world, the unit of measure for energy is the joule (J), where 1 calorie is equal to 4.184 joules.
Energy Content
Horses derive calories by breaking down feed through processes of digestion, absorption, and metabolism. Different feeds will generate different amounts of calories per unit weight based on these processes, so it is important to have an understanding of how feeds are broken down. Some biochemistry is involved to fully understand these processes, so we’ll just cover the basics.
Horses can generate energy from three main classes of feedstuffs: carbohydrates (derivatives of sugar), fats, and proteins. These are types of organic compounds because their structures have three key elements: carbon, oxygen, and hydrogen. (Note “organic” in this case does not mean “not treated with pesticides or herbicides.” In the realm of nutrition, organic refers to compounds containing these elements.) Structurally, carbohydrates, proteins, and fats are very different, but the ultimate energetic end product of their digestion and metabolism is the same: adenosine triphosphate (ATP), with a difference among these energetic compounds being the number of ATPs each generates.
Continuous work (such as walking or trotting or even beating the heart) requires multiple contraction and relaxation cycles and substantial amounts of ATP.
ATP is the compound required for muscle to function, though in reality it relaxes the muscle after a contraction. Continuous work (such as walking or trotting or even beating the heart) requires multiple contraction and relaxation cycles and substantial amounts of ATP. Thus, without ATP the muscle would contract but not relax. For example, when rigor mortis sets in after death, it is due to the body’s inability to reproduce ATP to relax the muscles. (Eventually, the muscle proteins begin to break down so that rigor mortis only lasts a few hours.)
ATP is the energy currency of all cells, similar to gas in a car. Without gas the car wouldn’t go very far. Likewise, the body needs constant replenishment of ATP, which we can generate through the metabolism of feedstuffs. Carbohydrates (found in forages and grains) and fats (found in small amounts in all feeds, but primarily in oils) are the most important sources of energy for a horse because of the ability of carbohydrates and fats to generate ATP through their metabolism. The use of one unit of ATP generates 7 kcal (or Calories) of energy.
Carbohydrates are extremely important to the horse for two main reasons. For one, they are a major component of forages, a staple of the horse’s diet and required for digestive health. Secondly, forages provide ample energy for the horse after its digestion and metabolism to ATP.
One of the simplest carbohydrates is a monosaccharide, a structure comprising six carbon atoms arranged with hydrogen and oxygen atoms. Types of monosaccharides include glucose, fructose, and galactose, depending on the actual structure. Another type of carbohydrate is a disaccharide, such as sucrose and lactose, which contains two monosaccharides. For example, sucrose is made of the monosaccharides fructose and glucose while lactose is made from galactose and fructose.
A polysaccharide is a long chain of hundreds to thousands of monosaccharides bound together. Polysaccharides such as starch and cellulose (a type of fiber) are digested by the body differently, largely because of the specific bonds between the individual saccharides.
Digestion of carbohydrates such as starch and lactose is through the action of digestive enzymes, which break these compounds into monosaccharides which are then absorbed by the digestive tract. Therefore, monosaccharides, such as glucose, are the primary form of carbohydrates ultimately used for energy production. Because of their relatively simple structure, sugars don’t generate large amounts of energy (ATP) per unit weight. However, as horses can consume significant amounts of carbohydrates, particularly when fed a high starch diet (for example, one that is high in cereal grains), energy derived from them can make up a substantial portion of their intake.
Note that fiber, a type of polysaccharide, is not digested by enzymes produced by mammals. These carbohydrates must be fermented by microbial organisms found in horses' digestive tracts. The end products of microbial fermentation of fiber are the volatile fatty acids (VFAs). These compounds are absorbed and metabolized within the body and can be used to produce ATP. The VFAs do not produce substantial energy per unit weight, but have the ability to provide a large portion of the horse’s energy intake because of the high intake of fiber in the horse’s typical diet. The concept of fiber digestion is explained in more detail within the digestion section below.
As indicated earlier, fats are another important source of energy to the horse because of their ability to produce large amounts of ATP. Fats (lipids) are a category of nutrients that generally consists of triglycerides. Triglycerides are structures consisting of three fatty acid chains and one glycerol (a short carbohydrate) unit. Different types of fat are derived from differences in the fatty acid chain. For example, saturated fats have single bonds between all of their carbon units while unsaturated fats have double bonds between many of their carbons. The chain location of these double bonds gives rise to the “omega” fatty acids; for example, omega-3 fatty acids have their first double bond after the third carbon. Because of the complex structure of fats, their metabolism generates relatively large amounts of energy (ATP) per unit weight.
Proteins can also be used for energy production, though they are not a very efficient source of energy. Protein is found in varying amounts in most equine feeds, with feeds such as soybean meal and legume hays having high amounts (soybean meal is 44% protein and legume hays are typically 15% to 18% protein). Proteins are unique organic compounds in that along with the elements oxygen, hydrogen, and carbon, they also have nitrogen in their structure.
Amino acids are the building blocks of protein, similar to letters in a word. There are approximately 20 different amino acids due to different side chains in their structure. Proteins (amino acids) are primarily used to build hormones and other important functional compounds within the body, but they can be metabolized to generate energy if fed in excess. When protein is fed in the diet, it will first be used to satisfy body protein requirements; any excess protein is metabolized for energy. Therefore, while protein can be used for energy, it is not a very efficient source of ATPs.
Almost all equine feeds are going to have a mixture of some carbohydrate, fat, and protein.
Almost all equine feeds are going to have a mixture of some carbohydrate, fat, and protein, and the proportions of these will partially determine how much energy can be generated. However, an important part of the picture is how well these compounds are digested and absorbed into the body.
The concept of how well energy is produced is relatively simple in theory. All energetic compounds (carbohydrate, fat, protein) can generate energy; that is, they can generate calories or heat when they are combusted (burned). The amount of heat (energy) generated by combusting a particular feed component is termed the gross energy. The gross energy of 1 gram of carbohydrate (straight table sugar, starch, or cellulose) is approximately 4 Calories; 1 gram of fat generates approximately 9 Calories; and protein generates approximately 5 Calories. Remember, however, that most horse feeds (such as grains or hay) are going to be made of plant material that already has a mixture of some carbohydrate, protein, and fat in it, so the actual gross energy of a feedstuff may vary.
As the animal digests feed, some components may not be digested well and will be lost from the body as feces. The amount of energy digested (and therefore available) by the horse after energy is lost through feces is termed the digestible energy. Thus, the amount of digestible energy in a particular feedstuff is going to depend primarily on the energetic nutrients in the feed (fat, carbohydrate, and protein breakdown) but also on the amount digested. When we refer to how much energy a horse needs in its diet, we use digestible energy values. It should be noted that some countries use the net energy system, which accounts for losses of energy in urine, gas, and heat.
Shannon Pratt-Phillips, MSc, PhD | 农业 |
2017-17/0128/en_head.json.gz/22514 | Award of Distinction
Excellence in Extension
Excellence in Industry
Excellence in International Service Award
Excellence in Regulatory Affairs and Crop Security
Ruth Allen Award
Hewitt Award
Hutchins Award
Keen Award
Syngenta Award
APS > Membership > Awards > Fellows > Denis McGee
Denis McGee
Denis McGee was born in Edinburgh, Scotland, in 1938. He earned a B.S. degree in botany in 1964 and a Ph.D. in plant pathology in 1967 from the University of Edinburgh. After a 2- year postdoctoral position at the University of Minnesota, Denis was employed as a plant pathologist by the Victorian Plant Research Institute, Melbourne, Australia until 1975. Following a 1-year research fellowship at Agriculture Canada, Saskatoon, he was appointed assistant professor in the Department of Botany and Plant Pathology at the University of Maine in 1976. In 1978, he became assistant professor in the Department of Plant Pathology and Seed Science Center at Iowa State University and was promoted to professor in 1984. Dr. McGee has received national and international recognition for his productive seed pathology program focusing on the epidemiology of seedborne diseases and for substantial contributions to the seed industry. The Seed Science Center, under Dr. McGee’s leadership, is in the forefront of national and international efforts to establish seed health test standards. In recent years, Dr. McGee has worked tirelessly on national and international phytosanitary issues, participating in countless meetings involving seed health testing and international phytosanitary reform. He was a key member of a committee that developed the National Seed Health System (NSHA), a government and industry collaboration designed to address seed health and trade issues in an organized, scientific manner. Dr. McGee is recognized worldwide as a seedborne disease expert and has helped resolve numerous phytosanitary disputes between international trading partners. His efforts are helping promote science-based solutions to phytosanitary and qauarantine issues. Get ALL the Latest Updates for CHANGING LANDSCAPES OF PLANT PATHOLOGY. Follow APS! © 2017 The American Phytopathological Society. All rights reserved. Contact Us - Report a Bad Link | 农业 |
2017-17/0128/en_head.json.gz/23784 | Looking for Ways to Beat the Weeds
New York Times, July 16, 2013LinkDepending on your point of view, barnyardgrass is a nightmare or a marvel.A cotton field was sprayed with residual herbicides before planting to counter glyphosate-resistant weeds.That’s because it’s a supremely triumphant weed. Barnyardgrass can swoop in to fields and outcompete planted crops. It is particularly devastating on rice farms, where losses sometimes reach 100 percent. It has evolved resistance to a number of herbicides that farmers rely on to control weeds. Even when farmers think they have rid a field of barnyardgrass, they may not have actually won the battle. Each weed can produce up to a million seeds, which nestle into the soil, waiting for a chance to regrow.Barnyardgrass is but one of many kinds of weeds found around the world. All told, they result in a 10 percent reduction in the productivity of crops. In the United States alone, they cause an estimated $33 billion in losses each year. Herbicides can reduce the toll, but within a few years of the introduction of a new chemical, weeds evolve resistance to it.For decades, farmers have responded to resistant weeds by turning to a new herbicide. But a number of scientists argue that we need to get off this treadmill. They argue that we can find more effective ways to fight weeds by appreciating how well they’ve done at our expense.“They’re amazingly successful plants. They’ve evolved to take advantage of us,” said Ana L. Caicedo of the University of Massachusetts, who recently published a review of weed evolution in the journal Heredity. By according weeds the respect they deserve, Dr. Caicedo and her colleagues hope to find some new clues to how to control them.Barnyardgrass, for example, has changed dramatically from its non-weed ancestors. They originally grew on dry land, for example, and were thus poorly suited to the flooded fields where rice grew. The weeds have evolved a tolerance to waterlogged soils.Barnyardgrass has also evolved into a master deceiver. It is known as a crop mimic because it has evolved to look just like rice. The base of the leaves have turned from pink to green, for example, and the leaves have become narrower. Blending into a rice field, the plants escape the notice of farmers trying to weed them out.“The biotech folks would have no clue about how to make one plant look like another plant,” said R. Ford Denison, an evolutionary biologist at the University of Minnesota and the author of “Darwinian Agriculture” (Princeton University Press, 2012). “And yet a thousand years of selection on a small patch of the earth was enough to give it crop mimicry — and flood tolerance.”This remarkable kind of transformation has been going on since the dawn of civilization. “They’ve been evolving alongside us for thousands of years, since we started agriculture,” said Paul Neve of the University of Warwick in England. Once humans began to farm, they created a new habitat that some plants were able to successfully invade.Scientists have documented three different ways that plants evolve into weeds. Many species, such as barnyardgrass, evolved from wild ancestors. Biologists have found that certain traits make it easier for wild species to become weeds. They already grow fast, for example, and make lots of seeds.Parasitic plants are especially well-suited to the weedy life. They wrap around other plants and send their roots into their hosts’ tissues. Rather than making their own food, parasitic plants steal nutrients from their hosts. The parasitic weeds that invade farm fields have not evolved major differences from the ones that attack wild plants.In other cases, weeds evolved from the union of wild plants and crops. In the 1970s, for example, wild beets in Europe released pollen that fertilized sugar beets growing on farms miles away.Crops can even turn into weeds. “We domesticated a plant from the wild, and somehow it de-domesticated itself — which I think is pretty exciting,” Dr. Caicedo said.Among these crops gone wild is a weed known as red rice. A key step in the domestication of rice was breeding plants that held onto their seeds when farmers harvested them. Red rice evolved fragile seeds that broke off and fell to the ground.The name red rice comes from the russet tinge that the plant evolves as it becomes a weed. Dr. Caicedo and her colleagues suspect the color is produced from a pigment that helps the seeds go dormant — a trait that’s good for a weed but bad for a crop.“If you’re a farmer, you want your seed to start growing when you plant it,” Dr. Caicedo explained. When weeds produce seeds, on the other hand, some sprout quickly while others go into suspended animation. Those dormant weeds create a seed bank that can sprout later, when conditions may be better for them. “It’s a fantastic trait for a weed to have. You’re hedging your bets,” Dr. Caicedo said.These de-domesticated weeds don’t simply go back in time to regain the same DNA as their wild ancestors, scientists are finding. Instead, they have acquired new mutations to different genes. “You’ve got a new bag of genetic tricks,” said Norman Ellstrand of the University of California, Riverside.Once plants become weeds, they keep evolving. New mutations allow some of them to have more offspring than others. Foxtail, for example, evolved to crawl along the ground, where it wouldn’t be destroyed by combine blades.The past century brought a slew of weed-killing chemicals. They helped boost agricultural productivity, although they also caused environmental damage. And it didn’t take long for them to become less effective at killing weeds. Farmers responded by increasing their dose, but the weeds became even more resistant. Eventually, they had to abandon the old herbicides and turn to new ones. Today 217 species of weeds are resistant to at least one herbicide, according to the International Survey of Herbicide Resistant Weeds.Weeds became resistant through evolution. Compared with complex traits like dormancy and mimicry, resistance can be quite simple to evolve. In some cases, a weed needs just one mutation to blunt the effect of herbicides.In the 1970s, there was great hope for a new herbicide called glyphosate (sold by Monsanto as Roundup). Early studies revealed no resistance evolving in weeds, raising hopes that, at last, farmers had escaped from evolution. In the 1980s, Monsanto increased glyphosate’s popularity by introducing genetically modified crops carrying a gene that gave them resistance to the herbicide. Instead of using several different herbicides, many farmers could now use just one.Some critics predicted that interbreeding between genetically modified crops and wild plants would create “superweeds” — hybrid plants carrying the resistance gene. So far, though, only a few cases have been documented.And yet the weeds have become resistant to glyphosate anyway. They did so the old-fashioned way: through evolution.“It’s easy to say, ‘We’ve used it for years and it never developed resistance,” Dr. Ellstrand said. He argues that the reason was that farmers applied glyphosate to relatively little farmland. As they applied it to more and more acreage, they raised the evolutionary reward for mutations that allowed weeds to resist glyphosate. “That ups the selection pressure tremendously,” he said.Glyphosate-resistance is now rampant. Twenty-four species of weeds have evolved it, and they are expanding their range around the world. Earlier this year, the agricultural consulting firm Stratus reported that half of American farms had glyphosate-resistant weeds in 2012, up from 34 percent the year before.Monsanto has developed crops that can resist an older herbicide called dicamba. Dow, meanwhile, has developed crops resistant to a different herbicide called 2,4D. The environmental impact of the products is now being evaluated by the Agriculture Department.Some researchers have argued that weeds could be foiled by combining two resistance genes in one plant, so that farmers could apply two herbicides at once. The odds of a weed having resistance to both chemicals would be tiny.David Mortensen, a weed biologist at Penn State, rejects these claims. He notes that some weeds are already resistant to dicamba, and others to 2,4D. In the journal Trends in Genetics, a team of French and American weed scientists present another reason to worry about these new crops: weeds can become resistant to more than one herbicide at once. Spraying with one chemical can drive the evolution of an all-purpose stress response system, which can defend the weed against other chemicals.If farmers plant a large area with the new crops, Dr. Mortensen predicted, they will drive the evolution of a new generation of resistant weeds.“I am quite certain that this is a short-lived solution,” he said.Dr. Mortensen and his colleagues are investigating controlling weeds by planting crops like winter rye that can kill weeds by blocking sunlight and releasing toxins. “You want to spread the selection pressure across a number of things that you’re doing, so that the selection pressure is not riding on one tactic,” he said.To some extent, evolution-guided strategies are not new. Scientists have explored them for battling other enemies, like bacteria that evolve resistance to antibiotics.“We should be looking at this more carefully,” Dr. Ellstrand said. “And we’re just getting to it now.” Copyright 2013 The New York Times Company. Reproduced with permission. | 农业 |
2017-17/0128/en_head.json.gz/24677 | To plan improved agriculture, or even to attempt to halt or slow down the effect of soil degradation, we must know the facts which determine what is possible and what is practical, what the physical resources allow, and which of these options can be made to work in human terms.
3.1 PHYSICAL POTENTIAL
It is remarkable that so many countries, whose future development is going to depend mainly on agricultural production, have not taken the important step of compiling an inventory of their available natural resources, and a classification into agro-ecological zones of different potentials. Such surveys can be done using methods according to the scale. The FAO programme of regional agro-ecological studies uses massive computa- tional capacity to combine the 1:5 000 000 World Soil Map with climatic data to give maps of agricultural potentials. The same method can be applied to countries, with mapping at 1:1 000 000. Studies at this scale are useful for very broad strategic planning but need to be followed up by more detailed studies (FAO 1978).
Another style of resource inventory is the series of natural resources studies by the Land Resources Development Centre (LRDC) which combine air-photo interpretation and ground survey with existing country data on geology, soils, and climate, and may be at a scale suitable for the whole of Northern Nigeria (LRDC 1968), or at 1:250 000 for the tiny country of Lesotho (LRDC 1968). An effective system has been developed in Zimbabwe which could serve as a model for most developing countries. The agro-eco- logical survey of Zimbabwe was completed and mapped at 1:1 000 000 in the nineteen-fifties, and has been progressively refined and improved to the present "natural regions and farming areas" which is an essential tool for the government strategic planning of agricultural policy for Zimbabwe. Australia provides good examples of detailed surveys at catchment level (Aldrick et al. 1978). The French service for overseas research (ORSTOM) has developed in Tunisia an ecological classification with 22 "ecological systems", suitable for Mediterranean semi-arid zones in North Africa (Floret 1981).
Erosion also needs to be surveyed and recorded, at different scales according to the degree of detail required. Landsat and the constantly improving satellite imagery, can be used for broad assessments (Pickup and Nelson 1984), or air-photo interpretation for more detail (Keech 1985), in both cases with field work to establish ground truth. As well as studying present erosion we should collect information on soil conservation. What has been done in the past, even if it has not been successful, can provide useful information on mistakes to be avoided. Also we need to study conservation methods in case they can also be used in other situations.
The fact that semi-arid regions have not been intensively developed has led to a generally low level of information on soils and climate. Rainfall measurements tend to be few and far between whereas the strong spacial variability means that the available data may be not representa- tive. Similarly, soil surveys and studies of the physical and chemical characteristics of soils are in general much weaker than in areas of more reliable rainfall.
Because of the wide variation of conditions in semi-arid regions, the results of research and development in other countries need to be interpreted with caution, but in recent years there has been a greater interest in farming drier areas and so any review of existing information should include information from research programmes, particularly current and recent programmes where the results may not have been widely dissemi- nated. In the most common situation of existing knowledge and information being inadequate, programmes of research and development must include and bring together both component research within disciplines, and research on farming systems both on-station and on-farm.
3.2 SOCIAL POSSIBILITIES
There is little doubt that in the past much competent component research has not been successfully transferred and adopted by the farmers because it did not fit into the farming system. It is increasingly recog- nized that a complete understanding is required of all the social and economic ramifications of the farming system in order to guide component research into topics and techniques which will be applicable. Both col- lecting the information and understanding it is particularly difficult in the case of farming systems in semi-arid regions. The usual difficulty in collecting data from farmers, such as scepticism of official intentions, and reluctance to disclose financial information, are compounded by the complexities of the system. For example, in commercial farming for profit, it is fairly straightforward to find out the process of taking management decisions and who the decisions are taken by. In tribal or village commu- nities, taking decisons can be a very lengthy and complicated operation. The facts which are being sought are complicated and may be unfamiliar to the people conducting the survey. Rights of tenure and rights of access, e.g. to water supplies, to grazing, to fuel, or cultivation rights or gathering rights are usually complicated. In nomadic or semi-nomadic live- stock management even ownership may not be straightforward; for example, individual ownership of animals within a communal herd, or ownership of the animal but not its offspring, or conditional ownership with reversion if a marriage breaks up, and many other complications unfamiliar to western agriculture. There can be no doubt that studying the whole of the agricul- tural system is fundamental to any consideration of the possibilties for agricultural development. Techniques for obtaining the required information have been greatly improved in recent years, by Mann (1974), Chambers (1981), and Collinson (1981).
Many of the strategies for improved cropping and methods to make more effective use of the rainfall, discussed in Chapters 5 and 6, are most likely to be applicable to individual land holdings or to small groups. This probably accounts for the popularity and success of small development schemes operated by Non Government Organizations (NGOs), for example the Oxfam project in Burkina Faso, or the project by War on Want in Kenya, which are discussed in Section 5.2.4. The classic phrase of Schumaker "small is beautiful" certainly seems to apply to most development projects in semi-arid areas. There are of course some examples of large-scale run-off farming operations, such as the ancient systems in the Negev or the inundation tanks or khadins of northern India. One such tank near Bharatpur has an impounding bund 19 km long, inundates 4100 hectares, and irrigates another 4800. These schemes are described in Section 5.3.3.
The slow rate of adoption of what appears to be a wholly satisfac- tory new method was discussed against the background of extension in India in Section 2.1.4, but there are also examples of speedy adoption, such as the recent rapid spread in Botswana of the use of medium horsepower tractors and borehole syndicates. A study of why new ideas sometimes move slowly and in other cases take off rapidly would be an interesting field of study. One problem of the adoption of methods which attempt to change the rainfall/run-off/crop usage pattern is that the rainfall varies too much to form the base of a reliable strategy. The water collection device which is required in a dry year, is counterproductive in a wet year when drains are required, and vice versa.
In the long term there are opportunities for improving the physio- logy of plants for use in semi-arid areas. The selection and breeding of short-maturing varieties is well established and has resulted in some significant successes, and there are other aspects not so well developed such as increasing the transpiration efficiency. The question of more effective use of available water is discussed further in Section 4.2.4. | 农业 |
2017-17/0128/en_head.json.gz/24931 | Business Day|An Accidental Cattle Ranch Points the Way in Sustainable Farming
https://nyti.ms/18mDbZ9
Business Day An Accidental Cattle Ranch Points the Way in Sustainable Farming
By STEPHANIE STROMNOV. 11, 2013
The ranch’s goal is to help reverse the trend of lower levels of carbon in soil, a worldwide issue that coincides with the growth of greenhouse gas emissions in the air.
Jim Wilson/The New York Times PESCADERO, Calif. — When Tom Steyer first learned that his wife, Kat Taylor, wanted to sell beef from the cattle herd on their ranch here, he rolled his eyes.Mr. Steyer is the founder of Farallon Capital, one of the largest hedge funds in the world with some $20 billion under management for universities, foundations and some of the country’s wealthiest people — and he was sure beef was a lousy business investment, particularly on a small scale.“Practically every year since 1865 has been a bad year for beef,” he said, only somewhat in jest. “And Kathryn” — virtually everyone else calls her Kat — “knew nothing about selling beef.”Mr. Steyer may have made billions of dollars for his investors before retiring this year, but he would have lost money betting against Ms. Taylor and Leftcoast Grassfed, the brand name of the Steyer-Taylor beef. Continue reading the main story
While Ms. Taylor says, modestly, that it is hard to know how profitable the business is, her husband said it had outperformed his expectations. “We could sell 10 times the amount we raise, in 10 minutes,” he said.
The couple did not set out to raise prime grass-fed beef at TomKat Ranch, which sprawls across some 1,800 acres in this rural community near the ocean off Highway 1. The plan was to create a model conservation project, demonstrating ways to improve soil health, use solar energy and conserve water. “This wasn’t about cows,” Ms. Taylor said.But once cows became part of the plan to restore the land, it was not too long before TomKat also became an agricultural project, one that the couple hope will help develop sustainable farming practices that can be put to use far beyond Pescadero.“Think of the ranch as a huge science experiment,” Mr. Steyer said. “Can you raise animals sustainably? Can the land become the carbon sink that it once was? Can you demonstrate a way of doing agriculture, raising food, that doesn’t damage the environment?
Kat Taylor, an owner of the TomKat Ranch in California, and Jeremiah Stent, who manages the ranch.
Jim Wilson/The New York Times Since his retirement, Mr. Steyer has stepped up his work on environmental causes, creating a national campaign to oppose the Keystone XL pipeline and spending heavily to support candidates around the country whose credentials on environmental issues mesh with his goals.No statistics are available on the size of the market for grass-fed beef. But in a sign of the growing interest in it, the Agriculture Department this fall began publishing a monthly report on prices for such meat in partnership with the Wallace Center, part of a network of nonprofit groups established by the Rockefellers that work on food issues.Ms. Taylor has a full-time job as chief executive of One PacificCoast Bank, the community development bank she and Mr. Steyer started. On a sunny spring day this year, she drove out to the TomKat ranch to talk about Leftcoast Grassfed, arriving in a beat-up Toyota SUV together with her constant companions Fang and Ziggy, a wheezy pug and fluffy chow.She said the ranch’s goal was to help reverse the trend of lower levels of carbon in soil, a worldwide issue that coincides with the growth of greenhouse gas emissions in the air.In a book, “Grass-Fed Cattle: How to Produce and Market Natural Beef,” the author Julius Ruechel theorized that soil was enriched as a result of the migration of giant herds of ruminants and other animals across the world’s great plains.
According to his book, large herds of heavy, hoofed animals help force dead plant materials back into the ground, where they are broken down by microorganisms in the soil. Herd migration also churns up the earth, allowing rain to penetrate it further and slowing runoff, and natural “fertilizers” containing additional microbes are left in the herd’s wake.All of that produces more and better grass, which then feeds the herds the next time they migrate across the land.“The conservation movement now largely says these large, migrating herds aren’t so bad after all,” said Wendy Millet, the ranch director who formerly worked at the Nature Conservancy. “Ranches can be working landscapes if people understand how animals and land work together.”TomKat is aiming to mimic the migratory patterns that developed the world’s great plains on a small scale by rotating cows, birds and pigs around the ranch in a deliberate dance.
A staff meeting at the TomKat Ranch. The ranch aims to mimic migratory patterns by rotating cows, birds and pigs on the land.
Jim Wilson/The New York Times The ranch has been farmed since at least the mid-1800s, when homesteaders named Honsiger contributed their name to a creek on the property that still is home to coho salmon and steelhead. The Honsigers put up barns and houses, orchards and stock ponds that still dot the property, and their descendants have perpetual access to a grave site near its entrance.In the 1970s, it was owned by an Austrian count and countess, Alfred and Beatrice Von Homola, who used it for family retreats and entertaining. “Then the count died of a heart attack while on a European voyage, and the countess was heartbroken and reportedly couldn’t bear to return to the ranch,” Ms. Taylor said.The countess leased the property to new occupants who effectively worked it to the bone. “They literally had sold everything, even the topsoil,” Mr. Steyer said. “People came in with dump trucks and carted it away.”
When a friend of Ms. Taylor’s called her about the ranch in 2002, technology titans were snapping up big swathes of property in the area and putting up gates and fences. “He told me if we didn’t buy it, it was going to end up as a housing development,” she said.Having grown up in San Mateo, Ms. Taylor wanted to keep the ranch as an integral part of the community.
This spring, for instance, silos were installed where nongenetically engineered feeds are stored that can be bought by nearby farmers and ranchers. Such feeds are in scarce supply and thus out of reach of most farmers, but TomKat makes the investment in a bulk buy and then passes on the savings to its neighbors.The silo is housed at a barn leased to the Early Bird Ranch, a poultry, egg and pig business owned by Kevin Watt and his wife, ShaeLynn.When TomKat’s herd has finished grazing a pasture and been moved to another spot, Early Bird’s chickens and turkeys move in and dine on the insects that have been attracted to the cattle droppings.“The bugs are a good source of protein for my birds, and my birds eat up the insects and parasites that are bad for the cattle when they return,” Mr. Watt said. “And of course, they leave a little beneficial deposit behind, too.”
Begun as a way to improve the soil quality and foster conservation, the ranch now produces beef under the brand name Leftcoast Grassfed.
Jim Wilson/The New York Times The Watts sell their chickens locally in farmers’ markets and sell eggs, bacon, Italian sausage and other products via a website, goodeggs.com, in the San Francisco market.Mr. Watt said Early Bird cleared roughly $6 in profit on each bird. Out of that, they make a lease payment to TomKat for the acres they use for their poultry, which rotates depending on where the TomKat herd has been. “It really is a symbiotic system, for the chicken and turkeys and cows as well as for Early Bird and the ranch,” he said.Similarly, a company devoted to aquaponics, Inka Biospheric Systems, is developing a fish and vegetable business on the ranch. Inka’s goal is to raise the food it needs for its fish, things like barley fodder, earthworms and black soldier flies, using waste manure generated by the horses Ms. Taylor keeps on the ranch.The vermicompost byproduct Inka produces is used to fertilize more stressed locations on the ranch and made into compost teas that can be spread on the orchards and on livestocks as a natural pesticide.
“We’re the garbage men of the organization,” said Brian Whitney, the recently retired chief executive of Inka. “What we are slowly doing is taking on the waste streams the ranch creates and converting those into assets.”Inka pays the ranch a portion of its revenue, but its profits, when it starts generating them, will flow into a philanthropic foundation, in the same way that a foundation benefits from the operations of One PacificCoast Bank.“We want to see if we can create a closed-loop system here — water with fish waste will get pumped into the land, and the land will produce things that go back into the fish,” Ms. Taylor said.Not everything in the experiment works, of course. The ranch originally bred its herd to deliver calves in the fall on the theory that since most calves are born in the spring, it would be producing fresh beef in the off-season.But the colostrum in cow’s milk is highest in the spring, when the herd is eating the new grass.“Nature intended for babies to be born in the spring, and we eventually had to go along,” Ms. Taylor said.The herd, which started with 30 heifers in 2006, now numbers 120, about half of which are breeding stock. They produced about 60 calves this year.
Correction: November 13, 2013 An article on Tuesday about the TomKat Ranch, a conservation project in California that has become a model for sustainable agriculture, misspelled the given name of an owner of the ranch. She is Kathryn Taylor, not Katherine (though she is known as Kat). The article also misstated part of the subtitle of Julius Ruechel’s book “Grass-Fed Cattle.” It is “How to Produce and Market Natural Beef,” not “How to Raise and Market Natural Beef.” A version of this article appears in print on November 12, 2013, on Page B1 of the New York edition with the headline: An Accidental Cattle Ranch. Order Reprints| Today's Paper|Subscribe | 农业 |
2017-17/0129/en_head.json.gz/143 | Whole Grains: Millet (Gramineae/Poaceoe) by Karen Railey
Millet is one of the oldest foods known to humans and possibly the first cereal grain to be used for domestic purposes. It is mentioned in the Bible, and was used during those times to make bread. Millet has been used in Africa and India as a staple food for thousands of years and it was grown as early as 2700 BC in China where it was the prevalent grain before rice became the dominant staple. It is documented that the plant was also grown by the lake dwellers of Switzerland during the Stone Age.Today millet ranks as the sixth most important grain in the world, sustains 1/3 of the world’s population and is a significant part of the diet in northern China, Japan, Manchuria and various areas of the former Soviet Union, Africa, India, and Egypt. Millet is a major crop in many of these countries, particularly Africa and the Indian subcontinent where the crop covers almost 100 million acres, and thrives in the hot dry climates that are not conducive to growing other grains such as wheat and rice. The Hunzas, who live in a remote area of the Himalayan foothills and are known for their excellent health and longevity also enjoy millet as a staple in their diet. Millet is used in various cultures in many diverse ways: The Hunza’s use millet as a cereal, in soups, and for making a dense, whole grain bread called chapatti. In India flat thin cakes called roti are often made from millet flour and used as the basis for meals. In Eastern Europe millet is used in porridge and kasha, or is fermented into a beverage and in Africa it is used to make bread, as baby food, and as uji, a thin gruel used as breakfast porridge. It is also used as a stuffing ingredient for cabbage rolls in some countries. Millet was introduced to the U.S. in 1875, was grown and consumed by the early colonists like corn, then fell into obscurity. At the present time the grain is widely known in the U.S. and other Western countries mainly as bird and cattle feed. Only in recent years has it begun to make a comeback and is now becoming a more commonly consumed grain in the Western part of the world. The plant is now grown in the U.S. on 200,000 acres in Colorado, North Dakota, and Nebraska, but much of the crop is still used for livestock, poultry, and bird feed. It is remarkable that despite the grain being an ancient food, research on millet and its food value is in its infancy and its potential vastly untapped. Research results so far are promising, showing the grain to have great aptitude and versatility and more and more uses for millet are being discovered every year, including its potential benefits in the American diet. Millet is superior feed for poultry, swine, fish, and livestock and, as it is being proven, for humans as well. Millet is related to sorghum, which is used to make the thick dark sweetener, sorghum syrup. Discrepancies exist concerning exactly what family millet actually belongs to, with some references giving the family name as Gramineae, and others claiming it is in the family Poaceae. There are many varieties of millet, but the four major types are Pearl, which comprises 40% of the world production, Foxtail, Proso, and Finger Millet. Pearl Millet produces the largest seeds and is the variety most commonly used for human consumption. Millet is a tall erect annual grass with an appearance strikingly similar to maize. The plants will vary somewhat in appearance and size, depending on variety, and can grow anywhere from one to 15 feet tall. Generally the plants have coarse stems, growing in dense clumps and the leaves are grass-like, numerous and slender, measuring about an inch wide and up to more than 6 feet long. The seeds are enclosed in colored hulls, with color depending on variety, and the seed heads themselves are held above the grassy plant on a spike like panicle 6 to 14 inches long and are extremely attractive. Because of a remarkably hard, indigestible hull, this grain must be hulled before it can be used for human consumption. Hulling does not affect the nutrient value, as the germ stays intact through this process. Once out of the hull, millet grains look like tiny yellow spheres with a dot on one side where it was attached to the stem. This gives the seeds an appearance similar to tiny, pale yellow beads. Millet is unique due to its short growing season. It can develop from a planted seed to a mature, ready to harvest plant in as little as 65 days. This is an important consideration for areas where food is needed for many.Millet grows well on poorly fertilized and dry soils and fits well in hot climates with short rainfall periods and cool climates with brief warm summers. The plants need good drainage, have a low moisture requirement and do not do well in waterlogged soils.Millet is highly nutritious, non-glutinous and like buckwheat and quinoa, is not an acid forming food so is soothing and easy to digest. In fact, it is considered to be one of the least allergenic and most digestible grains available and it is a warming grain so will help to heat the body in cold or rainy seasons and climates. Millet is tasty, with a mildly sweet, nut-like flavor and contains a myriad of beneficial nutrients. It is nearly 15% protein, contains high amounts of fiber, B-complex vitamins including niacin, thiamin, and riboflavin, the essential amino acid methionine, lecithin, and some vitamin E. It is particularly high in the minerals iron, magnesium, phosphorous, and potassium. The seeds are also rich in phytochemicals, including Phytic acid, which is believed to lower cholesterol, and Phytate, which is associated with reduced cancer risk. Millet has an interesting characteristic in that the hulls and seeds contain small amounts of goiterogenic substances that limit uptake of iodine to the thyroid. In large amounts these "thyroid function inhibitors" can cause goiter and some researchers feel this may explain, at least in part, the perplexing correlation between millet consumption and goiter incidence in some of the developing countries where millet constitutes a significant part of the diet. In many of these countries another contributing factor may be a lack of sufficient dietary iodine. Obviously these substances are diminished during the hulling process but there is definitely controversy concerning the idea that the process of cooking largely destroys those that are left in the seed itself. Some researchers including Dr. Jeffrey Bland believe that cooking greatly diminishes these substances; others claim that it doesn’t and that in fact if millet is cooked and stored in the refrigerator for a week, a practice common in many cultures, these substances will actually increase as much as six fold. Millet is not alone in possessing this characteristic. Commonly eaten foods that also contain these goiterogenic substances include brussel sprouts, broccoli, cabbage, cauliflower, kale, mustard greens, spinach, turnips, rutabagas, cassava, soy beans, peanuts, peaches, and pears. All of these foods are nutritionally valuable as is millet and this is generally not cause for alarm. A healthy, whole foods based diet containing an abundant variety of foods will ensure that an excess of these goiterogenic compounds is not consumed. It is important to note that Jeanne Wallace, PhD, CNC, states that for those with hypothyroidism a significant guideline would be to consume three servings a day or less of the foods containing goiterogenic compounds.There are many cooking variations to be found for millet. A good general guideline is to use 3 parts water or stock and 1 part grain, add grain to boiling water, and simmer covered for approximately 30 minutes or until water is completely absorbed. Remove from heat and let steam, covered for ten minutes more. The grain has a fluffier texture when less water is used and is very moist and dense when cooked with extra water. The flavor of millet is enhanced by lightly roasting the grains in a dry pan before cooking; stir constantly for approximately three minutes or until a mild, nutty aroma is detected. If millet is presoaked the cooking time is shortened by 5 to 10 minutes. An intriguing suggestion for cooking millet is found in the book Hunza Health Secrets: Soak the grain overnight, heat water or other liquid in top of a double boiler, add millet and steam over boiling water for thirty minutes or until the millet is tender. Individual preferences can be addressed by experimenting with cooking times, methods, and liquid amounts. Millet is delicious as a cooked cereal and in casseroles, breads, soups, stews, soufflés, pilaf, and stuffing. It can be used as a side dish or served under sautéed vegetables or with beans and can be popped like corn for use as a snack or breakfast cereal. The grain mixes well with any seasoning or herbs that are commonly used in rice dishes and for interesting taste and texture variations it may be combined with quinoa and brown or basmati rice. Millet may also be sprouted for use in salads and sandwiches. Millet flour produces light, dry, delicate baked goods and a crust that is thin and buttery smooth. For yeast breads up to 30% millet flour may utilized, but it must be combined with glutinous flours to enable the bread to rise. For a delightful "crunch" in baked goods, the millet seeds may be added whole and raw before baking.Properly stored, whole millet can be kept safely for up to two years. The grain should be stored in tightly closed containers, preferably glass, in a cool dry place with a temperature of less than 70° or in the refrigerator. The flour deteriorates and becomes rancid very rapidly after it is ground, so it is best to grind the flour right before it is to be used. As we have seen, millet is a highly nutritious, healthful and versatile grain that would be a worthy addition to anyone’s diet. Black Bean and Millet Salad 1 cup millet, uncooked 3 cups water 2 cups black beans, cooked 2 large tomatoes, chopped 1 medium onion, (or substitute green onions), chopped 1 medium cucumberDressing 1/3 cup water 3 Tablespoons lemon juice 1 Tablespoon balsamic vinegar 2 teaspoons garlic, minced 1 teaspoon sea salt 1/2 teaspoon allspice 1/4 teaspoon black pepper 1 teaspoon cuminCook the millet in 3 cups of water until water is absorbed, about 30 minutes. Fluff with fork and allow to cool.In a large bowl, combine millet, black beans, tomatoes, and onion.Peel several strips from the cucumber (it should look striped) and cut it lengthwise into four pieces. Remove the seeds and cut into 1/2-inch slices. Add the cucumber to the salad.Mix all dressing ingredients until well blended and pour over the salad, tossing to blend. (Experiment with the seasonings to suit taste.) Cover and refrigerate until the salad is well chilled. Serve on lettuce leaves or stuff into pita bread. Recipe adapted from Internet Chef Millet Muffins 1-1/2 cups Millet flour 1/2 cup soy flour 1 Tablespoon baking powder (non-aluminum) 1/2 teaspoon salt (optional) 1/4 teaspoon orange flavoring 1 cup water or orange juice 1/4 cup vegetable oil 1/4 cups brown rice syrup or honey (or substitute Stevia)Combine all dry ingredients in a medium bowl. Mix all liquid ingredients together, then add to dry ingredients. Put mixture in well-oiled muffin tins. Makes 12 muffins.Bake at 375 for 15-20 minutes or until done. Recipe from Arrowhead Mills References "Black Bean and Millet Salad" found at http://www.ichef.com, March 23, 1999, Bumgarner, Marlene Anne, The New Book of Whole Grains New York, First St. Martin’s Griffin, 1997"Cook It Right" http://www.phys.com/b_nutrition/02solutions/06database/grains/millet.html March 25, 1999, Crowley, Marilyn, "Not Just for the Birds", Chatelaine; October, 1995Haas, Elson M., M.D., Staying Healthy With Nutrition, Berkley, California; Celestial Arts, 1992"Hulled Millet" at http://www.glness.com/agway/millet.html, March 23, 1999"Millet" at http://encarta.msn.com/index/conciseindex/25/02545000.htm, March 25, 1999"Millet" at http://www.orst.edu/food-resource/g/millet.html, March 25, 1999"Millets" at http://teach1cses.vt.edu/cses3444/3444lec9.html, March 28, 1999"Pearl Millet" at http://www.znfu.org.zm/technical/pearl.html, March 28, 1999Raloff, Janet, "Goiter, Do you eat millet?" Science News, May 3, 1986Roehl, Evelyn, Whole Food Facts, Rochester, Vermont; Healing Arts Press, 1996Strauss, Karen, "Mighty Millet: This Nutrition-packed, Mild-flavored Grain Isn’t Just for the Birds" Vegetarian Times, February 1997Taylor, Renée, Hunza Health Secrets, New Canaan, Connecticut; Pivot Health Books, 1978 Disclaimer: Throughout this website, statements are made pertaining to the properties and/or functions of food and/or nutritional products. These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration and these materials and products are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease. | 农业 |
2017-17/0129/en_head.json.gz/1424 | Tobacco purchasing should be based on value, not price Apr 03, 2017 Caledonia: Where prisoners have grown their food for 125 years Apr 04, 2017 How a blueberry family won and lost against a punishing situation Apr 05, 2017 90 percent of South Carolina’s peach crop destroyed Apr 02, 2017 Georgia growers study agricultural practices in Argentina and Brazil
Brad Haire University of Georgia | Apr 06, 2005
Soils in Argentina and Brazil can grow good crops with little fertilizer. Both countries have fewer pest and disease problems. Farm laborers work cheap, and chemical costs are low. Brazil's growing season, too, is much longer than Georgia's. “I'm scared,” said Donald Wood, a farmer from Rochelle, Ga., on a study trip to the South American countries. “These guys have a lot of things going for them. It's going to be tough for us (to compete).” Wood and 14 other Georgia farmers traveled with four University of Georgia experts to study agriculture in the two countries in January. Georgia Farm Bureau co-sponsored the trip. “Agriculture in Brazil and Argentina has made great strides in recent years,” said Gale Buchanan, former dean of the UGA College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences. “These countries are already serious agricultural producers.” Brazilian and Argentine farmers could become global competitors for U.S. farmers, said Nathan Smith, an economist with the UGA Extension Service. “This area could become the breadbasket of the world.” Brazil is about as big as the continental United States. Argentina is nearly a third of the size of Brazil. Soybeans are the major crop in the area, Smith said. Farmers there also grow corn, cotton and peanuts, all major Georgia commodities. Cooperatives there add value to commodities and save on costs, too. The group toured the state of Parana in Brazil and the provinces of Chaco and Cordoba in Argentina. “These are especially intense agricultural regions,” Buchanan said. They spoke with farmers, agribusiness people and university and government officials. They visited farms, research stations and farmer-owned cooperatives in both countries. They found that U.S. and Georgia farmers have advantages, too. The transportation infrastructure is much better in the United States, Smith said. Farmers have easier access to capital for growth. Interest rates are lower, and markets are better and more established. Both countries have national agriculture departments. But the U.S. and Georgia agricultural research and Extension services are much more developed, Buchanan said. Brazilian and Argentine agricultural officials and farmers often take U.S. research and apply it to farms there, Smith said. Or they come to the United States to learn it. This type of sharing goes both ways. U.S. scientists now are taking trips to Brazil, for instance, to learn how to handle an aggressive and deadly soybean disease called Asian Soybean Rust. Government support of certain commodities through legislative farm bills is a plus for U.S. farmers, too, Buchanan said. (In 2002, Brazil filed a complaint with the World Trade Organization that claimed certain U.S. cotton subsidies violated WTO regulations. WTO ruled in favor of Brazil in 2004. The United States filed an appeal. It has since been reported that the WTO ruled against that appeal.) Despite the differences, Wood said, there was something universally familiar about both countries. “The people we talked to were very eager to share their information with us … and ask us questions about what we're doing,” Wood said. “That's the case with farmers wherever they are.” Ed Kanemasu, director of the UGA office of international agriculture, helped organize the trip. Miguel Cabrera, a CAES crop and soil scientist and Uruguay native fluent in Spanish and Portuguese, coordinated the tours and acted as translator. | 农业 |
2017-17/0129/en_head.json.gz/1485 | Shipping Profiles California, Arizona growers remain vigilant on citrus pest
By Dan Gailbraith
California and Arizona citrus growers hope their industries won’t suffer the same fate as their counterparts in Florida, where citrus greening disease — also known as huanglongbing or HLB — has devastated thousands of acres of citrus trees.
