Datasets:

BAAI

/

IndustryCorpus_agriculture

like 3

Follow

Beijing Academy of Artificial Intelligence 621

2017-09/0195/en_head.json.gz/12403

YOU ARE HERE: Aberdeen News Home→Collections→John DeereWaterloo Boy tractor produced in 1912January 04, 2008The Waterloo Gas Engine Company produced the first Waterloo Boy tractor in 1912. It was rated at 12-24 HP with a two-cylinder engine that operated at 750 RPM. John Deere did not have a tractor for the rapidly growing market so in 1918, the firm bought the Waterloo Gas Engine Company for $2.1 million and entered the tractor production business with a successful and well-accepted tractor. The records of production show that in 1912, the first year of production, 118 Model N tractors were sold. By 1918 when John Deere acquired the Waterloo Boy, over 8,000 units had been sold. About a year later the Nebraska Legislature passed the Tractor Law. The law stated that no tractor could be sold in Nebraska without a permit that would be issued upon certification proving that the tractor had been tested by the University of Nebraska to meet certain standards of performance. In 1920, the testing procedure was ready, and the first tractor to be tested was John Deere Model N 12-25 Waterloo Boy. Nebraska Test number one for this two-cylinder engine was rated at 750 RPM. It had a valve-in-head design with a six and one-half inch by seven-inch bore and stroke. It developed a maximum 15.9 HP on the drawbar and 25 HP on the belt. The tractor weighed about 6,183 pounds. It had two forward speeds of two and one-quarter and three miles an hour. It was called a three-plow tractor. It could pull two binders or a nine-foot tandem disk. The tractor started on gasoline and operated on kerosene. The manifold heat vaporized the kerosene before it entered the combustion chamber. Cooling was by a radiator fan and water pump driven by the flywheel. The fuel tank was mounted in the front of the tractor and the radiator was cross- mounted on the frame. The rear driving wheels had a large spur gear about the size of the wheel. The tractor had no enclosed gearing for the driving shafts. To provide lubrication, two small tanks were located on the fenders and oil could be dripped on the final drive and spur gear. Simplicity and easy servicing were strong selling points of the Waterloo Boy. From 1918 to 1924, about 20,000 Waterloo Boy tractors were made by John Deere.AdvertisementFIND MORE STORIES ABOUTJohn DeereFEATURED ARTICLESFord-Ferguson joined forces in 1938November 7, 2008Huber Model BMay 29, 2009Moline Universal Model D upped horsepowerMay 15, 2009Copyright 2017 Aberdeen NewsTerms of Service|Privacy Policy|Index by Date|Index by Keyword

农业

2017-09/0195/en_head.json.gz/13176

Market Watch: Atwater Village market's local tomato grower, Cameron Slocum At the farmers market David Karp Cameron Slocum, the self-proclaimed "Eastside Tomato King," grows tomatoes on the hill above his home in Lincoln Heights. Cameron Slocum, the self-proclaimed "Eastside Tomato King," grows tomatoes on the hill above his home in Lincoln Heights. (David Karp) David Karp, Special to the Los Angeles Times Cameron Slocum pulls up to the Atwater Village farmers market in the Tomatomobile, a 1980s Volvo station wagon with crude icons of tomatoes, blue on the right side, pink on the left, scrawled everywhere including the windows, along with a plug for "The Eastside Tomato King.com." He whips out a high-design Italian chair and a few handfuls of carrots, radishes and beets, which he displays on a table covered with trippy spirals. "Dad approaches everything like a visual arts project," says his daughter and assistant, Lina, 19. "Last year when he sold at farmers markets it was more a performance piece than anything else."Slocum is certainly not your average farmers market vendor. He combines self-promotion and elusiveness, to the extent that some have even suspected that his tomato farm is an urban legend. But as a recent visit revealed, he does in fact grow tomatoes, and this week he'll be selling them for the first time at farmers markets, at the Silver Lake and Atwater Village venues. Photo gallery: David Karp captures what's fresh at the farmers market, and more. Born in Glendale in 1957, he started a performance art space when he attended UC- San Diego, then forged a career as a fine arts photographer, sculptor and painter, exhibiting at galleries in Europe and the United States. With the profits from a successful show in 1986 he bought his current home in Lincoln Heights, northeast of downtown Los Angeles. In addition to creating art, he sold modern furniture from 1985 to 2005, until EBay killed his business, he says.For years he grew a few tomatoes in a garden in his half-acre backyard, but it was just in the last few years, as other sources of income dried up, that he expanded his planting into what he calls Cam's Farm."I did it on a bet," he says. "A friend named Fred who later died said I couldn't pull it off. But in 2008 I gave all the tomatoes away, because I felt like it would be disrespectful to the memory of Fred to sell them." Last winter he grew mâche, and now he has radishes, carrots and his namesake crop, several thousand tomato plants of a full-flavored dark-pink beefsteak heirloom variety called Mexico.Up a set of stadium stairs from the street, his bungalow is strewn with dishes, ashtrays, art supplies and the art itself, spooky, spectral images on marble and paper. The stairs carved into the hillside leading up to the tomatoes are still a work in progress, and the slope vertiginously steep, enough to intimidate most creatures other than goats or llamas. But as one ascends to the top of his property, there's a sweeping view of the Eastside, downtown and the Hollywood Hills."I feel like I'm farming in the Andes," Slocum says, waving an omnipresent Camel 99 cigarette. "I'm going to put in a funicular so that I can continue farming when I get older."Farther up the hill a small grove of walnut trees and the scraggly remnants of old grapevines cling to the slopes, a relic of the era, before the Second World War, when Los Angeles was the most productive farm county in the nation, and vineyards abounded in the Southland. Slocum has grand hopes that the profits from selling his tomatoes will allow him to buy adjacent properties and substantially expand his plantings. "Just a few acres though," he says. "If I take it bigger than that I lose all control."There are many parts of California and the nation where all farmers markets vendors grow locally. Los Angeles is not among them, obviously, although there are a few exceptions, mostly postage stamps of agriculture located beneath power lines. Slocum prides himself on what he calls "hyperlocal production," and sells at the nearby El Sereno farmers market. His original idea was to sell no further than five miles distant, but if his harvest goes well, he's considering venturing farther afield to other farmers markets.Slocum writes a blog with excerpts from what he says will be a forthcoming book entitled "Seeing Red: Confessions of the Eastside Tomato King," with contents ranging from self-portraits and farm photos to a recent profane rant against the gophers assailing his plants. He says he'll soon be opening an art gallery in his home. Unsurprisingly, he adds that he is in the "early stages of negotiations with a producer for a reality television show."All this and tomatoes too? Hard to believe, even for a guy who says he works 17 hours a day. But chefs who have bought Slocum's produce speak well of him. "We have indeed purchased green tomatoes from Cam," wrote Corina Weibel, chef-owner of Canelé in Atwater Village, in a recent e-mail. "We pickle them and feature them on our fried chicken sandwich at brunch. A big hit. I'm sure we'll be purchasing more from him in the future. He's quite a character!"***Another mysterious grower whose farm sits high on a hillside, in this case overlooking the San Gabriel Valley, is Jerry Dimitman, who turns 90 this month. A retired professor of plant pathology from Cal Poly Pomona, he has planted a famous collection of lychee, longan, wampi and pummelo trees, many of them huge, mature specimens of rare varieties. He sells the fruits, with the aid of his children, at the Alhambra farmers market, where the mostly Asian American customers form long lines, appreciative of the freshness of his offerings.Last week he started bringing lychees, with bright red shells and juicy, sweet-tart flesh. Lychees are one of the most emblematic fruits of southern China, where they are grown in vast quantities and exported to the United States from May to July; these often are sold cheaply, undercutting producers in Florida and Mexico, who have objected that most of the Chinese fruits are treated with sulfur dioxide gas, which maintains the rosy color and soft texture of lychee skins during shipping. As is so often the case with long-stored fruits, however, the pristine appearance of treated lychees long outlasts optimal flavor. Because the climate in California differs considerably from that of southern China, lychee trees flower and fruit undependably here, making commercial cultivation impractical, even though there is limited competition at this time of year. But for those who love luscious, fresh, untreated lychees, the local season runs for the next few weeks. In addition to Dimitman, Steve and Robin Smith of Mud Creek Ranch in Santa Paula have started selling organically grown lychees at the Santa Monica Wednesday and Hollywood farmers [email protected] Property Art Mexico China Television Industry World War II (1939-1945) University of California System Photos: Dates, eggplant, carrots and more Market Watch: The latest farmers market news by David Karp Map: Explore your local farmers markets

农业

2017-09/0195/en_head.json.gz/13602

The Opinion Pages|You Say Tomato, I Say Agricultural Disaster The Opinion Pages | Op-Ed Contributor You Say Tomato, I Say Agricultural Disaster By DAN BARBERAUG. 8, 2009 Karen Barbour Tarrytown, N.Y.IF the hardship of growing vegetables and fruits in the Northeast has made anything clear, it’s that the list of what can go wrong in the field is a very long one.We wait all year for warmer weather and longer days. Once we get them, it seems new problems for farmers rise to the surface every week: overnight temperatures plunging close to freezing, early disease, aphid attacks. Another day, another problem.The latest trouble is the explosion of late blight, a plant disease that attacks potatoes and tomatoes. Late blight appears innocent enough at first — a few brown spots here, some lesions there — but it spreads fast. Although the fungus isn’t harmful to humans, it has devastating effects on tomatoes and potatoes grown outdoors. Plants that appear relatively healthy one day, with abundant fruit and vibrant stems, can turn toxic within a few days. (See the Irish potato famine, caused by a strain of the fungus.)Most farmers in the Northeast, accustomed to variable conditions, have come to expect it in some form or another. Like a sunburn or a mosquito bite, you’ll probably be hit by late blight sooner or later, and while there are steps farmers can take to minimize its damage and even avoid it completely, the disease is almost always present, if not active. Continue reading the main story But this year is turning out to be different — quite different, according to farmers and plant scientists. For one thing, the disease appeared much earlier than usual. Late blight usually comes, well, late in the growing season, as fungal spores spread from plant to plant. So its early arrival caught just about everyone off guard. And then there’s the perniciousness of the 2009 blight. The pace of the disease (it covered the Northeast in just a few days) and its strength (topical copper sprays, a convenient organic preventive, have been much less effective than in past years) have shocked even hardened Hudson Valley farmers.Jack Algiere, head vegetable farmer at the Stone Barns Center for Food and Agriculture (where I have a restaurant that purchases from the farm), lost more than half his field tomatoes in three days. Other organic farmers were forced to make a brutal choice: spray their tomato plants with fungicides, and lose organic certification, or watch the crop disappear. Even for farmers who routinely spray, or who reluctantly spray precautionary amounts, this year’s blight lowered yields. (Fungicides work only to suppress the disease, not cure it.) As one plant pathologist told me, “Farmers are out there praying and spraying.”Of course, farmers aren’t the only ones affected. If you love eating flavorful organic field tomatoes, good luck — they’ll be as rare this summer as a week without rain. And those that survive will cost you; we’re already seeing price increases of 20 percent over last year.So what’s going on here? Plant physiologists use the term “disease triangle” to describe the conditions necessary for a disease outbreak. You need the pathogen to be present (that’s the late blight), you need a host (in this case tomatoes and potatoes) and you need a favorable environment for the disease — for late blight that’s lots of rain, moderate temperatures and high humidity.Does that last bit sound familiar? It has been the weather report for the Northeast this summer, especially in June. Where we saw precipitation fit for Noah’s Ark, late blight found something akin to a four-star hotel. Those soggy fields and backyard vegetable plots? Inviting, and all too easy to check into.But weather alone doesn’t explain the early severity of the disease this year. We’ve had wet, cool summers in the past, but it’s never been this bad. Instead we have to look at two other factors: the origin of the tomato plants many of us cultivate, and the renewed interest in gardening.According to plant pathologists, this killer round of blight began with a widespread infiltration of the disease in tomato starter plants. Large retailers like Home Depot, Kmart, Lowe’s and Wal-Mart bought starter plants from industrial breeding operations in the South and distributed them throughout the Northeast. (Fungal spores, which can travel up to 40 miles, may also have been dispersed in transit.) Once those infected starter plants arrived at the stores, they were purchased and planted, transferring their pathogens like tiny Trojan horses into backyard and community gardens. Perhaps this is why the Northeast was hit so viciously: instead of being spread through large farms, the blight sneaked through lots of little gardens, enabling it to escape the attention of the people who track plant diseases.It’s important to note, too, that this year there have been many more hosts than in the past as more and more Americans have taken to gardening. Credit the recession or Michelle Obama or both, but there’s been an increased awareness of the benefits of growing your own food. According to the National Gardening Association, 43 million households planned a backyard garden or put a stake in a share of a community garden in 2009, up from 36 million in 2008. That’s quite a few home gardeners who — given the popularity of the humble tomato — probably planted a starter or two this summer. Here’s the unhappy twist: the explosion of home gardeners — the very people most conscious of buying local food and opting out of the conventional food chain — has paradoxically set the stage for the worst local tomato harvest in memory. So what do we do?For starters, if you’re planning a garden (and not growing from seed — the preferable, if less convenient, choice), then buy starter plants from a local grower or nursery. A tomato plant that travels 2,000 miles is no different from a tomato that has traveled 2,000 miles to your plate. It’s an effective way to help local growers, who rely on sales of these plants before the harvest arrives. It’s also a way to protect agriculture. If late blight occurs in a small nursery it’s relatively easy to recognize, as straightforward as being able to see the plant, recognize its symptoms and isolate it before it has a chance to spread.This is less of an option on a farm that’s spread out over dozens of acres, nor is it likely once the plant gets to a large retailer. A plant pathologist from Cornell told me she visited one such store and noticed the tomato plants were infected with blight. She immediately reported it to the manager, who said he couldn’t remove the plants without approval from his superiors (which would take time). The pathologist returned a week later to find that the plants were still there.In fact, this late blight outbreak appears to be a classic example of what Charles Perrow, a sociologist, calls a “tightly coupled” accident. With tight coupling — lots of tomatoes grown in one place, say, or distributed by one large retailer — failures in one part of the system can quickly multiply. The damage cannot be as readily controlled. The recent spike in food-borne illnesses is another example of the problems associated with an overly consolidated food chain. E. coli’s been around for a long time; what’s new is how quickly and widely it spreads when there are only a few big meat producers.There’s another lesson here for the home gardener. When you start a garden, no matter how small, you become part of an agricultural network that binds you to other farmers and gardeners. Airborne late blight spores are a perfect illustration of agriculture’s web-like connections. The tomato plant on the windowsill, the backyard garden and the industrial tomato farm are, to be a bit reductive about it, one very large farm. As we begin to grow more of our own food, we need to reacquaint ourselves with plant pathology and understand that what we grow, and how we grow it, affects everyone else. (Potato farmers in the Andes, for example, plant disease-prone varieties at high altitudes where the cold keeps pathogens in check — to protect themselves and their neighbors. They don’t get as big a harvest, but they decrease the risk of an epidemic.)Government can help. For all the new growers out there, what’s missing is not the inspiration, it’s the expertise, the agricultural wisdom and technical knowledge passed on from generation to generation. Congress recognized the need for this kind of support almost 100 years ago when it passed the Smith-Lever Act, creating a network of cooperative extension services in partnership with land-grant universities. Agricultural extension agents were sent to farms to share the latest technological advances, introducing new varieties of vegetables and, yes, checking the fields for disease.The cooperative extension service is still active, but budget cuts have left it ill equipped to deal with a new generation of farmers. The emphasis now is on reaching farmers through mass e-mail messages and Web-based dialogues, with less hands-on observation. That’s like getting a doctor’s check-up over the phone. More agents in the field during those critical weeks in June might well have resulted in swifter, more effective protection of the plants: early detection of any disease requires a number of trained eyes.The food community has a role to play, too — by taking another look at plant-breeding programs, another major fixture of our nation’s land-grant universities, and their efforts to develop new varieties of fruits and vegetables. To many advocates of sustainability, science, when it’s applied to agriculture, is considered suspect, a violation of the slow food aesthetic. It’s a nostalgia I’m guilty of promoting as a chef when I celebrate only heirloom tomatoes on my menus. These venerable tomato varieties are indeed important to preserve, and they’re often more flavorful than conventional varieties. But in our feverish pursuit of what’s old, we can marginalize the development of what could be new.That includes the development of plants with natural resistance to blight and other diseases — plants like the Mountain Magic tomato, an experimental variety from Cornell that the Stone Barns Center is testing in a field trial. So far there’s been no evidence of disease in these plants, while more than 70 percent of the heirloom varieties of tomatoes have succumbed to the pathogen. Mountain Magic is an example of regionalized breeding. For years, this kind of breeding has fallen by the wayside — the result of a food movement wary of science and an industrialized food chain that eschews differentiation in favor of uniformity. (Why develop and sell 20 different tomato varieties for 20 different microclimates when you can simply sell one?)Breeders in regions vulnerable to late blight should be encouraged to select for characteristics that are resistant to it, in the same way that they select for, say, lower water demands in the Southwest. While they’re at it, breeders could be selecting for flavor and not for uniformity, shipping size and shelf life. The result will mean not just tastier tomatoes; it will translate into a food system with greater variety and better regional adaptation.Healthy, natural systems abhor uniformity — just as a healthy society does. We need, then, to look to a system of food and agriculture that values and mimics natural diversity. The five-acre monoculture of tomato plants next door might be local, but it’s really no different from the 200-acre one across the country: both have sacrificed the ecological insurance that comes with biodiversity.What does the resilient farm of the future look like? I saw it the other day. The farmer was growing 30 or so different crops, with several varieties of the same vegetable. Some were heirloom varieties, many weren’t. He showed me where he had pulled out his late blight-infected tomato plants and replaced them with beans and an extra crop of Brussels sprouts for the fall. He won’t make the same profit as he would have from the tomato harvest, but he wasn’t complaining, either.Sometimes giving in to nature can be the biggest victory of all. Dan Barber is the chef and co-owner of Blue Hill and Blue Hill at Stone Barns. A version of this op-ed appears in print on , on Page WK10 of the New York edition with the headline: You Say Tomato, I Say Agricultural Disaster. Today's Paper|Subscribe TIMES TOPIC Organic Foods and Products TIMES TOPIC Tomatoes

农业

2017-09/0195/en_head.json.gz/15404

Bridges AfricaAnalysis and news on African trade and sustainable development Overview WTO Ministerial ConferenceBridges Africa , Volume 2 - Number 8 Agricultural trade issues at the WTO ministerial conference in Bali: Stakes and challenges for African countries15 November 2013Yonov Frederick Agah Negotiations for the progressive liberalisation of global trade in agriculture under Article 20 of the World Trade Organization (WTO) Agreement on Agriculture (AoA) remain an important objective for African countries, which would also need complementary domestic policy reforms to enhance productivity and competitiveness. One of the major outcomes of the Uruguay Round of multilateral trade negotiations was the integration of international trade in agriculture into the multilateral trading system. Although this significant development involved WTO members undertaking commitments to reduce tariffs, domestic support and export subsidies in agriculture, it merely represented a ‘stepping stone' towards the long-term objective of substantial progressive and comprehensive reform of world trade in agriculture. It is in this context that the envisaged continuation of the reform process was started in 2000 and was subsequently clarified under the Doha Ministerial Declaration in 2001. Despite the overall stalemate in the Doha Round negotiations, Ministers at the Eighth WTO Ministerial Conference (MC8) in 2011, further committed to advance negotiations, where progress can be achieved. It is based on this understanding that members have been engaged in shaping the post-MC8 agenda, including advancing the work towards a package of ‘deliverables' at the Ninth WTO Ministerial Conference (MC9) in Bali. The three core areas of such a package include a binding agreement on trade facilitation, as well as elements related to agriculture and development with specific priority devoted to issues of special interest to least-developed countries (LDCs). Elements of the agriculture component of a possible Bali package The quest for free trade in agriculture through the reform of global rules is at the heart of the ‘development' mandate of the Doha Round for both developed and developing country members of the WTO. The significance of agriculture is clearly demonstrated by the existing ‘like-minded coalitions' in the negotiations, such as the Cairns Group, the G20, the G33, the G-10 and the net food-importing developing countries (NFIDCs). In spite of the diverse interests of these groups, their overarching objective has been to promote the liberalisation of global agricultural trade markets as an important driver of international economic growth and development through, inter alia, substantial reductions in trade-distorting domestic support; elimination of export subsidies; as well as deep cuts to all tariffs, expansion of tariff quota access and improvements in tariff quota administration. Various African countries are members of these different groups, reflecting their broad long-term interests and objectives in the Doha Round agriculture negotiations that bring together the three pillars of market access, domestic support and export competition. However, it is only three elements out of the broad long-term agriculture dossier that are under discussion for the Ministerial Conference in Bali: public stockholding for food security purposes, export subsidies and tariff rate quota (TRQ) administration. G33 proposal on public stockholding for food security purposes The G33 proposal seeks to amend the AoA by modifying the 'green box,' a category of spending that is believed to be minimally trade distorting and is without limits. The objective of the modification, if adopted, is to increase the list of policies and services related to farmer settlement, land reform programmes, rural development and rural livelihood security. Also, against the background of the significant increases in food prices and the number of resource-poor farmers in need of support in developing countries since the AoA was put in place, the G33 proposal seeks to remove limits on public stockholding and food aid. G20 proposal on tariff-rate quota administration This proposal seeks tighter disciplines for administering tariff-rate quotas (TRQs) - which are presently being used by some members to charge higher tariffs on goods being imported after an initial quota has been filled. Some countries argue that the way the quotas are managed can be too cumbersome and hamper exporters' ability to access markets. However, apart from a few minor changes aimed at adapting the text of the proposal to more suitable ‘treaty language', no substantive changes have been introduced. G20 proposal on export competition Based on the recognition that export subsidies are the most distortive form of agricultural support, the export competition element of the agriculture component of a possible Bali package is contained in the proposal by the G20 for a Ministerial Decision requiring developed country members to amend their export subsidy reduction commitments by the end of 2013 as follows: (a) budgetary outlay commitments shall be reduced by 50 percent, and (b) export quantity commitments shall be reduced to the actual average of quantity levels in the 2003-2005 base period. The proposed Ministerial Decision on export subsidies also provides that "developing country members with scheduled export subsidy commitments shall reduce them by 25 percent by the end of 2016." Other commitments contained in the proposal include flexibility for developing countries to continue to benefit from the provision of Articles 9.4 of the AoA for five years after the end-date for elimination of export subsidies; the prohibition of exports subsidies for cotton; reductions by developed and developing country members in the volume of subsidised exports; and disciplines on export financing. The proposed disciplines, however, would not be applicable to export finance operations in which LDCs and NFIDCs are recipients. Stakes and challenges for African countries Although only a few African countries are members of the G20 and the G33, it is important to note that the current proposals by these groups reasonably address some of the agriculture trade issues on which a positive outcome at the Bali Ministerial Conference should be of interest to all African countries. Agreement on the TRQ proposal in Bali should result in increased transparency, simplification of procedures and monitoring of tariff quota fill rates through the adoption of new mechanisms for consultation, redistribution of unused licences and new tariff quota administration methods. Although members are reportedly finding agreement on the transparency elements of the proposal relating to TRQ administration, convergence on the special and differential treatment component is yet to be achieved. From a long-term policy perspective, the G33 proposal has the potential of addressing some of the internal and external challenges, which have been critical to the underdevelopment of the agricultural sector of African countries. While the internal challenges relate to the lack of infrastructure and insufficient production by poor small-scale farmers, the external challenges are mostly centred on the vulnerability of the resource-poor farmers and the acquisition of foodstuffs at administered prices for food security purposes. Overall, the proposed changes to agriculture trade rules would enable developing countries, including African countries, to use agriculture as a development policy tool to achieve the core objectives of livelihood security, poverty alleviation and rural employment. The use of a "peace clause" as a potential interim solution to the controversial G-33 proposal on public food stockholding and domestic food aid has continued to feature prominently in the agriculture negotiations, particularly with regards to transparency, as well as safeguards to minimize any possible trade distortions. Cotton remains an important issue in the agriculture negotiations. The Cotton-4 countries (Benin, Burkina Faso, Chad and Mali) have indicated that they would be submitting an updated proposal for the Ministerial Conference in Bali (1). Although there is no proposal and no on-going discussions on issues related to technical standards and sanitary and phytosanitary measures in export markets for Bali, they present significant policy challenges to African countries' agriculture. This is more so as it is increasingly difficult to meet not only the public standards, but also the private standards being demanded by retailers in developed country markets. Finally, with respect to policy options, it is very important to recall that historical patterns of agricultural production and trade have clearly locked most African countries in primary commodity exports. This situation has been exacerbated by critical challenges arising from infrastructural bottlenecks, inadequate public investment in agriculture, distortive import-substitution and food self-sufficiency policies, as well as shortages and over-dependence on imported inputs. Consequently, there is a great need for domestic policy reforms to ensure an internationally competitive African agricultural sector by addressing challenges related to infrastructural facilities, pricing policies, promotion of regional trade and capacity building for African farmers. Policy measures to enhance agricultural productivity in Africa should also pay special attention to the interlinkages between demographic growth projections and the requisite solutions to employment, livelihood security and self-sustenance for rural populations and communities. There is also a need to address the dynamics related to climate change, including the associated secondary stress of increased competition for resources, biodiversity losses and spread of pests. Although the Uruguay Round AoA generally marked an important step towards the progressive liberalisation of international trade in agriculture, the successful conclusion of the Doha Round agriculture negotiations, including a possible small package at the Bali Ministerial Conference, would serve as only a part of the desired solutions. For African countries in particular, domestic policy reforms would be required to fully take advantage of reductions in trade-distorting subsidies and domestic support measures in other parts of the world. It is critically important that such domestic policy reforms comply with both public and private standards on addressing the challenges related to agricultural productivity and competitiveness, rationalisation of agricultural trade and pricing practices, promotion of regional trade integration, and the building of technical capacities. Author: Yonov Frederick Agah is a WTO Deputy Director-General, having assumed that role in October of this year. He previously served as Nigeria's Ambassador and Permanent Representative to the WTO from 2005 to September 2013. DISCLAIMER: This article was originally submitted in June 2013, prior to his taking on the Deputy Director-General position. It exclusively reflects the author's views in his capacity as the then-Nigerian Ambassador. [i] The C-4 proposal on cotton TN/AG/GEN/33 has not been tabled yet when this article was drafted. TAG: WTO, WTO MC9 (Bali 2013), WTO Ministerial ConferenceThis article is published under Bridges Africa,Volume 2 - Number 8 0 1 0 Email Print WTO Ministerial ConferenceHow does the G-33 proposal address LDC concerns in the area of food security? 15 November 2013This article assesses the G-33 proposal in regard to the food security issues faced by the LDCs. The Agreement on Agriculture (AoA), which was negotiated during the Uruguay Round, addressed the trade...Share: 1 1 Next article WTO Ministerial ConferenceChallenges facing LDCs in Bali and Beyond15 November 2013What is the way forward for LDCs in a post-Bali and post-Doha context? Because of their structural handicaps reflected in low income levels, high economic vulnerability and weak human assets, least-...Share: View the discussion thread. Financing Africa’s development: Challenges and opportunitiesVolume 6 - Number 1, 16 February 2017 Bridges AfricaCotton: What’s on the table for Bali and after Bali?15 November 2013 Bridges AfricaChallenges facing LDCs in Bali and Beyond15 November 2013 Bridges AfricaDecisions on the Development Pillar Expected to be Reviewed in Bali27 November 2013 Africa WTO Development WTO MC9 (Bali 2013) Agriculture TWITTER @ICTSD_AFRICA Promoting Sustainable and Socially Responsible Investment through Regional Trade Agreements New UK Economic Development Strategy Puts Emphasis on Trade and the World’s Poorest Economies WTO Members Make Permanent IP Rule Upgrade to Improve Access to Medicines African Manufacturing: What Can the Continent Learn from Asia? Least Developed Countries Propose New Caps on Trade-Distorting Farm Subsidies at WTO Back to top

农业

2017-09/0195/en_head.json.gz/16228

Factory farming is cruel and crazy. This is why » Why does factory farming still exist? Despite the vast body of evidence that shows factory farming to be a bad thing for animals, communities, our health and the planet, the spread of this backwards system of agriculture is showing no signs of slowing down. Why? Because of a tangled web of complex forces, which confuse and mislead everyone from the public to politicians. We think it’s time to untangle this web. Read on to learn the truth, and if you want even more information, get our full report here. Navigate this content Sugar-coating the truth Hiding behind meaningless laws Ignoring the case for animal welfare Discounting the damage Prioritising value over values Keeping consumers in the dark Viewing animals as commodities Misunderstanding the maths Believing the hype The banning of veal crates, barren-battery cages and sow stalls (“gestation crates” in the US) in the EU in 2007, 2012 and 2013 respectively, were unquestionable milestones in the advancement of animal welfare. But they also allowed the industrial-farming lobby to peddle the lie that the crueller aspects of the industry were a thing of the past. The reality is far more complex: not only were “enriched” cages – offering only a marginal improvement in welfare – not included in the ban, but sow stalls are still allowed in the first four weeks of pregnancy and farrowing crates – which are even more restrictive – are widely used. Unfortunately, the cruelty doesn’t end there. From the broiler chickens packed into sheds up to 50,000 at a time to the dairy cows pushed too hard and culled before their time to the pigs who endure tail-docking and teeth-clipping without anaesthetic, animal suffering is endemic in factory farming. Though laws can be useful in enforcing a basic standard of animal welfare (such as the bans referred to above), much legislation is couched in extremely broad terms and, as such, is very hard to enforce. While policy-makers and the factory-farming lobby use this legislation to reassure the public that their animal-welfare concerns are groundless, the reality is that many of these regulations are a façade, with no practical impact. In short, these abundant regulations often serve to protect the industry, rather than the animals trapped inside it. ...much of this legislation, because of its broad general language, proves to be a façade, the thinnest of veneers, which provides no real safeguards for animals. It acts as a legislative fig leaf to cover the depredations of factory farming. While scientific research and evidence is a crucial part of animal-welfare policy-making, it has its limitations when it comes to ethical considerations, which are notoriously hard to measure and therefore often ignored. This neglect of hard-to-measure aspects – from a lack of fresh air and daylight to the separation anxiety experienced when young animals are taken away from their mothers – has resulted in an arguably restricted view of what constitutes good welfare. Though some costs of producing intensive meat and dairy products – for example, feed, housing and veterinary care – are borne by the farmer and therefore also the end consumer, there are also huge “hidden” costs, such as ecological destruction and failing human health, that are borne by taxpayers and future generations. An economics that ignores these “external” costs gives the false impression that industrially produced meat is “cheap”, when – in reality – it is very expensive for society as a whole. If we are to develop an efficient economic system that properly reflects the true costs of producing industrial-animal protein, these negative externalities must be reflected in the price paid by consumers. A pricing system that disregards certain costs promotes unhealthy diets and inefficient, environmentally damaging ways of producing food. A country’s GDP (gross domestic product) has long been a measure of its economic status, but it fails to measure social welfare or individual wellbeing. In a similar way, factory farming is stuck in an outdated “quantitative” mindset, focusing on economic and performance data alone, from quantities and efficiencies to costs and margins. What we need is to develop a way of thinking about food and farming that takes into account the system’s “qualitative” aspects, such as animal welfare, the nutritional quality of the food it produces and its impact on the environment, among other things. The food industry has worked hard to champion “cheap”, convenient food while hiding its devastating impact on people, animals and the planet. Take many food labels, for example, with their misleading claims – “100% natural”, “farm fresh” and so on – and bucolic images of grazing animals to see this mass deception in action. We need more transparent food labelling in the EU, with the method of farming clearly stated, allowing consumers to play a more active role in improving welfare, as well as their own health and the environment. But it’s not in the interests of the government or the food industry for consumers to get wise to the miserable reality of much of today’s farming – after all, people might simply refuse to buy certain products. This painting of a reassuring picture that is far removed from the truth is profoundly dishonest and prevents consumers from making informed choices. Though farm animals are widely known to be sentient beings, the inhumane practice of factory farming continues to gather pace. One of the worst aspects of the system is the genetic selection of animals for higher productivity: high growth rates in chickens increase the risk of lameness; the high productivity of laying hens causes osteoporosis; and the pig industry’s drive to increase litter size results in high mortality rates among piglets. Yet the industry is determined to keep treating animals as machines. Astonishingly, the UK pig industry runs a campaign for a “Two-Tonne Sow” – sows who, through their piglets, produce 2000 kg of pork every year. The government and food industry’s recognition of animals as sentient beings is often nothing more than lip service. These animals are … locked into their over-producing bodies and cannot escape the suffering that this involves. The industry regularly asserts that cramming large numbers of animals into factory farms and pushing them to extreme levels of productivity is efficient. But this couldn’t be further from the truth: industrial-livestock production, which relies on huge volumes of human-edible crops for animal feed, is inherently inefficient. It’s thought that for every 100 calories we feed to factory-farmed livestock, we only get 40 calories back in the form of milk, 22 back in the form of eggs, 12 back in the form of chicken meat, 10 in the form of pork and 3 in the form of beef. But the wastage doesn’t stop there. Growing these crops to feed the animals uses up vital land, water and energy, and has led to the intensification of crop production with the use of chemical-soaked monocultures. The result is poor soil quality, as well as more pollution, carbon emissions, deforestation and biodiversity loss. It would be hard to devise a more inefficient way of feeding people. To add insult to injury, factory farming wraps itself in a cloak of virtue: its advocates tell us that 70% more food must be produced in order to feed a world population of 9.6 billion in 2050, and that intensive farming is our only hope of achieving this. This blind fixation with producing “70% more” drives global food and farming policy, justifying industrial and technology-based “solutions” to achieving food security. What it fails to acknowledge, however, is that the planet’s natural resources – upon which our ability to produce food depends – are under serious threat from intensification, and that there is already enough food on the planet to feed the world’s projected population. It’s been calculated that all the cereals due to be fed to intensively farmed livestock by 2050 (when the global population is expected to peak) could provide the necessary food energy for an astonishing 3.5 billion people every year. What’s needed, then, is a fairer distribution of food; and this, in large part, will involve curbing the demand for “cheap” meat and dairy. We do not need to produce huge amounts of extra food; we simply need to use what we produce more wisely. So there you have it: a complex, interlinked web of deception, dodgy information and senselessness that allows factory farming not only to survive, but also to thrive. We urgently need fresh thinking that allows society to develop a food system that provides healthy food for all, restores and enhances the natural resources on which agriculture depends, and respects the animals that provide our meat, eggs and dairy. Pledge to help end factory farming Submit your email address to allow Compassion in World Farming to send you urgent campaign actions and news (you can unsubscribe at any time). Factory farming threatens our health Factory farming exacerbates poverty Factory farming trashes our planet Factory farming leads to animal cruelty 'Game-changing book'

农业

2017-09/0195/en_head.json.gz/17134

Heinz to close Pocatello plant H.J. Heinz has announced plans to close its Pocatello, Idaho, plant, along with two other facilities. By John O’Connell Published on November 15, 2013 4:16PM John O'Connell/Capital Press Dan Hargraves, with Southern Idaho Potato Cooperative, stands by the entrance sign at the Pocatello H.J. Heinz plant, which the company intends to close in the next six to eight months. Buy this photo Capital PressPOCATELLO, Idaho — Officials of H.J. Heinz say their Pocatello facility, which employs 410 workers, is among three plants scheduled for closure during the next six to eight months.The company also intends to close a plant in Florence, S.C., which has 200 workers, and a Canadian plant in Learnington, Ontario, which has a workforce of 740.Heinz spokesman Michael Mullen said in a press release that production will shift to other Heinz factories in the U.S. and Canada.“Heinz will continue to invest in improving capacity utilization and will add 470 employees across five existing factories in Ohio, Iowa, California and Canada,” Mullen said. “Once this consolidation is complete, Heinz will employ approximately 6,800 hourly and salaried workers at sites across Canada and the U.S.Heinz will offer the displaced workers severance benefits, outplacement services and other support, Mullen said.“We reached this decision after exploring extensive alternatives and options,” Mullen said. “Heinz fully appreciates and regrets the impact our decision will have on employees and the communities in which these factories are located.”On Feb. 14, Heinz announced its acquisition by an investment consortium comprising an investment fund affiliated with 3G Capital and Berkshire Hathaway, which is controlled by Warren Buffett.Heinz bought the Pocatello plant from Kraft Foods in 1980. Though Heinz once used the plant for processing its Ore-Ida frozen potato product line, the facility has been used for making frozen meals in recent years.Dan Hargraves, executive director of Southern Idaho Potato Cooperative, said Idaho growers sell millions of hundredweights of potatoes to the Ontario, Ore., Heinz plant, but the Pocatello plant closure shouldn’t affect his growers.“They were using hardly any spuds,” Hargraves said.Matt Hunter, president and CEO of the Pocatello Chamber of Commerce, believes the facility has good rail access and has a good chance of being redeveloped for a new food processing use.“Heinz didn’t pay their chamber dues last month. Now we know why,” Hunter said.Prior to the announcement, Heinz had considered producing a line of deep-fried foods in Pocatello, said John Regetz, executive director of Bannock Development Corp.Regetz has asked the plant manager to provide information about when layoffs will occur and when the building will be available to market to other businesses. Regentz said other companies that have recently moved into Idaho would likely have been a good fit for the facility, and he’s optimistic the plant won’t remain idle. He believes the plant would be especially attractive with processors who finalize their processes with freezing.“It has great capacity. I think it’s very viable,” Regetz said. “Only very specialized food processors with a very specialized niche wouldn’t be able to use it.”Regetz said the Idaho Department of Labor’s rapid response team will assist with assessing the needs of workers, helping them obtain benefits and teaching job-searching skills.

农业

2017-09/0195/en_head.json.gz/17439

The squash The squash, an ancestral American crop The squash is the fruit of an annual garden plant belonging to the same family as the melon and cucumber and including many different varieties. Cultivated squashes are descended from wild squashes, which are believed to have originated in Central America, in the Mexico-Guatemala region. Cultivation later spread from there to North and South America. Squashes have been consumed for over 10,000 years; the Indians cultivated them for their seeds at a time when they were not yet very fleshy. Over the centuries, improved varieties having more flesh and a fruiter taste were developed; these varieties were cultivated along with corn and beans by the Aztec, Incan and Mayan peoples of Latin America. Christopher Columbus was the first westerner to discover these fruits. Cultivation of squash began in Europe shortly after the discovery of America. North AmericaSouth AmericaEurope An impressive diversity Most varieties of squash are classified as being either summer squash or winter squash, depending on their storage life. Summer squash cannot be stored for very long, whereas winter squash will keep for a good part of the winter under adequate storage conditions. Today, most squashes and pumpkins are produced in China, Romania, Egypt, Argentina, Turkey, Italy and Japan. Summer squashes are picked when still very young, from 2 to 7 days after flowering. Both their skin and seeds are tender enough to be edible. The zucchini is probably the best-known member of the summer squash family. Originally from Italy, it is also known as courgette. French and Italian cooking make use of zucchini flowers, which can be stuffed or deep-fried in batter. fruit vegetables fruit vegetables Winter squashes are harvested when fully ripe. They vary in shape, size, color and flavor, depending on the variety. The orange-colored flesh is drier, more fibrous and much sweeter than that of summer squash, and it becomes creamy when cooked. Like melons, winter squashes have a hollow inner cavity containing hard, fully developed seeds; these seeds can be washed, dried, and roasted, either salted or plain, and make a delicious and nourishing snack. Pumpkin seeds are commonly used this way. The large family of winter squashes includes well-known varieties: the butternut squash, the Hubbard squash, the buttercup squash and the acorn squash. Little is known about the history of spaghetti squash. Unlike that of other squash, the flesh of the spaghetti squash can be separated into spaghetti-like strands after it is cooked. It can thus be topped with a variety of pasta sauces or used in salads once chilled. The pumpkin, not to be mistaken for the autumn squash The pumpkin is very similar to the autumn squash, with which it is often confused. Pumpkins are more commonly used in North America, while the autumn squash is more popular in Europe. Both of these varieties are quite large and can be distinguished only by their peduncle; the pumpkin’s is hard and fibrous, with no swelling at the stern end, while that of the autumn squash is soft, spongy, cylindrical, and flared at the point of attachment. The flesh of these squashes is slightly thicker, and they have a more pronounced flavor than the other varieties of winter squash. They are more commonly used in soups, desserts, and jams. Although most often purchased for use as a Halloween decoration, pumpkins can also be substituted for or combined with other squashes in most recipes. Their seeds are said to be diuretic and to help in the treatment of urinary infections and prostate disorders. They also have a reputation for being an aphrodisiac.

农业

2017-09/0195/en_head.json.gz/17753

dansk Deutsch español Français italiano Nederlands norsk português suomeksi svenska Pennsylvania Game Commission Offers Seedlings For Landowners; Game Commission Offers 'Landscaping for Wildlife' Book from Pennsylvania Game Commission HARRISBURG, Pa., Dec. 28, 2012 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- While it may be winter, now is the time for landowners to begin making plans to help wildlife by planting tree and shrub seedlings offered by the Pennsylvania Game Commission's Howard Nursery, which will begin Jan. 7 through April 19. "If you are looking for seedlings for ornamental landscaping, look for a private nursery in your area," said Carl G. Roe, Game Commission executive director. "However, our bare-root seedlings are produced for use to improve wildlife habitat on State Game Lands and private-landowners enrolled in our Hunter-Access Program. These seedlings also are used to help educate Pennsylvania students about wildlife habitat needs through our 'Seedlings for Schools' program. "We also are able to offer a limited number of surplus seedlings for sale to the general public to help with their own private efforts to improve wildlife habitat conditions on their property. This effort is part of our agency's mission to manage wildlife and its habitat for current and future generations." New this year is an improved order form to help guide landowners seeking to create habitat for specific wildlife species, as well as a new "bundle" offering. Bundle offerings include 100 seedlings in a specified mix to benefit deer, game birds and songbirds, as well as riparian and winter-thermal habitats. The order form and information are available on the agency's website (www.pgc.state.pa.us) by putting your cursor on "General Store" in the menu bar at the top of the homepage, then clicking on "Howard Nursery" in the drop-down menu listing and scrolling down and choosing "2013 Seedling Order Form." (NOTE: If you have problems downloading the order form, you likely need to install the latest version of Adobe Acrobat Reader, which can be found doing an internet search and downloaded for free.) The order form can be completed and submitted on line, or printed out and faxed or mailed. Payments are not due until the order is confirmed by Howard Nursery. For those without internet access, order forms can be obtained at Game Commission offices or various displays or booths at shows in which the agency participates through the spring or by sending a self-addressed, stamped envelope to: Howard Nursery, 197 Nursery Road, Howard, PA 16841. "Seedlings are available for purchase by landowners are suitable for a variety of uses as wildlife food and cover, including hard- and soft-mast production, winter thermal cover and riparian habitats," said Annetta Ayers, Howard Nursery superintendent. "The Howard Nursery strives to offer the finest available tree and shrub seedlings that best provide for the various needs of wildlife, including food and shelter. All of our stock is inspected annually by the state Department of Agriculture. Ayers noted that the nursery sells seedlings in units/bundles of 25. Orders of 12 or more total units receive discounted pricing. Prices are as low as $3.75 per unit of 25 seedlings (15 cents each). The new bundles for deer, game birds and songbirds, and winter-thermal habitats, sell for $25; the riparian habitat bundle sells for $30. Some seedling types are on very limited supplies, so those interested will want to call Howard Nursery at (814) 355-4434. Hours of operation are Monday thru Friday 7 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Ayers noted that, for evergreens, 1,000 seedlings planted at the recommended tree spacing of eight feet by eight feet will occupy 1.5 acres. Planting space for hardwood trees should be a minimum of eight feet by eight feet and up to 15 feet by 15 feet, depending on species. For hardwoods, 100 trees will occupy one-quarter acre, and 1,000 seedlings will occupy 2.5 acres. The various shrub species can be planted on a six foot by six foot or eight foot by eight foot pattern. A description of each species available, along with size information, is available on the website under "Tree Seedling Index." Some of the new native shrubs are available in limited quantities and are expected to sell out quickly. The selection of native trees and shrubs is being expanded annually. With the exception of black locust, all of the hardwoods are grown from seed collected and processed by Game Commission personnel from Pennsylvania sources. The preferred method of delivery is by United Parcel Service (UPS). Shipping and handling charges do apply. This is very efficient and most orders are received next day. Orders are shipped only Monday through Wednesday to assure delivery for weekend planting. However, orders also may be picked up in person at the nursery once notified the order is ready. "Due to conditions beyond our control, such as ice and snow, wet weather, frozen ground, we may not be able to ship trees as early as we would like," Ayers said. "We will do everything we can at the nursery to ensure timely shipping and arrival of trees. Generally, seedlings ship in the month of April." For more information, contact the Howard Nursery, 197 Nursery Road, Howard, PA 16841, telephone (814) 355-4434. Hours of operation are Monday thru Friday 7 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. The Game Commission's Howard Nursery produces bare-root seedlings for wildlife food and cover on State Game Lands. The nursery has been producing and distributing 2.2 to 6 million seedlings annually for wildlife food and cover since 1954. Landowners who have land open to public hunting and are enrolled in one of the Commission's public access programs are eligible to receive up to 500 free seedlings annually, as available. Those enrolled cooperators with more than 500 acres are eligible for one free seedling per acre enrolled up to a maximum of 10,000 seedlings annually, as available. Cooperators are provided an order form each fall for following spring delivery. Free seedling orders are taken only in the fall through local Wildlife Conservation Officers (WCOs) and Land Management Group Supervisors (LMGS). GAME COMMISSION OFFERS 'LANDSCAPING FOR WILDLIFE' BOOK Landowners interested in developing "backyard habitats" beneficial to wildlife are encouraged to check out the "Landscaping for Wildlife in Pennsylvania," available from the Pennsylvania Game Commission. Written by Marcus Schneck, a noted outdoor and nature writer from Hamburg, Berks County, the 160-page book comes complete with descriptions, drawings and photos of ideal habitat for a variety of species, from hummingbirds to bats, as well as construction plans for a number of wildlife nesting boxes. The book also contains a chapter on nuisance wildlife and steps to address certain situations, as well as the importance of planting native species and a listing of recommended plants. "While spring garden plantings may be several weeks away, now is the time to begin drawing up plans," said Carl G. Roe, Game Commission executive director. "If you are interested in seeing and helping wildlife on your property, then this book is a must. It can help guide any first-time backyard habitat planner, as well as an experienced hand, in helping to create an oasis for wildlife." To order the book, which costs $9.43 (plus state sales tax and shipping and handling), visit the Game Commission's website (www.pgc.state.pa.us), put your cursor over "General Store" in the menu bar at the top of the homepage, click on "Visit the Outdoor Shop" in the drop down menu listing, then choose "Pennsylvania Game Commission Outdoor Shop" in the lower left-hand corner, choose "Merchandise" from the banner listing" and then click on "Books" in the categories in the left-hand column. Orders also are being accepted at 1-888-888-3459. Note to Editors: If you would like to receive Game Commission news releases via e-mail, please send a note with your name, address, telephone number and the name of the organization you represent to: [email protected] SOURCE Pennsylvania Game Commission RELATED LINKS http://www.pgc.state.pa.us Preview: Game Commission Welcomes Fox To Board Preview: Pennsylvania Game Commission Prepares For Special Snow Goose Season

农业

2017-09/0195/en_head.json.gz/17958

Study: Ag, Food Shipping Could Learn From Automotive Cross-Border Practices July 08, 2013 SHARING TOOLS | Print Subscribe The automotive industry’s just-in-time cross-border shipping practices are a good model for the movement of agriculture and food between the United States and Canada, according to a new study. An Economic Analysis of Agriculture and Food Cross Border Movements: Windsor-Detroit and Sarnia-Port Huron, has been released by the University of Windsor’s Cross-Border Institute. The study, prepared by the George Morris Centre, an independent, not-for-profit agriculture and food research organization, says efficiencies in cross-border movement of agri-food at both the Windsor/Detroit and Sarnia/Port Huron crossings have improved over the past decade. According to the study, this is in response to dramatic changes in exchange rates, as well as continual changes to regulatory oversight, border/customs issues, food safety and environmental regulations. According to William Anderson, CBI director and Ontario Research Chair in Cross-Border Transportation Policy, continuing dialogue among the two national governments, various industry associations and the Beyond the Border and Regulatory Cooperation Council initiatives are essential to improving business practices that will reduce cross-border costs and delays for producers and food processors in the future. “Naturally, the key challenge in the agri-food industry is perishability,” Dr. Anderson said. “This new report indicates that, similar to other industries, food producers are increasingly using just-in-time production and processing practices to fulfill commitments to major retailers." Crossings at Detroit and Port Huron account for 75% of Ontario exports to the U.S. and 64% of Ontario’s Imports from the U.S., and agri-food is an important part of that flow. Essex, Kent and Lambton Counties, including the rapidly growing greenhouse industry, are especially dependent on cross-border shipments. "We have to continue to work cooperatively to find new and better ways to make that cross-border flow more efficient.” The full report is available online. Tags: Canada, Cross-Border Trucking Will Trump's Take on Trade Be Boost or Bust for Fleets? CarriersEdge Addresses Food Safety Training Michelin and Bridgestone Also Increase Tire Prices The Future in Your Pocket