State and federal agriculture officials have joined the California citrus industry in fighting the Asian citrus psyllid, which carries the disease and has been spotted in several locations in Southern California, said Joel Nelsen, president of California Citrus Mutual, Exeter.
“They’ve had a population explosion in the Redlands area (about 60 miles east of Los Angeles),” Nelsen said. “That’s disturbing.”
So far, though, none of the psyllids that have been trapped showed signs of HLB.
“The industry is doing a fantastic job in matching federal dollars to detect, survey and communicate the seriousness of this issue,” Nelsen said.
Growers continue to have the support of elected officials in Southern California as well as in Washington and in Sacramento, the state’s capital, he said.
Citrus grower-shippers are highly concerned about HLB, but they’re hopeful that the combined efforts of the state and federal government and industry members will keep the psyllids at bay.
“I am guardedly optimistic that we will be able to control the psyllid and the spread of HLB in California,” said Tom Wollenman, general manager for LoBue Bros. Inc., Lindsay, Calif., and chairman of Citrus Mutual.
Psyllids have been found in the Riverside area, the Los Angeles Basin and the San Diego area, he said.
“Pretty much, they have been able to treat those areas and eradicate the psyllid,” he said.
There’s not much growers can do other than be vigilant.
“It’s something you’re going to check for continuously,” Wollenman said.
The pest can be eradicated in one place, then turn up somewhere else a short time later. So far, however, it has not reached California’s major citrus-growing region.
Dennis Johnston, partner in Johnston Farms, Bakersfield, Calif., is worried about the effect an embargo on California citrus might have if one is imposed by countries that import the state’s fruit.
Exports account for about 30% of the state’s citrus, he said.
In Arizona, Mark Spencer, secretary-treasurer and chief operating officer for Associated Citrus Packers Inc. in Yuma, said a quarantine was imposed in the area in June 2010 when psyllids were found there.
“If they don’t find any more, the quarantine will be lifted in 2012,” he said.
He is concerned that HLB has been detected in Mexico not far south of Arizona, and he also is bothered by fact that the psyllid continues to show up in his neighboring state.
“It makes me nervous that they haven’t been able to eradicate it in California,” he said.
Wollenman is pleased with the way the threat has been handled.
The state of California, its Department of Food and Agriculture and the Citrus Research Board “are doing excellent jobs in controlling the psyllid and trying to locate it,” he said.
He believes California growers have some advantages over Florida growers.
“We have more tools at our disposal than what Florida had when the psyllid was found 10 years ago,” he said.
He also believes the state’s climate might be more conducive to controlling the psyllids.
The geography of the region also may help prevent a psyllid infestation, Johnston said.
“We’re hopeful that the Tehachapi Mountains are an effective barrier to keep it out,” he said.
Still, Wollenman remains concerned.
“This is probably the biggest challenge we’ve ever faced here,” he said.
california citrusarizona citruscitrus greeninghuanglongbing hlb About the Author:
Dan Gailbraith | 农业 |
2017-17/0129/en_head.json.gz/1820 | The Other California
How the San Joaquin Valley makes modern life possible
CaliforniaEconomy, finance, and budgetsInfrastructure and energy In 1973, as I was going through customs in New York after spending the summer bumming around Italy and Greece, the customs agent looked at my passport and said with a Bronx sneer, “Bruce Thornton, huh? Is that one of them Hollywood names?” Hearing that astonishing statement, I realized for the first time that California is more of a distorted idea than a place. There were few regions more distant from Hollywood than the rural, mostly poor, multiethnic San Joaquin Valley, where my family had a ranch. Yet to this New Yorker, the Valley didn’t exist. And it doesn’t exist for many today, because it doesn’t conform to the fantasy of California better expressed in the state’s Hollywood south and dot-com north.
This ignorance of the “other” California has significance beyond illustrating the parochial sensibility of city dwellers. The San Joaquin Valley is the world’s most productive agricultural region and one of the great achievements of modern engineering, created by storing and diverting water from the Sierra Nevada and using it to irrigate what were once semi-arid grasslands. The San Joaquin Valley boasts five of the nation’s top ten counties in farm-production value, and they account for almost three-quarters of California’s $36 billion in annual agricultural revenues derived from the sale of 400 commodities. Yet even in California, many people either don’t know or don’t care that their lives and civilization rest on the shoulders of those who produce their food.
Our wired-in, high-tech world is made possible by the agricultural industry that produces the food we take for granted. Yet “agribusiness” is usually depicted as a corporate villain like Big Pharma or Big Oil, producing junk food oozing with high-fructose corn syrup and toxic pesticides while exploiting the labor of Mexican immigrants. Of course, the business of producing food, like all businesses, is concerned with making a profit. No doubt it has unsavory aspects, as do the academic, entertainment, medical, and journalism industries. But the rest of us can be professors, actors, doctors, and reporters only because we don’t have to spend ten hours a day cultivating the food that we need to survive.
That simple existential fact makes the contemptuous indifference to the San Joaquin Valley indulged by the California coastal elites a species of moral idiocy. Worse yet, it leads to policies detrimental to the region’s economic well-being. Diverting water from the Valley and dumping it into the Pacific during a drought to protect the three-inch Delta smelt, as happened a few years ago, is the most recent example. Tens of thousands of jobs were lost and land left uncultivated just so city dwellers could indulge their romantic environmentalism, a luxury of the well-fed who take the abundance of food for granted. It’s a safe bet that if San Francisco’s drinking water came through the Delta pumps, the smelt would have been history.
This year’s enormous Sierra Nevada snowpack has defused the water crisis for now. But California still has on the books myriad environmental regulations, most based on bad science or irrational prejudice, that make the business of growing food more costly and difficult than it need be. The bias against chemical pesticides and fertilizers—which across the globe have saved billions from malnutrition and starvation by exponentially increasing productivity—has led to Byzantine regulatory protocols that increase costs and impede production. Obviously, where science has definitively shown a danger, we need regulation. But many of the rules California farmers must now negotiate are aimed at minimizing risks equivalent to the danger of drowning in water a quarter-inch deep.
Truth is, agriculture is not just another industry, but rather the precondition for civilization itself. The historical progress of agricultural improvement that liberated more and more people from the drudgery of providing food was the precondition of our urban industrialized world. Today only about two people out of 100 are directly involved in the production of food, compared with 90 out of 100 in the late eighteenth century. The goods and services that make up our lives, from computers to movies, are luxuries we can create and afford because of this new freedom. Remember that the next time you start grocery shopping—or pontificating. Bruce Thornton is a research fellow at the Hoover Institution and a professor of classics and humanities at California State University Fresno. His most recent book is The Wages of Appeasement: Ancient Athens, Munich, and Obama’s America, published by Encounter Books.
Before the Culture Fades
Roger Kimball’s ongoing work of preservation
People Matter
Robert Zubrin’s powerful critique of antihumanism
Ibn Warraq’s eloquent defense of Western civilization
One State, Under Water
Kerry Jackson
California’s drought might never be over for farmers.
We Few, We Miserable Few
Claremont students’ missive misses the mark.
Pothole Coast Highway
With its dams and roads crumbling, California faces an infrastructure crisis.
How Assimilation Works
—and how multiculturalism has wrecked it in California
May 17, 2011 Education, The Social Order, California | 农业 |
2017-17/0129/en_head.json.gz/2869 | Industry DOL's child-labor proposal impacts ag communities
By Carly E. Giffin and A. Bryan Endres, University of Illinois
January 11, 2012 | 9:04 am EST
Last fall, the U.S. Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division proposed new regulations for children working agricultural jobs.
The Wage and Hour Division (WHD) worked with the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health to craft the first proposed updates to agricultural child labor regulations in over 40 years. The purpose of the proposed regulations is to increase the safety of children who work in agriculture and align the rules with those of other high-risk occupations, such as manufacturing.
Current federal, agricultural child labor standards primarily concern the age at which children become eligible to perform various activities on the farm. Generally, a child must be 16 or older to work on a farm during school hours and 14 years old to perform farm work when school is not in session. Twelve- and 13-year-olds may work on a farm either with their parents or with parental consent. Children younger than 12 may only work on their parents’ farms or on small farms exempted from the federal statute. Children ages 10 to 12 can work on farms not owned by their families only in rare circumstances, and the employer must show that the business would be severely disrupted without the child labor.
Federal law also prohibits children under 16 from performing hazardous activities unless they are employed by their parents or working on their parents’ farm. Hazardous activities include, but are not limited to, operating large farm machinery, working in enclosed spaces with dangerous animals (studs and new mothers), working on a ladder or scaffold more than 20 feet high, working inside certain spaces such as manure pits, and handling hazardous farm chemicals. 29 C.F.R. § 570.71 contains the full list of activities considered hazardous.
Although the proposed rule changes cover a wide range of safety concerns — it is important to note that none of the the Wage and Hour Division's proposed regulations would apply to a child working on a farm owned in whole or in part by his or her parents. Additionally, the new rule would not affect a child’s participation in 4-H and FFA. The WHD has specifically stated that under the new rules a child will be able to raise his or her 4-H or FFA animal, even if the animal is being raised on a working farm. The child participating in these activities would not be an employee, and thus the new regulations would not apply. The WHD’s entire proposal and links to more in-depth analysis can be found on the WHD’s website.
One proposed change would prevent children from working with animals in timber operations, manure pits, storage bins, and pesticide handling. Other elements of the proposal would prohibit children under 16 from operating nearly all power-driven vehicles (a similar rule has been in effect for non-agricultural labor for over 50 years). Perhaps the least controversial proposal would prohibit children from using electronic communication devices while operating power driven vehicles, a prohibition that several states already enacted. The proposal with perhaps the widest impact on commercial agriculture would prohibit children under 18 from working in “country grain elevators, grain bins, silos, feed lots, stockyards, livestock exchanges and livestock auctions.” A side-by-side fact sheet of the current and proposed rules is available here.
The Wage and Hour Division believes that these new regulations will increase the safety of children employed in agricultural jobs. However, children, as well as adults, who live and work in rural communities may find them life changing, and not in a positive way. In some farming communities, the prohibited places of employment are the largest employers, and a minor who wants to work in agriculture when he or she is an adult, would obviously benefit from having work experience in those places. On the other hand, the Department of Labor proposed these rules because the “fatality rate for young agricultural workers is four times greater than that of their peers employed in nonagricultural work places” and “injuries suffered by young farm workers tend to be more severe than those suffered by nonagricultural workers.” Moreover, current agricultural child labor rules are more than forty years old and have never been updated.
For an interesting 30-minute audio podcast discussing the impacts of the proposed rule, click here.
Source: http://www.farmdocdaily.illinois.edu/2012/01/proposal_to_revise_child_la...
dolchild laborfarmingagriculture About the Author:
Carly E. Giffin and A. Bryan Endres, University of Illinois | 农业 |
2017-17/0129/en_head.json.gz/3741 | Europa Press Room
European Commission activates exceptional measures to further ...
European Commission activates exceptional measures to further support European farmers in crisis
Source: Europa Press Room
'This is a package of measures which can have a material and positive impact on European agricultural markets and it should now be given the chance to succeed.'
The European Commission is announcing today an additional package of exceptional measures using all the tools made available in the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) to support EU farmers while safeguarding the EU internal market.
The Commission acknowledges the depth and duration of the current agricultural crisis as well as the considerable efforts made at Member State level to support their farmers and is responding with a further meaningful package of measures.
The series of measures outlined by Commissioner Hogan to the agriculture Ministers of the European Union complements the €500 million support package from last September and shows the Commission's determination to play its full role in assisting European farmers.
'In the interest of EU farmers, I am prepared to use all instruments that the legislators have put at our disposal, both as a short term and long term measure. We must use the appropriate instruments and actions to enable farmers to be resilient in the face of volatility whilst providing immediate assistance to them. Today's response is a comprehensive one, taking on board as many of the proposals as can be done, within the legal and budgetary constraints that apply to all of us. I believe that this is a package of measures which, when taken with the full implementation of the September solidarity package, can have a material and positive impact on European agricultural markets and it should now be given the chance to succeed.' Commissioner Hogan said today at the Council of Agriculture Ministers.
In times of numerous crises and budgetary constraints, the Commission has mobilised more than €1 billion over two years, including the €500 million support package from September 2015. We stand by our farmers and provide through the daily implementation of the CAP and the use of exceptional measures, full support and assistance to safeguard our agricultural model.
The measures activated today are highly adjustable so that Member States can use them to the best of their capacities depending on their specific national situation. Dairy, pigmeat and fruit and vegetable sectors are the main focus of this support package. The following is a summary of the proposals made at today's meeting.
Application of voluntary supply management (article 222)
The Commission will activate, for a limited period of time, the possibility to enable producer organisations, interbranch organisations and cooperatives in the dairy sector to establish voluntary agreements on their production and supply. This is the so-called Article 222 from the Common Market Organisation (CMO), which is specific to the agricultural sector and can be applied in case of severe imbalance in the market. The Commission has concluded that the strict conditions for the application of this article to the dairy sector are fulfilled in the current circumstances. This is an exceptional measure, which must also safeguard the EU internal market and was included by the legislators in the 2013 CAP reform but never used before.
Temporary increase in state aid
The Commission will give its full consideration to a temporary acceptance of state aid that would allow MS to provide to a maximum of €15,000 per farmer per year and no national ceiling would apply. This can be done immediately and much more quickly than an increase in de minimis ceilings.
Doubling intervention ceilings for skimmed milk powder and butter
The Commission will increase the quantity ceilings for skimmed milk powder and butter put into intervention from 109,000 tonnes and 60,000 tonnes respectively to 218, 000 tonnes and 100,000 tonnes. This way, we clearly commit to supporting the fixed intervention price.
Strengthening the producer in the supply chain
The role and position of producers in the food supply chain continues to be of great concern. The Agricultural Markets Taskforce, launched as part of the €500 million support package from September 2015, will deliver in autumn conclusions and legislative recommendations to improve the balance in the chain. It was decided today that High Level national representatives will meet with the Agricultural Markets Taskforce with the view to specifically look at the dairy sector.
Support for pigmeat sector
In response to the proposals for a new private storage aid scheme for pigmeat, Commissioner Hogan will consider the introduction of a new scheme. The details of the scheme, including the timing of its introduction, will have to be confirmed.
Establishment of a Meat Market Observatory
Member States all recognised and praised the Commission's work in monitoring the market and sharing valuable information on trends. Following the footpaths of the Milk Market Observatory set in 2014, a Meat Market Observatory will be set up, covering beef and pigmeat.
In relation to negotiations on TTIP and Mercosur, the Commission is well aware of the agricultural sensitivities. Commissioner Hoganalongside the college of Commissioners is determined to promote the EU's interests and open up new markets for EU products, while negotiating a differentiated treatment for sensitive products. While new markets are crucial for European agriculture, so too is a differentiated treatment of sensitive products.
Promotion campaigns are a key instrument in finding new markets and over €110 million are available for 2016 only to support promotion of EU agricultural produce within the EU and on third countries. Over €30 million are specifically earmarked for the pigmeat and dairy sectors, a commitment made last September. An additional amount is added today to the €30 million to reflect the market disturbances in those sectors.
Russian/SPS Bans
The Commission as a whole is relentlessly continuing its efforts to lift the phytosanitary Russian ban. Despite our efforts to try to ensure a rapid resumption of trade between the EU and Russia, very little has happened. However, important progress has been made in lifting of unjustified or disproportionate phytosanitary measures by third countries which will contribute to substantially increased trade flows. This includes progress in the US, Japanese, Brazilian and Ukrainian markets.
Financial instruments/European Investment Bank/European Fund for Strategic Investments
The Commission will prioritise its engagement with the EIB, with a view to developing appropriate financial instruments to assist farmers and processors to invest in their enterprises to improve the competitiveness of those enterprises or to invest in making any necessary structural adjustments.
Member States are also encouraged to make full use of the opportunities offered by the European Fund for Strategic Investment for investment in the agricultural sector and to look into the possibilities of setting up dedicated platforms for EFSI financing.
Export Credit
The Commission is examining the feasibility of an export credit scheme, which could supplement the schemes which Member States are operating on a national basis scheme. In that regard, the Directorate General for Agriculture is stepping up its contacts with the EIB and the relevant agencies in the Member States.
Fruit & Vegetable Sector
The Commission is considering a prolongation of the exceptional measures for Fruit and Vegetables, arising from the Russian ban which will expire on 30 June.
The Commission will work together with the Member States to see where and how rural development programmes can be adjusted to make them more responsive to the current crisis.
fruit lifting platform
beef farmer
vegetable farmer
milk measurement
milk measuring
buyer-farmer
agriculture produce
animal-specific milking setting
fruit lifting
milking setting
Kentucky Cattleman Testifies before U.S. House Small Business Subcommittee
Today, Tim White, a cattle producer from Lexington, Kentucky, testified before the House Small Business Committee’s Subcommittee on Agriculture, Energy, and Trade regarding the future of America’s small family farms. In his testimony, White called on Congress to address the overly burdensome regulatory environment that is hampering rural America, repeal the federal estate tax, and to ensure the 2018 Farm Bill works for America’s cattle producers. White said that as a small business owner, one...
Cattlemen support nomination of Gov. Perdue to lead U.S. Department of Agriculture
Tracy Brunner, president of the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, today released the following statement in support of President-elect Trump’s nomination of former Gov. Sonny Perdue to be Secretary of the U.S. Department of Agriculture: “Governor Perdue’s an excellent pick to head the Agriculture Department. As a lifelong agri-businessman and veterinarian, as well as the two-term governor of a state where agriculture’s the largest industry, Gov. Perdue has a unique and expert...
Proposed Tax Regulation Threaten Multigenerational Cattle Operations
The Internal Revenue Service hosted a public hearing today on a Department of Treasury proposed rule that would eliminate or greatly reduce available valuation discounts for family-related entities. Kevin Kester, National Cattlemen’s Beef Association vice president, said the regulation would effectively discourage families from continuing to operate or grow their businesses and passing them on to future generations.
Many cattle operations are family-owned small businesses, facing the same concerns as other...
NCBA Showcases Cattle Operation’s Conservation Practices
The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association and Catoctin and Frederick Soil Conservation Districts hosted an event today to highlight the successful conservation efforts by farmers and ranchers that have led to the improvement of the Chesapeake Bay watershed. Scott Yager NCBA’s Environmental Counsel said voluntary conservation efforts have proven successful at Hedgeapple Farm, an Angus operation located in Frederick, Md.
“We know the one-size-fits-all approach to conservation doesn’t work...
USPOULTRY Releases Fifth Video in Series Highlighting Poultry and Egg Farm Environmental Stewardship
U.S. Poultry & Egg Association (USPOULTRY) is releasing a fifth video in a series highlighting environmental stewardship on poultry and egg farms. The video features one of USPOULTRY’s Family Farm Environmental Excellence Award winners, Riverhill Farms of Port Republic, Va.
Riverhill Farms is owned and operated by Glenn and Sheri Rodes, along with their parents, brothers and extended family. The Rodes raise turkeys, dairy and beef cattle, corn and forage. Their farm has five turkey barns, and they...
No comments were found for European Commission activates exceptional measures to further support European farmers in crisis. Be the first to comment! | 农业 |
2017-17/0129/en_head.json.gz/4314 | On September 18, 2011, Italy’s largest agricultural cooperative donated eight beehives containing 500,000 honeybees to Pope Benedict XVI. Given in honor of the Italian Catholic Church’s Day for the Protection of Creation, the bees from Coldiretti currently reside on the pontifical farm at Castel Gandolfo. Farmers around the world are concerned about the honeybee, whose global population has declined sharply and mysteriously in the last ten or so years. As Coldiretti president Sergio Marini observed, bees "play a vital role in the planet's ecosystem and their disappearance would have disastrous consequences for health and the environment; a third of human food production depends on crops pollinated by insects, 80 percent of which are bees." In recent years, beekeepers across North America and Europe have reported devastating losses of anywhere from 25 to 100 percent of their colonies. The official term for this massive worldwide disappearance of honeybees is Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD). It’s a bizarre and unprecedented phenomenon characterized by worker bees deserting their hives nearly en masse, leaving only the queen and her capped brood behind. Without its worker bees and their vital honey production, a bee colony cannot survive. Scientists all over the world are researching a variety of potential causes of CCD including pests (such as the Varroa mite), disease, viruses, pesticides, genetically modified crops, stress, poor nutrition, and climate change. However, none of these factors can adequately explain the unique characteristics of CCD, such as its rapid spread and simultaneous appearance on multiple continents. Attacks by pesticides, viruses or parasites would result in piles of dead bees in the hives, whereas the hives are simply left vacant in the case of CCD. Climate change has been much too gradual to account for the disorder, and harsh winters can explain only part of the bee die-off. The other possible causes (GM crops, stress, poor nutrition) are not factors in every area affected by CCD. In fact, two pioneering research scientists—Dr. George Carlo and Milt Bowling—may have already identified the main cause of CCD. Dr. Carlo is an award-winning American public health expert who ran the wireless industry’s six-year, $28.5 million study on the health effects of cellular phones back in the 1990s. Milt Bowling of Canada has been involved with the cell phone safety issue since 1997 and has been working with Dr. Carlo on the issue since 2005. According to these two researchers, the culprit in the world’s current honeybee decline is the enormous and continuing proliferation of information-carrying radio waves (ICRW) in the global environment due to the massive 21st-century shift to wireless technology. As a result of their research carried out both independently and in concert, Dr. Carlo and Bowling are convinced that man-made wireless signals—particularly from cell phones and their transmitters—interfere with the bees’ natural navigation and communication capabilities. A honeybee’s navigational system is comprised of small magnetite crystals in its abdomen, which allow it to tune like a radio into the earth’s electromagnetic field. When a worker bee leaves the hive to gather pollen, it senses this field and uses it to calculate its position relative to the hive much as a GPS system works. This enables it to return to the colony with its precious load, even from more than a mile away. But various independent studies show that the bees lose this crucial ability to navigate when artificial electromagnetic fields are introduced into their environment. In one study conducted in 2006 at Landau University in Germany, two beehives were exposed to radiation from a cordless phone and two were left unexposed. Twenty-five bees were then taken from each hive and released about 2500 feet away. Within 32 minutes, 16 bees returned to one of the unexposed hives and 17 to the other, while only six bees returned to one of the exposed hives after 38 minutes and none at all made it back to the other. Moreover, after nine days the bees in the exposed hives had constructed 21 percent fewer cells in the hive frame than the bees in the unexposed hives. Another study was carried out in 2009 by Dr. Daniel Favre, a retired biologist of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Lausanne, Switzerland. He placed mobile phone handsets near beehives, activated them for specific periods of time, and analyzed the bees’ resulting behavior. Favre found that activation of the phones triggered the worker piping signal, which is a sign of distress, and that the colony’s activities did not return to normal until some time after the phone activation had ceased. In a third study conducted in 2010, researchers at Panjab University in Chandigarh, India fitted cell phones to a beehive and activated them twice a day for 15 minutes each. Within three months, honey production had ceased, the queen laid half as many eggs, and the hive population had fallen significantly. While this research provides strong support for a link between wireless transmissions and CCD, a definitive study is still needed to conclusively prove the theory (and convince skeptics). Dr. Carlo and Bowling have designed a comprehensive research program to do just that, but it remains on hold due to lack of funding from North American and European governments. Furthermore, the highly successful mobile phone industry is in denial that the widespread global use of their product could be placing bees at risk—even though the spread pattern of CCD is remarkably consistent with trends in cell phone use during the last ten years. Meanwhile, the number of honeybees worldwide continues to decline drastically, presenting an urgent environmental challenge. As Marini noted above, honeybees are one of the major insect pollinators essential to human food production, so their disappearance would be a disaster for the world’s food supply. Without pollination by bees, many fruits, vegetables, nuts and herbs simply could not be produced.
What can—and should—we do about this? If information-carrying radio waves are indeed disrupting honeybee colonies around the globe, the obvious solution would be a planet-wide reduction in wireless transmissions, particularly from mobile phones and their supporting infrastructure. By virtue of their sheer numbers (well over five billion worldwide), cell phones generate far more ICRW than all other wireless sources put together. Thus, cutting back global cell phone transmissions along with careful regulation of other wireless technology would allow the world’s honeybee population to stabilize and begin recovering. Individuals, communities, governments and non-government organizations should work together to address this issue and take up the challenge of saving the bees before it’s too late. The future of life on earth depends on it. Copyright © 2012 Justin D. Soutar. All rights reserved. REFERENCES
1. “Benedict XVI Receives Half Million Bees,” ZENIT, Sep. 21, 2011. Oct. 24, 2011 2. “Pope: Christians Should Unite to Care for Creation, Poor,” Worldwatch Institute. Oct. 28, 2011 3. Milt Bowling, “Bees and the Future of Food,” Health Action Magazine, Fall 2007. Oct. 21, 2011 4. Ibid; Milt Bowling, “Where are the Birds and Bees?”, Health Action, 2007. Oct. 21, 2011 5. Ibid.
6. Ibid. (Original source: Hermann Stever et al, “Verhaltensanderung der Honigbiene Apis mellifera unter elektromagnetischer Exposition” [Electromagnetic Radiation: Influences on Honeybees (Apis mellifera)], University of Landau, Feb. 2006. Nov. 7, 2011 <http://agbi.uni-landau.de/material_download/elmagexp_bienen_06.pdf>) 7. Daniel Favre, “Mobile phone-induced honeybee worker piping,” Kokopelli Association, April 13, 2011. Oct. 21, 2011 http://www.kokopelli.asso.fr/documentation/favre.pdf
8. Sasha Herriman, “Study links bee decline to cell phones,” CNN World, June 30, 2010. Oct. 24, 2011 9. Wikipedia contributors, “List of countries by number of cell phones in use,” Wikipedia, Oct. 21, 2011. Oct. 24, 2011 Posted by
honeybees,
science and technology,
The Catholic Church,
Christmas with Mother Teresa: A True Story
Imagine working eighteen hours a day, every day for several months straight. Imagine baking, packing, shipping, unloading, and distributing two million loaves of bread a day. Imagine feeding, clothing and sheltering millions of homeless and needy visitors from another country. Imagine doing all this with Blessed Mother Teresa of Calcutta—and then spending your Christmas with her through an unforeseen twist of circumstances. These are the actual experiences of a man whom I know personally. As an overseas Program Director for Catholic Relief Services (CRS), this man spent nine years in India working closely with Blessed Mother Teresa. In 1971, with her assistance, he organized and directed a tremendous humanitarian relief program for millions of East Pakistani refugees. Then, at the climax of this great effort, he and Mother Teresa unexpectedly shared a providentially arranged Christmas with a very special visitor: a well-known American Catholic archbishop whose cause for sainthood is now underway. A few years ago, I was blessed with the incredible opportunity to interview this living witness of Mother Teresa’s sanctity and hear his own firsthand account of the amazing events in which he was involved—a true story never before told. I found it to be a dramatic, inspiring and deeply moving account of great human tragedy and suffering illuminated and uplifted by the gentle touch of Christ’s redeeming love. Catholic Relief Services spent tens of millions of dollars to bring the East Pakistani refugees necessary food, water, clothing, soap, shelter, and medical aid, but Mother Teresa gave them what no money could buy—Christian love and compassion. “She was truly a mother to everybody, and of course the people responded to that,” the former CRS Program Director tells me in one of our interviews. He also recalls how the refugees in each camp would eagerly await Mother Teresa’s arrival regardless of the time of day or night. Whenever he and she arrived at a camp, the refugees would courteously welcome them according to Bengali custom by placing garlands of flowers on their shoulders and offering them food and drink. “Especially when it’s Mother Teresa because she was the big honored guest, so just by association I would get my share too,” chuckles the Director. However, his fondest memory of the relief program is his unique Christmas spent with Mother Teresa and her famous visitor from the United States. “Mother Teresa had a wonderful opportunity that day to demonstrate to everybody just how a saint would operate on Christmas Day,” he remarks, “because I’m sure that she would have had a totally different type of a Christmas Day herself.”
More than forty years after it happened, this powerful true story will finally be told to the world as it was told to this author in a new book currently being written. The book, entitled My Christmas with Mother Teresa, will tell you who that surprise Christmas visitor was, why he came to visit Mother Teresa and the refugees, and how the CRS Program Director was personally affected by spending Christmas with two such holy individuals. (The identity of this now retired Program Director will be revealed in the published book.) The book will also delve into the historical background of the East Pakistani refugee crisis to answer common questions such as: What prompted ten million East Pakistani refugees to flee into India in a single year? How did India and the world respond to the massive refugee crisis? How did the crisis end? What happened to the refugees after the crisis? Additionally, My Christmas with Mother Teresa will feature a variety of colorful, entertaining, inspiring, and amazing personal anecdotes and experiences of the CRS Program Director culled from memories of his nine years’ life and work in India and his personal friendship with the “Saint of Calcutta.” Information about the book’s publisher, release date, and availability will be posted on my Twitter page at http://twitter.com/justinsoutar as well as right here on my blog. Posted by
Catholic Relief Services,
Mother Teresa, | 农业 |
2017-17/0129/en_head.json.gz/4876 | High-Input Soybean Production: Soybean yield response to rhizobia inoculant, gypsum, manganese fertilizer, insecticide, and fungicide Apr 19, 2017 Answers on water quality, drainage Apr 14, 2017 A better way to manage phosphorus? Apr 19, 2017 Mergers and competition in seed and agricultural chemical markets Apr 19, 2017 Farm Operations>Conservation Tile Drainage Directly Related to Nitrate Loss
Highly-tiled land contributes to hypoxia
Farmers are not to blame for hypoxia
New water-management methods necessary Source: University of Illinois | Sep 30, 2010
Tile drainage in the Mississippi Basin is one of the great advances of the 19th and 20th centuries, allowing highly productive agriculture in what was once land too wet to farm. In fact, installation of new tile systems continues every year, because it leads to increased crop yields. But a recent study shows that the most heavily tile-drained areas of North America are also the largest contributing source of nitrate to the Gulf of Mexico, leading to seasonal hypoxia. In summer 2010 this dead zone in the Gulf spanned over 7,000 square miles.
Scientists from the University of Illinois (U of I) and Cornell University compiled information on each county in the Mississippi River basin including crop acreage and yields, fertilizer inputs, atmospheric deposition and number of people and livestock to calculate all nitrogen (N) inputs and outputs from 1997 to 2006. For 153 watersheds in the basin, they also used measurements of nitrate concentration and flow in streams, which allowed them to develop a statistical model that explained 83% of the variation in springtime nitrate flow in the monitored streams. The greatest nitrate loss to streams corresponded to the highly productive, tile-drained Corn Belt from southwest Minnesota across Iowa, Illinois, Indiana and Ohio.
This area of the basin has extensive row cropping of fertilized corn and soybeans, a flat landscape with tile drainage and channelized ditches and streams to facilitate drainage.
Farmers not to blame
“Farmers are not to blame,” says U of I researcher Mark David. “They are using the same amount of N as they were 30 years ago and getting much higher corn yields, but we have created a very leaky agricultural system. This allows nitrate to move quickly from fields into ditches and on to the Gulf of Mexico. We need policies that reward farmers to help correct the problem.”
David is a biogeochemist who has been studying the issue since 1993. “We’ve had data from smaller watersheds for some time, but this new study includes data from the entire Mississippi Basin. It shows clearly where across the entire basin the sources of nitrate are,” he says.
“A lot of people just want to blame fertilizer, but it’s not that simple,” David says. “It’s fertilizer on intensive corn and soybean agricultural rotations in heavily tile-drained areas. There is also an additional source of N from sewage effluent from people, although that is a small contribution. It’s all of these factors together.”
Drainage management options
David says that ripping out all of the drainage tiles is not a viable option. “Creating wetlands and reservoirs such as Lake Shelbyville can remove nitrate by holding the water back and letting natural processes remove it, but that’s not a solution. It’s expensive and we can’t flood everyone’s land to stop nitrate. That’s not going to happen.”
“The problem is correctable but will take a concerted effort to change the outcome, with some of the solutions expensive. Installing small wetlands or bioreactors at the end of tile lines that remove nitrates before they flow into the ditch do work, but would cost thousands of dollars per drain. Who’s going to pay for that?” David says.
Cover crops can hold the nutrients so they are available in the spring, and are reasonably cheap, David says, but can increase the farmer’s risk for the following crop. “So if a farmer plants a cover crop and his neighbor doesn’t, he may be at a disadvantage.”
David believes that the system can be improved by focusing conservation efforts on the areas of the country that are contributing the most nitrate loss and establish an incentive program for farmers to utilize one or more practices known to reduce nitrate losses from tile lines.
Encouraging farmers to apply the right amount of N in the spring rather than the fall (or to sidedress), establishing a more complex cropping system which incorporates cover crops or even biofuel crops such as miscanthus or switchgrass when there are markets and installing end-of-pipe solutions such as controlled drainage, bioreactors or wetlands are some of the efforts David suggests would help reduce nitrate loss.
“Until we change the payment system beyond our focus on yield alone, we’re not going to make much progress in reducing nitrate losses. We also haven’t developed voluntary programs that really address nitrate loss from tiles, and we need to provide more incentive and cost-share funding to producers. We may also need regulation. We could say to producers, ‘If you buy fertilizer, you’ve got to do one of these five things,’” he says. “There’s no one solution.”
Dennis McKenna of the Illinois Department of Agriculture says “David’s work is an important contribution in helping producers and policy makers identify the most critical areas. Hopefully this information will be used to develop a focused national and state effort to reduce nutrient losses to surface water.”
Sources of Nitrate Yields in the Mississippi River Basin was published in the September-October 2010 issue of the Journal of Environmental Quality.
This research was funded by the National Science Foundation Biocomplexity in the Environment/Coupled Natural-Human Cycles Program. Authors in addition to David were Greg McIsaac from the University of Illinois and Laurie Drinkwater from Cornell University.
RelatedMore Efficient Fertilizer Use Reduces Nitrate LoadsNov 12, 2001Hypoxia: Fact or Fiction?Oct 01, 20085 Questions to Help Evaluate Your Nitrogen LossMay 25, 2010Corn and Soybean Farmers Stepping Up Conservation PracticesJun 16, 2010 Load More | 农业 |
2017-17/0129/en_head.json.gz/6868 | الصفحة الأولىالجنسانيةالأخبارلماذا الجنسانية؟تعليقاتالمشروعاتالمواردروابط مفيدة الجنسانية
FAO’s 37th Biennial Conference: A commitment to women in agriculture at the highest Level
© FAO/A. Benedetti The vital role of women in agriculture and rural development was the theme of the thirty-seventh session of the biennial FAO Governing Conference (25 June-2 July 2011).
27 June 2011, Rome - The Conference, which brings together FAO’s Member Country Representatives including Heads of State, Ministers and Ambassadors, emphasized that pervasive gender inequality in agriculture has severe negative implications for the agriculture sector, food security, nutrition and society as a whole, endorsed the recommendations of FAO’s State of Food and Agriculture (SOFA) 2010-11 “Women in Agriculture: Closing the gender gap for development,” and committed to strengthening support to women in agriculture and to closing the gender gap in access to agricultural inputs, services and opportunities in order to increase economic growth and global food security.
The Conference also urged the elimination of all forms of legal and customary discrimination against women, particularly in access to land, financial services, rural employment, agricultural technology and extension services. It called on countries, donors and civil society to ensure that all agricultural programmes and projects take account of the different roles and responsibilities of men and women and the constraints they face in agriculture and rural employment, and recommended that gender be mainstreamed throughout FAO’s work.
A Strong Focus on the Recommendations of the State of Food and Agriculture 2010-11
The Conference’s discussions on women in agriculture opened with “A Dialogue on Women in Agriculture: Where to after SOFA?” a side event sponsored by the Rome Women's Network and co-hosted by Ertharin Cousin, the U.S. Ambassador of the UN Agencies in Rome, and by Josephine Wangari Gaita, Ambassador of Kenya to Italy and Permanent Representative to FAO, IFAD, and WFP, focusing on the positive impacts of closing the gender gap in agriculture on agricultural production and food security.
The event was moderated by Melanne Verveer, U.S. Ambassador-at-Large for Global Women’s Issues and featured the participation of Dr. José Graziano da Silva, elected new FAO Director-General by the Conference on July 26, Ann Tutwiler, FAO Deputy Director-General for Knowledge, Kathleen Merrigan, Deputy Secretary of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Dr. Agnes Kalibata, Minister of Agriculture of Rwanda, and Gloria Abraham Peralta, Minister of Agriculture and Livestock of Costa Rica.
In one of his first public presentations as FAO Director-General elect, Dr. Graziano da Silva opened the discussion by reflecting on his previous role as Brazil's Extraordinary Minister of Food Security and Fight Against Hunger, where he was responsible for implementing the country's highly-successful "Zero Hunger" programme that helped lift 24 million people out of extreme poverty in five years and reduce undernourishment in Brazil by 25 percent. “Zero Hunger” included a cash transfer programme to families to buy food and improve their purchasing capacity locally in order to sustain the stimulation of local production. Dr. Graziano Da Silva related the fact that households benefited significantly more when the cash was entrusted to a female member: “The conclusion was very clear. The commitment to use the money to buy food by women was very much higher than men’s.”
Dr. Graziano Da Silva also stated that he would work to make gender equality in agriculture and rural development a priority for FAO under his tenure. “I would like to see this item reflected in the budget for three regions: Latin America, Africa and Asia, where the role of women in food is crucial. We should set this clearly in the budget. We should set this as priority.”
Ambassador-at-Large for Global Women's Issues for the United States of America Melanne Verveer.
Ambassador Verveer commended FAO for its work in advancing the understanding of the vital role of women in agriculture: “The SOFA focuses on women for the first time in its 27 year history and clearly sets out our challenge to end the gender gap,” Ms. Verveer said, emphasizing, as stated in the Report, that providing women working in agriculture with the same resources as men would increase agricultural productivity and improve the well-being of their families and communities.
Offering some hard facts to illustrate this point, Ms. Tutwiler, FAO Deputy Director-General, recalled the Report’s findings that if women were given equal access to productive assets, agricultural production would increase by 2.5 to 4 percent in developing countries, which could lift 100 to 150 million people out of hunger.
“The message of this report is that closing the gender gap is not just the morally right thing to do, it is the necessary thing to do if we are going to meet the Millennium Development Goals and reduce hunger,” said Ms. Tutwiler, also announcing some of the new steps being taken to increase gender mainstreaming within FAO, including incorporating gender into the Organization’s performance-based system for the Director General, Deputy Director Generals and Directors, and formalizing the Organization’s gender focal point network. She also expressed FAO’s intention to intensify its policy work with Governments on gender mainstreaming and equality.
Dr. Agnes Kalibata, Minister of Agriculture and Animal Resources in Rwanda, spoke of the progress made by her country for women in agriculture and the way forward. In Rwanda, 86% of women work in agriculture, making policies affecting access to means of agricultural production especially impactful on women’s lives. The country has recognized in its Constitution equal opportunity for men and women, and the need for women’s empowerment. As a result, a policy was put in place that requires every public institution to have at least 30 % women at the management level. “We were pleasantly surprised that women took parliament was 56 %, making it the parliament with the highest proportion of women in the world. It is amazing what happens when women are shown what it is that they can do,” Minister Kalibata said.
Rwanda has also changed its inheritance laws to ensure the equal opportunity to inherit for male and female children and to protect the land ownership of women, and a programme was put in place to improve their access to technologies. Going forward, one of the country’s main priorities will be to improve the life chances of children living and often working in agricultural areas, especially those of girls, by raising the awareness and educating mothers to send their children to school to give them a better future: “We can talk all we want but unless we introduce knowledge systems that allow women to become empowered and to make the decisions that affect their families, we will not achieve much,” Minister Kalibata concluded.
Minister Abraham Peralta of Costa Rica added that gender inequality in agriculture does not only affect rural women but the entire agricultural sector, food security and society as a whole. She explained that in the case of Costa Rica, decent employment opportunitieffs for rural women are insufficient and much of rural women’s work is neither remunerated nor taken into account in the country’s economy.
Working Side by Side with Civil Society
INGO side event - "Women in agriculture: Microcredit, land tenure and cooperation". See the full slideshow here.
A discussion was also organized by Civil Society, bringing together the representatives in Rome of thfe AdHoc Group of International Non-Governmental Organizations (I.N.G.O.s) and focusing specifically on the issues of microcredit, land tenure and cooperation for women in agriculture.
Participants comprised representatives from a number of NGOs including Rotary International, Soroptimist International, Lions Club International, ICRA, the International Commission on Irrigation and Drainage (ICID), the International Federation of Women in Legal Careers, The International Association of Agricultural Economists (IAAE), the International Federation for Home Economics (IFHE), the International Federation of Business and professional Women (BPW Int), ActionAid, Women Organizing for Change in Agriculture and NRM (Wocan), Fédération Internationale des Femmes des Carrières Juridiques (FIFCJ), CIDSE, as well as Member Country Representatives. The event was introduced by Ms. Cristina Gorajski Visconti, BPW Int Representative and Coordinator of the AdHocGroup, who lauded the Conference for focusing on the role of women in agriculture, an issue, she explained, that the members of the AdHocGroup consider crucial for closing the gender gap at the regional, national and International level. After speaking of the complementary role of N.G.O.s to that of the UN, Ms. Gorajski Visconti turned the floor to Ms. Marcela Villarreal, Director of FAO’s Gender, Equity and Rural Employment Division, who offered a review of the findings and recommendations of the SOFA 2010-11. The AdHoc Group expressed its agreement of the Report’s findings and each organization discussed the initiatives it had carried out over the past years to support women in agriculture, reiterating their long-term commitment to supporting gender equality in agriculture for greater and better development.
Read the final report of the thirty-seventh session of the FAO Conference: The Vital Role of Women in Agriculture and Rural Development. To read the full SOFA 2010-2011 Report, click here.
Visit the website of The AdHocGroup of INGOs Representatives in Rome.
Listen to Kathleen Merrigan (Deputy Secretary of Agriculture from the United States Department); Melanne Verveer (U.S. Ambassador-at-Large for Global Women’s Issues); Agnes Kalibata (Minister of Agriculture of Rwanda); and Mme Odette Kayitesi (Minister of Agriculture of Burundi) speak at the side-event: A Dialogue on Women in Agriculture: Where to after SOFA?