农业

2017-09/0195/en_head.json.gz/18438

Local Food Movement Glossary Our glossary is a work in progress! We welcome any additions to help broaden our knowledge of the edible world. Click here to contact us with suggestions! 100 Mile Diet Eating food products produced within a 100-mile radius of where the consumer lives. The capacity of actors in a system to manage resilience, either by moving the system toward or away from a threshold that would fundamentally alter the properties of the system, or by altering the underlying features of the stability landscape. See http://www.resalliance.org/ to learn more. Agricultural Cooperatives Agriculture cooperatives involve the pooling of resources by multiple individuals in order to accomplish a shared goal which often includes the sharing of labor, machinery, and/or land with the objective of increasing positive outcomes for all involved. Agriculture is the science of farming, which includes the cultivation of the soil for the growing of crops and the rearing of animals to provide food, wool, and other products. It also refers to the production of crops, the raising of livestock, and farming in general. A system of aquaculture in which the waste produced the by farmed fish, or other aquatic animals, supplies nutrients for plants grown hydroponically, which in turn purify the water. Artisan/Artisanal Generally, these terms mean that the product was made by hand with great care and high-quality ingredients. They are most frequently applied to items like bread, chocolate, cheese, vinegars and jam. Back to Top Biodynamic farming uses organic practices such as crop rotation and composting, with special plant, animal and mineral preparations. Production practices are done according to the rhythms found in nature. Biodynamic Agriculture Based on the work of Austrian philosopher Rudolf Steiner, this method of farming is rooted in a holistic understanding of nature. It involves treating the farm and the soil as living organisms that need to be nourished and replenished, as well as used for their resources. Cage-Free Cage-free birds live in large houses in flocks up to several thousand. While they might never go outside, they are able to walk around, spread their wings, and lay eggs in nests. There is no regulated definition of this term. Enhancing the ability of individuals, organizations or communities to address their own long-term needs. A representation of the effect human activities have on the climate in terms of the total amount of greenhouse gases produced (measured in units of carbon dioxide). See www.earthlab.com to learn more. Carrying capacity is the theoretical equilibrium population size at which a particular population in a particular environment will stabilize when its supply of resources remains constant. It can also be considered to be the maximum sustainable population size; the maximum size that can be supported indefinitely into the future without degrading the environment for future generations. The USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service and Agriculture Marketing Service evaluate meat products for class, grade, and other quality characteristics. Their findings are then represented on food labels as “Certified,” such as “Certified Angus Beef.” The word “Certified” can also mean a product meets standards defined by a third-party, non-governmental organization or trade group. In such cases, the USDA requires that the word “Certified” be printed in close proximity to the name of the certifying organization or standard, such as “Fair Trade Certified.” Certified Humane The Certified Humane Raised & Handled Label is a consumer certification and labeling program. When you see the Certified Humane Raised & Handled label it means that an egg, dairy, meat or poultry product has been produced with the welfare of the farm animal in mind. Food products that carry the label are certified to have come from facilities that meet precise, objective standards for farm animal treatment. Visit the Certified Humane Website to learn more. Certified Naturally Grown A grassroots alternative to the USDA's National Organic Program meant primarily for small farmers distributing through local channels such as farmers' markets, roadside stands, local restaurants, Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) programs and small, local grocery stores. The standards and growing requirements are no less strict than the USDA National Organic Program rules. The primary difference between Certified Naturally Grown and the USDA Organic program is cost to farmers and paperwork requirements. Visit the Certified Naturally Grown Website to learn more. The USDA requires that anyone who produces, processes or handles organic agricultural products must be certified by a USDA-accredited certifier in order to sell, label or represent their products as "organic." To become certified, an organic producer, processor or handler must develop, implement and maintain an organic system plan which meets the certification requirements. A certified operation must update its organic system plan and be inspected annually. Part of sustainable agriculture prohibits the use of harmful chemical pesticides. As a practice, chemical-free farming aims to restore soil stability and fertility in target locations. Chemical-free agriculture is difficult, especially where land has already been degraded. A chicken coop (or hen house) is a building where female chickens are kept. Inside hen houses are often nest boxes for egg-laying and perches on which the birds can sleep, although coops for meat birds seldom have either of these features. Chicken Tractor A chicken tractor (sometimes called an ark) is a movable chicken coop lacking a floor. Chicken tractors may also house other kinds of poultry. Most chicken tractors are a lightly built A-frame. It may have wheels on one or both ends to make moving it easier. Community Capacity The knowledge, skills, participation, leadership and other resources needed by a community to effectively address local issues and concerns. Community Food Assessment (CFA) "A collaborative and participatory process that systematically examines a broad range of community food issues and assets, so as to inform change actions to make the community more food secure." From: What's Cooking in Your Food System: A Guide to Community Food Assessment. Community Food Security (CFS) A condition in which all community residents obtain a safe, culturally acceptable, nutritionally adequate diet through a sustainable food system that maximizes community self-reliance, social justice, and democratic decision-making. Visit www.whyhunger.org/ to get info to learn more. A plot of land that is gardened by a group of people to produce fruits, vegetables, flowers, and sometimes chickens for egg production. Community gardens exist in a variety of settings, urban and rural, on vacant lots, at schools or community centers, or on donated land. Food may be grown communally, or individuals or families may have individual garden plots or beds. Community Supported Agriculture creates a direct connection between farmers and consumers. To join a CSA is to buy a share of the season's harvest. The farmer gains the security of knowing he or she has been paid for a portion of the harvest and the farmer's "community" participates in how and where their food is grown. Every week throughout the season, the CSA community receives a box of that week's harvest. Most of the local CSAs will deliver to several convenient area locations, but they always encourage the community to come to the farm, and even to participate in the growing of their food. Community-Based Participatory Research (CBPR) Research that is conducted as an equal partnership between traditionally trained experts and members of a community. In CBPR projects, the community participates fully in all aspects of the research process. CBPR projects start with the community. Compost is a mixture that consists largely of decayed organic matter and is used for fertilizing and conditioning land. Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation (CAFO) In concentrated animal feeding operations, animals are confined for more than 45 days per year. The EPA determines whether an agricultural business is a CAFO based on regulations created by the Clean Water Act, and special permits have to be given for the owners to operate a CAFO legally. Consumer Cooperatives Businesses owned and run by the customers themselves with the goal being improved service rather than improved profits. Members govern the cooperative, usually through a democratic process. Profits generated by the cooperative are returned to the members based upon their use of the cooperative's services. Controlled Environment Agriculture (CEA) An advanced and intensive form of hydroponics-based agriculture. Plants are grown within a controlled environment so that horticultural practices can be optimized. Products that are created via standard practices accepted by the agriculture industry are often called “conventional.” This isn’t an official term, but it implies that the product did not undergo any special production or certification process, which means it may include pesticides, antibiotics, hormones, or genetically modified traits. It may also have been produced with agribusiness practices like use of synthetic fertilizers and This is a maze that is cut out of a corn field. These mazes have become popular tourist attractions in North America; they are normally combined with other farm attractions of interest to families and day-trippers. Direct-to-Consumer Marketing Methods used by growers to market and sell products directly to consumers, enabling them to compete outside the supermarket system and other large wholesale market channels. Includes farmers' markets, farm stands, roadside stands, community-supported agriculture, pick-your-own/you-pick farms, Internet marketing, and niche marketing. Distribution Distribution is the act or way that farmers transport their products or livestock to customers, businesses, or other farms. DIY is an abbreviation of Do It Yourself, and means you do the work yourself rather than hire a professional or buying a pre-built object. Eco-Label A seal or logo indicating that a product has met a set of environmental or social standards. Ecological Footprint (EF) Term introduced by William Rees in 1992 and elaborated upon in his book, coauthored with Mathis Wackernagel, Our Ecological Footprint: Reducing Human Impact on the Earth, New Society Publishers, 1996. A measure of how much land and water is needed to produce the resources we consume and to dispose of the waste we produce. Related term: Carbon footprint Economic Gardening An innovative, entrepreneur-centered economic growth strategy originally developed by the city of Littleton, Colorado, that's based on the belief that small local entrepreneurial firms are the engine for the creation of sustainable wealth and new jobs. By treating economic growth like a garden, more attention is paid to the unique attributes and resources of a given community and the “complex biological and interrelated factors of building an environment conducive to entrepreneurial activity: intellectual stimulation, openness to new ideas, the support infrastructure of venture capital and universities, information and community support.” (Source: Small Business Administration article) Electronic Benefits Transfer (EBT) An electronic system that allows participants in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) to authorize transfer of their government benefits from a federal account to a retailer account to pay for fresh foods. A growing number of farmers' markets are equipped with the technology to accept SNAP benefits. Entrepreneurial Ecosystem A diverse set of interdependent actors within a geographic region that influence the formation and eventual trajectory of the entire group of actors, and potentially the economy as a whole. Entrepreneurial ecosystems evolve through a set of interdependent components which interact to generate new venture creation over time. Within an ecosystem, start-ups, established businesses, research institutions and others can interact and mutually benefit from each other's ideas, knowledge and connections. Formal accumulation of knowledge and the conceptualization of previous experiences contributes to improving the virtuous cycle. In economics, benefits or costs that are not included in the market price of goods or services. For example, the cost of natural resource depletion, pollution and other environmental and social factors are externalities that often are not factored into the market price of a product. A market-based approach to reducing poverty and empowering farmers in developing countries by encouraging fair wages and labor conditions and promoting environmental sustainability. Trans Fair USA is the only third-party certifier of Fair Trade products in the United States, which carry the official “Fair Trade Certified” label. Family Farm The general concept of a family farm is one in which ownership and control of the farm business is held by a family of individuals related by blood, marriage, or adoption. Family ties can and often do extend across households and generations. A common facility or area where several farmers or growers gather on a regular, recurring basis to sell a variety of fresh fruits and vegetables and other locally-grown farm products directly to consumers. Certified Farmers' Markets are those provide certification the products sold there are produced by the farmers themselves. Farmland Preservation/Protection Land that produces our food and provides us with scenic open space, wildlife habitat and clean water is increasingly at risk from urban sprawl and rural subdivisions. According to a 1997 American Farmland Trust study, every state in the nation is sacrificing irreplaceable agricultural resources to urban sprawl. We are converting a total of 1 million acres a year, and while the quantity of top-quality agricultural land being lost varies from state to state, the process of conversion increases the pressures on agriculture even beyond the acres that are actually taken out of production. Actions to reverse this trend are being taken on many levels. Tactics include focusing on policies related to property tax relief and protection from nuisance lawsuits for farmers, purchase of agricultural conservation easement (PACE) programs, special agricultural districts where commercial agriculture is encouraged and protected, comprehensive land use planning, and farm-friendly zoning ordinances. Farmstead Cheese The American Cheese Society classifies a cheese as “farmstead” if it is made with milk from the producer’s herd or flock and crafted on the farm where the animals are raised. Food Alliance Certified The Food Alliance is a nonprofit organization that certifies farms, ranches and food handlers (including packers, processors and distributors) for sustainable agricultural and business practices. These businesses use Food Alliance certification to make credible claims for social and environmental responsibility, to differentiate and add value to products, and to protect and enhance brands. Certified farmers and ranchers meet stringent standards. Food Circle A dynamic, community-based and regionally-integrated food-systems concept. In contrast to current linear production-consumption systems, the food circle is a production-consumption-recycle model. A celebration of cycles, this model mirrors all natural systems and is based on the fact that all stable biological systems function as closed cycles or circles, carefully preserving energy, nutrients, resources and the integrity of the whole. Geographic areas that lack convenient and affordable access to a range of healthy foods, including fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and high quality sources of protein. A food hub is a centrally located facility with a business management structure facilitating the aggregation, storage, processing, distribution, and/or marketing of locally/regionally produced food products. Food Miles The distance food travels from where it is grown or raised to where it is ultimately purchased by the consumer or end-user. Local food systems can reduce food miles and transportation costs, offering significant energy savings. Consumers also benefit from fresher, better-tasting, and more nutritious food, while more food dollars stay within rural communities. Related term: 100 Mile Diet Food Policy Councils (FPC) Officially sanctioned bodies comprised of stakeholders from different elements of a state or local food system. Food policy councils allow collaboration between citizens and government officials to examine the operation of a local food system and provide ideas or recommendations for how it can be improved. They are considered a key aspect of community food security. Visit OregonHunger.org to learn more. Access by all people at all times to affordable, nutritious, culturally appropriate food, derived from non-emergency sources and produced through sustainable practices in order to lead healthy and productive lives. (Source: Community Food Security Coalition) Communities achieve food sovereignty when they democratically control what they eat, how it is raised and by whom, and how profits in the food system are distributed. The guiding principle behind food sovereignty is the belief that each person has a right to adequately nutritious food and the resources necessary to be able to feed oneself with dignity and in culturally appropriate ways. Food System Assessment (FSA) A food system assessment looks at the way the area being assessed grows, processes, distributes, consumes, and disposes/reuses its food. The end result can be used to identify specific ways to strengthen the links between the economic, environmental, and social aspects of the food system. Food Systems Council (FSC) A grassroots network focused on educating the public, coordinating nonprofit efforts, and influencing government, commercial, and institutional practices and policies on food systems. They help the community to explore its own food system, assess what is possible, and build programs for change. FSCs differ from food policy councils by the nature of their grassroots coallition makeup and that they do not act as official advisory bodies to governments. This term, gaining in popularity, indicates the interconnected nature of a local food system. In the same way a watershed is comprised of diverse, interdependent plant and animal species, a foodshed is made up of local and regional food producers, their customers, and the retailers (food co-ops, farmers’ markets, and independent grocers) that carry their products, creating an integrated local economy. Free-Range/Free-Roaming The USDA definition of these interchangeable terms, "producers must demonstrate to the Agency that the poultry has been allowed access to the outside," applies only to poultry meat (not egg-laying hens) and suggests that the animals were raised in an unconfined environment. However, the USDA’s requirement is somewhat vague and does not include any minimum amount of time for outdoor access. “Free-range” labels on beef, pork, and eggs are not regulated. GAP Certified GAP (Good Agricultural Practices) is a series of on-farm practices designed to minimize the risk of food contamination, maintain a clear record of how food was produced, handled and stored, and ensure people buying produce that it is coming from a clean, well-managed environment. To be GAP certified farms go through a third party audit, chosen by buyers, to show proof that they have followed the necessary practices. The act of cultivating or tending to a plot of ground, usually near a house, where flowers, shrubs, vegetables, fruits, or herbs are planted. Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) GMOs are plants and animals that have had their genetic makeup altered in the laboratory to exhibit traits that are not naturally theirs. For example, tomato plants can be genetically altered so that the tomatoes will store longer. In general, genes are taken (copied) from one organism with a desired trait and transferred into the genetic code of another organism. Genetic modification is currently allowed in conventional farming in the United States. A concept developed around the vast influences of trade, globalization, labor and market competition in the way it effects the production, distribution, pricing and consumption of food worldwide. Indicates the absence of gluten, which is composed of two proteins that naturally occur in some grains, including wheat, spelt, and rye, and products derived from these grains. The term is not regulated in the US; products are labeled gluten-free voluntarily by manufacturers to assist people with sensitivities or allergies to gluten. Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) GAP approach aims at applying available knowledge to addressing environmental, economic and social sustainability dimensions for on-farm production and post-production processes, resulting in safe and quality food and non-food agricultural products. Based on generic sustainability principles, it aims at supporting locally developed optimal practices for a given production system based on a desired outcome, taking into account market demands and farmers constraints and incentives to apply practices. Grass Farming/Grass-Based Farming Grass-based production relies on pasture or rangeland to supply the protein and energy requirements of livestock. Grazing and forage feeding replace high grain diets, close confinement and feedlot-finishing during most or all of an animal’s lifetime. The producer focuses on pasture plant and soil management, and proper stocking density and rotational grazing. Related terms: Grass-fed; Pasture-based; Pasture-raised; Pastured poultry; Free-range; Intensive grazing Grass-Fed/Pastured/Pasture-Raised Grass-fed or pasture-raised livestock have had continuous access to pasture throughout their lives and have never been confined to a feedlot where movement is limited. This type of livestock typically spends about 80% or more of their lives with access to fresh forage as the primary energy source. The end product results in leaner meats compared to grain-fed livestock. Grass-Finished/Pasture-Finished An animal is considered “finished” when its natural growth has slowed enough for it to start putting on fat; this is the stage at which animals are slaughtered for meat. Grass-finished animals continue eating grass until they reach this stage, while most meat animals spend the last several months of their lives in feedlots, eating grain. Heirloom Heirloom species are seeds that have been cultivated over generations. There is no official definition, but it is widely agreed that seeds are naturally pollinated, and a strict interpretation of the term requires that the species be at least fifty years old and not commercially cultivated on an industrial scale. A term applied to breeds of livestock that were bred over time to be well-adapted to local environmental conditions, withstand disease, and survive in harsh environmental conditions. Heritage breeds generally have slow growth rates and long productive lifespans outdoors, making them well-suited for grazing and pasturing. Also called high hoops or hoop houses, these are temporary, covered structures that extend the growing season. They are constructed in the field with materials like translucent plastic or polyethylene fabric in order to protect crops from adverse weather (rain, wind, cool or warm temperatures) and, in some cases, pests. High-Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS) A sweetener derived from corn, commonly found in myriad consumer goods in the United States, including soft drinks, yogurt, salad dressing, and soup. Humane treatment of animals does not have a legal definition. However, the Certified Humane Raised and Handled program’s “Certified Humane” label indicates that the meat comes from animals that were able to engage in natural behavior, given ample space, and provided clean water and a healthy diet free of antibiotics and hormones. Growing vegetables and fruits (such as lettuce, tomatoes and cucumbers) in water with nutrients washing over the roots of the plants, without the use of soil. Industrialized Food System A wide range of activities and disciplines in modern food production. From a consumer perspective, the industrialized food system might be equated with corporate farming. As such, it represents large-scale, vertically integrated food production businesses, seen as the source of a range of effects (some undesirable) on the environment, on food quality, and on society in general. An ecologically based approach to pest (animal and weed) control that utilizes a multi-disciplinary knowledge of crop/pest relationships, establishment of acceptable economic thresholds for pest populations and constant field monitoring for potential problems. IPM makes use of all available pest control methods, turning to pesticides when less risky methods fail to control the pest population. Integrity Food Integrity foods are produced in ways that are consistent with community values, principles, and beliefs. This term implies a global perspective on food issues, from soil to plate; it goes beyond food safety in capturing all aspects of food production, methods of procurement, and the means of distribution. A shared-use commercial kitchen where caterers, street cart vendors, farmers, and producers of specialty/gourmet food items can prepare their food products in a fully licensed and certified kitchen. The kitchens, often sponsored by an umbrella nonprofit organization, provide start-up businesses the opportunity to explore food production without the high cost of buying their own equipment or constructing their own building. Interactive map of incubators in the US available from CulinaryIncubator.com. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) A quantification of the level of energy and raw materials used as well as the solid, liquid and gaseous wastes produced at every stage of a product's life or process. LCA can be conducted for a whole process or for part of a process. There is no official rule about what constitutes local food, but the widely accepted idea is that local food was grown or produced within a 100-mile radius of where it’s sold and eaten. In some instances, however, food originating from within one’s region or even one’s state is considered “local,” depending on the scope of available foods and the location. Local / Community Food System A community food system, also known as a local food system, is a collaborative effort to integrate agricultural production with food distribution to enhance the economic, environmental, and social well-being of a particular place (i.e. a neighborhood, city, county or region). One of the primary assumptions underlying the sustainable diet concept is that foods are produced, processed, and distributed as locally as possible. This approach supports a food system that preserves local farmland and fosters community economic viability, requires less energy for transportation, and offers consumers the freshest foods. Related terms: Foodshed, Food Circle, Food Miles Food and other agricultural products that are produced, processed, and sold within a certain region, whether defined by distance, state border, or regional boundaries. The term is unregulated at the national level, meaning that each individual farmers' market can define and regulate the term based on its own mission and circumstances. Locally Sourced "Locally sourced" is used to describe or label food products, however, there is no agreed definition for the use of "local." Some may consider vegetables grown within 100 miles to fit the definition, while others may feel that it only includes food produced within a 10-mile radius. A locavore is a person who attempts to eat only foods grown as locally as possible. Locavores often grow their own food or buy foodstuffs grown within their region. The particular radius of what constitutes as local depends on the individual. Logic Model A logic model is a representation of how an activity (such as a project, program, or policy) is intended to produce particular results, showing logical relationships among resources invested, activities, and benefits that result as a sequence of events. Monoculture Cultivation With monoculture cultivation, land is used exclusively for the constant cultivation of a single crop—a practice that leaves soil depleted of nutrients and often requires synthetic fertilizers, pesticides, and/or genetically modified crops for continued use. Natural / All-Natural This term is defined by the USDA only for meat products, which should be only minimally processed and contain no artificial ingredients or added colors. As defined, the term is broad enough to cover most meats. The label may be added to products at the meat manufacturer’s discretion—the USDA does not investigate every claim. On produce and packaged food labels, “natural” is a marketing term, suggesting that the product was created without the use of artificial ingredients. However, this term is not regulated or verified by a third-party certifier for non-meat products and is open to wide interpretation. No Antibiotics Industrial meat companies often add antibiotics to animals’ food to prevent disease caused by cramped and unsanitary conditions, a practice that is raising concern about the emergence of antibiotic-resistant illnesses in people. The USDA allows the label “no antibiotics added” or “raised without antibiotics” on meat or poultry products. However, the use of these terms is not verified by third party certifiers and is largely based on information given by the producers themselves, thus reducing the strength of such labels. The term “antibiotic free” is not defined or approved by the USDA. No Hormones Industrial meat companies use hormones to promote growth and milk production in cattle. The USDA regulates the label “no hormones administered” on beef, and federal law does not allow hormones in raising hogs and poultry. Crops and animals raised organically have not been exposed to synthetic pesticides or fertilizers, genetic modification, growth hormones, or antibiotics. The original principles of organic farming are based on the minimal use of off-farm inputs and focus on practices that restore, maintain and enhance ecological harmony. Organic farming practices do not ensure that products are free of residues; it stresses methods to minimize pollution to the air, soil and water by using products that readily break down in the soil. Organic is a method used to produce food, not the food product itself. Related terms: Certified organic, Organic but not certified, Uncertified organic Organic But Not Certified / Uncertified Organic Many farmers adhere to accepted organic practices but are not certified organic. Organic farming is an approach to agriculture where the aim is to create integrated, humane, environmentally and economically sustainable agricultural production system. They cannot label their product organic, so they use descriptive terms such as “organically grown”, “organic methods”, or “organic but not certified." By not being certified, there is no guarantee that the farmer is using the methods defined by the National Organic Program. To find out more about a farmer’s reason for not pursuing certification, ask him or her. Organic Certification (Certified Organic) Under the USDA National Organic Program, all products sold as “organic” must be certified. Certification involves a farm submitting a production plan and being inspected annually by a certifying organization. The process is very similar to quality control programs used in other industries. The organic certification process is designed to assure customers that the organic products they purchase have been produced using appropriate organic practices, with records that allow traceability. A production system which avoids or largely excludes the use of synthetically compounded fertilizers, pesticides, growth regulators, and livestock feed additives. To the maximum extent feasible, organic farming systems rely upon crop rotations, crop residues, animal manures, legumes, green manures, off-farm organic wastes, mechanical cultivation, mineral-bearing rocks, and aspects of biological pest control to maintain soil productivity and tilth, to supply plant nutrients, and to control insects, weeds and other pests. Related Terms: Certified Organic Pasteurized / Homogenized Pasteurization is the process of heating foods to kill pathogenic bacteria. The USDA regulates the use of this word in food labeling and in some cases may require certain foods to be pasteurized. Homogenization, when it refers to milk, is a mechanical process that breaks down the fat globules so that they are uniform in size and distributed evenly throughout the milk. Some milk is pasteurized, but not homogenized—that’s why it will have a “plug” of cream at the top. A contraction of "permanent agriculture," the word "permaculture" was coined by Australian Bill Mollison in the late 1970s. One of the many alternative agriculture systems described as sustainable, permaculture emphasizes design with thought given to the location of each element in a landscape, and the evolution of that landscape over time. The goal of permaculture is to produce an efficient, low-maintenance integration of plants, animals, people and structure, which can be applied at the scale of a home garden, all the way up to a large farm. Pesticide-Free / No Spraying Some farmers may avoid the use of pesticides, herbicides and fungicides even if they continue to use conventional approaches such as synthetic fertilizer. "No Spraying" or "Pesticide-Free" indicates that while the farm may not be organic, there are no toxic sprays applied to the produce. These claims are not verified by any outside parties. Ask the farmer if anything has been applied to the surface of the produce if this is a concern for you. Processing The practice of taking the crops you grow or livestock raised and processing them into a new and different product. Cow’s milk that is not processed or pasteurized before being bottled for consumption. Sale of raw milk is illegal in many U.S. states, and cheese made from this type of milk must be aged as a safety precaution. Proponents claim that raw milk has remarkable health benefits. Regional Any area that has some unifying feature and is typically, but not necessarily, smaller than a country (e.g. county, state, watershed). Resilience The ability to persist, innovate and transform into more favorable configurations in the face of change; the capacity for self-organization, to learn and adapt. Related terms: Adaptability Places (incorporated or unincorporated) with fewer than 2,500 residents and open territory. Rustic Foods While there is no universally-accepted definition of "rustic food," the implication is that every aspect of the meal has been prepared by you, using fresh ingredients from where you live. A seed bank is a type of gene bank that stores seeds as a source for planting in case seed reserves elsewhere are destroyed. The seeds stored may be food crops, and/or those of rare species to protect biodiversity. The practice of collecting seeds for replanting in the future. Seed saving is seen by many as an essential indigenous capacity for local and regional food systems. The freedom to collect, re-grow, save and distribute seed, free of legal and practical restrictions, as a necessary foundation for healthy, equitable and resilient food systems. Seed sovereignty is asserted as an act of resistance and social empowerment in response to the monopolization of seeds (as well as DNA) by agrochemical firms, and regulations of seeds favoring such firms. One of the most notable proponents of seed sovereignty is Dr. Vandana Shiva, and the participatory research initiative she helped start, Navdanya. Seed Stewardship Process of saving seeds with the purpose of maintaining or improving that seed’s health and resilience. It also includes the act of saving and selecting a variety of seeds over a period of many seasons, with the end goal of passing it on to others in the future. An international movement begun by Carlo Petrini in Italy seeking to preserve cultural cuisine, advocate for the consumption of wholesome, local foods, and to enjoy the food available within a short distance. The movement combats a global food system associated with “fast foods.” Visit the Slow Food USA website to learn more. Entrepreneurial approaches to organize, create, and manage ventures to address social problems and make social change. Social entrepreneurship focuses on creating social capital, but need not be incompatible with making a profit. Learn more about social entrepreneurship at Cornell Center for Transformative Action. This term has no standard definition, but it is generally used to describe food production that does not deplete nonrenewable resources (like petroleum) and is mindful of the well-being of animals, workers, the environment, and the local community. Related term: Sustainable agriculture Sustainable agriculture is a system that utilizes an understanding of natural processes along with the latest scientific advances to create integrated, resource-conserving farming systems. It integrates three main goals: environmental stewardship, farm profitability, and prosperous farming communities. These systems will reduce environmental degradation, are economically viable, maintain a stable rural community, and provide a productive agriculture in both the short and the long term. Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education (SARE) SARE is the USDA's primary means of studying and publicizing sustainable agriculture practices. Through a competitive grants program that works with teams of agencies, organizations, and farmers, more than 3000 projects have been implemented. Sustainable Cuisine Practices • Purchasing sustainably and locally grown or raised products. • Using ingredients that are seasonal and plentiful (not in danger of depletion). • Encouraging local purveyors to provide diverse products including heirloom varieties and rare breeds. • Minimizing waste by using all edible parts of a product (i.e. making stock out of scraps and bones), composting, and recycling. Sustainably Grown Generally, a product can be considered sustainably grown if its production enables the resources from which it was made to continue to be available for future generations. Sustenance is food and drink regarded as a source of both strength and nourishment. Tilth is the physical condition of soil, in relation to its suitability for planting or growing a crop. A few factors that determine tilth are the formation and stability of aggregated soil practices, moisture content, degree of aeration, and drainage. Transitioning to Organic / Transitional Farmers need to practice organic production methods for three years on a given piece of land before the products grown there can be certified as organic. Transitional means that the farmland is in this transition period, moving toward organic certification. U-Pick U-Pick or pick-your-own farm is a type of farm where the customers are allowed to harvest their own produce, often paying less per pound than they would in stores. Urban farming is the practice of cultivating, processing, and distributing food in or around a village, town or city. It uses the resources of the city to help grow the food to then be sold directly to the customers living near the farm. The USDA (United States Department of Agriculture), created in 1862, is the federal department that administers programs that provide services to farmers (including research and soil conservation and efforts to stabilize the farming economy). Value-Added Product A raw agricultural product that has been modified or enhanced to be a product with a higher market value and/or a longer shelf life. Examples include fruits made into pies or jams, meats made into jerky, and tomatoes and peppers made into salsa. Products labeled "vegan" do not contain any animal products, including meat, dairy, and animal byproducts. Cultivating plant or animal life within a city skyscraper greenhouse or on vertically inclined services. Vine-Ripened/Tree-Ripened "Vine-ripened" or "tree-ripened" is a term applied to fruit or vegetables that have ripened on the vine or tree and were then picked when ripe. They often taste better because their flavor and sugars have developed naturally but they can be delicate to the touch and too fragile to ship. Alternatively, fruits shipped long distances may be picked while still unripe, and later treated with ethylene gas to "ripen" and soften them prior to being sold. A vineyard is a plantation of grapevines, especially one producing grapes for winemaking. but also raisins, table grapes and non-alcoholic grape juice. The science, practice and study of vineyard production is known as viticulture Wild / Foraged Items gathered growing wild in fields or woods. Can include ramps (wild leeks), dandelion greens, morel and puffball mushrooms, fiddlehead greens, wild asparagus, strawberries, blueberries and a variety of nuts. A winery is a building or property that produces wine, or a business involved in the production of wine. Larger wineries may feature wine making equipment, warehouses, bottling lines, laboratories, and large expanses of tanks known as tank farms. Alfalfa is the oldest known plant used for livestock feed.

农业

2017-09/0195/en_head.json.gz/18962

RegionsAfrica | 274 articlesAmericas | 70 articlesAsia | 71 articlesEurope | 67 articlesMiddle East | 179 articles Amid Oil Crash, Could Farming Offer Nigeria a Lifeline? February 11, 2016by Hilary Matfess A merchant sells freshly caught fish in a small village in Nigeria. Orimedu, Nigeria, September 15, 2010. ( Arne Hoel /World Bank) The global collapse of oil prices—now tracking at 12-year lows—has thrown the budgets of resource-dependent countries on several continents into disarray. In Nigeria, the government’s overwhelming dependence on petroleum revenue has been coupled with the expensive and time-consuming fight against the Boko Haram insurgency in the country’s north. The result has been a projected budgetary shortfall of more than $11 billion USD this year, as well as continued depreciation of the national currency, the Naira.The Washington, DC-based international financial institutions, most notably the World Bank, have expressed a willingness to provide loans at concessionary rates, to prevent collapse in Africa’s largest economy and most populous country. In the mid-1980s, when oil prices also dropped dramatically, these same institutions provided Nigeria assistance in return for implementing sweeping economic liberalization reforms. The resulting Structural Adjustment Program (SAP) notably gutted government control over the nation’s agricultural sector, in an attempt at fostering economic diversification. However, a predicted windfall of private investment never eventuated, and the sector and overall economy remained stunted.While the level to which Nigerian authorities were complicit in the failure of the SAP continues to be debated, the latest crisis provides an opportunity for the World Bank to redeem itself in the eyes of many, by working with authorities to facilitate sustainable broad-based growth in the country. Historically low oil prices obviously present a challenge to a country that derives more than 70% of revenue from oil, but there could also now be an opportunity for Nigeria to achieve its long-sought and much-needed goals. Many Nigerian politicians, including former president Goodluck Jonathan, have in the past engaged in high-minded rhetoric regarding the need for change, but serious investment in the sector and the infrastructure projects that would empower such production has long lacked, particularly in comparison with petroleum sector development.Short-sightedness aside, with the price of crude oil below $30 USD a barrel the administration of Muhammadu Buhari could seize the opportunity to hit reset on the economy, investing aggressively in agricultural modernization, and allowing the sector to reclaim some of its historical importance. An increase in the use of fertilizer, greater mechanization, and the establishment of processing plants for turning raw materials into higher value products would all be huge improvements.All of these changes will require significant government planning and buy-in, however, in addition to international finance and logistical and technical support. The development of more robust local economies might also help inoculate against Boko Haram’s employment-based recruitment strategies. Tales of young boys being incorporated into the movement through the offer of $5-10 USD to undertake errands underline the importance of creating alternative economic pathways.While Nigeria is now the largest oil producer in sub-Saharan Africa, prior to the mid-1970s its economic profile was largely agrarian. In terms of its contribution to gross domestic product, oil rose from just 6% in 1970, to more than 48% in 2004. Over the same period, agriculture’s contribution fell from 41% to 16%. Combined with rapid population growth, this diminished focus on farming has contributed to Nigeria becoming the world’s largest importer of rice.Despite agriculture taking a backseat to petroleum in recent decades, Nigeria has significant potential for increased development in this area. The country already has a remarkable diversity of agricultural production. The commodities it produces include cotton, animal products, groundnuts, and sesame in the North and Middle Belt states; cocoa in the South-West; and rubber and palm oil in the South-East and South-South. The diversity of products could help hedge against low or volatile prices for any one commodity.Nigerian agriculture is in turn characterized by small-holder farming. Though this presents challenges in terms of disseminating technology and achieving economies of scale, it also means that increased investment would help to distribute wealth and employment to a broad population base—70% of Nigerians are estimated to be subsistence farmers to some degree.A central challenge to overcome is low productivity. According to a World Bank study conducted in 2010, this is a result of a poor adoption rates of modern technologies, including use of improved seed varieties and irrigation. Weak human resource and skills bases were also identified as limiting factors. Internationally backed investment in improving access to, and information about, agricultural technology is clearly needed.Levels of investment in Nigerian agriculture must not also increase in volume, but in targeting. Exporting raw materials is significantly less profitable than exporting refined or processed materials, and Nigeria has little value-adding capacity of this nature. For example, though it produces large volumes of tomatoes, and even exports small amounts of them, it does not have the processing plants necessary to produce tomato paste, meaning its consumers must import it at significant expense.The intent to rectify Nigeria’s economic imbalance has long been present. During his time as national agriculture and rural development minister, Akinwumi Adesina, current head of the African Development Bank noted that the country is the largest producer of cassava in the world, but expressed a desire to ” become the largest processor of cassava as well.” He highlighted opportunities for using the crop to produce starch, cassava chips for export to China, and cassava flour to replace some of the wheat flour Nigeria currently imports.Despite the current challenges to its economy, Nigeria has made considerable gains in governance in recent years, particularly with the peaceful transition to Buhari’s government following last year’s election. The former military dictator has, in the space of 30 years, remade himself as a “reformed democrat,” offering hope that meaningful progress is entirely possible in the country. Moves to pursue an economic future not entirely pegged to the oil price must be the next step, with agricultural reform critical to the fortunes of the majority of Nigerians.Hilary Matfess is a researcher at the Center for Complex Operations at the National Defense University, Washington, DC. Analysisafrica, resources by Hilary Matfess More articles by this author → Related Topics Gambian Gamble: Rare Intervention a Win for African Democracy January 25, 2017by John L. Hirsch and Michael R. Snyder Barrow’s victory now adds him to the list of freely elected rulers in West Africa, alongside President Johnson Sirleaf of Liberia, President Akufo-Addo of Ghana, and President Sall of Senegal. Analysisafrica, elections Elections and Economics Add to Africa’s 2017 Security Challenges January 24, 2017by Ryan Cummings Successes in 2016 were counterbalanced by a number of sociopolitical and economic grievances that will continue to afflict the continent in 2017. Analysisafrica, security The Gambia’s Dictator Increases Pressure on Africa’s Regional Institutions December 14, 2016by John L. Hirsch Whatever the national or regional achievements of these leaders, their determination to stay in office indefinitely reflects on the inability of the… Analysisafrica, elections Ghana’s Institutions Hold up in Stern Electoral Test December 12, 2016by Clement Sefa-Nyarko The voting process itself was the most uneventful, smooth, and efficient in Ghana’s history, apart from a few hitches that delayed the opening of polling stations across the country. Analysisafrica, elections Regional Pathways for Preserving Justice in Africa November 23, 2016by Stanley Ibe Despite challenges, regional courts could become increasingly important sites for victims of international crimes if provided better resourcing, clearer access for victims, and support from governments. Analysisafrica, justice A New Path Emerges for Troubled Somali Security November 8, 2016by Ilya Gridneff and Brian O’Sullivan Somalia’s government ultimately envisages a 28,000-strong national army, but World Bank/UN projections to be published later this year suggest that they will be unable to afford a force of this size. Analysisafrica, security

农业

2017-09/0195/en_head.json.gz/19050

Dairy Talk By: Jim Dickrell, MILK Jim Dickrell is the editor of Dairy Herd Management and is based in Monticello, Minn. 2014: Real Reasons for Optimism Dairy farmers, by nature, are a tempered-by-reality optimistic bunch. They have to be—or they wouldn’t spend hundreds of dollars for a bag of seed corn or hundreds of thousands on a milking system. Farmers also know that Murphy’s Law is alive and well. If things can go wrong, they usually will. 2013 was one of those Murphy’s Law years. A cold, wet spring meant thousands of acres got planted late—or not all. Alfalfa winterkill in the Midwest left forage in short supply—and what there was, exceedingly expensive. And even though the U.S. harvested a record corn crop, it was often difficult to bid corn out of bins and into feed bunks for less than $5 per bu.—even though the CME said it was only worth that much. Knowing that things will go wrong, I’m still pretty optimistic going into the New Year. For one thing, milk prices are strong. USDA is projecting that they’ll remain strong. The 2013 U.S. all-milk price will average $20. For 2014, USDA says the all-milk price average will range from $19.70 to $20.50. Not bad, considering the aforementioned $5 per bu. corn. In fact, USDA projects corn prices to be in the $4.05 to $4.75 per bu. range next year. Rabobank agrees, thanks to strong export demand from China. "We expect [dairy commodity] prices to hold around current highs before easing from mid to late 2014 with continuing supply growth in response to significantly improved margins," says Rabobank analyst Tim Hunt. Other reasons for optimism: • A new farm bill also might be in the offing early next year. The big sticking point is food stamps. The Senate is willing to cut $4 billion in Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program funding; the House of Representatives wants to cut $40 billion. The compromise that is being discussed is $8 billion. Lobbyists for the dairy industry continue to fight over what should be new dairy policy. Everybody agrees dairy price supports are outmoded, and income-over-feed-cost margin insurance makes much more sense. The sticking point is whether a dairy market stabilization program is needed along with margin insurance to avoid long, expensive periods of government indemnities. I’m not convinced market stabilization is needed, on two conditions. One, premiums should be set at more actuarially sound levels. Two, sign-up dates should be set early (similar to crop insurance) so farmers can’t game the system. • Immigration reform might also get some life in the House of Representatives this spring. The recent budget agreement may lay the groundwork for compromise. Don’t expect it to be as favorable as the Senate version, which allows current illegal workers to stay if they meet certain conditions and a method for new workers to come north. But Congressional leadership wants to get immigration reform done before the 2014 elections. Maybe, just maybe, Congress can get it done. • The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade agreement is also expected to be finalized in 2014. The agreement will still have to be approved by Congress—no small feat—and the other countries involved. But the addition of Canada and Japan to the negotiations earlier this year "has created a new paradigm in the TPP negotiations that, if done properly, could provide a significant boost to the prospects of an overall net positive outcome in the negotiations," says Tom Suber, president of the U.S. Dairy Export Council (USDEC). Canada is already our number 2 (sometimes #3) export partner. Under current Canadian law, our dairy sales to Canada fall under its Import for Re-Export Program, where Canadian companies can import our milk and dairy ingredients duty-free on the condition that the final product is exported and not consumed by Canadians. The TPP would, presumably, give the U.S. more access to Canadian consumers. Japan is the second prize. Last year, it imported $284 million of U.S. dairy products, and a favorable TPP which lowers high tariffs and regulatory burdens would undoubtedly add significantly to that total, says Suber. The TPP, even if approved by negotiators in 2014, will take years to implement. But it would set the process in motion, perhaps cementing the U.S. role in global markets for decades to come. All in all, 2014 could be a very pivotal one for the U.S. dairy industry. Happy New Year!

农业

2017-09/0195/en_head.json.gz/19083

Grains of Change In California’s Central Valley, where a quarter of the food varieties we eat are farmed, a new generation of growers is teaming up with conservationists to make sure that rice and long-billed curlews will always mix. By Don StapMarch-April 2011 By Don StapMarch-April 2011 Popular Stories Listen to the Sweet, Soft Warble Common Ravens Sing to Their Partners Hear the Many Different Hoots of the Barred Owl Till Death Do Them Part: 8 Birds that Mate for Life Birdist Rule #75: Get a Bird Tattoo, and Make It a Good One Build a Nest Box to Welcome Spring Birds A grassland located on a private ranch near the Yolo Bypass Wildlife Area is a prime location to search for the sometimes elusive long-billed curlew. Photo: (Photo: Brown W. Cannon III) Take Action I’ve come to California to search for the link between sushi and the long-billed curlew. On this February day the rice paddy before me is filled with a few inches of water and the crumpled, mud-sopped straw that last summer was three-foot-high grassy stalks top-heavy with rice panicles. Not just any rice. Virtually all of the rice harvested here in the Sacramento Valley, at the northern end of the vast Central Valley, is short and medium grain—premium varieties that find their way into nearly every sushi roll sold in the United States. In the distance, hundreds of white-fronted geese rise like surf off the fields, then settle back down. “My father and grandfather would have been amazed to see how many geese are here now,” says Don Traynham, a third-generation rice grower who works these fields with Mike Kalfsbeek on White Road Farms. Traynham, 37, is part of a new wave of rice farmers who understand their fields’ importance to birdlife. Throughout the morning he stops to point out sandhill cranes, egrets, and ibises—though only one long-billed curlew, probing the muddy water for invertebrates. With a checked brown and beige upper body, plain buff belly, and cinnamon underwings, the long-billed curlew is North America’s largest shorebird. Long-bills stand nearly two feet tall and have a wingspan approaching three feet. More imposing yet is the bill they are named for—up to eight inches long and curving downward like a scythe. It serves as the perfect tool to capture shrimp and crabs burrowed deeply in tidal mudflats and earthworms buried in pastures. This impressive bird is known to attack nearly any predator that ventures too near its nest, including hawks, eagles, coyotes, and humans. It flies directly at the intruder at great speed, looking like, as one observer noted, a guided missile, veering off at the last second, then circling around to attack again. Once fairly common and widespread, the long-billed curlew has gone the way of many shorebird species, its population declining and its range shrinking. Dwindling grasslands have left only relict long-bill populations breeding in the West. For years scientists thought the bird’s prospects were bleak enough that of the 53 shorebird species breeding in North America, it was one of only five listed as “highly imperiled” by the U.S. Shorebird Conservation Plan, a comprehensive attempt by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and more than two dozen partnering organizations to gather all the pertinent facts on North American shorebirds. For some time, the entire long-bill population has been estimated to be 20,000 birds. At the same time the long-bill was disappearing, a similar fate befell the Central Valley’s flora and fauna. An ancient lake bed, roughly 450 miles north to south and generally 40 to 60 miles east to west, this flat landscape was once dominated by grasslands threaded with riparian woodlands and opening into freshwater marshes and oak-grass savannas. Pronghorn antelope, elk, and mule deer fed on the grasses, and grizzly bears, wolves, and mountain lions fed on them. In the mid-1800s the Gold Rush that lured people westward forever changed the face of the valley, reducing the pronghorn and elk to small, isolated populations. By the late 1800s grizzly bears and wolves had vanished altogether. A few mountain lions survived, but today the largest predator common to the Central Valley is the coyote. Less than one percent of the valley’s remaining grasses are native. Farm fields have replaced more than 94 percent of the freshwater marshes, and 99 percent of the riparian woodlands have been degraded or destroyed. This is the bad news. But if you are accustomed to strawberries on your cereal in the middle of winter, you might need to think twice before you criticize this land transformation. The Central Valley, with its Mediterranean climate of mild, wet winters and hot, dry summers, has more than 81,000 farms and ranches on 14.5 million acres of agricultural land that produces fully one-fourth of the varieties of food items we place on our tables. More than 300 crops are grown here, from lemons, asparagus, and bell peppers to olives, almonds, and spinach. Yet “we’ve discovered that the ag fields are important to all kinds of wildlife during the winter,” says Gary Langham, director of bird conservation for Audubon California. The long-billed curlew in particular favors rice and alfalfa fields as well as pastures. So for a week in late February, Alex Hartman, shorebird conservation biologist at Audubon California’s Sacramento office and an expert on long-bills, takes me all over the Sacramento Valley, where most of the long-billed curlews congregate this time of year. We watch for them as we travel through farmland and pastures, a calming landscape of expansive fields and sky that reaches a flat horizon in all directions. Along the way we talk with rice growers and conservationists. After several days of rain and bad luck we have seen only three long-bills at relatively close range and a few distant flocks in flight disappearing into charcoal skies. This should be a good time to see the birds; two weeks from now the majority will be gone. The long-bills are early migrants, leaving for their northern breeding grounds in March. Herein lies a problem. The estimate of 20,000 curlews in North America was based in part on the annual continent-wide Breeding Bird Survey, a census conducted in June when most species are easily heard or seen as they defend their territories and engage in courtship displays. By then, however, long-billed curlews—courtship and breeding far behind them—are slipping inconspicuously through the grasslands with their chicks. With this in mind, in 2004 and 2005, several scientists set up surveys across 16 states, looking specifically for curlews in March and April, when the birds would be more visible. Although their sample size was small, through mathematical extrapolation they came up with a new estimate—100,000 to 160,000 long-bills. This, surely, is good news. Gary Page, director of the Point Reyes Bird Observatory Conservation Science’s (PRBO) wetlands ecology division and one of the country’s leading shorebird experts, took an interest. “I wanted to see if we could document the importance of the Central Valley to the curlews,” he says, “so we needed to know how many curlews depend on the valley and what kind of habitat they are using.” The question was whether surveys could be done without having to gain access to private property, so in 2007, 2008, and 2009 Page drove public roads in and around some of the area’s agricultural fields and pastures. He discovered that with a spotting scope he could see the big, unmistakable curlews even in the fields’ far corners. Page, David Shuford, a senior biologist with the PRBO, and Langham then coordinated volunteers to conduct daylong surveys that would cover much of the Central Valley and all the interior valleys of California. From September 2007 to August 2009 more than 100 people participated in four surveys. The results suggested that the new estimate of more than 100,000 curlews was likely more accurate than the old one of 20,000 birds. In fact, most of the surveys tallied 18,000 to 20,000 curlews in one day—just in the Central Valley. Many birds were spotted in the shallow waters of rice fields. In February 2009 Audubon California, the PRBO, The Nature Conservancy, and the California Rice Commission sponsored a workshop for rice growers to discuss ways to make their fields even more hospitable to long-billed curlews and waterbirds in general. “We weren’t really sure how it was going to go, but there was an excellent turnout,” says Langham. “The rice growers really wanted the science to show how the birds were using their lands. If we could just show them the right things to do, they were very willing to consider them.” Don Traynham was among six growers to volunteer for a pilot project. Traynham, outgoing and energetic, works 1,500 acres of rice fields in the northern Sacramento Valley. In California rice is harvested once a year. Each April the fields are flooded with five inches of water, and the rice seed is planted. During the growing season, May to July or August, more water is added, but before the season’s apex, in August and September, the fields are dried out so the heavy harvesters can do their work. The rice stalks that remain after harvest must be worked back into the soil over the winter in order to prepare the fields for replanting the following spring. For 80 years, since rice farming began in California in 1912, the growers routinely set their fields ablaze, burning off the straw. This was efficient, though unpleasant to anyone who lived nearby. “I grew up in Sacramento,” Langham says, “and as a kid you couldn’t play outside for two weeks or more. It was hard to see. Ash fell from the sky.” In 1991 the Rice Straw Burning Reduction Act mandated that burning be phased out over the next decade. As rice growers tried various mechanical means to get rid of the straw, some realized that keeping water in the fields created anaerobic conditions that would break down the plants naturally. “Lo and behold,” says Langham, “this also had the effect of creating a huge amount of waterbird habitat.” Discussions at the workshop focused on finding ways to more closely align farming practices—primarily when and how much water is kept in the fields—with migrating and wintering waterbirds’ seasonal cycles. Practices that would provide more water for the curlews and waterfowl ranged from simply holding rainwater in the fields after the summer harvest to extending how long the water was retained during the winter. Traynham, who was already managing land around his rice fields for wildlife, agreed to try one of the more labor-intensive suggestions: create islands in the fields that could serve as nesting areas for black-necked stilts and avocets as well as other birds. Talking about these projects, he acknowledges that historically farmers and conservationists haven’t always seen eye to eye. “Yeah, it used to be that way,” he says. “But with time you can change anything. Pro-environment is where it’s at, and if you’re going to survive, you better be part of it. With the political environment we live in today, coalition building is the only way you get anything done.” Interest in wildlife extends well beyond the younger generation of rice growers. The day before we met with Traynham, we spent some time with Jack DeWit. Lanky and soft-spoken, the 67-year-old DeWit, who has been farming for about 30 years, seems like an elder statesman of sorts for the area’s roughly 2,500 family-run rice growers. He talks about his experiment with growing organic rice in some of his fields. At one time, his operation was among 73 rice farms that had gone at least partly organic, a practice that requires planting cover crops for several years. “Our crop rotation there is wild rice, regular rice, and shorebirds,” DeWit said, a slight smile disappearing as quickly as it appeared. A few minutes earlier he had led us to an overlook and pointed out a shallow stretch of water packed with black-necked stilts, avocets, dowitchers, dunlins, pintails and mallards. In a light rain, he remarked on how many species were using just this one small area. “Each year, when I see the first mallards with a brood, I call my wife to come look,” he said. “I’m excited by that.” DeWit also knows all too well that farmers want to farm, and find it difficult to leave their fields sitting untouched for the waterbirds’ benefit. “I have one son who likes ducks as much as I do,” he says, “and another who wants to fire up his tractors after harvest as soon as possible.” Some or all of the practices discussed at the February 2009 workshop went into effect on six farms during the 2009–2010 season. As part of this pilot project, Hartman organizes bird surveys every two weeks. “The jury is still out,” he tells me as we drive back to Sacramento after our visit with Traynham. “We’ve only done a few surveys to this point.” But both Hartman and the rice growers are optimistic about the long-term results. The rice growers’ alliance with conservation organizations holds a barely concealed benefit for them as well: It deflects the criticism they receive for “wasting” water. In the arid West, “whiskey is for drinking and water is for fighting over,” Hartman says, quoting a well-worn aphorism usually attributed to Mark Twain. Many Californians have had their water use restricted by drought, and when they fly into Sacramento they can look down and see the gleam of water siphoned from the Mount Shasta reservoir and filling tens of thousands of acres of rice fields. The rice growers can now point out that the water in their fields is essential to a wide variety of wildlife. Up to 230 animal species have been recorded, including 187 bird species, 28 of which are listed at the state or federal level as species that range from “special concern” to “endangered.” Most rice fields are designed to make optimum use of the moisture they receive. Water released at the high end of the field spreads out through paddies. Then, on many farms, it is collected by a canal so it can be pumped back uphill and recycled, reducing the amount of water needed to replace what is lost to evaporation. A pound of rice requires between 250 and 650 gallons of water, although numerous crops use comparable amounts (a pound of soybeans uses about 240). Still, Hartman says, “There’s simply not enough water to go around.” How California’s water is split among farmers and 35 million residents is complex and often contentious. When the long-bills come south each year, they generally spend the first months in the alfalfa fields at the bottom end of the Central Valley. In past years Page has seen large numbers of curlews sitting under irrigation sprinklers. Now, he says, some farmers are putting in drip lines, which run underground and deliver water directly to the plant roots. This is a perfectly sound water conservation strategy, but, ironically, one with potentially unfortunate consequences for waterbirds. What happens if the flooded areas the curlews depend on disappear? Will they simply move elsewhere? Page and others have placed satellite transmitters on long-billed curlews the past few years and tracked their movements. “I thought that maybe the birds have to go all over the valley to find food, or that some would move back and forth from the valley to the coast, but none of that happened. We found a lot of site fidelity to wintering areas. Curlews would tend to return to their own little portion of the valley rather than settling in different places every year. One bird came back to the area around Dixon four years in a row.” Near Dixon we run smack into another problem: blocks of new homes that appear to have been dropped, like a movie set, into the middle of the fields. Small farming towns are becoming bedroom communities for people who want to work in the city but live in the country. “All these houses went up in the last six to seven years,” says Chris Conard, a natural resource specialist and curlew census volunteer. “And developers own much of this ag land, just waiting to develop it.” On my last day in California I make one final attempt to find some curlews, with shorebird expert Nils Warnock (then at the University of California-Davis and now Alaska Audubon’s executive director) as my guide. Once again the day begins with dark skies and drizzle. We drive along old farm roads near Davis for an hour, and the rain picks up. Twenty minutes later it stops suddenly and a break in the clouds allows some sunlight to peek through. There they are: a hundred or more long-billed curlews picking at the grasses in a pasture, stretching their wings and preening. A harrier sweeps by and the birds fly up, their cinnamon underwings flashing. They circle the field, lazily it seems, then settle again. More birds appear: song sparrows, tree swallows, white-crowned sparrows, meadowlarks, a dozen great egrets, and a big flock of blackbirds. We watch for a half-hour as the curlews roam the wet pasture. Then the clouds close like a curtain and the rain begins again. Suddenly I realize the rainfall I’ve been cursing all week is adding water to the rice fields—those “surrogate wetlands”—artificial and less picturesque perhaps than the originals but just as important to the future of the long-billed curlew and many other species that depend on them. “The views expressed in user comments do not reflect the views of Audubon. Audubon does not participate in political campaigns, nor do we support or oppose candidates.” 2017 Audubon Photography Awards

农业

2017-09/0195/en_head.json.gz/19327

New Agricultural Extension Economist Feels Right at Home Article | Wed, 05/23/2012 - 13:04 | By Lee Schulz, Sherry Hoyer AMES, Iowa – As Lee Schulz made his way from home in central Wisconsin to college (earning a B.S. at University of Wisconsin-River Falls, M.S. at Michigan State University and Ph.D. from Kansas State University) to career (Iowa State University), one thing was clear: there’s no place he’d rather be than working for a land-grant university in the Midwest. As a youngster on his family’s cow-calf farm near Rosholt, Wis., ISU Extension and Outreach’s new livestock economist first became acquainted with extension through 4-H and FFA activities like showing cattle, and meat and livestock judging. That understanding and appreciation of extension continued as Schulz’s agricultural interests expanded. “I learned the importance of extension in providing valuable information and education to producers and the general public,” he said. “I’ve always been impressed by the quality of information and support provided by extension services, and throughout my undergraduate and graduate experience I sought out opportunities to be involved myself.” During his undergraduate years, Schulz worked with an extension agricultural marketing specialist on livestock marketing and price analysis for Wisconsin cattle producers. While at Michigan State he assisted producers with learning to use mandatory electronic identification to enhance profitability, and his thesis research identified perceptions and preferences of cow-calf producers for voluntary traceability systems. But it was his doctoral program experience at Kansas State that solidified his desire to continue to work with producers through extension and research efforts. “Some of the projects I worked on were fed cattle trade and pricing and changing governmental regulations; feeder cattle and retail beef pricing; and animal welfare, handling and performance in the U.S. swine industry,” Schulz said. “I’ve also worked with the economics of regional control and eradication of Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome, or PRRS.” All of this helped lead him to Iowa State, where his role is to provide leadership in studying critical issues that are relevant to Iowa and the U.S. livestock industry. This includes developing an extension education curriculum and the production of decision tools to meet the education, information and analysis needs of farmers, livestock industry representatives and consumers. “My appointment is 65 percent extension, 20 percent research and 15 percent teaching, and involves active interaction with other ISU units like the Iowa Pork Industry Center and the Iowa Beef Center,” Schulz said. “Because I’ll work with a diverse clientele, I expect to use a variety of delivery methods like Internet, extension publications, peer-reviewed journals and conferences.” Schulz began his job as ISU Extension and Outreach livestock economist the first week in May and already has met with a number of people on and off campus to get better acquainted and to share his goals. He said he’s looking forward to meeting many more in the coming weeks, and invited people to contact him via email at [email protected] about his availability to speak at meetings, workshops and conferences. About the Authors Lee Schulz [email protected] Sherry Hoyer Iowa Beef Center | Iowa Pork Industry Center [email protected] Share Publications & Materials Connect with Extension

农业

2017-09/0195/en_head.json.gz/19374

Business & EconomyCompanies & Industries Dairy Industry Melissa Brown, Georgia College and State University, Lane O. Ely, University of Georgia, 05/26/2006 Last edited by NGE Staff on 08/02/2016 Explore This ArticleContentsEarly HistoryEarly Twentieth CenturyPasteurization and SanitationCooperativesTwenty-first Century The first dairy cows arrived in Georgia with James Edward Oglethorpe, the founder of the colony, in the early 1700s. By the 1930s the dairy industry had gained success as a commercial enterprise in Georgia and has been a primary industry in the state ever since. In 2000 the value of the Georgia dairy industry to the state (including milk, cull cows, and bull calves) was $254 million. Little is known about the earliest period of dairying in Georgia because acquiring milk was primarily a local enterprise, left to individual families. A family that produced excess dairy products—butter, cream, cottage cheese, or cheese—would trade or sell the products to neighbors. Eventually, some farmers acquired an extra dairy cow or two for the purpose of producing dairy products to sell. As demand grew, such herds increased to five to ten cows. Farmers processed and distributed their own milk for sale. The Cow's Milk Cheesenumber of cows in Georgia, as well as the price per head of cow, fluctuated during the antebellum period. One reason for the fluctuations, at least until the 1820s, may have been Indian raids on livestock herds in settled areas. The dairy industry slowly expanded as the population of the colony increased and spread inland from the coast. After the Civil War (1861-65) the demand for milk products grew. Cows were pastured and milked by hand. Milk was cooled in cans in water tanks filled with spring or well water. (Milk was considered adequately cool at a temperature of 50 degrees Fahrenheit.) The dairies closest to communities produced fluid milk for the town's population. The dairy farmers were producer-processors, as they produced the milk with their small dairy herds, bottled the milk, and delivered it to their customers. Dairy farms located farther away from the towns produced cream or butter, which could be stored longer and transported more easily than fluid milk. In 1876 Benjamin Hunt, a banker and expert in horticulture and animal husbandry, brought a herd of Jersey cows to Putnam County and opened Panola Farm, an experimental dairy facility. He is credited with establishing the dairy industry in that county. Early Twentieth Century The Cobb Dairy1920s were a period of great change in the dairy industry. The introduction of the automobile and the truck allowed milk to be transported across greater distances, and farms farther from population centers thus had new markets for their milk. Tractors replaced horses and mules as power sources on the farm; consequently more acreage and crops were available to be sold or to support dairy cows instead of supplying feed for horses and mules. The introduction of electricity and the milking machine allowed more cows to be milked by one person with less effort. Each pail of milk was strained and placed in electrical coolers. Mechanical refrigeration cooled milk more efficiently and maintained its freshness longer. All of these advances led to a rise in the number of dairy farms and dairy cows in the state of Georgia as well as in the United States. At the same time, the Great Depression of the 1930s caused decreasing farm prices. Part of farmers' attraction to dairying during the depression was that it provided steady income over time. From Cedar Grove Dairyabout 1867 to 1919 the number of dairy cows in Georgia increased from about 20,000 head to 411,000 head, with an average price per cow of $16. In 1920 the average price per cow increased to $65. At this time dairy farmers were typically still producer-processors who owned fifteen to twenty-five cows apiece. Following a decline in the dairy herd after World War I (1917-18) that lasted through the early years of the depression, Georgia's dairy herd grew once again to a high of 419,000 head in 1935, and the price per cow fluctuated until World War II (1941-45), when it began to increase rapidly. In 1945 dairy cows in Georgia numbered about 360,000 head. By 1953 cows were valued at an average of $138 per head. Pasteurization and Sanitation As Hooks Dairy Barnmilk production became industrialized, sanitation became a more critical issue. The French scientist Louis Pasteur's experiments in the 1860s with heating milk to destroy bacteria generated great interest in milk's health aspects, and studies showed that milk could be a source of such human diseases as diphtheria, typhoid fever, tuberculosis, undulant fever, and pox. Nevertheless, there was much resistance to the pasteurization of milk because of its expense. In 1923 the U.S. Congress passed the Pasteurized Milk Ordinance (PMO), which required that all milk shipped between states be pasteurized. Milk sold within a state was not covered by the PMO and was regulated by each individual state. This law (with revisions over the years) still governs the sale of milk in the United States. In Georgia pasteurization was not required, but inspections of producers selling milk were conducted by the state department of agriculture in Atlanta. Many county health departments around the state shipped milk samples there by railroad. The inspectors were most concerned about unsanitary milking machines; there was a great deal of bacteria in the milk because in many cases water around the dairies was contaminated by nearby outhouses. In Cloverdale Dairy1943 the state legislature finally passed a law requiring all milk to be pasteurized. Since World War II was still being fought and there was a shortage of equipment, producers and processors were given a three-year period to comply. In 1950 the Interstate Milk Shippers Agreement took effect. All states were members of this agreement, which prevented multiple inspections of milk as it was transported from state to state. After World War II the Georgia Department of Public Health purchased a used house trailer and transformed it into a mobile milk laboratory. The first area that benefited from the mobile lab was Cobb County. During the approximately sixty days that the lab stayed in each area, state and county personnel inspected each dairy producer and milk plant. Samples were taken from each dairy and examined thoroughly. The milk producers became conscious of the need for better sanitary practices and were made aware of the quality of their milk. Milk producers were given a grade for their milk. "A" was the highest grade, and "C" was the lowest. In the Dairy Worker1950s milking equipment and the cooling and transportation of milk were improved. Pipeline milking was introduced during this time. Each cow's milk was conveyed through a glass or stainless-steel pipeline by vacuum into the milk house, where it was released directly into a farm bulk tank. Each tank was capable of holding from 150 to 1,000 gallons of milk. Milk in the tanks was cooled to below 40 degrees Fahrenheit in about one hour. Pipeline milkers were designed to be easily cleaned, which promoted sanitation. Tanker trucks hauled up to 5,000 gallons of milk to processing plants. One truck could serve from three to ten milk producers. Because of these new technologies, the policy of a "one-week shelf life" was introduced in retail outlets. In time both the state regulatory agencies and a cooperating milk industry ensured a safe and reliable source of milk for Georgia's citizens. The pipeline milking system and bulk tanks replaced the bucket milkers and milk cans on dairy farms in the 1960s. The introduction of silos and silage replaced pasture, and better highways and trucks meant that milk and dairy products could be transported further and faster. An effort to control mastitis, a bacterial disease found in dairy cows, also began in the 1960s. This benefited both the public and the owners of milking herds. In 1965 federal and state milk regulations established a maximum of somatic cells, which produce mastitis, for grade A milk. InSweet Grass Dairy the wake of the Georgia pasteurization law, producer-processors had a choice—they could stop producing milk, buy the expensive equipment to pasteurize, or form or join a cooperative that would collect the farmer's milk, pasteurize it, and sell it. Only a few cooperatives, namely Wells Dairies Cooperative in Columbus and Athens Cooperative Creamery in Athens, operated in the state during the 1940s. The large group of producers that supplied the Atlanta market decided to form a cooperative that became Atlanta Dairies. They purchased land, built a processing plant, and acquired trucks to haul the milk cows from the farm to the plant. The plant and cooperative are still operating today under different names. In the 1960s dairy farmer cooperatives grew and began helping dairy farmers earn better prices for their milk. Some of the most significant cooperatives in the state were Atlanta Dairies, Athens Cooperative, Miss Georgia Cooperative, South Georgia Cooperative, and Well Dairies Cooperative. In 1970 a cooperative known as Dairymen was formed from a collection of new and large cooperatives in Georgia. Dairymen was primarily a marketing agency for milk producers, and with its formation about 90 percent of all milk in the state was marketed through dairy cooperatives. This improved the sanitary quality, flavor, and shelf life of grade A milk. In 1972 the Georgia General Assembly returned all responsibility for milk sanitation and safety to a single state agency—the Georgia Department of Agriculture. Twenty-first Century In Cagle's Dairy1945 every county in Georgia had at least one dairy farm, for a total of 6,040 farms with 360,000 cows producing approximately 1 billion pounds of milk (3,150 pounds of milk per cow) annually. The greatest number and concentration of dairies were in the counties surrounding Atlanta and in northwest Georgia. Since then, the number of dairy farms and cows has steadily declined, but milk production has increased. In 2005 there were 313 dairies in Georgia with 81,000 cows producing approximately 1.4 billion pounds of milk (17,259 pounds of milk per cow). Today, 50 percent of all milk production in Georgia occurs in south Georgia. Several factors contributed to these changes in the industry. The dairy farms around Atlanta and other cities were sold for housing as population increased. Many people in farming communities left agriculture to pursue other job opportunities. Technology advanced so that larger farms could be efficiently operated. Through genetics and management techniques introduced in the last decades of the twentieth century, dairy cows have increased their production dramatically, so fewer cows are needed to produce a comparable supply of dairy products. A few dairy farmers in south Georgia implement sustainable agriculture practices. The owners of Sweet Grass Dairy in Thomasville, for instance, abandoned conventional dairy farming in 1993 in favor of a "rotational grazing" approach, the method used by farmers in New Zealand. Sweet Grass also produces artisanal cheeses made from cow's milk and goat's milk, which have won national awards. According to industry experts, projections for Georgia through 2020 show a continued decline in milk production. Georgia, along with most other southeastern states, is a milk-deficit state, meaning it does not produce enough milk to supply its own population. As of 2006 the state produces less than 300 pounds per capita, while the nation's average is 581 pounds per capita. Ironically, about 40 percent of Georgia's milk is shipped to Florida, with Georgia's needs being met by milk shipped from other states. As of 2006 nine companies are involved in the processing of milk and milk products in Georgia. Berry College Agricultural Program Gold Kist Inc. More in Agribusiness Flowers Foods Jesse Jewell (1902-1975) Henry Tift (1841-1922) Ellis Bros. Pecans Destinations Art Across Georgia Fall in North Georgia Seven Natural Wonders of Georgia Ten Major Civil War Sites in Georgia Media Gallery: Dairy Industry Cow's Milk CheeseCobb DairyCedar Grove DairyHooks Dairy BarnCloverdale DairyDairy WorkerSweet Grass DairyCagle's DairyDairy Cows Loading Further Reading H. B. Henderson, comp. and ed., A History of the Dairy Industry in Georgia, 2 vols. ([n.p.], 1981). Cite This Article Brown, Melissa, and Lane O. Ely. "Dairy Industry." New Georgia Encyclopedia. 02 August 2016. Web. 21 February 2017. More from the Web Georgia Department of AgricultureUGA Cooperative Extension: DairyGeorgia Historical Society: Victor Hugo Bassett Papers More in Business & Economy Quick Start Primerica Financial Services Jesse Jewell (1902-1975) South Georgia Pecan Company Farm Cooperatives Brumby Family Peanuts Federal Road Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation Georgia Department of Labor Goats James H. Blanchard (b. 1941) Babyland General Hospital Georgia Trend Bradley-Turner Foundation Maule Air NGE Topics

农业

2017-09/0195/en_head.json.gz/21065

Follow us on: Mozzarella gone wild! California farm tames exotic animal with gourmet results Issue Date: August 23, 2006 Unless you hail from Honcut, Rackerby or Wyandotte, you may not know where Bangor, Calif. is, let alone its claim to fame. The tiny Butte County town has a population of 585, not including its most famous residents—175 water buffaloes. This unique herd is the foundation of California's only water buffalo mozzarella farm. In fact, save for a small dairy in Vermont, it's the only such business in America. "I think no one could have ever predicted that I would one day have this business," said company president and majority owner Hanns Michael Heick. "Earlier on, I didn't even know that water buffaloes existed." The company name, Bubalus Bubalis, is the Latin name for the Asian River or Swamp Buffalo. The animals are common in the Philippines, China and India and are renowned for their intelligence, strong work ethic and gentle disposition. "In Asia, most of the time when you see a buffalo depicted, they have a little child on top playing a flute," Heick said. Providing further evidence of their soft demeanor, Heick's herd sports names including Tuffy, Prima and Cleo. Bubalus Bubalis was founded in Southern California in 1998, when Virgil Cicconi imported a small herd from Florida that originated in his native Italy. The dairy operates in Chino, San Bernardino County, with the cheese made at a plant in Gardena, Los Angeles County. Those facets of the business are ongoing, although a move north is planned. Bubalus Bubalis purchased a defunct dairy farm in the hills of eastern Butte County that was too small to stay in that business, though it's ideal for the buffalo operation. The herd resides on 50 acres of pasture, which provides plenty of room to roam, plus large trees for shade and bathing opportunities via two small lakes. One of the strengths of Northern California is the buffalo-friendly climate, including favorable weather and the pro-agriculture attitude of the region. "Butte County is very intent on creating a specialty food environment and we fit right into it," Heick said. "They are very supportive and happy to see us." The buffalo farm is part of the Sierra Oro Farm Trail, a campaign to encourage the public to visit Butte County farms and ranches and buy locally grown foods. Another strength is the ready access to a surprising, inexpensive food source for the herd-rice straw. "They come from rice country and are the only bovine that has an enzyme in their intestines that can break down, digest and make a profitable food from rice straw," Heick said. Being in the midst of the world's most productive rice-growing region, Heick has easy access to the straw. The herd gobbles up 100 tons of rice straw per month. The company goal is to make Bangor an all-encompassing site for the farmstead cheese by the end of the year. Expansion is very much in the offing. The current herd is expected to double within a few years, which in turn would double the amount of cheese produced. Production currently stands at about 150,000 pounds a year. Customer demand is fueling the expansion. Known as mozzarella di buffala in the marketplace, this cheese has a passionate following among knowledgeable gourmets. Mozzarella cheese was identified as a rising star in the food world in a recent article in the Wall Street Journal. There are six Bubalus Bubalis products, including different types of mozzarella, mascarpone and ricotta. It offers a full, fresh flavor that lactose-intolerant customers can enjoy. Their cheeses won four awards at this year's California State Fair competition, including one gold medals, two bronze medals and a best of division in the soft cheese category. Bubalus Bubalis sells for $7.99 to $9.99 per half-pound package at specialty retail stores, including Vons Pavilion Markets in Southern California, Mill Valley Market in Mill Valley, Ferry Plaza in San Francisco and Corti Brothers in Sacramento. Restaurants featuring the cheese include Piatti, St. Regis in San Francisco, The Ivy in Beverly Hills and the Old Yellow Garage in Jackson Hole, Wyo. One of the biggest buffalo mozzarella fans is Jason Shaeffer, chef de cuisine of the luxurious restaurant 1500 Ocean at the iconic Hotel Del Coronado in San Diego County. Shaeffer has visited the farm and includes its cheeses in several dishes, including appetizers and salads. "After visiting, I can see how much everyday care they put into it all," he said. "Once you taste it, you're hooked. It's an incredible product." The protégé of Thomas Keller of the acclaimed French Laundry restaurant in the Napa Valley said the buffalo cheese fits into their concept of buying local ingredients that are of the highest quality. "People want to know the farmer—the why, how and where their name came from," Keller said. "It's all part of the dining experience now." Heick said, "Chefs, delis and specialty stores are our keys to success. We have to get the public to understand that we produce something here in the United States that is as valuable and as good as anything we are importing." Buffalo milk mozzarella is somewhat new to America but has a long history in Europe. The first documented water buffalo mozzarella dates back to the 12th century in Italy. Heick's circuitous journey to Northern California only adds to the improbable mix. Born in Vienna, Austria, he spent much of his professional career as an importer-exporter. After 15 years exporting California wines, he came across the water buffalo opportunity. His European upbringing and extensive travel had already enlightened him on the popularity of buffalo mozzarella elsewhere in the world, chiefly in Italy. Sealing the deal may have been the expertise of his Italian-born wife, Grazia Perrella, who comes from a third-generation mozzarella cheese-making family. Their partnership provides an ideal combination of modern technology and Old World artistry. Heick said he is excited about what the future holds for this cheese. "It's a pleasure to have people taste your product and really enjoy it," he said. "I think that's a major part of the fun—to be able to enjoy the circumstances when you produce something and also to have positive feedback from the public. You cannot ask for anything more than that!" (Jim Morris is a reporter for Ag Alert. He may be contacted at [email protected].) Permission for use is granted, however, credit must be made to the California Farm Bureau Federation when reprinting this item. Dairy & Livestock Trees & Vines From the Fields® Ask Your PCA Leaders Conference 2017 California Water Crisis Making it Work YF&R Colusa Farm Show Working For You Home Archives Subscribe Advertise About Us Contact Us California Farm Bureau Federation, 2300 River Plaza Drive, Sacramento, CA 95833 Phone: (916) 561-5570, Fax: (916) 561-5695, General Information: [email protected] © 2014 California Farm Bureau Federation. All rights reserved. Read our legal notice. Website Inquiries: [email protected]

农业

2017-09/0195/en_head.json.gz/21067

HomeNewsFocus Shifts to Soybean Planting Progress Focus Shifts to Soybean Planting Progress By Darrel Good, University of Illinois The late start to the 2013 corn planting season has created concerns about the likely magnitude of planted acreage and likely yield potential. The rapid planting progress during the week ended May 19 alleviated some of the corn production concerns. Still, a larger than average percentage of the crop will be planted later than is considered optimal for maximum yield potential. Recent and upcoming heavy precipitation, particularly in Iowa and parts of Illinois and Missouri, suggest that some corn acreage will be planted extremely late, switched to soybeans, or not planted at all so that production uncertainty persists. Until recently, there was little concern about the timeliness of soybean planting. However, the same weather that will delay the completion of corn planting may also result in more than the average amount of late planting for soybeans. As with corn, there is not agreement on what constitutes late planting for soybeans. We have defined late planting as occurring after June 10 in years prior to 1986 and after May 30 since 1986. The difference in late planting dates reflects the shift to early planting dates, similar to that which occurred for corn. By this definition, an average of 32 percent of the acreage was planted late in the 33 years from 1980 through 2012. The average is relatively high since the planting of double-cropped soybeans generally occurs "late". Those acres typically account for six to nine percent of total soybean acreage. The percentage of the acreage planted late has ranged from nine percent in 2012 to 66 percent in 1995. There were five years in which late planting exceeded 50 percent, and all of those years were in the 1990s. Late planted acreage accounted for 48 percent of the acreage in 1986 and 47 percent in 2011. Acreage and yield outcomes in those years might influence expectations for this year if it turns out that a large percentage of the acreage is planted late. In the five years with the most late planted acreage (1990, 1991, 1993, 1995, and 1996), total planted acreage exceeded March intentions in four years. The increase ranged from about 800,000 acres (1.3 percent) to about 2.1 million acres (3.6 percent). Planted acreage was 1.6 million acres (2.7 percent) less than intentions in 1990. In both 1986 and 2011, planted acreage was about 1.6 million acres (2.6 percent and 2.0 percent, respectively) less than March intentions. Acreage responses in years of large amounts of late planting have not been consistent in either direction or magnitude relative to intentions reported in March. The difference between actual planted acreage and March intentions in those seven years ranged from 1.3 to 3.6 percent and averaged 2.4 percent. Based on planting intentions of 77.126 million acres this year, the previous experience suggests that planted acres will differ from intentions by about 1.8 million acres, in a range of 1.0 to 2.8 million acres, if late plantings are large. History, however, does not offer much insight on the likely direction of the difference. The U.S. average soybean yield relative to trend value also varied in the previous years of large amounts of late-planted acreage. The U.S. average yield was less than one bushel above trend value in 1986 and 1996, very near trend in 1990 and 1991, and about a bushel below trend in 1995 and 2011. The largest deviation from trend was the nearly three bushel shortfall in 1993. Yields are mostly determined by July and August weather conditions. The history of yields in late-planted years suggests that like most other years, the U.S. average yield this year should be within about one bushel of the trend value of 44 bushels per acre unless summer weather conditions are extreme. The USDA's weekly Crop Progress report indicated that 24 percent of the U.S. soybean acreage had been planted as of May 19. That compares to the previous 5-year average planting progress of 42 percent. The slowest progress relative to the previous 5-year average was in Iowa and delays are likely to continue there due to recent and upcoming precipitation. The report to be released on June 3 will allow a calculation of the percentage of the crop planted late by our definition. It appears that percentage will be above the long term average of 32 percent, but well below the historical extreme of 66 percent. November 2013 soybean futures have increased about $0.75 from the low on May 10. Much of that increase is apparently based on production concerns related to prospects of more than the average amount of late planting. History suggests that those concerns, particularly from the yield side, are probably premature. The USDA's June 28 Acreage report will provide a clearer picture of the magnitude of planted acreage.

农业

2017-09/0195/en_head.json.gz/23674

National Hog Farmer Newsletters Jump to: National Hog Farmer Daily | Pork Industry Express | Nutrient... Missouri Senate confirms Chinn as ag director Feb 14, 2017 Emerging Salmonella isolated from Midwest swine Feb 14, 2017 Registration now open for April Pork Management Conference Feb 13, 2017 Farm Operations>Sustainability Consumers demand dirt-to-dish environmental data While the majority of livestock producers may not be legally required to report greenhouse gas emissions today, Timothy Smith, associate professor of environmental sciences, policy and management, bioproducts and biosystems engineering at the University of Minnesota, says greenhouse gas regulation is not going away, though it may change forms Feb 18, 2011 Consumer demand for dirt-to-dish environmental data may soon dictate what retailers will ask of their meat suppliers. While the majority of livestock producers may not be legally required to report greenhouse gas emissions today, Timothy Smith, associate professor of environmental sciences, policy and management, bioproducts and biosystems engineering at the University of Minnesota, says greenhouse gas regulation is not going away, though it may change forms. Experts speaking at the Food, Agriculture & Biofuels National Conference in Minneapolis, MN, predict that consumers may one day request greenhouse gas data be included on product labels in the retail meat counter. The Walmart Effect Controlling a sizeable share of the retail food market means retailers such as Walmart wield impressive power over their food processing and meat packing company suppliers. According to Brian Buhr, University of Minnesota agricultural economist, Walmart controls 29% of the retail food market in the United States. Food sales alone bring in $233 billion for Walmart. By comparison, Kroger, the nation’s second-largest food retailer, represents 8% of the retail food market with $66.1 billion in sales. Eric Jackson is the chief sustainability officer at Conservis, a company that helps provide and analyze environmental compliance programs. He specializes in corporate sustainability and concentrates on figuring out what strategies businesses need to take in order to be competitive. “For all of the major food companies, their largest customer is Walmart,” Jackson explains. “So every time Walmart says something, even the companies we may consider to be the behemoths have to figure out what their response is going to be.” What Walmart Wants Jackson says Mike Duke, Walmart president and CEO, has focused on the “greening” of Walmart since he took on the company’s leadership role in February 2009. During a shareholders’ meeting in June 2010, Duke indicated that Walmart is committed to eliminating 20 million metric tons (22 million tons) of greenhouse gas emissions from the company’s global supply chain by the end of 2015. “They said that reduction in greenhouse gas emissions would come from their supply chain, not only from their stores,” Jackson points out. “The number one hot spot for greenhouse gas emissions in the supply chain is apparel. The number two source is food production. They are very focused on (emissions) in cotton and wheat production right now and they are talking about the meat side, too.” Jackson says Walmart is currently conducting significant studies to find ways to track and trace inputs and activities, including greenhouse gas emissions, at all points in the production process — from the farm to the retail shelf. He expects Walmart’s agricultural tracking activities to eventually encompass more of the company’s food suppliers. “They are starting the tracking process with their private (Walmart) brands because the major branded food companies have told them it is not possible. Walmart is trying to prove to the (branded) food companies that is not the case,” he notes. “Walmart is taking a very proactive approach. They see the train rolling down the track and they would rather be in the driver’s seat than back in the caboose.” A July 16, 2009 Walmart press release quotes Duke as saying, “Customers want products that are more efficient, that last longer and perform better. Increasingly, they want information about the entire life cycle of a product so they can feel good about buying it.” The “feel good” focus on environmental emissions is not unique to Walmart. “In our research, we have not found a single U.S. food company that is not studying, at least quietly, the greenhouse gas emissions from their food supply chain,” Jackson relates. “And they are doing it largely in response to Walmart.” As a large distributor of meat on a global scale, Jackson says McDonald’s is focused on the environmental impact that suppliers may have on the protein side. While they face pressure from around the globe, McDonald’s has been engaged in the European effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the food supply chain for the last 10 years. Similar initiatives have been launched in the United States recently. The McDonald’s Web site proclaims: “Our opportunity is to increase our influence along the supply chain back to the primary producer, thereby driving progress in sustainable agriculture.” Proctor & Gamble (P&G) recently introduced a Supplier Environmental Sustainability Scorecard, which asks suppliers about greenhouse gas emissions in a request-for-information format. “After talking with people in the (P&G) procurement area, the scorecard is gradually going to move from a ‘request’ format to a ‘filtering’ format,” Jackson explains. “They are going to practice in the request stage for a while, but those who cannot or will not participate will find themselves in a different position in regards to being a supplier to Proctor & Gamble.” Walmart is expected to follow a similar path, first asking suppliers for their greenhouse gas information, and then gradually requiring more disclosure. “Eventually, participation in the market is going to be limited by whether or not you are willing to provide information to your downstream markets,” Jackson says. “That is why it is important to realize the difference between measurement and reduction. Right now, it is all about measurement. Will you be transparent?” Jackson predicts producers are going to play a big role in answering the investor demands for corporate transparency. “Investors are requiring scoring systems and labeling systems already, and that pressure is going to keep getting dialed up every year,” he states. Database Building Stockholders for major corporations are driving greenhouse gas emissions reporting by using entities such as the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP), an independent, not-for-profit organization that holds the largest database of primary corporate climate change information in the world. According to the CDP, 2,500 organizations in 60 countries now measure and disclose their greenhouse gas emissions and climate change strategies through the organization. CDP encourages companies to put this information at the heart of financial and policy decision making. Jackson says more than $65 trillion is being managed by companies that back the global carbon disclosure initiative, and 65% of Fortune 500 companies are reporting their carbon emissions. “Last year, there were 100 shareholder lawsuits brought specifically around greenhouse gas disclosure transparency,” he explains. “At the corporate level, they (investors) are standing on the doorsteps of the boards of directors and saying, ‘you will report.’ Today it is about the corporate level; tomorrow it is about the supply chain level. It is working its way back toward production agriculture.” Voluntary? Really? “My question becomes, is this really ‘voluntary’ if the major investors are requiring this type of disclosure? It is going to have to be a corporate decision, so in that sense it is not mandated by law. But your shareholder price may react and you may have shareholder activity against the board if you don’t comply with the request,” Jackson says. As investors demand information, the dirt-to-dish data gathering will likely become more commonplace. The data at the retail end is currently much easier to gather and analyze than at the farm level, but Jackson does not believe producers will be let off the hook. Eventually, greenhouse gas emissions information could very possibly become a food label data field, much like nutritional information is presented now. “It has already happened in Europe and it will happen here,” he notes. “The consumer will eventually start making data-driven choices; that’s probably only 5-10 years away. If there are any gaps the industry is not covering, the regulators will fill in the gaps.” Time to Get Started As a first step, Jackson urges producers and industry experts to develop an understanding of the types of requests consumers are making. Watch for the metrics being set for measuring and categorizing greenhouse gas emissions and have the tools necessary to respond to those metrics. “Position yourself to respond to whatever requests or regulations are developed, whether through legislation or via regulatory bodies. There will be virtually no one in the food supply chain, from the farmer all the way up to the retailer, who is not going to be affected at some point,” he assures. Lora Berg is a freelance writer from Lakeville, MN.

农业

2017-09/0195/en_head.json.gz/23879

New study probes highs and lows of Green Revolution One of broadest assessments of the impact of the Green Revolution to date shows that although improved crop yields did benefit farmers in many developing countries, others suffered from associated price reductions of their crops. The study confirms that the Green Revolution — which in the 1960s and 1970s saw the widespread introduction of high-yielding crop varieties — increased global food production, leading to a decline in food prices and an increase in people's average calorific intake. But it also suggests that some farmers, who did not benefit from the increased yields — though nonetheless experienced decreasing prices for their harvests — suffered actual losses of income. The study — initiated by the Consultative Group for International Agricultural Research (GGIAR), which supports a global network of agricultural research centres — gives a "nuanced view" of internationally funded research, according to a R E Evenson and D Gollin of Yale University, United States. Writing in this week's journal Science, they note that the benefits of the Green Revolution were "uneven across crops and regions". Farmers in less favourable farming regions, such as sub-Saharan African, fared particularly badly, they say. "But it is unclear what alternative scenario would have allowed developing countries to meet, with lower environmental impact, the human needs posed by the massive population expansion of the 20th century," they write. Link to Science article © SciDev.Net 2003 By Katie Mantell Katie Mantell Related links Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR)

农业

2017-09/0195/en_head.json.gz/23997

Follow @thecattlesite News & Analysis Features Markets & Reports Sustainability Knowledge Centre Directory Events Our Shop News Zimbabwean Beef Processor Close to Going Under14 October 2015 ZIMBABWE - The Cold Storage Company (CSC), a Zimbabwean meat company that used to supply 9,100 tonnes of beef to the European Union yearly until 2001, is tottering on the brink, writes Ian Nkala.Successive droughts, recurrent outbreaks of foot and mouth disease, loss of lucrative markets, mismanagement and the prevailing economic crisis have resulted in the CSC becoming a minor player on a market it used to dominate. CSC chief executive officer, Ngoni Chinogaramombe told members of a parliamentary portfolio committee on agriculture that visited the parastatal’s head office in Bulawayo recently that the company is saddled with a US $25 million debt. It also owes its 413 employees $3.5 million in salary arrears dating back to 2009 and operates at 10 per cent capacity. In July, an auctioneering firm, Hollands auctioned 399 CSC head of cattle to raise money to pay the company’s $453,110 owed to workers. Mr Chinogaramombe told the committee that in the first five months of this year, the government company slaughtered just 5,600 animals out of the 97,000 the beef processing sector killed between January and May. “The biggest challenge for the CSC is finance, they need money,” portfolio committee chairman, Chris Chitindi said. “We know they have applied to government to dispose of some assets and land which could earn them $11 million. "We are going to push so that it could be expeditiously approved so that they sell the land and excess machinery that they would want to export.” Mr Chinogaramombe said a turnaround strategy being considered by the sole shareholder - the government - involves unbundling the CSC into three regional units and selling off non-core assets like houses currently occupied by the company's employees. If approval is granted for the sale of the assets, about $11 million would be raised, he said. “We need to break the CSC into three companies for investors to come in,” he said. “The first company being Chinhoyi and its farms, second being Bulawayo and its farms and finally Masvingo and its farms.” The new investor would have to also invest in restocking the parastatal’s herd, now at 792, a far cry from around 10,000 head of cattle in 2000. He said the CSC’s two operational abattoirs are now slaughtering about 600 cattle weekly for service slaughter, up from 280 between January and May. It charges $25 per beast. “However,” he said, “these are not our beasts and that service we are offering is not our core business that we can rely on. Our duty is to slaughter for the nation.” CSC owns four abattoirs in Bulawayo, Masvingo, Chinhoyi and Kadoma as well as ranches across the country where 8,533 animals forage. Of these, 7,741 are owned by tenants and 792 are the CSC’s. The Bulawayo abattoir, which is still using machinery donated by the European Union in 1990, is the biggest in the country. Discussions, said Mr Chinogaramombe, are ongoing with prospective investors to inject at least $90 million needed to revive the CSC. Paddy Zhanda, the deputy minister of agriculture, said he is confident that CSC can be revived. “We are waiting for Cabinet approval and I am sure you know how Cabinet works,” he told state-owned The Sunday Mail in July. “We cannot talk of investors now when we have not even injected any capital ourselves into the company. An investor cannot come and put money into a company without any structural plan, but we will make sure it will be resuscitated and ensure it is viable.” TheCattleSite News Desk Processing, General Share This

农业

2017-09/0195/en_head.json.gz/24072

The Vanuatu Cocoa Growers’ Association: Inclusive Trade in Rural Smallholder Agriculture 1 Nov 2013Working paper series The Cocoa Grower’s Association (CGA) in the Republic of Vanuatu is a fundamental example of how the organization of local cooperatives can make a significant impact and create an environment for inclusive trade. This paper will review a case study of implementing a governing association that coordinates cocoa cooperatives in Vanuatu, and which is focused on organizing the production and trade in the region, as a method to highlight key lessons learned and potential for scalability in furthering inclusive trade goals. What complementary policies may contribute to the inclusiveness of international openness?1 Nov 2013Working paper series This paper studies the linkages between international openness and inclusive growth, understood as better access to productive employment and entrepreneurship, the reduction of poverty and a more equal income distribution. It introduces the notion of inclusive trade as the linkages through which international integration can contribute to inclusive growth. Four dimensions of potential linkages are analyzed, namely: (i) aggregate employment and its distribution, (ii) aggregate productivity, (iii) poverty and income inequality, and (iv) equal opportunities. 2013 ESCAP Population Data Sheet2 Oct 2013Flagship publications and book series The 2013 ESCAP Population Data Sheet for Asia and the Pacific focuses on maternal health. In light of the current challenges in achieving MDG 5 on maternal health, indicators such as births attended by skilled health personnel, maternal mortality ratio, unmet need for family planning and adolescent fertility rates are provided. Report (Launch of the Asia-Pacific regional MDGs report 2012/13)20 Sep 2013Books The Millennium Development Goals have helped rally political support for global efforts to reduce poverty and achieve sustainable human development. The Asia-Pacific region has achieved remarkable progress on the MDGs, particularly on reducing income poverty; however, it still has a significant ‘unfinished agenda’. People in the region continue to face major deprivation, along with many new and unaddressed development challenges. As the finishing line for the MDGs approaches, this report articulates Asia-Pacific aspirations for a post-2015 development framework. Asia-Pacific Regional MDG Report 2012/13 Asia-Pacific Aspirations: Perspectives for a Post-2015 Development Agenda20 Sep 2013Books This report highlights that Asia and the Pacific has made good progress towards the MDGs, through the region will still need to make greater efforts if it is to meet some important targets. Now it has the opportunity to set its sights higher when considering priorities for a post-2015 framework. Designing and Implementing Trade Facilitation in Asia and the Pacific, 2013 Update6 Sep 2013Flagship publications and book series This book, co-published by the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP) and the Asian Development Bank (ADB), provides guidance for the implementation of trade facilitation measures and reforms in Asia and the Pacific. It attempts to bridge the gaps among policy makers, practitioners, and economists by outlining operational guidance on how to assess the status of trade facilitation, what measures and reforms are necessary, and how to implement them at the national and regional levels. Asia-Pacific Development Journal Vol. 20, No. 1, June 201330 Aug 2013Journals The Asia-Pacific Development Journal (APDJ) is published twice a year by the Macroeconomic Policy and Development Division of the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP). The primary objective of the APDJ is to provide a platform for the exchange of knowledge, experience, ideas, information and data on all aspects of economic and social development issues and concerns facing the region and to stimulate policy debate and assist in the formulation of policy. An In-Depth Study of Broadband Infrastructure in the ASEAN Region20 Aug 2013Working paper series Between late 2012 and mid‐2013, Terabit Consulting performed a detailed analysis of the broadband infrastructure in the nine largest member countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN): Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Viet Nam. Terabit Consulting’s analysis also included trans‐border broadband projects extending into contiguous regions such as Yunnan Province, China. UNNExT Brief No. 9, Pan Asian e-commerce Alliance (PAA): Service providers join forces to enable cross-border paperless trade1 Aug 2013Working paper series UNNExT Brief No. 9, Towards an Enabling Environment for Paperless Trade - Pan Asian e-commerce Alliance (PAA): Service providers join forces to enable cross-border paperless trade, August 2013. Development Financing for Tangible Results: A Paradigm Shift to Impact Investing and Outcome Models, The Case of Sanitation in Asia1 Aug 2013Working paper series Household water security is a basic requirement of life. More than being simple basic needs, water and sanitation services are recognized as crucial elements that otherwise would put other development investments and public health at risk. Asia and the Pacific as a whole is an early achiever for halving the proportion of people without access to safe drinking water, but not however, sanitation. Most of the Asia-Pacific countries will not come close to achieve the MDG target on access to improved sanitation. Pages« first

农业

2017-09/0195/en_head.json.gz/24308

UN: Food prices likely to remain volatile, high Share Tweet Prices for rice, wheat and other key foods are expected to remain volatile and possibly increase _ and poor farmers and consumers particularly in Africa will be hurt most, the U.N. food agencies said Monday.In an annual report on the state of food insecurity around the world, the U.N.'s three food agencies urged governments to make good on pledges to share information about farm forecasts and food stock levels to avoid the price swings that resulted in food riots in 2006-2008 and an eight percent increase in the number of undernourished people in Africa.They also urged greater long-term investment in the agriculture sectors of poor countries so farmers can bolster production to meet increasing demand and cope better when food crises hit.Failure to do so, the agencies warned, will result in continued price fluctuations, which makes poor farmers and consumers in food-importing countries at ever greater risk for poverty in both the short and long term, it said."Changes in income due to price swings that lead to decreased food consumption can reduce children's intake of key nutrient during the first 1000 days of life from conception, leading to a permanent reduction of their future earning capacity and an increased likelihood of future poverty with negative effects on entire economies," the report said.It was produced by the Rome-based U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization, the World Food Program and _ for the first time _ the U.N.'s International Fund for Agriculture Development.FAO has been urging producer countries not to take drastic measures such as export bans when production plummets because of drought or other reasons. Such export restrictions have been blamed for the record high grain prices that fueled the social unrest in 2007-2008.In June, the world's largest economies agreed to establish a transparent system to track global food supplies, set up emergency reserves and create a rapid reaction mechanism when drought or other calamity hits.The agencies said the G20 proposal for a so-called Agricultural Market Information System would improve the reliability of food stocks estimates and forecast data and improve coordination in times of crisis.A recent U.N. study predicted that prices will be 20 percent higher for cereals and up to 30 percent higher for meat in the coming decade compared with the past 10 years.With the global population expected to increase from 6.9 billion to 9 billion by 2050, the problem of feeding the world has taken on urgency and was put at the top of the G-20 agenda this year under the French presidency.In a separate report, ActionAid said Monday that 1.5 billion people across 10 countries are vulnerable to what the global anti-poverty agency calls a triple crisis of climate change, depleted natural resources and high food prices.ActionAid urged G-20 leaders to increase investment in small farms in poor countries. It warned that millions of poor farmers will be deprived of arable land to produce food due to demand for biofuels, which take up land that could be used to grow edibles, and a rush from foreign investors to control natural resources such as minerals.The group said it had conducted a survey of 28 poor countries and found the 10 most vulnerable were Congo, Burundi, South Africa, Haiti, Bangladesh, Zambia, India, Sierra Leone, Ethiopia and Rwanda. Share this on Facebook Tweet Tags: Africa

农业

2017-09/0195/en_head.json.gz/24651

July 2011 Weather and Its Impacts on Missouri Commercial Agriculture/University of Missouri Extension A ridge of high pressure over the southern Plains intensified and expanded northeastward in July, profoundly influencing the weather pattern across the Show-Me state for the month. Hot and dry conditions spread across Missouri and had adverse impacts on people, animals and vegetation. Preliminary numbers indicate Missouri witnessed its hottest month in more than 30 years. The average statewide temperature for the month was 83°F, slightly over 5 degrees above normal, and the hottest month since July 1980. It was also the 6th hottest July on record and will go down as the 8th or 9th hottest month of all time when final numbers are tallied. Monthly temperatures averaged 81-82°F across northern sections and the eastern Ozarks region, 82-84°F over central, east central and southeastern sections and 84-87°F in west central and southwestern Missouri. Springfield and Joplin, MO experienced 8 and 19 days, respectively, of triple digit heat and both recorded their 3rd hottest July on record. The highest temperature for the month was reported in two southwestern locations on separate days. The communities of Protem (Taney Co.) and Ava (Douglas Co.) reported 107°F on July 11 and July 27, respectively. Hot temperatures and high humidity combined to produce very uncomfortable and life threatening conditions during the month. There were lengthy and continuous periods of various heat advisories and warnings impacting the state and, unfortunately, heat related fatalities were reported. According to the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services, there were 11 heat related fatalities between May 1 and July 31 and another 24 deaths were likely heat related. The majority of deaths occurred during July and in the St. Louis metropolitan area. More than 1,300 heat related visits to emergency rooms were documented statewide for the period. Another feature of the prolonged heatwave was high minimum temperatures. The average July minimum temperature for most areas of Missouri was between 72-74°F, or five to six degrees above normal. Urban locations, i.e. St. Louis and Kansas City, witnessed average monthly minimum temperatures around 77°F. The high maximum and minimum temperatures combined to create records for electricity demand across the state. Most areas of the state reported dry conditions at the end of the month and preliminary data indicated a statewide monthly average of 2.52 inches, or 1.43 inches below normal. The majority of precipitation events were scattered and highly localized, but there were a few occasions of significant rainfall. Heaviest monthly precipitation was confined to northwestern, north central and east central sections, and the eastern Ozarks region. Several northwestern counties reported four to six inches of rain. Rock Port, in Atchison County, received 8.17 inches. Three to four inches were common over north central Missouri and parts of the eastern Ozarks. Two to four inches were reported across east central Missouri, however, a localized area of much heavier precipitation occurred in Ste. Genevieve County where five to nine inches were reported. Two CoCoRaHS observers in Ste. Genevieve County reported 7.86 and 9.54 inches for the month. Less than two inches were typical over northeastern, central, west central, southwestern and far southeastern sections. Some exceptionally dry pockets were found in parts of northeast, west central, southwest and southeast Missouri where less than 0.75 inches were reported for the month. Some of the lowest monthly totals were 0.50 inches in Purdy (Barry County), 0.44 inches at Lakeside (Miller Co.), and 0.31 inches at Clarence Canon Dam (Ralls Co.). According to the Missouri Agricultural Statistics Service, 69% of the state reported topsoil moisture supplies in short to very short condition by the end of the month. Corn, soybean and pasture conditions continued to deteriorate with 28%, 19% and 40% in poor to very poor condition, respectively. The southwestern district has been especially hard hit with 84% of the corn and 91% of the soybean crop in very poor condition. Complete crop failures were also reported in southwest Missouri. Burned up pastures were forcing livestock producers to feed hay in some areas. The National Drought Mitigation Center's July 26 Drought Monitor map indicated abnormally dry conditions affecting the southwestern half of Missouri with some far southwestern counties depicted in a moderate drought.

农业

2017-09/0195/en_head.json.gz/24853

Should Farm Kids Be Allowed To Drive A Tractor? Some Say It's Too Dangerous By editor Nov 2, 2011 TweetShareGoogle+Email Drew Wilber, 14, works on his parents' 20-acre farm near Boone, Iowa, during his day off from school on Columbus Day. Peggy Lowe for NPR Originally published on November 2, 2011 5:11 pm For a lot of farm kids, "learning to drive" means learning to drive a tractor before ever driving a car. Tractors are a big part of family farm life, which is one reason advocacy groups and dozens of congressional representatives have heavily criticized a U.S. Department of Labor proposal that would bar children under age 16 from doing many dangerous farm jobs, such as driving a tractor and handling pesticides. The outcry has been so strong that on Monday, the agency backed away from the Nov. 1 deadline it had set for public comment and extended it another month. But while traditional family farmers say the change threatens the future of agriculture, child and labor advocates say the plans are a much-needed update to protect vulnerable young workers. The changes do include a legal exemption for farm families that would allow children to work on the farms owned by their parents. But it would still affect many small farmers who hire kids in the summer or who have extended family members work on their land. At the 20-acre farm of Julie and Scott Wilber near Boone, Iowa, for example, Drew, 14, and Jade, 12, could still do any work their parents ask of them under the changes. But the Wilbers' employee, 15-year-old MacKenzie Lewis, would be prohibited from driving the four-wheelers used on many farms, mowing grass or working around animals. The Wilbers say finding part-time seasonal workers is difficult; they can't spend a lot on wages and need sporadic help for hard, manual labor. "It's easier to hire kids or teachers, because people who have regular full-time jobs aren't going to quit their job to work in the summer," Julie Wilber says. Ag advocacy groups are also outraged about the changes. They say the government doesn't understand how agriculture gets done today. Most farms are now organized under a corporation that includes multiple members of an extended family — uncles, aunts, brothers, sisters, grandparents — but having that status would mean many families that count on their kids wouldn't be exempt, says Jordan Dux, national affairs coordinator with the Nebraska Farm Bureau. "So kids of individuals who are involved in a family corporation would no longer be able to help mom and dad on the ranch, on the farm. They wouldn't be able to work with animals. They wouldn't be able to work on hay wagons stacking bales 6 feet tall," he said. "There are lots of ... typical farm practices that ... would be outlawed by the Department of Labor." The plan's critics also say the regulations would hinder the recruitment of the next generation of farmers and ranchers, calling it a direct hit on youth groups like 4-H and Future Farmers of America. Farm work is one of the most dangerous occupations, and it frequently affects the 1.26 million children under age 20 who live on farms in the U.S. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, an average of 104 children die each year as a result of a farm-related injury, and more than 22,000 kids are injured. Child safety advocates and others applauded the Labor Department's announcement and said the changes are long overdue. Others, like Barry Estabrook, a food journalist who has done extensive reporting on farm labor, particularly in Florida tomato fields, says given the extent of injuries, the proposal was "timid at best." Children who work in agriculture have little protection under the Fair Labor Standards Act, unlike their counterparts who work in other occupations, Estabrook said. Young people who work on farms "have suffered under a federally mandated double standard," Estabrook writes on his "Politics of the Plate" blog. "I don't see it as any more ludicrous to envision a child driving a bulldozer or a backhoe on a construction site than driving a backhoe in the farm fields," he said in an interview. "What is the fundamental difference?" In a separate update, the Labor Department also proposed preventing anyone under age 18 from working at stockyards, livestock auctions, commercial feed lots or grain elevators — sites of several high-profile deaths. Six of the 26 people who suffocated in grain elevator deaths last year were under the age of 16, according to a Purdue University study. Public Citizen, a congressional watchdog, supports the increased protections. Justin Feldman, a worker health and safety advocate with the group, points to the case of two 17-year-old boys in Oklahoma who were caught in a grain auger in an accident last summer. "It took the fire department an hour to cut through the grain auger, and each one lost a leg. They were athletes," Feldman says. "They were going into their senior year in high school. And now their lives have been very much changed." Peggy Lowe is a reporter for Harvest Public Media.Copyright 2013 NPR. To see more, visit http://www.npr.org/. TweetShareGoogle+EmailView the discussion thread. © 2017 KUNM

农业

2017-09/0195/en_head.json.gz/25825

State Leaders Stymied On Agriculture Agenda At WTO Meeting Joseph Giordono Iowa governor Tom Vilsack should probably avoid black cats, broken mirrors and walking under ladders. Just months after avoiding serious injury in the devastating Taiwan earthquake in October, Vilsack was nearly assaulted by protesters at last week's World Trade Organization meeting in Seattle. An Iowa state trooper pulled the governor away from the mob, which then attacked a Washington state trooper also escorting Vilsack. Vilsack was just one of several state officials who are still picking up the pieces after attending the meetings, which were transformed by the violent clashes between police and protesters from a story buried in the business section to a prominent story splashed across the front page. The protests resulted in at least 500 arrests, spurred a 24-hour downtown curfew and forced Washington governor Gary Locke to mobilize the National Guard and pull an additional 300 state police troopers from their assignments in other parts of the state. In the midst of the turmoil, state leaders, especially those from agricultural states, attempted to use the meetings as a way to open new markets in the international economy and lower existing tariffs on exported agricultural products. North Dakota Governor Ed Schafer and several other officials traveled to the meeting to promote the state's agricultural interests to an international market. They met with Australian and Canadian officials to discuss farm subsidies in an international context. While they emerged from that meeting with a general agreement, the North Dakotans' meetings with European Union and Japanese officials did not fare as well. U.S. Senator Tom Daschle, a South Dakota Democrat and Senate minority leader, warned that European and Asian history and tradition leads those countries to be wary of relying on imported food. "It's more personal when it comes to food. They've made it a national mantra not to be dependent on other countries for food," Daschle said in a press conference. Nonetheless, officials from agriculture states pressed their agenda and tried to articulate their goals to constituents at home suddenly bombarded by images of riot police firing tear gas into crowds of protesters. "One of the real questions that people ask is, what is your reason for going and what's the likelihood of something coming out?' Our goal here is to try and get our agenda heard," North Dakota Wheat Commission administrator Neal Fisher told the Bismarck Tribune. Fisher and U.S. Rep. Earl Pomeroy reported that they were forced to cancel several meetings because of the street violence, including once when they were unable to get through security at Gov. Schafer's hotel. Seattle wasn't the only place protesters gathered. A group of 100 peaceful protesters representing agriculture interests, organized labor and environmental groups marched on the Idaho statehouse last week to show their opposition to Idaho senators Larry Craig and Mike Crapo's participation in the meetings. Leaders from South Dakota also attended the WTO meetings in Seattle to promote the interests of the state's farmers and ranchers. According to South Dakota Farm Bureau spokesman Mike Held, U.S. agricultural products face an average tariff of 50 percent when they enter other countries. U.S. tariffs on agricultural products are closer to 10 percent. "It's not an equal playing field. That's what we're trying to get at. This meeting has determined the parameters of discussions that will take place over the next two to five years, and we are going to keep agriculture at the top of the agenda," Held said. Agriculture was such an important topic at the meetings that President Clinton appointed Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman as the chief United States spokesman for the Seattle talks. While South Dakota government officials were busy meeting with delegations from Japan, France, Italy, Spain and Canada, some South Dakota farmers joined in the protests. South Dakota Farmers Union president Dennis Wiese led some of his constituents in joining the protests aimed at protecting the environment and assuring that trade does not overshadow human rights in foreign policy. "There's more to trade than just selling more grain or cattle. There are other values that need to be addressed and we must do it in a way that raises the standard of living in other nations up to ours, not by lowering our own," Wiese said. WTO officials project that removing barriers to trade will increase global output by 3 percent and put an additional $1.2 trillion into the world economy, particularly benefiting poor countries. But the failure to agree even on an agenda between the European Union and United States over farm subsidies now casts doubt over some of those predictions. In the end, the violent clashes between protesters and police had their intended effect since WTO leaders adjourned the meetings without any significant agreements on agricultural policy. But that doesn't mean the WTO won't figure largely in the future of agricultural trade policies. "We cannot stop the World Trade Organization because there is already globalization now. Our world is becoming smaller and smaller," said union president Dennis Wiese. Tags: Politics and Campaigns, Economy

农业

2017-09/0195/en_head.json.gz/26021

Follow @thecattlesite News & Analysis Features Markets & Reports Sustainability Knowledge Centre Directory Events Our Shop News OFC - Can UK Farming Afford to Leave the EU?11 January 2016 UK - The UK could grow the rural economy, improve the environment and protect the country from plant and animal diseases if it was outside the European Union, according to the former environment secretary Owen Paterson.If the UK remains within the EU then it will be offered “some sort of associate status”, the politician said. Speaking at the Oxford Farming Conference, Mr Paterson said that the UK can leave the political arrangements of the European Union and still have access to the European market. “They have a £70 billion surplus with us, 5 million Europeans depend on sales to the UK; they have an enormous strategic and selfish interest in being able to export to us,” Mr Paterson told the conference. However, the European Agriculture Commissioner, Phil Hogan said that access to the internal market from outside the EU would come at a price. “Would the British Exchequer be prepared to pay a price that fully guaranteed your access for agricultural products?” he asked. “Would it expect farmers to pay part of the access-fee through higher taxes?” Mr Paterson said that the first priority in growing the rural economy of the UK outside of the EU should be to increase food production. He said a UK policy should encourage import substitution, the export of quality products and the Government should direct public procurement, which is worth £2.4 billion towards UK producers. Agriculture and food production in the UK is hampered by the Common Agricultural Policy, because it means that the UK has to accept compromises, which Mr Paterson said have been “deeply unsatisfactory and at worst damaging to UK farmers”. “Farmers are often exasperated by the difficulties of implementing the CAP,” Mr Paterson said. “To add insult to injury, the European Commission then fines the UK for incorrectly implementing the CAP measures.” He said that imposing a pan-European environment policy, with all the differences between the countries has proved impossible. “Many aspects of greening are intrusive, costly and difficult to administer – some are wholly unsuited to the UK environment, such as the three crop rule.” Mr Paterson added that outside the EU it would be possible for the UK exchequer to lend significant support to farmers. At present they receive £2.9 billion from the CAP, but the UK pays in £9.8 billion and Mr Paterson said that much of this could be release back to the farming sector if the UK was outside the EU. “By leaving he political structures of the EU, a UK government could not only pay as much if not more, than the CAP, but funds would be allocated in a much more effective and targeted manner,” he said. He said regulation could be simplified and subsidies could be more specifically tailored to satisfy the UK’s unique geography and climate. Mr Paterson told the conference that being outside of the EU, the UK would not be hampered and hindered by policies that are holding back advances in technology and science particularly in areas such as crop production products and genetic modification. “Instead of the precautionary principle, I would like to see the UK adopt the innovation principle, which the Commission, to date, has shied away from,” he said. Mr Paterson added that being outside of the EU, the UK would have a better voice on global bodies, rather than being part of a body representing 28 countries and he compared the situation with that of Australia and New Zealand. “UK agriculture is heavily constrained by the EU,” he concluded. “Subsidies are delivered through an immensely complex mechanism that should be radically simplified. “Membership prevents us from working with like-minded countries to combat plant disease and animal disease. “It prevents us from doing trade deals with countries that would buy our products. “It restricts us from leadership in setting global regulation that would make sense for us and our allies.” However, Commissioner Hogan warned that the UK could struggle on the world stage outside of the EU. “How would Britain with a population of 60 million fare in negotiating with countries like China, with a population of 1.3 billion? In the EU it punches at a weight of 500 million, almost twice the size of the US,” he said. He said that recent World Trade Organisation (WTO) negotiations in Kenya were brought to a climax on the phase out of export subsidies with discussion between the US, China, Brazil, India and the EU and major trading countries such as Canada, New Zealand, Japan and Australia were left outside the negotiating room. He said that the CAP had brought stability and is providing the foundation for economic growth, emphasising that the CAP had changed dramatically from the concept of butter and beef mountains. “Farmers have accepted and adapted to successive reforms and, in doing so, have had to grapple with the regulations,” Mr Hogan said. He accepted that the greening measures had not been popular and has called for proposals for simplification. He said that the next round of CAP simplification will reduce the number of regulations from 200 to 40 or 50. The commissioner added: “Europe is, and has always been, a vital market for British produce. “Today, the UK exports more to Ireland than is does to China, Japan, Canada, Russia, Saudi Arabia and South Korea combined. “The EU accounts for 60 per cent of the UK’s food exports.” He added: “The Union is engaging with what we might call the Anglosphere, which is a natural market for you in Britain. “You can expect to benefit from this more than other member states.” Economics, Policy and Regulatory, General Share This

农业

2017-09/0195/en_head.json.gz/26424

Poll Finds 89% of U.S. Consumers Want GE Food More StrictlyRegulated Confusion, ignorance about biotech food By Mike Lee -- Sacramento Bee Staff Writer Even as genetically modified crops continue to spread across the globe, Americans appear to know less about biotech foods than they did two years ago -- and much of what they do "know" is wrong, according to nationwide survey results being released today. Research for the Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology found that even though an estimated three-quarters of processed food on grocery store shelves contains genetically engineered ingredients, only 24 percent of survey respondents believed they had eaten such food. Nearly half opposed introducing biotech foods into the nation's food supply -- something that was done years ago. "It's obvious that people are confused and many people are troubled about (genetically engineered) foods," said Ronnie Cummins, national director of the Organic Consumers Association in Minnesota. "But it's also clear that they are not learning much from the media in their everyday lives." The survey, conducted in August, also shows that resistance to biotech foods is lessening, but that consumer opinions about the safety of those products remain as deeply divided as they were in Pew's base-line 2001 survey. Among its clearest conclusions, however, was that consumers want the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to take a more active role regulating genetically engineered foods. About a decade after the first biotech foods were introduced, the industry remains largely self-regulated on questions of food safety. Most consumers don't know anything about government regulation, according to the new survey, but they aren't comfortable with the FDA's voluntary consultation program that allows companies to submit only a research summary. "A very strong 89 percent of the respondents supported the idea that the FDA should have a mandatory process under which they find the (genetically engineered) foods are safe before they can be marketed," said Michael Rodemeyer, executive director of the Pew Initiative, in Washington, D.C. Those findings were in sync with a report issued last year by the U.S. General Accounting Office, which suggested that the FDA's evaluation process for biotech foods "could be enhanced by randomly verifying the test data" from companies. Jim Maryanski, biotechnology coordinator for foods at the FDA, declined to discuss the Pew study but characterized the GAO's recommendation as reasonable -- even though his agency has yet to make the changes. "We are quite confident that the system in place is one that is working very well; that it protects consumers' health," Maryanski said. "Companies ... are continuing to use the system of consultation with the FDA." The underlying theme of the Pew survey was that the public remains ill-informed about a technology being used to enhance crops on 145 million acres worldwide and one that is being touted as a promising new way to grow lower-cost pharmaceutical compounds in plants. Knowledge of genetically modified foods actually decreased since 2001; only 34 percent of respondents to this year's poll had heard some or a great deal about the food, compared to 44 percent in the earlier survey. The Mellman Group, which surveyed 1,000 American consumers, theorized that knowledge about biotech food was higher in 2001 because that survey was conducted right after a widely publicized mistake in which genetically engineered corn called StarLink -- intended only for feed corn -- was mixed into corn products such as taco shells. "We still have a long way to go on education in science and technology," said Judith Kjelstrom, acting director of the University of California, Davis, biotechnology program. Kjelstrom said information from the industry appears to be helping reduce negative opinions about genetic engineering. "It takes people time to get used to new technology," she said, adding that Americans tend to worry about more pressing issues, such as war and the economy, while assuming trusted federal agencies will protect them from dangerous foods. Corn, soybeans, canola and cotton account for the vast majority of commercialized biotech crops, which are designed to withstand herbicides or resist pests. Biotech opponents -- a few thousand of whom protested at an international conference on agricultural technology held in Sacramento this summer -- fear that messing around with genes will ultimately hurt human health and the environment. Nonetheless, opposition to using biotech ingredients in U.S. foods dropped 10 percentage points between the surveys, heartening Lisa J. Dry at the Biotechnology Industry Organization in Washington, D.C. "Technology opponents have worked very hard ... to make people fearful, and they haven't been able to get any traction on that because the science and our experience with these foods don't support their arguments," Dry said. Tom Hoban, a sociology professor at North Carolina State University in Raleigh, said he has been urging biotech and food companies to make it clear that genetically engineered foods are already part of our food chain. That, Hoban said, would avoid charges of deception if any future problems arise. But as long as the industry can avoid another contamination problem such as StarLink, Hoban said the lack of consumer knowledge found in the survey may work well for those companies developing products that target consumers instead of farmers. Monsanto, for instance, is working on plants high in heart-healthy oils. "What industry and others have kind of hoped," Hoban said, "is that they could kind of keep genetically engineered foods under the radar screen until there are some consumer benefits." Americans are iffy on genetically modified foods By Elizabeth Weise, USA TODAY Posted 9/17/2003 8:16 PM Americans still don't know much about genetically modified foods, even though increasing amounts of their food comes from biotech corn and soybeans, according to a poll released today by the non-partisan Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology. Support for the introduction of GM foods into the food supply is divided: One-quarter of Americans are in favor and almost half are opposed. But opposition is softening, to 48% from 58% two years ago, when Pew first polled consumers. Opinions about the safety of GM food haven't budged much. Just above one-quarter of Americans, 27%, say the foods are basically safe, and exactly one-quarter say they're basically unsafe. This is where knowledge comes in. Just 24% of Americans say they've eaten GM foods, and 58% say they haven't. But the Grocery Manufactures of America says 70% to 80% of processed foods sold in supermarkets contain products made from genetically engineered corn, soybeans or cottonseed oil. That includes most products sweetened with high-fructose corn syrup, which is almost sure to contain at least some genetically modified corn. U.S. Department of Agriculture figures for 2003 show that 40% of the U.S. corn crop was biotech, as were 81% of the soybeans and 73% of the cotton. But when pollster told those who were surveyed the extent to which GM foods are already on store shelves - and therefore that the respondents probably have been eating them - attitudes changed. After learning that, 44% said GM foods are safe and 20% said they are unsafe. "For consumers, biotechnology is not a high priority," says Stephanie Childs of the Grocery Manufacturers of America. "Knowing that it's on the market and it's regulated, they think, 'We have other things to be concerned about right now.' " But one of the survey's strongest findings was that people support a more active role by the Food and Drug Administration role to ensure GM food safety. "More than half those surveyed said they'd be more likely to eat GM foods if the FDA had a mandatory regulatory process," says Michael Rodemeyer, Pew executive director. James Maryanski, the FDA's biotechnology coordinator, says that although companies aren't required to send the FDA safety data on biotech foods, they are required to market safe and wholesome foods. "In other words, they're not able to just do whatever they want." Results of the poll released in March 2001 can be viewed at http://pewagbiotech.org/research/gmfood/survey3-01.pdf A summary of findings from the survey, as well as the statistical results can be viewed at http://pewagbiotech.org/research/2003update/ Issues | Politics Español | Campaigns | Buying Guide | Press | Search | Donate | About Us | Contact E-mail: Staff · Activist or Media Inquiries: 218-226-4164 · Fax: 218-353-7652