منظمات الأمم المتحدة في روما تدعو إلى المساواة بين الجنسين للقضاء على الجوع والفقرالنساء هن المفتاح لبناء عالم خالٍ من الجوع والفقرنحو المساواة بين الجنسين في صناعة المأكولات البحريةدليل جديد مصوّر لحماية الأطفال من المبيداتتقنية رائدة لتجفيف الأسماك تعزز سبل المعيشة في كوت ديفوار
Participatory Information and Communication
Gender and Climate Change Programme
Gender and Land Rights Database
للاتصال بناFAO Gender ProgrammeFood and Agriculture Organization of the United Nationsالبريد الالكتروني[email protected] :اتصالات
للإتصال بنا | شـروط وأحكـام | الرسائل التحايلية
FAO, 2017 © | 农业 |
2017-17/0129/en_head.json.gz/7327 | Cucumbers Timco Worldwide begins new melon breeding strategy
(Oct. 22) Timco Worldwide Inc., Woodland, Calif., has formed an exclusive partnership with Origene Seeds Ltd., Israel.“We’re going to breed watermelons, specifically the characteristics of watermelons, to what we believe are what consumers are looking for,” said Tim Colin, Timco’s chief executive officer. “We believe there’s a much more distinct experience available to consumers, in particular the watermelon flavor.”The president of Origene Seeds is Eyal Vardi, a global figure in seed genetics. He specializes in melons, squash and cucumbers.“Timco’s intense focus and expertise with melons in general, and particularly watermelons, provides us the partner we need to meet the needs of growers and consumers,” Vardi said in a prepared statement. “This is a collaboration built on complementary strengths and shared mutual objectives.”After completing a series of focus groups, Timco has it has a good handle on what shoppers ideally want in a watermelon, in both regular and personal sizes, Colin said.“Now I’m taking that information from the focus groups and working with a breeder who can actually get us to the end result,” he said. “We want more than a taste of sugar; we want an explosion of flavor.”The fruits of the strategic partnership will be readily obvious to Colin. The Davis complex will be immediately adjacent to the company’s new 11-acre research and development, seed trialing and greenhouse facilities.Unlike other commodities that require a decade or more to develop new varieties, Timco plans to have new watermelon varieties on market shelves in record time, Colin said. Varieties that show promise will be fast tracked through the system, he said. “We’re looking to take those varieties from concept to commercial volumes in three to four years,” Colin said.The ultimate goal is proprietary varieties, he said, but those varieties are just part of Timco’s broad vision. “We are looking to build sustainable, hi-yielding varieties that use less fertilizer, less irrigation water, those types of characteristics that will enable us to be able to bring to our customers a product they can market at their margins and still have the customers buy,” Colin said. “We want long-term sustainability from seed to grower to the shelf.”The plan does not include becoming a full-fledged farming company or a seed company. To achieve that goal, Timco must have ownership over many aspects of the business, including seed selection, varietal selection, farming protocols, drip irrigation and more, he said. “We think we can add a tremendous amount of value to our customer base and also to our growers,” Colin said.In 2009, the company plans to have growers in 14 states and in Costa Rica, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico and Panama, Colin said. This year, Timco contracted with growers in 10 U.S. states and the five other countries.The exclusive partnership with Origene is for Central America and North America and is not limited to watermelon varieties, although that is the initial focus, Colin said. In the future, he plans to expand the program to cantaloupe, honeydew and other melon varieties. Timco Worldwide, a privately held company founded in 1985, sells conventionally grown and organic melons under the MelonUp and Sundia labels.The company is scheduled to move from Woodland into a new 6,000-square-foot sales and administration office in nearby Davis in December. | 农业 |
2017-17/0129/en_head.json.gz/7395 | California State Water Project boosts irrigation allotment Apr 18, 2017 Even with effective synthetic alternatives Sulfur remains a relevant tool for controlling powdery mildew Apr 12, 2017 With buds pushing in late March, start of San Joaquin Valley wine grape crop follows normal timing Apr 12, 2017 Walnut growers responsible for ensuring clean water use on operation Apr 05, 2017 Crops>Grapes President nominates Mark Keenum to be undersecretary of agriculture
Mark Keenum, veteran staff member for Mississippi Sen. Thad Cochran and a major player in the last three farm bill debates, has been nominated for the No.3 post at the U.S. Department of Agriculture. President Bush named Keenum, a graduate and former assistant professor of economics at Mississippi State University, to fill the post of undersecretary of agriculture for Farm and Foreign Agricultural Services. He would replace J.B. Penn, who resigned last August. As undersecretary for Farm and Foreign Agricultural Services, Keenum would oversee the operations of the Farm Service Agency, the Foreign Agricultural Service and the Risk Management Agency. He would also serve as executive vice president of the Commodity Credit Corp. Over the years, Keenum has become known as Cochran's alter ego, often standing in for the chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee at farm meetings throughout Mississippi. He is also considered a farm bill expert, having helped write the last three farm laws in his position as agricultural aide and then chief of staff to Cochran when the latter was chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee. Keenum, a native of Sunflower County in Mississippi, joined the staff of Sen. Cochran after working at an agricultural economist with the Mississippi Cooperative Extension Service. He was named Cochran's chief of staff in 1998. “As an adviser to me on agricultural issues, he worked closely on the 1990, 1996 and the 2002 farm bills, and this experience will benefit the administration greatly in preparation for the reauthorization of the next farm bill,” Cochran said in a statement. “His experience on Capitol Hill and his background in agricultural economics make him an outstanding nominee to be an undersecretary of agriculture. I have confidence in his professional ability and in him personally. Mark is an excellent choice for this position, and I look forward to voting on his nomination soon.” “When it comes to being of service to agriculture, there are very few individuals who can say they've done more than Mark Keenum,” said David Waide, president of the Mississippi Farm Bureau. “As a member of Sen. Cochran's staff, Mark has always been available to Mississippi agricultural leaders to discuss issues. “He frequently attends meetings with farmers where he discusses the latest issues and listens to their concerns. He has been an invaluable person for Mississippi agriculture and an extremely effective advocate for the farmers of Mississippi.” He and his wife, the former Rhonda Newman, live in Alexandria, Va., and are the parents of four children. Rhonda Keenum, also a graduate of Mississippi State, currently serves as the White House Director of Public Liaison.
RelatedPulled raisin vineyards led 2016 decline in California grape acreageApr 21, 2017Napa County farm, wine grape values jump 33 percentApr 20, 2017Groundwater recharge workshop May 12 in San Luis ObispoApr 19, 2017Sponsored ContentArysta LifeScience Portfolio Offers Multiple Options to Protect VineyardsApr 12, 2017 Load More | 农业 |
2017-17/0129/en_head.json.gz/7410 | What are Herbaceous Plants?
Irises are an example of herbaceous plants.
The stems of herbaceous plants are usually soft and fleshy.
Herbaceous plants are plants with growth which dies back to the ground each year, in contrast with woody plants, which keep adding growth and remain active during the season when herbaceous plants are dormant. As a general rule, annual plants are all classified as herbaceous, but herbaceous plants can also be biennials or perennials as well. Many gardeners rely heavily on herbaceous plant species to add color and texture to their gardens, and these plants often form the core of a garden.
A typical herbaceous plant starts to die down in the fall, often dropping leaves in the process. In the spring, new growth appears as the plant's roots and low-lying stems start to put out fresh shoots. Eventually, the plant will flourish again, often producing bright, colorful flowers and rich greenery which will thrive through the summer before the plant starts to die back again.
In the case of annuals, the plant often reseeds itself, and new plants will grow again in the following spring. Biennials and perennials may be able to reseed, but they can also spread through rhizomes, corms, and bulbs. Some plants die back completely, while others retain some growth near the ground, especially in temperate zones, where the weather will not be severe enough to force the plant to die off entirely. This trait can be valuable, as gardeners usually do not want to look at dead stems and vacant patches in the garden every winter. Ad
The stems of herbaceous plants are typically soft and fleshy, unlike those of woody plants. Many herbaceous plants are characterized by very bold, bright flowers, which makes them a very popular addition to the garden. Their foliage may also be bold and colorful, with some species being bred specifically for variegated foliage which will add color to the garden. Some examples of herbaceous plants include: irises, nasturtiums, peonies, carrots, and cosmos.
These plants can be used in a variety of ways in the garden. Herbaceous plants often make excellent borders and groundcovers, because they tend to grow rapidly and they take well to shaping with careful pruning and clipping. Their bright flowers also make them popular for container gardening. Some can be forced to bloom indoors in the winter, adding some color to the home in months when winter weather can make life seem grim, and these plants can also be used for things like erosion control, with seeds being spread over erosion-prone areas so that plants will develop and put out roots which will hold the soil in place.
Most nurseries keep an array of herbaceous plants in stock, along with seeds for growing them. Gardeners can also collect seeds from the gardens of friends and neighbors, and some plants will grow from clippings, as well. One of the advantages to using annuals and biennials in gardening is that the look and feel of a garden can constantly be changed as old plants die and new plants are established in their place. Ad
What Are the Best Tips for Planting Peony Seeds?
What Is the Growing Season for Peonies?
What Are the Best Tips for Growing Nasturtiums?
What Is Cyclamen Hederifolium?
What Are the Different Types of Herbaceous Plant?
What are Bluets?
What is Prairie Coneflower? | 农业 |
2017-17/0129/en_head.json.gz/8383 | World of Benefits from Biotechnology? For Whom?
By Jim Goodman
When the Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO) met in Chicago in May they were, no doubt, elated to hear that the US State Department would be aggressively confronting critics of agricultural biotechnology.
Wouldnt you think the State Department might have more pressing issues than carrying water for Monsanto and the rest of the biotechnology industry?
Jose Fernandez, assistant secretary of state for the Bureau of Economic, Energy and Business Affairs noted that the State Department was ready to take on the naysayers. Fernandez stated they would be building alliances (presumably with the biotech industry and foreign governments), anticipating roadblocks to acceptance and highlighting the science.
To this point the only science they can highlight is the fact that nearly 100% of the commercially available genetically modified (GM) crops worldwide are engineered to be insecticidal, resistant to herbicide application, or both.
The State Department and its allies promote GM as a way for the developing world to feed itself, but the four predominant GM crops (corn, soy, cotton and canola) are not specifically human food crops, they are used for animal feed, biofuel, fiber and processed food.
They would like us to believe that the science will deliver more nutritious food, higher yielding crops, drought resistant crops and an end to world hunger. These claims are not based in science, but only on the promise, or the hope of GM doing what its supporters claim it can do.
The science, or lack thereof, that we should take note of is the glaring lack of regulation of GM crops and the serious questions about their safety. Nina Fedoroff, science and technology adviser to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, noted We preach to the world about science-based regulations but really our regulations on crop biotechnology are not yet science-based.
We should not be surprised that the State Department is again, on the stump, promoting biotech crops. It would be difficult to say how long our government has been aggressively promoting biotech, specifically GM crops, but certainly since the commercialization of GM soy in 1996. In 2004 the State Department launched a website (usbiotechreg.nbii.gov) that was part of a department initiative to encourage broader adoption and acceptance of biotechnology in the developing world, according to Deborah Malac, then chief of the Biotechnology and Textile Trade Policy Division.
USDA is also actively promoting biotechnology with an agricultural biotechnology website at (usda.gov) that supports bringing biotechnology to the worldwide marketplace.
The US Senate is getting into the act, even mandating GM technology to the developing world. Senate Bill 384, The Global Food Security Act, would amend the Foreign Assistance act of 1961 to read Agricultural research carried out under this act shall include research on biotechnological advances appropriate to local ecological conditions, including GM technology.
So why does the US government promote the interests of the biotechnology industry over the best interests of peoples health, the environment and the food security of the developing world?
Easy answer: the biotechnology industry has a high profit margin and they know how to influence government policy.
Jim Goodman is a dairy farmer from Wonewoc, Wis., and a 2008-09 Food and Society Policy Fellow of the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy. From The Progressive Populist, June 15, 2010 Populist.com
News | Current Issue | Back Issues | Essays | Links About the Progressive Populist | How to Subscribe | How to Contact Us
PO Box 819, Manchaca TX 78652 | 农业 |
2017-17/0129/en_head.json.gz/8855 | Search Archive Blue mold tobacco fungus is in 44 Kentucky counties
By TIM THORNBERRY
Kentucky Correspondent
LEXINGTON, Ky. — This year’s fight with blue mold continues for many state tobacco producers as the fungus has now been confirmed in at least 44 counties in Kentucky as of July 14.
According to the University of Kentucky (UK) Tobacco Disease Information website, the newest reports of blue mold have been confirmed in Anderson, Breathitt, Lincoln, Knox, Montgomery, Owen, Robertson and Washington counties.
The airborne disease has also been detected in Tennessee, southern Ohio, Virginia and Pennsylvania.
UK Plant Pathologist Kenny Seebolt said that even though the disease has spread, it is still manageable for most producers.
“On a positive note, blue mold is widespread but the level of severity is low-to-moderate in most cases,” he said. “I believe that most of our growers have been doing a very good job in controlling (it). The number of growers following a regular fungicide program is probably higher than it’s ever been (proportionally).”
Seebolt also said that, geographically, most of the state’s counties east of Interstate 65 have been exposed to the blue mold pathogen and the disease was present in those counties even if cases had not been reported.
UK Extension Agent Bryce Roberts said he thought it was just a matter of locating the disease in his county.
“We’ve been fortunate not to see it here in Spencer County, yet. There have been some blue mold finds in neighboring counties in the last few days so I figure that it is here. It’s just a matter of finding it,” said Roberts.
“I’ve been urging producers to apply the recommended protective fungicides to be on the safe side especially with last week’s daily rains.”
That rainy weather has given way to a heat wave, at least for the week according to the National Weather Service. The forecast called for temperatures in the mid to upper 90s with heat indices in the 100-105 F. range with little chance for rain until the weekend.
Seebold said that the worse cases of blue mold in the state this year so far have come at the hands of waiting too long to react or no action at all.
“For the most part, growers reporting serious damage from blue mold have not applied fungicides, have waited too late to begin applications, or have not applied fungicides in a timely and accurate manner,” he said. “Hopefully the hot and dry weather headed our way will help check the progress of ‘old blue’ for a while.”
Seebold added these bits of advice for producers.
“Given the forecasted weather, it’s advisable for growers to keep up with fungicide programs until we get to topping time. Experience has shown us that topping and good control of suckers helps to slow the progress of blue mold,” he said.
“Up to this point, timely applications of fungicide are critical to achieving good control. Ideally, any of the fungicides cleared for tobacco should be applied prior to the appearance of blue mold symptoms, or when symptoms first appear at the earliest. Control of blue mold becomes difficult, if not impossible; the longer fungicide applications are delayed after the onset of disease.”
For the latest blue mold information, visit the UK Tobacco Disease Information Page at www.uky.edu/Ag/kpn/kyblue/kyblue.htm
This farm news was published in the July 19, 2006 issue of Farm World, serving Indiana, Ohio, Illinois, Kentucky, Michigan and Tennessee. | 农业 |
2017-17/0129/en_head.json.gz/8924 | Senate Leaders Deny Votes on Animal Welfare Issues During Consideration of the Farm Bill
Egg industry compromise put at risk by reckless Senate action
The Humane Society of the United States strongly objected to action taken by the U.S. Senate last night to exclude consideration of two animal welfare amendments and issues in the Farm bill. Specifically, Senate leaders denied consideration of an egg industry reform measure, requested by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and a bipartisan group of lawmakers, that would have phased out the use of barren battery cages, provided more space and enrichments for hens, and provided greater regulatory security for egg producers, given that there is a growing patchwork of conflicting state laws and food safety standards on the subject. The United Egg Producers and The HSUS worked out an agreement last July to seek a national standard by amending the four-decades-old Egg Products Inspection Act. The Senate also denied Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., an opportunity to offer an amendment that would have cracked down on illegal dogfighting and cockfighting operations, by building onto the existing federal law related to animal fighting and making it a crime to attend or to bring a minor to an animal fighting enterprise. Traditionally, the Farm bill has been a vehicle to consider some animal welfare policies, given that the U.S. Department of Agriculture oversees and enforces the Animal Welfare Act, the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act, and other related statutes and regulations related to the care of animals. “It is an outrageous subversion of the process for Senate leaders to deny any consideration of animal welfare issues in the Farm bill,” said Wayne Pacelle, president and CEO of The Humane Society of the United States. “Tens of millions of Americans care deeply about the welfare of animals, and this snub of that enormous and growing constituency and their denial of progress on critical policy reforms is unprecedented.”
The Farm bill is reauthorized every five years or so, and it deals with wide-ranging agricultural and food policies throughout the nation. “For years, we’ve been lectured to work with the agricultural community, and we did just that by forging an agreement with the egg industry that provides stability and security for egg farmers that will last for many years. The Senate, bowing to special interests in other sectors of animal agribusiness, thumbed its nose at the process of compromise and reconciliation and now has put an agreement between all the major stakeholders at risk. Here’s a case of Congress acting on behalf of special interests and defying common sense,” added Pacelle.
The American Farm Bureau Federation, the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association and the National Pork Producers Council objected to any improvements on animal welfare within the context of the Farm bill. “These groups lobby for hundreds of millions and even billions of dollars in subsidies in all of their varying forms, but they want no meaningful standards and no accountability when it comes to animal welfare,” Pacelle continued. “They are so extreme on the issue of animal welfare that they’ve even been willing to block progress sought by egg farmers—an entire sector of animal agriculture that they have nothing to do with.”
Not a single Senator has stated his or her opposition to the animal fighting legislation, and the underlying bill has been endorsed by dozens of law enforcement agencies across the country, including the Fraternal Order of Police and the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association. It would close a remaining gap in the federal law which does not currently cover spectators, who finance criminal dogfights and cockfights with their admission fees and gambling wagers. Forty-nine states already have penalties for animal fighting spectators, and the legislation seeks to bring the federal law in line with the state laws, since many animal fighting raids are multi-state and multi-jurisdictional operations. Both the 2002 and 2007 Farm bills had provisions related to animal fighting, so it was in line with past action that this issue be considered on this legislative vehicle. The underlying House bill, H.R. 2492, has nearly 200 cosponsors.
The Egg Products Inspection Act Amendments of 2012 would: require conventional cages to be replaced during an ample phase-in period with new, enriched colony housing systems that provide each egg-laying hen nearly double the amount of current space; require that, after a phase-in period, all egg-laying hens be provided with environmental enrichments, such as perches, nesting boxes and scratching areas, that will allow hens to express natural behaviors;
require labeling on all egg cartons nationwide to inform consumers of the method used to produce the eggs: “eggs from caged hens,” “eggs from hens in enriched cages,” “eggs from cage-free hens” and “eggs from free-range hens”;
prohibit feed- or water-withdrawal molting to extend the laying cycle, a practice already prohibited by the United Egg Producers Certified program;
require standards approved by the American Veterinary Medical Association for euthanasia of egg-laying hens;
prohibit excessive ammonia levels in henhouses; and
prohibit the transport and sale of eggs and egg products nationwide that don’t meet these requirements.
If enacted, the proposal would require egg producers to increase space per hen in a tiered phase-in, with the amount of space hens are given increasing, in intervals, over the next 15 to 18 years. (Phase-in schedules are more rapid in California, consistent with a ballot initiative approved earlier by that state’s voters.) Currently, the majority of hens are each provided 67 square inches of space, with up to 50 million receiving just 48 square inches. The proposed phase-in would culminate with a minimum of 124 square inches of space for white hens and 144 for brown hens nationwide.
Media Contact: Anna West, 240-751-2669, [email protected]
News: News/Feature
Plant-based cooking for beginners: Tips, tricks and easy recipes to get you started
Inside McDonald's decision to switch to cage-free eggs
10 fun facts about farm animals | 农业 |
2017-17/0129/en_head.json.gz/9151 | Subscribe for FREE now London: Menu
BanaBay Buoyant for 2017: Avocado advancement, branded plantain crisps and breaking into US
by Gaynor Selby
BanaBay managing director, Mark O'Sullivan
BanaBay is creating its own brand of Ecuadorian plantain chips while expanding its presence in the booming avocado space. The tropical fruit supplier is diversifying its product portfolio, brand and markets this year with one of its key projects - transforming South American plantains into crisps/chips for the retail market. Speaking with PBUK during the trade event last week, managing director of BanaBay, Mark O’Sullivan, takes us through the new plantain chips innovation as well as expanding the booming avocado category and breaking into new markets. Last month, the UK-headquartered company expanded its tropical fruit basket with the introduction of avocado, lime and mango varieties from Latin America as well as setting up a new export company in Ecuador to firm up supply from plantation to port. Branching out from its core banana business, the producer importer wanted to tap into the ever-increasing avocado demand and has been working with growers in the Dominican Republic to find the best varieties, including Semil 34, Hass and Carla as well as Hass from Colombia. “With avocado, there is just not enough supply for the demand,” O’Sullivan told PBUK. “You can see from last year, the development and growth in avocado which shows it’s a key product for us and we really wanted to focus on it. It’s not necessarily easy to source avocado because it’s a product everyone wants. “I think we’re in a good position because what we offer is a brand and a long-term strategy, it’s not just a trading option. We’re trying to develop something that can incorporate across a number of different products.” Avocado represents the obvious choice for BanaBay to diversify, something O’Sullivan is keen to do throughout 2017. “You see at this event, there are so many companies that are one-product focused and I’ve always been conscious that we want to do much more than that because we want to offer our customers more of a spread of products, but still built around the same quality, the same care, but through one account process. “Everyone is so busy these days so if we spread a number of products, we can make our customers’ lives easier, then it’s a natural fit.” Part of BanaBay’s strategy is a long-term process of bringing in produce and creating branded products that can, over the years, challenge some of the bigger players. “We are offering some samples of plantain chips; we’re creating two brands of plantain chips at the moment, one in conjunction with one of my partners in Ecuador and another that we’re developing from scratch in the UK. “We think the Ecuadorian brand is probably more focused around the Latin American countries, whereas for the Western and the Asian market, we need to create a different look and feel. “We are going through a process of market testing at the moment as well as brand creation, and we’ve brought a new graphic designer into the business so all of our designs are worked on internally.” O’Sullivan explains the plantain crisps are in the first phase with focus groups scheduled for later this month and the beginning of March where three different names (being kept confidential for now), plus different branding options, will be proposed. “We’re looking around May to be more exact with additional information,” he adds. Linking in to supermarkets Creating a branded product is one way BanaBay could find new links into retail, by offering an innovative product that then open doors for fresh produce lines. “We’re trying to find links into supermarkets; there might not naturally be a way in through fresh produce but a fresh produce angle could open up in another way. It’s about utilising and capitalising on where there is a strength in some of the countries we are working in. “Plantain is a massive product in Ecuador and it’s so unknown in so many different areas and cultures around the world. When you try them when you’re in the country, you understand that it’s a really nice product. “And they go great with beer.” BanaBay’s mission is to bring new products into the business, but they have to feel like a natural fit, according to O’Sullivan. “I expect by July we will have the finished (plantains) product signed off ready to sell and market at different events. “In terms of processing, we’re looking at either the UK or producing directly in Ecuador. We’ve got different options at the moment from a number of manufacturers in Ecuador and one option in the UK, so we’re working through the pricing and cost assumption to come up with the best solutions.” Fresh developments Looking at BanaBay’s seasonal calendar, bananas tend to be weak during the summer months and so there are opportunities here for new produce to fill the gaps. “There are several different projects that we’re working on that could open up a number of products by the end of this year. We’re still conscious of certain periods when bananas are very weak, so we’re trying to bring in more products to make the business solid and stronger through periods of peaks and troughs that could affect financial performance. “As we go towards the back end of the year, there’s a number of citrus products and other things we’re working on. “I can’t say for definite that we have another two or three products that will be aligned. But I would say that across two different buyers of bananas, we’re working on three products which they have in their country (Egypt and Greece), that we could turn into a BanaBay branded product - watch this space.” US and UK markets BanaBay has a small team in Atlanta exploring stateside breakthroughs to expand from the current key markets of New Zealand, Korea, China, Tunisia, Moldova, Ukraine and mainland Europe. At the same time, getting back into the British market is on O’Sullivan’s mind for 2017, despite some cost implications connected with the weak pound and the fallout of Brexit. “The US and UK are the two markets you would normally think are the safe bets but it’s finding the right balance as these markets are so mature, all of the big players are there and doing very well with amazing systems to service customers, whereas we’ve always had to try and find the right niche. “The immediate impact of Brexit is obviously on currency and the confidence and stability of the financial markets. The strength of the pound taking an impact obviously affected us in our evaluations because we are mainly a dollar business but converting back to sterling. “I think it’s still far too early to understand the true dynamics of what Brexit is going to mean but if you look at the work Theresa May is doing at the moment, potentially there could be some good deals out there in the long-term, including with the US.” BanaBay did supply the British market but withdrew two years ago. Could that change? “I’m always positive about what Britain can do as a nation and I’m sure Britain will find a way to be strong because we’re very innovative in our thinking and we have some amazing people in the UK. Businesses always find a way to move forward. “We feel that by diversifying across our products and by improving our banana programmes and our costs linked to that, the UK could be a good market for us. “We’re doing more analysis and I wouldn’t be surprised to see BanaBay coming back to the UK.” All stories
Your e-mail address will be used solely in case we have a
question about your submission.It will not be published or used for marketing.
All Purchasing Stories
All Supply Stories
All Insight Stories
All Marketing & PR Stories
All Services Stories
All Academia Stories
Produce Mystery Shopper
© 2017 Produce Business UK
SUBSCRIBE FOR FREE NOW | 农业 |
2017-17/0129/en_head.json.gz/9751 | AMERICAN SHEEP INDUSTRY TRANSMITS PRIORITIES TO THE NEW ADMINISTRATIONJan. 5, 2017Source: American Sheep Industry Association news release
In preparation for the new year and new administration, the American Sheep Industry Association, on behalf of the nation's 88,000 sheep producers, provided the Trump Administration a list of priorities they hope will be considered for immediate action. Burton Pfliger, ASI President and North Dakota sheep producer said America's sheep producers are struggling amidst the last eight years of regulatory rampage.
"It is no secret that all of agriculture has been over-burdened with regulation and that has had a significant impact on our ability to compete globally," said Pfliger. "From the current administration's 'waters of the United States' rule to the restrictions on grazing permits in bighorn sheep habitat without compensation, there are a number of issues ripe for the new administration to tackle."
America's sheep producers are asking the Trump administration to look at ways the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Interior and the Department of Labor can immediately take action to stabilize the rural economy. These actions include robust Wildlife Services predation management, supporting the work of the U.S. Sheep Experiment Station and delisting wolves and grizzly bears under the Endangered Species Act. Additionally, protecting the health of the domestic herd by withdrawing rules allowing imports from countries with a known history of Foot and Mouth Disease and publishing the final rule on scrapie in sheep and goats are top priorities.
"The specific issues outlined in our letter are commonsense requests that would immediately benefit sheep producers and the local communities they support," said Pfliger. "In addition to regulatory reform, we are hopeful President-elect Trump's administration will focus on fair trade and re-opening markets lost to U.S. lamb. Japan remains closed to our producers and the United Kingdom and European Union maintain significant barriers to lamb trade. Prioritizing open access and free trade will expand our opportunities for export and allow our producers to capitalize on growing markets."
ASI is hopeful the new administration will recognize the role of America's sheep ranchers in managing private land and federal allotments to preserve habitat and natural resources to benefit wildlife and rural economies. Tweet | 农业 |
2017-17/0129/en_head.json.gz/10678 | 2017 Cotton Producer Tour of Cotton Incorporated Headquarters Apr 14, 2017 Make sure hay donations are properly inspected before moving Apr 19, 2017 John Bradley: Still leading the innovation charge Apr 13, 2017 To weather ag downturn: ‘Keep it simple’ Apr 17, 2017 Soybean rust in 2006 Beware ill winds bearing gifts
Forrest Laws Farm Press Editorial Staff | Feb 10, 2006
Mississippi's lone encounter with Asian soybean rust in 2005 had a happy ending. “We had one producer in Mississippi who had soybean rust in three fields in George County,” says Billy Moore, retired Extension plant pathologist with Mississippi State University. “When we found it outside Lucedale, we suggested he spray with a fungicide. He sprayed with Headline. He had heavy rust just prior to leaf drop but made an excellent yield with that one application of fungicide.” Moore, who has been working “part-time” with MSU's Soybean Management and Application of Research and Technology or SMART program almost since its inception, says Mississippi soybean growers may wonder what all the fuss was about since Asian soybean rust seemed to be a no-show in 2005. But rust could have turned up in more places than George County if environmental conditions had been right, he told farmers attending the Delta Ag Expo in Cleveland, Miss. “We had spores throughout Mississippi last year, including in the Delta,” he said. “There were even spores found in the northern United States at a population high enough that you could identify them as the fungus that causes soybean rust. “But the one thing that was missing was the proper environment.” Moore said three ingredients are needed for the development of Asian soybean rust: (1) A susceptible host, (2) a disease pathogen and (3) the proper environmental conditions. “100 percent of our soybeans are susceptible because they have no resistance to soybean rust,” he said, noting that researchers are investigating 24 lines for possible resistance to the disease. “You have to have a pathogen that has to be blown in. If it's not blown in, you won't have the disease because the fungus is not there. And it was brought in last year, late in the season. If you have don't have the proper environment, you won't have rust.” Leading up to the 2005 season, growers heard predictions of a 40 percent reduction in soybean yields in the Mid-South and 10 percent nationally if Asian soybean rust became established at the critical stage of development or R1/R2 or flowering. “Didn't happen, did it?” said Moore. “Those predictions were made prior to the Environmental Protection Agency giving approval for a number of rust control combinations that will prevent the disease if applied at the proper time. “I don't think we will have that kind of loss because you folks know almost as much about soybean rust as we do. You've heard enough about it.” That's not to say that the disease shouldn't be treated with respect — and with fungicides — when the proper conditions exist for its development. New research by LSU AgCenter scientists shows just how prolific the fungus can be when those conditions occur. Ray Schneider, the LSU plant pathologist who was the first to find soybean rust in the United States in 2004, had test plots near Quincy, Fla., where rust occurred in some farmers' fields and on the University of Florida Experiment Station last fall. His research was conducted over a five-day period. He and fellow researchers calculated that the plots were producing 80 billion urediniospores per acre per day for each of those five days. “That's a lot of fungi,” said Moore. “If you consider that 50 percent of those are dead when they come out of the canopy, which is very likely because solar radiation kills them, and, if you consider that another 25 percent were dead by the time they reached the field, you have 25 percent left. You would still have enough urediniospores being produced by one acre of soybeans to contaminate several million acres of soybeans in this country. It just takes the right environment.” Moore used maps produced by Bart Freeland of USDA's World Agricultural Outlook Board in Stoneville, Miss., to illustrate the location of Asian soybean rust discoveries in the United States in the fall of 2004 and in 2005. In September 2004, Hurricane Ivan brought spores in from South America and deposited them in nine states. Rust was subsequently discovered on late soybeans in 14 locations from south Louisiana to southeast Missouri to South Carolina. As expected, the disease did not overwinter north of a line running along the Gulf Coast areas of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Florida and cutting across the central portion of Florida in 2004-05. “It depends on how cold the temperatures get,” said Moore. “But what's the situation that exists out there right now?” (Moore was speaking on a rainy, January day with temperatures in the 40s. January 2005 was the second warmest in Mississippi in 50 years.) Even though the disease did not survive the winter of 2004-05 in the Mid-South, scientists believe Asian soybean rust spores were blown into the region from overwintering sites in central Florida in April and again in June. The latter occurred beginning on June 8 when mean air currents shifted and began blowing to the northwest. “On June 11, Tropical Storm Arlene went through the same area where urediniospores were being blown from known infected areas into the Gulf,” he said. “It picked up those urediniospores and moved them straight up the Mississippi-Alabama state into Georgia and into southern Mississippi. “Alabama and Georgia were having frequent rains. It was so dry in parts of south Mississippi they were having to feed cattle. This was the difference in environmental conditions — you have to have moisture.” A short time later, scientists discovered soybean rust in sentinel plots near Foley in south Alabama and in the Florida panhandle. More discoveries followed in Alabama and Georgia, which received more rainfall than south Mississippi. Rust did show up in a small area of a sentinel plot in southeast Mississippi on July 13. Those weather patterns continued into the fall with numerous discoveries of the disease being made in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina and South Carolina. Scientists also found outbreaks of the disease in southeast Texas. What will happen in 2006? Moore said he recently talked with Scott Izard, a Penn State University researcher who is working on the computer modeling program that could help predict where rust will occur, triggering fungicide applications for the disease. Izard was in a kudzu plot in Florida and had been in several areas of the state looking at other kudzu plots. “The kudzu was loaded with rust,” said Moore. “They had five kudzu plots with fungus down there last fall. Why they didn't kill them I don't know. We tried to talk them into (doing so), but, nevertheless, they left them down there.” In Texas, scientists have also been watching a field plot of kudzu, one acre in size, between Beaumont and Houston. “The Extension plant pathologist told me that 90 percent of that plot is dead and that he was planning to check on the rest of it the next week,” said Moore. “Hopefully, those spores in Texas will be dead by the time we plant our soybeans because we can get wind blown in from Florida or we can get wind blown in from Texas, and, in the Midwest, it can do the same thing.” Sentinel plots will again be the early warning system for Mid-South soybean producers, said Alan Blaine, Extension soybean specialist and interim head of the Northeast Research and Extension Center at Verona, Miss. “We're not going to have as many as we did last year, but we're going to plant those across the coastal area and then come up the Mississippi River a short ways,” he said. “We will plant them extremely early because what we found in the field is that once the plant starts blooming it becomes much more susceptible to the disease. “If we put those plots in in late January or March before you begin planting, they will bloom earlier and we should be able to pick up the disease then.” e-mail: [email protected] | 农业 |
2017-17/0129/en_head.json.gz/10756 | Gardening SpacesIndoor GardensHouseplants Diseases of Amaryllis Diseases of Amaryllis
Diseases of Amaryllis
Amaryllis have large trumpet-shaped flowers that grow on thick stems in clusters of four or five to a single stem. The leaves of the amaryllis do not grow on the stems, but grow from the base of the plant. The colors can be solid red, white, pink, salmon and orange or they can be multicolored or striped, mostly in pink or red combined with white. The flowers are so large that the stalks cannot support them and the plant needs to be tied to a stake. Amaryllis are susceptible to several serious, and sometimes fatal, diseases.
Red Leaf Spot Disease
Red leaf spot disease is caused by a fungus and appears as spots on the leaves. They will develop into cankers with red borders at the base of the stalks and the base of the leave. Eventually the leaves will turn yellow and drop off. The flower stalks may become weak and break off, but it is not known to be a fatal disease. There is a chance to prevent the disease by using only sterile potting soil. If it does occur, there are effective fungicides.
Mosaic is a viral disease. The leaves will develop a yellow mottling pattern, which will grow and develop small spots or streaks of yellow and green. The plant will become stunted and it will get worse year after year. If the plant is able to bloom, the leaves, the stalks and the flowers themselves will be smaller than they are supposed to be. Unfortunately, there is no cure or way to control the disease and the infected plants should be destroyed.
Root and Bulb Rot
Root and bulb rot are caused by fungi and attack young seedlings. A black lesion may appear at the soil line, which will cause the stems to fall over. The plant will become pale, fail to grow, wither and die. There is no cure, but there are ways to prevent the disease from getting established. Wet the pot with a fungicide before planting and pot in sterilized soil. Do not reuse a pot or soil from an infected plant.
Botrytis Blight
Botrytis blight is a fungal disease that strikes when the temperatures are too cool-60s to low 70s--and the plant does not get proper air circulation. Damp conditions, humidity that reaches at least 92 percent and moving infected plants can cause the spores to spread. It can infect the plant in just 14 hours. It will appear as small brown spots on the flowers. In the worst cases, the spots will merge and a gray web-looking growth will appear. Pick up any fallen debris as it acts as a breeding ground for the fungus. Keep water off of the plant itself. Once it hits, there is no stopping it.
Amaryllis Diseases
Red Blotch Information
Amaryllis, Plant fungus, Botrytis Blight About this Author
Regina Sass has been a writer for 10 years, penning articles for publications in the real estate and retail industries. Her online experience includes writing, advertising and editing for an educational website. Sass is a member of the Society of Professional Journalists. New in Houseplants
Root Rot of a Rubber Tree
Indoor Calathea Plants
Houseplants in Low Humidity
How to Make a Macrame Plant Hanger
Bugs in Indoor Tropical Plant Soil
House Plant Pollutants
How to Raise House Plants
Indoor Growing Conditions for Plants
How to Pot Amaryllis
What Indoor Plants Help to Clean the Air? | 农业 |
2017-17/0129/en_head.json.gz/11253 | August is National U.S. Farm-Raised Catfish Month, and it’s a great opportunity to enjoy the many delicious preparations of this versatile, all-American fish. Long-regarded as a Southern staple, U.S. Farm-Raised Catfish is now being embraced across the country not only because of its health benefits, quality assurance and environmental safety, but also because it is American-grown, and widely available.
The month of August was designated as National Catfish Month by Congress in the late 1980s to pay tribute to an outstanding American product that contributes to our nation’s economy, while providing consumers with a healthy, safe and great-tasting food.
The majority of U.S. Farm-Raised Catfish is produced on family-owned farms in the states of Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas and Louisiana, where many of these growers are second- or third-generation farmers.
Catfish farmers feed their fish grain-based pellets made primarily of soybeans and corn, which are grown by American farmers. When the catfish reach market size, they are harvested and delivered to processing plants, many of which are located in rural areas where they are major sources of employment and the primary driver for the area’s economy.
"Our goal at The Catfish Institute is to educate consumers about what a wonderful, home-grown product we have in U.S. Farm-Raised Catfish," says Roger Barlow, the organization’s president. "When consumers purchase catfish labeled with the U.S. Farm-Raised Catfish seal, they are supporting our nation’s farmers and providing jobs to tens of thousands of Americans."
Whatever your reason for choosing U.S. Farm-Raised Catfish – whether it is because of its great taste and versatility, to support domestic farmers or because you are concerned about the safety of imported products – you can be confident that U.S. Farm-Raised Catfish is a safe, healthy, responsible choice for you and your family.
"It’s important to remind people how much the U.S. Farm-Raised Catfish industry matters – both economically and as a stable, sustainable food source," says Barlow. "This August, when we are in the grocery store or at the restaurant, we need to remember to support our hardworking American farmers by purchasing products grown in the U.S.A. – and that includes U.S. Farm-Raised Catfish."
To find a variety of U.S. Farm-Raised Catfish recipes, visit www.UScatfish.com. | 农业 |
2017-17/0129/en_head.json.gz/12687 | 2017 Cotton Producer Tour of Cotton Incorporated Headquarters Apr 14, 2017 Make sure hay donations are properly inspected before moving Apr 19, 2017 John Bradley: Still leading the innovation charge Apr 13, 2017 To weather ag downturn: ‘Keep it simple’ Apr 17, 2017 Rice group pleased with Cuban trip
Bruce Schultz | May 21, 2004
Linda Zaunbrecher of Gueydan, La., is ready to go back to Cuba, but she said she hopes next time she goes as a tourist. Zaunbrecher was the only Louisiana representative on a recent five-day goodwill organized by the USA Rice Federation. More rice sales to Cuba could benefit the industry, according to LSU AgCenter economist Mike Salassi, who said Cuba was the largest buyer of American rice when the U.S. trade embargo was imposed in the 1960s. As for the April trip, Zaunbrecher, who is active with the Rice Federation and also represents the LSU AgCenter on the Council for Agricultural Research, Extension and Teaching, said luck more or less placed her there. Originally, rice farmer Jackie Loewer of Branch, La., was scheduled to go, but when he couldn't make it, he recommended Zaunbrecher instead. “I got in on it because it was planting time, and I was free to go,” said Zaunbrecher, whose husband Wayne is a rice farmer. Cuba currently buys a limited amount of American rice from Riceland Foods, Zaunbrecher said, and agreements were signed during the trip that could lead to more rice sales. But mostly the meetings were a way for the Americans to meet officials with the Cuban trade ministry called ALIMPORT, she said. “We were a goodwill group,” Zaunbrecher explained. Salassi, the LSU AgCenter economist, points out there's no way of knowing if the demand would be the same as it was before the trade embargo of the 1960s, but he said Cuba “would be a good market for us because it's close.” USA Rice Chairman Gary Sebree, a rice grower from Arkansas, said the trip strengthened the relationship with buyers and consumers of rice in Cuba. “Cuba is estimated to import 550,000 tons of rice this year; however, only a fifth of that comes from the United States due to U.S.-imposed export restrictions,” Sebree said. The USA Rice delegation was among an estimated 400 farmers and food traders in Havana to make trade contacts. The group met with ALIMPORT, Cuba's food import agency, and pledges were signed to continue joint promotion efforts and to work to create a more open trade environment. One of the highlights was hearing a speech by Cuban leader Fidel Castro, according to Zaunbrecher, who said she was only 20 feet from the 77-year-old dictator whose remarks were translated by an interpreter. “He looked frail,” she said. But he gave a speech filled with statistics and details, she said, and he didn't appear to be reading from any notes. “I was pretty much in awe, just being there for that to happen,” Zaunbrecher said. Castro excused himself from a steak and lobster dinner that followed his speech, Zaunbrecher said. But before leaving he gave assurances that American companies would be treated fairly. “He would point his finger and say, ‘You don't have to worry. You're going to get your money,’” Zaunbrecher said. While full two-way trade between the United States and Cuba is prohibited, cash sales of U.S. agricultural goods are allowed. Cuba has bought much of its rice from Vietnam, but the quality is inferior to American rice, Zaunbrecher said. She said the USA Rice group toured a rice mill and farm. Some of the rice fields appeared to be stressed, she said, but the explanation was given that fertilizer wasn't obtained when it was needed. “Wayne (her husband) would not have liked the size of the panicles,” Zaunbrecher said of the rice plants she saw. She said the old architecture in parts of Havana reminded her of the French Quarter in New Orleans, but many of the buildings need maintenance. “What I could do with a pressure washer there,” she said. She said American vehicles from the 1950s fill the streets, and photos of old movie stars who frequented Cuba before Castro took power lined their hotel walls. “It was like being in another time,” she said. “Some of us dated ourselves by being able to recognize the year of some of the cars.” Zaunbrecher recalled that Castro came to power in Cuba in 1959 when she was a student at Southwestern Louisiana Institute (now the University of Louisiana at Lafayette). Several of her friends were dating Cuban students who returned to their homeland, she said. “Younger people have studied this in history, but I lived it.” While the USA Rice delegation was in Cuba, the U.S. House of Representatives Cuba Working Group also was in Cuba, Zaunbrecher said. Many of the congressmen on the panel want to lift the general ban on travel to the island nation by Americans. Zaunbrecher and her USA Rice colleagues were allowed to travel to Cuba by the U.S. government because they were on a trade-related visit. By law, American tourists are barred from legally going to Cuba. Bruce Schultz writes for the LSU AgCenter. | 农业 |
2017-17/0129/en_head.json.gz/14560 | Quinoa questions remain as UN year concludes
The International Year of Quinoa raised awareness of the crop, but backers say questions still remain for efforts to increase production of the crop.
Matthew WeaverCapital Press
Published on December 31, 2013 10:31AM
Matthew Weaver/Capital Press
Washington State University graduate student Hannah Walters talks about her work on quinoa in a field on the WSU organic farm as researchers from around the world listen during an international research symposium Aug. 12 in Pullman, Wash. The United Nations’ International Year of Quinoa helped to boost awareness of the crop and its possible role in alleviating hunger, industry members say.