农业

2017-09/0196/en_head.json.gz/525

'Christmas tree tax' spar returns By Julian Hattem - 12/25/13 06:00 AM EST © Getty Images Christmas tree farmers have renewed their push for the creation of a marketing and research program that conservative critics have dubbed a “Christmas tree tax.”ADVERTISEMENTThe U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) in 2011 moved to create a marketing and research program for Christmas trees that would have been similar to the “Got Milk?” or “Pork: The other white meat” campaigns.But the promotional push was put on hold amid an uproar from conservative groups and anti-tax advocates.Farmers haven’t given up on the idea, and are now pushing to have the program authorized in the farm bill legislation that is being negotiated by the House and Senate. They say they’re at risk of being run out of the market, and insist the program would involve “zero tax dollars.”“Fresh cut Christmas Tree producers have long been concerned about losing market share to artificial tree makers and foreign imports,” National Christmas Tree Association spokesman Rick Dungey told The Hill in an email. “There are zero tax dollars involved here. USDA bills all costs associated with these promotional efforts to the industry groups that create the boards.”The Christmas tree industry’s message stands in contrast to activists at conservative groups like the Heritage Foundation and the National Taxpayers Union, which argue the costs will trickle down to the consumer. They say the campaign would force some companies to take part in a scheme that they want nothing to do with.“The problem is that you have some in industry using the force of the government and the government basically being the enforcer, being the middle-man, to compel others within the industry to get along and to go along with this scheme, even against their will,” said Heritage Foundation research fellow Daren Bakst. “They have to pay a tax on the Christmas trees.”The USDA’s commodity research and promotion programs, often known as checkoff programs, are overseen by the federal government but funded by the industry, and allow farmers and producers to pool their resources. Twenty industries currently fund their own checkoff programs, from beef to milk to processed raspberries.Christmas tree farmers say that they need the program to counter market trends that have led people away from fresh pine.“There are more and more households that may be making a decision to display a petroleum-based import from China instead of a U.S. farm-raised product,” said Craig Regelbrugge, who represents the industry in Washington as vice president for government affairs with the American Nursery and Landscape Association.“The other concern is that there are more and more households that may decide not to display a tree at holiday time altogether.”According to the National Christmas Tree Association, 20 years ago about 50 percent of American households bought a Christmas tree each year. In 2012, only about 23 percent of households did.The checkoff program would also help spur innovation in farming methods, advocates say, which would result in healthier trees that retain their needles for longer. The USDA-backed promotional program would cost about 15 cents per tree sold. Smaller producers that sell fewer than 500 trees a year would not be required to pay in.But Bakst of Heritage said that the size of the fee is largely irrelevant.“The costs may not be mind-boggling for a Christmas tree but, first of all, it’s the principle of it. Plus, with anything, it’s just death by 1,000 cuts,” he said.The fight over the program began in 2011, when after two years of pushing, an industry task force convinced the USDA to create a checkoff program for fresh cut Christmas trees. The reaction from conservatives was swift and loud. “I think the absolutely faulty narrative that some worked to established in the press was ‘There goes President Obama, now he’s taxing your Christmas tree,’” said Regelbrugge.Just nine days after the program was announced, the administration changed course. The USDA issued an indefinite stay on the program “to provide additional time for the Department to reach out to the Christmas Tree industry and the public to explain how a research and promotion program is a producer driven program to support American farmers.”Since then, the program has been in a holding pattern. But an amendment from Rep. Kurt Schrader (D-Ore.) in the House’s version of the farm bill would end USDA’s delay and force the agency to get the program going.House and Senate negotiators were unable to hammer out a final deal on the farm bill before leaving Washington earlier this month, but are aiming to unveil a final package early in the New Year.Supporters say it only makes sense for the Christmas tree provision to make the final cut.“I think from a farm policy standpoint, it’s a no-brainer that this industry which has done its due diligence and gone through due process ought to have the same opportunity to employ the kinds of programs that exist for a couple of dozen other industries,” said Regelbrugge.If the lawmakers do tell the USDA to start up the program, Bakst predicted it would be more expensive to buy a tree at Christmas time.“It’s going to make Christmas just a little less happy,” he said. Tags Christmas tree farming, Agriculture View the discussion thread. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) on Tuesday pushed back on... 99 Shares Liberal ‘lies’ about President... OPINION | "The concept of lying has been noticeably absent from liberal... 92 Shares

农业

2017-09/0196/en_head.json.gz/1417

>Pigs and Protection Money: German Farmers Seek their Fortunes in Russia Pigs and Protection Money German Farmers Seek their Fortunes in Russia In the 18th century, Catherine the Great invited German farmers to come to Russia and cultivate the land. Over two centuries later, the country is recruiting Teutonic pioneers once again in a bid to put vast tracts of fallow land to use. The land holds great opportunities for agricultural entrepreneurs -- provided they have strong nerves. By Steffen Winter The roads are a problem. The dark, frost-damaged asphalt is patched in many places. As the black Toyota Camry bumps along the road, Alexander, the driver, glances quickly into the rear-view mirror and steps on the gas, passing trucks that look like they haven't seen the inside of a repair shop in a long time. Sitting in the back seat, Stefan Dürr is being thrown back and forth on the bumpy road. As he looks out the window, he sees trees and low shrubs flying by. Beyond them is a vast, shimmering Russian landscape, a region of dark fields and kilometer upon kilometer of black earth -- the Voronezh Oblast. The German points to the signs along the side of the road. On one sign, the words EkoNiva Agro are painted in black on a white background. "It all belongs to us," he says cheerfully. When Dürr, 47, a former activist with the Bavarian Young Farmers Association, studied agriculture in the northern Bavarian town of Bayreuth, he anticipated leading a comfortable life on his grandfather's farm in the Odenwald region near Heidelberg. Instead, he is now the owner of more than 170,000 hectares (about 420,000 acres) of prime Russian farmland. With his curly hair, and in his blue wool sweater and gray jeans, Dürr could be mistaken for a tractor driver. But he has achieved breathtaking results as a businessman. He now speaks Russian with almost no accent, and is cultivating fields in the Kursk, Voronezh, Orenburg, Novosibirsk and Kaluga regions. Through his holding company, EkoSem-Agrar, he employs 2,800 people in farming, owns a herd of 28,000 cattle and most recently generated revenues of €80 million ($102 million). In good years, he earned €200 million selling agricultural machinery, a business he has since spun off. According to Dürr, EkoNiva, one of his subsidiaries, is among the top 30 agricultural companies in Russia. Plans to Expand Dürr's success story, and his pioneering achievements as a Western European deep in the heart of Eastern Europe, serve as a model for the Russian government. Almost 250 years after Empress Catherine the Great attracted tens of thousands of German settlers to her realm, Russia is once again courting Western settlers to revive a farming industry that is ailing in some areas. Dürr has, in fact, attracted imitators. The Westphalian meat baron Clemens Tönnies has just announced a plan to invest millions in Dürr's neighborhood. Together with a Russian partner, Tönnies wants to build 10 new pig farms, which are expected to produce 62,500 tons of meat a year. It is one of the largest projects ever planned in Russia, and it promises an investment of more than €100 million in the Voronezh region. Eckart Hohmann, a former banker with the German state-owned bank WestLB, is already there. He and a business partner from the northeastern German region of Mecklenburg are farming an area of 29,000 hectares 400 kilometers (250 miles) south of Moscow. His "Rheinland Farm" produces brewers' yeast, seed grain and wheat. "The Russians practically forced the land on us," says Hohmann, adding that the business already achieved profitability some time ago. Not far from his farm, three farmers from Ingolstadt, in Bavaria, are cultivating a total of 4,000 hectares -- and they plan to expand. Some 23 million hectares of fertile farmland is currently not being used in Russia. Much of this land is in the coveted Black Earth Region. In the early 1990s, after the fall of the Soviet Union, collectives everywhere went bankrupt, and the country was forced to import grain. The Kremlin has since made agriculture a top priority, and it is openly recruiting Western expertise. Its efforts have been successful. When Bavarian Agriculture Minister Helmut Brunner returned from a tour of Dürr's vast farms, he was so enthusiastic that he practically called upon Bavarian farmers to leave the country. "The Russians have made it clear that they want more Bavarian farmers," Brunner said. On Landtreff.de, an Internet former for farmers, a thread titled "Let's go east" was filled with glowing comments. "Let's go, lads," one farmer wrote enthusiastically. "The thawing permafrost soil is waiting for us beyond the Ural Mountains. Get over there and farm as far as the horizon!" Falling in Love with Russia Dürr's liaison with the east began a long time before online communication became commonplace. He became a pioneer at a May Day festival in 1989 in the Bavarian town of Weidenberg. He was drinking a beer when an official with the German Farmers Association approached him. Then-Russian President Mikhail Gorbachev and then-German Chancellor Helmut Kohl had just signed a student exchange agreement, and officials in Bonn, Germany's capital at the time, were desperately looking for volunteers. Dürr, who was then 25, saw himself facing the choice between his grandfather's farm in the Odenwald and an adventure in the Soviet Union. A short time later, he was standing in a collective farm near Moscow, between 110,000 pigs and seemingly endless fields, an intern from the West who had arrived in the middle of perestroika. He advised the head of the ailing operation to grow rapeseed instead of just wheat. "Khorosho (OK)," said the boss, "but only on 50 hectares to start." Dürr still looks wide-eyed with astonishment today when he tells the story. "Fifty hectares!" He was familiar with the 14 hectares of the family farm, but the collective farm consisted of 5,000 hectares. The German enjoyed the student parties in decadent, sophisticated Moscow, and after three months, he started speaking Russian. He still raves about the beginnings of that "crazy period." The Russian virus had infected him. Dürr stayed for six months. At the end, he explained to the Russian agricultural administration how East German collective farms were being privatized. On behalf of the German Agriculture Ministry, he brought Russians to the eastern states of Brandenburg and Thuringia, drank vodka with them and learned the best Russian toasts. His tours were praised as part of a "German-Russian dialogue on agricultural policy," and his salary was paid by the Agriculture Ministry. As a government consultant of sorts, Dürr soon brought his expertise to the Land Reform Task Force of the Russian parliament, the Duma. His recommendations differed markedly from those of the market radicals. He was strongly opposed to disorderly privatization and feared land speculators, and he was worried that agriculture would also fall into the hands of the oligarchs. A Toast to Russian Agriculture Dürr, the German counterweight to Russian oligarchs, is sitting in the village pub in Shchuchye, 600 kilometers south of Moscow. He married a Russian woman in 1994, and three of his children were born in Russia. The street is still called Sovetskaya, but the pub is now his. He farms the 63,000 hectares outside, has 13,500 cattle in nearby pastures and sponsors the local kindergarten. The bar is full. Almost 100 of Dürr's business partners have come to the village to tour his new stables and a production building for agricultural machines. The district administrator utters a few words of praise. The German gives a short speech in Russian. Bottles of Pyat Ozer, a Siberian brand of vodka, are on the tables. It is noon. Dürr delivers his toast to the health of Russian agriculture as if he were firing a volley from a machine gun. The audience roars: "Urra! Urra! Urra!" Dürr acquired his first collective farm, named "The Quiet Don," in the region in 2002. Until then, he had earned his money by selling seed and exporting East German agricultural machines. He bought old forage harvesters from an East German enterprise called "Progress" for 1,000 deutsche marks, fixed them up and sold them in Russia for 13,000. He eventually earned enough money with the venture to buy 11 former collective farms in the Voronezh region alone. It's ideal farmland -- thick black earth with an extremely thick layer of humus soil, well mixed by hamsters, gophers and worms. Today, Dürr cultivates almost half of the agricultural land in the district. He has just turned in a record harvest: 117,000 tons of sugar beets, 51,000 tons of corn, 180,000 liters of milk per day -- an increase of 70 percent. Has the German transplant turned from being the savior of collective farms into an oligarch? Dürr begs to differ. "I don't speculate with the land," he says. "I grow crops, live from agriculture and create jobs." He sees himself as an idealist who got to know the other side of the Russian soul long ago, and who knows why, two decades after perestroika, more fields than ever now lie fallow. According to Dürr, one of the reasons is that many collective farmers traded their ownership shares for crates of vodka. Part 1: German Farmers Seek their Fortunes in Russia Part 2: Solving Problems Outside the Legal System Photo Gallery: The Lure of Russia's Black Earth Speculating with Lives: How Global Investors Make Money Out of Hunger (09/01/2011) Vertical Farming: Can Urban Agriculture Feed a Hungry World? (07/22/2011) German-Russian Relations

农业

2017-09/0196/en_head.json.gz/1916

Sage (Salvia officinalis) is an herb which has been valued for centuries for its fresh scent, the peppery depth of flavor it adds to foods and for its special constituents which help to keep skin healthy and beautiful. Sage grows as a small perennial shrub, usually no more than 24 inches tall;the oblong leaves have a slightly rough texture and hair-like growths. It is a member of the mint family and is related to rosemary. The plant is believed to have originated in the Mediterranean region, but spread to northern Europe during Medieval times. It is now, of course, a treasured garden herb grown throughout the world. Salvia officinalis, usually called common sage or kitchen sage, should not be confused with Russian sage (Perovskia atriplicifolia, which has a similar scent), sagebrush (Artemisia tridentate, native to the plains region of North America) or Jerusalem sage (Phlomis fruticosa).Sage has been used as both an herb for food flavoring and as a source of healing ingredients for more than 2,000 years. The earliest records of its use show that the Egyptians prepared a tea-like beverage from its dried leaves to increase fertility. The Romans apparently introduced the plant into Europe, where it quickly found favor as both as a culinary ingredient and as a medicinal plant. The scientific name for the genus, Salvia, is taken from the Latin word meaning "healthy" and is the root of the modern English word "salve," reflecting the curative value associated with the plant. Throughout the Medieval period in Europe, sage was credited with the power to heal almost every ailment. It was even an ingredient, along with thyme, rosemary and lavender, in "vinegar of the four thieves," a concoction believed to provide protection against infection by bubonic plague. It was considered such a valuable herb that it was perhaps the only spice" that was traded to the Far East;during the 16th century

农业

2017-09/0196/en_head.json.gz/2592

USDA PUBLISHES CENSUS OF AGRICULTURE STATE AND COUNTY PROFILESMay 30, 2014Source: USDA news release The U.S. Department of Agriculture's National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) today released new 2012 Census of Agriculture profiles for all 50 states, Puerto Rico, and more than 3,000 counties in the nation. The Census, which is conducted only once every 5 years, is the only time that NASS gathers and makes available agriculture data down to the county level for all U.S. counties. "The state and county profiles provide snapshots of agriculture by highlighting key data from the recently released 2012 Census of Agriculture," said NASS Administrator Joseph T. Reilly. "Census information is heavily relied on at the local level and is an excellent resource for anyone searching for data about farmers and agriculture production in their community." A variety of data points are included in the profiles to provide a general picture of agriculture in each state and county. Among the information is: �Number of farms, land in farms, average size of farm �Market value of products sold, average per farm�Crop sales, livestock sales �Government payments, average per farm receiving payments �Market value of agricultural products sold �Value of sales by commodity �Top crop and livestock items �Economic characteristics �Operator characteristics The state and county profiles are the first in a series of products NASS will publish following the May 2 release of the 2012 Census of Agriculture results. NASS will release new tools throughout the year to highlight the more than 6 million data points captured in the agriculture census. "NASS is committed to providing timely, accurate and useful statistics and part of that is making data as accessible as possible, including more online resources from the Census of Agriculture than ever before," said Reilly. "Next up this summer are the 2012 Congressional District Profiles and Rankings, which will provide insight into agriculture of particular interest to advocates and policymakers." For access to the 2012 Census of Agriculture State and County Profiles and all the other Census data and tools, visit www.agcensus.usda.gov.Tweet

农业

2017-09/0196/en_head.json.gz/2769

Drought tolerant corn moving east Feb 13, 2017 Match sprayer to new herbicides Feb 10, 2017 Dicamba-resistant soybean challenges Feb 09, 2017 Weed control outlook: Soybeans & corn Feb 07, 2017 Transition to El Niño Brings Midwest Drought Richard Brock 2 | Jul 03, 2012 El Niño and La Niña are the troublesome duo responsible for the lack of rain in the majority of the Midwest, according to Dev Niyogi, climatologist and professor at Purdue University, who spoke at the Brock Summer Seminars in Lafayette, IN and Bloomington, IL. This is a transition year from the La Niña weather seen in 2011 to El Nino, which should take full effect by the early fall of 2012. That shift means the high amount of rains the U.S. received during the winter and spring of 2011 have been replaced by prolonged dryness. Significant relief may not arrive for some time. The upcoming two weeks are crucial in early corn development, but Niyogi predicts the drought to worsen next week unless a tropical hurricane forms and changes weather patterns, which looks unlikely at this point. In two weeks time, with no rain, the drought is expected to widen and migrate westward. Also, above-average temperatures "if anything, will intensify for the next several weeks," according to Dr. Niyogi. The tropical storm season may provide relief for the southern states, he says noting the heavy rains Florida has received from Tropical Storm Debby. The way the drought is affecting the crops is severe. Although it is more damaging to early planted corn, which is entering a crucial development stage, soybeans are not unaffected. Crops are losing about 1/4 in. of water due to evaporation every day. If the dry weather continues, it will prevent many double-crop soybean acres from being planted this year. Current Drought Conditions in the U.S. Corn Belt Some 45% of the Midwest was experiencing moderate or greater drought conditions by Tuesday, with that area having increased by 8 percentage points in just a week’s time, according to the weekly U.S. drought monitor issued on Thursday. The majority of Indiana is in a severe drought, along with central and southeastern Illinois. Some parts of Illinois have only received 21% of their normal monthly rainfall amount for June, and the state as a whole has received 42% of its normal amount for this month. Ohio and Michigan face moderate drought conditions along with Missouri and drought is spreading to Iowa. Dry soil moisture conditions have not spread as far, mainly affecting Indiana and Illinois. The area of southern Illinois, western Kentucky, southeastern Mississippi and all of Alabama have excessive to severe dry soil conditions. In the long term outlook, moderate drought and dry soil moisture conditions are forecast to spread to southern Wisconsin and become more severe in Illinois and Indiana, with some severe drought developing in northern Minnesota as well. For the western areas of the Corn Belt, soil moisture drought conditions are much less severe, only slightly dry in a small area of Iowa. Western Nebraska and Kansas have more severely dry soil conditions, but due to the high amount of irrigation in Nebraska, that state’s corn condition rating was still at 60% good/excellent as of June 25. However, the long-term soil moisture outlook for the western Corn Belt does not look so promising. Moderate drought will spread to cover almost all of Iowa, Nebraska and the majority of Kansas by the end of September, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Climate Prediction Center.

农业

2017-09/0196/en_head.json.gz/2974

About ICTSD Experts network Gbadebo Odularu Regional Policies Analyst, Continental Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa (FARA) Gbadebo Odularu holds a PhD degree in Regional Economic Development from the University of Sunderland, United Kingdom. He is currently a regional policies and markets analyst at the continental Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa (FARA) based in Accra, Ghana. He works closely with national, regional and international partners to promote information sharing on agricultural research for development policy instruments for dissemination across the African continent. He has been visiting scholars at: the Centre for the Study of African Economies (CSAE), University of Oxford, United Kingdom (UK); Centre for Regional Economic Studies (CRES), Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP), Seoul, South Korea; United Nations Institute for Economic Development Planning (UNIDEP), Dakar, Senegal; and the Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment (SSEE), University of Oxford, UK. He was also the 2008 visiting doctoral scholar at the Economic Research and Statistical Division (ERSD), World Trade Organisation, Geneva, Switzerland. Dr. Odularu is a member of the Natural Resources, Agricultural Development and Food Security International Research Network (NAR-IRN), the Chatham House, Academic Council of the United Nations System (ACUNS), African Economic Research Consortium (AERC) Network and the Nigerian Economic Society (NES). He is a pioneer regional coordinator / manager of the Young Professionals’ Platform for Agricultural Research for Development in Africa (YPARD-Africa). In this capacity, he facilitates exchange of information and knowledge among young African professionals across disciplines, nations and sub-regions. He also leads a team of young professionals in agriculture to articulate the strategic roles of youth in promoting agro-entrepreneurship, adapting and mitigating climate change, choosing agriculture as a career, and promoting agricultural development within the framework of the Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP). In addition to being a former lecturer at the Department of Economics and Development Studies, Covenant University, Nigeria, he was also a field supervisor for the USAID/IIDA/WARD/NISER collaborative study on the constraints, opportunities, and strategic choices available to the Nigerian rice economy in a competitive world. Dr. Odularu has done extensive research in development and agricultural economics and has refereed publications in major economic journals and books. Bridges news Bridges Africa,Volume 1 - Number 3 Intra-African trade: Not an easy path 4 July 2012The need to enhance intra-African trade among African countries led to the formation of the EAC-COMESA-SADC (East African Community; Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa and the Southern Africa Development Community) tripartite Free Trade Agreement (TFTA), as well as to the proposed 2017... 10 10 Eclairage sur les Négociations,Volume 10 - Number 9 L'établissement des normes pour le commerce international des produits agricoles : promouvoir la participation de l'Afrique13 December 2011La réduction rapide des droits de douane ayant eu lieue au cours des cinq dernières années se voit de plus en plus souvent remplacée chez les pays les plus développés par la mise en place de mesures non tarifaires. Ayant pour raison officielle la volonté de protéger les consommateurs et producteurs... 1 1 Back to top

农业

2017-09/0196/en_head.json.gz/3457

Follow @thecattlesite News & Analysis Features Markets & Reports Sustainability Knowledge Centre Directory Events Our Shop News EUROTIER: Seeking Solutions to Antibiotic Resistance 13 November 2014 GERMANY - At an event at EuroTier 2014 in Hanover this week, the President of the German veterinarians' association offered his views on possible solutions to the issue of antibiotic resistance.The use of antibiotics in productive livestock keeping, how to manage antibiotic resistance and how to organise an effective antibiotic monitoring system: these are all important matters of current concern to practising veterinary surgeons, not only in Germany but throughout Europe, said Dr. vet. med. Hans-Joachim Götz, President of the German Federal Association of Practising Veterinary Surgeons (bpt). The reason is that the risks posed to human health by antibiotic-resistant germs require ever more urgent solutions. One measure of the seriousness of the situation is that Germany will place 'Antimicrobial Resistance' at the centre of its G7 presidency next year. While research continues into whether and how resistant bacteria can be passed between humans and animals, the decisive criterion for the public and politicians is the quantity of antibiotics needed to select resistant bacteria. Veterinary medicine is blamed, due to its presumed excessive and non-specific use of antibiotics, although the disturbing level of resistance in human medicine is the direct consequence of the high rate at which medical practitioners have for years prescribed antibiotics to their human patients. How then can this problem be successfully overcome? Usually, the selective pressure on antimicrobial resistance occurs at the point where the relevant antibiotics are used. The most important factors, present in equal measure in both human and veterinary medicine, are poor hygiene in hospitals and animal housing, treatment courses for human patients or animals which are either abandoned too early or where the prescribed doses of antibiotics are too low, and the use of an ineffective antibiotic because the bacterium has not been definitively identified. Consequently, reducing antibiotic use will not, of itself, solve the problem despite the constant emphasis placed on this by politicians and the media. If the German Federal Association of Practising Veterinary Surgeons (bpt) were to have its way, continued Dr Götz, veterinary surgeons and doctors would together, as part of the EU Commission's Anti-Microbial Resistance (AMR) action plan and of the German Antibiotics Resistance Strategy (DART), commit themselves to using antibiotics only in accordance with the guidelines and under controlled conditions, and would develop effective solutions to be communicated to veterinary surgeons and doctors via the relevant channels, so as to enlist their support for the degree of care, attention and responsibility required. Particularly as regards the MRSA problem but also in respect of the transmission of other resistant bacteria, hospital hygiene, which must urgently be given greater priority, is the key to success. Equally, the aim of 21st century animal health policy must be to avoid disease by means of preventive action such as inoculation and hygiene measures and by better farm management and improving the conditions in which animals are kept. If, despite all these efforts, disease occurs in herds and flocks, the governing principle must be that sick animals are also entitled to be treated whenever necessary. Anything else could not be reconciled with animal welfare needs and with responsible animal husbandry methods. Antibiotics, especially reserve antibiotics, should however only be employed after considering their therapeutic efficacy and taking the possible selection of antimicrobial resistance into account. To achieve this, the 16th amendment to the German Medicines Law, which came into force in Germany in the spring, created an antibiotics minimisation concept which leads the way not just throughout Europe but world-wide. The bpt had argued strongly for this amendment because the new statutory provisions will, for the first time, allow farms and supervisory agencies to know the frequency with which antibiotic therapies are employed in each type of farming operation. At the same time, livestock farmers will be able to use data covering the whole country to make comparative assessments of their own position and the authorities will be made aware, in the form of a risk alert, of farms where monitoring measures need to be reviewed. That, in the opinion of the bpt, is the right approach to permanently reducing the use of antibiotics in livestock farming and thus to being able to minimise the risk of the emergence and spread of antibiotic resistance. However, this minimisation concept has not yet been put into practice. Hopefully, as of the beginning of next year, good practice should follow on from this excellent theory. * "Antibiotic use monitoring now covers 95 per cent of poultry farms and some 90 per cent of pig rearing operations in Germany." All the more significant is the comprehensive antibiotic monitoring currently undertaken by the poultry and pig fattening industries; long before any monitoring by government agencies, this monitoring arrangement was established through the quality assurance system arranged by the private sector on the initiative of the bpt and the German Farmers Association. Antibiotic use monitoring now covers 95 per cent of poultry farms and some 90 per cent of pig rearing operations in Germany. As a consequence, the analysis to be carried out at the end of 2014 will, for the first time, produce a comprehensive picture of the use of antibiotics in poultry and pigs. The positive aspect is that quality assurance monitoring will provide farmers and veterinary surgeons with genuine benchmarking or the ability to 'learn from the best'. The pressure from the added-value chain on major users of antibiotics will do the rest, according to Dr Götz. This is yet another reason why the bpt is convinced that it is important to introduce a European system to monitor antibiotic use. The new version of the animal medicines law recently put forward by the European Commission should be further improved to include this aspect. However, at both national and EU level, there must under no circumstances be a competition to outdo each other in setting ambitious antibiotic reduction goals, said Dr Götz. He continued: "Specialist expertise must be at the heart of any decisions about the sustained reduction in antibiotic use. Animal health must be maintained or improved. This essentially requires all therapy options to be retained, including the use of an alternative medication or the use of reserve antibiotics. "Only the results produced by an effective monitoring system will allow the use of antibiotics to be minimised without impacting animal welfare standards. This could be reinforced and made permanent by legislation requiring mandatory veterinary monitoring of productive livestock farmers," concluded Dr Götz. TheCattleSite News DeskTop image via Shutterstock Health and Treatment, General, Antibiotic Share This

农业

2017-09/0196/en_head.json.gz/3735

Strengthening the resilience of rural and indigenous people in Colombia - Malteser International Americas / Colombia Strengthening the resilience of rural and indigenous people in Colombia People who benefit from our programs have had their livelihoods severely affected from armed conflict Wayu and afro-Colombian farmers will receive sustainable and environmentally friendly farming training, and will teach other farmers in the communities Malteser International Americas is educating, empowering and strengthening the resilience of vulnerable Afro-Colombian communities and the indigenous Wayu people of La Guajira and Magdalena in Colombia. In this region, generations of families and entire communities have survived on subsistence farming, depending heavily on Mother Earth, especially soil and water of the Don Diego and Tapia rivers. However, climate change and its effects have had detrimental effects on their livelihood and are putting those resources more and more at risk. The region experienced the harshest drought in 20 years and 4,000 people have lost their livelihood, and they lack financial means, materials and knowledge to improve their situation. Our new program — “Strengthening Resilience of Colombian Communities” — helps to protect the region’s natural resources, despite the recent climate changes, and ensure that these communities can build sustainable futures through improved farming techniques, health and nutrition. Part of the project will build on traditional farming practices, introducing farmers to alternative ways of providing for themselves and the community, such as beekeeping. The initial group of 100 farmers will be the catalysts for skills-building throughout their communities, educating and motivating more farmers to practice sustainable and environmentally-friendly farming. The efforts will result in more than 2,000 people gaining skills, understanding the importance of the diversity in crops, and eating a balanced diet. In this area, access to health care is also inadequate, and there is a lack of knowledge about hygiene, nutrition and health. To achieve a healthier community, our program also focuses on individual and community health. Women, and mothers will be taught how to eat well and prepare food safely during pregnancy, childhood and youth. A community wash station will also be built to avoid contamination of water, which will maintain the health of the entire community by avoiding water-borne diseases and epidemics that could threaten families. Environmental health is also of great importance because of the direct impact it has on the indigenous and rural communities that depend on the earth for their livelihood. The project also promotes active conservation and recuperation of almost 250 acres of degraded ecosystem. Two community-based systems were established to respond in case of natural disasters such as flooding, forest fires and landslides. Malteser International Americas is working with our partners on the ground, ABIUDEA (Association of Biologists of the Universidad de Atlántico) and PDPC (Programa de Desarrollo y Paz del César/Development and Peace Program of César).

农业

2017-09/0196/en_head.json.gz/4201

IP/10/121 Brussels, 3 February 2010 State aid: Commission temporarily authorises Hungary to grant limited amounts of aid of up to €15,000 to farmers The European Commission has authorised under State aid rules a Hungarian scheme worth some EUR 18.2 million (HUF 5000 million) aimed at supporting farmers who encounter difficulties as a result of the current economic crisis. Aid under this new scheme can be granted until 31 December 2010 and will take the form of direct grants, soft loans, interest subsidies and guarantees. The Hungarian scheme is an application of the amendment to the European Commission's Temporary framework for state aid measures to support access to finance in the current financial and economic crisis, which introduced the possibility of granting limited amounts of aid to primary agricultural producers. The Hungarian scheme is open to farmers in all sub-sectors of primary agricultural production, provided they were not already in difficulty on 1 July 2008 (i.e. before the beginning of the crisis). It is limited in time until 31 December 2010 and complements other crisis measures already put in place by Hungary in application of the Temporary Crisis Framework. The new Hungarian scheme meets all the conditions of the Temporary Crisis Framework as amended. In particular, the Hungarian authorities demonstrated that it is necessary, proportional and appropriate to remedy a serious disturbance in the Hungarian economy. The European Commission therefore considered that the scheme can be approved under Article 107(3)(b) of the TFEU. The full text of the Commission decision will be published in the State Aid Register on DG Competition’s website under the reference number N 679/09.

农业

2017-09/0196/en_head.json.gz/4848

Great Falls Farmers Market Hits Spring Season Spring produce, other goods available at weekly market. Cinthia Giannakos of Dimitri Olive Farms, which sells olive oil, olives and aged balsamic vinegar at the Great Falls Farmers Market. Photo by Alex McVeigh. Great Falls — The Great Falls Farmers Market has kicked off its spring season, welcoming vendors returning and new with fruits, vegetables and other products. Three vegetable vendors are currently at the market, offering early spring crops. Photo by Alex McVeigh Sergio Izaguirre of Crazy Farms in Warsaw, Va., at the Great Falls Farmers Market Saturday, April 27. Izaguierre, who used to work at the Great Falls market as a helper with his father, is one of several produce vendors present at the market. "It’s been a cool year so far, so we’ve got asparagus and a lot of greens available. In the next few weeks we’ll start seeing more turnips, radishes, strawberries, cabbage, cauliflower and broccoli, and later in the season we’ll be getting in squash and melons," said Sergio Izaguirre of Crazy Farms in Warsaw, Va. "Right now we also have a lot of potted herbs for people to buy, it’s the perfect time to start putting them in and making a herb garden." A NEW ADDITION this year is Dimitri Olive Farms. Coming from a 100-year-old family farm in Southern Greece, they sell extra virgin olive oil, aged balsamic vinegar and a weekly rotation of fresh olives. "My husband’s family owns the orchard in Southern Greece and they’re harvested four months out of the year. The day the olives are picked, they go to my husband’s uncle, who presses them on his neighboring farm," said Cinthia Giannakos, who was at Saturday’s market. "The olives we feature every week are made from the farm, and cured in olive oil and herbs, like rosemary and oregano, that come from the same farm." Returning to the market is High View Farms from Berryville, Va., with their line of Berkshire pork products and eggs. This year they will also be carrying grass-fed beef and lamb, as well as milk, yogurt, butter and cheese from Trickling Springs Creamery. Market Master Kathleen Murphy said that Potomac Vegetable Farms, an ecorganic farm in Vienna, will be coming to the market after their harvests, starting in mid-June. "We’ve been in contact with the co-ops that provide us with produce about using fungicides and pesticides, and they’re working on accommodating our needs," Murphy said. "It’s been a cold year so far, so there hasn’t been any need for spraying yet, but our suppliers have been very open about getting us produce that meets our standards." For visitors that might be interested in growing their own produce, but aren’t interested in the hassle of setup, My Great Garden has a booth at the market. "We’re here to make vegetable or flower gardens, raised beds, with whatever people want planted. We like to say that you just have to water and harvest the crops once we’re done," said Robin Jenks Vanderlip of My Great Garden. "A lot of people don’t have the time or the knowledge to start a garden, but they’re interested in the produce, some for juicing or canning, and that’s what we’re here for." Photo by Alex McVeigh From left, Ian, 10, Kaila, Mary, 9, Josh and Aurora Barker, 3. Kaila Barker is the owner of "I Am Naturals," a children’s clothing company that is featured at the Great Falls Farmers Market. OTHER PRODUCTS that mesh with the philosophy of the market are also available on a weekly basis. Kaila Barker runs I Am Naturals, an Oakton-based children’s clothier. "As the mother of children that are 10, 9 and 3, I quickly saw the need for clothes that would fit them longer," Barker said. "So our clothes are made from organic fabrics, are adjustable for four sizes and are reversible. Kids like to pick out their own clothes, so they have fun picking out which side they like, without parents having to buy piles of clothes." Barker started her business in January 2012, after years of making homemade clothes that drew compliments. Now I Am Naturals carries clothing for babies and every age up through 12-year-old children. Also at the farmers market is Backyard Eden, which produces local honey, Amalthea Ridge with its line of goat’s milk-based beauty and hygiene products, Baguette Republic with pastries, cookies, cakes and bread and more. There will also be live music every week, and Murphy says they are encouraging local bands that might be interested in playing. The Great Falls Farmers Market takes place every Saturday from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. at the Great Falls Village Centre. More information on incoming vendors can be found at www.greatfallsfarmersmarket.org. More like this story Great Falls Farmers Market Returns to Village Centre Summer Market Opens in Great Falls Great Falls Community Farmers Market: Treasuring Heritage, Home and Habitat Farmers Markets Open In Herndon Great Falls Farmers Market Highlights Local Produce

农业

2017-09/0196/en_head.json.gz/5112

Home History In 1986, leaders of rural and farm movements from around the world gathered in Geneva to discuss the deepening farm crisis that was forcing farmers off the land and devastating rural communities. It quickly became clear that many of the obstacles facing farmers in the U.S. were the same challenges facing farmers in Europe, Asia and Africa, and that international trade agreements were deeply affecting local rural communities across the globe. At the conclusion of the Geneva meeting, a small group of rural and farm leaders—who now comprise IATP's board of directors—identified the need for a new organization to examine the links between global policy and local communities. Mark Ritchie, then a trade policy analyst for the state of Minnesota, returned from the Geneva meeting to the United States and incorporated the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy as a non-profit, tax-exempt organization, with the mission of fostering sustainable rural communities and regions. In 1987, IATP began to organize and report on the newly launched round of international trade negotiations being conducted by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade or GATT—which eventually became the World Trade Organization. The rules of agricultural trade set in the GATT and implemented at the WTO have deeply influenced national and local farm policies around the globe over the last two decades. Since its founding, IATP has played a unique role in analyzing international trade policy and summarizing the ramifications of these policies on local communities, both in the U.S. and abroad. In the 1990s, IATP expanded beyond its initial focus on international policymaking institutions like the WTO to include the promotion of positive alternatives to economically, socially and environmentally destructive agricultural and trade practices. This wider focus gave IATP the opportunity to work with a much larger audience of partners. For example, with the Center for Agriculture and the Environment in the Netherlands, IATP developed tools to help U.S. farmers increase their income by reducing on-farm pollution. We tackled major health concerns of rural communities by organizing campaigns to stop the contamination of farmland by toxic waste incinerators. We helped launch international efforts to promote certified sustainable farming, fishing and forestry and sustainable consumption, including fair trade for farmers and fair wages for everyone working to put food on our tables. We put our ideas into action to demonstrate the viability of fair trade by founding Transfair USA, an international fair trade certification organization, and starting Peace Coffee, now a nationally consumed fair trade coffee brand. With offices and staff in the U.S. and Switzerland, IATP continues to expand international partnerships, adapting ideas, strategies and experiences from the global community to the challenges facing local communities. IATP published "Not So Sweet: Missing Mercury and High Fructose Corn Syrup" by Dr. David Wallinga, Director of the Food and Health program at IATP. On May 8, Minnesota became the first state in the country to ban the use of the toxic chemical bisphenol A (BPA) from baby bottles and "sippy" cups. It was landmark legislation pushed by the 31 member organizations of the Healthy Legacy coalition, which is co-directed by IATP. IATP helped coordinate and host the first Midwest Rural Assembly bringing together policy makers from the local, state and national levels with rural residents. IATP opened two new offices: one in Washington, D.C., and one in Bangkok. IATP co-authored "The Global Food Challenge: Towards a Human Rights Approach to Trade and Investment Policies." IATP sent a 9-person delegation to the CoP15 climate summit in Copenhagen, Denmark and participated actively in the Klimaforum after being denied access to the negotiations taking place in the Bella Center. At a January reception in Minneapolis, the Sow the Seeds Fund celebrated an effort that donated $383,900 to 31 farms in Minnesota, Wisconsin and Iowa that were damaged by massive storms in August 2007. IATP published the Smart Plastics Guide to help consumers choose safe plastic products. When "The Today Show" mentioned IATP's Smart Plastics Guide, the immediate surge of traffic crashed our Web site. This summer, IATP helped organize six mini-markets hosted and managed by local community organizations in Minneapolis neighborhoods that have limited offerings of fresh, healthy foods. IATP launched the Center for Earth, Energy and Democracy (CEED) to promote sustainable and equitable energy, environmental, and economic development locally and globally. The Blue Cross Blue Shield of Minnesota Foundation honored IATP's own David Wallinga, M.D., with its Upstream Health Leadership Award. In February, IATP joined 60 farm, faith, consumer, environmental, development and rural advocacy organizations in a new campaign called "Building Sustainable Futures for Farmers Globally." At a Washington, D.C., press conference, the groups launched a comprehensive platform for the 2007 U.S. Farm Bill as a basis for moving away from agricultural market and trade deregulation, and toward an alternative vision for food and agriculture based on "food sovereignty." IATP launched new China initiative to integrate sustainability into food systems in China. IATP President Jim Harkness met with researchers, international organizations and nongovernmental organization (NGO) leaders in Beijing to discuss the program. IATP and the City of Minneapolis hosted a Midwest Rural Somali meeting to better connect rural Somali refugees from different communities. Participants came from rural Minnesota and Wisconsin to network, find common solutions to concerns, share resources and plan for future events. Mark Muller, the Director of IATP's Environment and Agriculture program, received a Community Partnership Award from University of Minnesota's School of Public Health on September 20. IATP President Jim Harkness and TIP staff met with WTO Director General Pascal Lamy in October to discuss, among other topics, concerns about the Aid for Trade program. In November, IATP and colleagues held a press conference in Geneva, criticizing the initiative and calling for the WTO to focus on building a new and better framework for trade. A WTO dispute panel rules against EU measures to protect the environment and consumers against harm from GMOs; IATP is the first to post the panel's conclusions and recommendations online IATP publishes a primer for free-range poultry farmers to protect them and their flocks against avian influenza, a global health threat IATP publishes a report, summarized in the New York Times, on the incidence of arsenic in U.S. poultry products Mark Ritchie steps down as president; Jim Harkness is hired as IATP's new president IATP publishes Cultivating a New Rural Economy on how bio-based fuels and products can revitalize the Upper Midwest IATP hosts a town hall meeting featuring the UN's Evelyn Herfkens and business leader Marilyn Carlson on the United Nations Millennium Development Goals IATP publishes a critique of the U.S. food aid system for undercutting local food systems in poor countries IATP joins a friend of the court brief in a WTO dispute over the EU's system for regulating GMOs The WTO holds its sixth ministerial in Hong Kong; IATP's Radio Hong Kong podcasts are downloaded more than 13,000 times IATP webcasts live a first-ever meeting between civil society and WTO director-general candidates from Geneva IATP issues paper warning about efforts to privatize oceans for industrial fish farming Monsanto abandons regulatory approval for genetically engineered wheat after farmers object; IATP and the Stop GE Wheat campaign declare victory IATP and the Earth Council launch the WTO E-Learning Center for NGOs and government representatives around the world who want to learn more about how the WTO works IATP participates in the UN Conference on Trade and Development and supports the creation of an international task force on commodities WTO holds its fifth ministerial in Cancún, Mexico. During the ministerial, IATP organizes the first Fair Trade Fair and launches Radio Cancún, daily on-the-ground podcast coverage. IATP issues the first report documenting the presence of bacteria resistant to multiple antibiotics in brand-name poultry products First discovery of mad cow disease in the U.S. IATP and Windustry host the first Upper Midwest Wind Energy Show IATP co-publishes the first book in the Renewing the Countryside series about successful farmers and rural entrepreneurs who protect the land IATP issues its first report documenting export agricultural dumping by U.S.-based food companies Sen. Paul Wellstone and his wife, Sheila, are killed in a plane crash IATP launches the Eat Well Guide, eatwellguide.org, an online directory of sustainably raised meat, poultry, dairy and eggs available from North American farms, stores, restaurants and online merchants WTO holds its fourth ministerial in Doha, Qatar, and launches a new round of trade negotiations with the promise of promoting development IATP hosts a town hall forum with Mary Robinson and Walter Mondale in response to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks IATP and other coalition members form the Keep Antibiotics Working campaign to end antibiotic overuse in animal production IATP publishes The Price We Pay for Corporate Hogs, on health, environmental and social costs of factory hog farms With six other groups, IATP launches GE Food Alert to challenge the use of genetically engineered crops in food IATP hosts experts from 11 countries on the precautionary principle as a basis for a regulatory system In Montréal, 131 countries approve the Cartegena Protocol on Biosafety, which addresses specific risks of genetically engineered crops IATP launches Trade Information Project in Geneva to serve as an information clearinghouse on the WTO for NGOs around the world The WTO holds its third ministerial in Seattle IATP hosts the first international NGO media center and broadcasts its first live webcast IATP and the Mississippi Riverwise Partnership work to find solutions to Gulf of Mexico hypoxia; IATP publishes reports on agriculture and climate change IATP conducts a workshop in Zimbabwe for representatives of 18 African governments on the impact of U.S. agriculture policies on Africa IATP works with WTO trade negotiators in Geneva to protect the use of indigenous plants without fear of patent violations IATP participates in its first meeting of the Codex Alimentarius Commission, a food-standards body recognized as authoritative by the WTO IATP's Forestry Program works with forest owners to establish the first value-added, sustainable forestry cooperative in the country IATP marks the 50th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights with an event in New York with Jesse Jackson, John Sweeney and others IATP publishes Bugs in the System: Redesigning the Pesticide Industry for Sustainable Agriculture, edited by William Vorley and Dennis Keeney IATP purchases the 2105 First Av. S. building in Minneapolis, a turn-of-the-century home built by the Crosby family, one of the founders of General Mills IATP launches No Patents on Life campaign and publishes The Ownership of Life IATP introduces environmental impact assessment yardsticks to help farmers reduce chemical use IATP incorporates TransFair USA, the first U.S. fair-trade certification body WTO holds ministerial in Singapore; Mark Ritchie attends as part of the official U.S. delegation IATP forms Peace Coffee with Guatemala's Nobel Peace Prize winner Rigoberta Menchú The World Food Summit is held; IATP helps draft a Global Convention on Food Security presented to delegates IATP joins with 25 other groups to form Health Care Without Harm U.S. Congress approves the Freedom to Farm Bill, wiping out programs that had helped stabilize farm prices. As IATP predicts, prices soon collapse IATP joins four other NGOs for its first friend of the court brief in a WTO dispute settlement process for the U.S. challenge of the EU's ban on beef raised on growth promoting hormones IATP holds a series of events nationwide with surviving founders of Bretton Woods and United Nations institutions IATP organizes a Science and Strategy on Chlorine conference to develop strategies for reducing chlorine use IATP promotes farmer-led approaches to protecting watersheds Mark Ritchie is appointed by Vice President Al Gore to the Trade and Environment Policy Advisory Committee 50th anniversary of the United Nations The World Trade Organization goes into effect IATP joins with other activists to form the International Forum on Globalization IATP is the only American NGO present when GATT approves the creation of the World Trade Organization in Marrakech, Morocco. IATP warns about the challenge of WTO rules to democracy at the national level IATP launches its first Web site, iatp.org U.S. Congress approves the North American Free Trade Agreement The New York Times reports on an IATP paper that raises concerns about potentially reintroducing bovine tuberculosis into the U.S. attributable to lax NAFTA regulations IATP opens Selling to America, training seminars for NGO, government and business leaders from countries around the world Congress gives President Bill Clinton fast-track negotiating authority. NAFTA is agreed to by all parties and signed by Clinton; the national debate over NAFTA goes full bore IATP joins AFL-CIO, Friends of the Earth, National Farmers Union, Public Citizen and the Sierra Club in organizing Trade for the 21st Century in Washington, D.C. IATP warns that if NAFTA is passed, the United States will see a wave of immigration from Mexico due to the devastating impact cheap U.S. corn exports will have on the Mexican economy IATP launches email news bulletins Trade News and NAFTA Monitor United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, more commonly known as the Earth Summit, meets in Rio de Janeiro; IATP co-hosts the Global Forum on the GATT at the summit IATP co-hosts a series of trilateral meetings for U.S., Mexican and Canadian organizations on forestry, farm policy, immigration and environmental standards as they relate to trade IATP publishes a legal critique of the GATT Tuna/Dolphin decision, which strikes down U.S. legislation designed to protect dolphins from death and injury in the nets of tuna fishermen In New York, IATP conducts trainings and strategy coordination for 20 coalition partners in preparation for the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development IATP arranges exchanges among U.S. and Mexican organizations leading up to the battle over NAFTA IATP organizes an international conference of consumer organizations in Geneva to discuss how GATT will impact consumer protections, including food safety. IATP warns that a proposal could categorize health and safety standards as trade barriers IATP distributes "Trading Away Our Future"—a video on how GATT affects American agriculture policy—to over 1,000 local organizers, opinion leaders and teachers Paul Wellstone, one of IATP's earliest and strongest supporters, is elected to the United States Senate IATP moves out of Mark's basement and into our first office at Sabathani Community Center IATP purchases its first secret weapon: a Toshiba TF581 fax machine, immortalized in a Nov. 23 Financial Times article: "Through a busy fax machine, Mr. Ritchie keeps farm groups more abreast of GATT developments than many members of Congress." IATP, in conjunction with the Canadian Environmental Law Association, organizes Trading Away the Environment, a conference outlining threats GATT poses for environmental protection, including climate change The United States, Canada and Mexico launch talks on the North American Free Trade Agreement IATP, Prairiefire Rural Action and League of Rural Voters hold a presidential candidate forum on agriculture issues in Ames, Iowa A GATT meeting in Montréal is met by thousands of anti-globalization protesters. It is one of the first organized civil society challenges to GATT and, later, the WTO IATP organizes a meeting of farm leaders from the U.S., Canada, Japan and Europe in Brainerd, Minnesota, just prior to the Big Four Summit to negotiate the Uruguay Round agriculture agreement. IATP and farm leaders call for the ministers to retain domestic farm policies, stop agriculture dumping, support fair markets and protect the right to food security IATP launches the Sustainable Agriculture Computer Network with email, access to shared data and research, news wire services, electronic conferencing and bulletin boards IATP organizes a series of exchanges with European partners; exchanges include bringing German farm leaders from the Protestant Farmers Association to the United States IATP organizes the first GATT workshop for farm leaders, agricultural policy makers, churches and other NGOs in Geneva The U.S.-Canada Free Trade Agreement is signed; it is a precursor to the North American Free Trade Agreement IATP is founded and headquartered in the basement of Mark Ritchie's house at 3838 Blaisdell Av., Minneapolis The Uruguay Round of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade is launched The first Farm Aid is held in Champaign, Illinois In November, an international conference, Impact of Agricultural Trade on Domestic Farm Policies, is held in Geneva Leaders of the meeting decide an American organization is needed to focus on the role of trade and international institutions on domestic farm policy The meeting brings together many people who will become IATP's board of directors and the idea for IATP is formed From the 1983 Ottawa meeting, U.S. and European farm leaders and researchers form an informal network that includes exchanges and study tours Mark Ritchie hosts the Old Timers Conference, bringing together the surviving leadership of the progressive farm movements from the 1920s to the present Farm leaders from Europe, Asia and the Americas hold an emergency meeting at Canada's parliament in Ottawa to address the worsening agricultural trade situation. The First International Farm Crisis Summit is organized by Mark Ritchie Mark Ritchie writes Loss of Family Farms, a powerful indictment of U.S. farm policy, which intentionally cut the number of farmers in the country Think Forward blog Trump’s EPA Pick Protects Corporate Backers over the Environment Andrew Puzder: the narrowly avoided threat to food system workers Main office: 2105 First Ave. S.

农业

2017-09/0196/en_head.json.gz/6461

"The soil is, as a matter of fact, full of live organisms. It is essential to conceive of it as something pulsating with life, not as a dead or inert mass." - Albert Howard, The Soil and Health, 1947 You are here: PublicationsMaine Organic Farmer & GardenerSpring 1998Debbie Deal Debbie Deal: Maxed Out But Still Growing By Jane Lamb Debbie Deal had just completed the monumental task of converting a collapsing lobster-trap shed into a trim little shop. She’d had a contractor jack up the derelict outbuilding, resill it and skid it up to the roadside. Then she’d tackled the restoration herself – reframing, reboarding, setting in windows, shingling. “I’d never built anything in my life. It took me a whole season to build that silly thing,” she says. But then she faced another, perhaps even more perplexing, challenge. “When I finally got it done, I had to make a hard and fast decision. What was I going to do with it?” That was seven years ago, and what she has done has been to transform a neglected saltwater farm on Johnson Cove in Friendship into an attraction as compelling as the classic sloop that’s Friendship’s other claim to fame. Spectacular rows of delphiniums in every shade of blue, lavender, pink and white dominate close to an acre of organically-grown annual and perennial flowers and vegetables. The. resurrected trap shop is now Friendship Garden and Farm Stand, center of a thriving business that draws a steady flow of customers from miles around. Landscapers and home gardeners come for seedlings and field-grown plants. The summer folks, who double the midcoast population from July Fourth to Labor Day, snap up fresh vegetables, carry off armloads of cut flowers for their homes and festivities and make a point of topping off their expedition with a breathtaking eyeful of the incomparable blues of sea, sky and delphiniums. Handywoman’s Dream Deal wasn’t thinking delphiniums when she camped out with sleeping bag, battery lantern and porta-potty in her under-reconstruction farmhouse eight years ago. It all began when the Massachusetts company she worked for as an ad rep started going under. Fed up with the corporate world and armed with some months of unemployment insurance, she decided she would move to Maine and make a new life for herself. Deal had been an art major. She had been captivated by the state’s landscape and slower pace during many a stay at her parents’ summer place in Cushing. Based there, she spent six months looking for houses and businesses to buy, but nothing came up. “I almost ended up buying a laundromat in Belfast,” she recalls with mixed horror and amusement. “At the last minute I bailed out of that. I knew it wasn’t right for me.” Deal found a charming old sea captain’s house in Warren and lost that opportunity to an unscrupulous realtor. Furious at first, she later realized that her true destiny was the farmhouse in Friendship, but even that was elusive. Another buyer had first dibs. As her search ended along with summer, she reluctantly returned to Massachusetts, planning to take her house there off the market and take “another yucky job.” She’d barely walked in the door when the phone rang. The other buyer had dropped out of the running and it was her turn. “I was home one hour and just turned around and came back at six o'clock the next morning and I got it!” What she got was almost a joke, she says. The house had been in the same family since 1832. When she bought it in December of 1989, half the windows were missing, the kitchen wall was split a foot away from the main house, the well was frozen. All the “good stuff,” such as the central fireplaces and other original features, had long since been removed. A chimney hung crazily off the back wall. She set local builders to work at once. Finally, in February, she could stand it no longer. “I moved up here among all the construction with my down sleeping bag, porta-potty, a box of cornflakes and a little igloo cooler. I lived on cold cuts and cereal until the following fall.” When she finally got appliances into her redesigned, old-fashioned kitchen, she couldn’t even wait to finish the wide pine floorboards. “It was like – I’ve got to cook real food!” The floor has yet to see a finish other than butcher’s wax, but the cook has moved from plain hot food to playing with such fun things as lavender ice cream and exotic salad greens. Rebuilding the mother of all fixer-uppers had to come before anything else. Deal, a slight, exuberant woman of boundless energy, grit and good humor, ripped up layers of rotting flooring, replaced sills and joists, tore out partitions and the south wall that looks down across fields to the shoreline. The view, now open to a broad expanse of glass, was glimpsed through two tiny windows, one of them in a ridiculously-located bathroom. The farmhouse, snugly insulated and sheathed in new white clapboards, nestles among old lilacs, rugosa roses and hollyhocks. A brick path bordered by spicy dianthus and culinary herbs leads to the front door, replacing a horrendous platform of cement and concrete blocks that took all but dynamite to remove. The woman she bought the house from, in her 80s, was leery of selling it to a “young girl.” (Deal was 36 at the time.) “She didn’t know what a worker I was,” she says. “The deal with the builders was, ‘You can have the job if you let me work with you and teach me.’ I picked up all my skills from them. That’s how I learned I could do the shed.” She later hired on as a helper to the same contractors and, along with the tricks of the trade, gleaned many a useful bit of well-aged lumber from their other remodeling projects. Finding the Organic Balance The gift of an herb book from her mother, with the motherly hint that she might consider an herb farm on her sunny south-facing slope, was the initial answer to Deal’s quandary about what to do with the shed she’d finished. “I started tilling up the upper garden, and it just grew,” she recalls. She now has quadrupled her ground under cultivation and can’t seem to stop opening up more. But the first year looked doubtful. “The dirt was so horrible, it was liked compressed driveway dirt,” she says. “A friend of mine, a landscaper, said ‘Put a foot of cow manure on the whole thing.’ Everybody in town said you just don’t do that, but it was perfect. I grew a lot of lush stuff that first year. Things just went crazy. Then every year I put lots of compost in. It’s all organic. I got soil tests done. The last couple of years I haven’t had time for them, but everything is still cranking, so I know it’s okay.” She has been a MOFGA member since she first heard of the organization, but has never felt the need to be certified. Deal, who comes from a place where putting a geranium on the doorstep is considered gardening, absorbed horticultural know-how in huge gulps, through reading, careful observation and intuition. “In the beginning, I looked up everything,” she says. “But after awhile, you just start to know.” She attributes her relative freedom from insects and diseases as much to good luck as to planning. “I noticed more bugs when I first started, but now I’ve gotten everything pretty much in balance, I literally haven’t any bugs,” she says. “I think it’s partly to do with the wind.” She keeps the gardens clean, and well-cultivated, with plenty of air space around the plants, relying on endless hand hoeing and weeding with her tools of choice, a high-grade, super sharp hand cultivator and narrow-bladed hoe. She makes every effort to scramble the rows to avoid a monoculture situation. She’s had a few bouts with cucumber and flea beetles. “Normally it’s so minor I just work around it. I try to catch bugs in certain cycles. Healthy plants don’t get bothered much.” Though she has bought some excellent reference books, such as Gardens Alive, she doesn’t do a lot of studying. “If I have a problem, I call Extension. There are so many great sources around here to get help from.” Including the birds. Deal takes a sash out of a barn window every spring to welcome back the barn swallows. Together with their tree swallow cousins, they made a noticeable dent in the insect population. Abundant bloom is essential to a business that depends heavily on flowers, so Deal keeps bees to ensure good pollination. In fact, learning about the effects of pesticides on bees reinforced her gut feeling that organic was the only way to go. Earlier she had several hives and had enough honey to sell in the farm stand. Though she thinks her bees have survived fairly well the onslaught of winter and disease that has hurt many beekeepers, she has consolidated them into one healthy hive. She now leaves the honey for the bees to winter well on, the market value of flowers being greater in her operation than that of honey. Besides, she says, she’s had her fill of lively, time-consuming adventures with swarming bees, as well as the heavy 60- and 90-pound supers that are beyond her weight-lifting capacity. No Tomatoes, No Potatoes Debbie Deal, whose adventurous spirit keeps her eyeing derelict buildings to restore and plowing up more space to accommodate the divided perennials that she can’t bear to throw out, might be called a romantic pragmatist. She’s willing to bow to the authority of nature when it comes to what to grow and to go with the cash flow when it comes to business. “I didn't come here with a big business plan,” she explains. “I know what they’re all about and boy, was I getting away from that!” Thus, she doesn't raise potatoes because they’re subject to too many diseases. She doesn’t raise many tomatoes because they don't ripen until after her major clientele have left for the summer. She dropped European cucumbers from her list because no one bought them despite their superior quality. One year, following what turned out to be a false lead, she raised literally a ton of leeks. There was absolutely no market for them, so no more leeks. In her six years in business, she has shifted from supplying restaurants and raising lots of vegetables to giving up the restaurant trade and focusing more and more on flowers, for which the demand continues to escalate. Deal does cater to a steady clientele for the summer vegetables – lettuces, mesclun greens, peas, beans, carrots, onions. They overflow antique blue spatterware pails and kettles in the farm stand, set off by a few antiques that remain from an earlier enterprise – an old bean thresher in mint condition that actually works, a cider press that sees annual resurrection for a one-day pressing and picnic in the fall. An old dough trough filled with dewy ears of corn imparts the atmosphere Deal deliberately cultivates. What she has to offer can be unpredictable, as any farmer knows. Last summer she had “a melon season to die for,” she says, citing Pulsar cantaloupe, Burpee’s Ambrosia and Yellow Doll watermelons among the most spectacular. Ironically, she enjoyed most of them herself, since they didn’t ripen until September. But flowers count for most of Deal’s business. A brilliant patchwork quilt of rectangular raised beds behind the farm stand dazzles the eye. Six-foot-tall delphiniums, red and yellow gallardias, blue and white campanulas, blazing zinnias, magenta foxgloves rising from a mass of white shasta daisies mingle their hues and textures and fragrances with four-foot lavender bushes, waist-high pansies and dozens of other herb and flower species. Rows of irises, lilies, hundreds of Canterbury bells and 2,000 or more delphiniums, mature plants for cutting as well as first-year plants for the following spring landscape trade, adorn the field that slopes toward the water bordered by trellises of pink and white sweet peas. Roman-stripe rows of pale and dark green, rust and burgundy lettuces demonstrate that vegetables are just as decorative as flowers. “Cut your own” is the way Deal sells flowers. “I hand out scissors and people go down into the garden and pick what they want. I charge by the size of the bouquet. It’s the only way I can do it. I don’t count stems. I’d be all day just doing that,” she says, implying that she has too many other things to keep up with. “I'm forever digging up delphiniums,” she sighs. She runs her entire enterprise single-handed with the sole exception of a little help from her father on the lawn mower and her faithful golden lab, Jessie, who serves as official greeter and constant gardening companion. She gave up supplying restaurants partly because she couldn’t be away to make deliveries for even a half-hour. “I would be swamped. I couldn’t leave and it’s hard to find anyone to hire. Most of the summer help around here find better-paying jobs as sternmen with the lobster fishermen or in construction.” Growing Her Own Deal receives every seed catalogue known to gardening and spends countless winter hours making lists of all the new things she’d like to try, and then whittling it down to the few for which she might just have room. But mainly she saves her own seeds for things she will repeat year after year. She raises all her own seedlings for both annuals and perennials. In the beginning, she had a few lessons to learn. “The first year I bombed,” she relates. “I bought so many packets but I couldn’t get them to grow. I was so frustrated. So the next year I tried all these experiments – soaked the seeds in water, some in manure tea, refrigerated some, put some in the freezer. I did every combination there was and they did grow.” Then a funny thing happened. Thrifty yankee that she is, Deal couldn’t throw away all the good dirt and potting mix in the trays that didn’t germinate the year before. “I dumped it all in a garbage bag, thinking I could use it. There was nothing in it but dead seeds. The next year, I used that dirt to plant something else, and up came several thousand delphiniums. All of the old ones germinated. I had to throw most of them out. They needed to go through that cycle in the winter, sitting out there in the barn.” As her operation expanded, Deal realized she’d have to have a greenhouse. It was too expensive to buy all the seedlings she’d need. Once she had moved the old lobster shack, she chose its former site beside the barn, which had to be filled and leveled. With her usual enthusiasm, she ordered a kit. “It turned out to be the hardest thing I ever did,” she recalls. “I started so late in the fall and the thing came with no instructions.” She assembled the double plastic, hoop style structure herself while autumn winds whipped around her. Although the greenhouse is indispensable for the numerous plants she raises for herself and others, it has a few disadvantages. It has to be kept inflated all year as insurance against the winds that whip up the cove, sometimes reaching 80 mph in winter. “It’s too hot in summer to grow tomatoes,” she says. “Even with the doors open and the fan going things would cook.” So far, she hasn’t considered the hoop houses that other Maine gardeners find so useful for raising tomatoes for early market. Besides, Deal has too many other projects going. Last November (1997) found her chasing windblown shingles around the yard before they could tear into the greenhouse. They were part of another building renovation. Heeding her father’s constant admonition that her barn, stuffed with dried flowers, gardening equipment and all the other things farmers and gardeners can’t possible throw away, was a serious fire hazard, she collected two more derelict buildings. It took two huge boom trucks to haul home an old henhouse and a wharf building, which would become a 16-by 24-foot and a 10-by 12-foot pair of storage sheds. Racing against winter as usual, she managed to get them roofed as snow moved in early and, eternal optimist, expected to have them closed in before real winter. At the same time, Deal was making summer plans for the long spruce roost poles from the henhouse. They’ll become teepees for the pole bean seeds she’s never used and giant ladder trellises for sweet peas. She’s already had one more patch of ground plowed up for the purpose. She’ll load it with cow manure and lime in the spring, have the soil tested and “add a bit of character” to the lower field. Deal has managed to stay out of debt, relying on the proceeds of the sale of her Massachusetts house and other income, and her accountant tells her she’s doing well. “My business is definitely building, but it takes time for people to find you,” she says. “My whole experience here is loads of fun, but it’s a lot of work and I sometimes wonder if I’m making anything.” Then she looks around her and reflects: “It’s so wonderful to be here. The best part is I’m a visual person, so I get a lot of satisfaction from seeing what’s been created here, from looking out at the water.” But Debbie Deal is not just a dreamer. She’s an indefatigable doer. “Every year I say I’m pretty much maxed out for what I can do and every year I expand. Every year I’ve said I couldn't possibly do more, and I did!” Jane Lamb, formerly of Brunswick, Maine, is now retired in California.

农业

2017-09/0196/en_head.json.gz/6933

2016: Reality for producers ‘was pretty grim’ Feb 13, 2017 Cash, other prizes could be yours at Mid-South Farm & Gin Show Feb 15, 2017 Judsons winners in National Outstanding Young Farmer competition Feb 14, 2017 What are Arkansas rice producers considering for 2017 season? Feb 15, 2017 LSU AgCenter researchers finding better ways to grow sweet potatoes CHASE, La. — Scientists at LSU AgCenter’s Sweet Potato Research Station in Chase, La., are studying the effects of herbicides and soil compaction as they relate to producing high-quality sweet potatoes. LSU AgCenter researchers Steve Kelly and Arthur Villordon believe their work will help Louisiana producers grow more-profitable crops. Kelly’s research, funded in part by Louisiana sweet potato growers, focuses on two herbicides, Sandea and Valor, which were recently approved by the Environmental Protection Agency and the Louisiana Department of Agriculture and Forestry for use with sweet potatoes. This is the first year Sandea is being used in sweet potatoes and the second year for Valor. Sandea previously was labeled for use in other vegetables, and Valor was previously used in cotton and soybeans. “The research plots we’re working with show pigweed can cause as much as a 60 percent loss in yield,” Kelly said of the sweet potato studies. “We’re finding Valor controls pigweeds, ground cherry, copperleaf and smellmelon in sweet potatoes. Sandea is used to control sedges.” Pigweeds and sedges are the primary weeds found in Louisiana sweet potatoes, Kelly said. The cost of using Valor is $8 to $9 per acre. Sandea costs about $32 per acre. In addition to those studies, Villordon is conducting research to characterize the influence of soil compaction on the shape of sweet potatoes. “Sweet potatoes are a unique crop in that the grower is dealing with an underground produce that cannot be seen until it is dug up,” Villordon said. “The quality — for example, the size and shape — of the sweet potato is a very important economic factor. It can determine how much money the producer can get from his crop.” Villordon’s study is investigating the effect of land preparation operations on sweet potato storage quality. “Typically, compaction within a field can produce sweet potatoes that vary considerably in length and shape,” he said. “Understanding the role of soil compaction in sweet potato shape can lead to adjustments in tillage operations by the grower. “For instance, subsoiling operations can be reduced or minimized where less-compacted soil is present. This reduces unnecessary field operations by the grower.” U.S. No. 1 is the grade producers are aiming for. These potatoes generally are 3 inches to 9 inches in length and elliptical in shape. “These are the premium sweet potatoes that are sold as fresh produce in stores,” Villordon explained. “The grower typically is paid a wholesale price of about $14 to $15 per bushel for this grade.” The sweet potato industry plays an important role in the state’s economy. According to the Louisiana Summary of Agriculture and Natural Resources, published by the LSU AgCenter, the sweet potato industry contributed more than $87.6 million to the state’s economy in 2003.

农业

2017-09/0196/en_head.json.gz/8241

Five-point Plan Proposed To Feed World in a Sustainable Fashion An international team of scientists has unveiled a plan that they say would double food production by 2050 while reducing the global environmental impact of agriculture. Reporting in the journal Nature, scientists from the U.S., Canada, Sweden, and Germany said that the only way the world community could sustainably feed the estimated 9 billion to 10 billion people expected on the planet later this century would be by taking the five following steps: halt expansion of farmland into tropical forests and wild lands; more efficiently use large swaths of underutilized farmland in Africa, Latin America, and Eastern Europe, boosting current food production by nearly 60 percent; make more efficient use of water, fertilizers, and chemicals, which are currently overutilized in some areas and underutilized in others; shift diets, especially in the developed world, from excessive meat consumption; and reduce the amount of food that is discarded, spoiled, or eaten by pests, which currently amounts to about a third of the food supply. “For the first time we have shown that it is possible to both feed a hungry world and protect a threatened planet,” said the study’s lead author, Jonathan Foley, of the University of Minnesota.

农业

2017-09/0196/en_head.json.gz/10163

How Biological Farming Can Transform Your Food Supply for the Better The entire food chain is connected to soil health, from plant and insect health, all the way up to animal and ultimately your health We’ve come to appreciate that the maintenance of intestinal flora is really essential for your health just as it is in the soil The root ball of the plant is the “gut” or intestinal tract of the plant. In botanical terms, it’s called the rhizosphere, and it houses microbes just like the your gut does, provided the soil system is healthy Biological farming helps keep the planet healthy by sequestering carbon in the soil It also prevents the loss of topsoil and increases the soil’s water-holding capacity, which provides natural drought resistance. It also helps reduce and boosts nutrient uptake in the plants Jerry Brunetti, an internationally renowned speaker, is the founder of Agri-Dynamics, a company that provides holistic animal remedies for farm, livestock, and pets. He's also a co-founder of EarthWorks Natural Organic Products, which provides products and consulting services. Brunetti is a cancer survivor who can say he saved his own life employing holistic methods. He initially got involved with biological farming while studying animal science, also known as "animal husbandry," at the University level. "When I was in college, I saw the industrialization of agriculture accelerating. We were getting away from the Joel Salatin models and getting into the factory farm models because of: a) efficiency – Labor efficiencies and time efficiencies, and b) subsidies from the federal government that made it worthwhile to lock animals up and feed them concentrates," he says. What many fail to consider, however, is that purely focusing on production alone isn't necessarily the most cost effective. Profits are frequently eaten up by increased diesel consumption, combating soil erosion, rising NPK fertilizer costs, and increased need for veterinary drugs to keep livestock healthy in an unnatural and unhealthy environment. "Production was being, in effect, purchased off the farm with fertilizer inputs, feeds, and drugs. So, I got into the ecological model because we realized that ecology does equate the economics," he says. We Need to Return to Ecological Principles The ecological principles Jerry teaches apply no matter what you're growing, because the soil systems all require very similar kinds of biology and chemistry. According to Brunetti, you can take the same model that you use in crop production and apply it to cabbage, fruits, or any other food crop, and get the same kinds of outcomes in terms of reduced expenses and reduced dependence on agricultural chemicals such as pesticides. The latter is becoming particularly critical as a number of pesticides have already been implicated in the mass die-offs of pollinating honey bees, which are essential for the growing of about 70 percent of our food supply. As stated by Brunetti: "The United States right now has 1,200 pesticides approved for agricultural use, and the European Union only has 400. We're losing our pollinators like crazy. I think there's a very strong smoking gun connection between the honeybee implosion / the native pollinator implosion and the tremendous use of pesticides in this country." Soil health connects to everything up the food chain, from plant and insect health, all the way up to animal and human health. Health, therefore, truly begins in the soils in which our food is grown. Forerunners like Weston Price, William Albrecht, Louis Bromfield, and Friend Sykes all found that there's a strong correlation between having good mineralized soils with robust biological activity. As Brunetti states, the marriage of biology, chemistry, geology, and the physical structure of soils translates into increased quantity and improved nutrient-density in our foods. Furthermore, plants that are properly nourished from good, healthy soils end up having tremendous all-natural resistance against fungal outbreaks and insect attacks. They're also just as productive if not more productive than conventionally chemically-grown foods. The claim that you cannot produce as much food using ecological methods as you can using conventional chemical methods simply isn't true. Like You, Soil and Plants Need Microbes In human health, we've come to appreciate that the maintenance of intestinal flora is really essential for health, both physical and psychological. Probiotics are even becoming widely accepted and adopted in the conventional medical community to support health. In soil, we have a similar process. The health of the plants, and those who eat those plants, all stand to benefit from the optimization of soil microbiology. As stated by Brunetti: "Probably one of the most important things about living on this planet is the microbiotic community, our microbiome. We now know that there are millions of species of bacteria and half as many fungal species, of which we've identified less than five percent. The same kind of things goes on in animals. We're finding out that, for example, ruminants that forage or eat grass do not consume the nutrients that are in the forages; they ferment them in this rumen, this tank, where they're growing tremendous numbers of microbes. Then they ingest these microbes. We're finding out that the actual ecology of the animal is predicated on what it's fed. If you're feeding an animal an abstract kind of feed like grain when it's really a forage consumer, you're going to end up changing the ecosystem of that rumen. You're going to end up having a downward spiral of negative outcomes, where animals end up having all these metabolic disorders – immune implosion, reproductive failure, mastitis, calf deaths, mortality, and morbidity." The soil microbiomes work on the same principles. As explained by Brunetti, the root ball of the plant is the "gut" or intestinal tract of the plant. In botanical terms, it's called the rhizosphere, and it houses microbes just like the human gut does, provided the soil system is healthy. The Cycle of Life Begins with the Biome The soil system contains both predator and prey kinds of organisms. Bacteria, Brunetti explains, are the prey. These "grazers" get eaten by "predators" like protozoa and nematodes. The process of this predator-prey relationship is very similar to what occurs in the Serengeti when lions eat the ungulates. "There's a conservation of nutrients and a strengthening of the gene pool of not just the microbiome but of the plants themselves," he explains. This results in a massive increase in fungal, bacterial protozoa and nematode populations, which in turn increase the organic matter—the carbon—of the soil. It also increases the water-holding capacity of the soil, which provides natural drought resistance, and helps to reduce and control soil erosion. Last but not least, it boosts nutrient uptake in the plants growing in the soil. A fascinating aspect of this soil system is that there's a fantastic amount of communication going on in the root ball. Plants actually "talk" to one another through aerial emissions—the volatile gasses they emit—and also through the mycelial networks in the soil. This is a major insight that deepens our understanding of the importance of nurturing and maintaining healthy soil microbiome. It also explains why you don't really need synthetic chemicals to grow large amounts of food. On the contrary, the chemicals used in modern agriculture are killing the very foundation of health—the microbiome in the soil. As explained by Brunetti: "The plants can tell their neighbors, 'By the way, there's a pest in the neighborhood. Amp up by changing your chemistry so that you have more resistance.' They can do that provided that the soils are well-nourished. If you don't have well-nourished, mineralized soils, the compounds necessary to fight off these adversaries are not there. The plants then are still vulnerable." Why GMOs Are Far from the Answer This is one of the reasons why so many of us are concerned about genetically engineered crops, because one of the main characteristics of genetically modified plants is resistance to the potent herbicide glyphosate, which decimates the microbiome. Glyphosate is a potent chelator that sequesters valuable minerals, rendering them inaccessible and unusable for the plant. "[Glyphosate] ties up minerals like manganese, zinc, or iron, which are critically essential for the plants' immune system. By doing that, it takes those critical trace elements out of the soil solution, rendering an immune deficiency and basically creating an immune implosion because of the fact that the plants are undernourished. These minerals are critical raw materials for plants to synthesize protective compounds called Plant Secondary Metabolites (PSM's). The PSM families consist of terpenes (carotenes and essential oils), phenols (flavonoids, tannins, salicylic acid, etc) and alkaloids (e.g. caffeine, nicotine, etc.) These compounds are essential to the plant's immune system to repel pests." he says. Another problem, which applies to both genetically engineered (GE) and conventional hybridized plants, is that when a plant is altered it may lose its ability to emit the correct signals to warn its neighbors about impending attacks. Also, substances that are normally emitted in the root ball that defend the plant against the attacking pest have been found to be missing in certain hybrid and/or GE plants. "Even when they seeded a field with high populations of predator, beneficial nematodes, they didn't do their job of attacking western corn rootworm pests because they weren't getting the sesqui-terpene signal from the [hybridized] corn plant," he says. "There's a very intimate relationship between organisms that live on the plants and organisms that live in the soil nearby the plants. But there is a connection, a communication, that's dependent upon the plant's ability to have this communication ability. That's one of the problems with GMOs: it's turning hybrids into much more dependent plants that need everything [to be added]. Not just the glyphosate herbicide, but high rates of nitrogen and phosphorus as well." How Plant Growth Is Optimized in Biological Agriculture In this interview, Brunetti expands on a variety of strategies for optimizing plant growth. Needless to say, it all begins with a comprehensive soil analysis. He uses a chemical extraction called Mehlich 3, which extracts the loosely attached mineral elements from the soil. Soils have a negative charge whereas certain elements (cations) attached to the soil have a positive charge, and typically it is recommended to have a balance of these various positively-charged minerals. This includes calcium, magnesium, potassium, sodium, and trace elements. The individual numbers and ratios are measured, and based on that data, soil amendments can then be recommended to optimize the ratios. Amendments might include limestone, rock phosphate, trace elements like boron, zinc, or copper, or manure for example. Brunetti has a new book, The Farm as Ecosystem, published by Acres USA, which expands on everything discussed here. It should be available from them this week. Jerry was kind enough to give me a preview and it is one of the best books on biological farming I have read to date. Highly recommended if you are interested in this topic. He also checks for soil compaction. A soil penetrometer is a useful tool for any farmer to have. It works like a pressure gauge—you stick the probe end into the soil, and the meter tells you how tight your soil is. If your soil is compacted, it will not contain air, and if it doesn't have air, it cannot sustain microbial life. "If the soil doesn't have life, you can throw all the minerals you want on that ground but you're going to be wasting a lot of it because the limiting factor there is oxygen. The first nutrient for life in an aerobic environment that we live in is oxygen," he says. Compacted soils can be treated in a number of ways. If you have livestock, you may need to manage your animals differently. A subsoiler may be used to break up compacted soils, or you could switch out your crop to a more deep-rooted plant like comfrey or chicory, which can penetrate and fracture deeper compactions, allowing critical air to enter into the soil. Once you get air back into the soils, you'll start getting biology back into it. Biological Stimulants and Soil Chemistry Next, biological stimulants are considered. This includes rock dust powders like granite or basalt dust, which are excellent biological stimulants and have paramagnetic energies. They provide an excellent way to remineralize the soil in a balanced natural way supplying many if not all of the important trace minerals. Being susceptible to magnetic influence, they tend to energize plant growth. "Dr. Phil Callahan did a lot of work on paramagnetism in soils, looking at archaeological sites, discovering that the most fertile were also highly paramagnetic. He invented a device that's now available, called the PCSM meter, which measures the paramagnetism of the soil. That's another tool in the box." Ormus minerals such as Dyna-Min have also become popular. According to Brunetti, Dyna-Min is primarily used in animal feeds for mineral nutrition and detoxification, but it can also be used to improve the mineral content of compost. Another good product is called Azomite. It's a montmorillonite from Utah that contains a lot of valuable trace elements. Ormus minerals are also susceptible to energetic influences that help to stimulate microbiotic communities. "It's almost like Wilhelm Reich's orgone accumulator," Brunetti says. "His accumulator was a layering of carbon and metal, which accumulated the vital force that he called orgone or what is also known in Ayurveda as prana or in Chinese as chi. I think when you take these minerals and you blend them with things like char in compost, you're creating an orgone accumulator blanket in the soil. It attracts cosmic forces that the biodynamic people talk about..." After looking at the chemistry of the soil, he evaluates the actual structure of the soil. Certain tests can also be used to measure different kinds of biology. He also takes samples of plant tissues, called a forage test, which is then analyzed for macro and micro elements, proteins, and energies. Again, just like the soil test, there needs to be certain minimum levels and ratios of minerals, carbon, and protein. Sap testing may also be performed to measure the pH of the plant's sap. Electrolytes like nitrates, potassium, sodium, and calcium can also be measured this way, as can chlorophyll. The level of chlorophyll in a plant is indicative of the plant's overall health. Based on all of this data, additional strategies may be prescribed. For example, if the crop is low in magnesium, you could use a foliar spray of Epsom salts (magnesium sulfate) on the crop. In summary, Brunetti likens the process to a three-legged stool, where each leg affects and depends on the strength of the other two. "You can't take one out without affecting the other. Biological systems affect the availability of chemistry or minerals. Minerals affect biologicals. What we're trying to do is get the physical, chemical or mineral, and biological systems working in tandem, so that we have a three-legged stool that reinforces itself. Let's say, you have a really acidic soil that's down below 5. This is typical in Australia and New Zealand. Their soils are very acidic. They're even getting biological bounce-backs by using, let's say, ecological practices. But you could speed that up tremendously by just giving the microbes what they need, which is a pH of somewhere between 6 and 7 by liming the soil. They like that pH much better than a pH of 5. If we can do that, you're going to speed up biological processes." For those unfamiliar with chemistry, a pH change from 5 to 7 is a hundredfold difference of hydrogen ions—a massive change. The pH scale basically runs from 1 to 14, with 7 being neutral. Anything above 7 is alkaline; anything below 7 is acidic. According to Brunetti, soils should ideally be slightly acidic, or in the mid-6 range. Plant sap pH also tends to reflect that. A pH of 6 is 10 times more acidic than a pH of 7. So going from a pH of 7 down to 5 means increasing acidity by 100 times (10x10). Biological Farming Is a Win-Win for the Environment Besides soil nutrient depletion, top soil erosion, and water pollution, we also have rising atmospheric carbon dioxide levels to contend with. Biological farming is the obvious answer for virtually all of these concerns, including rising carbon dioxide levels. I've previously written about the usefulness of biochar, which is essentially agricultural charcoal once it's added to the soil. According to Brunetti: "I think the way biochar can help is if we particularly use it on small-scale, intensive horticultural beds. It's probably not going to be as practical on large landscapes, although there is a belief that you might be able to put it in the seed row for row crops and get a benefit from that." Biochar has shown its usefulness in larger scale scenarios, however, it needs to be activated first with minerals and/or microbes or else it tends to decrease soil fertility for about a year. Terra preta, or "black earth," is a type of dark, fertile soil found in the Amazon Basin. This soil has a very high charcoal content, and was created by mixing together charcoal, bone meal and manure to the native Amazonian soil. As explained by Brunetti, a key to the success of terra preta was the addition of biology to the charcoal. "What they typically did was they used either human or animal waste and mixed it with the char, so that the poorest of the charcoal would absorb these biologically based nutrients that could then grow the microbes, which in turn could then grow topsoil. Some of the areas where they had terra preta areas were half a mile-wide by a couple of miles-long that could allegedly support anywhere from 200,000 to 400,000 people. And these were soils that are [originally] completely useless for growing crops." The Future of Food Is Medicine—As It Was in the Past The American health system is fatally flawed, and to quote Brunetti, the entire system is "about to implode because it's just too costly, it's too vast, it's too bureaucratically encumbered, and it's not dealing with the fundamental reasons of why we're unhealthy." I couldn't have said it better myself. I also agree with him when he says that one of the fundamental reasons why Americans are so unhealthy is because we're ignoring the fact that humans are agricultural beings. We're supposed to be connected to the land that feeds and sustains us. "We need to have an identification with the fact that soil systems and ecosystems at large are the breadbasket, and we're destroying them. Until there's some kind of campaign globally that says we have to stop the madness of destroying our ecosystem, which supports not just the many, many thousands of species that we're annihilating every year but also ourselves, I'm not very hopeful. But by the same token, we can turn it around. What I am hopeful about is that we still have time to fix it." That window of opportunity is rapidly narrowing however. Brunetti, on his part, tackles the problem one farm at a time. He's a long-time active member of the Weston A. Price Foundation, and takes every opportunity he can to educate his fellow man about the connection between health and the food system. "There's no doubt about it. The future doctors have to have relationships with people who produce the foods," he says. "There's a gentleman out here who's a physician. He has a mobile practice. One of the things that he does, his 'prescriptions,' is giving his patients a list of foods that they can get from Levi Miller's Amish farm – you know, raw milk, pastured eggs, and things like that. This is part of his Rx for his patients. I think this is going to have to be more common instead of rare if we're going to start turning around these health problems. Because food is the medicine, as you know. It's the ultimate medicine, because it's so complex. Taking supplements is great, but it doesn't replace food in and of itself." If you're a small farmer, or just a dedicated home-grower who would like to learn more, there are plenty of sources and support nowadays. Biological agriculture has come a long way in terms of building up a solid network over the past 30 years. The best thing to do is to find out who your local association or your regional association is, and join that. Once you've joined, you'll be able to find out what kinds of conferences and workshops are available in your area throughout the year. One way to find a local organization is to simply Google "sustainable agriculture." Brunetti belongs to the Pennsylvania Association for Sustainable Agriculture (PASA), but there are many others, including but not limited to the: Northeast Organic Farming Association1 (NOFA) (NY, NJ, CT, VT, MA, NH) Maine Organic Farmers & Gardeners Association (MOFGA) Midwest Organic and Sustainable Education Service2 (MOSES) California Certified Organic Farmers3 (CCOF) Tilth (OR & WA) Mid-Atlantic Food Cooperative Alliance4 (MAFCA) Carolina Stewardship Project (NC) The Xerces Society IFOAM Acres USA The Stockman Grass Farmer Natural Farming To learn more about Jerry Brunetti, or to hire him as a consultant, please see Agri-Dynamics.com. Other helpful resources include Savory Institute's website,5 as well as permaculture institutes and permaculture websites. You can find many of them by using those search terms in Google. Jerry's new book, The Farm as Ecosystem, can be purchased below. 1 Northeast Organic Farming Association 2 Midwest Organic and Sustainable Education Service 3 California Certified Organic Farmers 4 Mid-Atlantic Food Cooperative Alliance 5 Savory institute Most Popular 1 Latest Gardening News High-Performance Agriculture Can Increase Your Garden Yield Eight-Fold Composting Made Easy—Even for City Dwellers

农业

2017-09/0196/en_head.json.gz/10575

The History of Community Supported Agriculture, Part I Posted on Thursday, January 1st, 2004 at 8:48 am.Posted by Rodale Institute By Steven McFadden Originally posted in January 2004 Over the last 18 years Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) has taken root in North America with moderate speed and has gradually grown to include as many as 1,700 farms spread over every region. Against a surging tide of decline for small farms in general, CSA has set roots deep and wide. CSA is providing direct support for hundreds of small farms and clean local food for thousands of families. As side benefits, CSA is also establishing a matrix of environmental oases, building networks of families who are cultivating new and healthy aspects of community life, and helping to shape a new vision of agriculture. As CSA approaches its 20th anniversary, the possibility of a substantial third wave of development looms large. The workable paths are well known by now; meanwhile, a host of food- and farm-related issues is steadily building a groundswell underneath this grass-roots movement. Oddly, the origins of CSA in the United States have remained indistinct and are routinely reported incorrectly. PART I: The Origins of CSA in America—Dispelling an “Agrarian Myth" For years, one standard albeit erroneous telling of CSA’s history has been echoed in hundreds of articles and web sites. That version was recently repeated by Time magazine: "The CSA movement began in Japan some 30 years ago with a group of women alarmed by pesticides...Their teikei [partnerships with local farmers through annual subscriptions] spread to Europe and the U.S. From a single Massachusetts CSA in 1986, subscription farms in the U.S. have boomed..."(1) I can fault no reporters for repeating this false history. While I did know all along that CSA sprang forth from not one U.S. farm, but from two, for most of the past 18 years I also labored under the misimpression that some of CSA’s inspiration had come from Japan, for that is what I read everywhere. Robyn Van En (facing forward at right), her son, David, and other founding members hammer out the early details of the Indian Line Farm CSA. Photo by Clemens Kalischer. But that’s not how it happened. An email discussion on the CSA-L list piqued my curiosity. Correspondents such as Wolfgang Stranz of Germany, Allan Balliett of West Virginia, and Connie Falk of New Mexico uncovered many of the details of how CSA unfolded here in the United States. I’ve been reporting on CSA since 1987, so when I read their postings, I was prompted to research the movement’s beginnings to unearth a clearer sense of what really happened and why. I also wanted to see how the beginnings might bear upon the present and the future. I learned that while community farm initiatives got under way in both Japan and Chile in the early 1970s, those efforts did not directly influence the 1986 start of the CSA movement in the states. The U.S. impulse came from Europe, and specifically from the biodynamic agricultural tradition. The ideas that informed the first two American CSAs were articulated in the 1920s by Austrian philosopher Rudolf Steiner (1861-1925), and then actively cultivated in post- WW II Europe in the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s. The ideas crossed the Atlantic and came to life in a new form, CSA, simultaneously but independently in 1986 at both Indian Line Farm in Massachusetts and Temple-Wilton Community Farm in New Hampshire. The two original CSA farms are still thriving as of 2004. Both have established enduring legacies, even though they have confronted many challenges over the years. The stories of these two farms illustrate many of the challenges the entire CSA movement faces. Their stories also demonstrate many of the potentials. Indian Line Farm Susan Witt was there at the beginning. She is director of the E.F. Schumacher Society, headquartered about a mile down the road from Indian Line Farm in South Egremont, Mass. Robin Van En (center) and other Indian Line members divide shares following a harvest. Susan recalls that articles in Rodale’s Organic Gardening magazine (2) attracted a young gardener named Jan Vander Tuin to South Egremont in 1985, where he met with her, Robyn Van En and other members of the community. According to a 1992 article that Vander Tuin wrote for RAIN magazine (3), he had been working on a biodynamic farm named Topinambur near Zurich, Switzerland. He also traveled to explore other farms—Birsmatterhof in Germany (close to Basel, Switzerland) and Les Jardins de Cocagne in Geneva, Switzerland. Vander Tuin noted that the producer-consumer food alliance in Geneva had been founded by a man inspired by the co-op movement in Chile during Salvador Allende’s administration (1970-73).These experiences shaped Vander Tuin’s thinking as he returned to the United States and began talking with Witt, Van En, John Root, Jr., Andrew Lorand, and others. Each individual was generally knowledgeable about anthroposophy and biodynamic farming (two pillars of Steiner’s legacy). Witt recalls that their discussions were informed by Steiner’s concept of world economy, and she felt the work of the Schumacher Society best put those ideas into practice. "One of Steiner’s major concepts was the producer-consumer association, where consumer and producer are linked by their mutual interests," she explained. "And one of Schumaker’s major concepts was ‘to develop an economy where you produce locally what is consumed locally.’ We began to see CSA as a way to bring these key ideas together." Principal players (from left) Bob Swan, Ursula Cliff, Susan Witt, Frank Lowenstein, Clemens Kalisher, Elizabeth Keen and Al Thorp celebrate the 1999 partnership between The Nature Conservancy, the Community Land Trust in the Southern Berkshires and the farmers and shareholders of Indian Line Farm. Photo by Clemens Kalischer. In those early days there was much talk of biodynamics and anthroposophy and the "Small is beautiful" philosophy of E.F. Schumacher, as Witt recalls, but definitely no talk of Japan. "None of us had heard yet of what was happening in Japan." On this point, Anthony Graham and Trauger Groh of the Temple-Wilton Community farm agree. None of the CSA pioneers in the United States had heard a word about teikei in Japan. As Anthony recalls, "We (Anthony, Trauger, Lincoln Geiger) all went to a conference in Kimberton, Pennsylvania, as well as a group from South Egremont including I believe Robyn Van En. This was after both of our farms had started, maybe a year later. A speaker at the conference mentioned what was going on in Japan, and that was the first any of us learned about it." In autumn 1985, with Vander Tuin’s enthusiasm added to the wherewithal of the rest of the community, the Massachusetts group undertook a project with an apple orchard. Root and a community of developmentally disabled people from nearby Berkshire Village sold 30 shares in the orchard, then picked, sorted, and distributed 360 bushels of apples, as well as cider, hard cider, and vinegar. While that project was under way, the core group made plans. They began as the CSA Garden at Great Barrington (not Indian Line Farm) an unincorporated association managed on behalf of all shareholders, with Witt, Root, Van En and Jan Vander Tuin acting as principals. The association entered into a three-year lease with Van En to use land at Indian Line Farm for a garden starting in 1986, the same year the Temple-Wilton Community Farm started about 80 miles to the northeast in New Hampshire. The association that leased Indian Line Farm held onto the name CSA Gardens at Great Barrington until 1990, when there was a difficult split. Robyn stayed on her land; the farmers and many members departed to form the Mahaiwe Harvest CSA at nearby Sunways Farm. Robyn went on to write the pamphlet "Basic Formula to Create Community Supported Agriculture," to produce a video "It’s not just About Vegetables," and in 1992 to found CSA North America (CSANA), a nonprofit clearinghouse to support CSA development. In 1997 at age 49, Robyn died of an asthma attack. Her contributions were later recognized in the naming of a national clearinghouse of information, the Robyn Van En Center for CSA Resources. After Van En’s death, her son was forced to sell the farm. The farmers who had been working the land could not afford to buy it. But with the help of the Schumacher Society, they partnered with a community land trust and The Nature Conservancy to buy Indian Line Farm in 1999. This partnership serves as a model for other CSAs. According to Susan Witt, the key idea of the Indian Line Farm transaction is this: The consumers actively took responsibility to hold farmland open and to make that land available and affordable for farmers over a long term. Other CSAs, she said, should give serious consideration to this basic idea. The Temple-Wilton Community Farm Anthony Graham was among the founders of the Temple-Wilton (TW) Community Farm, along with Trauger Groh and dairyman Lincoln Geiger. Anthony remembers that they were all talking with one another back in 1985. "Trauger had just moved to New Hampshire from Germany. He and I and Lincoln and others in this community were talking intensively, making plans. One day in the autumn we drove out to South Egremont to meet with the people there and share ideas. There was a lot of excitement. Lincoln Geiger (left) and Anthony Graham, two cofounders of the Temple-Wilton Community Farm in southern New Hampshire, visit a couple of the beasts of burden that helped provide early bread and butter (especially butter) for the burgeoning CSA. Photo courtesy by Steven McFadden "The folks in Western Massachusetts had their approach and we had ours," Anthony recalled. "A lot of our inspiration for the Temple-Wilton farm came out of discussing with Trauger what he knew from Germany, and from the Camphill Village in Copake, New York, in 1961.” Through the 1970s and early 1980s, Trauger, Carl-August Loss, and other farmers at Buschberghof in Northern Germany had been experimenting with ideas from the work of Rudolf Steiner. Then Trauger met Alice Bennett of New Hampshire. They were wed and he moved to be with her. "Back in 1985, out of our discussions with Trauger, we decided on our approach,” remembers Anthony. “We asked members of the farm community for a pledge rather than asking them to pay a fixed price for a share of the harvest. We realized that the members of our community had a wide range of needs and incomes and that one set price was not necessarily fair for every family. What we do each year is to present a budget showing the true costs of the farm over the coming year and then ask the members of the farm to make pledges to meet the budget. "Our approach works. It requires honesty and good will, but it works,” Anthony says. The last four or five years, our annual budget meeting with the farm members has only taken about 45 minutes. It’s fast, up front, and everyone understands it by now." The overall philosophy of the TW Farm evolved from some of Steiner's ideas spelled out in his anthroposophical writings. Some of the farm’s key ideas are: New forms of property ownership—The land is held in a common by a community through a legal trust. The trust then leases its property long-term to farmers who use the land to grow food for the community. New forms of cooperation—A network of human relations replaces old systems of employers and employees as well as replacing the practice of pledging material security (land, buildings, etc.) to banks. New forms of economy – (associative economy). The guiding question is not "how do we increase profits?" but rather "what are the actual needs of the land and of the people involved in this enterprise?" Trauger Groh is retired from active farming but stays close to the TW Farm. As he looks back over the years, he said he feels satisfaction. The farm has found a permanent home on good land and has also secured an orchard. In 2003, he said, the farm had a record harvest, and it received funding support from state, federal and local sources. "The farm will easily raise the rest of the money," Trauger said. "There is enormous public interest. Wilton has voted at town meeting two years in a row to spend $40,000 of taxpayer money to support the farm and its programs. Now remember, this is in skinflint New Hampshire, where a request for money for a new light bulb can cause a knockdown, drag-out debate. Not one person has ever stood to speak against the funding request for the farm. "Now is when all our work is paying off," Trauger observed. "We have a track record of 18 years. People know us and trust us. They can see what we are doing for the land and for the community." Reflecting on the start of CSA in America 18 years ago, Trauger said "As with all great ideas, the idea of CSA had arrived. It just needed to emerge. The time was ripe. Who started at what hour is totally unimportant. What is important is that the CSA initiative has emerged and developed, and there is now a base for people to carry forward." Journalist Steven McFadden co-authored Farms of Tomorrow: Community Supported Farms, Farm Supported Communities (1990), and Farms of Tomorrow Revisited (1998) with Trauger Groh. Steven is the director of Chiron Communications in Santa Fe, NM http://www.chiron-communications.com Tags: community, community supported agriculture, farming, history, local, Steven McFadden

农业

2017-09/0196/en_head.json.gz/10888

Calling On Big Business to Step Up and Help Solve California’s Water Woes Long before the California drought became a national crisis, multinational berry company Driscoll’s knew it had to organize a solution to the water problem its grower partners were facing. by Kirsten James — Long before the California drought became a national crisis, multinational berry company Driscoll’s knew it had to organize a solution to the water problem its grower partners were facing. Groundwater was being over-pumped in its major California growing region in the Pajaro Valley, and as a result saltwater was seeping into farmers’ wells from nearby Monterey Bay, threatening berry growers and other farmers in the valley. Finding another sourcing region was not an option for Driscoll’s, even though the company represents community growers in 21 countries around the world. “There’s a very specific climate for strawberries,” said Driscoll’s then-CEO Miles Reiter at a drought forum last year. “... and none of the growing environments is quite as perfect as California. That means we need to fix the water situation.” And that’s what Driscoll’s set out to do. In 2010, it launched the Community Water Dialogue, a bold public/private partnership with local landowners, growers and the Resource Conservation District of Santa Cruz. The dialogue brought disparate and often competing factions together to forge collaborative efforts to solve the valley’s water woes. Driscoll’s is one of a growing number of companies with large water footprints that are striving to be part of the solution in solving local and global water scarcity challenges. They’re beginning to collaborate at the watershed level in their sourcing regions. They’re enlisting their employees, supply chains and consumers in their conservation efforts, and they’re even stepping into the policy arena to advocate resilient water solutions, such as through Ceres’ Connect the Drops Campaign in California. Today, at a World Water Day Summit, the White House is recognizing Connect the Drops and its five newest members — Anheuser-Bush InBev, Annie’s, Eileen Fisher, Kellogg Company and Xylem — for their contributions toward building a sustainable water future in California and beyond. Like Driscoll’s, Anheuser-Bush InBev, whose brands include Budweiser and Stella Artois, is collaborating with stakeholders in the communities where it operates. The beer giant has worked to improve its water efficiency and management, reducing its water usage rate by 23 percent from 2009 through 2015 in the U.S. resulting in water savings of over 2.5 billion gallons. Among its many water saving initiatives, it reuses its effluent, reclaimed water, in auxiliary operations to reduce needs from local sources in many breweries such as its Los Angeles brewery, and supplies its effluent to local communities at nearly forty of its breweries globally for agricultural irrigation, watering public parks and soccer fields, street cleaning, fire-fighting and other community needs replacing the fresh water that would otherwise be used. Other companies, like Levi Strauss & Co., are engaging their peers in water cutting initiatives. Today the iconic jeans brand is making its innovative Water<Less™ finishing techniques publicly available to spur water conservation across the apparel industry. The techniques reduce water use in garment finishing by up to 96 percent and have helped the company save more than one billion liters of water since 2011 - or the equivalent to 10.56 million 10-minute showers. Levi Strauss & Co. also engages it consumers in water conservation because its water footprint analyses show that of the nearly 3,800 liters of water used in the lifecycle of a pair of jeans, consumer care has the second-highest impact on consumption, after cotton. In order to help consumers better understand their environmental impact, LS&Co. created the “Are You Ready to Come Clean” quiz. But are the collective actions and policy advocacy of these companies making a difference in California? Steven Moore, a member of the California State Water Resources Control Board thinks so: “Businesses have a unique bully pulpit to put pressure on policy makers. More and more we need that voice at the table as we contemplate sustainable water policy.” In 2014, for example when Driscoll’s Reiter spoke out in favor of California’s historic Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, it helped to break the logjam in the state to pass the critical bill. Looking ahead, there are still a number of critical policies that California needs to put in place in order to right many years of unsustainable water use. One such policy is removing perceived barriers created by Prop 218 to implementing tiered water pricing, a system for charging water guzzlers increasingly higher prices at higher volumes of water use. Tiered pricing can be very effective at incentivizing water conservation. Another is AB 1755, which proposes to bring California closer to having good water data, and being able to act on it. The proposed legislation would create an online water data information system that could set the stage for a well-functioning water market in California. And for California’s critical groundwater reform to move forward, sustainability plans must be developed at the sub-basin level. Food companies that source from California’s fertile agricultural lands can and should help to develop and implement those plans, following Driscoll’s lead in the Pajaro Valley. As increasingly more companies realize the critical role the can and must play in the effort to create a sustainable water future, I believe that we will make great strides. As General Mill’s Ellen Silva put it, “We firmly believe that in order for Californian citizens, businesses, farmers and the ecosystem to thrive, we must all work together to manage the water supply sustainably.” This post is part of a series produced by The Huffington Post in conjunction with World Water Day (WWD), which has taken place annually on March 22 since 1993. The awareness day is an opportunity to learn more about and take action on water-related issues. It has a different theme selected by U.N. Water each year; in 2016, WWD focuses on water in relation to jobs. To see all posts that are a part of the series, click here. Follow Kirsten James on Twitter: www.twitter.com/kirstenjames_CA Read the post at Huffington Post connect the drops Kirsten James Kirsten James, in close partnership with the California Director, develops strategy and policy objectives for Ceres’s California-focused work. She is the lead for tracking and evaluating important statewide policy initiatives and implementation. Kirsten also helps establish and maintain business and investor partnerships within California and collaborates with the Policy and Water Programs to mobilize them in support of public policies that call for sustainable water management, clean energy and greenhouse gas emissions reductions in California.

农业

2017-09/0196/en_head.json.gz/11477

HomeFeaturedSpotlightsRetail SpotlightsLicensing SpotlightsSupplier SpotlightsE-Commerce SpotlightsReal Estate SpotlightsSpecial FocusTradeshow CoverageColumnsOnlineEventsAboutHistory and MissionMedia and AdvertisingMedia KitSolution Providers InfoAwardsTestimonialsContact UsPrivacy PolicyServicesEditor's BlogSolution ProvidersVideos Supplier Spotlights Organic Valley Family of Farms facebook This cooperative developed green initiatives to increase its efficiency and decrease its carbon footprint. Some companies focus solely on increasing sales and revenue, but Organic Valley Family of Farms is also concerned with making the world a better place. To achieve the latter goal, the organization distributes healthy food that comes straight from the earth. Organic Valley is a farmer-owned cooperative that distributes organic milk and other dairy products to retailers across the US. As one of the leading organic brands in the US, Organic Valley, which was established in 1988, represents 1,332 farmers in 34 states. Last year, the cooperative’s sales reached approximately $527 million. The organization’s profit sharing model states that both farmers and employees are granted 45%, while 10% goes to the community. With a mission centered around preserving family farms through organic farming, Organic Valley distributes an array of products, including milk, soy, cheese, butter, produce, and juice. But the cooperative isn’t focused only on its own business; the team at Organic Valley dedicates a significant amount of effort toward promoting green initiatives and raising awareness for nonprofit charities. Going green Because of its focus on organic food, the team at Organic Valley knows the importance of environmental stewardship. Consequently, the cooperative makes an effort to increase its inhouse efficiency and promote sustainability issues to the public. The most recent example of this effort was announced in March when Organic Valley joined the EPA’s GreenChill Advanced Refrigeration Partnership, which was launched in 2007. The partnership is an alliance between the EPA and companies in the supermarket industry, and its goal is to promote technology and strategies that help decrease the emission of ozone-depleting waste and gases. More specifically, the EPA works in conjunction with grocers and foodservice providers to reduce emissions generated from retail refrigeration. Although Organic Valley just announced its partnership with GreenChill in March, the cooperative is already pulling its own weight. The organization uses an ammonia-based cooling system at its creamery and its distribution center. Because ammonia requires less energy than its alternatives when used in large industrial refrigeration systems, its impact on the ozone is minimal. “If every supermarket in the nation joined GreenChill and reduced their emissions to the current GreenChill average, the industry could prevent the release of 13 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent and 157 ozone-depleting potential tons annually,” said Cecil Wright, vice president of sustainability at Organic Valley. “That’s a tremendous step in fostering a more sustainable supply chain for the entire food distribution industry,” she continued. “We’re delighted to be a part of this initiative and help promote the immense opportunities for cost-savings and contributions to the environment GreenChill offers.” Giving back to the community The team at Organic Valley is also concerned with giving back to the communities it serves. In March, the cooperative announced that it donated more than $2.2 million in cash and food to US charities in 2008. Nearly $1.2 million of the contribution was donated to 586 nonprofit and/or educational organizations, and the remaining amount consisted of food that was given to food shelters across the US, including the Oklahoma-based Feed the Children and the Wisconsin-based God’s People Helping People. Company materials state that Organic Valley chooses to support organizations that have efforts focused in the following areas: family farming, rural communities, organic research, organic education and promotion, humane animal treatment, environmental education and preservation, and child wellness. “Our giving programs are an extension of our cooperative ideals,” said Theresa Marquez, chief marketing executive at Organic Valley. “When we give to great organic causes and to local communities, we get back tenfold. We consider every dollar given an effective way of supporting change for good.” Of the nearly $2.2 million in cash and food donated, approximately half was generated from the organization’s foundation, Farmers Advocating for Organics (FAFO), which is funded and operated by the cooperative’s farmer-owners. Participation in FAFO is voluntary, but many choose to take part. A selected group of members review several grant applications each year and award money to the causes of their choice. In 2008, the largest grant was awarded to the University of Minnesota. The grant was worth $45,000 and is being used to fund two studies: “No-Till Organic Research” and “High Tunnel Season Extension of Vegetable Crops.” A grant for approximately $38,000 was awarded to an extension of the University of Vermont to fund its study on the feasibility and season extension of cereal grains as a source of organic feed. Other large recipients included Midwest Organic and Sustainable Education Service and Sustainable Agriculture Coalition. Looking to the future, the team at Organic Valley plans to continue on its mission to create a visionary future for family farmers by promoting healthy food and giving back to the communities it serves.