Buy this photo The United Nations-sponsored International Year of Quinoa raised the crop’s profile in the U.S. and elsewhere, backers say, but hurdles remain before it can be widely grown.The UN Food and Agriculture Organization declared 2013 the International Year of Quinoa, heralding the crop’s nutritional value and adaptability.Quinoa is unique in that its popularity in the U.S. and elsewhere has driven up its price to the point where some people in the nations where it is commonly grown can no longer afford it.Farmers in Bolivia receive about 75 percent of the export price, about $1.36 per pound, compared to the consumer price, which ranges from $6.36 to $8 a pound in U.S. supermarkets, said Salomon Salcedo, senior policy officer for the year of quinoa.“Quinoa has been, and still is, a family farming crop,” Salcedo said. “We very much would like to keep it that way, because quinoa demand has been growing exponentially over the past years. Quinoa prices have skyrocketed, so we believe this is a big opportunity for farmers who are quinoa producers to take advantage of this growing market.”Quinoa, a species of goose foot, produces a gluten-free seed that can be substituted for wheat and other grains. It is commonly grown in parts of South America but is being adapted for cultivation in the Pacific Northwest and other regions of the world.University of Copenhagen professor Sven-Erik Jacobsen, who delivered the keynote address during an international quinoa symposium at Washington State University in Pullman, Wash., says the next steps to satisfy market demand have not been defined.“There are more questions than answers at this point,” said Albion, Wash., farmer Ian Clark, who raised 2.5 acres of quinoa last summer.Clark considers cleaning and processing of the crop to be the biggest unknown. Without a specialized cleaning plant, it’s difficult to remove the saponin coating from the seed. There’s interest in building a plant, but that would be a major investment, Clark said, and the location remains to be determined.“Without a practical way of cleaning it, we have no way to send the crop to market,” he said.Other unknowns include dealing with quinoa’s low heat tolerance and weed control.“We’re linking up farmers with distributors and consumers,” said Washington State University breeder Kevin Murphy. “We’re trying to get entrepreneurial interest in development of a quinoa processing facility, somewhere in Washington or the Pacific Northwest.”Murphy will continue his work to find a variety suited for the region. Future research efforts will include insect and disease resistance. Murphy is collaborating with researchers who will examine quinoa’s nutritional value and end-use quality, and where it would fit into crop rotations and soil microbial activity.Even with all the unknowns, quinoa is on more people’s radar.Frank Morton, breeder and seed dealer at Wild Garden Seed in Philomath, Ore., said his company has received orders for quinoa varieties from around the world.“Not a day goes by that we aren’t sending out quinoa planting stock to someone in the U.S. or elsewhere,” he said. “Most of these orders are from folks who have never tried growing quinoa, in regions where it has never been grown.” | 农业 |
2017-17/0129/en_head.json.gz/14941 | Food shortage threat
Siphiwe F. Mkhize
We live in a world where nearly one billion people suffer from chronic food insecurity. An estimated 25 000 people die each day from malnutrition-related causes. Health experts advise us that chronic hunger has major health consequences, including decreased child survival, impaired cognitive and physical development in children, and weaker immune system function, including a lowered resistance to HIV/Aids.
These severe humanitarian consequences of hunger are cause for concern. But we have an even bigger problem. The global food supply is increasingly at risk from forces that threaten the fundamental welfare of a large share of the world’s population, and the stability of major regions of the globe.
A dangerous confluence of factors threatens to severely limit food production in some regions as the world’s population continues to expand. Between 1970 and 1990, global aggregate farm yield rose by an average of two percent each year. Since 1990, however, aggregate farm yield has risen by an annual average of just 1,1%. The Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO) and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) projects that growth in farm yields will continue to fall.
Here are the basic parameters of the problem. First, the world’s population is projected to increase to about 9,2 billion people by 2050. Growing affluence in China, India and elsewhere is increasing demand for resource-intensive meat and dairy products. The world’s farmers will have to double their output by 2050. Second, food security is closely tied to volatile energy costs. Farming is an energy-intensive business. Crops have to be transported efficiently to market, and petroleum-based fertilisers and pesticides are widely used. Energy price spikes in the future are likely to hit with even greater ferocity than the spike in 2007 and 2008. Third, water scarcity will worsen in response to population growth, urbanisation, land-use pressures and the effects of climate change. According to a recent report by the Royal Institute of International Affairs, half a billion people live in countries with chronic water shortages, a figure that is expected to rise to four billion by 2050. Fourth, climate change is challenging farmers on every continent to deal with altered weather patterns, novel agricultural pests and new water conditions. Despite these alarming trends, investment in agriculture has tumbled in recent decades. By 2007, rich countries devoted a mere four percent of their foreign assistance to agriculture. In Africa, which has the most severe food problems, donor aid to the farm sector plunged from U.S.$4,1 billion in 1989 to just $1,9 billion in 2006. African ministers of agriculture who took a resolution in Maputo to commit 10% of their budget to agriculture, have still to deliver. Africa’s per capita production of maize, its most important crop, has dropped by 14% since 1980. Equally troubling are sharp cutbacks in research into new technologies, farming techniques and seed varieties that could increase yields, cope with changing climate conditions, battle new pests and diseases, and make food more nutritious. Over the long term, satisfying global food demand can be achieved only by raising yields per hectare. Increasing hectares under production will not meet the growth in food demand. Our overall food security strategy must restore agriculture programmes to prominence.
In recent years, development investment has flowed to urban areas because cities were seen as the drivers of growth. And trade policy of both developed and developing countries has too often focused on protecting domestic farmers, rather than creating well-functioning global markets. Many governments, especially in Europe and Africa, have rejected biotechnology advancements that are necessary to meet future demand. Without action, we may experience food riots and warfare over food resources. We will have to contend with mass migration and intensifying health issues stemming from malnutrition.
South Africa as a leader in Africa is expected to address this issue at a global level. We formulated the African Union (AU) Comprehensive African Agricultural Development Programme (CAADP) which was adopted by African ministers of agriculture some years ago. South Africa has adopted an Anti-poverty Strategy to co-ordinate a sustained and decisive campaign that would respond to the ravages of poverty. The G8 ministers of agriculture will meet in Treviso, Italy, from April 18 to April 20. In addition to agriculture leaders from the U.S., Canada, Japan, Germany, the United Kingdom, France, Italy and Russia, agriculture ministers from Brazil, China, India, Mexico, South Africa, Egypt and the Czech Republic are expected to attend this year’s meeting. I believe that contributing towards achieving global food security is an opportunity for South Africa. We are an undisputed leader in agricultural production and technology. A more focused effort on our part to join with other nations to increase yields, create economic opportunities for the rural poor and broaden agricultural knowledge could bring a new era in South African diplomacy.
• Siphiwe F. Mkhize PhD is Minister Counsellor (Agriculture) in the Embassy of the Republic of South Africa, Washington.
Nelspruit Jobs | 农业 |
2017-17/0129/en_head.json.gz/15165 | South African Citrus Demand expected strong for South African citrus
By Andy Nelson
The South African citrus industry is expected to ship 14% more fruit this year than last year, and industry officials and importers say they’ll have no problem finding enough demand to match those higher volumes.In the past 10 years, Fort Pierce, Fla.-based DNE World Fruit Sales never received any South African clementines in May, said Tom Cowan, South African citrus category manager. This year DNE expects to do just that, with some early shipments coming in the third week of May. However, Cowan says he’s not worried about product entering a full pipeline.“We should fit right in, from what retailers are telling us,” he said. “California should be done with mandarins.”Clementines continue to gain favor in the U.S., Cowan said. “They’ve taken away navel business in the winter, and we see it being a big item for the summer citrus program,” he said. “It’s a very popular piece of fruit.”South African navels should be in high demand as well, with little chance of Chile, whose navels were allowed in the U.S. beginning last year, dampening demand, Cowan said.Both countries shipped about 1.5 million boxes last summer, he said, and this summer the joint total could be in the 3.5 million to 4 million box range.“I think there will be some offers out there for retailers to offer customers,” he said. “One thing retailers like about summer citrus is it’s added dollars they didn’t have before. And citrus can take a full mark-up. It’s a profitable item.”South African shippers and importers are a lot less nervous about Chile entering the navel deal than they were last year, said David Mixon, senior vice president and chief marketing officer of Vero Beach, Fla.-based Seald Sweet International.“Last year everybody was very, very concerned,” he said. “There wasn’t a good handle on the the amount of fruit the market could bear. But it proved to be very achievable for everyone,” Mixon said.Peru and Australia along with South Africa and Chile among those enjoying good navel demand in 2009, he said.Things should only get better, Mixon said.“I think this market is just seeing the tip of the iceberg of what can be utilized,” he said. Montreal-based Fisher Capespan Inc. also is optimistic heading into the summer of 2010, despite having Chile in the mix again, said Marc Solomon, the company’s president and chief executive officer.“Based on last year’s experience, South African growers are confident they can grow (the size of the North American deal),” he said. “Chile has an advantage on the West Coast on freight, but I think they can co-exist and both do well.”It all comes back to quality, said Joretha Guldenhuys, chief executive officer of the Citrusdal, South Africa-based Western Cape Citrus Producers Forum.“The quality of the South African fruit is outstanding year over year and importers, retailers and consumers know that,” she said. “Given the demand of the consumer for quality product, we have every confidence there will be ongoing and continued growth.”That should also mean strong market conditions for South African fruit this summer, Geldenhuys said.“Taste and quality drive demand and the excellent quality of our fruit commands good prices,” she said. “We expect to achieve similar prices to last year.”The South African industry also is benefiting from an industrywide acceptance of all summer citrus, regardless of where it came from, Geldenhuys said.“We recently completed market research among national and regional supermarket buyers of summer citrus, and they were unanimous in saying that summer citrus continues to be a growing category,” Geldenhuys said. “We are going to be a part of that growth.” New competition from Chile, which last summer was given the green light to export navels to the U.S. for the first time, does not overly concern Geldenhuys.In 2009, Chile shipped about 23,000 tons, according to the Chilean Fresh Fruit Association, Sonoma, Calif.“We did well in 2009 and expect to continue to do well in this market this year and in coming years,” she said.“Our navels have built up a great reputation over the more than 10 years we have been shipping to the U.S. for having excellent eating quality. This, coupled with our reputation for being a reliable shipper of superior fruit, will continue to stand us in good stead.” Topics:
demand expected strong for south african citrus About the Author:
, markets editor
Andy Nelson joined The Packer as a staff writer in 2001. He became the paper's Handling & Distributing editor in 2005 and markets editor in 2006. Before joining Farm Journal Media, Nelson was a staff writer for The Kansas City Star. View All Posts | 农业 |
2017-17/0129/en_head.json.gz/15448 | Speculation shrouds grain demand, rejections from Egypt
By Jade Markus Published: March 17, 2017 Crops, Markets
The Nile River at Cairo. (CIA.gov) CNS Canada — Egypt, the world’s biggest buyer of wheat, rejected three cargoes of the grain last week — its first rejections since it overhauled its inspection system and relaxed its import policy last fall.
Three cargoes of wheat — two Russian, one Argentinian — purchased by Egyptian grain buyer GASC were rejected last week at their ports of origin by inspectors citing quality issues.
Those rejections are the first under Egypt’s new inspection system, set up last fall after the country moved its ergot policy closer to international standards.
Egypt has increased its buying to the highest level this time of year since about 2012-13, according to data from news agency Bloomberg.
The country is trying to stockpile wheat, doubling its reserves from three million tonnes before the country’s harvest, expected in April, local media said, translating a statement from Egypt’s supply ministry.
That indicates the country is becoming savvy in purchases essential to its citizens as it accumulates stocks, according to one U.S. trader.
“They don’t want any bad cargoes. They want high-quality wheat that they can stockpile for a long time in their state reserves, and not have to worry about it,” said Terry Reilly, senior commodity analyst at Futures International in Chicago.
“In my opinion, they’re just getting more savvy in the way they buy wheat.”
Jay Roddy, editorial manager for the Tahrir Institute for Middle East Policy in Washington, D.C., sees other issues at play — “but it’s not quite clear what they are,” he said in an emailed statement.
“Wheat has featured heavily in Russian-Egyptian relations, but despite deepening ties, the Egyptian government has rejected several Russian cargoes,” Roddy said.
As a U.S. dollar shortage heated up last year, there was speculation that shipments were rejected so the government wouldn’t have to pay, and it’s not clear if that’s still an issue, he said.
The country has implemented a number of austerity measures, which caused domestic prices for food to soar, and the Egyptian pound to drop sharply.
However, those measures also set the country up to receive a multi-year US$12 billion loan from the International Monetary Fund (IMF), which may have propped up the country’s purchasing power.
On March 7, the same day as the cargo rejections, an Arabic hashtag emerged on Twitter, which translates to “supply uprising,” after the government made changes to its bread subsidy program, which feeds millions of Egyptians.
Protests were reported as news emerged about changes to the way bread rations are managed.
Reuters last year released a report which said in some cases bakers were overstating the amount of bread sold, at a heavy price to the government.
“The government seems to have backed down on one of the most substantial issues of the bread subsidy reforms — namely, the government is keeping intact the amount of wheat bakeries can buy on their ‘gold cards’ — in hopes of placating popular frustration with food prices,” Roddy said.
Though there are mixed reports on the rationale behind Egypt’s demand, the pickup in buying from Egypt has provided much-needed support to wheat futures at the Chicago Board of Trade and highlighted the affordability of U.S. wheat.
In a tender from Egypt on Wednesday, on a FOB basis, U.S. wheat was the most affordable offer.
“The U.S. is now a little bit more competitive against the world,” Reilly said, though when considering shipping and insurance, Ukrainian wheat beat out the U.S. at US$208 a tonne.
“But the fact that the U.S., on a FOB basis, was actually mentioned, is monumental,” he said.
He expects the wheat market to trade sideways moving forward, as any further decline in futures prices should be met with increased demand.
— Jade Markus writes for Commodity News Service Canada, a Winnipeg company specializing in grain and commodity market reporting. Follow her at @jade_markus on Twitter. Comments | 农业 |
2017-17/0129/en_head.json.gz/17420 | Global Farmer Network
By: Global Farmer Network
The Global Farmer Network are farmers committed to inserting their voice and perspective in the global dialogue regarding food and nutritional security.
Farmers have been looking for a friend in Barack Obama’s cabinet, and this week they appear to have found one or two. But we could use a third.
On Wednesday, Obama introduced Tom Vilsack, a former governor of Iowa, as his pick to become the next Secretary of Agriculture. The president-elect also announced Sen. Ken Salazar of Colorado as his selection for Secretary of the Interior.
These choices send a reassuring signal to farmers who have recently grown uneasy about the composition of the incoming administration. Even so, Obama has yet to fill the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative. We are all counting on him to make a sensible decision.
Obama’s initial cabinet nominations, involving economic policy and national security, demonstrated a healthy commitment to centrism and even bipartisanship. Then the president-elect seemed to lurch to the left with the so-called ‘Green Team’, whose members include Steven Chu as Secretary of Energy, Lisa Jackson as head of the Environmental Protection Agency, and Carol Browner and Nancy Sutley as top White House advisors.
Ronald Reagan used to joke that the most terrifying words in the English language are: “I’m from the government and I’m here to help.” Many farmers worry that the Green Team’s vision of “helping” agriculture includes burdensome regulations and sky-high gas and energy prices. As we confront the global recession and food crisis, farmers and consumers alike will need policies that boost productivity rather than depress it.
Vilsack and Salazar will make sure that when the Obama cabinet meets, farmers will have a place at the table. It remains to be seen how potential disagreements with the Green Team are settled, but for the time being farmers can take comfort in knowing that their voices at least will be heard. (In the end, all disagreements are settled by the President)
Vilsack, in particular, will play a key role. Although he’s not a farmer himself, he understands farming in all of its dimensions. He’s a strong advocate of biotechnology, from the importance of GM crops to the promise of alternative fuels. Last year, he ran a climate-change panel that recommended the gradual elimination of subsidies for certain biofuels and the lowering of tariffs on Brazilian sugar ethanol.
He’s also a supporter of free trade, which is so vital to American farmers. We depend heavily on overseas customers, and rely on political leaders in Washington to expand export opportunities through smart diplomacy. But it’s primarily up to the U.S. Trade Representative--not the Secretary of Agriculture--to make sure America’s rural economy remains plugged into the global marketplace.
Earlier this month, Obama invited Rep. Xavier Becerra of California to become the Trade Representative. For those of us who have the audacity to hope that the protectionist rhetoric of the Obama campaign would transform into the common-sense reality of the Obama administration, this was a troubling development. Becerra voted against CAFTA and opposes pending trade agreements with Colombia and South Korea. Years ago, he voted for NAFTA but he now says he erred.
This week, however, Becerra snubbed Obama’s offer. The rejection gives Obama a chance to correct the mistake of having turned to Becerra in the first place.
The president-elect must make sure his administration is committed to American exports. He’ll need a person of special talents---the number one being pro-trade--- to serve as our country’s trade ambassador in these challenging times.
The World Bank recently projected that in 2009, world trade will actually shrink, for the first time in a generation. Separately, the Copenhagen Consensus has argued that the successful conclusion of the Doha round of trade talks will deliver billions of dollars of economic benefits to the developing countries--without costing American taxpayers a penny in foreign aid.
Our next Trade Representative must fight economic contraction rather than surrender to it. With the right kind of leadership, trade can become a tool to improve our current economic lot.
Now it’s up to Obama to make an appointment that rivals the soundness he displayed in picking Vilsack. Dean Kleckner, an Iowa farmer, chairs Truth About Trade & Technology. www.truthabouttrade.org | 农业 |
2017-17/0129/en_head.json.gz/17610 | U.S. WHEAT ASSOCIATES DIRECTORS ELECT 2017/18 OFFICERSFeb. 7, 2017Source: U.S. Wheat Associates news release
The U.S. Wheat Associates (USW) Board of Directors elected new officers for the 2017/18 (July to June) fiscal year at their meeting Feb. 2, 2017, in Washington, DC. The board elected Doug Goyings of Paulding, OH, as Secretary-Treasurer, current Secretary-Treasurer Chris Kolstad of Ledger, MT, as Vice Chairman and current Vice Chairman Mike Miller of Ritzville, WA, as Chairman. These farmers will take their new leadership roles at the USW Board meeting in July 2017 in Annapolis, MD, when current Chairman Jason Scott of Easton, MD, will become Past Chairman. USW is the export market development organization for the U.S. wheat production industry. "I think it's important for growers to give back and U.S. Wheat Associates has had such a strong and positive influence on my family's farming operation as well as many other farms across the nation," said Goyings. "With many pressing issues for wheat, we need a strong, united industry guiding us forward and I am honored to be a part of the leadership team working to continue to positively affect U.S. wheat farmers." "I'm happy to congratulate Doug Goyings for winning the election, I think he'll make an excellent Secretary-Treasurer," said Scott. "U.S. Wheat Associates has a strong board, filled with dedicated farmers that are willingly take time out from their own operations to represent wheat farmers. Without this type of leadership our wheat industry would not have the strong foundation and market share it does today. I look forward to working with the team to continue to promote the U.S. wheat grower's competitive advantage, which is the quality and reliability of supply." Doug Goyings' family has been farming in northwestern Ohio since 1884. Together with his wife Diane, son Jeremy, daughter-in-law Jessica and his twin grandsons, Goyings grows soft red winter (SRW) and has hosted numerous trade teams on their farm. With more than 35 years of experience representing wheat and Ohio agriculture, Goyings has been a member of the USW board while serving as a director for the Ohio Small Grains Checkoff Board since 2009 and is a past chairman of the USW Long-Range Planning Committee. He is also a past-president of his local Farm Bureau and has previously sat on the board of directors for the Ohio Veal Growers Inc., Creston Veal, Inc. and Paulding Landmark, Inc. Chris Kolstad's family farm is located in Montana's "Golden Triangle" region. He and his wife Vicki have four children, including their son Cary who is a partner in their operation and the fifth generation of their family to farm. Kolstad grows hard red winter (HRW) wheat, dark northern spring wheat and durum, barley and dry peas. As a commissioner of the Montana Wheat and Barley Committee, Kolstad has represented his state on the USW board since 2012. He is also an active member of the Montana Grain Growers Association and Montana Farm Bureau. His community leadership includes serving on his local school board, as treasurer for his family's church and has been a regular blood donor since 1972. Mike Miller is a fourth generation farmer who operates a dryland wheat farm and grows multiple crops on a separate, irrigated farm in east central Washington. He has served on many local, state and national boards, and is in his third term on the Washington Grain Commission and his fifth year as a USW director representing Washington. Miller is also very active in supporting wheat research and development. He and his wife, Marci, have three children. A sixth generation farmer from Maryland's Eastern Shore, Jason Scott is the farm manager of Walnut Hill Farms where he produces soft red winter (SRW) wheat, row crops and vegetables. Scott is also an Independent Sales Representative for Pioneer Hi-Bred Int'l, under the title Scott's Seed, L.L.C. A founding member of the Dorchester County Young Farmers, past president of the Maryland Grain Producers Utilization Board and the Maryland Grain Producers Association, Scott is no stranger to industry leadership. In 2011, he was presented the Maryland Young Farmers Achievement Award. In his eight years on the USW Board, Scott has represented his state and USW on two board team delegations to Africa and Europe and served as Secretary-Treasurer, Vice Chairman and Chairman as well as on several USW committees. He and his wife Dr. Casey Scott have a young daughter and son. USW's mission is to "develop, maintain, and expand international markets to enhance the profitability of U.S. wheat producers and their customers." USW activities in more than 100 countries are made possible through producer checkoff dollars managed by 19 state wheat commissions and cost-share funding provided by USDA/Foreign Agricultural Service. USW maintains 17 offices strategically located around the world to help wheat buyers, millers, bakers, wheat food processors and government officials understand the quality, value and reliability of all six classes of U.S. wheat. For more information, visit our website at www.uswheat.org. Tweet | 农业 |
2017-17/0129/en_head.json.gz/18977 | Spectrezine Home › Stop this cruel trade
in: Editorial
October 3, 2007 17:36 | by Steve McGiffen
The outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease in the UK has once again drawn attention to problems which have their origin in the conditions under which farm animals are kept. These conditions are very often not only abysmally cruel, but also injurious both to the health of the animal in question and to anyone who might later eat the unfortunate creature, or anything produced by or from it.
Given that agriculture in Europe floats on a sea of subsidies - and never forget that this means your money and mine - it would be quite easy to improve this situation, simply by making these payments dependent on strict compliance with rules designed to eliminate unnecessary suffering and protect human health and the environment. Use of subsidies to pursue goals which do not relate directly to production levels, known in the EU jargon as 'cross-compliance measures', is permitted under the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and would give farmers an incentive to improve their practices.
Unfortunately, existing EU rules represent an attempt to "balance" public concerns over health, as well as sensitivities regarding cruelty to animals, against the corporate hunger for profit. It is, after all, hardly surprising that cruelty to animals is so widespread, when you consider what the owners of capital are happy to do to people. It would, therefore, be bad enough if the EU's inadequate standards were actually enforced. In reality, however, they are widely ignored.
Many of the worst abuses concern the transport of farm animals from one part of the EU to another, or even beyond. The existence of such a trade is an abuse in itself, of course. With rare exceptions, transport of live animals is unnecessary and enforcement of decent standards of treatment would immediately make it cheaper and more profitable to slaughter them before exporting their refrigerated meat.
However, while this trade continues, it must be properly regulated so that maximum journey times are respected. EU law requires that before animals are transported a journey plan be lodged with the relevant authorities, yet from that point on the sector is almost entirely self-policing. Self-policing can only work, if at all, in sectors where most operators obey the rules and stand to lose out if a minority gains a competitive advantage by cutting corners.
This is not the case here. On the contrary, operators, vets and the public authorities seem to be involved in a conspiracy of blind-eye turning. National authorities fear putting their own farmers and food producers at a disadvantage if they enforce the rules and other EU member states do not. A GPS-based system could be centralised, with national authorities being informed of abuses and obliged to act.
Enforcement of the existing rules would be a big step forward, but their inadequacy would mean that animals would continue to suffer. They would also still be exposed to the dangerous pathogens which, as human beings know from direct experience, inevitably afflict mammals when too many are packed together and basic principles of hygiene ignored.
What is needed, as an absolute minimum, is a time limit of eight hours for the transport of animals for slaughter or further fattening. The overcrowding permitted by the current standard must also be addressed, with animals allowed much more space to breathe and move. The transport of very young animals, such as calves under three months of age, should be banned completely.
Under current EU rules the maximum journey time for bovine animals is an appalling 29 hours, after which they must be fed, watered and allowed out into the fresh air before another 29-hour journey is permitted.
Krista van Velzen, a Member of Parliament for the Socialist Party of the Netherlands who has long campaigned for improvements, describes these standards as "good for profit maximalisation, but certainly not for the animals." Arguing that maximum journey times should be far shorter, Van Velzen also wants to see the structure of farm subsidies reformed so that they do not lead to extra and unnecessary journeys, as is the case with subsidies for the export of dairy cows. Rules should also, she says, take into account such possibilities as extreme weather conditions, obliging transports to be suspended, for example during heat waves. Pointing out that abuses are far too widespread to be seen as isolated incidents, Van Velzen adds that . "it's not only a question of checks and controls, but also of sanctions. If the law is being broken, action must be taken."
At least one member state is proving that effective action is indeed possible. In Denmark any breach of the rules leads to immediate withdrawal of the culprit's licence to transport animals. In most other member states, however, transport firms can continue to operate even after serious breaches.
True, the European Commission has promised to address these issues. In an answer to a parliamentary question tabled by UK Green MEP Caroline Lucas in March of last year, Commissioner Kyprianou said that there were plans "to establish a range of maximum and minimum temperatures for long journeys and standards for satellite navigation systems for road vehicles," adding that "the satellite navigation system will facilitate the enforcement of travelling time limits." He also promised to review travelling time limits and loading densities, and pointed out that the stricter enforcement of drivers' hours by tachograph would also have a positive impact.
This would be good news if it showed any sign of producing results, and it is possible that yet another major food scare involving farm animals will focus minds untouched by suffering. What makes me doubt this is not simply scepticism about the European Commission's ability to keep its promises, but that it does not get to the real issue. For however useful GPS or the tachograph might be, they represent technological solutions to what is in reality a political problem.
Food production companies, agribusiness corporations and hauliers represent three of the most influential sectors of capital at EU level. They almost always get their way. And these are people to whom the complaints of greedy shareholders are far more moving to the heart than the baleful lowing of a cow being slowly crushed to death in an overcrowded wagon on a boiling hot day.
Steve McGiffen edits Spectre and writes a monthly column for the Morning Star where this article first appeared.
See also http://www.spectrezine.org/europe/cap.htm | 农业 |
2017-17/0129/en_head.json.gz/19020 | Governor follows grant money to local farms
Farmer Scott Cheetham, right, leads Governor Dannel P. Malloy, center, and State Department of Agriculture Commissioner Steven Reviczky, left, on a tour of White Oak Farm in Stonington Tuesday, Nov. 13, 2012, as part of the governor's tour to promote Connecticut based agriculture. White Oak Farm has been in the Cheetham family as Scott says "since the King of England."
By Anna Isaacs and Claire Bessette, Day Staff Writers
Gov. Dannel P. Malloy toured three local farms Tuesday morning to learn how grant money from the Department of Agriculture’s new Farmland Restoration Program is being spent.The program was enacted as part of the October 2011 jobs bill with the goal of bringing fallow farmland in the state back into production. The program set aside $5 million for restoration projects on farms throughout Connecticut and was up and running beginning in February. Malloy said about $1 million has been set aside so far for 50 farms.According to the Department of Agriculture website, farmers may qualify for grants of up to $20,000. The program is meant to serve about 250 farms in all.Wearing khakis and boots and joined by three Department of Agriculture staffers, Malloy toured White Oak Farm in Stonington late Wednesday morning, trudging through a field with owner Scott Cheetham and chatting about the 400-year-old farm's history and the progress enabled by the $17,000 grant Cheetham will receive.On the 200-acre farm, where Cheetham, 36, raises beef cows, the grant money will go toward rehabilitating seven acres of land to grow hay and possibly produce, Cheetham said."In the past, when you wanted to clear land, it was all on you," he said.Malloy said the program not only promotes agriculture in the state, but also addresses a need for jobs and a growing demand for local food."We have a lot of land that over the last 50 years went fallow in Connecticut, but what we now know is there is an increasing market for locally produced foods, whether it's milk or vegetables or meat production," he said. "We want to promote that. We want to be very supportive of farming in the state of Connecticut. It's part of our history, it's part of our culture, but it also represents a gigantic opportunity for job creation, to bring back lands for production purposes."Earlier in the day, Malloy visited Ekonk Hill Turkey Farm in Sterling and Woodmansee Farms in Preston. Woodmansee, owned by Clark and Lois Woodmansee, is a fourth-generation, 300-acre dairy farm with 100 dairy cows.Lois Woodmansee said the governor asked good questions and seemed genuinely interested in the farm operation.The Woodmansees have applied for state assistance to convert three parcels — about 12 acres — from woods and overgrown brush back to hay fields and pasture land for the cows."I think it's nice that the governor took the time to come out and visit," Woodmansee said. "I really didn't know if he would make it here with all the work he has to do with the storm and all."Malloy said he was pleased with what he'd seen in touring beneficiary farms, adding that there is more work to be done with just 20 percent of the fund allocated so far."I want more money spent," he said. "I want more land into production, faster."[email protected]@theday.com | 农业 |
2017-17/0129/en_head.json.gz/19827 | Food Weed Wackos
By Grist Staff
The widespread use of Roundup, a common herbicide developed by Monsanto, has caused weeds that are resistant to the chemical to spring up on a half-million acres of agricultural land across the U.S. At fault, scientists say, is the popularity of bioengineered crops that are “Roundup Ready” — that is, created by Monsanto to be genetically impervious to the herbicide. Together, Roundup and Roundup Ready crops make life simpler for conventional farmers, who can use just one herbicide and spray it directly on their crops. The ease of the practice has led to widespread use of Roundup, and that has led to evolution taking its inevitable course: Those weeds that can survive exposure to Roundup are flourishing. Further spread of resistant weeds could wreak havoc around the globe, because glyphosate — the generic name for Roundup — is the most popular weed-killer on the planet. So far, the U.S. government has not imposed any limitations on the use of Roundup or Roundup Ready crops. | 农业 |
2017-17/0129/en_head.json.gz/20984 | Organic Vegetables Earl’s Organic Produce marks 25 years
By Tom Burfield
Earl Herrick (from left), owner; Patrick Stewart, sales manager; and Robert Lichtenberg, director of purchasing for Earl’s Organic Produce on the San Francisco Wholesale Produce Market, show off some of the company’s organic product. The company is celebrating its 25th anniversary. Photo by Courtesy Earl's Organic Produce
What began as a lifestyle choice for Earl Herrick gradually has turned into a career.
Herrick, now 64, said he was a “child of the ‘60s” who was born in a small town just outside Cleveland and never had been west of the Mississippi before he took to the road in the early 1970s with the goal of ending up in California.
His admitted “hippie” way of life included a healthful diet, which was appropriate for jobs he held in a vegetarian restaurant, a fruit stand on the edge of Golden Gate Park and at Living Foods, a “small but successful” natural food store in Mill Valley.
While working at the store, Herrick nurtured relationships with growers, asked a lot of questions and visited their farms.
All of this prepared him to set up shop for himself on the San Francisco Wholesale Produce Market in 1988, giving birth to Earl’s Organic Produce, which he said is the only tenant offering organic products exclusively.
He started with the equivalent of a half stall, which quickly expanded into a full stall.
“From there, we just grew,” he said, taking over neighboring spaces as tenants moved on.
His space increased from 2,500 square feet to 20,000.
This year, as Earl’s Organic Produce celebrates its 25th anniversary, Herrick plans to move into a 34,000-square-foot facility next to his present location. The move is expected early next year.
The new location will have amenities that should make the 65-person company even more efficient and effective, Herrick said.
mechanized plates that can be raised to enhance the loading process and eliminate the need to lug around dock plates;
a bigger, taller warehouse “so we can go more vertical”;
a banana ripening room; and
triple the walk-in cooler space, enabling the company to better maintain the cold chain.
The cold chain remains unbroken even as the company delivers product in its two tractor trailers and six bobtail trucks.
Earl’s Organic Produce offers a full range of organic fruits and vegetables, but Herrick said he’s especially proud of the items he sources exclusively from area growers, including satsuma mandarins, heirloom tomatoes, peaches and blueberries.
The company’s customers include major retail chains, independent stores, restaurants and even a manufacturer of kale chips.
Herrick said he enjoys working with emerging growers and helping them market their crops.
“I want to make growers rock stars,” he said.
The company saw its biggest growth in 10 years last year, in part because of its social media activities and community involvement, Herrick said.
“We are in a high-profile food culture in San Francisco, and we want to make ourselves relevant by being part of that conversation,” he said.
Despite logging several decades in the business, Herrick figures he’ll keep working for at least 10 more years.
“I still love what I do,” he said.
earl's organic producesan francisco wholesale produce marketorganic fruitsorganic vegetablessocial media About the Author:
Tom Burfield
, Western Correspondent
Tom Burfield has been Western correspondent for The Packer for more than 20 years, and he also writes for Produce Retailer magazine and has contributed to several other Farm Journal Media publications. View All Posts | 农业 |
2017-17/0129/en_head.json.gz/21047 | California State Water Project boosts irrigation allotment Apr 18, 2017 Even with effective synthetic alternatives Sulfur remains a relevant tool for controlling powdery mildew Apr 12, 2017 With buds pushing in late March, start of San Joaquin Valley wine grape crop follows normal timing Apr 12, 2017 Walnut growers responsible for ensuring clean water use on operation Apr 05, 2017 Management Dwindling supplies, strong demand: higher grain prices
Burgeoning demand, coupled with last year’s Russian grain crisis, floods in China and Pakistan, dry weather in Argentina, and other crop adversities have sharply reduced supplies of major agricultural commodities, pointing to “a need for more planted acres in 2011,” says Steve Freed.
Barring another meltdown in the economy, commodity prices “probably won’t trade much below current levels” near term, says Freed, vice president of commodity market research for ADM Investor Services. Hembree Brandon 2 | Feb 21, 2011
Barring another meltdown in the economy, commodity prices “probably won’t trade much below current levels” near term, says Freed, vice president of commodity market research for ADM Investor Services, who gave his insight on grain markets at the Mississippi Farm Bureau Federation’s Winter Commodity Conference at Jackson.
“Most economists feel we don’t have enough acres to plant in the U.S. to satisfy demand,” he says.
“If you ask traders in Chicago what they think will be a roadmap for prices in 2011, they say 2008. If we lay the 2011 chart over 2008, from a price standpoint and a timing standpoint, we’re almost following the 2008 markets one for one. There’s no guarantee we’ll continue to follow them, but 2008 is the roadmap everyone’s looking at.”
Looking at historical trends, Freed says, over the last four years from mid-January to the peak of the market later in the year soybeans saw about a 60 percent to 70 percent rally and a $14-level price. “A similar percent rally in 2011 could mean $18 beans. A similar rally, mid-January to the high, would put corn around $7.80, and wheat somewhere around $9 to $9.50.
“Right now, soybeans are now the bull leader, and some economists are saying supplies are going to be really tight at the end of this year and into 2012.” The January USDA report was bullish, he noted, particularly for beans.
Strong global demand for grains
“Over the last five years, we’ve seen a 255 million to 315 million ton increase in global demand for soybean uses, and most of that has been in Asia,” Freed says. “The market is also concerned about whether we’re going to have enough corn production worldwide to satisfy demand over the next five years. In wheat, we had a couple of years when production rose above usage and prices went down. This year we’re expecting production to be below usage, and while growth in wheat demand for the next five years is not going to be as great as for corn and soybeans, there is still going to be demand for acreage planted to wheat.”There is “a lot of support” around the $5.50 price level for corn, he says, “and I don’t think the market will trade below that until we know more about acreages this year and weather patterns. Some people think that if we ratchet up ethanol demand it could take nearby corn futures to $7 — that if we want to buy acres, we need to take corn to $6.25.
“If we were going to change anything in the USDA estimates, we’d probably add another 100,000 bushels of corn for ethanol usage. Ethanol is here to stay, and that usage will continue higher.
“Things are really going to get tight for corn usage around Aug. 1, particularly if we have a late-planted crop. Corn ending stocks will remain low unless we just have a super crop. But looking all the way back to 1980, the number of days of world corn supply is now at a record low — we don’t have a lot of margin for error, whether from a weather standpoint or from a demand standpoint.”
La Nina and other weather concerns
2011 is a La Niña year, Freed notes, and projections are for dryness across most of the Northern Hemisphere, which will probably continue into spring. Rains in Australia and across the Southern Hemisphere could adversely affect their wheat crop and increase U.S. export demand. Concerns about cold weather in Russia and China and dryness in Argentina could also have an impact on U.S. exports if those countries don’t have good crops.
“Looking to the March-May time period, we’re concerned about the wet forecast for the Ohio River Valley — that could mean late corn planting. Beyond that, climatologists are concerned about the possibility of dry conditions from July through early September across the Midwest.”
Over the last 15 years, Freed notes, December corn has tended to make its high in the March-April period. “I think basis will tell us around April 1-15 just how tight the situation is relative to demand.
“Soybeans have already pushed through a lot of key price resistance levels, and the export demand could be a little better than the USDA is saying. Total usage trends continue to move higher, most of that due to export demand. The number of days of U.S. soybean stocks is at a record low versus demand. Technically speaking, we’re looking at much higher prices.”
Wheat is “something of the laggard” in the marketplace, he says. “The most important factor in wheat now is the condition of the crop in Kansas, one of the lowest we’ve seen. If the weather continues dry there, it could put a premium in the wheat market.
Analysts looking for more grain acres
“We already know farmers have planted 4 million more wheat acres, but analysts are saying we could see 4 million more acres of corn, they’re talking about 2 million more cotton acres, and are saying we probably need at least 2 million more soybean acres. I don’t think it quite adds up that we’ll see that many more acres. The next big USDA report is at the end of March, when we will get planting intentions.
“Looking at cotton, it’s really interesting to see a market that has had its highest price since the Civil War. The question is whether we’ll have enough supply to meet demand, and the perception is that the cotton market still has price potential.
“I personally have not recommended selling any 2011 corn yet,” Freed says. “I think $6.25 is where I’ll start selling. I also haven’t sold any 2011 soybeans; $13 beans is going to be a good sale for me. I think if you don’t sell beans at $13, you’re playing more of a speculative game than locking in some kind of profit.”
Demand for commodities by China will be a significant influence on markets, Freed says. “When I visited there, I came away with these key impressions: They’re going to continue to buy commodities; 70 percent of Chinese farm land is irrigated, with an average farm size of 7 acres; and they do not believe they have enough water to grow enough crops to satisfy growing demand and that at some point they will become a net importer of food.
China a major player in marketplace
“They also believe that 20 years from now the world is going to begin running low on fossil fuels and that they’re going to have to come up with alternative fuels. They are buyers in the energy market to increase their supply. The Chinese now buy more cars than the U.S. and Japan combined, and the numbers are going to increase, which will escalate their demand for energy.
“China is going to be a big player in our marketplace. Of their 70 million tons of demand for soybeans, they import about 55 million tons. The U.S. produces 90 million hogs a year — the Chinese produce 600 million, and they want to double that. One exporter says that by 2015 China will be importing 70 million tons of soybeans and 30 million tons of corn.
“Whatever size corn crop China grows, that’s what they’re going to use internally. A factor that can influence the corn market is that the Chinese congress will meet in March to look at whether or not they want to establish a domestic ethanol program. If they do, they’ll probably come into the market to buy corn, and we hope some of that will come from the U.S. The market is extremely sensitive as to how much corn they’re going to buy, so mark your March calendar and watch what they say in their congress about ethanol production.”
Changes in the dollar’s value will also be a factor, Freed says. “A lot of money nowadays is linked to the markets: if the dollar is lower, commodities are higher; if the dollar is higher, commodities are lower.”
Other factors that will have an impact on grain markets include the 2012 elections in the U.S., measures to deal with U.S. debt, and tax reform legislation.
Strong flow of money into commodity funds
Money going into commodity investment funds will also be an influence on markets, he says. “One projection is that money going into commodity markets will reach a half-trillion dollars, up from $360 billion last year and $270 billion in 2009. With low interest rates, a lagging housing market, and a lethargic economy, investor money is looking for other places to go. The investment firms are saying that commodity markets will continue to trade higher, at least for the first half of this year.
“We also have to look at U.S. debt, which going out to 2030 is projected at $20 trillion, and the impact that will have on the dollar. Most economists will tell you that long term they’re negative to the dollar, which would be positive for commodity prices.”
U.S. farmers “are doing very well right now from the standpoint of net farm income,” he says, but a recent survey of growers across the Midwest showed “their major concern is that, as grain prices go up, so do costs. What happens, they ask, if they have a perfect crop this fall and prices drop below what it cost for them to put it in the ground? That can happen in any year. I think this year crop insurance is going to be critical.”
Commenting on farm land values, Freed says, “When I graduated from college in 1976, I planned to farm, but land in central Illinois was going for $5,000 an acre. Recently, land near us sold for $9,700 an acre. In Iowa just recently, there was a bidding war in which land went for $13,000 an acre.”
TAGS: Outlook Cotton Rice 0 comments Hide comments
RelatedKey tools to maximize pistachio production in ‘trickier’ saline soilApr 19, 2017Reduce canker damage in almond with proven management tipsApr 19, 2017Monsanto launches ‘National Agronomy Week’ April 3-7Apr 03, 2017Researchers ramp up releases of tiny wasp to improve biological control of the Virginia creeper leafhopperMar 22, 2017 Load More | 农业 |
2017-17/0129/en_head.json.gz/21760 | The tangerine (Citrus tangerina) is an orange-colored citrus fruit which is closely related to the mandarin orange (Citrus reticulata). Taxonomically, it may be named as a subspecies or variety of Citrus reticulata; further work seems to be required to ascertain its correct scientific name. Tangerines are smaller than common oranges, and are usually easier to peel and to split into segments. The taste is considered less sour, but sweeter and stronger, than that of an orange. What can be considered by some to be a good tangerine will be firm to slightly soft, heavy for its size, and pebbly-skinned with no deep grooves, as well as orange in color. Peak tangerine season lasts from October to April in the Northern Hemisphere. | 农业 |
2017-17/0129/en_head.json.gz/22243 | Industry Investment in QC Corp., micronutrients, ferrous sulfate By Paine & Partners, LLC
May 12, 2014 | 4:50 pm EDT
Paine & Partners, LLC, a global private equity investment firm focused on investing in food and agribusiness, announced that it has made a strategic investment in QC Corporation, a leading producer and supplier of granular and dry micronutrients and ferrous sulfate products. Founded by Don Gordon in 1971, QC began as a producer and supplier of ferrous sulfate, and today is one of the largest processors of moist and dried ferrous sulfate products in North America. Family owned and operated for 42 years, QC is the only domestic producer of all forms of technical and agricultural grade ferrous sulfate in North America. The company's ferrous sulfate products and manufacturing and processing system for moist ferrous sulfate continue to set the standard for the industry, the announcement contends. QC currently has two independent ferrous sulfate operations, located in Cape Girardeau, Mo., and North Lima, Ohio. Ferrous sulfate has applications in fertilizers and animal feed, soil remediation and land reclamation, hazardous waste and water treatment and chemical process industries, to name a few.
After successfully launching its granular ferrous sulfate products in the early 1990s, QC built a new bulk blending compaction granulation plant in 2000, and began producing a variety of granular micronutrients. The company completed a major expansion in 2013, and QC now operates a highly innovative micronutrient business with significant growth potential, with two independent compaction granulation facilities located in Missouri. In addition to offering its own line of granulated fertilizer micronutrients, QC offers custom manufacturing and toll processing of granulated materials, utilizing its more than 25 years of expertise in compaction granulation technology. QC notes it is one of the few micronutrient producers that can offer 100 percent water solubility in homogeneous, low dust, custom granular micronutrient formulations. Granular products also include various micronutrient combinations of sulfates, chelates, sucrates, oxysulfates and oxides, along with the capability to incorporate and granulate humates and other biostimulants with various NPK fertilizer ingredients. QC's products are formulated to help achieve better plant health and yields in lawn and garden, golf course, turf and ornamental, professional horticulture, crop production and agricultural applications. The Gordon family will continue to lead the day-to-day operations of the business. Don Gordon has been appointed chairman of the company. Jason Gordon, Don's son, has been appointed chief executive officer (CEO). Jason has almost 20 years of experience working at QC and management roles. "Paine & Partners is committed to providing QC with the necessary capital, expertise and resources to accelerate the granular micronutrient expansion strategy that is already in progress," said the senior Gordon. "Over the past forty years, we have built QC into a leading supplier of ferrous sulfate and granulated fertilizer micronutrients. We believe our partnership with Paine & Partners will enhance our industry leading products while maintaining our company's strong core values. I look forward to working with Paine & Partners and the entire QC team as we continue to build on our success."
The CEO Gordon said, "The investment from Paine & Partners will facilitate our continued growth and help us reach our goals across the business, particularly in granular micronutrients.
Angelos Dassios, partner of Paine & Partners, said, "Our investment in QC provides a platform for the company to enhance its already exceptional products and accelerate its growth trajectory. We see tremendous potential in QC's granular micronutrients business and believe QC can leverage cross-portfolio synergies from our agribusiness companies, specifically Verdesian Life Sciences, LLC, which focuses on plant health and specialty nutrition. We look forward to working with QC to capitalize on new market opportunities and realize QC's significant potential."
paine & partnersmicronutrientsferrous sulfatefertilizer About the Author:
Paine & Partners, LLC | 农业 |
2017-17/0129/en_head.json.gz/22577 | TKCrawford has been farming organically in south-central Pennsylvania for 40 years.Jim Crawford hauls his vegetables to farmers markets in Washington, D.C.Pearl Wetherall, field manager at New Morning Farm, spreads manure.Feeding the chickens at New Morning Farm.Many organic farmers are hopping mad at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, and their reason involves perhaps the most underappreciated part of agriculture: plant food, aka fertilizer. Specifically, the FDA, as part of its overhaul of food safety regulations, wants to limit the use of animal manure."We think of it as the best thing in the world," says organic farmer Jim Crawford, "and they think of it as toxic and nasty and disgusting."Every highly productive farmer depends on fertilizer. But organic farmers are practically obsessive about it, because they've renounced industrial sources of nutrients.So on this crisp fall morning, Crawford is rhapsodic as he watches his field manager, Pearl Wetherall, spread manure across a field where cabbage grew last summer."All that green material — that cover crop and the cabbage — all mixed up with that nice black manure that's just rich and full of good microorganisms, and we're going to get a wonderful fertility situation for next spring here," he says.Crawford, founder of New Morning Farm in south-central Pennsylvania, buys hundreds of tons of manure every year from a big turkey farm a few miles away. "It's really at the heart of our operation for having good, rich soil, and good fertility, so that we have the highest-quality crops."It's also part of a natural cycle, and the basis of organic farming. Most crops strip vital nutrients from the soil. But the nutrients don't disappear; if you feed those crops to cattle or turkeys, the nutrients mostly end up in manure. For the turkey farmer, the manure is waste. For Crawford, it's precious. "Cycling nutrients. That's what it's all about. Cycling organic nutrients."This is a typical practice among organic farmers, especially the smaller ones. But they may now have to change.The Food and Drug Administration considers manure a food safety risk. Disease-causing microbes, such as salmonella or toxic forms of E. coli, are commonly found in animal waste.Patricia Millner, a microbiologist with the U.S. Department of Agriculture's research center in Beltsville, Md., says scientists are now trying to figure out exactly how long such bacteria survive in the soil. "In some cases, salmonella will survive for a few weeks; in other cases, it'll be reported that it survives for 300-plus days," she says.When they survive, microbes do get on food. Carrots or radishes, of course, grow right in the soil. But bacteria also end up on salad greens. Raindrops, for instance, splash soil and microbes onto the plants.There's a lot of uncertainty about exactly how big of a risk this is. But the FDA is saying better safe than sorry.The agency is proposing new national food safety rules. If those rules are enacted, when farmers spread raw manure on a field, they won't be allowed to harvest any crops from that field for the next nine months. (This applies only to crops that people eat raw, such as carrots or lettuce.)The rules don't cover the smallest farms. They apply to farms with more than half a million dollars in annual sales, or which supply food to supermarkets.But that includes Crawford's farm.He already follows the organic rules; he doesn't harvest crops within four months of spreading manure. But having to wait nine months — longer than a growing season — would completely disrupt his operations. "We wouldn't even be able to function," he says.There is an alternative: composted manure. The heat from composting kills disease-causing microbes. But Crawford says compost would cost him anywhere from three to six times more than manure. And he just doesn't see why he should have to switch, because he doesn't believe that what he does now is at all risky."No one's ever been sickened by anything we've grown, in probably millions of transactions between us and our customers over 40 years," he says. Crawford sells most of his food at farmers markets in Washington, D.C.Yet organic farmers are not united in their opposition to the FDA regulations. There's a divide between large and small producers.Earthbound Farm, in California, is among the biggest organic producers of salad greens. Will Daniel, the company's chief food integrity officer, says, "History is not always your greatest ally, unfortunately. We never thought that we would see spinach or other produce involved in outbreaks." But in 2006, his company's spinach was linked to an outbreak of E. coli poisoning; 200 people got sick. Three died.Raw manure was not the source of that outbreak. (There's evidence the E. coli could have come from wild pigs that got into the fields.) But Daniel says using manure does involve risks that his company won't take.Instead, Earthbound Farm uses mostly "a pelletized, processed chicken manure product" that's been treated with heat and pressure to kill all microbes."We've gone in that direction because we feel that it's very important to assure that we are not spreading these pathogens in our fields, that could lead to contaminated product," he says.Daniel supports the FDA's proposed rules on manure. Many smaller organic farmers, meanwhile, are sending the FDA a blizzard of comments, arguing that the environmental benefits of using manure far outweigh the risks.The comment period ends on Nov. 22. Copyright 2017 NPR. To see more, visit http://www.npr.org/. © 2017 ideastream. | 农业 |
2017-17/0129/en_head.json.gz/22929 | Follow @thecattlesite News & Analysis Features Markets & Reports Sustainability Knowledge Centre Directory Events Our Shop News CME: US Beef Export Rates Benefit from Lower Prices11 July 2016 US - The USDA’s Economic Research Service (ERS) published May monthly trade numbers for the protein industries last week. This data is based on the US Department of Commerce trade data, write Steve Meyer and Len Steiner.ERS then calculates and publishes the meat trade numbers on a carcass weight equivalent basis.
Across the protein sectors of beef, pork, and chicken, in May there was a consistent theme of seasonally normal export movements. However, some protein categories were surprising in terms of overall volume movement for the month.
Starting with beef, imports for the month of May were 10 per cent below year ago. The majority of this decrease came from a 35 per cent decrease in imports from Australia compared to May of 2015, with an additional 25 per cent decrease in volume from Brazil and 53 per cent in imports from Uruguay.
Beef imports into the US increased from our immediate neighbours, up 16 per cent from Canada and up 21 per cent from Mexico compared to year ago.
Beef exports for May experienced notable growth and were up 14 per cent year-over-year. Three of our four top beef export destinations increased over 20 per cent year-over-year. Beef exports were up 29 per cent to Japan, 60 per cent to South Korea, 40 per cent to Mexico, and 1 per cent to Canada compared to May 2015.
Year-to-date (through May) beef exports were almost 3 per cent above 2015’s and imports were 12 per cent below 2015’s.
We do expect to continue seeing year-over-year improvements in beef exports due to lower priced product in the US, a more export favourable exchange rate, and comparing to the drop off seen in beef exports July through September of 2015.
Moving on to pork, imports for May were slightly higher than expected at 11 per cent over year ago levels. Increases in pork imports came from Canada, Mexico, the Netherlands, and Poland.
Pork exports were up 5 per cent year-over-year, and the only main category that showed a counter seasonal movement (up) on export volume.
Pork exports were up 1 per cent to Canada, up 152 per cent to Mainland China, up 100 per cent to Hong Kong, up 11 per cent to Mexico, and up 3 per cent to the Caribbean. Conversely, exports were down 13 per cent to Japan (our second largest pork export destination) and down 34 per cent to South Korea.
Year-to-date, through May, pork exports were 1 per cent higher and imports were 3 per cent higher than in 2015. Seasonally, it is normal for pork export volume to decline from May through late summer, but we expect slight year-over-year gains to be posted in pork export volume for the second half of 2016.
Broiler exports for May continued to move seasonally higher, but also continue to post levels below year ago.
Important to note, it is expected that the majority of year-over-year improvement in broiler exports will be seen starting in June and more obvious in the second half of the year.
For May, broiler exports were down 2 per cent year-over-year. This included a 10 per cent increase in exports to Mexico and a 24 per cent increase to the Caribbean, compared to 2015. However, that was not enough to overcome an 11 per cent and 20 per cent year-over-year decline to Canada and Hong Kong, respectively, as well as declines in product sent to Mainland China, Iraq, and South Korea.
TheCattleSite News Desk Markets, Economics, General Share This | 农业 |
2017-17/0129/en_head.json.gz/23654 | Russian Dairy Producers Eying Major Push into Mainland Market Photo: Moo-ving in: Can Russia help solve the mainland’s milk shortage? (Shutterstock.com)
Moo-ving in: Can Russia help solve the mainland's milk shortage?
Despite logistics and legal challenges, Russian producers remain hopeful of becoming lead dairy suppliers to China. Moo-ving in: Can Russia help solve the mainland's milk shortage?Moo-ving in: Can Russia help solve the mainland's milk shortage?The prospect of becoming one of the lead food suppliers to China has been nurtured both by the Russian government and the country's private sector. In particular, it chimed well with the so-called Turn to the East policy championed throughout the Russian media following the imposition of EU/US sanctions in 2014.To date, the policy has met with a number of successes. Russia, for instance, is now the prime supplier of sunflower oil to China. Similarly, Miratorg, Russia's largest meat-processing company, now supplies corned beef to the mainland, while several Russian ice-cream suppliers have made distinct inroads into Shanghai and Heilongjiang.Perhaps most ambitiously, though, Rusagro, one of Russia's leading agricultural businesses, has now announced plans to invest US$1 billion into milk production in the country's Far Eastern region, with an eye on supplying China and a number of other Southeast Asian markets. If successful, the plan would see Rusagro emerge as Russia's largest milk producer. It would also have a considerable impact on this outlying region of Russian, an area that has long suffered economically on account of its remote location and complex logistics requirements.In order to deliver on its ambitions, Rusagro will need to relocate some 70,000 cows to the region, with a capacity for producing approximately 500,000 tons of raw milk annually. This volume would meet the shortfall of milk and dairy products in the region and leave some 250,000 tons available for export purposes. Overall, the climate, soil and landscape of the region are seen as highly suitable for dairy farming. On the downside, though, the area is subject to occasional monsoons and floods, while its underdeveloped infrastructure and lack of a ready workforce also pose a number of challenges.According Rusagro's senior management team, although there has been interest from both South Korea and Japan, it is Chinese buyers that have proved the keenest. This is seen as largely because of the many problems China's domestic dairy producers face, including soil and water ecology issues, supply of cattle feed and the proper utilisation of cattle waste.Having learnt the lessons of the past, Rusagro is also keen to access a diverse number of export markets as a means of offsetting the risk associated with currency fluctuations and changes in individual market conditions. The Russian dairy industry struggled hugely on account of cheap imports of subsidised EU milk products, which remained cheaper than domestically produced products even after the 2014 and 2015 devaluation of the rouble.Perhaps the biggest problem is that – officially, at least – Russian dairy exports are banned on the mainland, except for ice-cream and via a number of semi-legal routes into Shanghai and Guangzhou. In 2016, China accounted for just 1.7% – some 736,000 tons – of Russia's exports of dairy products. This, however, represented a year-on-year rise of 350% in terms of the raw milk used.In part, this rise is down to individual residents in the Heilongjiang and Jilin provinces. Given the shortages in these regions, it is not unusual for residents to travel to the border with Russia to buy dairy products, with each individual entitled to a duty-free daily allowance of 50kg.Even should the relationship between Russia and the EU becomes normalised, this will have little benefit for the country's domestic dairy industry. The EU has long subsidised and supported the dairy industries of its own constituent nations, to the extent that Russian producers just cannot compete.Since the sanctions were imposed three years ago, the Russian dairy industry has developed hugely. As a result, many of the players in the sector would be sure to take a proactive approach in discouraging the distribution of EU-sourced milk, cream, butter, cheese and yogurts within Russia's borders.Given the situation, there are clear prospects for Hong Kong-based distributors with experience of the mainland market to work with Russian food producers, including Rusagro, on accessing China's retail food chains and wholesale food distribution centres. As most Russian dairy manufacturers now have considerable experience in freezing products destined for warmer climates, without impairing the produce, refrigerated delivery across the whole of the mainland is now a wholly viable option.Leonid Orlov, Moscow Consultant
Russian Cookies Set to Seek Their Fortune Among Mainland Consumers Niche Sectors and Low Commissions Bolster Besieged Russian E-tailers Russia Looks to Boost Food and Drink Exports to China in 2017 Mainland Exports Set to Suffer as Russia Goes Cycle Self-Sufficient Source for quality suppliers and manufacturers of food and beverages on hktdc.com. Comments (0) | 农业 |
2017-17/0129/en_head.json.gz/24424 | 2017 Cotton Producer Tour of Cotton Incorporated Headquarters Apr 14, 2017 Make sure hay donations are properly inspected before moving Apr 19, 2017 John Bradley: Still leading the innovation charge Apr 13, 2017 To weather ag downturn: ‘Keep it simple’ Apr 17, 2017 Farm bill — if it’s not broken …
Elton Robinson, Farm Press Editorial Staff | Jan 11, 2007
There is an old axiom in life that is an effective comment on the act of meddling — if it ain’t broke, don’t try to fix it. This advice could be applied to the writing of a new farm bill, according to Paul Combs, a rice, cotton, wheat and soybean producer from Kennett, Mo. Combs, who serves on the Missouri Rice Council and as chairman of the USA Rice Federation’s Rice Producers’ Group, says the rice industry “is really happy with the current bill. It provides counter-cyclical payments when prices are low, and payments aren’t paid out when prices are good. “The support level of the rice loan and the world market price mechanism works. The direct payment component works. “We think it’s a balanced and fair approach and it works for the rice industry.” That’s one reason Combs is advocating extension of the current bill. “But whatever happens, we think we should use the 2002 bill as a template to start from, especially in regard to the commodity title.” According to Combs, some “initial shots across the bow” indicate that commodity organizations will have their work cut out for them. “Legislators will take a hard look at the rice and cotton loans, the counter-cyclical payment and smaller payment limits.” There is no shortage of ideas for a new farm program, and this should make for some interesting debate, noted Combs. “The administration is pushing for a new bill. “Rep. Collin Peterson, D-Minn., who is expected to chair the House Agriculture Committee, indicates he likes the current bill but would like to see disaster assistance written into it. “Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, has been a fan of CSP, so he may have his opinion.” WTO is another factor affecting the pace and perhaps the face, of farm policy. “The problem right now, it’s hard to get a handle on where the WTO is going. We don’t need to be held hostage to the WTO process. We need to write the very best farm policy we can and go from there.” The task for the industry on all fronts “is to educate Congress and the general public on why current farm programs are important and that it’s not welfare for ‘tractor kings.’ We don’t have anything to apologize for as rice farmers or cotton farmers with regard to current farm program, so we shouldn’t.” Combs noted that corn producer organizations are considering going toward a revenue insurance program. “When you look at it on paper, with their numbers, they’re just as good or better off with it. But the cotton and rice farmers are worse off under their proposal. “So if they want to take the money that’s being spent on their program and rewrite their program to suit them, I don’t know that we would object. But they need to give us the flexibility for us to keep what we have. It will be interesting to see how those dynamics play out. They’ll certainly have an advocate in Harkin.” Harkin will become chairman of the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry, when Democrats take control of the House and Senate in January. “What we don’t want is a corn program being the driver,” Combs said. “It may be a bad deal for a lot of other commodities. The farm program we have now is not a bad deal for corn producers.” The rice industry must also guard against well-funded efforts to influence public opinion against agriculture, Combs noted. “We have not come under attack to the extent the cotton industry has, but I am not so naïve as to think that there are not people trying to figure out how our program is a bad deal for the poor of the world somewhere. “It’s an interesting tactic that Oxfam, some of the European organizations and the Cato Institute are taking. We seem to have the conservative think tanks and the liberal media piling on. Instead of saying farmers are getting too much money, they’re saying farmers are getting too much money and they’re making other people poor. And that is getting some traction in the urban areas.” It’s hard to say what effect high commodity prices may have on the farm bill debate in the coming months. But to Combs, farm policy is working just like it’s supposed to. “With rice prices where they are, USDA is not going to pay out a bunch of LDPs, and there’s probably no counter-cyclical payment, so the direct payment is the only cost. “We need a program that funds when times are lean and doesn’t give money to people who don’t need it when times are good. That’s the beautiful part of the program we have right now. In a year like this, with good rice, corn and soybean prices, it’s not costing as much money.” While Combs is happy with the current farm program, it’s still not perfect. One improvement would be to fully fund the Conservation Security Program, although care should be taken not to disturb the commodity title. “We in Missouri have been able to benefit from the CSP in the Little River Ditches area. We like the idea that the program is for land in production, rather than a land retirement program.” Other tweaking, assuming an adequate budget allocation, might include funding for specialty crops and a provision for updating bases, Combs said. “But the commodity title is still the bread and butter of the safety net farm programs, and we shouldn’t take away from it.” With the makeup of Congress increasingly urban and suburban, Combs believes the industry must make as many new friends on Capitol Hill as possible. “Farm policy tends to be a bi-partisan. We in the rice industry can work with whoever is in the majority. Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., has sure been an advocate for southern agriculture, but on the Democrat side, we have Sen. Blanche Lincoln, D-Ark., on the Agriculture Committee, and she’s been a tireless advocate for southern interests. There is also Rep. Marion Berry, D-Ark., who is a rice farmer himself. “In Missouri, we have Reps. Jo Ann Emerson and Kenny Hulshof (both Republicans), who have very good ag backgrounds.” The challenge, Combs says, “is to keep everyone educated that this is not just a rural versus urban issue; it’s a national food policy issue. Food security should draw the attention. “We have the safest, cheapest and most abundant food supply in the world. When you start changing farm policy, it can be affected. That’s a risk. It’s hard to quantify what is going to happen because you don’t really know. The problem is that if you start to radically overhaul our farm program — which a lot of people would like to do — this could cause a real danger. “When people go out of farming, they don’t come back when times get better. The farmers who had to quit farming in the region from Jonesboro to Stuttgart in Arkansas in 2005 are not going back into farming in 2007 because prices look good. It’s not like you can turn on a switch in a factory and you can produce more things.” e-mail: [email protected] | 农业 |
2017-17/0129/en_head.json.gz/24425 | 2017 Cotton Producer Tour of Cotton Incorporated Headquarters Apr 14, 2017 Make sure hay donations are properly inspected before moving Apr 19, 2017 John Bradley: Still leading the innovation charge Apr 13, 2017 To weather ag downturn: ‘Keep it simple’ Apr 17, 2017 Regulatory>Legislative USDA releases study on food program benefits
USDA highlights each state's success and participation in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.
SNAP helps feed over 43 million Americans every month.
SNAP provides economic benefits -- every $5 in new SNAP spending generates as much as $9 in economic activity. From the USDA | Feb 02, 2011
A recent USDA report measures each state’s success in reaching children and families eligible for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). While the national SNAP participation rate was 66 percent, “Reaching Those in Need: State Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Participation Rates in 2008,” reports state rates varied from an estimated low of 46 percent to a high of 94 percent.
“The Obama administration is dedicated to increasing access to nutrition assistance for those Americans in need," said Kevin Concannon, Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services. “That’s why we’re committed to working with our states to ensure everyone eligible for SNAP has access to this critical nutrition program.” SNAP puts healthy food on the table for over 43 million people each month, half of whom are children. Formerly known as the Food Stamp Program, SNAP is largest of the domestic food and nutrition assistance programs administered by USDA’s Food and Nutrition Service (FNS). Serving about one in seven Americans over the course of a year, SNAP is the cornerstone of America’s safety-net against hunger. Overall, the report shows twenty states had rates that were significantly higher than the national rate. Some states had consistently high participation rates relative to other states in all three fiscal years examined. In each year from 2006 to 2008, the District of Columbia, Illinois, Kentucky, Maine, Michigan, Missouri, Oregon, Tennessee, Washington and West Virginia had significantly higher participation rates than two-thirds of the states.
USDA’s FNS has expanded outreach efforts to reach those who are eligible, including underserved populations like the working poor. According to the report, participation among the eligible working poor was significantly lower than the rate for all SNAP-eligible persons in a majority of states.
“I commend the collective efforts made by the states to increase SNAP participation, as it helps millions of families access healthy food and live a more healthful lifestyle,” said Concannon. “Our hope is that all families in need seek these essential benefits to help feed their loved ones throughout the year.”
SNAP benefits, which are provided to recipients electronically, also provide an economic stimulus that strengthens communities. Research shows that every $5 in new SNAP benefits generates as much as $9 in economic activity. While SNAP benefits are administered by states, they are federally funded and move quickly into local economies, with 97 percent of SNAP benefits redeemed within a month.
USDA's FNS oversees the administration of 15 nutrition assistance programs, including the child nutrition programs. Through the direct certification process, all children participating in SNAP are automatically enrolled in the national school meals programs.
Improving child nutrition is a focal point of the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act that recently passed Congress and was signed by President Obama on December 13, 2010. The legislation authorizes USDA’s child nutrition programs, including the Summer Food Service Program and the National School Lunch Program, which serves nearly 32 million children each day. 0 comments Hide comments
RelatedDelta leaders seeking renewed effort to complete Upper Yazoo Basin ProjectsApr 20, 2017No funding for Upper Yazoo Project in president’s budgetApr 18, 2017Delta Farm Press Calendar of EventsApr 18, 2017Agriculture secretary vacancy looms large as farmers struggle to stay in businessApr 17, 2017 Load More | 农业 |
2017-17/0130/en_head.json.gz/493 | By Russ QuinnDTN Staff Reporter
WEVER, Iowa (DTN) -- Amidst fertile Mississippi River Valley farm fields here, the first greenfield nitrogen fertilizer production facility built in the U.S. in more than 25 years officially opened for business Wednesday. Iowa Fertilizer Company (IFCo) and its Egypt-based parent company, OCI N.V., unveiled their Wever, Iowa, plant, which will produce 1.7 million to 2.2 million tons of nitrogen products annually. The plant will produce ammonia anhydrous, urea and UAN solutions and can alternate between products.
Due to changing economics in producing nitrogen fertilizer with the ready supply of natural gas found in the Bakken region, many companies, and even commodity groups, decided they would build nitrogen-producing facilities over the last decade. The Bakken region encompasses parts of Montana and North Dakota in the U.S. and Saskatchewan and Manitoba in Canada. However, the reality of raising enough money to cover construction costs, as well as increasing building costs over the years, prevented most groups from ever getting plans off of paper and moving soil. Several existing nitrogen-producing facilities were rebuilt and began to produce increased amounts of nutrients in recent years. But the IFCo plant marks a significant accomplishment in the fertilizer industry. TRANSFORMATIVE MOMENT Nassef Sawiris, CEO of OCI N.V., told those attending a ribbon-cutting ceremony Wednesday that the day marked an important change in the nitrogen market in North America. "The start of production at Iowa Fertilizer Company plant in Wever is a transformative moment for the agricultural industry," Sawiris said. "We couldn't be happier to be part of this community which supported us." Larry Holley, president of Iowa Fertilizer Company, said that the domestic production of nitrogen is good news for the farmers of Iowa and Illinois as well as those farmers across the Midwest. Locally produced nitrogen will lower costs associated with transporting fertilizer, he said.
"This is the most innovative, safest, environmentally-friendly plant ever built," Holley told those in attendance.
Daily maximum product capacities at the Wever facility call for 4,750 tons of UAN solution, 1,320 tons of granular urea and 2,425 tons of ammonia. In addition, the facility will also produce diesel exhaust fluid (DEF) at a daily maximum capacity of 990 tons.
Yearly production will be at least 850,000 tons of ammonia, 460,000 tons of granular urea and 1.7 million tons of UAN solution.
Sawiris noted the plant, which is located in southeastern Iowa just across the river from Illinois -- the No. 1 and No. 2 corn-growing states -- houses both a world-class production facility as well as a top distribution center. That fact was evidenced by several semitrucks and trailers hauling ammonia that entered and exited the facility during a tour of the grounds.
ECONOMIC LIFT
New nitrogen facilities like the Iowa Fertilizer Company plant don't come cheap. IFCo invested more than $3 billion to build their sprawling new facility near Wever, an unincorporated village of about 700 in northeastern Lee County in extreme southeastern Iowa. The facility was built in part with funds from the largest tax incentive package in Iowa history, with $1.4 billion coming from the state. Some in the Hawkeye State criticized the amount of the package given to the company.
Despite the high price tag and controversy over public funds, the new plant is poised to be an economic lift for southeastern Iowa, and specifically Lee County. Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad and Lt. Gov. Kim Reynolds spoke at the ribbon-cutting ceremony, and both pointed to a region needing an economic shot in the arm.
"Six years ago, we started this process and we decided Lee County was the place it was needed as it had the highest unemployment rate in the state at 9.9%," Branstad said. According to a press release from IFCo and OCI, since the groundbreaking, unemployment in the country dropped from 8% to 5.3%. At the peak of construction, more than 3,500 workers were building the facility.
IFCo will employ a full-time staff of more than 200 workers. Annual payroll is set at $25 million, and $25 million will be spent in maintenance.
Reynolds, who is set to become Iowa's governor once Branstad is confirmed as U.S. ambassador to China, called the plant and region a perfect match.
"Lee County was overlooked in the past as it struggled during the tough economic downturn," Reynolds said. "This will draw dividends for decades." Russ Quinn can be reached at [email protected] Follow him on Twitter @RussQuinnDTN(AG/BAS)© Copyright 2017 DTN/The Progressive Farmer. All rights reserved. | 农业 |
2017-17/0130/en_head.json.gz/1848 | | Monday , July 15 , 2013 | In Today's Paper
Front Page > Northeast > Story Tea major forays into spice trade Amalgamated Plantations Private Limited is planning to introduce a brand of spices sourced from the Northeast, including pepper from its plantations, in the national market
ROOPAK GOSWAMI Searchlight Pepper being grown in a nursery inside an APPL garden. Telegraph picture
Guwahati, July 14: Amalgamated Plantations Private Limited, the second largest tea producer in the country, is all set to launch its brand of spices. The tea major, which has been growing other crops on its estates, is aiming big vis-à-vis spices and wants to become a national player within five years. “The idea is to have fair price aggregation and develop market linkages with the organised sector. APPL’s vision is to become the preferred provider of agri business supply solutions in the Northeast to ultimately benefit the farmer,” Prabir Banerjea, the chief operating officer of APPL’s agri business division, told The Telegraph. The company is growing only black pepper — the most traded spice in the world — in its gardens. Black pepper, known as the king of spices, is known for its hot, biting flavour and pungent aroma. The latest price for black pepper in India ranges from Rs 35,000 to Rs 50,000 per quintal. The company sources other spices from different states of the region. “The brand names are being shortlisted and our brands could hit the market by August,” Banerjea said. The company started growing black pepper commercially from 2007 and the yield this year was 24 metric tonnes — 20 per cent higher than last year. As on date, the company has 200 hectares under black pepper cultivation. He said the company planned to announce the origin of the produce and their USPs across marketing channels in the organised sector, as “at present, spices from the Northeast are being sold in mandis and nobody knows where these are coming from”. Independent nurseries have been set up in all gardens to ensure self-sufficiency in planting material and high-yielding and drought-resistant varieties have been sourced from south India. Banerjea said single polished turmeric fingers with specified curcumin content were recently sent to Olam International — a leading global integrated supply chain manager and processor of agricultural products and food ingredients — for export. “This is for the first time spices have been exported from the Northeast,” he said. The turmeric was mainly sourced from As-sam’s Karbi Anglong district. The company is also setting up a state of the art processing and packaging plant for spices and fruits aggregated from the Northeast at the North East Mega Food Park in Tihu. Construction will commence after the monsoon this year and trial production will start from the winter of 2014. The official said the company’s entry into the spices sector in the Northeast would create national links for local produce, benefiting the farming community of the region. Spices are high value export-oriented commodities, which play an important role in the country’s agricultural economy, as India is the principal source of spices in the global market. In the Northeast, black pepper is mainly grown in Meghalaya, which produces about 400 metric tonnes of the spice annually. According to Spices Board, the Northeast has tremendous potential for largescale production of spices and it is anticipated that the region can create exportable surpluses at competitive prices, ensuring that the country stays on top in the international spices market. In fact, the spices sector has been making strides in the Northeast and Spices Board has proposed an outlay of Rs 66.75 crore in the Twelfth Plan to promote the sector in the region. The Twelfth Plan focus is on development of large cardamom and other spices with respect to area expansion, irrigation and land development, mechanisation, organic farming and post-harvest processing. Copyright © 2017 The Telegraph. All rights reserved. | 农业 |
2017-17/0130/en_head.json.gz/2748 | Meat Market Update | Grilling demand pulls prices higher Apr 20, 2017 Prime and Choice producing more dollars Apr 17, 2017 2017 Feed Composition Tables: Use this to mix your cattle feed rations Mar 21, 2017 2017 Parasite & Pest Management Product Listing Apr 18, 2017 Farm Operations>Ranching BEEF Vet: Tips To Create Engaged Employees For Ranch Success
Engaging on-farm employees can help get protocols implemented accurately and even help practice profitability.
By Jennifer Ryan | Oct 21, 2013
Diagnosing a sick animal is easy compared to detecting the cause of an operation’s cultural failure. The symptoms can be increased employee turnover and animal health protocols that aren’t executed properly. Whether losing calves or clients, both can reflect poorly on veterinarians and the ranch owners.
The solution is investing in human capital, and veterinarians can play an important role in helping owners identify cultural failures and fix them. There’s no single-dose treatment for creating engaged employees—either on the farm or in a veterinarian’s own practice.
Recognizing the need for improved engagement is the first step. Then, listening to employees can help guide specific changes within an operation. Plus, engaging a practice’s staff can help a clinic grow and succeed along with its clients.
Investing in Human Capital
Veterinarians actually work with people most of the time, not livestock. The reliance on others to implement recommendations made Lawrence D. Firkins, DVM, M.S., MBA, realize he needed some additional skills beyond just science.
“I’m comfortable understanding cattle and pigs; it’s the people aspect I needed to find a better approach towards,” recalls Dr. Firkins, who is now a professor, Assistant Dean for Public Engagement and swine extension veterinarian at the University of Illinois College of Veterinary Medicine. “I’m a work-in-progress, at best, in developing human capital. None of that comes natural to me. As a veterinarian, my success or failure is largely dependent on other people. The veterinarian is completely dependent on others when it comes to making sure what is recommended actually takes place.”
Lawrence D. Firkins, DVM, MS, MBA, University of Illinois College of Veterinary Medicine that are “engaged” in an operation’s success are ones that aren’t simply there for a paycheck. To move beyond just earning an income, management should communicate the operation’s overall goals clearly and make the staff feel as though each individual is working towards a larger goal.
Dr. Firkins found help developing such skills in the Executive Veterinary Program in Swine Health Management at the University of Illinois, a program which he now directs. In fact, helping others improve their management skills has become his life-long passion.
These “softer” skills can translate easily from cattle and hogs to general business. In every case, the first step is communicating the overall goal of the business beyond the day-to-day tasks. It creates a sense of purpose for all involved.
“As I travel around the country, the family farms that don’t have turnover rates do a wonderful job of communicating the relevance of the employee’s responsibility—what they contribute to the well-being of the organization,” Dr. Firkins says. “They do a good job of communicating why they are in business, whether it’s a commitment to sustainable agriculture, or responsibility to the land their great-grandparents farmed.”
Veterinary consultants can provide an outside perspective for owners who aren’t aware of how their employees view their job. However, all practitioners can set aside time to ask open ended questions while they’re at the farm. This can help provide insight into the culture of an organization, recommends Larry L. Coleman, DVM, owner of Veterinary Care & Consultation in Broken Bow, NE.
Subscribe now to Cow-Calf Weekly to get the latest industry research and information in your inbox every Friday!
“The world loves a listener,” Dr. Coleman says. “I’ve spent most of my life doing walk throughs, and I see that after a period of time of asking questions of the employee—how things are going, are things getting done—those turn into conversations where I’m privy to what’s going on with the relationships in the operation.”
It’s been his experience in 33 years of practice in cattle and swine operations that the veterinarian can act as a go-between. Dr. Coleman notes those conversations can be awkward. He recommends overcoming the initial difficulty by keeping in mind the ultimate goal of animal health and welfare while maintaining the employee’s confidentiality.
“Sometimes those conversations are received warmly, or I find out I didn’t have the right impression,” he says. “When we’re talking about the care of animals—where we literally have seconds to look at each animal and assess its well-being—we need that employee emotionally caring for that animal. I don’t think you have proper animal care unless you have proper engagement.”
Research suggests only one in four employees are emotionally engaged on the job, which is of particular concern when that figure is applied to food animal production, Dr. Coleman says.
Creating Culture
After talking to both employees and management, Dr. Coleman says his next step is to determine if the operation has a healthy or unhealthy culture. Where relationships are simply not working, employee engagement must start with team building or more basic management training.
Additional training or reviewing procedures can help realign a farm with good employee-employer relationships and is important at all levels of on-farm management.
“I see employees that would like to do a good job, but are not given the training to be successful,” Dr. Coleman says. “I’m of the opinion that if you’ll care for the people, then they’ll care for the animals."
Cultural improvements aren’t just for large operations. He says training can help small operations work smarter, not just harder.
“World class farms have to be smart and healthy. Smart means they are doing the right protocols and things for their animals,” Dr. Coleman says. “Healthy speaks for the relationships and functional teams. Let’s not devote all our resources to being smart.”
Working healthy and smart is critically important with 100 employees in the farrow-to-finish hog operation at Thomas Livestock in Broken Bow, NE. For more than seven years, Dr. Coleman has worked with Tim Friedel, the production manager, to help ensure employees are engaged with the operation’s values and culture.
“I believe that to get the best productivity out of people, people have to enjoy what they are doing,” Friedel says. “It’s our job as supervisors to develop these people to first give them the opportunity to be successful and happy at work. If they are enjoying what they do, that will create a lot of pride. If you develop a loyalty to the supervisor, general manager and owner, you have a much greater chance of being successful.”
His career is an example of having worked in swine confinement operations for 37 years and rising in the ranks. As he’s grown as a manager, Dr. Coleman gave him advice and feedback. The outside perspective, combined with appreciation from supervisors, helped Friedel grow in his career.
“You can see very easily the people that take a lot of pride in what they do,” Friedel says. “Those that don’t, may overlook a problem or a sick animal. Whereas if you have people that take a lot of pride in what they do, they will not take a short cut because they understand that reflects on their success.”
Focusing on engaged employees can allow managers and supervisors to relax the reins more, Friedel notes. For example, Thomas Livestock’s night shift is unsupervised. However, the employees still feel accountable for the animals because of trust and loyalty.
Reducing turnover is another benefit that Clare Schilling, an owner at CD Bell in New Athens, IL, found in her operation.
“I’ve seen a huge difference,” says Schilling, who manages the livestock side of the hog and grain farm. “We had a pretty high turnover rate, which is typical for the livestock industry. Now, I’ve had maybe one or two new employees turn over. All of my employees have been with us two years plus. Realizing what employee engagement is, is what allows you to fix it. I just assumed everyone was there because they wanted to work, that’s not always the case.”
With 16 full-time employees on the hog operation alone, she focused on devoting time to employees that would be a good fit for the business and improving morale. Boosting attitudes is often as simple as having a pizza lunch, which Schilling does once a month.
“From a manager’s standpoint, I know if I don’t have the best attitude about the job, they aren’t going to either,” she says. “I try to be optimistic and be careful with how I provide constructive criticism. I try to make it a fun environment, make it somewhere they want to come.
Not all jobs on a livestock operation are fun, so Shilling tries to work alongside employees to set an example. Even if she can’t make time to complete the entire task, it helps contribute to a team atmosphere. Ideas on improving morale also come from her veterinarian, who can offer up examples from other operations.
“They are more willing to go the extra step,” she says. “After we’re done processing, our equipment and tools are washed and disinfected properly; taking that extra minute to go through and do it from start to finish according to protocol. Also, the whole process of processing baby pigs is done more carefully. It is an extremely important procedure, and I feel the team does it a lot better if they are more engaged. Four years ago maybe that wouldn’t have happened.”
Taking Effect
Creating a positive workplace culture at each farm is not a responsibility that rests solely on a veterinarian’s shoulders, Dr. Firkins notes. However, the overall relevance of each employee is necessary before they can feel a connection to their daily actions, whether those are monitoring animals for illness or administering antibiotics.
The overall effect of a focus on employee engagement can be tremendous, Dr. Firkins says. He has seen a reduction in employee turnover and increase in compliance, which can result in improved animal health and profitability.
Don’t guess whether employees are engaged—make sure to ask them, notes Sarah Probst Miller, DVM, President and Creative Director for AgCreate Solutions, Inc.
In a research project as part of the University of Illinois Executive Veterinary Program, Dr. Probst Miller was one of four veterinarians who surveyed swine operations on employee levels of engagement. The survey found operations with good employee engagement had significantly improved production and produced more pigs per sow per year than other operations.
“Increasing engagement on-farm became a doorway through which I could be more impactful with other recommendations,” she says. “I do believe in the ag industry we have great jobs that can be great careers, but we have to let people know where they are going and what their path is.”
Sarah Probst Miller, DVM, AgCreate Solutions, Inc.
Dr. Probst Miller used the Gallup’s Q12® employee engagement survey to assess farms and help figure out what they can do to improve engagement. One of the questions in the survey asks employees if they have everything they need to do their job.
“We sure hope everyone has what they need, but we don’t know that for sure unless we ask,” she says. “This was true with other areas important to employee engagement as well. Once we figured out which engagement element needed improvement, we were able to work on it to get better. It takes people to make pigs. Unless you can figure out how to impact the people, there’s no vaccine or treatment that’s going to impact the pigs. If you don’t have engaged employees, you might be fighting a losing battle.”
At the time of her survey and work in the Executive Veterinary Program, Dr. Probst Miller was working with independent Midwestern hog operations. She found clients receptive to exploring improvements in employee engagement in addition to the veterinary expertise she provided.
The results of increasing efforts in engagement can be measurable for any business, inside or outside of agriculture. In general, businesses that increase employee engagement can see a reduction in absenteeism, fewer work related accidents and more profitability.
Creating engagement is not simply related to larger salaries. Dr. Probst Miller notes the benefit to an employer of an increased salary is often equivalent to a specific and sincere expression of praise. Not just a routine “thank you” to a group, but a tailored message to an individual.
This expression demonstrates to the employee their good work was noticed, and all it costs is a little time and effort.
“People are similar in their desire to be fairly compensated,” Dr. Firkins says. “It doesn’t have to be a literal pat on the back, but did the boss notice if I’ve been asked to change my behavior and did so? All people may not get to the excellence level, but if they start making changes and I ignore that, those changes aren’t going to last. Simple acknowledgement, a thank you, doesn’t cost us a thing.”
Acknowledgement is important to consider as employers hire more members of Generation Y, which is accustomed to continual interaction and feedback. Dr. Firkins notes there is a misconception this generation only wants praise, but that hasn’t been his experience. Younger employees want to know how they can improve.
“I may have been raised that if you don’t hear anything, assume you’re doing fine,” he says. “The current generation is used to more continuous feedback. With the younger generation, if we can focus on improving their knowledge base and make sure they have the tools, we can reduce the level of frustration. The newer generation responds well to mentoring.”
Putting it Into (Your) Practice
Developing team building skills early can help set the stage for future growth, Dr. Coleman says.
“Owners and managers that see the big picture and focus on having good teams, over time their operations get bigger,” Dr. Coleman says. “You can take a young person and grow because he’s such a good operator. But, if he’s unable to manage people, he or she will reach a ceiling, and the operation is maxed out.”
The focus on investing in human capital can be turned inward as well. Dr. Coleman notes his own practice has grown to nine people. There, he sets the stage for a culture of hard work and continued development.
“I’d like to think that I set an example by working the hardest and treat them all with respect,” Dr. Coleman says. “I try to only give them jobs they enjoy or are gifted for. I am focused on their personal development and improvement and try to encourage them with opportunities. In the ag world, if you’re willing to grow personally, there’s always room for advancement.”
Demonstrating proficiency in the area of employee engagement is particularly important when asking clients to invest in the effort themselves, notes Dr. Probst Miller, who now owns her own business.
“It’s always important to practice what you preach,” she says. “Like any normal human being, I have to take a step back and self-assess. I really try to make sure I have people in the right spot. People want to use what they are good at every day. It’s something you have to repeatedly make an effort to do.”
These practitioner approved reading materials can help jump start knowledge and skills in employee engagement.
12: The Elements of Great Managing by Rodd Wagner and James K. Harter, Ph.D.
Built to Last: Successful Habits of Visionary Companies by Jim Collins
Engaging the Hearts and Minds of All Your Employees: How to Ignite Passionate Performance for Better Business Results by Lee Colan
Full Engagement!: Inspire, Motivate, and Bring Out the Best in Your People by Brian Tracy
Good to Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap... and Others Don’t by Jim Collins
StrengthsFinder 2.0 by Tom Rath
The Advantage: Why Organizational Health Trumps Everything Else in Business by Patrick Lencioni
Genomics Coming Of Age For Commercial Beef Herds
65 Photos That Celebrate Cowgirls & Cattlewomen
It's Not Voodoo! Veterinary Acupuncture Can Be A Helpful Tool For Beef Producers
BEEF Vet: How To Choose The Best Lender For Your Practice
Balancing Cattle Nutrition With Genetics Key To Ranch Success
TAGS: Animal Health Livestock 0 comments Hide comments
Related70+ Photos Honor The Hardworking Cowboys On The RanchMay 24, 2012BEEF Vet: How To Choose The Best Lender For Your PracticeAug 30, 2013It's Not Voodoo! Veterinary Acupuncture Can Be A Helpful Tool For Beef ProducersAug 31, 2013Part 1: What do our consumers really want?Apr 22, 2017 Load More | 农业 |
2017-17/0130/en_head.json.gz/2859 | 2017 Cotton Producer Tour of Cotton Incorporated Headquarters Apr 14, 2017 Make sure hay donations are properly inspected before moving Apr 19, 2017 John Bradley: Still leading the innovation charge Apr 13, 2017 To weather ag downturn: ‘Keep it simple’ Apr 17, 2017 Regulatory>Legislative The new farm bill: a Louisiana perspective
Louisiana Sen. Mary Landrieu and Mike Strain, commissioner of the Louisiana Department of Agriculture and Forestry, hold press call to explain importance of farm bill for their state.