农业

2017-09/0196/en_head.json.gz/11561

Scrapping regulations calls for discretion Feb 10, 2017 Stronger safety net is goal for National Cotton Council Jan 27, 2017 Oklahoma Peanut Expo March 23 in Altus Feb 08, 2017 Cattle industry 'very concerned' about Trump's pledge to renegotiate NAFTA Feb 06, 2017 House passes bill restoring conservation funds Forrest Laws 1 | Dec 07, 2004 WASHINGTON – The House has passed a bill authored by Sens. Thad Cochran, R-Miss., and Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, that promises to restore funding taken from one set of 2002 farm bill conservation programs and diverted to another. The bill, passed by the Senate in October, now goes to President Bush for his signature. When it becomes law, the legislation will return about $100 million a year to agricultural conservation incentive programs, according to its proponents. “The funding we worked so hard to include in the farm bill for conservation practices was being redirected to other conservation programs by USDA officials in Washington,” said Rep. Frank Lucas, R-Okla. “They were robbing Peter to pay Paul, and the landowners who use these cost-share programs were losing out as a result.” Lucas, chairman of the House Agriculture subcommittee that oversees conservation programs, said the bill prevents conservation funds from being spent on other projects by requiring that funds set aside for working lands conservation efforts can only be spent on those programs. The Senate bill, S-2856, that passed the House Monday was nearly identical to legislation authored by Lucas earlier this year. Sens. Cochran and Harkin are the chairman and ranking member of the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry. Since the current farm bill was enacted in May 2002, USDA has diverted more than $200 million from the Environmental Quality Incentives Program, the Farmland and Ranchland Protection Program, the Grasslands Reserve Program and the Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program to pay for technical assistance for the Conservation Reserve Program and the Wetlands Reserve Program The Senate bill ensures that funding for CRP and WRP technical assistance comes from the Commodity Credit Corp., not from working lands conservation programs, according to proponents of the legislation. “I had hoped that we could have resolved this problem with USDA officials, but our efforts there were unsuccessful,” Lucas said. “This language will correct a problem we’ve been working on since USDA began implementing the 2002 farm bill.” Language in the 2002 farm bill addressed the funding for technical assistance, which USDA field staff and conservation district employees provide to landowners to help them plan and implement soil and water conservation practices. But contradictory language on the issue has since been passed in two appropriations bills, as a result of differing legal opinions from the General Accounting Office and the Department of Justice. During the debate on the 2002 farm bill, Lucas pushed the Agriculture committee to fully fund EQIP, and introduced a bill to provide adequate funding for the program, which was previously funded at $174 million per year. Lucas was successful in his efforts to provide additional EQIP funding, as the farm bill includes $9 billion for EQIP over the next 10 years. Conservation groups praised Lucas and House Agriculture Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, ranking member Charles Stenholm and others for their efforts to pass the legislation. “We are delighted with House passage of the Senate bill that will restore about $100 million a year to key conservation incentive programs,” said Ferd Hoefner, policy director for the Sustainable Agriculture Coalition, which sent letters to House members urging them to pass the bill. “We also commend Sens. Cochran, Harkin, and Herb Kohl, D-Wis., for their three-year effort to overturn misguided administrative rulings. The 2002 legislative change to mandatory Commodity Credit Corp. funding for technical assistance on all farm bill conservation programs was first proposed to Congress by the Sustainable Agriculture Coalition. We are happy to see this issue settled at long last.” e-mail: [email protected]

农业

2017-09/0196/en_head.json.gz/11592

Design and Determination: The Backstory of the Iconic ‘Organic’ Label Americans care more and more about the labels on their food. But the regulatory bar isn’t as high as it should be. (Photo: Wally Eberhart/Getty Images) Jul 23, 2014· Willy Blackmore is TakePart’s Food editor. Food labels are tricky things. They can be essentially meaningless, as in the case of "natural," or, as with the "USDA Organic" label, they can carry a huge amount of meaning. We care a lot about labels that matter: When America goes to the supermarket, nearly half of consumers are looking for the USDA certified organic label on the foods that they buy. That’s one of the findings of a recent survey conducted by Consumer Reports that examined the public’s attitude toward food labeling. While the survey shows that consumers don’t quite have a full understanding of what "organic" means, it also shows that they have a high bar when it comes to the organic foods they buy. Part of the reason the label has achieved acclaim is because of the universal symbol that accompanies it. Consumers readily recognize the seal, yet it’s highly unlikely that they know who George Avalos is. A nearly 20-year veteran of the USDA's Office of Communications, Avalos is, in a sense, the man behind "USDA Organic"—he designed the seal, the marker that has proven able to lead one of every two shoppers to consider a certified organic product over another. Kashi May Be Healthy—but It’s Not ‘All Natural’ Anymore Sales of organic products are projected to approach an estimated $35 billion in 2014, but when Avalos was assigned to design a logo for USDA certified organic products more than a decade ago, the idea of a national organic standard was untested. When "organic" was defined by a patchwork of state regulations, some retailers went so far as to convince companies not to label their products, thinking it would be a turnoff. Working in that environment at USDA, Avalos says, “I had no idea that it was going to get that big, frankly.” But ever since the national organic standards were finally established in 2002—after more than a decade of drafting and deliberating—sales of certified products have continued to rise. Rather than turning off consumers, the seal has come to define not only an industry but a consumer movement for more sustainable food. It is one of the first labels designed to be consistently meaningful across different food categories, a consumer shorthand that serves as a guide to shoppers who want to make better choices but might not have time to do their own research. The food producers who use the label are fully accountable—to the public—making it a credible and singular consumer label. Still, it took a few years for Avalos to realize the cultural weight his design was picking up. “I don’t think I really made a big deal about it until I started walking into stores and saw it appearing on different things,” he says. “It’s funny actually, because I think my friends actually made more of a deal. They had a lot more questions, said a lot more things—‘Wow’ and this and that—saying, ‘You’re immortalized.’ ” As for the concept, Avalos says the process was straightforward. “At that time the government and USDA were very attached to things with a circle—in fact a lot of the USDA labels and the government logos, they all have that rope around them and that eagle over the top.” He wanted to break with that, making a more graphic, modern seal. “I just wanted to make it very simple and use very intensified [type]face,” Franklin Gothic Extended. The seal may have been a departure from “the good ol’ rope around an eagle,” but Avalos says he didn’t dig too deep into the regulations the label stands for when he was coming up with the design. “If you look at the logo, it’s basically a field of green, the crop rows, 'USDA,' 'organic,' and a circle,” he explained. “That’s basically all I did. I didn’t really have to go into reading anything about the USDA organic rules—I knew what it was, but I didn’t go deep into any concepts.” Avalos says he hasn't given much thought to the seal's becoming a symbol of a lifestyle for some Americans, but he acknowledges that a shift is happening, with people thinking more about where their food comes from and eating more healthy, fresh foods—foods that might bear the seal he designed. As the "organic" label gained popularity, many companies took note. But rather than submit their products to the rigorous standards of the "USDA Organic" label, some of them have lured consumers with “natural” and “all natural” labels. Though the words sound appealing, the labels don’t have to mean anything—there are absolutely no standards for the term. The Food and Drug Administration says it “has not developed a definition for use of the term 'natural' or its derivatives.” So consumers are still in the dark. According to the Consumer Reports survey, 59 percent of consumers check to see if the product they’re buying is natural, and a majority of people believe that the term means the item was made from ingredients grown without pesticides, doesn’t include artificial ingredients, and doesn’t contain GMOs. It doesn’t have to mean any of those things. Because of this, Consumer Reports is pushing to kill the "natural" label altogether. The "USDA Organic" label does a good job, and its standards are closely monitored. Consumers deserve labels that say more about our food—labels that are backed up by rigorous standards like Avalos’ "USDA Organic" seal. Bogus Buzzword: This Popular Food Label Is Essentially Meaningless Next The Beef With Beef Labels: Do You Know What They Mean? About Us

农业

2017-09/0196/en_head.json.gz/12319

by peanut Thu Apr 15 2004 at 21:58:16 Bell pepper (Capsicum frutescens grossum) is a type of sweet pepper from the Capsicum annuum family that includes spicy chili peppers. The bell pepper contains a recessive gene that prevents the production of capsaicin, a chemical found in chili peppers that makes them spicy. Members of the pepper family are native to South and Central America and have been grown there for over 2000 years. The crop was very popular and quickly spread throughout the Caribbean and Mexico. Columbus discovered several varieties of peppers including the bell pepper when he was travelling in the West Indies and took them back to Europe, where they became very popular in Spain. The pepper was eventually called the bell pepper because the fruit resembles a bell. Today, bell peppers are mainly grown in Florida, Mexico, and Central America. The peppers grow on bushy upright shrubs that can grow to be about 3 feet tall and prefer warm but not hot climates. The plants produce white flowers about a month after planting and the peppers are harvested roughly two months later. Botanists classify bell peppers as a fruit, not a vegetable. The edible part of the pepper is the fruit wall and the hollow center of the pepper contains numerous small seeds. The fruits tend to be about six inches long and have either three or four prominent lobes. The peppers can be short and stocky or longer and tapered at the end opposite the stem depending on the variety. Bell peppers are most commonly harvested and sold when they are green. These peppers are fully developed but not yet ripe. They must remain on the plant for another several weeks to completely ripen. Ripe peppers will change color to red, yellow, or orange depending on the variety. Green peppers have a slightly astringent flavor while the ripe red, orange, or yellow peppers tend to be much sweeter. Bell peppers are filled with many nutrients, especially vitamin C. Red, yellow, and orange bell peppers also contain beta-carotene and other carotenoids. Bell peppers, especially green peppers, are available in most supermarkets year-round. However, the best selection is during the summer months. When purchasing the peppers, look for smooth, shiny, and firm skin with an undamaged stem. Avoid peppers with wrinkly skin. If you are purchasing green bell peppers and find one with streaks of red it will be sweeter than a normal green pepper. Bell peppers keep for about a week in the fridge and also can be frozen for longer storage. When ready to eat, use a knife to remove the stem and all the seeds inside the pepper. The seeds are attached to walls in the pepper that can be easily removed with your fingers. Peppers, especially the ripe and sweet red, yellow, and orange peppers, can be eaten raw with other vegetables or in a salad. They stand up well to baking, grilling, stir-frying, and sauteeing. Whole peppers can also be stuffed with various grains or meats and baked. BlueDragon adds:"I don't think i've ever seen them called bell peppers in UK. We just refer to them by colour, red pepper, green pepper, yellow, orange." http://www.florilegium.org/files/FOOD-VEGETABLES/peppers-msg.text http://www.gnc.com/health_notes/Food_Guide/Sweet_Peppers.htm http://indian.ifas.ufl.edu/greenpeppernews.htm Bell" pep`per (?). Bot. A species of Capsicum, or Guinea pepper (C. annuum). It is the red pepper of the gardens. The Secret to Great Vegetables chile powder Removing the skin from chile peppers Scoville heat unit banana pepper Easy vegetarian chili Beef fajitas Irish spaghetti Grilled chicken and Vegetables with Mojo Sauce Grilled Squash Foods which can be eaten raw Arroz con pollo (salsa chicken and rice) Italian Sandwiches

农业

2017-09/0196/en_head.json.gz/14434

Environment & Science Deforestation Decreased Over the Past 10 Years April 05, 2010 National and local policies are helping to protect the world’s forests and plant new ones. Click to Listen: Play Audio File Download MP3 (Right-click or option-click and save link) This is the VOA Special English Agriculture Report. The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization says deforestation has decreased over the past ten years. But it still continues at a high rate in many countries. Deforestation is mainly caused by the cutting down of tropical forests to provide land for agriculture. The world’s total forest area is just over four billion hectares. About thirteen million hectares of forest were cut down or lost through natural causes each year in the last ten years. This compares with about sixteen million hectares per year during the nineteen nineties. The FAO study covers two hundred thirty-three countries and areas. The study found that Brazil and Indonesia have reduced their deforestation rates. The two countries had the highest loss of forests in the nineteen nineties. In addition, the study noted tree-planting programs in countries such as China, India, Vietnam and the United States. These programs, along with natural expansion of forests in some areas, have added more than seven million hectares of new forests each year. South America and Africa had the highest yearly loss of forests during the last ten years. South America lost four million hectares. Africa lost almost three and a half million hectares. However, Asia gained more than two million hectares a year in the last decade. In North America and Central America, the forest area remained about the same. In Europe, it continued to expand, but at a slower rate than earlier. Eduardo Rojas is assistant director-general of F.A.O.’s Forestry Department. He said for the first time, the rate of deforestation has decreased around the world. This is the result of efforts taken at local and international levels. Mister Rojas said countries have improved their forest policies and legislation. They have also provided forests for use by local communities and native peoples and for the protection of biological diversity. He said this is a welcome message in two thousand ten – the International Year of Biodiversity. However, Mister Rojas said the rate of deforestation is still very high in many areas. He said countries must strengthen their efforts to better protect and manage their forests. And that’s the VOA Special English Agriculture Report, written by Jerilyn Watson. You can find transcripts, MP3s, podcasts and captioned videos at voaspecialenglish.com. I’m Bob Doughty.

农业

2017-09/0196/en_head.json.gz/15912

Analysis: Nervous farmers scramble for corn seed after drought Share Tweet By Tom Polansek CHICAGO (Reuters) - Ohio farmer Rob Joslin is not taking chances with his corn seed, despite assurances that seed companies emerged from this summer's devastating drought with adequate supplies. Joslin, who grows corn and soybeans in western Ohio, began buying seed in August, months earlier than usual, to lock in the best-yielding varieties. Farmers are "concerned about getting their seed varieties, especially corn," he said. "It may not be there come December 1." Coming off the worst drought in more than half a century, farmers in the United States are scrambling to get their hands on the best corn seed this year to ensure they plant a bumper crop next spring. Their success could be pivotal in keeping food prices stable across the globe. Two of the nation's leading seed companies saw the risk of a shortage coming and boosted seed imports by up to 20 percent to guarantee supplies. With plans to plant a massive number of acres to corn for a second year, farmers want to avoid last year's struggles to find some top-performing varieties that were scarce after poor weather reduced production. The drought reduced harvests again this year in the United States, which accounts for one-third of global corn exports, and lifted corn prices to record highs, pinching livestock producers who use the crop for feed and companies that crank out ethanol. At the height of the price surge this summer, there were fears of a devastating food crisis like in 2007/2008 when riots broke out in some countries and the ranks of the chronically hungry ballooned by 75 million according to United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization data. But seed supplies are sufficient this year, according to sellers like DuPont Pioneer and Monsanto, which dominate the $12 billion agricultural seed business in the United States. Companies say expanded corn plantings compensated for yields that were down 25 percent or more, and they cite timely rains in certain areas for helping avoid severe crop losses. Seed supply is crucial for next year as top-performing varieties have the best chance of producing the large harvest needed to replenish low corn inventories and bring relief from high prices. While saying the total supply is adequate, some companies warn the quick pace of early sales could leave slow-moving farmers planting varieties that do not perform as well in adverse conditions. FEELING THE SQUEEZE Seed companies large and small have their eyes on supply after back-to-back years of depressed production. Total U.S. corn production this year is estimated at a six-year low of 10.725 billion bushels, 27 percent less than the U.S. Department of Agriculture's initial estimate last spring. Elk Mound Seed Co in Wisconsin signed contracts to buy roughly 20 percent more corn seed from the 2012 harvest than it did in 2011, in hopes of avoiding a crunch. However, the increased acres under contract were offset by yields that missed expectations by about 20 to 25 percent, owner Mike Zutter said. "We're really glad we did contract for more, because now we're not going to get to get the fills" on all of the orders, he said. "I'm not going to holler wolf," he said. "There'll be seed out there. Is it tight? Yes." Stine Seed Co, which says it is the largest independent U.S. seed company, planted more acres in the United States and contracted to import almost 20 percent more corn seed from South America this year. The company decided to increase its imports "considering what we went through the year before" with tight supplies, said Myron Stine, vice president of sales. "We'll still be short on particular hybrids," he said. GEOGRAPHY MATTERS Companies were more or less vulnerable to crop damage depending on where their seed was produced. Stine Seed produces about two-thirds of its seed in central Iowa, where yields were down but still generally "good," Stine said. Some fields in Illinois, where southern areas were devastated, produced "nothing," he said. If "you're going to Indiana, Iowa," Stine said, "the drought is just not as severe." Pioneer, one of the world's largest seed companies, grows seed across the Corn Belt, from Nebraska to Indiana, with the large geographic area designed to mitigate events like the drought that devastated crops in certain regions and not others. The company increased its plans to import seed from South America during the summer as the severity of the U.S. drought came into focus. However, its "actual reliance on imports has actually tended to dwindle" because U.S. yields were not as bad as expected, said Dan Case, supply planning manager. "Certainly this was one of the most challenging production years I've seen," he said, declining to detail the U.S. yields. "We've been really pleasantly surprised with the yields." Corn grown for seed is a smaller subset of production. Companies produce it on their own land or sign contracts to buy it from farmers. Corn grown for seed often suffers severe damage from poor weather because it is produced from a genetically pure line that has not been bred with multiple traits to combat adverse conditions. By contrast, corn grown for grain is hardier because it is a hybrid of the best qualities of pure varieties. Farmers used 25 million bushels of corn for seed in the marketing year that ended on August 31, up 2.4 percent from the previous year due to expanded plantings, according to the Agriculture Department. That means about 0.2 percent of the total crop was used for seed. EARLY ORDERS, EARLY PAYMENTS Monsanto, the world's largest seed company, is "confident in supplying seed for the coming year," President Brett Begemann said on an earnings call last month, predicting that farmers for a second year will plant corn on nearly 96 million acres. He noted the supply situation is "remarkably similar" to last year because weather "stretched" seed production in both years. The company declined further comment. "As farmers turn toward next year, seed is a priority," Begemann said on the call. That's true for Joslin and other farmers placing orders early. Illinois-based Wyffels Hybrids has "seen a lot of early orders and early payments," said Jeff Hartz, director of marketing. "People are really after strong genetics that they think are going to perform," he said. Yields at Wyffels' seed farms in northern Illinois caught "lucky" rains and were roughly 10 percent below average, much better than the 40 percent losses the company said were possible, Hartz said. Wyffels has a good supply of seed on hand after expanding plantings last spring, he said, adding that some top varieties could run short industrywide. Referring to Wyffels' supply, he said: "We feel like right now it's probably a competitive advantage." (Reporting By Tom Polansek; editing by Jim Marshall) Share this on Facebook Tweet Tags: Drought

农业

2017-09/0196/en_head.json.gz/16347

Environment: Commission calls for a stronger response to soil degradation Brussels, 13 February 2012. Soil degradation is a worrying phenomenon in the EU. Between 1990 and 2006, at least 275 hectares of soil per day were permanently lost through soil sealing – the covering of fertile land by impermeable material – amounting to 1,000 km² per year, or an area the size of Cyprus every ten years. Soil erosion by water is estimated to affect 1.3 million km² in Europe, an area equivalent to 2.5 times the size of France. Soil degradation affects our capacity to produce food, prevent droughts and flooding, stop biodiversity loss, and tackle climate change. These are some of the main findings of two new reports on the policy and scientific aspects of European soil presented by the European Commission. Environment Commissioner Janez Potočnik said: "These reports highlight the importance of preserving European soils if we are to safeguard supplies of quality food and clean groundwater, healthy recreational spaces, and lower greenhouse gas emissions. We need to use the resources from our soils more sustainably. The best way to do this would be through a common approach across the EU. The Commission has put legislative proposals on the table, and I hope our new reports will help Council and Parliament move towards action. " The reports underline the need for action to prevent the ongoing deterioration of Europe's soils. Erosion, soil sealing and acidification have all increased in the past decade, and the trend is likely to continue unless challenges such as rising land-use, the inefficient use of natural resources and the preservation of organic matter in soil are addressed. According to the policy report, five years after the adoption of a Soil Thematic Strategy, there is still no systematic monitoring and protection of soil quality across Europe. This means that existing actions are not sufficient to ensure an adequate level of protection for all soil in Europe. In preparation for action at EU level, the Commission has been working to support soil awareness initiatives, research and monitoring projects, such as LUCAS, a survey on land cover, land use and agro-environmental indicators run by Eurostat. The Commission has also continued to integrate the objective of soil protection into other EU policies, including agriculture and rural development. Around €3.1 billion has been allocated to the rehabilitation of industrial sites and contaminated land as part of the Cohesion Policy for the period 2007-2013. Hungary, the Czech Republic and Germany have allocated the most funding (€475, 371, and 332 million respectively). In addition to ongoing actions aimed at addressing soil degradation, the Commission intends to support research and soil monitoring, finalise guidelines on soil sealing and integrate further soil considerations in the upcoming review of the Environmental Impact Assessment Directive. The Commission will also propose accounting for land use, land use change and forestry emissions (LULUCF) as part of the EU's climate change commitment for 2020, as well as work at the international level to promote soil-related initiatives. The scientific report 'The state of soil in Europe' has been published by the European Commission's Joint Research Centre, in collaboration with the European Environment Agency, and provides a comprehensive overview of our present understanding of soil resources and degradation processes. The report concludes that further research and improved data collection is needed to advance our knowledge and heighten public awareness of the importance of soil. The European Parliament and the Council are now invited to submit their views on the policy report. Background In 2006 the European Commission adopted a Soil Framework Directive, which addresses soil protection, including its trans-boundary aspects. The Directive aims at ensuring soil productivity, especially for food production, limiting risks to human health and the environment, providing opportunities for climate mitigation and adaptation and stimulating business opportunities for soil remediation. The Directive, which is still being debated in the Council and the European Parliament, once adopted, will contribute to address some of the critical issues highlighted in the report. Further information: Policy report: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/soil/three_en.htm Scientific report: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/jrc/index.cfm?id=2540 MEMO/06/341 on the Soil Thematic Strategy http://ec.europa.eu/environment/soil/index_en.htm http://eusoils.jrc.ec.europa.eu/

农业

2017-09/0196/en_head.json.gz/16896

Industry Cargill results bounce back in first quarter By Christine Stebbins, Reuters October 11, 2012 | 11:40 am EDT Agribusiness giant Cargill Inc said on Thursday quarterly earnings rose strongly, boosted by all five main business segments, but cautioned the impact of the worst U.S. drought in a half century was still unfolding. Minneapolis-based Cargill, one of the world's largest privately held corporations, reported net earnings of $975 million for the first quarter of fiscal 2013 ended Aug. 31, versus $236 million for the same quarter a year ago. The profit compared with $73 million for the March-May quarter - its lowest quarterly earnings since 1991. Revenues for the first quarter dipped to $33.8 billion from $34.6 billion a year earlier, the company said in a statement. Cargill Chief Executive Greg Page said the improved performance was due to the broad reach of its operations into most major areas of the world's food production systems. But he warned the full effects of drought and other weather- related damage to U.S. and world crops were still working through the supply chain and would challenge food processors, livestock feeders and exporters in the months ahead. Cargill said quarterly results were balanced, with improved earnings across all five business segments. There were no significant losses in any one business unit and results benefited from efforts in the past 12 months to lower costs, streamline work flows and reassess capital spending. "By investing steadily, we've been able to significantly boost the breadth and depth of the products and services we offer our customers," Page said. "And that has strengthened the balance, diversification and resilience we strive for in our business." He added that Cargill has spent $8.1 billion on supply-chain investments in the last two years. The company said the drought in the United States, the largest exporter of corn, soybeans and wheat as well as other food products, will continue to present challenges but crop damage in other areas, notably the Black Sea region in Europe, will do the same. "The impact of the drought on Cargill's business has been mixed and will continue to be so in the months ahead. The weather has altered the normal distribution of raw materials around the world, and that is pushing more international buyers to non-U.S. origins. As a result, Cargill expects more atypical trade flows," the company said in a statement. "Cargill's North American grain handling volumes for exports are anticipated to be lower than pre-drought expectations, and it may be a challenging year for the company's animal protein businesses globally." Cargill employs 142,000 people in 65 countries. Its main businesses are in agricultural services, food ingredients, food and crop processing, risk management and an industrial sector that includes metals, salt and other commodities. Cargill reported weak results in three of the four quarters in fiscal 2012, citing volatile commodity markets and soft world economic growth, even before the drought began hurting crops and livestock across the U.S. On Aug. 15, Standard and Poor's revised its outlook for Cargill to negative from stable, citing doubts about a 2013 earnings rebound. But S&P reaffirmed Cargill's strong credit ratings. Investors' confidence in Cargill as one of the strongest players in the cyclical and volatile world commodity markets was underscored on Aug. 29, when the company's 500 million euro bond issue was eight times oversubscribed. cargill About the Author: Christine Stebbins, Reuters

农业

2017-09/0196/en_head.json.gz/17163

Machines help farmers with feeding and milking cows Sun Mar 23rd, 2014 2:30pmBusiness By Amy Watkins For the Herald Business Journal ARLINGTON — A robot helps feed Nick Van Dam’s dairy cows. The red-and-white automatic feed pusher moves along the feeding alley at Van Dam’s dairy, a nearly 200-acre farm in an urban growth area between Arlington and Marysville. The Lely Juno 100 pushes feed closer to where cows are able to reach it. “The cows have fresh feed pushed up to them more often,” said Van Dam. “I have it running now 14 times a day. The more they eat, the more they milk.” Van Dam has owned his dairy farm on 67th Avenue since 1978. He first learned about the Lely Juno 100 after a visit to Excel Dairy Service, Inc. in Mount Vernon. The business provides equipment, supplies, animal health and services to support and improve the dairy industry. After learning about the robot, Van Dam knew he wanted to see one in action. He traveled to Abbotsford, B.C., in late 2012 to a farm with a Juno. The robot, which cost about $20,000, works well and has been reliable throughout the more than one year Van Dam has had it. Before his Juno arrived, Van Dam and his four employees had to manually push feed to as many as 200 cows three or four times a day. They now use their time and equipment on other jobs around the farm. “I saw it was a way to save labor and the cows would eat more,” Van Dam said. Excel Dairy Service more than two years ago became a distributor for Lely, a company that services agricultural products including automated milking systems. Based in The Netherlands, Lely’s North American headquarters and production site is in Pella, Iowa. Customers started asking about Lely products before they were available through Excel Dairy Service, said Aaron Johnson, Northwest sales manager. Excel Dairy Service has now sold the Lely Juno 100 and two other Lely robots in Washington and Oregon. The Lely Discovery, a mobile barn cleaner, was sold in Randle, a small town near Mount St. Helens. and the owners of Styger Family Dairy in March installed the first robotic milking system in the state. Linda and Andy Styger added two Lely Astronaut A4 robotic milking systems to their organic dairy farm in Chehalis. Before the robots, the Stygers milked their 90 cows twice daily. Now the cows can be milked up to four times daily and the couple has time to do other things. “We have gone to grandkids’ basketball games, cheerleading events, and out to dinner,” Linda Styger said. “You still have to do daily maintenance on machines but don’t have twice a day milking you have to be there for.” The Lely Astronaut typically costs about $250,000 with installation, Johnson said. Like other Lely devices, it’s programmable to fit the needs at different farms. A collar around the neck of each cow measures activity and possible health issues. That information is collected and downloaded whenever the animal freely walks into the robot. Then, based on that information, the machine automatically dispenses grain and milks the cow or lets her pass through. “The grain is like candy to them and that’s the motivator for them to go to the robot,” Johnson said. “If it’s time to milk, it will.” About 450 Lely robotic milking systems were installed in the United States and Canada last year. The third in the state began to be installed in late January in Grays River. While helpful to dairy farmers, Johnson said the Lely Astronaut isn’t an excuse for bad management. “It’s not a silver bullet,” Johnson said. “It just requires a different skills set and it changes how you work and how you think. It doesn’t mean the (work goes away) but it gives you flexibility in your schedule and that’s probably the biggest thing I hear over and over again.” Styger and her husband use the 120 pieces of information they receive daily about each of their cows as a management tool. She added that the robots were a choice to continue to own and operate the farm that has been in the Styger family since 1919. “It’s a lifestyle choice,” she said. “It’s hard on your body and it’s hard to find young people who want to come and do this type of job. We needed something to make it so we can continue milking for another 10 years.”

农业

2017-09/0196/en_head.json.gz/18690

Gladiolus oppositiflorus Herb. Family: Iridaceae (iris family) Common names: Transkei gladiolus, salmon gladiolus Gladioli are popular garden plants, cultivated in Europe for more than 250 years and renowned for their striking, colourful flowers. But did you know that these garden plants were grown from hybrids of wild gladioli native to South Africa? Gladiolus oppositiflorus, with its large, showy flowers is an important species in the breeding history of a number of Gladiolus hybrids, but is also an attractive garden plant in its own right. Description Gladiolus oppositiflorus is a summer-growing plant, 0.6-1.6 m high, with aboveground parts disappearing during winter. Roots, leaves and flowers develop from an underground corm, which is a swollen part of the stem serving as a storage organ when the plant dies back during winter. Leaves are long and narrow, and resemble the shape of a sword, which is where the genus derives its name. .The flowering stem is tall and straight, with flowers developing in succession from the lower end towards the tip, and is called a spike. Successive flowers face in opposite directions. The flowers are large and funnel-shaped, with long, narrow, curved perianth tubes. Flower colour varies from white, to mauve, pale or salmon-pink, with the lower petals (tepals) marked with dark red streaks. Flowering time varies between different areas of the species' native range, with some flowering from November to December, and others from February to March. The fruit is an oblong, three-lobed capsule and the small (4-6 mm), round seeds are winged. Conservation Status Gladiolus oppositiflorus is a representative from the Pondoland Centre of Plant Endemism, located in a small area between the Mzimvubu River, near Port St Johns, and the Umtamvuna River, near Port Edward, within the region known as the Transkei Wild Coast. This is an area of great natural beauty, and many rare and unusual species are found here. Because a high number of species are concentrated in such a small area of only about 180 000 hectares, the Pondoland Centre of Endemism is acknowledged by international conservation organizations such as the World Conservation Union (IUCN) and the World Wildlife Fund for Nature (WWF), as one of 235 world-wide centres of plant diversity. Another international organization, Conservation International, included the Pondoland Centre among only 25 global hot spot sites (see CI hotspots ), in need of special conservation efforts. However, locally, very little is being done to conserve the Pondoland floral riches. Only a few small nature reserves exist within the area, and although negotiations have been going on for years, no national park to conserve the Pondoland Centre has been established to date. Meanwhile the Pondoland Centre faces severe threats from dune mineral mining, overgrazing, illegal holiday cottage developments and a proposed toll road connecting Durban and East London which could dissect the most sensitive areas of the Centre containing more than 200 endemic or near-endemic plant species. Distribution and Habitat Gladiolus oppositiflorus is endemic to the summer rainfall regions of the Eastern Cape north of East London to southern KwaZulu-Natal, from the coast to as far inland as the Lesotho border. It is found in rocky areas in open grassland, often among rocks along streams. Derivation of name and historical aspects The genus name Gladiolus comes from the Latin word gladius, meaning sword, and refers to the shape of the leaves of all members of the genus. The species name oppositiflorus refers to the opposite-facing flowers, but this is not a unique characteristic to this species, as some closely related species such as G. elliotii and G. sericeovillosus also have opposite-facing flowers. The species was first mentioned in horticultural literature in 1837 by the Rev. William Herbert (1778-1847), theologian, linguist, poet, amateur botanist and father of the English novelist Henry William Herbert. Herbert experimented with breeding garden hybrids from wild species of Gladiolus. The salmon-pink variety of this species is found further inland on the lower slopes of the Drakensberg, and is somewhat shorter-stemmed than the coastal form, the flowers do not open as widely and the inland variety is always deciduous whereas the coastal form is often evergreen. They were long thought to be two different species, or subspecies, with the salmon-pink variety called G. salmoneus by J.G Baker (1896). A.A. Obermeyer (Lewis et al . 1972) classified it as G. oppositiflorus subsp. salmoneus in her revision of the genus. Therefore, in many older gardening publications the two forms are referred to by separate common names, with the coastal form called Transkei gladiolus, whereas the salmon-pink, inland form is called salmon gladiolus. Goldblatt & Manning (1998) found that the two forms integrate in the central Eastern Cape and therefore they are currently considered to be a single species. Ecology Gladiolus oppositiflorus is pollinated by species of flies with elongated mouthparts, also called long-tongued flies belonging to the family Nemestrinidae, the tangle-veined flies. The mouthparts of these flies can be several times longer than the body length of the fly, and is ideally adapted to reach nectar at the bottom of the long narrow perianth tube. The specific lengths of the flies' mouthparts vary according to the length of the perianth tube of the flowers they pollinate. The dark red markings on the lower parts of the flower are there to guide the insect towards the inner parts of the flower and are called nectar guides. Although the flies may visit different species of flowers with elongated perianth tubes, pollen does not get mixed between different species. This is because the structural arrangement of the floral parts are adapted so that pollen is only deposited on very precise parts of the fly's body, and each species deposits pollen on a unique part of the insect's body. This prevents the clogging of stigmas with foreign pollen, which will prevent fertilization and seed set, and also prevents the formation of natural hybrids between wild species. Uses and cultural aspects Gladiolus oppositiflorus has no known traditional or medicinal uses, but is highly regarded as a very attractive garden plant and cut flower. Growing Gladiolus oppositiflorus Gladiolus oppositiflorus is relatively easy to grow, and can be cultivated from corms as well as seeds. It should preferably be planted in light, well-drained, sandy loam soil in full sun. As this is a summer-growing species, plant corms in spring (around September) and give plenty of water all through the growing season. Corms are best planted in open ground, rather than pots, roughly 10 cm deep and 15 cm apart. Avoid the use of inorganic fertilizers, especially those with high nitrogen content. Rather use compost, and bonemeal can also be beneficial. The corms can be left in the soil during the winter dormancy period, or lifted and stored in a cool airy place to prevent decay. When growing from seed, sow in September. The seeds generally germinate well and seedlings appear after two to four weeks. Water thoroughly all through the growing season. However, flowers will only be produced from the second season onwards. Summer-growing Gladiolus species such as G. oppositiflorus are particularly susceptible to a wide range of pests, such as aphids, mealybugs and thrips, while red spider mites may become a problem when conditions are dry. G. oppositiflorus is also susceptible to rust, but avoid the use of copper-based fungicides. References and further reading Baker, J.G. 1896. Flora Capensis 6:154 Barnhoorn, F. 2005. Growing bulbs in southern Africa, edn 2. Struik, Cape Town . Bryan , J.E. 1989. Bulbs. Volume I, A-H. Christopher Helm Publishers, Bromley. Du Plessis, N. & Duncan, G. 1989. Bulbous plants of southern Africa : guide to their cultivation and propagation. Tafelberg, Cape Town . Eliovson, S. 1973. South African wild flowers for the garden, edn 5. Macmillan, Johannesburg. Goldblatt, P. & Manning, J. 1998. Gladiolus in southern Africa. Fernwood Press, Vlaeberg, Cape Town . Goldblatt, P. & Manning, J. 1999. The long-proboscid fly pollination system in Gladiolus (Iridaceae). Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 86: 758-774. Lewis, G.J., Obermeyer, A.A. & Barnard, T.T. 1972. Gladiolus : a revision of the South African species. Journal of South African Botany Suppl. 10. Nel, M. 2003. The extraordinary floral riches of Pondoland: Working towards a ' Pondo Park '. Veld & Flora 89: 96-100. Picker, M., Griffiths, C. & Weaving, A. 2004. Field guide to the insects of South Africa . Struik, Cape Town . Van der Spuy, U. 1971. Wild flowers of South Africa for the garden. Hugh Keartland Publishers, Johannesburg . If you enjoyed this webpage, please record your vote. Excellent - I learnt a lot Good - I learnt something new Lize Agenbag Pretoria National Botanical Garden May 2006 To find out if SANBI has seed of this or other SA species, please email our seedroom. This page forms part of the South African National Biodiversity Institute's plant information website www.plantzafrica.com © S A National Biodiversity Institute Copyright/Using this information

农业

2017-09/0196/en_head.json.gz/19090

2016: Reality for producers ‘was pretty grim’ Feb 13, 2017 Cash, other prizes could be yours at Mid-South Farm & Gin Show Feb 15, 2017 Judsons winners in National Outstanding Young Farmer competition Feb 14, 2017 What are Arkansas rice producers considering for 2017 season? Feb 15, 2017 Economists tackle aquaculture risks Bob Ratliff | Jan 09, 2004 Keith Coble and Terry Hanson are listening a lot as part of their effort to reduce the economic risks associated with production of catfish and other aquaculture species. Coble and Hanson, both agricultural economists with the Mississippi Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station at Mississippi State University, are the principal investigators for the National Risk Management Feasibility Program for Aquaculture, a four-year U.S. Department of Agriculture-funded partnership. They are working with USDA's Risk Management Agency and the Federal Crop Insurance Corp. to find ways to protect producers of the nation's top farm-raised aquaculture species from devastating economic losses. As part of their work, they are listening to producers of catfish, salmon, trout and baitfish. U.S. producers of those species received more than $568 million for their products in 2001, the most recent year with complete sales data. Catfish accounted for 68 percent of the total. “One of the biggest concerns among producers is disease,” Coble said. “In fact, producers have told us that they worry about the impact yet-undiscovered diseases could have on their industry.” One way to provide economic protection for aquaculture would be a federal crop insurance program similar to those available for cotton and other row crops. The fact that no other livestock enterprise is covered by a government insurance program and the very nature of aquaculture make developing a plan difficult. “Catfish and other aquaculture enterprises don't have the long-term production data available for row crops,” Hanson said. “It's also difficult to determine fish numbers and pounds in the pond.” That's why Coble and Hanson are listening to producers, insurance experts, USDA personnel, industry leaders and aquatic disease experts in their quest for the best approach to providing insurance and other protective measures. “Producers have told us that they don't want just normal losses covered,” Coble said. “They already factor those losses into their operations. What they want and need is protection from catastrophic losses due to a disease outbreak or a natural disaster, such as flooding.” A benefit of a federal crop insurance program, Hanson added, is that USDA's Risk Management Agency will subsidize premiums, which will help address the cost issue. “Producers tell us, however, that they don't want a program that will entice new producers with the idea that fish production is risk-free,” he said. As part of their research efforts, the economists are working with Carla Huston, an assistant professor at MSU's College of Veterinary Medicine. Huston organized an aquatic animal disease workshop for the project, which brought more than 30 scientists from across the nation to the Starkville, Miss., campus to discuss health issues involving the project's four species. Over the course of the two-day workshop, participants discussed disease issues in aquaculture and their own research into many of the problems. On the second day, the scientists toured the National Warmwater Aquaculture Center in Stoneville, Miss., and several commercial catfish operations in the Mississippi Delta. One of the goals of the workshop was to stimulate ideas among the researchers for potential research projects that could be funded by the MSU program. “Risk management is new to aquaculture, and the workshop helped position Mississippi State University as a leader in addressing health issues,” Huston said. “Bringing together Mississippi State's veterinary medicine personnel with scientists who are working with species other than catfish was a way to look at some of our disease problems from different perspectives.” The workshop participants will be submitting reports to help provide guidelines for disease management. Coble and Hanson are about halfway through the four-year project and will continue to gather input from agricultural insurance experts in this country and overseas. Bob Ratliff is a science writer for University Relations at Mississippi State University.

农业

2017-09/0196/en_head.json.gz/19166

Q&A: Why the Produce Industry Opposes Tester By Helena Bottemiller | November 23, 2010 As part of our ongoing expert Q&A series, a conversation with Bob Whitaker, the Produce Marketing Association’s Chief Science Officer: After working with Congress to get comprehensive food safety legislation in the pipeline, the Produce Marketing Association joined 19 other big produce interest groups last week to oppose S.510, a bill they’d been actively supporting, over a deal to include an amendment proposed by Sen. Jon Tester (D-MT) to exempt small farmers and producers under certain circumstances. (See: Politics, Small Farm Deal Stall Food Safety Bill, Nov. 19) Food Safety News had a chance to chat with Bob Whitaker, PMA’s lead food safety expert, to discuss the group’s opposition to the Tester amendment as part of the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act. Q: I know your members include the big players in the produce industry, but does PMA have small producer members who have been concerned about the pending food safety bill?A: We’re a global organization. PMA has over 3,000 members worldwide, so we represent the entire supply chain–that can be anybody from a small grower up to a large retailer or food service organization, and everybody in between. We have small growers, large growers, processors, transportation people, retailers, distributors, harvesters, you name it. Q: PMA has obviously been very engaged on the food safety bill, have you been actively working with staff on the Hill to express your views to the Tester-Hagan amendment from the get go? A: We’ve been working for quite a while now for comprehensive food safety regulations for the industry. We were disappointed last week when the Tester amendment basically stayed intact and made exemptions possible. It leaves holes in the system and it doesn’t do everything it could do to protect public health. Q: Are you more worried about the economic consequences–if one small tomato grower has a problem, it could impact everyone–or do you think that the growing number of small farms is actually an increasing public health risk? A: Well, I think what we’d like to see that everybody in the system has to have a food safety program. We’ve long advocated that producers have to take responsibility for the safety of their food, that they have to perform risk-assessments, and that we ought to try to use the best science we have available to us–and the best knowledge we have on each particular commodity and crop in each region–that’s really what’s most important to us, to have that baseline across the entire supply chain for food safety. We want to see everyone in the produce industry have access to markets and, frankly, if you don’t have a food safety program, whether Congress mandates it or not, you’re going to find yourself with limited access to markets because more and more of the buying community is demanding that you have a food safety program–something that’s written down, something you can look at, something you can actually verify. I think we’re doing a great disservice to part of our membership, and to the industry as a whole, if we [exempt] a big block of the sector. That’s why we’ve been so active in trying to set up training programs for smaller or regional growers around the country. You can advocate that everyone needs a program, but you need to do the other part, you’ve got to take action. We’ve partnered with some of our members to begin training programs simply so we can talk to regional growers about what it takes to put a foods safety program in place, how do you do a risk-assessment, how do you get an audit. A lot of these things can be really daunting … if you haven’t done it before. But the overwhelming response we get from growers after these trainings is: ‘that’s not so hard, we can do that.’ Q: Do you think that between the trade associations and university extension programs, the infrastructure exists to provide the training necessary for small growers to get support putting food safety programs together? A: I think there are a number of resources out there that are available to retail growers and smaller growers. You do have the trade associations, but more important than that you have the agriculture extension services at land grant colleges, you have regional and commodity groups, so you have smaller associations that might represent Washington apples, or the leafy green growers and shippers in Salinas, or the tomatoes in Florida–many of them in one fashion or another have offered food safety training programs or educational sessions. You also have third-party providers that can help with training programs. About two weeks ago the FDA put a $1.2 million grant into Cornell University to take the work they’ve been doing on [Good Agricultural Practices] and spread it nationally. http://www.gaps.cornell.edu/ One of the things we try to do with our [PMA] training programs is making growers aware of these resources. There are a lot of online tutorials to help you work through personalized risk-assessments and best practices. Q: Even with support from the resources you mentioned, it will take man hours and sometimes changing practices to comply with the new regulations, a lot of the concerns I hear from farmers are centered on cost and time … some of the very small business owners think this will put them under. In your experience working with smaller growers, have you seen some positive transitions? Are the costs prohibitive? A: You hear costs a lot. One thing you have to say up front, when you look at this, is that there are a lot of very small growers who are already doing this. I think there is plenty of evidence where growers have already made this a priority and they have been able to do so in a pretty innovative manner. There is a cost to this, there is no doubt about that. ,But it doesn’t have to be overwhelmingly expensive. A lot of this is common sense. One thing I’ve seen many, many times: food safety practices are good business practices. Food safety costs are scalable. You can do a third-party verification audit for as little as a few hundred dollars. People need to dive in and understand that this is food and you have to take responsibility for the safety of our food, to the extent that you can. Q: What about the argument that locally sold food presents a much lower risk to consumers? If something goes wrong, it will be contained to relatively small region and to a relatively small number of consumers… A: I look at that a couple different ways. Number one, everybody in agriculture understands that all production is local to someplace, and all production is fairly small. If you look at some of these larger grower-shippers, they are basically kind of accumulation points for small farmers that contribute into that grower-shipper and provide product. I would say that the least common denominator for our industry is a small farm. Number two, the pathogens don’t know what size farm they’re on. If practices are roughly similar and you’re facing outdoor environments where you’re producing food that may or may not have risks associated with them, and that may, or may not, have conditions that are controllable, it does not matter what size your plot of lan d is. If someone gets sick, the consumer doesn’t care if it’s a small farm, a local farm, a big farm–they’ve suffered an injury. I think that given the science that we don’t understand at this point and the very sporadic and random contamination events that we’ve seen, I don’t think we want to leave any stone unturned to make food as safe as it can be. Q: I don’t know if you saw that Glenn Beck started talking about the food safety bill on his radio program–which has millions of viewers–and he talked about it increasing the cost of food. I wonder if you have any thoughts about how this kind of alarmism fuels the push-back against something that the food industry actually supports… A: I always just go back to the basic premise: We’re all consumers. When I go to the store and I buy food, in this case produce, I expect it to be safe. People have got to understand one thing: you have to think about the people you’re serving. At the end of the day, we’re pursuing improved food safety so that products can be as safe as they possibly can, every time. Consumers have to be confident that our products are safe. That is the bottom-line contract we have with our consumers. When we see repeated recalls and positive tests, that hurts consumer confidence. When you think about food safety costs: can we afford not to do it? We make the healthiest, most nutritious products out there. If you look at FDA, USDA, CDC, all they want is to increase fruit and vegetable consumption. When we have an obesity epidemic in this country we ought to be doing everything we possibly can to have positive messaging on produce. I weigh that against food safety costs as well. Q: Are you confident that a compromise will be reached so that PMA can support the final version of the food safety bill? A: I don’t know. I think we’re all kind of waiting to see what happens on the legislative side. PMA will continue to work with the legislative side and will continue to work with the FDA–whatever legislation comes out it will be up to FDA to write the rules–and we will certainly work with them to get the most comprehensive food safety rules we can. Note: S.510 is expected to be taken up by the Senate the evening of Nov. 29. The conversation above has been slightly edited for length and readability.___ Featured past Food Safety News Expert Q&As: National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition on S. 510 Eric Schlosser T&E Meats on Small Meat Food Safety Produce Safety Project Marion Nestle More Headlines from Food Policy & Law »Tags: Bob Whitaker, Jon Tester, Produce Marketing Association, S. 510 This seems dubious. This guy is part of the lobbying group that wanted to ban the “dirty dozen” pesticides list. They argue that pesticides are safe, and that the public shouldn’t know about it. Go to the PMA website and do a search for Monsanto. That should tell you everything you need to know. But if you want your food to be under the jurisdiction of Monsanto and the DHS, by all means, don’t call your senator and try to stop s.510 Doc Mudd Whitaker: “A lot of this is common sense. One thing I’ve seen many, many times: food safety practices are good business practices.” “…the pathogens don’t know what size farm they’re on.” “If someone gets sick, the consumer doesn’t care if it’s a small farm, a local farm, a big farm–they’ve suffered an injury.” Yep. What he said. Exactly right, Whitaker! Keep the food science, cast out the superstition and woo. Exempting 95% of food producers from compliance with basic food safety standards assures that consumer confidence remains low, maybe declines now that it’s clear small producers care nothing for consumer safety – just worried over grubby profits. My family will no longer purchase ‘tailgate food’. Claims of ‘safe and healthy’ backed up only by the vendor’s sales pitch. Screw that! Michael Bulger @Doc Mudd Where do you get this “95% of food producers” figure that you repeat here? The Tester amendment exempts only facilities that do under $500,000 annually, within a 275 mile radius, and over 50% of their customers must be “qualified end-users” (restaurants, grocers, consumers direct). Do you have actual data that shows this is 95% of producers? I seem to recall Tester saying on the floor of the Senate that this would only cover 1% of the market. I don’t think that there is a small farm in the country that doesn’t think that they should have food safety programs. What we don’t want is regulations that only medium to large sized operations can handle. Lets not forget that lawsuits are a fairly effective means of keeping the supply safe. dangermaus This is complete BS. Nowhere does it mention the main problem with large-scale processing of food, namely the cross-contamination that occurs when food from dozens of sources all get processed on the same machinery. motherdog I think the whole bill should be tossed. STOP releasing GMO’s will do more for our food safety than this bill. Check out the FDA’s mobile lab. The pathogens can actually be growing right in the plants themselves. The salmonella is inside the eggs. If anyone thinks this bill will enhance food safety I think they will be in for a big surprise. At the rate rate we are going, the only safe food will be cooked. Does anyone pay attention to the “Food security” portions of the bill. This whole bill is scary. No problem, Bulger. Just visit the 2007 Census of Agriculture, where the facts reside. Facts…no substitute for facts!! You will find listed 2,204,792 total farms, of which 63,567 generate $500,000 or more in annual revenue. Some simple arithmetic [63,567 / 2,204,792 = .029] indicates that I may have underestimated — it’s really only 3% of farms that are fundamentally disqualified from claiming the dangerous Tester exemption Some 97% of farms meet the “$500,000 or less” test, and are only left to argue over where and to whom they market (an honor system set of reports, no doubt? Probably no chance of deception or fudging in reporting this, right?) Now, any epidemiologist and most sane, sensible people will correctly point out that each food producing farm (regardless of size or management philosophy) is a potential source of pestilence. You are left to opine and argue that ‘dilution is the solution’, but the smart money manages each potential point source to prevent catastrophe. You know what they say; “An ounce of prevention…” It only takes one grubby producer with some unsafe queer notion or other to place consumers at risk. Consumers like my family and yours. And that’s why my family will no longer purchase tailgate food. Why risk being poisoned by some goofball who understands nothing and cares nothing for food safety, who only cares for plumping his/her profits with every corner-cutting strategy they think they can get away with? The hobby farm lobby’s solo support of the Tester loopholes informs us – we now know “know our farmer” as someone who insists on remaining unaccountable, who cares nothing for our welfare, someone who is only after our grocery money. Carpe diem for the little producer, caveat emptor for you and me. “You will find listed 2,204,792 total farms…” This regulates “food facilities.” There are only about 160,000 of them in the United States. Here’s a link to the FDA’s website about who is supposed to be registering: http://www.fda.gov/Food/FoodDefense/Bioterrorism/FoodFacilityRegistration/ucm081610.htm It specifically exempts, “Farms, i.e., facilities in one general physical location devoted to the growing and harvesting of crops, the raising of animals (including seafood), or both.” Opponents of the bill have argued that the produce safety section might apply to farms, but that section refers to “facilities” repeatedly in its text. Additionally, there is nothing in this bill about FDA gathering registration information or constructing a database with which they might regulate farms. S.510 also states, “Nothing in this Act authorizes the Secretary to modify the definition of the term ‘‘facility’’…” The idea that, at any point, this bill was going to result in the FDA visiting a million small vegetable farmers is not very sensible. It is a useful tool for those who would oppose the bill for political reasons. Not very realistic, but it sure swells the ranks of opposition to whip the locavore movement into a frenzy. Even if that means lying to them. Steve Savage The issues that lead to food safety problems are not related to the scale of the farm (bird dropping from the sky, pathogens in manure or compost, pathogens introduced by interloping animals…). The ability to trace problems to a source is related to scale ( you will never be able to do that for the small local source vs the large grower/shipper). The Tester amendment might make some sense in terms of a burden on small producers from an economic (not a safety) point of view, but its threshold of $500,000 income is completely arbitrary. Tester’s own comments about how only small producers are generating “food” vs commodities completely undermines his credibility on this issue.