Play up growth of exports and key agricultural industries.
Talk about rice and peanut components of Senate farm bill and why they're now acceptable to the South. David Bennett | Jun 03, 2013
With the anticipation of Congress returning from its Memorial Day break and returning to debate on a new farm bill, several key Louisianans have provided a view of the developing legislation from their state’s perspective. As the 2008 farm bill was renewed for only a year, “We’re up against a September 30 deadline to get (a new farm) bill processed,” said Louisiana Sen. Mary Landrieu, who held a joint press call with Mike Strain, commissioner of the Louisiana Department of Agriculture and Forestry (LDAF). “The good news is the Senate version is much stronger for our rice producers than (the 2012 version). The (current) version has my full support.”
Rice, she continued, “is a very important industry for our state. It provides about $11.4 billion to our Louisiana economy and about 250,000 direct jobs according to the USDA.
“Farming is more than just a business, more than just a job. It’s a part of our culture and deserves our support. Whether it’s sugarcane and rice in south Louisiana or cotton in north Louisiana or cattle or aquaculture. We treasure our rural communities and the part that the farm bill plays in keeping them maintained and sustainable.”
Holding onto as much of the nutrition programs as possible is also important to Louisiana, she said. “In the farm bill we’ve also maintained, at least in the Senate version, a strong support for food aid for our people. It’s very important that the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (is available) for children in Louisiana to have access to healthy food. More than 74 percent of the people in Louisiana that receive food aid are children…
“Forty-two percent of SNAP participants come from working families. It’s kind of hard to believe but 42 percent of families receiving food benefits have an income and are working. They just aren’t making enough money to keep food on the table.
As for conservation, Landrieu said it “provides incentives to increase participation in conservation in protecting land and water resources. The program has been expanded in the Senate (farm bill). It’s very popular with our farmers and in rural communities as a way to preserve our precious wetlands and provide protections to our communities that are more vulnerable.”
Before turning the call over to Strain, Landrieu praised his efforts. “the Southern agriculture commissioners have a big lift on this because a lot of people on the (House and Senate Agriculture) Committees are from the Midwest. The Southern agriculture commissioners have a lot of hard politics that they must put into place to make sure they have the votes and support for Southern agriculture.”
Strain said Louisiana agriculture has grown 6.4 percent in the last year. Across the United States, agriculture is the fastest growing sector in the economy.
“Our exports are growing dramatically,” said Strain. “In Louisiana, in the first quarter, exports grew another 15.6 percent – more than double of any other state’s exports, predominantly (due to) agriculture.”
The farm bill, he said, “is absolutely critical. When you look at the 10-year farm bill and the $975 billion, there are many things that have been streamlined. The overall farm bill is less than 2 percent of the federal budget. However, the farm bill commodity programs (represent) less than one half of 1 percent of the federal budget. Yet, it drives the largest and most important sector of our overall economy.
“We will likely export $145 billion to $155 billion worth of product.
The farm bill sets not only priorities but also helps us move in a world economy.”
Rice, sugar, conservation
Strain played up the sugar program. “Sugar is (worth) over $3 billion for our state, now, and $1.1 billion directly for our farmers. It’s important to keep the sugar – a literally no-cost -- program in place. Other countries, specifically Brazil, massively subsidize their sugar program.”
More on the sugar program here. What about rice?
“The program we have in place dealing with adverse market payments and setting a floor of $13.30 is critical. Rice, is worth almost $400 million in our economy.”
Strain said that the original farm bill was passed when the great Dust Bowl was being dealt with. “Here we are at a time when we’re under pressures to have a cleaner environment and to deal with run-off. That can only be done with conservation. Conservation programs are cost-sharing and beneficial.
“We’ll be working in multiple states to develop a nationwide voluntary, nutrient management program. We can work with EPA and do it on a voluntary, cost-share basis versus penalties and mandates.”
U.S. agriculture interests export “40 to 50 percent of the world’s corn, 35 percent of the world’s soybeans, and 15 percent of the world’s protein.”
One Strain concern: the average age of a U.S. farmer is nearly 60 years of age. “The farm bill is important because it helps the new and beginning farmers.”
Queried on why the current Senate farm bill is better than the 2012 version, Landrieu said the short answer is “this Senate version is much more advantageous to rice and peanuts and now has the support of the Southern agriculture alliance. That’s why I strongly support the bill.”
Strain brought up regional issues. “The previous version was disproportionately unfair to Southern crops – specifically, rice and peanuts. The initial discussion was that the money that was no longer available for direct payments would be invested into a more affordable and crop insurance.”
When looking at how crop insurance has been done in the past, “our premiums were much higher than in other areas of the country and actually paid out less,” said Strain. “So, the overall discussion was it would be made much more fair and equitable. But the (2012) Senate version wasn’t fair to rice in that respect, nor to peanuts.”
The current Senate farm bill is better because of “the availability of different types of crop insurance programs, basic revisions and revenue protection,” said Strain. “Also, we now have a base price for rice of $13.30 per hundredweight.” 0 comments Hide comments
RelatedDelta leaders seeking renewed effort to complete Upper Yazoo Basin ProjectsApr 20, 2017No funding for Upper Yazoo Project in president’s budgetApr 18, 2017Delta Farm Press Calendar of EventsApr 18, 2017Agriculture secretary vacancy looms large as farmers struggle to stay in businessApr 17, 2017 Load More | 农业 |
2017-17/0130/en_head.json.gz/3322 | Tobacco purchasing should be based on value, not price Apr 03, 2017 Caledonia: Where prisoners have grown their food for 125 years Apr 04, 2017 How a blueberry family won and lost against a punishing situation Apr 05, 2017 90 percent of South Carolina’s peach crop destroyed Apr 02, 2017 THE EVOLUTION OF the U.S. government’s peanut program, from quota allotments to more of a market-oriented approach, has increased the importance of exports to the overall health of the industry.
Crops>Peanuts Peanut Futures: Peanut program evolution pushes exports to forefront
The evolution of the federal government’s peanut program has been a game changer as far as exports are concerned. Paul Hollis | Jun 03, 2014
The evolution of the federal government’s peanut program – from a supply-control program that restricted production through quota poundage allotments and a two-tiered pricing system to a more market-oriented program – has been a game changer as far as exports are concerned.
“So the big question is how can we increase exports? Because they are our future,” says Don Koehler, executive director of the Georgia Peanut Commission. “Exports represent the growth that we’ll have in the market, because we have a mature market in the United States.”
Peanut Futures: Marketing for Profitability, an exclusive editorial series sponsored by DuPont Crop Protection, examines recent developments in U.S. and international peanut markets. This is the third story in the series.
Koehler says that “old program” mentality too often destroys opportunity in the U.S. peanut industry, referring to the peanut quota program that was phased out with the 2002 Farm Bill. “As an industry, we’ve still got a lot of that old program mentality, but we’re seeing less and less of it, and that’s good for us,” he says.
The peanut quota allotment program had been in place since the 1930s. Quota assigned to farmers was limited to domestic use only while additional were used for export and crush. The program began as an acreage allotment and then changed to poundage allotments in the late 1970s. Quota was based on historical production, and there was no movement of acreage across states and limited movement across county lines.
The quota program, says Koehler, managed supplies to levels that were tighter than they needed to be.
“There was no opportunity for growth in the old peanut program. We knew what consumption was, and that’s what the quota was – that’s just how it worked. The cost of production escalator actually rewarded inefficiency, because if the cost of production increased, then the support price increased.
“Over time, the quota itself had a value that was greater than the peanuts. There were folks who were renting quota and were not growing peanuts, and they did well with that.”
Koehler says he admits that he was a champion for the peanut program because it seemed to work and it paid a lot of mortgages on the farm. But for any cause, he says, there has to be some effect.
“Quota ended up being a big part of the costs for farmers. We had people paying up to $200-plus for quota just to be able to participate in the program, and the escalator allowed farmers to be a little lax on managing their costs. The domestic market was ‘the’ market – no one was really concerned much about the export market. Exports were an after-thought for additional peanuts (peanuts sold in excess of the quota).”
Growth opportunities in exports
The U.S. domestic peanut market is more mature than the world market, says Koehler, so opportunities for growth in the domestic market are far more limited than in the export market.
“We need to get away from this old program mentality and look more at our opportunities in the world market. If the domestic manufacturers don’t get peanuts because someone in Europe or China bought them, it shouldn’t matter as long as we sell peanuts – it’s all one market, and we should get away from this old program mentality of there being an export market and a domestic market.”
Population growth is going to occur outside the United States, he says. “We’re pretty good about controlling our population, but the population growth in the world will happen outside the U.S., and if we don’t feed that demand, I promise you that someone else will. Having a record-large crop in 2012 should have taught us something about the value of exports. We have to be ready to participate in that market.”
The export market, says Koehler, also will help us to increase interest in the domestic market.
“If a domestic manufacturer knows that someone in another country is interested in our peanuts, they might decide they need to buy their peanuts sooner and cover their bases earlier on. Wouldn’t it be great if we could sell everything at a reasonable price at harvest?
Want access to the very latest in agriculture news each day? Subscribe to Southeast Farm Press Daily. It’s free!
“If we fail to increase demand, then we’ve lost an opportunity. The opportunity is there, and we saw it with China. When China stepped away from the market, or when the Chinese government helped to push them away from the market, Canada, Mexico and Europe picked up the slack there because there was interest and a need for what we had.”
There’s no such thing as too many peanuts, there’s just too few markets, says Koehler.
“This is why I say that 2012 was a good lesson for us, and we need to learn that lesson. We need a stable supply so if manufactures decide they’re going to put a new product on the market, then they’ll have the peanuts to do it.”
Research remains vital to growing the peanut market, says Koehler. “We need economic data so that whenever we do things like trying to eliminate trade tariffs, we’ll have a basis for it. Production research also must continue to address making us the lowest unit-cost producers in the world. I think we can get there. We’ve got the finest infrastructures, we’ve got the finest farmers, and substantial investments are being made. So I believe we can be the lowest-cost producers, but we’ve got to be concerned about unit efficiency, and research plays a large role in helping us get to that point.”
Economic research also is critical in helping peanut farmers make decisions, he says. A lot of times, farmers will do whatever they’ve seen their neighbors do down the road. We just can’t afford to do that. Farming decisions have to be based upon the numbers.
“We’ve got to have the most value worldwide, and we need to reward growers for quality. Farmers need to understand their impact on quality. Value sells peanuts, and U.S. growers need to offer the best value possible.”
RelatedPeanut Futures series: Oversupply not deterring more 2014 peanut plantingApr 10, 2014Peanut Futures: Marketing for profitability in a world marketApr 16, 2014Peanut Futures Series: Will farm bill ease peanut's boom-bust cycle?May 02, 20142020 strategic plan positions peanuts for optimistic futureApr 20, 2017 Load More | 农业 |
2017-17/0130/en_head.json.gz/3356 | Grant Schemes
RD1 & RD2
RDSP Teams
EU Grant Support Team
Crop Husbandry Technical Assistance Team
Animal Husbandry Technical Assistance…
Rural Development Support Team
Farm Advisory Services (FAS)
Development of Metrology Capacity
Local Development Strategies
Rural Development Plan
LEADER Approach
Project Cycle Managament Guidelines
CV Format
Community Development 4th Call for…
Community Development 4 Q&A…
Agro-Meteo and Irrigation
NewsCall for Expression of Interest - EN- Experts to act as Agricultural AdvisorsClick here for the Q&A document of Community Development 4 Concept Notes.See photos from the Fourth Community Development (CDIV) grant scheme Information Session held in the Merit Hotel on 15 April 2016. The grant scheme focuses on local communities who were represented in forceFourth Community Development Call for Proposals (CD4) launched on 8 April 2016. Deadline for Concept Notes is 27 May 2016. Please click here to access the Guidelines.
See photo gallery for the recently completed projects and events.See tenders section for the very latest tenders launched.
The EU-financed Animal Husbandry Project, implemented between October 2008 and December 2012, aimed at advising and training livestock farmers to improve farm management (including accounting) and animal breeding practices (feeding, hygiene and animal welfare), as well as strengthening the provision of animal husbandry, farm advisory services and veterinary services.
Key activities included: training local experts/advisors in the provision of animal husbandry advice to farmers, provide animal husbandry advisory services directly to farmers, develop the capacity of veterinarians and support staff, assist in the improvement of services provided by veterinary laboratories, support rural development planning, with respect to animal husbandry, and improve public awareness on the importance of healthy food, food safety and of diseases transmitted from animals to humans (zoonoses).
A total of 39 training courses (with 466 participants) were delivered to animal husbandry advisors, while 206 trainings were provided to 2,991 farmers and herdsmen. Farmer training subjects included animal health, identification, hygiene, nutrition, mastitis, forage crop production, rearing of livestock, farm management, and processing and marketing. Ad hoc advice with farm visits was also provided to 56 individual farmers and twenty three advisory bulletins were published on key topics of interest to farmers. A total of 69 training sessions were delivered for 649 veterinarians and support staff in subjects such as animal and herd health, notifiable diseases, food safety, mastitis control, reproduction, disease prevention, animal welfare and pharmaceuticals. Pilot epidemiological disease surveillance programmes were undertaken as part of the disease control and eradication plans. Following assessment of the veterinary laboratories technical specifications were drafted for the supply of needed laboratory and supporting equipment and training was provided for laboratory staff on the use and maintenance of the delivered equipment, funded by the EU. Four information campaigns were implemented on food safety and diseases transmissible from animals to humans.
Go to Tenders Videos Photos Grant projects shall ensure that, in the preparation and implementation of all investments, the rights of natural and legal persons, including the rights to possessions and property shall be respected. No project undertaken by an enterprise should be intended to imply recognition of any public authority other than the Government of the Republic of Cyprus. This website has been produced with the assistance of the European Union. The contents of the website are the sole responsibility of the WYG International Danışmanlık Ltd. led consortium and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Union. | 农业 |
2017-17/0130/en_head.json.gz/3850 | 2005 Anderson's Conn Valley Vineyards Cabernet Sauvignon Estate Reserve Napa Valley
Other Vintages of Anderson's Conn Valley Vineyards Cabernet Sauvignon Estate Reserve Napa Valley
The 2005 vintage in Napa was one of the best of the decade, with balanced, lovely wines with plenty of depth, richness, and concentration, all balanced by lovely fresh acidity and detail. Classic, structured, and deep, they should age well for decades.
A wet winter was followed in March by a dry, mild spell, then a wet, rainy period that delayed bloom and fruit set. Rains continued into April, May, and even into June. Some parts of Napa Valley had more than 15 inches of rain after bud break, creating problems for growers. Vineyard management costs skyrocketed as the moisture spurred weed growth, and powdery mildew was a big problem.
Summer was moderate, without any real extremes of heat. The cool temperatures and foggy mornings kept ripening moving slowly, and there was some concern with sugar levels and overall ripeness as the harvest began to approach. September arrived with beautiful, warm, sunny days — and an Indian summer allowed winemakers to wait as sugar accumulated at an even pace, while keeping the grapes balanced with good acidity. It was a very late vintage and a very large crop as well, beating out the previous record set in 1997. Many didn’t finish picking until late October and even into November, but the long hang-time was beneficial and the weather held for the most part.
The resulting wines are seamless, elegant yet structured and deep, with lovely well-knit fruit and tannins. They may not have the power and ripe, plush notes of some of the other top vintages of the decade — rather, they will be known for their beautiful balance and focus. The best should age gracefully for decades to come.
Additional 5 inches of rain falls
Harvest for sparkling wine began on schedule
Weather was mild throughout the month, with no heat spikes of any consequence
Harvest for still wine didn’t begin in earnest until October, because of mild September weather. The main Cabernet Sauvignon harvest began in the middle of October and continued until the middle of November
A few inches over the average amount of rain
About Anderson's Conn Valley Vineyards
Anderson's Conn Valley Vineyards
http://www.connvalleyvineyards.com/
Anderson’s Conn Valley Winery was founded in 1983 by Gus and Phyllis Anderson along with their son Todd, who owns and operates the winery today. Their first release was in 1987, making it one of the earlier wineries in the Napa wine boom that started in the late 1970s, and the estate has produced beautiful, classic Napa wines ever since. Although there has been some new construction in recent years, it is still a little bit of a throwback to the earlier days compared with some of the super-modern, high-tech designs of the newer wineries on the scene today.
The winery is nestled on 40 acres located in the scenic Conn Valley, just off Rossi Road, in the foothills on the eastern side of the Napa Valley. It is only three miles east of Saint Helena, but feels much more remote. Howell Mountain lies just to the north, with Lake Hennessey to the south, both working to create a unique micro-climate that is quite different than below on the valley floor. If you look at it on a topographic map, the winery and vineyards lie in a slight depression, a bowl formed by an elevation line that runs a couple of hundred feet above the vineyards and wraps around the property and a couple of other neighboring vineyards.
Driving in, you crest the ridge near the turn off from Conn Valley Road and drive down into a little valley to the winery and vineyards. The only break in the bowl is where the property is open to the south, towards Lake Hennessey, which lies about a mile or so away. The valley is influenced by cool air that forms on Howell Mountain and washes down its slopes into the valley, and fog that lingers in the mornings an hour or so later than on the valley floor. Mornings start out cooler, then by early afternoon temperatures catch up until a breeze comes up from Lake Hennessey at about 3 o'clock on summer afternoons that typically lasts until early evening. This cools the vineyards, allows a slower maturation for the grapes, and helps maintain freshness and acidity. Most years everything from bud break to veraison and harvest is two to three weeks later than on the valley floor. Harvests often don’t really get underway until October, while many spots lower down start in September.
Soils vary throughout the various blocks and parcels, with parts of the vineyard comprised of clays over rocky soils, (with the cool clays playing a role in the site’s cooler nature as well), and others with deep gravelly clay loam of the Bale Loam series, similar to those on the Rutherford Bench.
Winemaker Robert Hunt arrived on the scene three and a half years ago, with 2015 marking his fourth harvest here. He comes with an excellent resume, having worked at Clos Pegase for two years, working a crush at Ovid, traveling for a year and a half in Italy, a stint at Colgin in 2007, and getting his start in the cellars at Pine Ridge. His philosophy is fairly straightforward: no enzymes, minimal additions, do as little racking and moving as possible, let the wines and the place speak for itself, and concentrate on great fruit in the vineyards.
Having spent time at two of the most sophisticated and impeccably designed wine facilities at Ovid and Colgin, Robert notes the difference working here, where it’s a little more traditional. With the winery’s roots back in the 1980s, he feels a connection to the earlier days in Napa, and brings all of the experience and insight he gained over his career to continually learning the property’s ins and outs, and making the best wines possible — evidenced by his extremely successful and well-made 2012s, and the 2013s and 2014s in barrel indicating even more great things to come.
Browse top-rated wines from Anderson's Conn Valley Vineyards
Top Expert-Rated Wines from Anderson's Conn Valley Vineyards
2007 Anderson's Conn Valley Vineyards Eloge Napa Valley
2009 Anderson's Conn Valley Vineyards Signature Napa Valley
Browse all expert-rated wines from Anderson's Conn Valley Vineyards → | 农业 |
2017-17/0130/en_head.json.gz/5055 | Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada December 13, 2010 15:26 ET
Government of Canada Investment to Help Hemp Farmers and Processors Reach Full Potential
WINNIPEG, MANITOBA--(Marketwire - Dec. 13, 2010) - The Government of Canada is injecting more than $728,000 to help the hemp industry increase production capacity and make new inroads into the U.S. market. The Honourable Vic Toews, Minister of Public Safety, made the announcement today on behalf of Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz. "Canadian farmers and processors are finding tremendous success with hemp thanks to its many nutritional benefits and wide range of uses in pasta, salad dressings and frozen desserts," said Minister Toews. "This Government is proud to invest in this growing industry so that farmers can continue to expand their markets and develop more products."
The Government of Canada investment will support three groups: A $410,000 repayable contribution through the AgriProcessing Initiative for Fresh Hemp Foods to purchase and install new dehulling, oil pressing, and packaging equipment in its new 20,000 square foot state-of-the-art facility. A $300,000 repayable contribution through the AgriProcessing Initiative for Hemp Oil Canada to purchase and install new air classification milling and cold press oil expeller technology. A $18,625 investment through the AgriMarketing program for the Canadian Hemp Trade Alliance to enhance its website, hold a strategic planning meeting of its board of directors and take the first steps toward achieving Generally Regarded as Safe status in the U.S. In 2009, exports of hemp seed and hemp products were valued at more than $8 million, with most exports going to the U.S. The AgriProcessing Initiative, funded under the Agricultural Flexibility fund as part of Canada's Economic Action Plan, provides support to existing processing companies for agri-processing projects that involve the adoption of innovative and new-to-company manufacturing technologies and processes that are essential to sustaining and improving the sector's position in today's global marketplace. For more information, visit www.agr.gc.ca/api. The AgriMarketing program helps producers and processors implement long-term international strategies which include activities such as international market development, consumer awareness and branding and industry-to-industry trade advocacy. To find out more about this program, visit: www.agr.gc.ca/agrimarketing. Contact Information
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Office of the Honourable Gerry Ritz
Meagan Murdoch | 农业 |
2017-17/0130/en_head.json.gz/5078 | Heirloom Root Vegetable Varieties
Learn about unusual heirloom root vegetable varieties and how to make a delightful beignets recipe.
By William Woys Weaver
Heirloom Vegetable Gardening by William Woys Weaver is the culmination of some thirty years of first-hand knowledge of growing, tasting and cooking with heirloom vegetables. A staunch supporter of organic gardening techniques, Will Weaver has grown every one of the featured 280 varieties of vegetables, and he walks the novice gardener through the basics of planting, growing and seed saving. Sprinkled throughout the gardening advice are old-fashioned recipes — such as Parsnip Cake, Artichoke Pie and Pepper Wine — that highlight the flavor of these vegetables. The following excerpt on heirloom root vegetable varieties was taken from chapter 37, “Unusual Root Vegetables.”
Buy the brand new e-book of Weaver’s gardening classic in the MOTHER EARTH NEWS store: Heirloom Vegetable Gardening.
'Chufa'
'Crosnes'
'Earth Chestnut'
'Edible Tuber Dahlia' 'Evening Primrose'
'Ocha'
'Salsify'
'Scorzonera' 'Skirret'
'Turnip-Rooted Chervil'
Beignets Recipe
To locate mail order companies that carry these heirloom root vegetable varieties, use our Custom Seed and Plant Finder. Check out our collection of articles on growing and harvesting heirloom vegetables in Gardening With Heirloom Vegetables.
A Brief History of Unusual Heirloom Root Vegetable Varieties
'Chufa' or 'Earth Almond'
Cyperus esculentus
This easy-to-grow perennial vegetable, with 2-to-2 1/2-foot-long wispy, grasslike leaves, resembles several other members of the Cyperus genus, especially the common weed Cyperus strigosus, with which it should not be confused. The weed is native, but chufa was introduced from Spain in the eighteenth century in order to make a refreshing acid beverage called orgeat. The tubers were soaked for two or three days in spring water, then pounded. The liquid that ran off was strained and chilled on ice as a cooling summer drink. Chufa has since naturalized in the light sandy soils of the middle and southern states. In my part of the country it is commonly called Yellow Nut Grass, or simply Nut Grass, and at one time it was a common vegetable in our farm markets. The tubers, normally about 1/4 inch in diameter, will grow much larger under cultivation if the soil conditions are right and the plants are given a healthy dose of rock phosphate each spring.
In the Report of the Commissioner of Patents (1856, 259), Victor Scriba, a Pennsylvania Dutch newspaper publisher in Pittsburgh, described growing chufa in 1853 and noted that it could be eaten raw like a chestnut or almond. In texture it is somewhat mealy like a chestnut, yet with a distinct almondlike flavor. It was used by country people as an almond substitute in cookies and confectionery, and was even pounded with sugar to make a type of faux marzipan once quite popular among the Pennsylvania Germans. The Pennsylfaanisch word for it is Aerdmandel or “earth almond,” and it is from the Pennsylvania Dutch that this alternate name derives.
The tubers should be planted 6 inches apart where they are to grow for several years. Mature clumps should be divided from time to time, and only the largest tubers replanted. This will encourage the plant to develop large tubers over a period of years. The smallness of the tuber is the only drawback at present; a concerted effort to develop a large-rooted variety would doubtless result in greater interest in this vegetable, especially since it can be eaten by people who are normally allergic to nuts.
Stachys affinis
Crosnes are a perennial root vegetable with small tubers that have the texture of water chestnuts. The shape of the tubers is curious and knobby. In France, where they are popular in the region around Lyon, crosnes are often served as an hors d’oeuvre with cardoons.
Crosnes were sent from Beijing to France in 1882 by Russian botanist Emillii Vasilevich Bretschneider (1833–1901), whose famous botanical exploits in China were later described in a fascinating account published in 1898. By 1889, the American Garden (10:101, 193, and 228) began reporting on the French successes with this “new vegetable.” This was followed during the 1890s with a burst of interest in crosnes as part of a larger but passing fascination for Japanese vegetables and fruits. In Japan, crosnes are known as choro-gi. One of the leading promoters of the vegetable in this country was the seed firm of V. H. Hallock & Sons in Queens, New York, which advertised this “wonderful new food” under the unlikeliest of names: Vegetable White Bait. The firm’s advertisements in the Farm and Fireside (March 1, 1890, 188) claimed that the tubers were a bargain at 35 cents per dozen. One plant produces many hundreds.
Since the 1890s, crosnes have been grown off and on as a curiosity, but recently there has been renewed interest in them as a winter vegetable. A few years ago I acquired plants from Phyllis Hanes, former food editor for the Christian Science Monitor. She had been growing crosnes in Boston for several years. The plants are extremely hardy, and their culture is simple.
The tubers are planted in the fall in rich, light soil in a sunny location. They should be set in the ground about 6 inches deep and 12 inches apart, for generous spacing encourages the development of tubers. Once the plants sprout the following spring, allow them to reach about I foot in height, then keep them cropped back to 6 inches. Cropping will direct growth into the roots. Plants that’are allowed to flower will produce small tubers. Over the summer, keep the plants well watered, since they are sensitive to drought. In the fall, after frost kills the tops, the tubers can be harvested as needed. They can be grown in most parts of the United States and will withstand severe winters.
Due to their knobby shape, crosnes are not pared. The skin contains much of the flavor and is also rich in vitamins and minerals. To wash the tubers, place them in a large bowl of water and scrub them with a vegetable brush. A toothbrush purchased for this purpose will work beautifully, especially the brushes designed for false teeth. Once cleaned, the tubers can be eaten raw as a snack, added to casseroles, or mixed with stir-fries. They retain their crunchiness when cooked.
Bunium bulbocastanum
Introduction of this plant from East Asia was attempted in the 1870s under the name Prescott chervil, but the venture failed. Today it is known as Earth Chestnut or Tuberous-Rooted Caraway, and to be frank, none of the names fit it very well. The leaf and plant resemble parsley, although they are rather neutral in taste. The seed is small like parsley and easy to grow. Plants should be started indoors in the spring, then planted out after the threat of frost has passed. Plants should be spaced about 10 inches apart; crowding will only result in small roots. Allow the plants to establish for at least I year before harvesting the tubers, which are about the size of a thumb. They can be eaten raw in salads or boiled and served as a vegetable. The taste and texture remind me of celery root. The leaves make a good mix with salad burnet, which they resemble somewhat in shape.
The earth chestnut is extremely hardy in Pennsylvania, where it is more or less evergreen during the winter; thus it makes an excellent winter salad green. In fact, the plant continues to grow even under the snow.
'Edible Tuber Dahlia'
Perhaps it is my quirkiness, but I am always game to try new things, especially if it means introducing more cheerful color into my vegetable garden. The edible tuber dahlia recently surfaced as an untried culinary heirloom, and the adventure is worth reporting, for I have never seen dahlias listed as vegetables. In fact, Boston horticulturist Joseph Breck had this to say about dahlia tubers: “There is no danger from rats or mice or any other creature. I never knew an animal to touch them. You could not catch an old rat even to smell of them the second time” (1858, 50–51). Breck was as partial to dahlias as Victorian gardeners were to garlic. However, Roland Green, an early nineteenth-century flower specialist, noted in 1828 that the dahlia root resembled a sweet potato, and this also happens to be a fairly accurate description of its culinary merits.
The oral history concerning this attractive red double-flowering dahlia is that it was preserved among the Nanticoke Indians of Maryland for over 400 years. This pedigree is an example of how the mythology of the American Indian sometimes takes possession of an heirloom vegetable and provides it with an authenticity that is not above reproach. Simple mathematics explodes the story.
Dahlias were known in the back hills of Mexico but were not introduced to the outside world until 1787, when the flower was discovered during a French botanical expedition to Oaxaca. In 1789 seed was sent to Madrid under the name Mexican aster. This seed produced tall, gangly plants with uninteresting single flowers. It is believed that the early seed sent to Europe contained a mixture of two separate species, Dahlia pinnata (which grows about 6 feet tall) and Dahlia coccinea (which grows about 10 feet tall). All of the cultivated dahlias known today were created through hybridization or selection from these two species.
Double-flowering dahlias, like the edible one, appeared as sports in the botanic garden of Lou-vain in Belgium during the 1820s, and from that source the rage for double flowering and much overpriced dahlias emanated. American seedsman Thomas Bridgeman published a catalog of over 200 double varieties in his Florist’s Guide (1836, 60–74), with a dizzying abundance of red ones. The edible dahlia of the Nanticoke Indians is probably a variety of Victorian “decorative dahlia,” one of the recognized dahlia types, and with persistent research through old colored plates of dahlias, its true origin may someday be discovered. In the meantime, we shall cook it.
It is much to the credit of the Nanticokes that an observant gardener perhaps a hundred years ago, and not before that, noted certain similarities between the dahlia and the Jerusalem artichoke, for both belong to the helianthus tribe. It was a brave cook who first tried the roots for dinner, but one who must certainly have had an excellent understanding of plants — from missionary friends in Mexico with Mixteca connections. Eating a potato does not induce pangs of guilt, but eating a dahlia tuber provokes sadness for depriving the soul of an inspiring flower. To enjoy the dahlia tubers, it is important to dissociate them from thoughts of summer, and never serve them to friends who have first seen the flower, for this will only stir up endless quibbling about extraordinary waste and tastes so jaded they can only be satisfied by the sacrifice of beautiful and costly plants.
To my surprise, each plant produces four or five large, plump tubers. Thus, within the period of two or three seasons, it is possible to have an overabundance of tubers that cries out for thinning down to manageable size. Furthermore, anyone who has ever grown dahlias knows that if the tuber is accidentally broken from its stem, it will not grow. This is where cooking the culls makes absolute sense, and hunger for a gourmet treat takes hold of culinary fancy. And yes indeed, the flavor of the dahlia tuber goes perfectly well with a glass of red wine. Its approval is therefore assured.
'Evening Primrose'
Oenothera biennis
The evening primrose is native to eastern North America, but in colonial times its brilliant yellow flower caught the attention of European gardeners, so the wild form has undergone considerable alteration at the hands of plant breeders. The Société Royal d’Agriculture of Lyon, France, convened a small conference in 1838 to discuss the idea of cultivating the evening primrose as a root vegetable. The root is fleshy and rich in nutrients, and the plant thrives in poor soil. Such features would not only recommend it as a new type of food, similar to a turnip, but would also provide economic possibilities for farmers with poor ground.
Considerable effort was devoted to improving the evening primrose between 1838 and 1845, primarily in France and Germany, but the end result, it would appear, was only larger plants with more profuse flowers. The roots of the improved strain are indeed larger than the wild ones, but often irregular in shape. However, this improved strain came back to America, and it is the one most commonly cultivated in gardens. As an experiment, I dug some plants from the wild just to see if the differences were real, and they were.
The boiled root is generally used in salads, mixed with cardoons or other blanched vegetables. Personally, I find the taste of the root peppery and unpleasant, like some wild mushrooms I have eaten with very sad results, or perhaps, more accurately, like biting into a spoonful of mustard seeds. Yet I have tasted roots from other gardens that are almost as sweet as carrots. This suggests to me that soil may determine the success of this vegetable more than human intervention.
The green tops overwinter like Turkish rocket, which they resemble in taste. As its botanical name would imply, evening primrose is a biennial, although some plants bloom the first year. It commonly grows to a height of 6 feet and is covered with bright yellow flowers for much of the summer. As an accent plant, it is showy in the kitchen garden, but it reseeds promiscuously. I allow volunteers to establish themselves here and there and enjoy the random spots of color, but constant weeding of seedlings is necessary to keep it under control.
'Ocha', or 'Oca'
Oxalis tuberosa
The ancestors of the Incas perfected the culture of ocha more than a thousand years ago and developed many different varieties, yet Europeans took little note of the plant until the nineteenth century. Tubers were sent from Peru to England in 1829, where they immediately caused a gardening sensation, even though the plants had been identified by Nicholas de Jacquin in the eighteenth century. James Mitchell, an English gardener who had grown ocha, wrote an article on its culinary qualities for the Gardener’s Magazine (1833, 78–79). The vegetable was eventually trialed in the garden of the London Horticultural Society, followed shortly thereafter by a dinner in which several courses of ocha were served.
Oxalis deppei, now commonly grown under the name Good Luck plant or Lucky Clover, was introduced from Mexico in 1837 and also trialed by the London Horticultural Society. It was cooked as a root vegetable and pronounced “delicate.” Fearing Burr (1865, 38) wrote that it was served like asparagus, which is not possible since no part of the plant produces a stem even suggestive of asparagus. However, if the bulbs are planted in sandy soil, they will develop by the end of the summer into a cluster of perhaps 10 or 12 and will have sent down a white carrotlike root about 3 inches long. This makes a very delicate vegetable, but it must be allowed to mellow in the sun for several days to remove the bitterness. Furthermore, the “shamrock” leaves and the cheerful pink flowers are delightful in salads; that is the reason I cultivate it.
Ocha entered the United States about the same time that it appeared in England, except that our earliest stock came from Chile. It remained an exotic vegetable among our gentleman gardeners for much of the nineteenth century because interest in it was more or less shoved aside by the agricultural crisis brought on by the failure of the potato crop in the 1840s. Oddly, ocha would have made a good alternative. The only drawback is its acidity, which, if not properly dealt with, will impart a bitterness to the root, as with Oxalis deppei. Exposing the tubers to the sun for ten days converts this bitterness to sugars.
Fearing Burr (1865, 36–37) listed two varieties, the white-rooted (oca blanca) and the red-rooted (oca Colorado). The red variety was depicted in the Album Vilmorin (1869, 20), as well as a yellow one. There are also “blush” and brightly speckled varieties. I grow all of them, and they are harvested the same way.
The tubers resemble miniature Jerusalem artichoke roots, except that they are waxy on the surface and brilliantly colored. They are best started in individual pots in the late winter so that the plants are well established when they are set out after all danger of frost has passed. Loose, moist, sandy soil is their preference, and it is better to situate them in partial shade, because the blasting heat of summer may kill them. A drought certainly will, for these are plants from the High Andes that thrive in cool weather, but they also need a long growing season.
The tops or greens can be eaten as a vegetable. The stems are fleshy and slightly sour. For root culture it is important to leave the tops alone, because the plant must bloom if it is to produce a large crop of tubers, a characteristic it shares with the potato. Once it has bloomed, the tubers can be harvested. Those reserved for seed stock should be stored in a cool dry place until late winter, when the process of planting is repeated.
Ocha is day-length sensitive and will not form tubers until there are less than twelve hours of light a day. For most of the United States, this means that tubers will not form until November, so the plants must be covered to protect them from frost at least until Thanksgiving. In areas of the country where the ground freezes before November I, ocha may not be an option, since this last stage is critical to the development of the crop.
Sara McCamant, a member of Seed Savers Exchange in California, not only sent me some of the most exquisite pink and white ochas I have ever seen but kindly passed along cultural advice that proved quite helpful. Sara’s experience with ocha, due to its preference for cool weather, has been to plant it in a somewhat shady location, a conclusion I reached intuitively by observing its reaction to the hot sun. All members of the Oxalis genus thrive better in sandy soil; therefore I have created a special bed for ocha by double-digging and using cactus potting mixture as infill. This has tripled my yields.
It was interesting to see Sara’s ochas, because they were quite different from mine in skin texture. Hers had skins more like that of a potato, in outward appearance anyway — ocha skin is paper-thin — whereas mine have waxy skins. There is very little written on the differences in ocha varieties, yet they go far beyond color and skin texture. There are large differences in the texture of the flesh, and some varieties contain high amounts of oxalic acid, which gives them a bitter taste. This bitterness can be overcome by drying the tubers in the sun, which quickly transforms many of the starches to sugar, a technique used by the ancient Incas. Unfortunately, people who are allergic to spinach (which contains oxalic acid) are likely to experience a severe reaction and therefore should avoid ocha.
Tragopogon porrifolius
Salsify has naturalized in my garden. I planted it a few years ago in a raised bed half filled with sand, and the salsify has taken over. It thrives on ground where it can drive its root straight and deep, and an occasional summer flood does not hurt it. My grandfather called salsify oyster plant, and I can remember it in his garden: tall wispy leaves like giant grass, and a flower some four feet high that opened in the morning a brilliant red. This was the old Pennsylvania Dutch Hawwerwurzel (oat root), the real heirloom salsify of colonial America. I wish today that I had that red-flowering variety, because it is now extremely rare.
Salsify was cultivated by the ancient Greeks and Romans. It was discussed by the classical authors Theophrastos, Dioskorides, and Pliny. They did not mention the flower color, but it was probably the red variety, for that was the kind cultivated in the Middle Ages and called oculus porci (pig’s eye). Old herbals show both the red and the yellow types, the yellow-flowering one being the wild form, Tragopogon pratense, now naturalized in America and known as goat’s-beard.
The red-flowering form was generally called the “common” variety in early American garden books, although as Charles Hovey pointed out in the Magazine of Horticulture (1842, 129–30), “to the mass of the community, it is quite a new vegetable.” Aside from the that grown by Pennsylvania Dutch, who had been cultivating it since the 1700s, salsify was, in Hovey’s words “scarcely seen beyond the precincts of the kitchen gardens of gentlemen in the vicinity of our large cities.” Its popularity increased by the time of the Civil War, and the old red variety survived in country kitchen gardens into this century, but was eventually replaced by the blue-flowering varieties we know today.
In 1872 Rochester, New York, seedsman James Vick began offering a “new French variety” called New Blue Flowered, “said to be superior in flavor and size to the old sorts.” The J. M. Thorburn seed company of New York began distributing another blue-flowering variety in the late 1880s called Mammoth Sandwich Island, which is the variety of salsify that I recommend to heirloom gardeners. The American Garden (1889, 99, 187) promoted it when the variety was first introduced: “We are now using this delicious vegetable… its yield is double that of the Common variety.”
Salsify is a biennial, blooming the second year. The roots of first-year plants taste vaguely like oysters, which is why they were popular pureed into soups or cooked as a vegetable side dish with fish. Second-year plants can be woody, but the tender ones taste more like asparagus. During the early summer of the second year, they bloom with flowers resembling a dandelion. The seedheads develop feathers that carry off the seed during gusts of wind. When the seedheads are dry, the seed can be separated and dried. Since the seed goes into deep dormancy unless planted immediately after it ripens, I think it is best to plant it then and there where it is to grow and thus keep the salsify bed in a constant state of production. Seed purchased commercially is in deep dormancy and must be planted early in the spring when the potatoes go in, mid-March if possible. This cold period will cause it to germinate. Contrary to folklore, there are no “male” and “female” seeds.
The blue-flowering salsify will only cross with other blue-and red-flowering varieties. It will not cross with goat’s-beard or with scorzonera.
Both salsify and scorzonera make delightful beignets. The following beignets recipe is from A. B. Beauvillier’s Art of Cookery (1827, 243).
Beignets de Salsifi et de Scorsonère
Take of one of these a sufficient quantity, and cut them about three inches long; put in a stewpan a little water and vinegar; throw them in as they are scraped; wash and cut them; put upon the fire a pot with water, salt, vinegar, and a bit of butter rubbed in flour; when they are done enough drain and marinade them in salt, pepper, and vinegar; when ready to serve, dip them into a light paste (pâté à frire); put them into a frying pan; when they are a fine colour, drain them upon a cloth.
The reason for putting the salsify in acidulated water is that exposed to the air, the pared root discolors. Vinegar will also remove the stains on the hands resulting from the sap. Normally, before cooking either scorzonera or salsify, they are first blanched in a flour-and-water blanc, which keeps them from turning black.
'Scorzonera'
Scorzonera hispanica
Compared to salsify, the cultivation of scorzonera is quite recent. Leonhard Rauwolf observed scorzonera at Aleppo in 1575, noting that the locals called it corton. Shortly after this, the plant was brought under cultivation in Italy, and by 1660 it began appearing in French kitchen gardens. By the 1680s it was cultivated in Switzerland and Germany. By 1770 it had become well known throughout Europe and was already under cultivation in colonial America, particularly by the Pennsylvania Dutch. In the 1772 supplement to Christopher Sauer’s Kurtzgefasstes Kräuterbuch, scorzonera is discussed under its old Pennsylvania Dutch name Schlangenmord (snake bane). It was known to other colonial Americans as viper grass, owing to its presumed medical usefulness against snake bites.
By 1865, there were four cultivated varieties, including one from Russia known as géante noir de Russie. This is the heirloom variety that I raise, since it is the most reliable and consistent producer for culinary purposes. The Album Vilmorin (1869, 12) included a handsome illustration of the Russian scorzonera in color. This appears to be the basis for the line drawing in the 1885 Vilmorin garden book.
The root of scorzonera can be prepared like salsify, but it is richer tasting and contains a large amount of vitamin E. Unlike salsify, the root of scorzonera is black and will continue to grow in the ground for several years without turning tough. If a bed of it is large enough, and well established over a period of five years, it is possible to plant new seed and harvest very large roots every season.
Furthermore, unlike salsify, the young leaves of scorzonera make a delicious salad green. If the flowering plants are pruned to the ground after they bloom in the summer, they will sprout a crop of greens for the fall. The greens are excellent in étouffées (covered steamed dishes) and cook perfectly in the microwave oven. The leaf is different from salsify in that it is very broad and not at all bitter. The culture for scorzonera is the same as for salsify, except that the scorzonera flower is yellow. The seed-saving techniques are also the same.
'Skirret'
Sium sisarum
Skirret is one of those vegetables that has always hovered near the periphery of the kitchen garden, a weedy-looking plant not fully tamed, yet passionately advocated by those who enjoy its roots. It fascinates me in a way because it evokes flavors from another age. When I set out a dish of skirrets on an old china plate, the light coming through the window invariably captures the mood of a Vermeer painting. It is food made for quiet contemplation.
English colonists in this country called it water parsnip due to its affinity for swampy ground and banks by streams. The Pennsylvania Dutch called it Wassermarrich or water marrow, in reference to the marrowlike richness of the root. Christopher Sauer noted in the 1776 supplement to his herbal, “when it is still young and crisp, it is fit for the kitchen, with pureed greens and herbs, in soups, or in salads.”
The plant was introduced into Germany and Eastern Europe during the Middle Ages, yet it has been known in England only since 1548. Wherever it has been planted, it has been treated as a substitute for parsnips. Skirret was especially popular with the European peasantry because its preference for wet ground meant that it could be cultivated on boggy land or in other marginal areas where most garden vegetables do not thrive. Perennial, easy to grow, and free of pests, it offered many advantages over parsnips, especially the lack of the irritating leaves that made parsnips so unpleasant to harvest. Furthermore, with its Celtic name — siu means water in Celtic — the plant was thought to embody a vast array of medical benefits, one reason why there is so much space devoted to it in old herbals. In spite of this, skirret was never as popular in England as it was on the Continent.
Richard Bradley remarked in his New Improvements of Planting and Gardening (1718, 129–30) that “the Skirret has a very agreeable Root, altho’ it is propagated but in a few Gardens; and it may be, the Rarity of it is owing to the Want of the right way of cultivating it.” The right way of cultivating it is simple. Seed can be started in the early spring as easily as raising parsley. This is how I began my patch several years ago. There is much hocus-pocus about its being biennial, and needing to be dug up in regions where the ground freezes in the winter, but none of this is true. It is a hardy perennial.
The plants should be situated in the full sun about 12 inches apart, for they grow 4 to 6 feet tall, another reason why they should be planted toward the back of the kitchen garden. Once the plants begin to bloom (the white flowers look like Queen Anne’s lace), they should be staked to prevent them from toppling over in a heavy rain. This also keeps the seed high and dry. Yet once a patch is established, it is not necessary to gather seed. Skirret can be propagated from rootlets.
The plant does best in sandy soil, or should I say, the root formation is better, since in loose ground they grow long and straight. The largest roots will be about the size of the small finger in diameter and perhaps a foot long. They should be pared before cooking. As the roots are harvested over the winter, save the rootlets too small for cookery for next year’s crop. Either return them to the ground or store them in damp sand. I use a Styrofoam ice chest for this purpose. Plants that produce woody roots should be discarded; only plant rootlets from plants with tender roots. By this selective method it is possible over a period of a few years to develop a very tender strain of skirret.
At its best, skirret is sweeter than parsnip. As a child, I remember an old cousin in Lancaster County who made a pie of skirrets, apple schnitz, and ham. It was the perfect thing for a cold winter day.
Chaerophyllum bulbosum
This biennial is a native of southern Europe with hairy leaves and violet-tinted stems. It grows about 3 feet tall and produces a carrotlike root about 5 to 6 inches long, with a dark slate-colored skin and cream-yellow flesh. It is the most elegant root vegetable I grow, and one of the most difficult to grow from seed. In spite of its cultural difficulties, it gained considerable attention in the 1850s, and Fearing Burr (1865, 29–30) reported on the Vilmorin experiments with it. The idea in this country was to grow it as a luxury table vegetable, and some market gardeners began raising it around Washington, Baltimore, and Philadelphia. The plant became naturalized to some extent in all three areas after its cultivation was abandoned at the turn of this century, but recent development of old farmland into housing tracts has destroyed many of those sites.
I can only say that the root is worth the trouble. It is to carrots what champagne is to wine, or the true caviar of the vegetable world, yes, better even than feasting on dahlias. The plant is not much to look at. In fact, toward the end of the summer, it dies. At that point, the root can be harvested as needed. The flavor improves greatly if the roots are left in the ground, yet because they are attacked by nematodes and other boring insects, I store them in cool, damp sand. When the roots are cooked, they have an aromatic flavor similar to chervil, which pairs beautifully with fine white wines.
The plants bloom before dying and should be watched constantly so that the seed is harvested when it is ripe. The seed can be dried and planted the following spring, but it must be stratified; otherwise germination may take two years or not at all. This is because the seed goes into deep dormancy unless planted in the fall where it is to grow. I collect it immediately and plant it. It then germinates the following spring, and in this manner, crops can be kept going from year to year. If it is at all possible to purchase young potted plants from a nursery that sells specialty herbs, I would recommend starting with them. Those plants can be used to start seed in the fall rather than fussing with dormant seed that may or may not be worth the time and trouble.
Find seeds for these heirlooms and more with our Custom Seed and Plant Finder.
Photos and Illustrations Courtesy William Woys Weaver. | 农业 |
2017-17/0130/en_head.json.gz/5309 | Follow @thecattlesite News & Analysis Features Markets & Reports Sustainability Knowledge Centre Directory Events Our Shop NewsSave Food Campaign Asia-Pacific Kicked Off30 August 2013 THAILAND - Denouncing the huge amount of food that goes to waste, FAO Assistant Director-General and Regional Representative for Asia and the Pacific, Hiroyuki Konuma, announced a new initiative aimed at stopping post-harvest food losses and market-to-consumer food waste."The Save Food Asia-Pacific Campaign seeks to raise awareness about the high levels of food losses - particularly post-harvest losses - and the growing problem of food waste in the region," Mr Konuma said.
"FAO estimates that if the food wasted or lost globally could be reduced by just one quarter, this would be sufficient to feed the 870 million people suffering from chronic hunger in the world," said Mr Konuma.
The announcement came as Mr Konuma opened the two-day High-Level Multi-Stakeholder Consultation on Food Losses and Food Waste in Asia and the Pacific Region in collaboration with the Asian Institute of Technology and other partners.
More than 130 participants from 20 countries attended the Consultation, including four Agriculture Ministers. The Consultation will study ways to reduce food loss and waste and is expected to issue a communiqué outlining actions that can save food from farm to table.
According to Mr Konuma, "The world produces more or less sufficient food to meet the demand of its current population of 7 billion. However, 12.5 per cent of the global population, or 868 million people, equivalent to one in eight people, go hungry every day. In 2012, the Asia-Pacific region was home to 536 million hungry people, or 62 per cent of the world's undernourished."
The Asia-Pacific region benefitted from rapid economic growth in the first decade of the 21st century. But, successful economic growth did not alleviate hunger and poverty, because the benefits of economic growth were unevenly distributed, resulting in a widening income gap in many countries in the region.
According to statistics from the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific, an estimated 653 million people across the region, lived below the national poverty line in 2010.
Inefficient food systems
Yukol Limlamthong, Thailand's Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Agriculture and Cooperatives, speaking at the Consultation's opening session, said: "Within the context of Asia and the Pacific Region, more effort is needed to raise global awareness of the critical issue of food losses and particularly post-harvest losses as well as food waste, which is a is increasing nowadays."
Limlamthoung added: "The Government of Thailand is deeply committed to working with FAO and with other partners and stakeholders in the region to promote the security of the region and also of the world."
Indian geneticist M. S. Swaminathan, who played a leading role in India's Green Revolution, said in his keynote address on reducing post-harvest losses for food security: "Food waste is also a waste of natural resources like land and water. To a great extent, food losses and waste are symbolic of the inefficiencies of food systems" and this explains "why food losses and waste are becoming so central to discussions on both food security and sustainable development."
Worsak Kanok-Nukulchai, Interim President and Professor at the Asian Institute of Technology, said in his remarks: "The issue of food loss and waste is important to our agenda at AIT." It is cross-cutting and multi-disciplinary and is being scientifically targeted by several fields of study at AIT including the recently opened Asian Center of Innovation for Sustainable Agriculture Intensification (ACISAI).
The Save Food Campaign Asia-Pacific will be an on-going advocacy initiative that will appeal to consumers to have more respect for food and to stop wasting this precious commodity.
TheCattleSite News Desk Sustainability, Policy and Regulatory, General Share This | 农业 |
2017-17/0130/en_head.json.gz/7981 | The Corn Ethanol Juggernaut
Oil isn’t America’s only fuel addiction. Inefficient and environmentally damaging, the corn-ethanol boondoggle will nonetheless be hard to stop.
By Robert Bryce
The huge corn ethanol mandates imposed by Congress a few years ago may be the single most misguided agricultural program in modern American history. That’s saying something, but consider the program’s impact: higher global food prices, increased air pollution from burning ethanol-spiked fuels, spreading dead zones in the Gulf of Mexico from a surge of fertilizer use, and strong evidence that growing a gallon of corn ethanol produces just as many greenhouse gases as burning a gallon of gas.
Why then, given these many problems, hasn’t Congress rolled back the mandates and stopped this boondoggle? The answer can be boiled down to a few salient realities of American politics and agricultural policy. First, even in the subsidy-rich world of U.S. agriculture, corn is king. Second, the power wielded by the farm state lobby remains enormous. Third, Iowa is Ground Zero for corn, and its pivotal presidential caucuses leave even supposed change agents like Barack Obama bowing before the altar of corn ethanol. And, finally, once a juggernaut like corn ethanol gets rolling with massive federal support and mandated production levels, bringing it to a halt is enormously difficult — even when study after study shows that relying on corn ethanol as a cornerstone of an alleged renewable energy policy is folly.
The corn sector has long enjoyed staunch backing from Congress. According to the nonprofit Environmental Working Group, between 1995 and 2006, federal corn subsidies, which are provided through a myriad of programs, totaled $56.1 billion. That’s more than twice the amount given to any other commodity, including American mainstays like wheat and cotton, and 105 times more than was paid to tobacco farmers. Corn ethanol production has long been a favorite of farm state legislators in Congress, who have promoted the fuel as an alternative to the evils of foreign oil. Congress approved the first ethanol subsidies in 1978, just a few years after the Arab oil embargo of 1973. “It makes for a good public image — supporting the farmer, supporting the rural economy,” says Thomas Elam, an Indianapolis-based agricultural economist. The problem, he says, is that “it’s a special-interest program that spreads the cost of the program across the rest of the economy.”
Elam says that the farm lobby collects tens of millions of dollars a year to lobby lawmakers at the state and national levels. States like Iowa and Ohio have their own ethanol associations, which work in tandem with national groups like the Renewable Fuels Association. In 2006 alone, that group collected about $3.7 million in dues from its members and paid its president, Robert Dinneen, a salary of $300,000 to push the ethanol-is-good message on Capitol Hill. Additional support for the ethanol mandates comes from groups like the American Corn Growers Association and its larger cousin, the powerful National Corn Growers Association (NCGA), which reported 2006 total revenue of $8.6 million. The NCGA has some 33,000 dues-paying farmers spread among 48 of the 50 states. On its Web site, the NCGA makes it clear that it aims to “increase ethanol demand” by establishing a federal program that is “part of a comprehensive energy policy.”
These interest groups will spend millions of dollars “to keep the mandate where it is,” says Jan Kreider, a professor emeritus of engineering at the University of Colorado, who has been studying motor fuels for three decades. “It’s a massive political battle to even slow it down,” says Kreider. “Once the mandates are in, it’s almost a one-way street. It could take decades to whittle down the size of the mandates.” It’s a massive political battle to even slow it down… It could take decades to whittle down the size of the mandates.” The staying power of the ethanol mandates is largely due to the decades-long influence of the farm state delegations on Capitol Hill. As former Sen. Bob Dole of Kansas once explained to Texas oil baron T. Boone Pickens, “There are 21 farm states, and that’s 42 senators. Those senators want ethanol.” And the influence of those senators — 15 states now have ethanol production capacity of at least 200 million gallons per year —will be hard to overcome. Cutting the ethanol mandates will require jousting with two of the most powerful members of the Senate, Republican Charles Grassley and Democrat Tom Harkin. Both are Iowans. Both are ardent ethanol boosters. And Harkin is the chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee. Harkin’s position gives him tremendous leverage over any ethanol-related legislation that comes before the Senate. Which brings us to the Iowa Imperative. Any candidate who wants to win the White House must have a good showing in the very first presidential primary — the Iowa caucuses. “Candidates have to come here and suspend all critical judgment,” says David Swenson, an economist at Iowa State University. “There is a knee-jerk reaction in Iowa that if you don’t support our special interests then you don’t love us and we won’t vote for you — and that’s true even though the vast majority of Iowans don’t have anything to do with farming and wouldn’t know a crop if it fell on them.” The imperative can be explained by looking at the numbers: Iowa now has about one-third of the ethanol production capacity in the U.S., and those ethanol plants provide jobs for several thousand Iowans.
Barack Obama understood the Iowa Imperative. And his strong support for ethanol helped him win the Iowa primary. That win validated his campaign and was a key factor in assuring that he won the Democratic nomination. And the farm lobby is rewarding Obama. On Aug. 22, the American Corn Growers Association endorsed Obama. On the Republican side, John McCain, a long-time ethanol critic, tied for third in Iowa. In August 2006, six months before the Iowa vote, McCain switched sides in the ethanol debate, telling a crowd in Grinnell, Iowa, that ethanol “is a vital alternative energy source not only because of our dependency on foreign oil but its greenhouse gas reduction effects.” McCain has since switched sides again and is now co-sponsoring a bill — introduced in May by Texas’ Kay Bailey Hutchison and 10 other Senate Republicans — to freeze the ethanol mandates. Hutchison argued that the ethanol mandates needed to be limited because they were driving up the price of corn and were “clearly causing unintended consequences on food prices for American consumers.” Her bill would limit the volume of corn ethanol to be blended into gasoline to no more than 9 billion gallons. But current federal rules mandate far greater production: U.S. oil refiners must be using at least 15 billion gallons of ethanol per year in their gasoline by 2015 and 21 billion gallons by 2022. Such a sharp increase by 2022 would principally be reached by making ethanol from other materials like switchgrass and wood chips. But this “cellulosic ethanol” has never been produced in commercial quantities. Hutchison’s bill, S. 3031, is stuck in the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. A hearing has not even been scheduled.
In early August, the Environmental Protection Agency denied a request by Texas Gov. Rick Perry to allow his state to opt out of the federal ethanol mandates. Lower corn prices are a critical issue for livestock producers in Texas who have been hit hard by soaring corn prices. In denying the request, E.P.A. Administrator Stephen L. Johnson said that the ethanol requirements are “strengthening our nation’s energy security and supporting American farming communities” and are not causing severe harm to the economy or the environment.
Furthermore, Congress has passed rules that make it hard to waive the mandates. The Environmental Working Group is one of several environmental groups that are fighting to slow or reverse the ethanol mandates. The group’s Michelle Perez, a senior analyst for agriculture, was not overly surprised that the EPA rejected the Texas request. “Congress set the bar pretty high for states to demonstrate environmental and economic harm in order to get the mandate waived,” says Perez. She points out that Texas applied for a waiver based only on the economic harm being done by the mandates. The state would likely have made a stronger case had it sought a waiver based on both economic and environmental harm, Perez says, noting that her organization has begun providing testimony to the EPA on the environmental impacts. Any sustained attack on the ethanol mandates would have to counter the enormous amounts of capital that have been invested in the corn ethanol sector. The industry’s momentum can be measured in the billions of dollars. According to the Renewable Fuels Association, the trade group, some 168 ethanol distilleries with an annual capacity of 9.9 billion gallons are now operating in the U.S. Those plants are spread among 26 states, and another 43 plants are under construction or are being expanded. If you assume that each of those 200-plus plants costs $75 million to construct (a conservative estimate), the total cost of those distilleries is about $15 billion. If the federal mandates are eliminated or rolled back, the owners of the ethanol plants could seek compensation from the federal government. So the mandates continue, despite at least 10 studies — including one this spring by the World Bank — showing that the surge in U.S. corn ethanol production is forcing up global food prices. On the environmental front, a spate of studies has shown that the production of corn ethanol likely creates more greenhouse gases than conventional gasoline. Due to the energy-intensive nature of the cultivation and distillation processes, ethanol produced from corn yields very little, if any, benefit. Clean-air advocates also contend that the growing use of ethanol in gasoline is increasing the amount of smog in America’s cities. William Becker, executive director of the National Association of Clean Air Agencies, which represents air pollution control authorities across the U.S., said Congress “decided to mandate ethanol without first analyzing the air-quality impacts.” Gasoline that has been blended with 10 percent ethanol may be more volatile than conventional gasoline, which means more light hydrocarbons — and ground-level ozone — are emitted into the air. For Becker, the conclusion is crystal clear: “More ethanol means more air pollution. Period.”“More ethanol means more air pollution. Period.”Corn ethanol production has negative impacts on water quality. Researchers say that a key reason for the growing “dead zone” of oxygen-depleted water in the Gulf of Mexico is the increased planting of corn to meet the soaring demand from ethanol distilleries. That additional acreage has resulted in increased applications of fertilizers like nitrogen and phosphorus, which are then washed into the Mississippi, helping create the algal blooms that cause dead zones.
The controversy over the ethanol mandates will undoubtedly go on for months, or years, to come. But even if Congress repeals the mandates and eliminates the subsidies for ethanol production, the ethanol industry will not shut down. Even without federal supports, some distilleries will still be profitable. And their profitability will be directly linked to the price of oil: As the price of oil continues to rise, some of the most efficient ethanol producers will be able to compete with high-priced gasoline. No matter what Congress decides to do in the future with regard to the ethanol mandates, it has birthed an industry that has an incentive to burn food in order to fuel cars. And the ramifications of that move — in food prices and environmental effects — are likely to reverberate throughout the global economy for years to come. Facebook
Robert Bryce is an Austin, Texas-based journalist who has been writing about the energy sector for nearly two decades. His lastest book, Power Hungry: The Myths of "Green" Energy, and the Real Fuels of the Future, was published in 2010. In April 2010, he joined the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research as a senior fellow in the think tank's Center for Energy Policy and the Environment. More about Robert Bryce →
Join the conversation: The Corn Ethanol Juggernaut | 农业 |
2017-17/0130/en_head.json.gz/8542 | 30,000 tonnes of European cheese could be coming to Canada icon-twitter
30,000 tonnes of European cheese could be coming to Canada By Caroline Youdan | October 17, 2013 AT 9:22 amBy Caroline Youdan | 10/17/2013
(Image: Skanska Matupplevelser) After years of negotiation, Canada appears to be just days away from signing a new trade deal with the European Union that is likely to bring a $12-million boost to Canada’s income and increase trade by 20 per cent. But let’s face it, the most important question here is: how awesome is the cheese we’re going to get?
Under Canada’s protectionist system—often likened by critics to a government-sanctioned dairy cartel—96 per cent of the cheese available in this country is made here, too. The Conservative government has tentatively agreed to double the amount of European cheese allowed to bypass those protections, giving the EU 32 per cent of the fine cheese market. For foodies, this means better access to French Roquefort, Milanese Gorgonzola and Parmigiano-Reggiano that’s actually been produced in Parma, Reggio Emilia or one of the few other Italian provinces that can claim a historical stake in the name.
On the flip side, though, the trade agreement could spell trouble down the road for homegrown cheese makers. If the EU’s trade deal with South Korea is an indication, Canadian dairy producers could be forced to comply with strict European rules prohibiting the use of regional names to describe products made outside those specific areas. In other words, Ontario-made Parmesan would have to stop calling itself Parmesan. Somehow, Canadian-Style Spaghetti Topper doesn’t have the same ring to it.
cheese Random Stuff Food | 农业 |
2017-17/0130/en_head.json.gz/8974 | UK: First biodynamic baby food
By News Submission | 1 November 2000
Food grown biodynamically, all of which is organic, has consistently been rated very highly in terms of flavour, nutritional value, the ability to stay fresh longer, and the absence of chemical contaminants.The essence of Biodynamics is a "good old days" approach in which the individual family farm is the basic unit of agricultural activity. Each farm aims to be self sufficient, having both animals and crops, and growing enough fodder for its own stock. Farmers always leave some land fallow, and also maintain wildlife areas for maximum biodiversity.Using fruits, meats and vegetables which have been grown biodynamically, Bio Bambini baby food, new to the UK, will be available in 18 varieties, in two sizes, and with products for babies from 4, 6 and 8 months old. Prices will range from 49-79p per jar.Bio Bambini is produced by Sunval in Germany, in an area where there is a long established tradition of farming biodynamically (and organically). Going into the shops in January, the products will certified by the Soil Association in partnership with Demeter, the leading certifying body for biodynamic foods in Europe.Sunval have been producing biodynamic baby food for the past 45 years. Its range includes fruit and vegetable juices and drinks, main courses and desserts, all of which are already sold successfully throughout continental Europe. Biodynamic farming is relatively new to the UK but has a proven track record in Europe over 75 years. It is the oldest non-chemical agricultural movement, pre-dating the organic agriculture movement in the UK by some 20 years. | 农业 |
2017-17/0130/en_head.json.gz/9228 | How SVLC Protects Land
Agricultural Easements
Map of Properties
How SVLC Protects Land
Conservation Easements A conservation easement is a legal agreement between a landowner and a land conservancy (a private, non-profit organization) or government agency that permanently limits uses of the land in order to protect its conservation values. It allows the owner to continue to own and use their land and to sell it or pass it on to heirs. When a farmer or rancher donates a conservation easement to a land conservancy, they give up some of the rights associated with the land. For example, they might give up the right to build additional structures,while retaining the right to grow crops. Future owners also will be bound by the easement's terms. The land conservancy is responsible for making sure the easement terms are followed. In Santa Clara County, most agricultural conservation easements have been purchased rather than donated from the land owner. In these cases, the landowner receives payment for the appraised value and can use those funds in whatever way they choose. Conservation easements offer great flexibility. An easement on property containing wildlife habitat might prohibit any development, for example, while one on a farm might allow continued farming and the building of additional agricultural structures. An easement may apply to just a portion of the property, and need not require public access. If the donation benefits the public by permanently protecting important conservation resources and meets other federal tax code requirements--it can qualify as a tax-deductible charitable donation. The amount of the donation is the difference between the land's value with the easement and its value without the easement. Also, conservation easements can be essential for passing land on to the next generation. By removing the land's development potential, the easement lowers its market value, which in turn lowers estate tax. Whether the easement is donated during life or by will, it can make a critical difference in the heir’s ability to keep the land intact. As mentioned above,a landowner often decides to sell a conservation easement rather than donating it. Currently, SVLC is seeking land owners with prime agricultural lands that they would like to keep farming. If you are aware of a landowner in this situation, please call Craige Edgerton, Executive Director at 408- 406-1102 to see if that particular piece of land qualifies.
Copyright © 2015 Silicon Valley Land Conservancy. All Rights Reserved | 农业 |
2017-17/0130/en_head.json.gz/9729 | Earl Peel: I am extremely grateful, as I am sure are other noble Lords, for the concise explanation given by the noble Baroness of the way in which the definition has been expanded under this amendment. I add my thanks to my noble friend Lord Mancroft for explaining at such great length the complexities of this amendment.
I had the distinct impression that when the Minister, Alun Michael, originally decided to base a system of licensed hunting on cruelty and utilitybearing in mind the original definition of "utility"there was a general agreement that that was a useful way forward. Why that definition of utility was later allowed to be confined solely to pest control was, in my view, something of a mystery and certainly a travesty. I say that in particular given that the noble Lord, Lord Burns, produced his lengthy and time-consuming report on a whole host of other factors which embraced the social, economic, environmental and conservation elements that inevitably accompany hunting. Indeed, those discussions went further and were deliberated during the Portcullis House agreements.
So I believe that everyone had a genuine expectation that the definition of utility, as explained by the noble Baroness, Lady Mallalieu, was something that we wanted and expected to find set out in the Bill. As a result, I think it is wholly sensible for the amendment to be worded in this way.
One has to ask, therefore, why the Minister removed such tests, thus prejudging in effect what decisions the registrar was going to make. Of course the truth of the matter is that the proposal was tightened so that there would be a ban in everything but nameand that, I repeat, is the truth.
We are being asked, through the amendment, to reinstate under the utility tests the other considerations that were so painfully considered by the noble Lord, Lord Burns, and in the Portcullis House discussions. It is a perfectly legitimate and reasonable objective.
As regards the sustainable development of areas within the meaning of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development 1992, as the noble Baroness, Lady Mallalieu, said, what on earth is the point of the Government negotiating and agreeing these declarations if we do not implement them into the law of this country? We should bear in mind the cultural, social and economic aspects rooted in these agreements which are such a fundamental part of hunting. We cannot isolate the human dimension from the environmental dimension and the economic dimension. They are all part of the thread that makes the countryside work.
I hope that the Committee will accept the amendment. It is a thoroughly responsible way of redefiningnot in a massively different way but in a more comprehensive waythe word that the Minister himself wished to use as a test, that of "utility".
Lord Livsey of Talgarth: This is a very important amendment. Many of the issues I wished to address have already been spoken to and defined. I shall therefore confine my remarks to the topics of utilityin particular its impact on livestock, fisheries and minkthe Middle Way Group scientific study on 28 Oct 2003 : Column 236
shooting and the principle of least suffering. I shall also address some of the points made by the noble Lord, Lord Palmer, in his excellent amendments.
As we have heard, "utility" in the context of the Bill was defined by the Minister, Alun Michael, at the time the hearings took place. Indeed, quotations of what he said have already been given. The doubts expressed by the noble Lord, Lord Moran, about the possible impact on fishing cannot be ignored. Nevertheless, the debate at the moment concerns the way in which these topics were defined by the Minister at the time. Quite clearly he intended to use the two tests of utility and least suffering as part of his Bill. The fact that it was overturned in the House of Commons and modified as time went on is a story with which we are all familiar.
I declare an interest as someone who was brought up on a farm, who has managed farms both in a commercial sense and in an agricultural college, and who farms a medium-sized sheep flock. I also declare an interest as someone who is particularly keen on fishing.
There is no doubt that foxes prey on poultry and livestock such as lambs, calves and piglets. It is widely acknowledged that foxes engage in surplus killingthat is, killing more than they need to eat. There is a great deal of evidence of lambs being killed and left in the field. I have experienced it myself. Usually, headless lambs are found first thing in the morning. When you are lambing, "first thing in the morning" is about 5 a.m. That is when you find that lambs have been killed and their carcasses left in the field. This is quantified much more easily these days because sheep farmers often number their lambs from one to 300 as they are born and it is quite easy to count the numbers that have gone. In my worst experience, 37 lambs disappeared, which came to twice as much as the £500 loss quoted as an average figure.
It is the propensity of the fox to prey on agricultural stock that brings the biggest demand for fox control from farmers. The Burns report said of mid-Wales, my part of the world, that farmers, landowners and gamekeepers consider that it is necessary to manage the fox population. Over one-third of foxes in mid-Wales are culled as a result of terrier work, for example.
I take issue with some of the things that have been said about pest control. It is clearly an important part, although not the only part, of the issue. In its press statements, the NFU refers to the control of foxes as pest control. It refers to pest control tests that can lead to a notice being served on occupiers of land by the Ministry of Agriculture, as was, and now by Defra, under Sections 98 and 99 of the Agriculture Act 1947. That notice can require people to ensure that these pests are destroyed. Failure to comply may result in the pest being destroyed by the ministry at the occupier's expense. I know of no repeal of that part of the 1947 Act.
Those problems impinge on the effective management of ewe flocks. As has been said, the impact of foot and mouth and the fact that there was quite a long delay until hunting resumed caused a considerable increase in the number of foxes in the countryside.
I see that the noble Baroness, Lady Golding, is absent from the debate. I am sure there is a very good reason for that. The situation with regard to fisheries and feral mink is very serious. Apart from preying on ground-nesting birds, mink kill a tremendous number of fish in our rivers and have contributed to the virtual disappearance of the moorhen, a delightful bird, from our countryside.
The mink is not native to this country; it was introduced in the 1920s from America. Hunting with dogs has a huge utility in controlling mink. It is my view that mink should be exterminated from the United Kingdom and that the Government should bring forward legislation to achieve that. In the mean time, the hunting of mink is very important. Mink are not passive. Being confronted by one in a farmyard is very challenging. It is a very unpleasant animal. The trapping of mink does occur, but as far as fisheries are concerned, it is imperative that mink are controlled.
The Middle Way Group commissioned a scientific investigation into shooting foxes instead of hunting them. The results of the study were released in June 2003; it was conducted by five independent qualified animal experts who observed and filmed foxes being shot by both shotguns and rifles. The study was made under field conditions and concluded that,
"for every fox shot dead with a shotgun, at least the same number of foxes are wounded and many of these are never found".
I have done quite a lot of shooting in the countryside, and I am not making a case against shooting in a general sense. I am saying merely that it is not an effective method of controlling foxes. Even with experts, only about one-third of all shots fired hit their target. Shotguns are not a very effective method of doing it, and we all know the dangers of using rifles in the countryside, given the increased access that people now have.
The noble Lord, Lord Whitty, said:
"Cruelty is justifiable only if the alternative is worse cruelty or there is no alternative in achieving the utilitarian objective".[Official Report, 16/9/03; col.892.]
There is scientific evidence to show that certain types of shooting will cause a much higher level of wounding than previously claimed. Indeed, that claim of low wounding rates has been exposed as seriously flawed. In December 2002, Alun Michael said of the regulatory Bill in a Written Statement:
"There are no restrictions on hunting with dogs of rats and rabbits because this method of controlling the populations satisfies the two tests and causes less suffering than alternative methods of control such as poisoning or snaring".[Official Report, Commons, 19/12/02; col. 79WS.]
So snaring is considered by the Minister, and presumably by the Government, to be worse than hunting with dogs. Now there is scientific evidence to show that certain shooting regimes will cause high levels of wounding. Indeed, it appears that the statement made by the noble Lord, Lord Whitty, is rightthat only hunting with dogs is to be singled out for abolition.
Animal welfare issues must be addressedthat is very important indeedbut there is a clear inconsistency in many of the arguments put forward by some anti-hunting organisations. The Government have stated that they want to improve the welfare of wild mammals, so they must surely see that such muddled thinking provides no basis for good legislation. The more that the Government ignore scientific evidence and restrict their attention to hunting with dogs alone, while at the same time accepting that there are methods that cause even more suffering, the more they will leave themselves open to the charge of hypocrisy.
I am pleased to say that, at a press conference this morning, there was a discussion on the Middle Way shooting study. There was present a representative from the International Fund for Animal Welfare, Professor Stephen Harris. It was exposed in this morning's meeting that his evidence challenging the Middle Way findings was contained only in a press release. The completion of his research had not been validated yet, and not even published, so he was making assertions with no substantial background.
I am pleased to be able to report from that meeting that the co-operative discussion eventually took place after some confrontational argument. There is now a basis for a joint study to be held by the Middle Way Group and the International Fund for Animal Welfare, so that independent principles can be established for least suffering, and in particular in relation to shooting as an alternative to hunting.
We believe that to be a breakthrough and to deserve consideration, because it will be a much more objective outcome than some assertions that have been made on the issue. It is a constructive set of proposals, perhaps to find out the truth. In the mean time, there is insufficient evidence to say that hunting is not the best way of controlling foxes. Indeed, it is the most effective way of doing so. | 农业 |
2017-17/0130/en_head.json.gz/10616 | Reader's Choices: 10 Greatest Beef Innovations May 28, 2011 10 ways to cut cattle feeding costs Nov 23, 2015 Cover crop cocktails are more than a salad bar Feb 15, 2017 Producers impacted by wildfires encouraged to come and get hay Mar 14, 2017 Beef Bucks on the Wheel of Fortune
Promotion group will have prize of beef on America's number one game show. Jan 02, 2012
Beef Bucks, Inc., a non-profit organization based in DeSmet, South Dakota that promotes beef, will reach a national audience in January thanks to America's most popular television game show.
Co-Founder Nancy Montross says her husband Bob has been working on the agreement with Wheel of Fortune for about a year-and-a-half.
"We thought that would be a great place to tie the number one industry in with the number one game show," Montross said. "They called us and told us that we were accepted and could be a prize on the week of Jan. 9 on Monday, Wednesday and Friday evening."
Montross says one episode has already been recorded.
"They have taped the first show that will be shown Monday, Jan. 9 and someone did hit it." Montross said. "So Pat Sajak will speak about Beef Bucks, very briefly of course, but they did not tell us if the person solved the puzzle so we don't know whether they won the Beef Bucks $1,000 prize or not. We'll have to wait until Jan. 9 to find that out."
Montross says after being approved, there was one more thing that had to happen before Beef Bucks could be a prize on the wheel.
"When it came down to the bottom they told us it had to be in conjunction with whatever the theme of the show was," Montross said. "And this happens to be the theme of "America's Game" so what fits better with America than beef, and they decided to put it on that segment of the show."
But Montross says the Beef Bucks steak and hat logo will not be seen on the show, as it was too elaborate to go on the wheel tag. Those Wheel of Fortune episodes with the $1,000 Beef Bucks prizes will air Jan. 9, Jan. 11, and Jan. 13. | 农业 |
2017-17/0130/en_head.json.gz/13282 | NCBA distorts the truth; OCM sets the record straight
October 17, 2016March 5, 2017 OCM Staff ShareIn recent press statements, National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) has made false statements regarding the beef checkoff audits. Organization for Competitive Markets (OCM) would like to set the record straight.
In 2010, the Clifton Gunderson Accounting Firm performance review commissioned by the Cattlemen’s Beef Board, examined small number of expenditures and personnel time cards over a 29-month period ending in 2010. Irregularities were uncovered which resulted in the NCBA having to return to the National Beef Board more than $200,000. These numerous irregularities included improper payment for such things as spousal travel and golf tournaments.
With this evidence, OCM along with others pressured the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Office of Inspector General (OIG) to audit the Beef Checkoff Program. They agreed, and in 2011 OIG began their audit of USDA Agriculture Marketing Services (AMS), the agency whose responsibility is to oversee the checkoff programs. The investigative phase of the audit was completed in December of 2011, with the final report expected by March of 2012. A scant 17-page report was finally released on March 29, 2013, 15 months after completion of the investigation.
The first “final” audit report (no longer available) concluded that NCBA had properly expended all Beef Checkoff Program funds and that the relationship between the Beef Checkoff Program’s Cattlemen’s Beef Board (CBB) and the NCBA complied with U.S. law. Because these findings flew in the face of the Clifton Gunderson Accounting Firm 2010 performance review and screamed of a whitewashing of the facts, OCM promptly filed a request under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) for an extensive list of records pertaining to the audit report. The OIG FOIA office initially responded by releasing 101 heavily redacted pages of printed documents and denied release of the 3,120 pages of report drafts and 125 pages of related emails under a claim of exemption. OCM challenged this claim. At about the same time, R-CALF USA filed a complaint against this first final audit report. Under this pressure, the first final audit report was withdrawn in July 2013.
On January 31, 2014 OIG issued a corrected final report, some 36 months after the initiation of the audit. This corrected final report withdrew OIG’s conclusions that the NCBA had properly expended all Beef Checkoff Program funds and that the relationship between the Beef Checkoff Program’s Cattlemen’s Beef Board (CBB) and the NCBA complied with U.S. law. OCM has questioned what is the truth, and what evidence caused OIG to change their conclusions. What evidence were they trying to cover up on behalf of NCBA in their first final report?
When the audit report was not issued in March of 2012, OCM engaged one of Kansas City, Missouri’s large law firms that assisted OCM with filing a lawsuit against NCBA, only to have NCBA and their Big Ag partners pressure them, causing the law firm to withdraw. It was then that OCM reached out through one of OCM’s members to seek the assistance of The HSUS. They agreed to help OCM bring this cloud of contradictions to light by pursuing the FOIA request and which has now become the subject of this legal complaint. HSUS had the courage and experience to provide the needed legal assistance to assist OCM in filing the OCM FOIA complaint on November 12, 2014.
OCM now has reason to believe that the OIG because of outside industry pressure or just in an effort to cover their tracks “rebooted” its initial findings that would have exposed vulnerabilities in the checkoff. Further, OCM suspects the evidence will demonstrate that a central finding of an early draft audit report by OIG determined that as much as 25% of checkoff funds were “vulnerable to misuse” and that producers lack assurance that the Beef Board could protect those funds. After inter-agency concerns were expressed that such a finding could be seen as reflecting negatively on USDA and that it could result in increased “fracturing” of the agency’s relationship with the beef industry, the publicly released audit report omitted these central findings and substituted watered down, harmless language instead. OCM simply wants to know the truth: did this happen, is NCBA properly expending the beef checkoff dollars, and what is being done about the conflict of interest issues that exist between the Cattlemen’s Beef Board and NCBA.
During OCM’s five-year struggle to simply get the truth, NCBA has continued to have a stranglehold on the Beef Board’s operating committee, ensuring it receives the lion’s share of our checkoff dollars. With these millions of dollars, NCBA is able, through paid advertisements and other expenditures, to increase their positive name identity which they then use when pushing their anti-independent family farm policy in the halls of the capitols claiming they are the voice of the U.S. cattlemen in spite of the fact they represent less than 4% of the U.S. cattle producers. They used this ill-gotten influence to nearly singlehandedly end Country of Origin Labeling (COOL) and stop the new GIPSA rules that, if implemented, would have ended predatory market practices which are driving independent cattle producers out of business and off the land. This is a clear conflict of interest that is prohibited by law.
The truth, OCM’s FOIA complaint is simply an effort to have all pertinent documents released to the U.S. cattle producers letting in the light of day into what has been a very dark secret.
Fred Stokes
Porterville Mississippi
OCM Board Member
Checkoff Reform Taskforce Lead
Tweet Press Releases Written by OCM Staff Post navigation
OCM Responds to NCBA’s Attempt to Cover Up Abuses of Beef Checkoff FundsCourt Limits National Cattlemen’s Beef Association’s Role in Federal Records Case | 农业 |
2017-17/0130/en_head.json.gz/15196 | Low agricultural technologies
Refugees and internally displaced
Zambia is ranked 150th out of 169 on the Human Development Index and has recently been reclassified as a lower middle income country by the World Bank. Poverty and food insecurity are widespread in both rural and urban areas, and the country remains extremely vulnerable to recurring natural disasters, including floods, drought and animal disease.
Food production levels vary widely from year to year. Food security is fragile because subsistence farmers depend on rainfall and traditional hoe cultivation, and even in years of national food surplus, many subsistence farmers or households often struggle.
The lack of proper infrastructure, inadequate provision of agricultural inputs, poor access to markets, and the slow pace of change in attitudes towards crop and livelihood diversification also continue to undermine farming capacity.
The country has had bumper harvest in the maize production since 2011. While the harvest will help to improve overall food security, tens of thousands of people will still require food assistance due to the localised impact of floods and because many of the poorest and most vulnerable people will not be able to access sufficient food, even though staple food prices have fallen from their very high 2008 levels.
The national HIV prevalence rate is ranked seventh globally at 12.7 percent, and chronic malnutrition prevalence for children under age five is ninth highest in the world at 45.4 percent. Some 53 percent and 46 percent of Zambian children have Vitamin A and iron deficiency respectively, compromising their long term development
Standard national statistics for malnutrition levels amongst under-fives are 5 percent wasting, 28 percent underweight and 47 percent stunting (low height for age).
WFP activities in Zambia are implemented as an integral part of the United Nations Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF) and in line with the ‘Delivering as One’ mechanism under which UN agencies in selected countries have pledged to work together to ensure a more coordinated and effective level of action in areas of development, humanitarian assistance and the environment.
The WFPs Strategic Plan is aligned with both the Sixth National Development Programme (2011-2016) and The UNDAF (2011-2015). The overarching goal of the strategy is to support the Government's priorities to reach the MDG hunger targets and ensure long-term solutions to hunger, consistent with the Government of Zambia's "Vision 2030
WFP programme activities in Zambia operate within the framework of a Country Programme (CP 2011 to 2015).
Country Programme CP (DEV 200157) contributes to WFP's Strategic Objectives (1, 2, 3 and 4) and United Nations Development Assistance Framework Outcomes 1 to 5, as well as towards the attainment of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). The CP focuses on:
Improving human capital through food based safety-nets;
Improving Government preparedness to respond to and mitigate disasters as a way of reducing vulnerability; and
Expanding market opportunities for smallholder farmers by leveraging local food procurement..
Home Grown School Feeding Programme
The World Food Programme in collaboration with the Ministry of Education has been jointly implementing a School Meals Programme from 2003. A meal is provided to more than 861,000 children across the country every school day.
The programme aims at improving the quality of learning through improved enrolment, retention and reduced absenteeism. The programme targets districts with higher levels of food insecurity and low education achievement also taking into account high HIV, poverty and malnutrition rates. The programme also aims to enhance smallholder farmer’s productive capacity by linking them to a predictable market – in this case the school. Farmers are reached through cooperatives, given skills in crop aggregation to guarantee quality assurance
Purchase for Progress (P4P)
Purchase for Progress (P4P) is a WFP global pilot project aimed at supporting smallholder farmer to improve their marketing arrangements through increased access and better linkages to more lucrative markets. Through P4P, WFP Zambia is supporting the Zambian Government to strengthen its capacity to provide social safety nets to assist poor and hungry households and is committed to purchasing Zambian grown commodities for food assistance interventions in the country and the region.
WFP has linked up with FAO which is implementing the Conservation Agriculture Scale Up program funded by the EU targeting 315,000 farmers. The partnership will focus on the pulses value chain and provide a market for the farmers adopting Conservation Agriculture through a network of aggregation centers. These centers will be designed in such a way that they could evolve into multi service centers for smallholder farmers through strong partnerships with a range of private rural stakeholders. The lessons learned from P4P will be critical in the design of the value chain. Through its Smallholder Agribusiness Promotion Program, IFAD is supporting the project implementation reflecting true RBA collaboration.
Mobile Delivery and Trucking
The Mobile Delivery and Tracking (MDT) originally started to roll out the electronic food voucher program known as “Splash” has transitioned to providing specific technical support for Agriculture, Education, Health, and Social Protection programs. The unit supports the Government of Zambia (GRZ) through the Food Reserve Agency, Ministry of Education, Ministry of Health, and Ministry of Community Development Mother and Child Health.
The MDT unit participates in several Mobile Technology (M-Tech) Technical Working Groups with the GRZ, and is a vital member of the Cooperating Partner’s group, which includes UNICEF, DFID, and Irish AID, among others
Disaster Risk and Management
Under the Delivery As One WFP has continued to be technical lead in DRR related activities. Through the Capabilities Partnership Programme (CAPRO) WFP provides technical support and capacity building to the DMMU on strengthening disaster preparedness capacities at sub national levels done through comprehensive hazard identification and analysis, early warning which also includes risk and vulnerability analysis as support to bigger national disaster response planning. In addition WFP also Provides technical and financial support in designing and implementing a Comprehensive Vulnerability Assessment and Analysis (CVAA) which contains comprehensive hazards profiling on the basis upon which the resilience building activities are based on | 农业 |
2017-17/0130/en_head.json.gz/15305 | Pugets Sound Agricultural Company
The Puget Sound Agricultural Company (PSAC), with common variations of the name including Puget Sound or Puget's Sound, was a subsidiary joint stock company formed in 1840 by the Hudson's Bay Company (HBC). Its stations operated within the Pacific Northwest, in the HBC administrative division of the Columbia Department. The RAC-HBC Agreement was signed in 1839 between the Russian-American Company and the HBC, with the British to now supply the various trade posts of Russian America. It was hoped by the HBC governing committee that independent American merchants, previously a major source of foodstuffs for the RAC, would be shut out of the Russian markets and leave the Maritime fur trade.
Because its monopoly licence granted by the British Government forbade any activity besides the fur trade, the HBC created the PSAC to sidestep this issue. The PSAC was formed to produce or manufacture enough agricultural and livestock products to meet the Russian supply demands. In correspondence with British officials, the PSAC was long touted as a means to promote the British position in the Oregon boundary dispute with the United States. For years now the British had insisted that the Pacific Northwest be partitioned along the Columbia River, rather than a westward extension of the 49th parallel. This would have left most of modern Washington state under British control, notably the important Puget Sound. Through its company stations, the PSAC would promote settlement by British subjects in this disputed area, although it largely failed in this particular aspect.
The primary company operations were centered at Fort Nisqually and Cowlitz Farm in modern Washington state. At Fort Nisqually (near present-day Olympia, Washington) due to poor soil, the station focused on pastoral operations, including flocks of sheep for wool, cattle herds for beef and cheese manufacturing. Cowlitz Farm was the company's primary center of agricultural production. The company also operated many large farms in the area of Fort Victoria on Vancouver Island.
1.1 "The Organ Beef & Tallow Company"
2.1 RAC-HBC Agreement
2.2 Labor recruitment
3 Red River colonists
3.1 Overland to Fort Vancouver
3.2 Time with PSAC
4 Operations
5 The Oregon Treaty
6 Later years
George Simpson and John McLoughlin were both influential in the events leading to the eventual creation of the PSAC.