农业

2017-09/0196/en_head.json.gz/19356

Your E-mail: My AccountContact Us Temra Costa: The Feminine Side of Farming by Anna Soref If you grew up like most Americans, the word farmer probably conjures an image of a man in overalls, maybe driving a tractor or standing by a trusty dog. Preschool songs and television taught you that men farm and women garden. In the past decade, however, the farmer concept has evolved to also imply organic, local and farmers’ market. The evolution of the iconic farmer needs one more tweak to get us up to speed, says Temra Costa, author of Farmer Jane: Women Changing the Way We Eat (Gibbs Smith, 2010). The farmer needs to be a woman. The last agricultural census showed women-owned farms have increased by 30 percent. Additionally, women are the founders and force behind much of today’s sustainable-food legislation and emerging businesses. “We know that women are there, very much involved in food, but for some reason those stories weren’t being told,” Costa says. Sustainable Renaissance The burgeoning sustainable agricultural renaissance has been upon us now for about a decade. Farmers’ markets grew 17 percent last year. Small farms are popping up everywhere, many offering Community Supported Agriculture memberships that quickly sell out each spring. Most cities offer at least one farm-to-table restaurant. Salad bars are even creeping into public schools, some supplied by local farms. The sung heroes of this movement show up in the media frequently. People like Michael Pollan, Jamie Oliver, Joel Salatin and Mark Bittman share the good news of sustainable ag. But the women often remain in the shadows. Women such as Elizabeth Henderson of Peacework Organic Farm, who had the courage to take enormous risks for change. In 1979 Henderson retired from teaching at a university to start a farm. “I wanted to live in a way that was in concert with my beliefs about the environment and community,” she says. Her farm debuted one of the first CSAs 23 years ago. To do this, Henderson had to break with the values she was taught in the 1950s, that there is only one true way to do things,she says. Along the way she encountered many condescending and unpleasant men, “but that’s how social change is. Women stuck in behind-the-scenes agricultural roles is nothing new, according to Costa. Before the Industrial Revolution you had couples who were farming with their children and their families, and the women wouldn’t call themselves farmers. You still see that today; a woman will say, My husband is the farmer and I’m the farmer’s wife.It wasn’t until 2002 that the U.S. Census of Agriculture added a place for a second signature to indicate more than one farm owner. Costa got up close and personal with small farmers while working for the nonprofit Community Alliance with Family Farmers, in California. Her job entailed visiting area farms and getting to know the farmers. “I found myself driving around to different farms taking photos and writing down the farmers’ stories; I felt like Dorothea Lange. Meeting the people—that’s what hooked me,” she says. Throughout her six and a half years working with CAFF, a thread was constant: the large number of women in the sustainable-food movement. “It was something that couldn’t be denied. I became intent on helping them succeed and connecting them to the world,” Costa relates. The result was her book Farmer Jane, which profiles 30 women involved in sustainable food, from farmers to legislators and chefs. Was Costa worried about backlash from the male-dominated farming and ag community? Nope. “If anyone had a beef with me they could bring it up in a public forum and we could discuss why women are important in the movement, and why haven’t they been given their due attention?” she states. Women, a Natural Fit for Farming and Food Women tend to possess characteristics that make them a natural fit for sustainable farming and food production, observes Costa. “Women are very relationship oriented, very community based. They’re connectors and they care about future generations. Many of them have children, and that was one of the things that drew them into the field in the first place—wanting to grow or produce food in a way that wouldn’t compromise the health of their children,” she explains. These skills translate to successful marketing as well. “The women that I know are interactive people and they love to bring their product to market; they love to meet the people and they love to create that relationship,” Costa says. For Nancy Vail, a farmer at Pie Ranch in Pescadaro, California, it was the relationship aspects of CSAs that lured her to farming. CSAs “went beyond the individualism of homesteading and created a context where eaters and producers can be in direct relationships,” she says in Farmer Jane. Community has certainly been a central part of the success at Three Stone Hearth in Berkeley, California. Opened in 2006, this women-run cooperative makes healthy meals with local sustainable meats and vegetables that are available for delivery or pickup. Three Stone Hearth runs on what co-owner Jessica Prentice calls feminine-based principles. “The male restaurant world is often highly competitive, stressful and often fairly miserable,” she points out. At Three Stone, collaboration and no ego is the name of the game. There’s also a spiritual component. “We look at food as a gift and treat it as such, with respect,” she says. Given women’s common need for community, it’s no surprise that when women farmers and women in sustainable agriculture have struggles, it usually results from lack of community. According to Leigh Adcock, executive director of the Women, Food and Agriculture Network, farming women are often isolated geographically because they are in rural areas. They can also face cultural isolation because they are practicing an alternative form of a very traditional field in a male-dominated trade. “We find that providing even an online forum for these women helps them feel supported,” Adcock says. The two biggest areas of growth in sustainable farming are women inheriting their farms from their husbands and the growing market for local food. “The small and diversified farming that’s being demanded by eaters all over the world right now is the perfect place for a woman to start her own 2-acre, 5-acre or even 250-acre farm,” Costa continues. “Women are really into this connection between food and community, and it’s something that’s drawing them out to start their own operations.” When Costa talks of women being sustainable farmers, she means beyond organic farmers. “I’m talking about women in smaller-scale diversified farming that respects the land and doesn’t compromise its ability to grow nutritious foods. Sustainable farming uses less machinery than conventional farms, and you typically see fewer women involved in farms that require more machinery. I say that as a generalization. Small, diversified farms use a lot more hand labor like picking, cutting, pruning and weeding. More women feel they can do that work versus running large machines,” says Costa. And they’re successful. Women are now the principal operators of 14 percent of the nation’s 2.2 million farms—a sea change from 1978, when the figure was 5 percent, according to WFAN. “We’ve found that when women run the farm as their primary source of income, they are successful,” Adcock reports. “They probably aren’t prospering, but they are making a living, which is the usual goal.” Sustainable agriculture also provides many women with part-time work that allows them to raise a family. Beyond the Fields Historically men have dominated in government agricultural roles as well as farming. “It is largely still men in government roles, although women are certainly making their way, like Kathleen Merrigan, Deputy Secretary of Agriculture, and Michelle Obama,” says Costa. “I feel that both have made a real impact. Before taking office, Merrigan was a really strong supporter of local foods, and it’s almost as if the administration was trying to give the sustainable-food movement a bone. They had put in Vilsack as Secretary, who had very strong conventional farm ties, and it’s almost as if they wanted the Deputy Secretary as a balance to this.” Farmer Jane includes profiles of several women in government-related roles, such as Glenda Humiston, Director of Rural Development for the California Department of Food and Agriculture. “I feel she has kept up with a lot of her community-based work that differentiates her from other candidates,” Costa says. “She pioneered land policies that have engaged a broad range of stakeholders—no small feat—and continues to listen.” Humiston has found that being a woman in what is often a man’s world has not posed too much difficulty. “I have done a wide variety of jobs throughout my career that would traditionally be called ‘men’s’ work. Although there was the occasional misogynist, most people were more interested in the quality of my work than my gender. Some of that had to do with my realization early on that women did have to produce very high quality work in those fields while also reaching out in appropriate ways to socialize and network.” Humiston is finding more women are involved in or passionate about environmental land issues and farming. “In many ways I think women are better at seeing how environmental and farming issues tie into food and family. Making those connections is vital if we are to develop good policy on agriculture, food safety, healthcare and related issues,”she says. In addition to working the land, women are making inroads fighting against issues such as GMOs. Claire Hope Cummings, author of Uncertain Peril: Genetic Engineering and the Future of Seeds (Beacon, 2008), is a lawyer, has been a farmer, and is an anti-GMO advocate. GMOs are inherently a women’s issue, remarks Cummings. “Because of both the way they are made, which interferes with the reproductive process of seeds, and the fact that they are patented forms of life, GMOs put a primary part of the food system—seeds—into the hands of private corporations. “And since women feed the world (almost 85 percent of farmers in Africa and Southeast Asia are women) and all women care about feeding their families, they should be concerned that we no longer have control over our food system,” Cummings asserts. She points out that men are the ones primarily behind the creation of GMOs. “I don’t think a woman would ever give a name like Terminator to a life-giving source,” she says, referring to the Monsanto seed of that name. Farming Forward Although budget cuts could hurt some of the inroads women have made in sustainable farming and leadership roles, Costa feels confident. “I think it’s always been the case that these programs are in peril. Look at how much our government has been supporting programs that are based on conventional crop production versus sustainable organic food production. There were a lot of great funding streams that were added to the last farm bill, and they are being threatened with cuts right now because of the economy. So it’s a very challenging time in keeping the interest alive in the sustainable-food system in the country,” she says. Costa hopes her book inspires people to get more involved in community as well. “I think we are all craving more interaction these days, and I wanted to provide the information so that readers can make choices to interact more with people via food. If you look at our population that’s involved in farming, it’s 2 percent, whereas before the Industrial Revolution it was 60 percent. So you had more people connected to the land back then.” Costa believes that food is a powerful vehicle to address the economic and social disparities and environmental degradation now occurring. “Food offers solutions that don’t have to cost a lot of money,” she concludes. “If you can spend a little bit of time every day learning how to work with it, to grow it, we could all eat more healthfully and be healthier people in this country.” Currently Costa is working on her next book, tentatively titled Farmer Jane’s Kitchen. To learn more about Farmer Janes across the country and to view links to organizations making a positive change, visit www.farmerjane.org. Printable Version E-mail a Friend Search SiteEntire SiteProductsReference LibraryNews & Features 15940 Redmond Way Email Our Store Mon7:30 AM - 6 PM Pacific Tue7:30 AM - 6 PM Pacific Wed7:30 AM - 6 PM Pacific Thu7:30 AM - 6 PM Pacific Fri7:30 AM - 6 PM Pacific Sat9:30 AM - 6 PM Pacific SunNo Phone Support

农业

2017-09/0196/en_head.json.gz/19606

Advertisement Wastewater transformed into fertilizer Fri, 08/03/2012 - 5:06am Comments by Struvite fertilizer recovered from wastewater is a high-quality product that slowly releases nutrients into the soil. Image: Fraunhofer IGB Sewage sludge, wastewater and liquid manure are valuable sources of fertilizer for food production. Researchers at the Fraunhofer Institute in Germany have now developed a chemical-free, eco-friendly process that enables the recovered salts to be converted directly into organic food for crop plants. Phosphorus is a vital element not only for plants but also for all living organisms. In recent times, however, farmers have been faced with a growing shortage of this essential mineral, and the price of phosphate-based fertilizers has been steadily increasing. It is therefore high time to start looking for alternatives. This is not an easy task, because phosphorus cannot be replaced by any other substance. But researchers at the Fraunhofer Institute for Interfacial Engineering and Biotechnology IGB in Stuttgart have found a solution that makes use of locally available resources which, as unlikely as it might seem, are to be found in plentiful supply in the wastewater from sewage treatment plants and in the fermentation residues from biogas plants: a perfect example of the old saying “from muck to riches”. The new process was developed by a team of scientists led by Jennifer Bilbao, who manages the nutrient management research group at the IGB.“Our process precipitates out the nutrients in a form that enables them to be directly applied as fertilizer,” she explains.Mobile pilot plant for field testsThe main feature of the patented process, which is currently being tested in a mobile pilot plant, is an electrochemical process that precipitates magnesium-ammonium phosphate—also known as struvite—by means of electrolysis from a solution containing nitrogen and phosphorus. Struvite is precipitated from the process water in the form of tiny crystals that can be used directly as fertilizer, without any further processing. The innovative aspect of this method is that, unlike conventional processes, it does not require the addition of synthetic salts or bases. Bilbao: “It is an entirely chemical-free process.”The 2-meter-high electrolytic cell that forms the centerpiece of the test installation and through which the wastewater is directed contains a sacrificial magnesium anode and a metallic cathode. The electrolytic process splits the water molecules into negatively charged hydroxyl ions at the cathode. At the anode an oxidation takes place: the magnesium ions migrate through the water and react with the phosphate and ammonium molecules in the solution to form struvite.Energy-saving, chemical-free processBecause the magnesium ions in the process water are highly reactive, this method requires very little energy. The electrochemical process therefore consumes less electricity than conventional methods. For all types of wastewater tested so far, the necessary power never exceeded the extremely low value of 70 watt-hours per cubic meter. Moreover, long-duration tests conducted by the IGB researchers demonstrated that the concentration of phosphorus in the pilot plant’s reactor was reduced by 99.7% to less than 2 mg per liter. This is lower than the maximum concentration permitted by the German Waste Water Ordinance (AbwV) for treatment plants serving communities of up to 100,000 inhabitants.“This means that operators of such plants could generate additional revenue from the production of fertilizer as a sideline to the treatment of wastewater,” says Bilbao, citing this as a decisive advantage.Struvite is an attractive product for farmers, because it is valued as a high-quality, slow-release fertilizer. Experiments conducted by the Fraunhofer researchers have confirmed its effectiveness in this respect: crop yields and the uptake of nutrients by the growing plants were up to four times higher with struvite than with commercially available mineral fertilizers.The scientists intend to spend the next few months testing the mobile pilot plant at a variety of wastewater treatment plants before starting to commercialize the process in collaboration with industrial partners early next year.“Our process is also suitable for wastewaters from the food-industry and from the production of biogas from agricultural wastes,” adds Bilbao. The only prerequisite is that the process water should be rich in ammonium and phosphates. Source: Fraunhofer Institute Advertisement Advertisement View the discussion thread. Connect with R&D Facebook

农业

2017-09/0196/en_head.json.gz/19616

Clark Canyon Reservoir Holding Steady By Nick Gevock, The Montana Standard, Butte Jun. 17--Clark Canyon reservoir remains about a quarter short of its long term average water supply despite the recent several weeks of cool, wet weather. The reservoir as of last week was holding about 121,000 acre feet of water, roughly three quarters its average of 167,000 acre feet for this time of year, said Dennis Miotke, manager of the East Bench irrigation district. It's only 9,000 acre feet more than last year but a big improvement over the past few years. "It's in pretty good shape for this time of the year," he said. "It could be better but we've had it a lot worse." The good news is the reservoir's water level is roughly holding steady as irrigators pull water from it to start putting on crops. Miotke said the dam is releasing 350 cubic feet per second, which is less water than it normally would be letting go for this time of year. With a strong snowpack in the mountains and healthy rains in recent weeks, the release of water hasn't been drawing the reservoir down, Miotke said. In recent years the reservoir has been dropped in mid June on as irrigators start using water to deal with hot, dry conditions. "The inflows are just about matching the releases right now," he said. "We started to draw it down a little bit and it started raining." The Beaverhead River has also been helped with a strong inflow from Grasshopper Creek, Miotke said. The demand for water should go up in coming days as temperatures warm up and the growing season gets further along. "There are some people just starting to irrigate grain right now," Miotke said. Among those farmers and ranchers is Carol Giem, who raises cattle, hay and grain with her husband Loren near Twin Bridges. She said with the cool weather they've only irrigated some of their fields thus far this year. Even those haven't received as much irrigation water as in past years. She said most of them would have been irrigated twice, but this year the fields that have received water have only been passed over once with sprinklers. "When the wind blows and it's cold, it just doesn't do that much good," Giem said. "We're only about half over some of our fields and we've got it shut off right now." She added that she expects to start using more irrigation water in coming days. Haying will be pushed back later this year as a result of the cool weather and the irrigation needed to produce hay will also come later in the summer. While the reservoir has improved, Miotke said it won't fully recover from the past seven drought years for some time. "It's been dry for so long, it's going to take four or five years like this to bring it back," he said. "We've got a long ways to go." Reporter Nick Gevock may be reached at [email protected] ----- To see more of The Montana Standard, or to subscribe to the newspaper, go to http://www.mtstandard.com. Copyright (c) 2008, The Montana Standard, Butte Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services. For reprints, email [email protected], call 800-374-7985 or 847-635-6550, send a fax to 847-635-6968, or write to The Permissions Group Inc., 1247 Milwaukee Ave., Suite 303, Glenview, IL 60025, USA.

农业

2017-09/0196/en_head.json.gz/19660

Farm diversification for a profitable future Goruralscotland.com aims to promote agri-tourism businesses to Scottish city dwellers DOUGLAS MCADAM ‘Agri-tourism’ is a growing sector for farmers, says Douglas McAdam Tourism is a mainstay of the Scottish economy, worth £11 billion a year and paying the wages of 200,000 people.We can all point to the obvious cornerstones of the industry, but we should not forget one of the unsung heroes of Scotland’s tourism offering which is to be found quietly going about its business in the area of agri-tourism. The traditional farmhouse bed and breakfast has for a long time played a significant part in this reliable and growing sector and many of the providers of these tourism businesses are owners of farms and rural estates. Scottish Land & Estates has been promoting the benefits of business diversification to its members, from agriculture into tourism, and there are now much greater levels of interest amongst both providers and guests, all of which is helping to project agri-tourism increasingly into the spotlight. Agri-tourism is described by Scottish Enterprise as “tourism on a working farm in which visitors can experience a direct connection with the host farm, rural life and/or the local environment”. Staying on or visiting a farm or estate is a great way for visitors to experience Scotland’s rural landscape and outdoor activities and includes accommodation, farm shops, farm attractions and tours, agricultural exhibits, wildlife tours, not to mention country sports and much more. Land and farm owners, who already manage much of Scotland’s landscape, are ideally placed to diversify, but it takes a lot of time, money and research to get it right.Two such farmers who have taken the brave step into tourism are Neil Gourlay and his wife Mary of Three Glens House, a luxury catered holiday getaway in Moniave, Dumfriesshire; and Caroline Millar of the Hideaway Experience, Auchterhouse, near Dundee, providing luxurious escapes for couples. Both Caroline and Neil have recognised the need to diversify into something exciting, but that requires a completely different skill-set to farming albeit one that works very much in tandem with it. Speaking at the Oxford Farming Conference last week, Caroline revealed that at the Hideaway Experience, run by her and husband Ross, less than 0.6 per cent acres of their land is utilised by the agri-tourism business. However, it generates comparable turnover levels and more profit than the farm and has had no impact on output of the farming operation. Caroline has also stated the importance of agri-tourism to the local economy and to farming businesses and her belief that with 85 per cent of farming in Scotland classified as a Less Favoured Area, doing more than just farming is a necessity. And she makes a bold prediction in saying that farm diversification will overtake the main core farming enterprise of agricultural production, in terms of contribution to profits, in most parts of the UK over the next ten years.Caroline is so confident in her assessment that she launched www.goruralscotland.com two years ago, which aims to promote agri-tourism businesses to Scottish city dwellers. Neil Gourlay, a fourth generation farmer, has achieved his lifetime’s ambition by developing a luxury eco holiday house: a beautiful, organic building that is free from future utility bills and blends seamlessly into the landscape. He has moved a long way from the traditional farm in order to provide a lasting legacy and something to continue driving rural economic development in the area. This project also boasts a range of renewable energy features and the creation of insulation from the farm’s sheep.Estate and land owners, the majority of whom are farmers themselves, are long-term investors. A recent survey of our members revealed that their rural development projects – including tourism – over the next ten years will amount to investment of around £1bn.When you take into account that land-based businesses employ 10,000 people and are committed to significant energy and tourism projects, we believe that adds up to a substantial and very worthwhile contribution to the rural Scottish economy.The efforts of the likes of Caroline Millar and Neil Gourlay are emblematic of the entrepreneurial spirit of land and rural business owners and their willingness to invest in rural Scotland. Tourism is at the heart of our economy and is gratifying for all those involved that agri-tourism is playing its part. • Douglas McAdam is chief executive, Scottish Land & Estates www.scottishlandandestates.co.ukSEE ALSO• More information on becoming a Friend of The Scotsman Back to the top of the page

农业

2017-09/0196/en_head.json.gz/22454

Home › Food Security, Food Sovereignity & Sustainable Farming 'Climate-Smart Agriculture' - preparing for a corporate soil and climate-grab in Paris? This article gives a brief history of ‘Climate Smart Agriculture’, and shows how currently the term can equally be applied to both industrial monocultures and agroecology. The level of corporate interest is high, including Monsanto, Walmart, Danone, and the big fertiliser companies. France, a keen member of the Global Alliance for ‘Climate-Smart Agriculture’ (GACSA), and the host for December 2015 climate conference in Paris (COP21), has developed a proposal that risks defining the soil as a giant carbon sink to offset continued emissions. Committee on World Food Security: High Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition draft report: Biofuels and Food Security Comments from Biofuelwatch, EcoNexus and Global Forest Coalition The 2011 Report on Price volatility and food security by the HLPE on Food Security and Nutrition provided well-researched and high-quality evidence about the role of biofuels in recent food price rises and price volatility. We had therefore anticipated that the draft report “Biofuels and Food Security” by the HLPE on Food Security and Nutrition would build on and further develop the evidence collated for the 2011 report. Instead, we have been deeply disappointed by the low quality of evidence and inaccuracies contained within this draft report. While some paragraphs and statements are based on convincing evidence, so many are not that we believe the report needs to be sent back to be substantially re-written before being put out to public consultation again. Below are examples of some of the serious flaws we have found in the report followed by key concerns about the draft recommendations. Feed the world? The promise of more food from increased yields is driving the appeal for more GM crops, but that promise is theoretical and unfulfilled, argue Dr Ricarda A Steinbrecher and Antje Lorch. Argentina: A Case Study on the Impact of Genetically Engineered Soya How producing RR soya is destroying the food security and sovereignty of Argentina This case study explains why Argentina began to grow genetically engineered RR soya and why its cultivation has spread so rapidly to more than 14 million hectares (ha) in 2003-4. It looks at the role that Argentina adopted in the 19th Century as an exporter of raw materials and a target for foreign investment. Other factors touched on include the massive accumulation of debt, economic collapse, financial speculation, capital flight and structural adjustment imposed by the Menem government (1989-99) according to instructions from international financial institutions like the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. - February 2005 Interview: Thai Rice Farmer on GM crops Daoreung Pheudphon explains why GM crops are a threat to farmers and won’t feed the world Summary of points: History of rice farming and the introduction of modern technologies. Impact of the green revolution and its agro-chemicals on traditional farming, bio-diversity and culture What farmers are doing to revert to sustainable agriculture and food sovereignty Farmers fear to loose their rights to save and improve their own seed Farmers export chemically produced crops but avoid eating it themselves Message to Europe and UK – GM crops won’t solve the hunger problem. Farmers do not want GM seeds. - October 2003 Hungry Corporations Transnational Biotech Companies Colonise the Food Chain This book demonstrates that a handful of companies have gained an alarming level of control over the food chain through the industrialisation of agriculture, the forces of globalisation, and the vertical and horizontal integration of business. These corporations are deeply involved in the current push for genetic engineering in agriculture. Industry argues that genetic engineering is the technology of the next industrial revolution and that it can help resolve the problem of hunger. This book shows that the way the technology is being applied is instead a continuation and intensification of an industrial agriculture model that has failed to live up to its expectations and promises. Rather than offer new solutions, genetic engineering will advance a stronger, already established trend towards the social, political and economic reorganisation of our communities according to the interests of the world’s largest corporations, with little regard for environmental and social impacts. In this context, genetic engineering is not merely a new technology, but a means to gain power over people and resources. Opening up the South Chapter 8: GM crops worldwide — Agricultural research and development — Promoting technology to farmers — Micro-credit agencies — Binding the farmer to the corporation — Lack of choice for farmers — Argentina: the cost of complying with US pressure — Preparing the ground for GM — The struggle for Africa’s agriculture — Resistance in the South — ConTill: Monsanto's brand of sustainable development IntroductionIntroduction Food sovereignty: Access to a wide variety of foods is a necessity for health and well-being, but it is also the basis for cultural integrity. In many parts of the world, rich and diverse local food systems still exist. EcoNexus therefore addresses not only the food safety of GM crops but also food security and food sovereignty. Food security is often taken to imply a basic but impoverished supply of food, but genuine food security involves defending and regenerating local food systems. Diverse systems that are appropriate to their regions in which food production is under the control of the people or community who then actually eat it, is the basis for food sovereignty. In this context, sustainable farming not only ensures food security but also protects agricultural diversity. Under threat from industrialized agriculture? However, farming systems become more and more industrialized, concentrating on the production of agricultural commodities for mass processing. Local varieties of crop and animals are getting lost, along with vital knowledge and practice handed down over centuries. Without these, future food production is seriously jeopardised. At the same time, grains are increasingly used as animal feed instead of for human consumption, and currently we can witness the use of agricultural land for the production of agrofuels and industrial prodcuts rather than food production. While access to food already is a problem, the industrialized food production systems lead to the waste and destruction of vast quantities of food everyday, especially in the US and Europe. EcoNexus follows the developments of specific crop plants and animals (such as rice, soya or fish) but also looks at the bigger picture and recurring themes, like the question whether GM crops could feed the world. Search this site: Issues Bioenergy / Biomass Climate change & agriculture Food security / sovereignity (Green) Economy Social and ecological impacts Terminator (GURTs) This work by http://www.econexus.info is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 2.0 UK: England & Wales License. Original website design by Envoy.

农业

2017-09/0196/en_head.json.gz/23279

The tomato has been a symbol for genetically modified food for many years. In 1994, genetically modified tomatoes hit the market in the US as the first commercially available genetically modified crop. GM tomatoes have since disappeared. This transgenic tomato (FlavrSavr) had a "deactivated" gene (Antisense approach). This meant that the tomato plant was no longer able to produce polygalacturonase, an enzyme involved in fruit softening. The premise was that tomatoes could be left to ripen on the vine and still have a long shelf life, thus allowing them to develop their full flavour. Normally, tomatoes are picked well before they are ripe and are then ripened artificially. Tomatoes were the first genetically modified foods to come on the market. Today, they are no longer cultivated. Puree made from GM tomatoes was once a success in Great Britain. The EU Member States, however, could not agree on approval. These GM tomatoes, however, did not meet their expectations. Although they were approved in the US and several other countries, tomatoes with delayed ripening have disappeared from the market after peaking in 1998. At this point, no genetically modified tomatoes are being grown commercially in North America or in Europe. Genetically modified tomatoes are not approved in Europe. Applications that were submitted several years ago have since been withdrawn. Tomato puree made from GM tomatoes was a big success in the mid 90s in Great Britain. The fact that the tomatoes were of GM origin was clearly stated on the label. Later, an application was submitted for approval according to EU laws on genetic engineering. Although EU committees of scientific experts assessed the tomato puree as harmless, Member States could not come to an agreement. The application was withdrawn in 2002. Scientists are still working with genetic tools to give tomatoes new traits like resistance to insect pests and fungal and viral pathogens. Other projects aim to enrich tomatoes with substances offering health benefits. All of these products, however, are still many steps away from receiving authorisation. Today in the EU, all tomatoes found on the market, whether they're fresh or canned, are not genetically modified. Even the tomato that stayed red and firm after three weeks in the fridge isn't a GMO. See also on GMO-Compass: Food products: Genetic engineering and labelling agricultural practices and crop yields in Europe over the past few decades. Source: European Glyphosate Task Force Fruit and Vegetables GMO-Procucts: Not to buy yet Papayas GrapevineProcessed Foods Animal FeedGM Food and Feed: Labelling Guide These products must be labelledThese products do not require labelling Labelling: Flavours, additives, enzymes What does labelling look like? Labelling in restaurants and canteens Labelling of organic products Labelled goods: Hard to find New labelling laws: What has changed? Why a threshold?Frequently Asked QuestionsDetection methods: Having to draw a blurry line

农业

2017-09/0196/en_head.json.gz/23302

Farmer suicides can be minimised by addressing rural indebtedness Updated: Dec 03, 2014 23:32 IST Hindustan Times The figures are chilling. There have been 988 suicides by farmers in the Vidarbha region since January, 10 of them in the last three days. It is this agrarian crisis that is also fuelling support for the Maoists — Gadchiroli, a district in Vidarbha, is one of their strongholds. It is regrettable that though the problem is at least 15 years old, suicides continue. The year 2006, when nearly 1,450 farmers committed suicide, has been the worst so far. And the same year the then Prime Minister Manmohan Singh announced a Rs 3,750 crore debt relief package for six crisis-ridden districts of Vidarbha. This was in addition to the Maharashtra government’s Rs 1,075 crore for the region. But as indebtedness to banks was a criterion for being eligible for compensation, many farmers were left out. Even before this the Bombay high court had observed in 2004: “The suicides that have occurred are as much due to the failure of social and economic development to reach the poor as it is due to natural calamities.” Vidarbha falls in a rain-shadow area. Following the drought in the region in 1992, 15 irrigation projects were cleared. The Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation had once about 100 irrigation projects in the pipeline — sadly, most of them still remain on paper. It is also a fact that just 15% of the farmers are covered by the crop insurance scheme. However, for a farmer to be eligible for insurance, a district to which she/he belongs must be declared drought-affected, a factor that adds to the problems. In 2005, the Tata Institute of Social Sciences did a study of farm suicides. It found that the phenomenon was not restricted to any category of landowners. But the concentration of suicides was greater among small farmers (who owned up to five acres) and middle farmers (who owned more than five acres but less than 15 acres). And the Centre’s 2008 loan waiver applied to farmers who owned up to five acres. Narendra Modi as the BJP’s PM candidate had regretted that though the UPA’s agriculture minister was from Maharashtra, farmer suicides were taking place in the state. Now that the BJP is in power both in Maharashtra and the Centre, Mr Modi’s time to act is now. His first problem would be to find out the extent of indebtedness in rural areas. It was failure on this front that was largely responsible for the ineffectiveness of the 2006 package. farmer suicides rural indebtedness more from comment What Mosul needs to hear Oct 19, 2016 09:20 IST It’s fast becoming BRICS in a China shop

农业

2017-09/0196/en_head.json.gz/23818

Tomatoes Del Monte enters Florida, Virginia tomato deals By Doug Ohlemeier Expanding its presence in the tomato market, Del Monte Fresh Produce plans to grow tomatoes on land it recently bought in Florida and Virginia. On Oct. 2, the Coral Gables, Fla.-based Del Monte Fresh Produce NA Inc. stated its intentions to grow tomatoes on land it purchased in a series of bankruptcy auctions of property formerly owned by East Coast Brokers and Packers Inc. The purchase involves 7,200 acres in central and south Florida and on Virginia’s Eastern Shore. “We are very excited to expand our vertical integration in our tomato product line with this acquisition in North America,” Mohammad Abu-Ghazaleh, Del Monte’s chairman and chief executive officer, said in the release. “The acquisition of field grown tomato assets in Florida and Virginia complements our state-of-the-art greenhouse operations in Costa Rica and Guatemala, gives us the opportunity to continue to expand our tomato and vegetable product offerings, and enables us to provide our customers with high-quality, locally grown produce, strengthening our competitive position in the tomato industry.” Once a major Florida tomato grower-shipper, East Coast Brokers closed last fall. On Sept. 5, a bankruptcy judge approved the purchase. The auctions of East Coast’s facilities and assets owned by the Madonia family and related entities generated $75 million. del monte fresh producedel monte enters tomatoesdel monte enters tomato dealfloridavirginiatomatoeseast coast brokers About the Author: Doug Ohlemeier Doug Ohlemeier, who has written for The Packer since 2001, serves as eastern editor, a position he has held since August 2006. He started at The Packer as a staff writer after working for nearly a decade in commodity promotion at the Kansas Wheat Commission, where he was a marketing specialist. Doug worked in radio and television news writing, producing and reporting for seven years in Texas, Missouri and Nebraska. He graduated from Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, in 1984, with a bachelor of science degree in broadcast journalism and a minor in history. He earned a master’s in corporate communications from the University of Kansas, Lawrence, in 1991. In college, he served as a news editor of the daily O’Collegian newspaper and interned in radio and television news departments. View All Posts

农业

2017-09/1014/en_head.json.gz/638

Breaking the Cycle of Food Shortages in Africa with Fertilizer and Technology By Gilbert arap Bor: Kapseret, Kenya The United States has survived its debt-ceiling showdown, but it just found an extra $17 million for famine relief in East Africa. This new commitment, announced earlier this month by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, boosts the amount of aid for Ethiopia, Somalia, and my country of Kenya to more than $580 million this year. The humanitarian aid will reach 4.6 million people. They need it: Over the last three months, almost 30,000 East African children have perished as victims of the region’s worst drought in years. The assistance shows that even in the hardest of hard times, the United States is a generous nation. As much as East Africa needs help right now, the long-term solution isn’t more of the same. Food aid is at once an urgent need and evidence of a deeper problem. In East Africa, we must begin "breaking the cycle" of food shortages, as Clinton put it, so that we can support ourselves rather than depend on the charity of others. For that to happen, Africans must accept 21st-century agricultural methods, including biotechnology and modern fertilizers. This is the best way for farmers to increase their yields and start to make it possible for the continent’s farmers to feed themselves. Kenya took a positive first step by gazetting the country’s biosafety regulations on August 15th, paving the way for commercialization of GM crops in the country. By this gazettment, Kenya is now fully compliant with the international requirements on the development and utilization of the technology. It became the fourth African country to do so, following Burkina Faso, Egypt, and South Africa. For years, Kenyans have battled needless fears about biotech crops. Let’s hope that Agriculture Minister Sally Kosgei put these worries to rest a couple of weeks ago with her blunt talk. "I have been consuming soya beans imported from Britain which are GMO, yet they have not had an effect on my health," she said. "So nobody can die out of eating GMO foods." The Roman Catholic bishops of Kenya also have embraced biotech. They endorsed the government’s decision to permit GM crops, advising people to eat genetically modified foods to check starvation amid a serious drought that has threatened the lives of 2.9 million Kenyans and more in the Horn of Africa. This is contrary to opposition from some non-governmental organizations and MPs to a government plan to import genetically modified maize from South Africa, saying "We are in favor of non-genetically-modified-foods, but if there is a crisis and they can resurrect the person for one week, eat them." I agree with Minister Kosgei and the bishops: I plan to grow GM crops on my small farm as soon as possible because it will help my land produce more food. All Kenyan farmers should welcome biotechnology, just as a previous generation welcomed hybrid seeds. The time for full acceptance of biotechnology has arrived: "Most Kenyans wear clothes that have been made using cotton that is grown using GMOs and a sizable number have consumed GM foods bought from supermarket shelves," observes a Tanzanian newspaper. The other crucial ingredient for agricultural success is fertilizer. African farmers don’t use enough of it—far less than their counterparts elsewhere, according to the Comprehensive African Agricultural Development Program, a project of the African Union. In North America, farmers put more than 200 kg of fertilizer on each hectare they cultivate. In East and Southern Asia, the figure is 135 kg and in South Asia it’s 100 kg. Latin America comes next, with 73 kg. Africa trails them all—and not by a little bit, but by a lot. Farmers in sub-Saharan Africa use only 9 kg of fertilizer per hectare. Farmers in other countries are able to add enough fertilizer on their land to build up the fertility and replace important nutrients after a crop is harvested, but here in Africa we sprinkle it like a rare spice (when we use it at all). There are plenty of reasons for this sad state of affairs. Prices for fertilizer are two to six times the world average. Supplies are low due to poor infrastructure. Some farmers doubt the value of fertilization. Elsewhere, the problem is reversed: Landlords think so highly of it that they’re likely to reclaim land that’s been fertilized. This serves as a disincentive for sharecroppers to use this essential product. Bureaucratic obstacles also get in the way. In Kenya, the government subsidizes fertilizer but requires farmers to obtain paperwork from local agricultural extension officials, deposit cash in a bank, and finally collect fertilizer from an agency. This is a lengthy and intimidating process, especially for small-scale farmers. In his book "Common Wealth: Economics for a Crowded Planet," Jeffrey Sachs cites evidence suggesting that if African smallholder farms take advantage of modern technologies—and especially fertilizer—their yields could increase tenfold. This is the ultimate solution to Africa’s food insecurity: more productivity. Biotechnology and fertilization are two of its essential ingredients. Gilbert arap Bor grows maize, vegetables and dairy cows on a small-scale farm of 25 acres in Kapseret, near Eldoret, Kenya. He also teaches at the Catholic University of Eastern Africa, Eldoret campus. Mr. Bor is a member of the Truth About Trade & Technology Global Farmer Network.

农业

2017-09/1014/en_head.json.gz/754

Common Good Forum Preventing land-grabbing in Africa As the international community joins hands to stop the threat of the Ebola virus, Bahati Jacques of Africa Faith and Justice Network, a Catholic advocacy organization based in Washington DC, would like to also shine some light, stop and prevent another serious and rapidly growing threat to Africa's future: land grabbing. To ensure food security for a fast growing world population and satisfy the world’s urgent need for clean energy for cars, plane and other machines, Africa is once again the place to find cheap resources, as was the case during colonization. The effects of land grabs are worse than those of colonialism because in most cases people are being relocated from their ancestral homelands and deprived of the space needed for communities to expand. The lease terms vary between fifty to ninety years and are sometimes renewable. No community can be displaced for that long a period of time and remain cohesive, supportive and alive. This October, AFJN’s staff Melaura Homan-Smith and I traveled to Brewaniase , a town in Ghana’s Volta region to find out more about a land grab deal by Herakles Farms, a New York based agribusiness which less than a year ago sold the property to a British company, Volta Red. Given Herakles Farms’ history of corruption, intimidation of landowners, violence and legal action against local activists and community organizers who oppose its land grabbing efforts in South-West Cameroon, we wanted to once again shine more light on Herakles Farms’ ugly past dealings in Ghana. In fact, Africa’s agriculture is one of the many businesses with great investment opportunities. But there is an extremely huge difference between responsible investment and land grabbing. The International Land Coalition members, during their gathering in Tirana, Albania from May 24-26 May 2011 defined land grab as the “ acquisitions or concessions that are one or more of the following: i) In violation of human rights, particularly the equal rights of women; (ii) not based on Free, Prior and Informed Consent of the affected land-users; (iii) not based on a thorough assessment, or are in disregard of social, economic and environmental impacts, including the way they are gendered; (iv) not based on transparent contracts that specify clear and binding commitments about activities, employment and benefits sharing, and; (v) not based on effective democratic planning, independent oversight and meaningful participation” During our the two weeks stay in Ghana and in partnership with local chiefs and St. Theresa Catholic Church in Nkwanta, we conducted the first ever community town hall meetings to discuss land grabbing in general, how to stop it and prevent it from happening. The people were enlightened and the word spread quickly and more chiefs wanted us to come and speak. Unable to respond to all the invitations because of time constraints we co-sponsored awareness gatherings in five communities with the aim of empowering local communities to deal with land grabbing and welcoming honest and responsible investors. Reports from the groups we spoke with indicate high appreciation of the information we conveyed. And they want more. They want to save their homes and communities. Through these meetings we also learned that there are many foreign companies which have come to the area to ask for land. How did the people of Brewaniase get hooked to Herakles Farms? It is through Mr. Nicholas Fato, a local experienced farmer who introduced Herakles Farms to the Chief of Asukwawkwaw and Tamale traditional territory, Nana Dente Kofi Kuhan. The latter believed that him and his family had enough land to lease to Herakles Farm, but it turned out that their land was not enough. Then they asked those they shared boundaries with to join in the venture. Once Herakles Farms secured a total of 3.715 Hectares, the equivalent of 14.122 acres, the representatives of about eighty families, also known as the landowners committee, agreed to lease their land and were invited to a local hotel called Gateway Hotel in Nkanta. They were shown the lease agreement for the first time and were asked to sign it. So they did after assurance of an upfront payment of $24,000 token to be divided among landowners for just agreeing to the deal. The lease agreement was and still is under the new management for 50 years, renewable for 25 years, and at only $5 per hectare per year. In addition, like all the land grab deals, Herakles Farms promised jobs, scholarships for children, a school library, computers, water wells and a clinic. Only five wells were dug, and 2 desktop computers and some books were given to a local school. The Landowners’ committee was promised 15 copies of the lease and after a long fight Herakles Farms gave them one. As of September 2014, nearly a year after Volta Red, the British company that bought the property from Herakles Farms, they still had not issued the remaining copies of the lease. Since Volta Red took over, the landowners have been renegotiating some parts of the lease and this process is expected to continue. The negotiators with Volta Red seem to be happy with the response and attention given to landowners’ grievances. The negotiators told AFJN that the new agreements will be added as addendum to the original lease signed with Herakles Farms. Currently, the landowners have a trusted lawyer helping them negotiate. Previously, Herakles Farms hired its own lawyer and another for the landowners. The two were both from the same law firm, Hesse & Hesse, based in Accra in Ghana. The list of Hesse & Hesse’s clients shown on its website as of October 6, 2014 include the US Securities and Exchange Commission, The World Bank and many other foreign organizations. One of the reasons why countries and companies, mostly from developed countries, have been rushing to acquire cheap land in Africa is for speculation purposes. Herakles Farms did not make any money off the sales because it was forced to sell the land, due in part to growing pressure and protest from landowners in Brewaniae who subsequently filed a legal suit against Herakles Farms citing lack of Free, Prior and Informed Consent. Herakles Farms did not, among other things, honor its promises to pay workers’ salaries, hire family members of the landowners into permanent positions, allocate a portion of the land to those whose entire farm land fell within the concession, and payment delays of the $5 land lease per Hectare per year and much more. For six years the landowners struggled with Herakles Farms’ managers whose only answer was a threat that any grievances had to be settled in Paris, France in accordance with the terms of the lease. Some of these landowners can hardly send their children to school. How can they afford a ticket to travel to France to fight for money which is not even close to the ticket price? This is one of many land grabbing stories. We at AFJN will continue to highlight such injustices and we hope we will continue to find allied in the Catholic community here in the United States. Do you like this post?

农业

2017-09/1014/en_head.json.gz/2805

Home & Garden Columns Green Neighbors: Winter Native Flowers: Silk-Tassel and Leatherwood By Joe Eaton Along with all the flowering plums, acacias, and magnolias, a few native trees and shrubs are late-winter bloomers. Most, like the manzanitas and flowering currants, are on the shrubby side. But coast or wavyleaf silk-tassel (Garrya elliptica) is a bona fide tree up to 30 feet high, showy in its own way, and amenable to planting as an ornamental. There’s a particularly handsome silk-tassel specimen on the University Avenue median strip. It’s pretty obvious why they’re called that. Both male and female flowers are borne in catkinlike inflorescences. In the coast silk-tassel the gray-green male catkins may be up to a foot long (in the cultivar ‘James Roof’); the silvery female inflorescences are much shorter. Like similar flowers in other groups of plants, they’re wind-pollinated. The leaves are somewhat manzanita-like but are paired and have wavy margins. The fruit grows in clusters, like grapes. The genus Garrya has 14 or 15 species, ranging from Washington State to Panama; 6 are native to California. David Douglas first described it in 1826, naming it for Nicholas Garry, a Hudson Bay Company administrator. Their family, Garryaceae, is said to be one of only four plant families endemic to North America. That was from a Stanford site, though, so I wouldn’t take it as gospel; another source includes the Asian genus Aucuba in the family. Garryaceae in turn is the only family in the order Garryales. That’s this week, at least: plant taxonomy is very much in flux these days, with new genetic studies changing a lot of the old relationships that were based on flower structure. They broke up the lilies a couple of years ago, and I just learned yesterday that the water lotus (Nelumbo) turns out to be related not to other water lilies, but to proteas and sycamores. So if silk-tassels get reassigned, don’t be too surprised. Silk-tassels are chaparral plants, sometimes associated with conifers. Although their glossy green leaves feel leathery, they’re browsed by mule deer and bighorn. Native Americans treated fever, colds, digestive difficulties, and gonorrhea with extracts from the bark; the active ingredient is an alkaloid, garryine, whose bitter taste has inspired the name “quinine bush.” Stem extracts were widely used against diarrhea in rural Mexico. The natural rubber gutta-percha, used for temporary dental fillings, has been obtained from two Arizona species. Garryas were introduced into cultivation sometime in the last half of the nineteenth century, and three species are popular as ornamentals. They’ve also been planted for erosion control. Propagation can be either by seeds or cuttings. Drought-resistant coast silk-tassel does best in well-drained soil and open sunny or semi-shady locations. You can see several species of silk-tassel in the Regional Parks Botanic Garden, or the coast species growing wild in Huckleberry Preserve in the East Bay hills. Huckleberry, as well as Tilden and Redwood parks, is also home to another noteworthy winter-bloomer, western leatherwood (Dirca occidentalis), with yellow bell-shaped flowers. The blossoms are followed by pale green elliptical leaves. The name comes from the flexible twigs, so pliable you can tie them in knots. Thoreau called the eastern leatherwood species “the Indian’s rope.” It’s also known as moosewood or wicopy. Western leatherwood is California’s only member of the daphne family, Thymeleaceae. It’s restricted to the Bay Area, growing on wet slopes where soft chaparral meets mixed evergreen forest in association with buckeye, madrone, and coast live oak. Asa Gray, Darwin’s correspondent and ally, described D. occidentalis from a specimen collected in Oakland. Recent studies by Bill Graves of Iowa State University show that East Bay leatherwoods are genetically distinct from North Bay and Peninsula populations. Graves has also been looking at leatherwood’s reproductive strategies, which include asexual spread through rhizomes. The conspicuous yellow flowers are serviced by hummingbirds. Eastern leatherwood has been in cultivation since 1750; I’m not sure about our local species. One source says it likes a moist humus-rich limy soil; another recommends shade and plenty of winter moisture. You might be able to find a specimen at a specialized nursery or native-plant sale. Silk-tassel, more of a known quantity horticulturally, should be more widely available. Ron Sullivan, who writes the Green Neighbors column, is on vacation. Joe Eaton, who writes the Wild Neighbors column on alternate Tuesdays, is filling in for her this week.

农业

2017-09/1014/en_head.json.gz/3653

Sweet Potatoes Sweet potatoes aren't just for pie By Melissa Shipman Sweet potato use in the summer months has increased due to their rising popularity in grilling recipes, such as this one from the North Carolina Sweet Potato Commission. Promoting sweet potatoes still is often based around holiday use, but growers want to expand the peak season by offering promotions throughout the year. “As the demand for sweet potatoes continues to grow, sweet potatoes are no longer seen as an item to only promote at those times. Consumers are making sweet potatoes a regular item in their meal planning all year long,” said Mike Kemp, business analyst for Market Fresh Produce, Nixa, Mo. Year-round sales increase “Ads usually run during the holidays to promote sweet potatoes at that time of year, and we do promotions for Thanksgiving, Christmas and Easter, but we also run promotions with chain stores at different times of the year,” said Stewart Precythe, president and chief executive officer of Southern Produce Distributors Inc., Faison, N.C. Others agree year-round sales are growing. “Twenty years ago, our company sales around Thanksgiving were probably 35% of our total business. Now, it’s only 20%,” said George Wooten, president of Wayne E. Bailey Produce Inc, Chadbourn, N.C. In fact, Wooten says the company sees good demand in July and August. “Because of their versatility, summer is a big push for sweet potatoes. Grilling is especially popular with sweet potatoes,” he said. The North Carolina Sweet Potato Commission also has focused on summer grilling promotions. “Sure, we love them in pies, but they are also wonderful paired with savory ingredients, so we partnered with Elizabeth Karmel, grilling expert and executive chef of Hill Country BBQ in N.Y., to develop some tasty summer grilling recipes in hopes that food editors would give sweet potatoes some love in their summer issues,” Cristy-Lucie Alvarado, representative for the commission, said in an e-mail. In addition, Wooten says sweet potato consumption in the summer has gone up because of the increased offerings at restaurants. “It used to be that if you weren’t at home, you weren’t eating sweet potatoes, but now you can eat them on vacation in restaurants,” he said. Heart-healthy promos Precythe says he doesn’t think price cuts are the way to promote sweet potatoes. “In my opinion, that doesn’t sell more potatoes. The retail market generally stays around 79 cents or 99 cents a pound,” he said. Charles Walker, executive secretary of the Columbia, S.C.-based U.S. Sweet Potato Council, thinks promoting nutrition could be better taken advantage of. “We still have the heart check mark, but I’d like to see more shippers use it to their advantage,” Walker said. Walker only knows of three or four growers that use the check mark on their packaging or promotional materials, and while it might prove effective for those shippers, the industry isn’t getting the benefits it could see. “For the industry as a whole, with not having more shippers use it, we’re not getting the effectiveness we could get out of that,” he said. Still, he thinks it’s a good marketing technique. “I’m very happy we have it,” he said. The council also works with Produce for Better Health for promotional purposes. “They do nice recipes and have sweet potatoes featured on their website,” Walker said. southern sweet potatoessouthern produce distributors inc.market fresh producewayne e. bailey produce inc. About the Author: Melissa Shipman

农业

2017-09/1014/en_head.json.gz/3999

Advances in Agronomy Advances in Agronomy, Volume 113 Serial Editors: Donald Sparks View all volumes in this series: Advances in Agronomy Quantifying Processes of Pedogenesis Uta Stockmann, Budiman Minasny and Alexander McBratney Irrigation Waters as a Source of Pathogenic Microorganisms in Produce: A Review Yakov Pachepsky, Daniel R. Shelton, Jean E. T. McLain, Jitendra Patel and Robert E. Mandrell Quo vadis Soil Organic Matter Research? – A Biological Link to the Chemistry of Humification Morris Schnitzer and Carlos M. Monreal Zeolites and Their Potential Uses in Agriculture Kulasekaran Ramesh and Dendi Damodar Reddy Proximal Soil Sensing: A Spectrum of Possibilities R. A. Viscarra Rossel, V. I. Adamchuk, K. A. Sudduth, N. J. McKenzie and C. Lobsey The Role of Knowledge When Studying Innovation and the Associated Wicked Sustainability Problems in Agriculture J. Bouma, A. C. van Altvorst, R. Eweg, P. J. A. M. Smeets and H. C. van Latestejin Crop Yield Increase Under Water Limited Conditions: Review of Recent Physiological Advances in Soybean Genetic Improvement W. Sadok and T. R. Sinclair Advances in Agronomy continues to be recognized as a leading reference and a first-rate source for the latest research in agronomy. As always, the subjects covered are varied and exemplary of the myriad of subject matter dealt with by this long-running serial. Key Features Maintains the highest impact factor among serial publications in agriculture Presents timely reviews on important agronomy issues Enjoys a long-standing reputation for excellence in the field Professionals, researchers, students, and government involved in agronomy, crop & soil sciences, plant science, and environmental sciences Donald Sparks Serial Editor Donald L. Sparks is the S. Hallock du Pont Chair in Soil and Environmental Chemistry, Francis Alison Professor and Director of the Delaware Environmental Institute at the University of Delaware. He is internationally recognized for his landmark research on the kinetics and mechanisms of metal/oxyanion/nutrient reactions at biogeochemical interfaces. His pioneering studies on kinetic processes in soils and minerals include the development of widely used and novel kinetic methods, elucidation of rate-limiting steps and mechanisms over a range of spatial and temporal scales, and coupling of real-time kinetic studies with in-situ molecular scale investigations. His discoveries on the speciation, formation rates and stability mechanisms of metal hydroxide surface precipitates, and their role in the retention and bioavailability of toxic metals in the terrestrial environment, have received worldwide attention. This research has led to more effective soil remediation strategies and predictive models. He is the author or coauthor of 286 publications. These include: 11 edited books, 53 book chapters, and 219 refereed papers. He is the author of two widely adopted textbooks, Kinetics of Soil Chemical Processes and Environmental Soil Chemistry (two editions) published by Academic Press. Dr. Sparks is an ISI Highly Cited Researcher; his research has been cited more than 8380 times and his h-index is 53 (Web of Science). Dr. Sparks has served as editor of Advances in Agronomy since 1991, having edited 77 volumes. He has given over 200 invited presentations at scientific conferences throughout the world, and been a lecturer at 98 universities and institutes in North America, Europe, Asia, and Australia. He has received numerous honors and awards including Fellow of five scientific societies, national and international research awards, distinguished fellowships and lectureships, and teaching and mentoring awards. He has advised 90 graduate students and postdoctoral researchers and been the recipient of more than $50 million in research funding. He served as President of both the Soil Science Society of America and the International Union of Soil Sciences. S. Hallock du Pont Chair in Soil and Environmental Chemistry and Director, Delaware Environmental Institute, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, USA

农业

2017-09/1014/en_head.json.gz/5074

The garden history writer who published under four names Full marks to Sue Minter for finally giving the Hon. Alicia Amherst her rightfully place in horticultural history. Or should that be the Hon. Mrs Evelyn Cecil? Or the Lady Rockley of Lytchett Heath? Or the Dowager Baroness Rockley? Confused? You wouldn't be the first. These are all the names that aristocratic author Alicia Amherst, author of The History of Gardening in England (1895) published under. No wonder Sue Minter entitled her biography, The Well-Connected Gardener. Alicia Amherst painted by her daughter, Maud, holding a stem of the yellow form of the Gloriosa lily she had collected on her visit to South Africa in 1899-1900 Minter hails Amherst as the 'founder of Garden History' but also questions why she isn't better known. Her titles came from family and marriage but she was given many high horticultural honours including being the only woman to be given the Freedom of the Worshipful Company of Gardeners at a time when her contemporaries were Gertrude Jekyll and Ellen Willmott (a friend). Amherst was never a 'public' gardener in the sense that Jekyll and Willmott were and although I've always thought that many great female gardeners have disappeared from notice because they did not write about their garden work (Norah Lindsay being the most obvious example), she is one of my 'Gardening Women' for her astounding contribution to garden history writing. Amherst achieved great fame through her major works on garden history and I did enjoy the story of her tussle with her publisher, Bernard Quartich. My 'History of Gardening in England' came out in the autumn of 1895, and no one could have been more astonished that I was at its huge success. Quartich, the publisher, made an offer for a 2nd edition, three weeks from the day it first came out. His offer was double to what he had given for the 1st - £50, instead of £25. I was advised to refuse and, within a few days, he offered me £250. Sue Minter has impeccable credentials for tackling this biography. She was the first female Curator of the Chelsea Physic Garden for ten years from 1991 to 2001 when she left to become Director of Horticulture at the Eden Project. Amherst herself was on the Management Committee of the Chelsea Physic Garden which now holds her uncatalogued archive. It is good to finally have the full background to the woman who wrote the book that should still be the starting point for anyone interested in garden history. Sadly it is no longer in print but thanks to fellow blogger, VegPlotting, for sourcing an online version of The History of Gardening in England at the Open Library site. Just a reminder, I'll be speaking about 'Gardening Women' at the Chelsea Physic Garden on May 5. Full details also on the link under Events in the left-hand column. Posted at 12:02 PM in Chelsea Physic Garden, Eden Project, Ellen Willmott, Gertrude Jekyll, Norah Lindsay, Sue Minter, Worshipful Company of Gardeners | Permalink

农业

2017-09/1014/en_head.json.gz/6252

Cargill Increases Focus on Latin America by Euromonitor Research October 5th, 2011 FacebookTwitterLinkedinGoogle+RedditEmail Brazil has recently become an important focus of investment for Cargill as it looks to build its already fast-growing ingredients business in that country and the wider Latin American region. Earlier in the year, it announced plans to build a new corn processing plant for starches and sweeteners in Brazil, which will involve an investment of R$350 million and will add a further 30% to its corn crushing capacity in South America. This follows Cargill’s R$197 million investment in one of its existing Brazilian plants in 2010, which increased that site’s capacity by 70%. Latin America outpaces global market The move comes as Brazilian and wider Latin American demand for starches and sweeteners continues to flourish. Forecast growth rates for the corn-derived ingredients that Cargill sells in Latin America show that growth in the region is outpacing global growth rates in most categories. For example, polyol sweeteners in Latin America are forecast a CAGR of 3.4% over 2010-2015 compared with 2.6% worldwide, while other corn-derived sweeteners (including dextrose, maltodextrin, maltose syrup and glucose/corn syrup) are forecast a 3.2% CAGR in Latin America compared with 2.8% worldwide. Native starch is the only category in which global sales are growing faster than in Latin America, although the latter’s market for modified starches is very strong. It has been reported that the new plant will also allow Cargill to expand its product range in Latin America, using technologies from other sites around the world to create new products for its Brazilian and other regional customers. A notable absentee from Cargill’s Latin American portfolio is high fructose corn syrup, which has been facing tough times in North America but remains strong in Latin America with forecast growth of 2% over 2010-2015, compared with a global increase of just 0.4%. It remains to be seen whether this might also be included in the product range for the new Brazilian plant, which is scheduled to be up and running in 2013. Innovation facility to serve increasingly important customer base in Latin America In addition to the investment in a new corn processing plant, Cargill has also been dedicating funds to its R&D activities in Brazil. During 2011, the company has opened a new advanced technology and innovation centre in Campinas, São Paulo, following an investment of R$20 million. This facility features multiple laboratories and services for customers in the beverage, baking, confectionery, convenience foods and dairy categories and covers innovation for the entire food ingredients portfolio. Latin America was Cargill’s fourth most important regional market in 2010, accounting for 12% of total revenues, behind North America (37%), Asia Pacific (25%) and Europe (19%). However, the company has stated that this regional business is growing rapidly and it is certainly supporting this growth through investment. TAGGED: Brazil, Cargill, ingredients, Latin America, starch, Sweeteners Euromonitor Research Archive Get our insights in your inbox. Retail Trends in Latin America for 2017 By Amanda Bourlier, Marília Borges and Paula Goñi Euromonitor to Speak at Feira do Empreendedor SEBRAE-SP 2017 Euromonitor to Speak at Seminario Granotec ICCT 2017 More From Euromonitor Research Thailand: A Rapidly Ageing Populace will Continue to Undermine the Economy’s Growth Potential Euromonitor to Speak at Wabel Frozen Summit 2017 The Impact of the New Administrative Measures on the China Consumer Health Market Euromonitor to Speak at Upper Clash 2017 http://blog.euromonitor.com/2011/10/cargill-increases-focus-on-latin-america.html

农业

2017-09/1014/en_head.json.gz/6454

Agriculture key part of Kamloops history, future By Jennifer Stahn Agriculture has played an important historical role in the Kamloops region and the city is hoping to keep it important in the future as well. (JENNIFER STAHN / iNFOnews.ca) Agriculture has a long and vibrant history in Kamloops and the city is looking at ways to best reestablish itself as a hub city for agriculture production, processing and distribution. Agriculture as we know it – the actual planting, growing and harvesting of specific crops – began in the mid-1800s with forage grasses and potatoes but quickly grew to accommodate other “kitchen garden” items such as peas, carrots and onions as well as livestock herds. The first agricultural association was formed in 1892 and three years later canning and preserving became popular as an industry. By the early 1900s orchards had been planted and were growing in popularity. As agriculture grew in popularity in the Kamloops area the need for irrigation became clear and other essential technologies, like a grain elevator, were adopted by farmers in the region. Agricultural practices continued to grow in the region, until 1949 when cold weather ruined many crops – including 75 per cent of apple trees in Brocklehurst – forcing many orchards and market farms to close. Over the coming years canneries would start to close and 1961 was a particularly bad year for commercial vegetable crops as the industry saw a drop in overall acreage from 876 acres in 1951 to only 238. In 1973 agricultural land reserve designations were recognized as priority use and non-agricultural uses were to be controlled within those zones. Within five years the Kamloops Farmers' Market was established as a way to support local food production and in 1984 the first community garden opened on Crestline Street. In 1995 the Kamloops Food Policy Council was established and in 2000 a study examining alternative crops for small acreages was commissioned. Over the coming years the food and farming industries continued to evolve through safety regulations and the desire to support local food production and in 2007 a background report for the city supported the development of an urban agriculture strategy. 2010 saw the closing one of the last remaining apple orchards in Kamloops and the promotion of farm-to-table living through urban farms adjacent to residential areas found legs in the city through Tranquille on the Lake. That year also saw the B.C. Cattleman's Association move annual meetings to Williams Lake after more than 80 years in Kamloops and the following year the Provincial Winter Fair moved to Barriere after 72 years in Kamloops. The Sustainable Kamloops Plan outlined the need to identify viable agricultural land and opportunities for increased food production and processing. 2012 saw the city began looking at an Agriculture Area Plan that would promote and protect long-term sustainability of local agriculture and local producers. The city is now looking to establish an updated and more defined set of policies to protect and promote agriculture and encourage sustainable agricultural practices. The plan will focus on the community's farm areas to identify opportunities and practical solutions where agriculture can be strengthened and ultimately contribute to the community's long-term sustainability. Partnerships with agri-science students at Thompson Rivers University and surveys of producers, consumers and food retailers have helped guide the document. City staff are looking for input on the Agriculture Area Plan and is offering roadshow presentations for any interested groups. Staff have already been out in the community presenting progress on the plan and is continuing to offer the roadshows as way to culminate more feedback from the community. “Within the development stages of the Agriculture Area Plan, the city's commitment to build a strong working partnership with the local ranchers and farmers has been greatly beneficial - their personal experiences and insight combined with the city's intentions of building a guiding document to support local agriculture is a win-win,” commented Coun. Nelly Dever, who sits on the Agriculture Advisory Committee. Presentations are available between now and the first week of May by emailing Maren Luciani at [email protected] or calling 250-828-3568. Further information – including background information and a timeline of the plan - can also be found on the city website. There will be another public consultation phase in early summer 2013 and the plan is anticipated to go to council for adoption in fall. To contact a reporter for this story, email [email protected] or call (250) 819-3723.