The governing committee and its officers were as a practice in consistent contact with members of the British Government. This was a major advantage for the company and gave them important insights into political developments. Simpson and his cohorts knew the general position of the British Government for any potential negotiations with the United States to end the Oregon boundary dispute. The British would continue their previous stance of claiming the all territory north of the Columbia River. This insight influenced the location of Fort Vancouver, placed on the northern bank of the Columbia.
On his second visit to Fort Vancouver in the 1828 through 1829, George Simpson found the area quite promising for further agricultural ventures. Simpson sent his brother Lt. AEmilius on the Cadboro to the Russian American capital of Novoarkhangelsk in 1829 to offer large stockpiles of foodstuffs annually to the Russian-American Company. However, the proposal wasn't accepted by Governor of Russian Colonies in America Pyotr Chistyakov. Nonetheless, Simpson and other officers still considered it a viable option, as historian Galbraith recounted:
If the Hudson's Bay Company could provide the Russians with the supplies they were accustomed to purchase from American ships, one of the supports for American competition in the coastal fur trade would be removed.[1]
"The Organ Beef & Tallow Company"[edit]
The large herds of cattle owned by Californios in Alta California and the products derived from the animals were popular trade goods. This later helped convince the HBC to establish their own livestock venture on the Pacific Coast.
The Alta Californian hide and tallow trade greatly influenced John McLoughlin. In 1832 convinced fellow HBC officers and employees in the Columbia Department to create a new joint stock company to purchase several hundred cattle from Alta California. Called "The Oragon Beef & Tallow Company," as McLoughlin told his superiors, it was formed "with the view of opening from the Oragon Country an export trade with England and elsewhere in tallow, beef, hides, horns, &c."[1] If the cattle were gathered from Alta California in 1833, McLoughlin projected Fort Vancouver area to have a herd of over 5,000 by 1842. Additionally, he considered pointed out favorable locations to host these numerous bovines. The valleys of the Willamette, Cowlitz and Columbia were all deemed as appropriate to host upwards of half a million livestock.[1]
The proposal was immediately derided and denied by the HBC governing committee. They feared that if the Organ Beef and Tallow Company were successful then HBC members would quit the fur trade to become pastorialists and agriculturalists.[1] While Simpson was favorable to the idea of growing expansive numbers of livestock and farmlands, he was decidedly against McLoughlin's stance of independent men supplying the provisions for trade in Russian America and the Kingdom of Hawaii. Late in 1834, agreeing to Simpson's idea of the HBC directly overseeing these proposed operations, the committee considered a new central depot for operations on the Pacific Coast. Previous outbreaks of disease at Fort Vancouver worried the administrators, who ordered McLoughlin thoroughly examine Whidbey Island and other potential locations north of the Columbia River, although he had done neither by 1837.[2]
Creation[edit]
Modern Oak Harbor on Whidbey Island, an island deemed suitable by the HBC for the PSAC.
While the considered livestock project languished, the HBC pushed for a renewal of its monopoly licence from the British Government, set to expire in 1841. Governor of the Hudson's Bay Company John Pelly highlighted to Secretary of the Colonies Lord Glenelg the benefits the British Empire had for decades received from the HBC in 1837. In this correspondence he promoted the considered, not still not active, livestock and farming operations in the Columbia Department. Once this venture began these ventures would, Pelly declared, maintain "British interests and British influence... as paramount in this interesting part of the Coast of the Pacific."[3] The appeals of Pelly and his cohorts worked, for the HBC received another license in May 1838. The HBC was still only British enterprise only allowed to trade with native peoples west of Rupert's Land, and did not include the right to engage in commercial farming. However, like the previous license granted in 1821, the British Government stressed to not harass any American merchants in the Pacific Northwest.[3]
Throughout the summer and fall of 1838, the HBC held multiple conferences in London. Among those present were George Simpson, John McLoughlin, Governor John Pelly, and other members of the governing committee. Once gathered, the fur merchants and administered considered future company operations in the Pacific Northwest. Military action by Americans over the Oregon Question appeared to some members assembled as quite likely at the time. This was in no small part from the legislative work of U.S. Senator Lewis F. Linn. In February of 1838, he pushed for the dispatch of a naval force to the Columbia, in addition to offering land grants to interest American settlers. Despite some enthusiasm however, Linn's bill didn't pass receive enough votes in Congress to become law.[3]
RAC-HBC Agreement[edit]
Main article: RAC-HBC Agreement
Novoarkhangelsk in 1837.
Besides considerations about Americans, the company agreed to again pursue a supply contract with the Russian-American Company, an accord that had been desired by Simpson for a decade. Signed in 1839 with the Russian colonial authorities, the RAC-HBC Agreement gave the HBC the obligation to provide enough provisions to supply the various trading stations of Russian America. Having finally secured this financially important agreement, the HBC formally incorporated the Puget Sound Agricultural Company in 1840.
Created to bypass its license to only participate in the fur trade, the PSAC was overseen and staffed with HBC employees. In this way, the PSAC would protect HBC board members and shareholders from accusations and suits resulting from violations of the HBC charter. Besides meeting the new obligations with the Russians, the PSAC was conceived to support British claims in the Pacific Northwest.[4] These claims were centered on an area north of the Columbia River but south of the 49th parallel, located within modern Washington state. The PSAC had two stations within this area, Fort Nisqually and Cowlitz Farm.
Labor recruitment[edit]
Starting with Étienne Lucier in 1829, a steady number of primarily French-Canadian employees of the HBC became farmers in the Willamette Valley. Their agricultural products were sold to the HBC and continued to use Fort Vancouver as their source of needed material and household goods. These men eventually contacted bishop Provencher through McLoughlin and requested priests to be sent. Eventually Provencher selected François Norbert Blanchet and Modeste Demers as capable for traveling to the distant Willamette Valley. In correspondence to HBC officials he requested overland transportation for the two men in 1837. The fur merchants saw this as a useful opportunity to further the still paper PSAC. French-Canadians farmers residing in the Willamette Valley could potentially be induced to relocate to more favorable locations north of the Columbia.[5] The Catholic priests could additionally counter any Methodist influence over the French-Canadians by superintendent Jason Lee. However, they utterly failed to convince any farmer to leave the Willamette Valley.[5]
The failure to get any Willamette farmers to relocate didn't deter the HBC administration. According to the plans established in September 1839, by 1841 the PSAC would have enough of a material basis to begin sending families from Scotland. The invited families would be each given a house and about 100 acres of land already cleared, but notably these families wouldn't be given legal ownership of the farmsteads. Additional terms offered each interested family "twenty cows, one bull, 500 sheep, eight oxen, six horses and a few hogs," in addition a year's supply of foodstuffs.[5] Despite these considerations, the company never received applicants due to a combination of no advertisement campaigns for the deal and successful farmers in Scotland not finding the offered deal worthwhile.
Red River colonists[edit]
See also: James Sinclair (fur trader)
Red River carts in the 1870s. The carts used by the families led by Sinclair were largely the same design.
The only successful source of early colonists for the PSAC would come from the Red River colony. In November 1839 Sir George Simpson instructed Duncan Finlayson to begin promoting the PSAC to colonists.[6] If the initial movement of settlers from Red River was successful, company officials wanted at least fifteen families arriving at the Cowlitz Farm annually. While finding many men were reportedly favorable to offered terms, the inability to own the farmland they would till was a contentious issue.[6]
Finding many families unwilling to sign provisions, Finlayson felt pressure to get a number of willing emigrants as previously ordered. Without the approval of Simpson, Pelly or the Committee, he announced that the farmers could be able to purchase the farmlands they would work on around Cowlitz Farm. This new clause came with a major stipulation, as Finlayson later explained to his superiors. The sales would happen only if the Oregon Question was settled with British receiving the northern bank of the Columbia River, rather than a direct continuation of the 49th parallel.[6]
Overland to Fort Vancouver[edit]
James Sinclair was appointed by Finlayson to guide the mostly Métis settler families to Fort Vancouver on the Columbia River.[6] In June 1841, the party left Fort Garry with 23 families consisting of 121 people.[7] They followed the Red River north, crossing Lake Winnipeg and traveled in the Saskatchewan River system to Fort Edmonton. From there they were guided by Maskepetoon, a chief of the Wetaskiwin Cree. Maskepetoon would stay with the party until they reached Fort Vancouver, where he sailed home on board the Beaver.
While on a world tour of company assets, Simpson met the party near Red Deer Hill. Writing in his diary, he gave a description of the settler families:
"Each family had two or three carts, together with bands of horses, cattle and dogs. The men and lads traveled in the saddle, while the vehicles, which were covered with awnings against the sun and rain, carried the women and the young children. As they marched in single file their cavalcade extended above a mile long... The emigrants were all healthy and happy; living with the greatest abundance and enjoying the journey with great relish."[7]
Going through Lake Minnewanka, they eventually reached where the Spray and Bow rivers meet. Following the course of the Spray River valley, the intrepid British colonists then trekked along a tributary, Whiteman's Creek. From here they crossed the Great Divide of the Rocky Mountains, by a new route which became known as Whiteman's Pass. From the summit, they traveled southwest down the Cross River to its junction with the Kootenay River. They entered the upper Columbia River basin via Sinclair Pass, near present-day Radium Hot Springs. From there they journeyed south-west down to Lake Pend'Oreille, then on to an old fort known as Spokane House, then to Fort Colvile. When they arrived at Fort Vancouver, they numbered 21 families of 116 people.[6]
Time with PSAC[edit]
Despite the far reaching and extensive plans of Simpson and Pelly, the Red River families didn't act as planned. At Fort Vancouver, fourteen families were relocated to Fort Nisqually, while the remaining seven families were sent to Fort Cowlitz.[6] Within two years however, the families at Fort Nisqually had all left in favor of the Willamette Valley. Crucially, these men held accounts with the HBC and most were in varying levels of debt to the company. A delegation of Red River men arrived at Fort Vancouver in November 1845 to notify McLoughlin of their disinterest in paying back the money owed to the HBC. As McLoughlin was in the process of leaving the HBC, he apparently didn't press the matter as it wasn't of "compelling importance" to him, as historian John C. Jackson later stated.[8] Dugald MacTavish tried and failed to collect upon these debts in the following year.
Operations[edit]
During its initial years the company had occasionally had to purchase wheat from other sources to meet the RAC demands. In 1840 John McLoughlin had to purchase 4,000 bushels of wheat from Alta California to supplement produce made by the PSAC.[9] During the 1840s pastoral and agricultural produce shipped to New Archangel annually consistently was 30,000 lbs of beef and from 40,000 to 80,000 lbs of wheat.[9] Governor Arvid Etholén praised wheat produced by the PSAC as "incomparably cheaper" than produced bought from American merchants and being of "the best quality."[10] Despite the PSAC's initial growth, its principal manager, John McLoughlin didn't hold a favorable view of the venture. In a letter written to Douglas prior to the 1838 London meetings, McLoughlin criticized what eventually became the PSAC:
"I will take this opportunity to state it is my opinion that, though I think individuals who would devote their attention to raising cattle in the Columbia might make a living at it still it is my opinion the Hudson's Bay Company will make nothing by it."[11]
The Oregon Treaty[edit]
The Oregon Treaty that was negotiated in between Great Britain and the United States and went into effect in July 1846 upon the exchange of ratifications settled the Oregon question.[12] This treaty had specific provisions regarding the Puget Sound Agricultural Company in Article IV, namely that the United States would respect PSAC property but had the right to purchase any of the properties.[12]
In 1863, Great Britain and the United States agreed to arbitrate the disposition of the PSAC properties in US territory.[4] The PSAC was awarded $200,000 in compensation in 1869 for all of its properties south of the Canadian-US border as spelled out in the Oregon Treaty.[4] Meanwhile, the company’s operations had shifted north, including agricultural ventures on Vancouver Island.[13] In 1934 the company ceased to be listed on the stock exchange.[13]
History of Olympia, Washington
Citations[edit]
^ a b c d Galbraith 1954, pp. 234-236.
^ Galbraith 1954, p. 238.
^ a b c Galbraith 1954, pp. 239-241.
^ a b c "The Puget Sound Agricultural Company". Hbc Heritage. Hudson’s Bay Company. Retrieved 2007-01-17. ^ a b c Galbraith 1954, pp. 247-249.
^ a b c d e f Galbraith 1954, pp. 252-255.
^ a b Simpson 1847, p. 62.
^ Jackson 1984, p. 280.
^ a b Gibson 1985, pp. 94-95.
^ Gibson 1985, p. 107.
^ a b LexUM (1999). "Treaty between Her Majesty and the United States of America, for the Settlement of the Oregon Boundary". Canado-American Treaties. University of Montreal. Retrieved 2007-01-12. ^ a b "IV. Fort Vancouver: Vancouver Barracks, 1861-1918". Fort Vancouver. National Park Service. Retrieved 2007-01-17. Bibliography[edit]
Galbraith, John S. (1954), "The Early History of the Puget's Sound Agricultural Company, 1838-43", Oregon Historical Quarterly, Portland, OR: Oregon Historical Society, 55 (3): 234–259 Gibson, James R. (1985), Farming the Frontier, the Agricultural Opening of the Oregon Country 1786-1846., Vancouver, B.C.: University of British Columbia Press Jackson, John C. (1984), "Red River Settlers vs. Puget Sound Agricultural Company, 1854-55", Oregon Historical Quarterly, Oregon Historical Society, 85 (3): 278–289 Simpson, George (1847), An Overland Journey Round the World, during the Years 1841 and 1842., Philadelphia: Lea and Blanchard External links[edit]
Indian Claims Commission: Steilacoom Tribe v. U.S. A
Indian Claims Commission: Steilacoom Tribe v. U.S. B
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pugets_Sound_Agricultural_Company&oldid=772673466" Categories: Canada–United States relationsPre-Confederation British ColumbiaPre-statehood history of Washington (state)Oregon CountryFur tradeCompanies established in 1840Companies disestablished in 1934 Navigation menu | 农业 |
2017-17/0130/en_head.json.gz/16912 | Beekeeper numbers increasing across Illinois
By The Associated PressJune 16, 2014
SPRINGFIELD – The number of beekeepers in Illinois has been increasing for more than a decade.
The Illinois Department of Agriculture’s yearly report says there were 700 new registered beekeepers in the state in 2013. The statewide total is more than 2,500 beekeepers operating more than 24,000 colonies. The number of registered beekeepers has increased every year since 2002.
Colony collapse disorder has helped increase awareness of the importance of honey bees and contributed to the increase, agriculture department experts said.
“With all the media exposure on colony collapse disorder, it’s really helped increase awareness of the importance of the honey bee to society,” said Steve Chard, bureau chief of land and water resources at the Department of Agriculture told The Springfield State Journal-Register.
Beekeepers started reporting the disorder about a decade ago. Chard says it’s too soon to determine if the increase has made up for losses due to the disorder. The long, cold winter also has meant losses for Illinois beekeepers, according to the Illinois State Beekeepers Association.
There are registered beekeepers and colonies in all Illinois counties. Union County in southern Illinois has more than 2,000 colonies – the most in the state.
State numbers show most beekeepers in Illinois keep the insects as a hobby and operate ten or fewer colonies. | 农业 |
2017-17/0130/en_head.json.gz/17188 | Donate Search this site: Who we are
Nicaragua: Entrepreneuse and Successful
Mónica Cadenas
— 18 March 2014
WFP/Alberth Ramos
Martha Matute is a 36 year old single woman from the town of Jalapa, Nueva Segovia. Martha has been an active member of the smallholder farmer’s organization “Nuevo Horizonte” (New Horizons) for the past 5 years. While speaking with her she adamantly expressed how “blessed” and happy she is because of the opportunity she now has share information and advise women of her community.
“I feel that I am capable of advising other women, to help and motivate them to reach their dreams”, expresses Martha. She learned about cultivation and farming as a teenager from helping her father and brothers on their land. “That’s the way I learned, I did what they did. Nobody ever invited me to participate in any trainings or workshops to talk to me about land cultivation”. “Because I did not have land, I started renting half an acre which I paid for with the money I made from the crops I cultivated and from breeding pigs. Even though it was tough, I was determined to make it.” Year after year Martha was faced with plagues, diseases and many time lack of rainfall. She was also her worst enemy by not knowing when to harvest her maize, making the crop more susceptible to pests. “Nuevo Horizonte” Changed Her Life
“Nuevo Horizonte” is a part of WFP’s “Purchase for Progress” (P4P) initiatives in Nicaragua. P4P programmes assist “Nuevo Horizonte” and other agricultural cooperatives with grain production in Nueva Segovia, Jinotega, Matagalpa and Estelí. This is done through various actions that are aimed at improving the quality of production and access to better markets and also improving food and nutrition security at home.
When Martha joined “Nuevo Horizonte” her life began to change. In 2009 Martha found herself with no money to buy her necessary agricultural inputs. With the help of her father, Marcos Roberto Matute, Martha took the first steps to join “Nuevo Horizonte”. With the financial assistance offered through this P4P cooperative, Martha and others like her were able to receive credit to begin sowing. "I have participated in three field schools, where I acquired useful information about the production of mazie and beans and the household economy. Now I know how to identify diseases and pests. And I know what chemicals and organic products to use to eliminate them”, affirms Martha. Other techniques such as the analysis of the agro ecosystem, planting density and soil analysis allows for improved yields and quality of production. From her sales in 2011 Martha was able to pay off half of her 2 acres of land in Jalapa. The success from the following harvest allowed her to repay the debt in its entirety. Finally she has become an official land owner! She Doubled Her Production
In 2011, Martha was able to cultivate 50 quintals of mazie per acre, her efforts and dedication were rewarded in 2013 when she doubled her productivity and was able to cultivate 120 quintals per acre. Her income also increased allowing her to purchase six oxen that she now rents to other farmers in her community. “It is a way of making money” states this firmly spoken decided, petite, brunette woman.
Martha bought another half-acre of land and acquired more working tools through the cooperative and P4P; she has seriously considered the opportunity presented to the farmers to stop selling their crops to intermediaries at lower then market prices. She has begun to participate in the Commercialization of the Cooperative Committee of the “Nuevo Horizonte”. Who recently signed contracts with the Nicaraguans Company of Basic Foods (NCBF). Now Martha is informed each day about the selling price of crops that she produces at a local and national level, allowing her to be as well informed as possible and look for the best buyers. “I am a woman with understanding and experience. I am respected and recognized in my community and in my cooperative. The members of the committee of my cooperative consult with me and value my opinion. Now I have a voice and a vote”, she states. That is the way my conversation with Martha Matute ended, a Nicaraguan women, an example of self-worth and strength. Martha Mautute is the Secretary of the Supervisory Credit Board and member of the Gender Committee of the Cooperative “Nuevo Horizonte”. She actively Participated in the Diploma Progarmme "Leadership and Entrepreneurship" organized by P4P. She was a major participant and motivating force behind the construction of the Gender Policy to promote the participation of women in her organization.
One of the greatest achievements for Martha is to work with women in her community and empower them. Thus far 25 women have joined her cooperative this year.
Thanks for reading this story. Please tell others about it.
Author: Mónica Cadenas
Mónica Cadenas worked as a Field Monitor for Gender and Procurement. Follow World Food Programme on social networks | 农业 |
2017-17/0130/en_head.json.gz/18934 | SPORE No. 21 - January 1989 Pisciculture : a growth industry? Fish from farm ponds This land is my land CTA Activities Newsline Courses ICARDA Pisciculture : a growth industry?
Pisciculture has not been developed in any major way in Africa. A few ponds have been constructed in some savannah lands, cages have been set up in rivers, enclosures have been built to try and exploit the potential of the lagoons but, at present, the production of "farmed" fish has not risen above the 50,000 tonne mark. This is not much as a fraction of the 45 million tonnes of fish caught in Africa. But these first, tentative efforts show signs of considerable future Potential.
In Benin, in the shallow waters of Lake Nokoue, the fishermen build circular enclosures from tens to hundreds of centimetres in diameter, just as their fathers did before them. These are the famous "acadjas" of the West African coast. The lake-dwellers, who are pisciculturists in the true sense of the word, place all kinds of vegetable matter inside these enclosures, including leaves and branches. The fish flock into these traps, which form a giant hoop-net offering them food and shelter. The branches provide an ideal environment where the fish can hide, for reproduction and egg-laying and the vegetable matter provides food as it decomposes. Once a year the fishermen harvest the fruit of their year's labour - to the beat of the drums, which gives a sort of carnival atmosphere. The time they spend beside their acadjas is well worthwhile - up to five tonnes of fish per hectare can be caught in the nets.
These Lake Nokoue fishermen probably don't realize that they are just about the only fisherfolk of the entire African continent to be carrying on a tradition of pisciculture: the Benin acadjas are the nearest thing to true fish farms to be found in Africa. There are, of course, many skilful and competent fishermen in countries such as Mali but fishing is not the same thing as fish-farming: the production figures prove that. At best, traditional fishing can catch a few hundred kilos/ha, but usually it is much less. But the yields of pisciculture are measured in tonnes per hectare.
Unlike the traditions of pisciculture in China or other parts of Asia, which are so ancient that the ponds have become part of the landscape, the rearing of fish in Africa is a relatively recent import. It was probably the Belgians who developed it first in Zaire to solve food shortages during the Second World War. The idea was sufficiently successful that the innovation was tried in neighbouring countries where some ponds were dug in the next few years.
But the experiment flopped - either from lack of experience or lack of skill. The ponds were often poorly built and too far from the villages to be properly maintained and supervised, and their limitations soon became apparent. Successful pisciculture depends on a basic understanding of pond construction and maintenance, vigilance on water levels (permanent freshwater creeks are not too plentiful - especially in the Sudan), knowledge of the fish to be reared, their peculiarities, needs and weaknesses.
For this reason, specialist organizations such as FAO or CIRAD CTFT (Centre Technique Forestier Tropical) of the Canadian CRDI (Centre de Recherches pour le Developpement International) have set up important research programmes, notably on rearing structures and also on which fish are best suited to aquaculture. Several projects which put into practice the different methods thought suitable for African pisciculture have been set up and are now producing fish. | 农业 |
2017-17/0130/en_head.json.gz/19085 | Japan suspends wheat imports after GMO discovery
Thu., May 30, 2013, 3:25 p.m.
By Mary Clare Jalonick and Nigel Duara
WASHINGTON — Japan has suspended some imports of U.S. wheat after genetically engineered wheat was found on an Oregon farm. The Agriculture Department announced the discovery of the modified wheat on Wednesday. No genetically engineered wheat has been approved for U.S. farming. Japan is one of the largest export markets for U.S. wheat growers. Katsuhiro Saka, a counselor at the Japanese Embassy in Washington, said Thursday that Japan had canceled orders of western white wheat from the Pacific Northwest and also of some feed-grade wheat. He said the country was waiting for more information from the Agriculture Department as it investigates the discovery. “In most countries the unapproved genetically modified wheat would be a target of concern,” Saka said. “The Japanese people have similar kinds of concerns.” USDA officials said the wheat was the same strain as a genetically modified wheat that was designed to be herbicide-resistant and was legally tested by seed giant Monsanto a decade ago but never approved. Monsanto stopped testing that product in Oregon and several other states in 2005. The Agriculture Department said the genetically engineered wheat is safe to eat and there is no evidence that modified wheat entered the marketplace. But the department is investigating how it ended up in the field, whether there was any criminal wrongdoing and whether its growth is widespread. The mystery could have implications on the wheat trade in the U.S. and abroad, as evidenced by Japan’s suspension of imports on Thursday. Many countries around the world will not accept imports of genetically modified foods, and the United States exports about half of its wheat crop. U.S. consumers also have shown increasing interest in avoiding genetically modified foods. There has been little evidence to show that foods grown from engineered seeds are less safe than their conventional counterparts, but several state legislatures are considering bills that would require them to be labeled so consumers know what they are eating. While most of the corn and soybeans grown in the United States are already modified, the country’s wheat crop is not. Many wheat farmers have shown reluctance to use genetically engineered seeds since their product is usually consumed directly, while much of the corn and soybean crop is used as feed. The modified wheat was discovered when field workers at an Eastern Oregon wheat farm were clearing acres for the bare offseason when they came across a patch of wheat that didn’t belong. The workers sprayed it and sprayed it, but the wheat wouldn’t die. Their confused boss grabbed a few stalks and sent it to a university lab in early May. A few weeks later, Oregon State wheat scientists made a startling discovery: The wheat was genetically modified, in clear violation of U.S. law. They contacted the USDA, which ran more tests and confirmed their discovery. “It looked like regular wheat,” said Bob Zemetra, Oregon State’s wheat breeder. The tests confirmed that the plants were a strain developed by Monsanto to resist its Roundup Ready herbicides and were tested between 1998 and 2005. At the time Monsanto had applied to the USDA for permission to develop the engineered wheat, but the company later withdrew its application. The Agriculture Department said that during that seven-year period, it authorized more than 100 field tests with the same glyphosate-resistant wheat variety. Tests were conducted in in Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota, Washington and Wyoming. During that testing and application process, the Food and Drug Administration reviewed the variety found in Oregon and said it was as safe as conventional varieties of wheat. USDA officials declined to speculate whether the modified seeds blew into the field from a testing site or whether they were somehow planted or taken there, and they would not identify the farmer or the farm’s location. They said they had not received any other reports of discoveries of modified wheat. Japan is regularly the top buyer of Northwest wheat, said Blake Rowe, CEO of the Oregon Wheat Commission. He said reductions in wheat sales would affect farmers in Idaho and Washington as well as Oregon, because the wheat is blended together. Oregon sold $492 million in wheat in 2011, the most recent data available, and 90 percent of it went overseas, Oregon Department of Agriculture spokesman Bruce Pokarney said. “If those markets are closed off — you can do the math,” Pokarney said. Published: May 30, 2013, 3:25 p.m. Tags: genetically modified organism, GMO crops, Japan, wheat, wheat exports
There are 23 comments on this story » | 农业 |
2017-17/0130/en_head.json.gz/20033 | Lawmakers considering pesticide restrictions to limit bee die-offs
A type of pesticide many beekeepers blame for mass bee die-offs would come under tighter regulation under a bill filed in the Massachusetts legislature in January.
Gerry Tuoti Wicked Local Newsbank Editor WHY IT MATTERS: Pesticides containing a classification of chemicals called neonicotinoids have come under mounting suspicion by beekeepers, who have reported high death rates among their honeybees.
LOCAL IMPACT: Bees play a direct impact on human food sources.
“I believe this is a responsible attempt to limit the amount of these pesticides in the environment, while recognizing the need to use these chemicals responsibly in agriculture,” said state Rep. Carolyn Dykema, D-Holliston, the bill’s main sponsor. “When they’re used judiciously and properly, we can mitigate the impact on pollinators.”
Over the past decade, pesticides containing a classification of chemicals called neonicotinoids have come under mounting suspicion by beekeepers, who have reported high death rates among their honeybees. Nationally, annual honey bee losses have averaged around 30 percent over the past 10 years, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Dykema’s bill (HD.2382), which has 134 co-sponsors, would bar anyone who hasn’t completed a state training and certification program from applying neonicotinoid pesticides. It would also be illegal to apply the pesticides during blooming season. Stores and garden centers selling plants pre-treated with the pesticides would be required to clearly label them.
Maryland and Connecticut recently enacted similar restrictions on the pesticides, and the European Union put a moratorium on their use in 2013. Last October, Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey reached a $75,000 settlement with Bayer CropScience, the world’s largest agrochemical company, to resolve allegations that the company misled consumers about its pesticides potential risks to bees and other pollinators.
Ann Rein, president of the Plymouth Beekeepers Association, said she recently lost 80 percent of her bees. She’s convinced neonicotinoids are a major problem.
“Whoever thought putting poisons in the food systems was a good idea? The whole issue boggles my mind,” she said. “The only thing driving this is money, not love of nature or common sense.”
In one of the largest scientific inquiries into the effects of neonicotinoids, the international Task Force on Systemic Pesticides released a 2015 report that analyzed more than 1,100 peer-reviewed studies, concluding that the chemicals pose a serious risk of harm to honey bees and other pollinators.
There are other studies with conflicting conclusions.
Brad Mitchell, director of government affairs for the Massachusetts Farm Bureau Federation and a former toxicology expert for the Massachusetts Toxicology Board, believes states like Massachusetts should wait for the federal Environmental Protection Agency to further study the matter and issue guidance before enacting neonicotinoid restrictions or bans.
Mitchell said many studies have been flawed. He doesn’t believe the science supports that neonicotinoids are the primary cause of large-scale bee die-offs. Parasitic mites, diseases, and poor bee husbandry, he argues, could be more significant factors.
“Part of our concern is too many people are looking at this as part of a quick fix,” Mitchell said. “We don’t believe neonics are the main issue here.”
He added that the certification process would be costly and burdensome for farmers.
“We can always be more careful, and there’s always further research to be done, but I don’t think this bill is justified from a scientific point of view,” he said.
Mitchell pointed to state data concluding that in the 14 colony die-offs the state most recently examined, investigators did not find pesticide exposure to be responsible.
Dykema said that while there is no “smoking gun,” there seems to be a preponderance of evidence pointing to neonicotinoids as a problem.
“I know that research does continue, and it would not surprise me if further limitations are needed in the future,” she said.
In the meantime, she said, her bill offers a “step forward” that could potentially win support from farmers.
Essex County Beekeepers Association member Marty Jessel, who has keeps hives in Boxford and Haverhill, said that while he supports Dykema’s bill, he doesn’t think it goes far enough. He wants to see an outright ban on neonicotinoids.
“I think this is a good first step to have people more aware to know what’s going on and be more schooled to use the pesticides,” he said. “It’s a start.”
Since neonicotinoids are systemic pesticides, they are present in the plant tissue and pollen, making them a threat to bees regardless of when they were applied, Jessel said.
“We need bees for pollination and we need bees to pollinate the food,” he said. “It almost gets down to if you want to eat, you need to have food, and if you want to have food, you need to have bees to pollinate.” | 农业 |
2017-17/0130/en_head.json.gz/20562 | High-Input Soybean Production: Soybean yield response to rhizobia inoculant, gypsum, manganese fertilizer, insecticide, and fungicide Apr 19, 2017 Answers on water quality, drainage Apr 14, 2017 A better way to manage phosphorus? Apr 19, 2017 Mergers and competition in seed and agricultural chemical markets Apr 19, 2017 Management Obama, Romney on American Agriculture Issues
American Farm Bureau Federation offered up questions regarding agriculture to both major party candidates. Source: American Farm Bureau Federation | Sep 25, 2012
From energy and environment to taxes and trade, and let's not forget the farm bill, American Farm Bureau Federation questioned Barack Obama and Mitt Romney on their positions about topics surrounding American agriculture. Here's what each of them had to say.
Agriculture is an energy-intensive industry and volatile prices significantly affect the cost of growing crops. What policies will you support to meet our energy needs and strengthen energy security? What role do you see for agricultural-based biofuels in the nation’s energy supply?
Our rural communities, farmers, and ranchers can increase our energy independence and boost the transition to a clean energy economy. U.S. biofuel production is at its highest level in history. Last year, rural America produced enough renewable fuels like ethanol and biodiesel to meet roughly 8% of our needs, helping us increase our energy independence to its highest level in 20 years. We are increasing the level of ethanol that can be blended into gasoline, and the new Renewable Fuel Standard helped boost biodiesel production to nearly 1 billion gallons in 2011, supporting 39,000 jobs.
An affordable, reliable supply of energy is crucial to America’s economic future. I have a vision for an America that is an energy superpower, rapidly increasing our own production and partnering with our allies, Canada and Mexico, to achieve energy independence on this continent by 2020. Taking full advantage of our energy resources will create millions of jobs, but this revolution in U.S. energy production will not just expand economic opportunity within the energy industry. Upstream businesses that supply the industry will experience a surge in demand, and perhaps the greatest benefit will occur downstream as agricultural businesses and manufacturers gain access to a more affordable and reliable supply of energy and feedstock. America’s energy resources can be a long-term competitive advantage for American agriculture and their development is key to the success of the industry.
The increased production of biofuels plays an important part in my plan to achieve energy independence. In order to support increased market penetration and competition among energy sources, I am in favor of maintaining the Renewable Fuel Standard. I also support eliminating regulatory barriers to a diversification of the electrical grid, fuel system, and vehicle fleet. My policies broadly aim to ensure that all of our energy industries can sustainably become competitive, innovative and efficient.
In the context of regulating water quality, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has increasingly encroached on states’ authority, from nutrient loadings in Florida to total maximum daily loads in the Chesapeake Bay to overall regulatory reach through proposing “guidance” that essentially gives EPA regulatory control over all waters. Do you support reaffirming the primary role of states in regulating both non-navigable waters and non-point source runoff?
Farmers are some of the best stewards of our environment, which is why my administration is working with more than 500,000 farmers and ranchers on more than 30 million acres of land to help conserve our lands and protect our waters. I have seen how we can bolster growth of our nation’s agricultural economy while protecting our environment. Now there is a lot of misinformation out there about changes to clean water standards. We are not going to be applying standards to waters that have not been historically protected. And all existing exemptions for agricultural discharges and waters are going to stay in place. I believe that we can work together to safeguard the waters Americans rely on every day for drinking, swimming, and fishing, and those that support farming and economic growth.
Government oversight is of course crucial to the protection of our environment. But statutes and regulations that were designed to protect public health and the environment have instead been seized on by environmentalists as tools to disrupt economic activity and the enjoyment of our nation’s environment altogether. President Obama’s Administration has embraced this approach, his EPA embarking on the most far-reaching regulatory scheme in American history.
Modernizing America’s complex environmental statutes, regulations, and permitting processes is crucial to ensuring that the nation can develop its resources safely and efficiently. Laws should promote a rational approach to regulation that takes cost into account. Regulations should be carefully crafted to support rather than impede development. Repetitive reviews and strategic lawsuits should not be allowed to endlessly delay progress or force the government into imposing rules behind closed doors that it would not approve in public. Energy development, economic growth, and environmental protection can go hand-in-hand if the government focuses on transparency and fairness instead of seeking to pick winners and repay political favors.
A new farm bill will be enacted and implemented over the next four years during a time of significant evolution in agriculture. What policy and risk management tools do you propose to ensure that agriculture is a profitable, competitive and viable industry?
I understand the need for a strong farm safety net. That’s why I increased the availability of crop insurance and emergency disaster assistance to help over 590,000 farmers and ranchers keep their farms in business after natural disasters and crop loss. My administration expanded farm credit to help more than 100,000 farmers struggling during the financial crisis to keep their family farms and provide for their families. And as farmers continue to go through hard times because of this drought, we are expanding access to low-interest loans, encouraging insurance companies to extend payment deadlines and opening new lands for livestock farmers to graze their herds.
And I know that any farm bill passed this year – and there needs to be a farm bill passed this year – needs to have adequate protections for America’s farmers. That’s why I have called for maintaining a strong crop insurance program and an extended disaster assistance program. We can reduce the deficit without sacrificing rural American economic growth, as the Romney-Ryan budget would do. Instead of making farmer pay more for crop insurance, we will do it by cutting subsidies to crop insurance companies and better targeting conservation funding.
I support passage of a strong farm bill that provides the appropriate risk management tools that will work for farmers and ranchers throughout the country. In the near term, my immediate priority should be given to enacting disaster relief for those not traditionally covered by crop insurance as this year’s drought has worsened. My running mate, Paul Ryan, voted for this relief in the House. Unfortunately, the Democrat-controlled Senate went home for August break without enacting them.
On the broader question of farm programs, we must be cognizant that our agricultural producers are competing with other nations around the world. Other nations subsidize their farmers, so we must be careful not to unilaterally change our policies in a way that would disadvantage agriculture here in our country. In addition, we want to make sure that we don’t ever find ourselves in a circumstance where we depend on foreign nations for our food the way we do with energy. Ultimately, it is in everyone’s interest is achieve a level playing field on which American farmers can compete.
U.S. agriculture has a long history of relying on temporary workers to help plant and harvest crops, tend orchards and manage livestock. What would you do to solve agriculture’s labor shortage problem?
To contribute to the vitality of our agricultural economy, we must design a system that provides legal channels for U.S. employers to hire needed foreign workers. This system must protect the wages and working conditions of U.S. workers and only be used when U.S. workers are not available. I have called on Congress to pass and implement the AgJOBS Act, which allows farmers to hire the workers they rely on, and provides a path to citizenship for those workers.
But we cannot wait for Congress to act, which is why my administration is already taking action to improve the existing system for temporary agricultural workers. We are also standing up a new Office on Farmworker Opportunities at the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the first office for farmer workers in the Agency’s history. These measures are helping to identify the challenges faced by farmworkers and address the need for a reliable labor force.
I understand and appreciate the critical role that foreign temporary workers play in the agriculture industry.I also understand that our current system for issuing visas to temporary, seasonal workers is broken. Too often, harvest or tourist season passes before temporary worker visas are approved. Indeed, in 2006 and 2007, 43% of all applications for temporary agricultural workers were not processed on time. As president, I will make the system for bringing in temporary agricultural workers and other seasonal workers functional for both employers and workers.I will get rid of unnecessary requirements that delay issuance of a visa and will speed the processing of applications. A legal immigration system that works will provide a lawful alternative to workers who would otherwise enter illegally and employers who face the choice of either reducing operations or turning to illegal labor to address labor shortage problems.
Additionally, let me add what my Administration will not do in this area. We will not propose heavy-handed regulations that will limit opportunities for our youth to be involved in agriculture. This is a stark contrast to what the Obama Administration proposed in their regulations to prohibit those under the age of 16 from working on farms, in some cases even one owned by their family. The impacts of this rule would have negatively affected our next generation of farmers, ranchers, and rural leaders. That’s why even the National FFA Organization opposed this misguided regulation. While the Obama Administration has since retreated on this ill-advised regulation, it demonstrates how out of touch they are with our nation’s family farms and their possible agenda if given another four years unhindered by reelection.
What priorities will you set for reforming the tax code? How should tax reform deal with the estate tax and capital gains taxes, two critical concerns for farmers and ranchers?
The tax code has become increasingly complicated and unfair. While many tax incentives serve important purposes, taken together the tax expenditures in the law are inefficient, unfair, duplicative, or even unnecessary. That’s why I’m calling for comprehensive tax reform. First, we must extend the middle class tax cuts for the 98% of Americans making less than $250,000 for another year. In fact, my proposal extends tax cuts for 97% of all small business owners in America. But at the same time, we need to ask the wealthiest to pay their fair share. I remain opposed to the extension of tax cuts for those with household income is above $250,000 and support the return of the estate tax exemption and rates to 2009 levels. These policies were unfair and unaffordable when they were passed, and they remain so today. Governor Romney would take the opposite approach – his tax plan would require an average tax increase of $2,000 on middle class families with kids, to pay for a new round of tax cuts for multi-millionaires, who would get an average break of $250,000.
My proposal would return the top tax rate on estates to 45% and reinstate the $7 million per-couple estate tax exemption, which exempts all but the wealthiest 3 in 1,000 decedents from the tax, but still helps us reduce the deficit. Independent experts estimate that under this plan, only 60 small farm and business estates in the entire country would owe any estate tax in 2013.
I’d also return capital gains taxes to the rates they were when Bill Clinton was president. But I’m calling for the permanent elimination of capital gains taxes on key small business investments.
We must pass fundamental tax reform that lowers tax rates, broadens the base, achieves revenue neutrality, and maintains the progressivity of the tax code. This will help jumpstart an economic recovery that will help create 12 million jobs in my first term in office. Regarding the estate tax and capital gains taxes, we must work to help all working families, including farmers and ranchers, keep more of what they earn. As president, I will eliminate the estate tax, helping keep family farms and ranches intact when businesses pass on from one generation to the next. I will also maintain the current 15% capital gains rate for wealthier Americans, while totally eliminating capital gains, dividend, and interest taxes for those who earn less than $200,000 per year. This will help middle-class families save tax free for long term costs like college tuition and retirement, and to generally enjoy the freedom that accompanies financial security.
Expanded export opportunities are essential for agriculture’s continued growth. What are your views on enforcing existing trade agreements and pursuing new trading opportunities for the United States?
I have expanded markets for American goods that help support over a million agriculture jobs here at home. In 2011, American farm income reached a record high, with a record number of agricultural exports and a record agriculture trade surplus that means more of our products are being sold in markets around the world. I signed three historic trade agreements with Panama, Columbia, and South Korea, which will increase exports by $2.3 billion – supporting nearly 20,000 American jobs. And I am working to expand local and regional food markets, a multi-billion dollar industry. We’ve increased the number of farmers markets by 53% since 2008. Through these policies, we are expanding markets for American goods abroad and at home.
As the United States is the largest agricultural exporter in the world, I understand that agricultural trade is incredibly important to our economy and to job creation in our country. A thriving agriculture sector is a key to getting our economy going again. We must continue to encourage this sector to grow, not stifle its success with ineffective trade policies that linger in bureaucracy and do not advance our economic interests. As president, I will work to promote multilateral trade agreements and reverse the course of the Obama Administration, which has only enacted three trade agreements – all initiated in the Bush Administration. As president, I will work with Congress to gain Trade Promotion Authority in order to facilitate the negotiation and completion of trade agreements. I will also stress that the World Trade Organization should reassert itself in order to resolve and restrict non-science-based trade restrictions prohibited by the overriding agreements, and I will value the important roles of the USDA and USTR as they provide focused attention and resources important to agricultural trade issues.
Farmer vote
Why should farmers and ranchers vote for you?
I am committed to building the foundation for a renewed rural economy so that future generations can enjoy the way of life in rural America. I am building a rural economy built to last – one focused on reclaiming the security of the rural middle class by growing products that the rest of the world buys, and restoring the basic values of hard work and fair play that made our country great. Farmers and rancher should vote for me because I am the only candidate that is committed to strengthening the farm safety net, strengthening rural economic growth, and supporting rural investments in clean energy.
Not only am I committed to providing farmers the safety they need to grow America’s food, but I am also planning for a strong agricultural future, increase funding for agricultural research and development by over 20%. My Administration is boosting rural small businesses by making it easier for them to access the capital they need to sell their products, expand operations and hire workers. And we are investing in a 21st century infrastructure - expanding broadband service for nearly seven million rural residents. We are working aggressively with our nation's rural communities, farmers, and ranchers to increase our energy independence and boost the transition to a clean energy economy. We are also partnering with over 13,000 farmers and ranchers to support renewable energy and energy efficiency projects that help save energy and improve their bottom line. Unlike my opponent, I understand that clean energy can provide farmers with additional income and economic security, which is why I have called on Congress to extend tax incentives for wind energy, which Mitt Romney would let expire.
As the breadth of your questions indicate here, American agriculture needs relief from the Obama Administration’s crushing onslaught of unnecessary regulations; a commonsense energy policy that develops our resources right here at home; a renewed focus on opening new markets; and a pro-growth tax policy that encourages investment and recognizes that death should not be a taxable event. On day one of my administration, farmers and ranchers would have something they’ve lacked over the past several years – an advocate.
Farmers and ranchers are the backbone of America and play a critical role in ensuring Americans across the country have access to safe and affordable food. The fruit of your labor nourishes the world, and I admire your hard work in harvesting our country’s bountiful resources. I also admire our farmers and ranchers for the critical role you play in the health of our economy, employing millions of Americans.
I’m honored to have interacted with so many farmers and ranchers during this campaign, and I’m grateful to have them supporting our efforts to turn around the economy and strengthen the middle class. If you haven’t yet signed-up to help with the campaign or just want to learn more, please visit my website at www.mittromney.com. Much is held in the balance of this election for all Americans, but particularly for farmers, ranchers, and rural communities, and I hope I can count on your vote this November 6th.
Read the responses at the Farm Bureau website.
RelatedWet conditions set 2017 planting start behindApr 18, 2017Understanding 120-bushel soybeansMar 31, 2017Views from AustinMar 27, 2017Educational perspectiveMar 20, 2017 Load More | 农业 |