农业

2017-09/1014/en_head.json.gz/7163

Cross with the RHS? You bet I am Rumour has it that the RHS are desperate to find ways of encouraging women, particularly younger women, to attend the RHS shows held at the London headquarters in Vincent Square. So it's a brilliant idea for the RHS to stage an exhibition from their archives of women's achievements in horticulture. But what do they do? Run it for just two days this weekend, 19-20 March, at the less well attended RHS London Orchid and Botanical Art Show. What a missed opportunity! Other exhibitions in the Lindley Library run for considerably longer - why stage this important show for just 48 hours? Here is the RHS's press release to tempt you if you are able to go, or show you what you'll be missing from the RHS's rich archive if you can't. And if you feel like complaining to the RHS, please do! You can, of course, always read about these women in Gardening Women. For the first time in the Royal Horticultural Society’s history, two women, Elizabeth Banks and Sue Biggs, hold the most senior positions in the Society - President and Director General. But women have played an important part in horticulture for many years. At the RHS London Orchid and Botanical Art Show over 19-20 March, the RHS Lindley Library will host a display to highlight the life and works of a number of women who have been extremely influential in horticulture over the last century. On display will be photographs, books, archives and artworks to celebrate the lives of: Gertrude Jekyll was a garden designer and one of only two women among the first recipients of the Victoria Medal of Honour in 1897. Ellen Willmott, a horticulturist, was the other woman among the first recipients of the Victoria Medal of Honour in 1897. Marion Cran was the first gardening radio broadcaster. Dorothy Martin, a botanical artist. Her 300 original watercolours are housed in the RHS Lindley Library. Two of these will be on display. Constance Spry, society flower arranger and social reformer. Lilian Snelling, botanical artist. The RHS holds an extensive collection of her works. Three of her watercolours will be on display. Margery Fish was a horticultural journalist famous for popularising gardening for the masses after the war. Vera Higgins was another botanical artist. Beatrix Havergal, a horticulturist who was a member of the RHS Examinations Board for over 20 years. She started the Waterperry School of Horticulture for Women. Margaret Mee, a conservationist and botanical artist famous for her trips to the Amazon rainforest. Valerie Finnis, a plantswoman, alpine gardener and photographer. Joyce Stewart who worked as a botanist in Africa, she was the first Sainsbury Orchid Fellow at Kew and went on to be Director of Horticulture at the RHS. RHS Art Librarian, Charlotte Brooks, says: ‘These women are represented within the library collections by books, archives, original photographs and artworks, many received as valuable donations. We will be exhibiting 13 original items, including a wall paper design by Gertrude Jekyll and an unfinished field sketch from the Amazon by Margaret Mee.’ Posted at 12:36 PM in Beatrix Havergal, Constance Spry, Dorothy Martin, Ellen Willmott, Gertrude Jekyll, Joyce Stewart, Lilian Snelling, Margaret Mee, Margery Fish, Marion Cran, Vera Higgins | Permalink

农业

2017-09/1014/en_head.json.gz/8172

What are the main crops in Italy? Italy's rich soil, especially in the Po region, makes it possible to grow rice, corn, wheat, grapes, olives and tomatoes. Italy uses a majority of these crops, but the country is a major exporter of rice. What crops are grown in Italy? What fruits are grown in Italy? What do people eat in Italy? Francesco Sgroi Italy uses its land to grow field and tree crops. Some of these crops grow better in one area than another, and the country considers its rice, wheat, tomatoes, olives and grapes to be its most important crops.People in Italy use hard wheat to make pasta, and use soft wheat to produce bread and pizza crust. Two of the most successful agricultural exports out of Italy are olives and wine made from Italian grapes. Learn more about Italy britannica.com What are the main crops grown in Africa? Some of the main crops grown in Africa include cereals and grains, such as corn, wheat and rice, and legumes and fodder, such as beans, groundnut and cowpe... What are some common crops and their botanical names? Some common crops and their botanical names include corn (Zea mays), wheat (Tritcum spp.), rice (Oryza sativa) and alfalfa (Medicago sativa). Others are to... What are some examples of monocots and dicots? Some examples of monocots are garlic, onions, corn, wheat, rice, asparagus, sugarcane, lilies, orchids and grass, while tomatoes, peppers, potatoes, caulif... What is the climate of Italy like? Italy has a varied climate, including a harsh climate in northern Italy, a milder climate in central and southern Italy. Italy typically faces thunderstorm... What is the most popular food in Italy? Why did the Renaissance orginate in Italy? Where is Tuscany? Where is the Leaning Tower of Pisa, and will it ever fall? What are the benefits of traveling to Italy in October? What are the three main rivers in Italy? Types of Crops Grown in Italy Agricultural Crops of Italy Animals in Italy Agriculture in Italy Climate in Italy Farming in Italy Physical Features of Italy Landforms in Italy What are the seasons like in Spain? What is Naples, Italy, famous for? Where did the story "Romeo and Juliet" take place? What are the names of some important Italian seaports?

农业

2017-09/1014/en_head.json.gz/8305

You are here: Home › Resources › USDA › Survey of American Honeys, Part 10: Summary Survey of American Honeys, Part 10: Summary Gleanings in Bee Culture – August, 1961 10. Summary 1/ JONATHAN W. WHITE, JR. Eastern Regional Research Laboratory Eastern Utilization Research and Development Division Agricultural Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture Philadelphia 18, Pennsylvania This is the last of a series of ten articles on the different honeys of America. In the previous articles in this series, we have attempted to describe briefly the high-lights of our analytical survey of the composition of American honeys. We have presented average values for the composition of honey, based on 490 analyses, and for honeydew based on 14 analyses. A listing of 74 types of honey and 4 honeydews has been included which shows generally how the various kinds of honey compare with average values and with one another. The kinds of sugars, rare and common, that are found in honey were discussed. All honey samples were found to have the same sugars present, but the relative amounts did differ considerably. Differences in composition of honey have been considered that can be ascribed to area of production. Probably the only reliable way to assess this factor is by statistically comparing average values for several samples of the same type of honey from different areas. In other articles the relationship of color and of granulating tendency of honey to its composition were discussed. It was shown that the granulating tendency of honey can be predicted from its dextrose and water content. A D/W ratio of 1.70 or less generally means a non-granulating honey, while a value of 2.10 or more predicts a relatively rapid complete granulation. Values between these imply partial granulation. In comparing dark honeys with light honeys, we have confirmed that the former show higher ash and nitrogen contents. We have also shown that the dark honeys are lower in dextrose and levulose content, granulate less, and are higher in acids. Storage of honey at ordinary temperatures has been seen to cause considerable loss in free simple sugars, increases in more complex sugars, some increase in acids and rather considerable (3% per month) losses in diastase content. The laboratory work in this project, representing nearly 10,000 separate analyses, was carried out by the individuals named in the first article in this series. We could not have done this work without the active cooperation of hundreds of honey producers, packers, extension specialists, apiary inspectors, national and state organizations and their officers and others. They cannot be named here, but we are greatly appreciative of their cooperation. All of the individual analytical results, complete descriptions of all samples, and names of those cooperating appear in the final technical bulletin to be published by the Department of Agriculture. This will also contain descriptions of the analytical methods used, a review of the literature and show the statistical evaluations of the data. In addition to the principal tables of data, averages are included for all floral types and blends in which more than one representative was present. Average values of all honey samples as classified by plant family is given, and a table showing the average composition of honey from each of the 47 states having samples, as well as a map showing sample distribution. No mention has been made in these articles of the flavor of honey. This does not mean that it is not considered important, but simply that it is difficult to measure and practically impossible to describe. It is, of course, probably the most important single attribute of honey, and possibly the one that is least understood chemically. More attention should be given to flavor and its maintenance in honey, especially protection against processing factors within our control. 1/ This is one in a series of articles describing a large-scale study of the composition of honeys from over the United States. Complete data interpretation and conclusions will appear in a forthcoming Department of Agriculture publication.

农业

2017-09/1014/en_head.json.gz/9227

Business & EconomyCompanies & Industries Gold Kist Inc. Paul G. Brower, Atlanta, 12/15/2003 Last edited by NGE Staff on 01/12/2015 Explore This ArticleContentsThe Early Years, 1930s-1940sDiversification, 1950s-1980sRefocusing on Poultry, 1990sTwenty-first-Century Developments Atlanta-based Gold Kist, founded during the Great Depression by a young agronomy instructor at the University of Georgia, merged in 2006 with rival Pilgrim's Pride Corporation to form the world's largest poultry company. In 2003 Gold Kist employed more than 18,000 people, conducted annual sales of more than $1.8 billion, and comprised 2,300 member-owners who produced 14.5 million chickens per week for national and international markets. The Early Years, 1930s-1940s In 1922 D. W. Brooks, who at the age of nineteen received a master's degree from the University of Georgia College of Agriculture, was given a faculty appointment by his alma mater to teach and conduct research in agronomy. Traveling around the state and visiting with Georgia farmers over the next decade, he became aware of the bleak economic situation that prevailed with farmers all across the country, and particularly in Georgia. In the early 1930s a group of farmers from Carroll County—then one of the largest cotton-producing areas of the state—having failed at several attempts to organize a cotton-marketing cooperative, asked Brooks for help. They were impressed with Brooks's dedication to agriculture and his sound judgment on business matters, despite his youth. As the son of a merchant, Brooks had a practical knowledge of the basic requirements of competent management. Through his education and research, he knew that new methods of production were being developed that could help farmers improve their yields and extremely thin profit margins. In 1933, with the depression closing banks and businesses all over the country, Brooks left his secure position on the faculty and took on the challenge presented by the farmers in Carroll County. By 1936 the original venture was liquidated and reorganized as a Georgia cooperative. It soon began to turn modest profits, which were returned to the farmer members in the form of patronage refunds. Before World War II (1941-45) most of the cotton handled by the Cotton Producers Association (CPA), as the company became known, was exported to England and Europe. During the war the cooperative struggled to satisfy the strong wartime demand for cotton despite a shortage of able-bodied workers to produce and gin it. By war's end in 1945, CPA was on firm financial ground and had expanded into fertilizer, farm supplies, seed, and agricultural chemicals that were sold through a rapidly growing network of local farm-supply cooperatives in Georgia, Florida, Alabama, and South Carolina. Diversification, 1950s-1980s InD. W. Brooks the 1950s feed sales grew rapidly as southern farmers began to produce more and more chickens. Feed mills were built to supply the chicken growers as well as dairy operators, hog producers, and cattle growers. To supply the mills, the cooperative bought larger volumes of corn and soybeans, as well as other food and feed grains that were handled through a growing number of grain-buying points operated in connection with the local Farmers Mutual Exchanges, or FMXs, as they were popularly known. Peanut production had long been an important agricultural enterprise in much of the South, especially Georgia, Florida, and Alabama. CPA purchased peanut-shelling operations in all three states, each of which grew distinctive varieties of peanuts for specific markets. CPA quickly became the largest sheller in the peanut industry. Exports, long a primary cotton opportunity, were also an important market for U.S. peanuts. The successful introduction of soybeans to the Southeast in the 1950s offered the promise of a major crop opportunity as an alternative to cotton. CPA, one of the region's larger users of soymeal in its expanding chicken business, soon added soy-crushing plants in Mississippi, Alabama, and Georgia to handle the anticipated growth in soybean production. Although the Mississippi Delta saw huge acreage shifts to soybeans, the expected boom in soybean production in the Southeast did not materialize. After trying for a decade to procure enough soybeans in the area to keep its plants operating at optimum efficiency, the company sold the operations to focus on poultry production, processing, and marketing, and its network of approximately 100 farm stores. Peanut shelling also continued to be a major revenue source for the company, as did pecan shelling after the purchase of a privately owned company in Waycross in 1951. The shelled pecans were marketed under the Gold Kist brand name, which soon was applied to poultry and other products as well. The brand was linked with the familiar CPA corporate identity in the late 1960s when the company began to call itself CPA–Gold Kist. Cotton declined in the region, and the Cotton Producers Association name and the initials CPA disappeared in 1974, when the company became officially known as Gold Kist, Incorporated. By the 1980s the company's primary business segments were the FMXs, which were its largest operation in terms of dollar volume, followed by chicken, peanuts, pecans, and several subsidiary companies related to its core businesses. Despite the seesaw cycles of agriculture, Gold Kist surpassed $2 billion in sales volume by the 1990s and accumulated nearly $400 million in member equity. Much of Gold Kist's success during these decades can be attributed to its status as a farm cooperative. Farmer members paid competitive market prices for the goods and services they purchased from Gold Kist, and were paid market prices for the products they sold to Gold Kist. Beyond their individual profits, the farmers received a share of the cooperative's profits. Moreover, they shared the profits from the supplies they purchased, thus lowering their cost of doing business in profitable years. Membership in the cooperative also isolated farmers from most market risk on their commodities: they shared in the gains made by Gold Kist in processing and marketing the products they sold to the cooperative, but they did not suffer losses in the inevitable down cycles that characterize commodity markets. Refocusing on Poultry, 1990s During the 1990s fundamental changes affected all of American business, and agriculture was not left untouched. Size and ability to serve larger markets became extremely important to survival, and consolidation became the norm in all segments of the American industrial base. Farmers realized that economies of scale were their only defense against stagnant global agricultural-commodity values. Gold Kist pursued growth in its core businesses of farm supplies and poultry. Having become the largest poultry processor in the United States, it was recognized as a provider of quality chicken products by consumers in many foreign countries as well. Per capita consumption of chicken had risen from about twenty-four pounds per person in 1960 to more than seventy-two pounds per person by the late 1990s. Chicken surpassed pork in 1985 and displaced beef in the mid-1990s as America's favorite source of meat protein. Meantime, farm consolidation continued at a rapid pace, reducing the number of farms from four million to fewer than two million in less than a decade. A major redistribution of population resulted in the shift of millions of acres of farmland in the Sunbelt from agriculture to residential and commercial development. Surviving farmers had to cope with increasing pressure to invest more capital and operate as efficiently as possible. These events together were driving a quiet revolution in the farm supply industry. The list of fertilizer manufacturers shrank from hundreds to less than two dozen, and major chemical suppliers merged or abandoned the cyclical agricultural market, as did seed-breeding companies. The farm-supply retail business was forever changed. In the late 1990s, having sustained heavy losses for some time, Gold Kist sought a buyer for its farm stores and related businesses. In 1998 Southern States Cooperative, a farm and suburban store specialist based in Richmond, Virginia, purchased the Gold Kist farm-supply operations. Gold Kist withdrew as a one-third partner in Golden Peanut Company, an international commodity-trading firm it had joined in 1985. Twenty-first-Century Developments A partnership with Young Pecan Company of Florence, South Carolina, was dissolved in 2002, leaving Gold Kist with its poultry operations, a small operation that produced baby pigs in partnership with another cooperative in the Midwest, and a hog growout operation that supplied mature hogs to a Mississippi-based packer. Gold Kist's poultry plants—including twelve processing plants, nineteen hatcheries, twelve feed mills, and three by-product plants—posted sales of more than $1.8 billion in fiscal 2002. While consumption of chicken peaked at nearly eighty pounds per person in 2001, Gold Kist continued to expand and develop new international markets and to create more processed-chicken products to maintain its leadership position among meat items. The once-familiar whole chicken nearly disappeared from supermarkets and was replaced by trays of chicken parts and numerous forms of processed chicken products. And where once the meat counter was the only source of chicken, large supermarkets began to sell as much chicken in the deli section, in fully prepared form. New technology not only kept chicken prices low in comparison with other forms of meat but also made it possible to provide chicken in an amazing variety of partially and fully cooked forms with breading, spices, and companion vegetables all in one heat-and-eat package. Although competition from Brazil, China, Thailand, and other producing nations encroached on traditional U.S. export markets, distinct labor cost advantages and "upstream," or invisible, government subsidies of producers gave Gold Kist, and other American poultry processors, significant advantages when marketing to international customers. In 2006 Gold Kist agreed to merge with Pilgrim's Pride Corporation of Pittsburg, Texas, thereby creating the world's largest poultry company. At the time of the merger, Gold Kist was the nation's third-largest poultry producer, employing 16,500 people and controlling 8.8 percent of the poultry market share in the United States. D. W. Brooks (1901-1999) Farm Cooperatives More in Agribusiness Henry Tift (1841-1922) W. B. Roddenbery Company Cagle's Jesse Jewell (1902-1975) Destinations Art Across Georgia Fall in North Georgia Seven Natural Wonders of Georgia Ten Major Civil War Sites in Georgia Media Gallery: Gold Kist Inc. D. W. Brooks Loading Further Reading Brian S. Wills, "D. W. Brooks: Gold Kist's Goodwill Ambassador," Georgia Historical Quarterly 74 (fall 1990): 487-502.Barbara Young, "Trendy Solutions," National Provisioner , December 2001. Cite This Article Brower, Paul G. "Gold Kist Inc.." New Georgia Encyclopedia. 12 January 2015. Web. 21 February 2017. More from the Web Pilgrim's: The Pilgrim's Story More in Business & Economy Waffle House Irrigation Georgia Experiment Station, Griffin Kaolin College of Management at Georgia Institute of Technology J. Mack Robinson College of Business Primerica Financial Services Michael J. Coles College of Business Georgia Department of Transportation Equifax Joel Hurt (1850-1926) Cagle's Coca-Cola Company Terry College of Business Stuckey's Georgia Railroad Bank and Trust/Wachovia Bank, N.A. NGE Topics

农业

2017-09/1014/en_head.json.gz/9475

http://www.mysanantonio.com/life/home_and_garden/article/A-homegrown-lifestyle-4340314.php A homegrown lifestyle By Karen Sullivan, Charlotte Observer Published 4:53 pm, Friday, March 8, 2013 Photo: McClatchy-Tribune Photos The mix of plants on Barbara Damrosch's and Eliot Coleman's land creates a good ecosystem, say the authors of “Four Season Farm Gardener's Cookbook.” Damrosch loves to tell about the rewards of growing food. “There is a new awareness of the value of homegrown food,” says Damrosch. CHARLOTTE, N.C. — No matter where she goes, Barbara Damrosch can find herself talking with someone about the rewards of growing fresh, wholesome foods at home and becoming less dependent on other sources. It's a lifestyle that was popular in the 1960s and '70s. Today a natural food movement has re-emerged as the nation's ecology and health force us to tally things being lost to convenience. Nutrients and fuel use can be tradeoffs when foods travel long distances to reach us. Pesticides and food waste also take a toll. As measures of the pros and cons continue, many people are going off-grid for food. Others are puttering in the soil for the joy — and the flavor — of a home-based harvest. “There is a new awareness of the value of homegrown food,” said Damrosch, co-author of the newly released “Four Season Farm Gardener's Cookbook” (Workman Publishing, $22.95). “We're trying to make it easier for people to get out there and grow their own food.” Damrosch's husband, Eliot Coleman, has been farming in Maine for more than 45 years. Coleman, 74, started what is now Four Season Farm in 1968. Today, the operation occupies fewer than 2 acres but provides enough food for a farm stand that is open in June through September, a mobile stand for farmers markets, as well as a year-round wholesale business. He shares his expertise at extending the growing season with home cooks, chefs and various TV audiences, so they can have access to local food for more of the year, as he does. Damrosch, 70, came to the farm in 1991, the year she married Coleman. She has emerged as a champion of gardening as a central part of family and community life, even as big corporate farms grew and overshadowed small, local agriculture such as theirs. Their family garden is a showcase of the plant diversity that is considered vital to a healthy ecosystem but frightfully lacking in large-scale agriculture. They grow old, heirloom varieties alongside newer hybrids. The couple's new book includes pictures of their gardens, growing tips and recipes that Damrosch created with produce from their fields. “The deep green of the spinach and bluish cast of the broccoli leaves tell us we've fed these plants well, and that they will feed us well in return,” the couple write in the book. In her weekly column for the Washington Post, called “A Cook's Garden,” Damrosch shares pictures of her home-grown vegetables and fruits with the pride of a parent posting her babies' pictures. At a time when digital automation makes so many chores seem effortless, the prerequisite of toiling for weeks or months to grow one's own food seems too costly for many people, especially when a supermarket is on the way home. Damrosch says that even the smallest plot can be an abundant source of food for much of the year. The book includes tips for making gardening manageable and efficient, even for those with limited time. For Damrosch, the garden is a path to better flavor, better nutrition and perhaps hope that more of our great-grandchildren will want to know the magical flavor of food grown in the backyard. The transformation of pretty herbs and tomatoes to food for the table, as illustrated in the book, is perhaps the best argument that we are missing something special when we don't harvest from our land or at least buy from a neighboring farm. “People are looking for stuff that's real and not diluted with chemicals,” Damrosch said. “It doesn't taste the same.”

农业

2017-09/1014/en_head.json.gz/10431

Skillful Means: A New Report from Brighter Green Breeding Sow in a Medium-Sized Farm, Eastern China (Picture: Peter Li/HSI/CIWF) New York-based policy action tank Brighter Green’s new report, Skillful Means: The Challenges of China’s Encounter with Factory Farming (PDF) explores the emerging superpower’s “livestock revolution,” which is having serious impacts on public health, food security, and equity in China—and the world. The Beijing Summer Olympics are showcasing a resurgent nation, which only two generations after a devastating national famine is eating increasingly high on the food chain. In the past ten years, consumption of China’s most popular meat, pork, has doubled. In 2007, China raised well over half a billion pigs for meat. Given that every fifth person in the world is Chinese, even small increases in individual meat or dairy consumption will have broad, collective environmental as well as climate impacts. Increasingly, what the Chinese eat, and how China produces its food, affects not only China, but the world, too. “When I was a child, every person was allotted one pound of pork a month,” says Peter Li, a professor of political science at the University of Houston in Texas who grew up in Jiangxi province in southeast China says in Eating Skillfully. “We could not eat more than that. You could not get it. Now, though, more people have access to more meat and want to eat a lot of it.” In yuan terms, meat is the second largest segment of China’s retail food market. China has also opened its doors to investments by major multinational meat and dairy producers, as well as animal feed corporations, including Tyson Foods, Smithfield, and Novus International. Western-style meat culture has gone mainstream. Fast food is a U.S. $28-billion-a-year business in China. McDonald’s, a major sponsor of the Olympics, had more than 800 restaurants in China, with at least a hundred more set to open by the time the games began. Four McDonald’s are operating in Olympic venues, including the press center and the athletes’ village. “China is not yet a bone fida “factory farm nation” like the U.S.,” says Mia MacDonald, Brighter Green’s executive director and co-author of Skillful Means. “But the strains of its fast-growing livestock sector are becoming harder to ignore. In the U.S., a re-examination of the multiple human, environmental, economic, and ethical costs of factory farming is taking place. Such a process needs to get underway in China’before it’s too late.” Although these realities won’t be fully obvious to the millions of people cheering on the Olympic athletes in China and across the globe, they demand attention: China’s livestock produce 2.7 billion tons of manure every year, nearly three and a half times the industrial solid waste level. Run-off from livestock operations have created a large “dead zone” in the South China Sea that is virtually devoid of marine life. In northern China, overgrazing and overfarming lead to the loss of nearly a million acres of grassland each year to desert. Diet-related chronic diseases now kill more Chinese than any other cause, and nearly one in four Chinese is overweight. More than 90 percent of some bacteria in Asia can no longer be treated effectively with “first-line” antibiotics like penicillin’due to their overuse in farmed animals. China can still feed itself. But this is likely to change as its meat and dairy sectors expand and intensify. The Chinese government is looking abroad, not only to international food markets but also to Africa, Latin America, and other parts of Asia for land on which to produce food for people and feed for livestock. In 2008, China surpassed the U.S. to become the world’s leading emitter of carbon dioxide (CO2). Per capita emissions of CO2 in China have more than doubled, from 2.1 tons of CO2 equivalent in 1990 to 5.1 tons today. Meat and dairy production have a direct relationship with global climate change: fully 18 percent of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions stem from the livestock industry. Even though the Chinese government seems set on emulating industrialized nations’ meat and dairy culture, a small but growing number of Chinese non-governmental organizations and individuals are questioning this path. To them food quality, not quantity, is important, along with issues of sustainability and animal welfare. Eating Skillfully recommends the following actions to both the Chinese government and civil society: The government ought to redefine its conception of short- and long-term food security so it doesn’t give priority to a meat-centered diet. Meat in China ought to be, as it was, a condiment and not the mainstay of a meal. Government subsidies that now support the expansion of industrial-scale livestock operations, owned by Chinese or foreign companies, should be ended. The “externalities” on which animal agriculture is dependent’such as riverine and marine water pollution, contamination of soil and groundwater, and land degradation’should be paid for, in full, by the industry and/or specific facilities that cause them. Increased sharing of information and experiences of industrial animal agriculture should take place among policy-makers, academics, and civil society groups in China and other countries, both developing and developed. A forum for dialogue between the government and China’s and global animal welfare, environment and other civil society organizations should be established. The growing environmental movement in China ought to include the issue of intensive animal agriculture within its analysis, awareness-raising, and advocacy activities, and collaborate with civil society groups working on related issues. Contact: Mia MacDonald, Brighter Green, New York, E-mail: [email protected] (After August 26: Tel: (1) 917 202 2809). Peter Li, University of Houston, Texas Tel: (1) 832-647-6518. E-mail: [email protected]

农业

2017-09/1014/en_head.json.gz/10974

Agweb HomeMyMachinery.com HomeNewsDeep Cuts in Food-Stamp Spending Said Averted in Farm Bill Deep Cuts in Food-Stamp Spending Said Averted in Farm Bill Deep cuts in U.S. food-stamp spending sought by House Republicans were averted in a tentative agreement on a much-delayed agriculture bill, according to a congressional aide familiar with the matter. The proposed farm legislation crafted by U.S. lawmakers, billed as saving $24 billion through food-stamp cuts and the end of a direct-payment program for farmers, may advance to the Senate after a vote in the House of Representatives that could take place as soon as Jan. 29. By approving a plan that largely keeps food stamps intact and preserves most farm subsidies, an urban-rural coalition has been maintained amid a tough political environment that saw an earlier plan rejected in the House. If it passes, the agreement would be another bipartisan achievement by a Congress faulted for a lack of legislative success. Leaders of the House and Senate agriculture committee are being asked to sign off on the plan today, after weekend talks. The House plans to act before leaving town this week for party strategy meetings. The House Rules Committee is scheduled to meet at 5 p.m. Washington time and may consider the farm plan, according to the aide. Some of the savings may go to compensate counties with large swaths of untaxed federal land, a $450 million item House Speaker John Boehner assured lawmakers earlier this month would be in the bill. Bunge, Ace The bill to reauthorize U.S. Department of Agriculture programs governs farm subsidies, which encourages planting of soybeans, cotton and other crops that lower materials costs for commodity processors including Bunge Ltd. The bill subsidizes crop-insurers such as Ace Ltd. and funds purchases at Kroger Co. and other grocers through food stamps, its biggest expense. The farm-bill accord would be a third bipartisan deal by the current Congress, which passed a budget last month and cleared a $1.1 trillion spending bill on Jan. 16. The five-year farm legislation would end an aid program that makes direct payments to farmers and cost about $50 billion over 10 years, and reduces food stamps. Much of the subsidy spending was restored in other programs. The agreement reached on food stamps would cut spending by $8 billion over 10 years, or about one-fifth of the $40 billion sought by House Republicans. Negotiators agreed to tighten a provision that let states give residents as little as $1 a year in heating assistance to qualify them for an average of $1,080 in additional nutrition aid. Target, Supervalu Republicans successfully sought to lift the "heat and eat" threshold to $20, while Democrats proposed $10. The higher level creates almost $9 billion in savings, some of would be plowed back into a $200 million pilot program that lets 10 states toughen work requirements and boosts spending for food banks by about $200 million for 10 years, said the congressional aide who requested anonymity to discuss internal talks. Food stamps used at retailers such as Target Corp. and Supervalu Inc. cost a record $76.1 billion in fiscal 2013, or about 12 percent of the $650 billion a year Americans spend on groceries. About 47.4 million Americans used the program in October, the most recent month available, the U.S. Department of Agriculture said Jan. 10. Almost half of all food-stamp redemptions are in big-box supercenters such as Wal-Mart Stores Inc., while most of the rest are in chains such as Safeway Inc., according to data collected by Bloomberg. Lottery Ban The farm bill would also forbid food stamps for lottery winners, an idea supported in both chambers, and restrict aid for college students. Not included was a Republican plan to tighten state eligibility requirements, a projected savings of $11.6 billion, or a $19 billion reduction by reducing waivers states can give childless adults who would otherwise face work requirements or time limits under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, the technical name for food stamps. Contested proposals over meat labeling and state laws governing farming practices are still being negotiated, while a plan to involve the government in managing dairy supplies will be modified to gain support from House Speaker John Boehner. Companies including Tyson Foods Inc. have called for country-of-origin labeling, a part of farm bills since 2002, to be weakened after complaints about the labeling from Mexico and Canada before the World Trade Organization the U.S. has lost. Last year the USDA tightened the rules, eliminating the ability for companies to merely say the beef was from North America and requiring separate disclosures to say where beef, lamb, pork, chicken and goat were born, raised and slaughtered. Subsidies, Insurance On commodity subsidies, the bill combines a House push to raise so-called target prices under which the government will subsidize farmers with the Senate approach that emphasizes more insurance aid. As the cost to farm has increased and crop acreage has shifted from wheat and cotton to soybeans and corn in the past 20 years, price and acreage calculations for aid have been seen as archaic, though tying subsidies too closely to market conditions increases the chance of trade retaliation through the World Trade Organization. Payment limits under commodity programs would be capped at $125,000 per individual or $250,000 per couple, with the definition of a "family farmer" left up to the USDA for definition purposes. Crop insurance, which paid out a record $17 billion after the 2012 drought, would include requirements that farmers follow conservation plans on their land to qualify for federal subsidies. So-called conservation compliance is included, while limits on subsidies for wealthier farmers receiving assistance on paying premiums, supported by the Senate, isn’t in the bill. Congressional passage would put in place a new law to succeed the previous bill passed in 2008. An extension of that law expired Sept. 30, potentially forcing the USDA to re- implement farm programs governed by language the from 1949 law that underlies policy and potentially doubling dairy prices. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack has said the department is focusing on implementing a new law rather than re-creating an old one because he’s confident Congress will pass the legislation. The department won’t change paths unless he’s convinced otherwise, the secretary said earlier this month. GAO Report Criticizes USDA on Subsidy Rules 10/8/2013 12:21:00 PM Lobbyists Provide Inside Look at Farm Bill Negotiations 12/12/2013 7:27:00 AM Comments

农业

2017-09/1014/en_head.json.gz/11759

Scrapping regulations calls for discretion Feb 10, 2017 Stronger safety net is goal for National Cotton Council Jan 27, 2017 Oklahoma Peanut Expo March 23 in Altus Feb 08, 2017 Cattle industry 'very concerned' about Trump's pledge to renegotiate NAFTA Feb 06, 2017 2006 High Cotton Award Winners Delta Winner, Joe Bostick, Golden, Mississippi Nestled into a corner of northeast Mississippi, cotton producer Joe Bostick must sometimes feel like a forgotten man. There is no irrigation here to bump cotton yields to super-high levels. Soils are thin and not always forgiving. This year, the only rain of any consequence came on the heels of three hurricanes that blew through the Gulf of Mexico. But success isn’t always built on what we have, or what Mother Nature doles out. Rather success is measured by what we do with what we’ve got. And Joe Bostick is doing some good things with his 1,050-acre cotton operation near Golden, Miss. For those accomplishments, Bostick has been named the 2006 High Cotton Award winner for the Delta states. He farms with his two sons, Ryan and Nathan, who help out at harvest and planting. There is full-time hand, Dale Ray, and part-time hand, Josh Brown, who helps out after tending to his job as a football manager at the University of Mississippi. Moral support comes from Bostick’s fiancé, Teresa Singleton, who works at the La-Z-Boy factory in nearby Belmont. Bostick graduated from Mississippi State in 1971, and taught agriculture to high school students full-time while farming part-time with his father, Charles. He took over the cotton operation when his father retired in 1982. He had taken cotton out of his crop mix in 1978 after the local gin closed, turning his attention to grain and soybeans. “We didn’t have Pix and cotton would just get too big,” Bostick explains. In 1991, he started growing cotton again, and he’s been at it ever since. “He came back to his bread and butter,” says his consultant, Homer Wilson, who has been working for Bostick since 1996. The return to cotton production was made without Bostick’s father, who died in an automobile crash in 1985 at an intersection a hundred yards from the farm headquarters. Soon after returning to the crop he loved, Bostick emerged as a conservationist and top-notch cotton manager, eager to increase efficiency on the farm. He began with water and soil — building and maintaining terraces and grass waterways, improving drainage, and converting to no-till in order to conserve soil, fuel, and labor. “One of the greatest benefits of no-till is the increase in organic matter,” consultant Wilson says. “There was a train of thought here in the hills that the ground was supposed to do what it was supposed to do. We really never used to give much thought to how our practices were affecting our yields.” In fact, Bostick’s topsoil is very thin — just a few inches thick before running into barren red clay. Many fields are highly erodible, making his soil conservation efforts even more important. “You have to take care of it, or you’re going to be in trouble,” Wilson says. Trouble often came in the form of stunted plants. “We were applying so many yellow herbicides that those thin places with no organic matter couldn’t handle it. Joe tried to build organic matter with corn, but in some cases, corn would die if we tried to rotate on some of this land.” Bostick says, “No-till has provided us with the organic matter in the soil to handle these herbicides, although we don’t have to use as many now that we have herbicide-resistant crops. But no-till was a great plus, and has boosted our overall yields. It brought yield between poor land and good land closer together.” He continues to rotate cotton with corn on a field-by-field basis. “We notice when the cotton yields start dropping during the year, and we try to rotate it with corn the following year. The soil needs a rest from the cotton.” He can usually count on a 150-pound yield increase in cotton following corn. No-till has helped from a labor perspective as well, Bostick says, noting that. “dependable farm labor is almost non-existent in this part of the country.” Controlling and slowing the flow of water on cotton fields is an ongoing project. During rains, he will often travel around the farm to get a better understanding of how surface water moves across his fields. His farm sits on a divide between the Tennessee-Tombigbee and Tennessee River waterways. Some land drains into the Tombigbee basin, but most drains into the Tennessee basin. He’s built parallel terraces on larger fields, diversion channels, and wide grass waterways. Drainage pipes built into the terraces take water off the fields into a ditch, lake, or a wooded area. To keep soil on the farm, he’s installed grass turnrows on most of the field edges. The grass – some seeded, some volunteer – also does a good job of keeping down dust. He’s built parallel terraces on larger fields, diversion channels, and wide grass waterways. Drainage pipes built into the terraces take water off the fields into a ditch, lake, or a wooded area. To keep soil on the farm, he’s installed grass turnrows on most of the field edges. The grass – some seeded, some volunteer – also does a good job of keeping down dust. Bostick is known for rescuing some tough ground from potential ruin and making it profitable. For example, he acquired one field in 1991 where erosion “had torn it up pretty badly. I signed up with the Soil Conservation Service and we built it up with terraces and ran drainage pipes.” He has dramatically improved yields on the field, too. “In the long run, you make more cotton with the terraces.” In 1995, Bostick took advantage of USDA’s Environmental Quality Incentives Program to help pay for converting to no-till cotton production on a couple of 50-acre fields. The cost-share program helped him purchase no-till equipment, and helped launch a 100 percent conversion to no-till. A conservationist and a good farm manager have a lot in common, says consultant Wilson. “One thing that impresses me most about Joe is that he carries out recommendations quickly and accurately. From time to time, I might see a low spot that might need some drainage or some dirt work, and I’d tell Joe about it. It wouldn’t be long before it got done. He doesn’t put things off.” “Conservation can be aggravating sometimes,” says Bostick, who does his own dirt work,“but in the end, it’s worth it. If you have a weak spot in the field and you let it continue to wash, it gets worse. If you’re willing to go the extra mile, it will pay.” He has won several local awards for his conservation work, serves as chairperson of the FSA county committee, and has also served as commissioner of the Tishomingo County Soil and Water Conservation District. In nominating Bostick for the award, Wilson noted, “He has many fields with a 50-foot, fringe wildlife area that also catches runoff and prevents stream pollution. He uses these practices to protect the land for future generations, specifically his sons’ future livelihood.” Phillip A. Horn executive director of the Alcorn/Tishomingo County FSA office, noted, “Joe has set the benchmark on all aspects of hill farming, and through his example, showed others that it can be done.” There is no age limit on the beneficiaries of Bostick’s efforts. One afternoon in late September, he hosted a group of first graders from nearby Tishomingo Elementary School. Each had a small sack for picking a few bolls of cotton. He and his hands stopped the cotton harvesting operation long enough for the kids to fill their sacks and ask a few dozen questions about the crop. It was hard to tell who was having more fun — the kids, or Bostick. Southeast Winner, Cliff Fox, Capron, Virginia For Virginia growers Cliff and Clarke Fox cotton is something new, but soil conservation and good stewardship are generations old. The Fox brothers with some sage help from their father, Trent Fox, grow 950 acres of cotton, 200 acres of peanuts, 325 acres of corn and 150 acres of soybeans at Foxhill Farms in Capron, Va. Though Cliff and Clarke Fox have developed Foxhill Farms into a diversified agricultural business, farming is a multi-generation operation for the Fox family. winners of the 2006 High Cotton Award. Cliff and Clarke Fox got an early introduction into farming from their father Trent. Their grandfather was a banker, who worked closely with farmers in Southampton County. Both Clarke and Cliff graduated with degrees in agricultural economics from Virginia Tech. Both their father and grandfather also attended Virginia Tech. After graduating from college, Clarke returned to the farm and began the process of converting his father’s part-time farming operation to a modern, diversified operation. When Cliff graduated from college, he chose to work with Southern States Farmer’s Cooperative in the southeast region of Virginia. In 1991, he joined his brother in the farming operation and Foxhill Farms became a corporate entity. Since that time, the farming operation has diversified away from a dependency on peanuts to cattle (for a few years) and on to cotton in 1994. Located about 70 miles south of Richmond and 75 miles west of the Atlantic Ocean, Foxhill Farms is in the heart of Virginia’s historic Southampton County. For over 200 years cotton was king in Southampton, but WWII and the need for domestic oil from peanuts brought a new crop to the area — peanuts. Add to the increase in peanut production, continued cotton losses to boll weevils, and by the 1950s cotton was no longer king and by the 1960s it was gone from Southampton County. Ironically, what nature and the government gave and took from Southampton County farmers has gone full circle. The boll weevil eradication program brought cotton back to the county and the end of the government supported peanut program has dramatically reduced the popularity of the crop to area growers. “We planted our first crop of cotton in 1994,” notes Cliff Fox. “My dad started farming this land in the mid-1960s, but he didn’t remember much about cotton, so the first 100 acres we planted was done with very little knowledge about the crop,” he said. “For our first cotton crop, we broke the land and ripped and bedded it,” he recalls. “It didn’t take us but one crop to figure out we needed to do something different, the younger Fox brother stresses. “My father was one of the first to use strip-tillage equipment in the county in 1969 for some of his corn fields, so he knew a great deal about conservation tillage — all we had to do was adapt it to cotton,” Fox laughs. For their second crop of cotton in 1995, they bedded the land in the fall and planted a wheat cover crop. They killed the wheat a couple of weeks prior to planting cotton in the spring. “The second year was better, the Virginia growers remember, but even with a cover crop, the bedded land is flat, and when it gets water on it, the water doesn’t have a place to go, so it makes it own way, causing us a lot of erosion problems,” the Virginia grower explains. Though growing dryland cotton in Virginia has been a challenge, the Fox brothers have consistently topped two bales per acre. This year is likely to be in the 1,000 pound per acre range, with some fields topping three bales per acre. One of the keys to keeping yields high, they agree, is taking care of the land. Growing cotton has been a work in progress for the Virginia farmers. Cliff laughingly recalls his first experience with Pix. “I over did the Pix a little bit and the cotton never met in the rows. We had a good crop of cotton, and a real good crop of weeds — that’s a battle we don’t want to try again,” Fox muses. In 1998, the Fox brothers bought a KMC strip-tillage rig, which has been good for both cotton production and conservation practices. The eight-row rig has a ripper shank in front, followed by four fluted coulters and a two basket configuration behind that. Though they continue to tweak the rig, it produces an excellent seed bed for cotton. “We handle our cover crop a little different from some growers,” Fox says. “We have found that when we kill the wheat 2-3 weeks prior to running the strip-till rig, the stubble tends to go away before we plant,” he said. They use a burn down herbicide, either glyphosate or paraquat, depending on the weed history of the field and time of application. “If we don’t have a real strong stand of wheat, we wait until the first true leaf of the cotton crop to kill the wheat,” he says. By waiting until the first true leaf of the cotton crop, he saves one pass over the field and glyphosate has no negative affect on Roundup Ready cotton. Cotton varieties stacked with herbicide and insecticide genes have changed the way cotton is grown — for the better, according to the Fox brothers. “For one thing, these varieties have allowed us to grow cotton with no cultivation. If we need to get into our cotton for escaped weeds, we use a directed, hooded sprayer,” Fox points out. In some years strip-tillage costs more in herbicide costs in some crops, but being able to use glyphosate on cotton has greatly reduced the need for herbicides. “For our operation, the big increase in cost has been the technology fee,” Fox says. Some savings come from application of Orthene tank-mixed with the first true leaf application of glyphosate. Thrips are a constant problem for young cotton in the Tidewater area of Virginia. They typically come back in the fifth true leaf with another application of glyphosate, which usually takes care of most weed problems. “If problem weeds come back later in the growing season, we go back with a hooded spray application, usually Suprend, which has worked well for us,” Fox contends. Loss of the peanut program has created problems for Virginia farmers, regardless of other crops grown. For the Fox brothers, it has meant a decrease in peanut acreage, which affects their rotation program for cotton. Ideally, they rotate cotton with corn and peanuts. They have replaced some of their peanut acreage with soybeans, which works well in the rotation, but doesn’t have the profit potential of peanuts. Always innovative, the Virginia farmers would like to take advantage of many of the new high-tech farming systems that are available. “We farm about 2,000 acres of land, but we have over 200 individual fields,” Clarke Fox points out. “Some of the new, high-tech, precision agriculture systems are just not practical for us,” he adds. “When we first went to module builders to replace bale wagons, people would stop on the side of the road to watch and often ask us what the contraption was,” Cliff Fox recalls. Now, he says, virtually all the cotton picked in Southampton county is moduled. One of the biggest changes in cotton production over the past 10 years for the Fox brothers has been with varieties. “Of the cotton varieties we started with in 1994, only Deltapine 51 is still available, and it’s being phased out,” Cliff Fox points out. We do variety tests with pesticide companies and with Virginia Tech researchers at Tidewater Research and Education Center in Holland” (Holland, Va, is about 30 miles from Capron, Va.), Fox says. He points out that being in the northern end of the Cotton Belt has meant fewer varieties that are bred for Virginia growing conditions. Farming on land that is prone to washing and erosion problems has likewise been a challenge for the Virginia growers. Cover crops on all their land, strip-tillage and drainage tiles on most of their land have proven to be successful for both erosion and crop production. “On land with bad wash problems, we have installed grass waterways,” says Cliff Fox. “Some we do ourselves, but on some land we have a company from nearby Suffolk come in and construct the waterways,” he said. The grass waterways are typically 60 feet across, with the bottoms of the drainage ditch at least 8 feet wide. These waterways are graded back to natural levels and seeded with grass. The concept is to provide a gentle grade, not a ‘V’ shape. “We are trying to create a way for water to get off the land,” says Fox. Critical to these grass waterways being efficient is to clean off the banks periodically, because dirt builds up in the grass, creating multiple pathways for water to run across the field. “If you don’t keep the banks of the waterways clean, you get two or more ways for water to get off the field, creating a bigger problem,” Fox said. Another key to the conservation system is to place heavy rocks at the end of the waterway. Otherwise, Fox says, the volume of water will be so heavy it will break the end of the waterway. Conservation practices are an everyday part of the operation at Foxhill Farms. The Fox brothers routinely triple rinse chemical containers and place these in a trailer. Once the trailer is filled, they take it to a warehouse, where the plastic is picked up, ground into pellets and reused in the plastic industry. They also recycle all the used oil from the farm. These services are provided through the local Virginia Tech Extension service. They also participate in a used tire program with the Soil and Water Conservation District. “We recently bought a farm that had thousands of used tires discarded on several sites on the farm. Working with the Department of Environmental Quality, we found a regional company that would pick up these tires for a fee. Since that time, we have recycled all the tires from our farm,” Fox said. Foxhill Farms has several miles of drainage tiles — another holdover from the conservation practices of Trent Fox. “We spend a lot of time keeping drainage tiles working. In the winter that is one of Cliff’s biggest jobs,” Clarke Fox notes. For Cliff and Clarke Fox cotton is becoming a part of the tradition that includes Virginia Tech, conservation, good stewardship and strong family support. Southwest Winner, Lawrence (Buck) Braswell, Raymondville, Texas Buck Braswell walks through stalks left standing from last year’s cotton crop, stopping occasionally to kick up remnants of grain sorghum stubble, residue from 2004. He stoops, digs his hands into the loose, grayish-black soil and sifts it through his fingers, like a miner, panning for gold nuggets. No shiny stones turn up here but Braswell picks out bits and pieces of rich organic matter, decomposing and adding value to his South Texas fields. He points to a tractor and bedding rig running across the far end of the field and explains how he’s rowing up a bed, through last summer’s cotton stalks, for next spring’s grain sorghum crop. He says soil erosion will not be a significant problem in this field. Braswell values soil and does all he can not only to conserve it, but also to make it better than he finds it. Conservation makes sense. He contends that the better he maintains the soil the better cotton crop it will make. It makes economic sense as well, saving him trips across the field, allowing him to farm more acreage with fewer and smaller tractors, less expensive diesel fuel and fewer man hours. And yields remain equal to or better than many farmers who continue to follow conventional tillage methods. Braswell’s dedication to conservation, along with his unselfish willingness to help other growers learn about and adopt conservation practices, earned him the 2006 Farm Press High Cotton Award for the Southwest. Braswell will accept the award in January at the Annual Beltwide Cotton Conferences in San Antonio, Texas. He made his first reduced-tillage crop in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in 1992. He had done some conservation tillage in Mississippi before moving to Texas. “Yield on that first con-till crop was just as good as conventional,” he says. He’s refined the system since and follows the same basic procedures in both cotton and grain sorghum. “We’re producing crops as good as anyone around us,” he says. Braswell plants cotton in grain sorghum stubble and grain sorghum in cotton stalks. “We never pull stalks,” he says. “It’s important to leave those stalks.” He says, in addition to adding organic matter to the soil, stalks and root systems keep channels open for water to penetrate and for the next crop to follow to moisture. “I always follow the same rows, every year. Controlled traffic is a key for conservation tillage.” Braswell follows a fairly simple procedure. He uses a John Deere Max Emerge planter. “I just add a disk on the front to move dry soil,” he says. “I put out seed, no insecticide hoppers, no herbicide tanks. I just plant. And I use bulk seed, so we don’t have to lift bags anymore.” Braswell doesn’t use a total no-till system. “I put up a little row,” he says, “and use the same ones every year.” He likes to “bed up the land” in the fall, after September rains. “I don’t want to bed up too early, because all rain water will run off when the middles are clean of debris,” he says. “I leave the stubble in the beds to hold that moisture and will put up beds in October. Then I hope we get rains before planting to replenish moisture.” He manages residual stalks with a Prep Master before planting. “I kill cotton stalks just after harvest with 2,4-D to prevent boll weevils from reproducing late in the year. I may hit it three times. I get checked a lot on stalk destruction, but this system works better than mechanical destruction. Often I can’t find any (stalks) alive after spraying. I can get near 100 percent stalk destruction by spraying. I can’t do that well when pulling stalks.” He says growers have to be meticulous about spraying to assure proper coverage. He runs the Prep Master over grain sorghum stubble too, usually a week before planting. “I have no trouble getting a stand with minimal-till cotton,” Braswell says. “That was a concern back in the early 1990s but since 1995 and 1996, we’ve gotten excellent stands. But we will do whatever it takes to get a cotton stand. We only get that one shot at it, so we make certain we get it up. I rarely have to replant.” Weed control has posed few problems either. He uses all Roundup Ready varieties and will apply Prowl pre-emergence only to irrigated acreage. “I may use some Diuron in a rainy summer. “I’ll plant as many Roundup Flex, stacked varieties as I can get in 2006,” he says. “Roundup Ready has made a big difference in farmers’ acceptance of reduced tillage systems.” He expects Roundup Flex, with a broader application window, will be even more useful in reduced tillage systems. The current system has worked well. “I have no serious weed problems but I realize that Roundup is not good on some weeds, and I could run into some trouble down the road.” He uses a hooded sprayer to take care of in-season weeds. He’s careful with spray application, for either weed or insect pests. “Spray drift can cause a lot of damage and ill will,” he says. “But we can spray without drift if we do it right. We have to be aware of the wind.” He uses a high cycle and a hooded spryer for spraying insecticides and herbicides. He is careful with either. “We have to be mindful of people’s property,” he says. “Folks spend a lot of money on their yards and they don’t want their plants damaged. If we’re careful, we can draw a fine line with a sprayer and keep drift from being a problem.” Cultivation plays no part in his weed management system. “I own no disks or field cultivators,” he says. He recently took in a 500-acre farm and had to run a chisel plow to get it ready to plant. “Even when I chisel, I leave residue on the surface,” he says. That residue is important in the Valley. “We get a lot of wind erosion down here.” Rotation keeps yields up. “We simply can’t plant cotton after cotton here,” he says. “Cotton yields will drop by half if we don’t rotate.” He says milo responds to reduced tillage even better than cotton. “Yield improvement seems better with the grain,” he says. Braswell says current high energy prices may encourage other Rio Grande Valley farmers to cut back on tillage. “We’re saving a lot of diesel fuel with minimal tillage. I haven’t bought diesel since mid-season,” he said in mid-October. “My neighbors are buying it every week. And at $2.23 a gallon, it’s a big expense.” Steel price jumps also add up. “Steel cost is a big issue for a farmer,” he says. “Sweeps are up 40 percent since last year, but we only put up that little row so we only use a sweep once a year.” He figures equipment lasts 30 percent to 40 percent longer because of reduced tillage. “I don’t go to the shop for repairs nearly as often as I used to. We spend very little money on equipment repair. “We use less equipment, probably 60 percent to 70 percent less than we did with conventional tillage. And we use smaller equipment. We just don’t need the high horsepower.” In addition to fuel, soil, labor and equipment savings, Braswell believes his nutrient program works better. He’s participated in a variable rate fertility program and says his soils show more uniform nutrient distribution than conventionally tilled fields. “Also, I have higher organic matter content.” He says the organic matter provides a “distinct difference during drought. At planting time I see an obvious difference in the amount of planting moisture available. That’s an established fact.” In addition to his minimum till conservation program, Braswell also keeps soil out of the Arroyo Colorado River that runs by one of his fields. He’s built a buffer between the field and the river, built low berms to divert water away from the river and is planting grass to help hold the soil. He thinks precision farming will be the next step in improving farm efficiency. Global Positioning System (GPS) agriculture “is the way to go,” he says. “I intend to work on it in the next few years. It will improve farming. The technology is amazing and will allow us to be more accurate with spraying, planting and the other practices we do on a farm. We will be able to apply chemicals with GPS and save $4 to $5 an acre because of improved accuracy. We will save on seed, too. “Every application on the farm, within five years, will be adaptable to GPS. A lot of us said we would never use a computer on a farm. Now, we all have them. It will be the same with GPS.” Braswell has been a willing teacher for other farmers interested in learning about reduced tillage systems. He speaks at five or six meetings a year, sharing what he’s learned about reduced tillage. “And hardly a day goes by that someone doesn’t call asking for information,” he says. He provides that counsel willingly because it’s a production philosophy he believes in. “In this area, we now have thousands of acres that have not had a plow in 10 or 15 years,” he says. “A lot of neighbors who have adopted reduced tillage have been able to make a crop when some with conventional systems could not. And conventional farming has higher production costs.” Braswell says the percentage of reduced till acreage goes up every year, he estimates by around 10 percent. “Five yeas ago, very few were into reduced tillage, but we see a lot of it now. We don’t have as much bare land in the fall as we used to see. And landlords are beginning to request that we use reduced tillage methods on their land. They have seen the advantages.” Buck Braswell drives the back roads of Willacy County, showing us the bare autumn landscape where the country’s earliest cotton crop was harvested back in mid-summer. He points out fields with cotton stalks still standing and tells how one farmer or another recently switched to conservation tillage. He’s pleased at how much better these farmers like the system than what they had done before, many for decades. He doesn’t say so, but other observers contend that Braswell may have played a key role in encouraging the change. Calling him an evangelist for no-till may be a bit over the top but it somehow seems appropriate. He’s not a pushy type, but given the opportunity to talk about what conservation tillage will do, he’s more than willing to share what he knows. Western Winner, Wally Shropshire, Blythe, California Wally Shropshire of Blythe and famed movie director Cecil B. DeMille of Hollywood share a lot more in common than just calling California home. They both are epic creators -- gathering together casts of thousands to attract millions: Wally even more so than the late Cecil. Shropshire has been orchestrating — with a supporting production ensemble of hundreds — a cast of trillions that saved millions from a horde of lurking evildoers. Wally’s legacy over the past 38 years would make Hollywood proud. However, Wally’s work will never get him invited to Oscar night, but there are thousands of cotton growers who would be more than willing to dole out statues by the truckloads for the accomplishments of the band Wally leads. Former California Department of Food and Agriculture director Jack Parnell called the epic Wally has directed since 1974 “The Greatest Story Never Told.” Western Farm Press and the Cotton Foundation are telling the story this year with its Far West High Cotton Award for 2006. Rather than honor a farm family for producing cotton with a commitment to environmental stewardship, this year’s Far West High Cotton award goes down a different path. The honor goes to the California Cotton Pest Control Board or as it is better known, “The California Pink Bollworm program,” and its chairman Shropshire is accepting the High Cotton Award at this year’s Beltwide Cotton Conferences in San Antonio, Texas. Why? The answer is simple. It is undoubtedly the world’s most successful and longest running area wide integrated biological pest control program, and the program with a current budget of $5.5 million has been funded virtually with 100 percent grower funds almost from its inception nearly four decades ago. It is a program that has negated the use of millions of pounds of pesticides. The California San Joaquin Valley pink bollworm exclusion program is an environmental benchmark for the ages. There have been at least 38 million acres of some of the highest quality cotton produced in the world in California’s San Joaquin Valley since growers banded together and opened their checkbooks to keep the pink bollworm — the world’s most destructive cotton pest — out of the San Joaquin. Using a conservative 2.5-bale average, this acreage represents roughly 100 million bales of cotton. Beat expectations And Wally’s entourage has succeeded longer than anyone imagined in the beginning, using an integrated pest control approach, relying on trapping, sterile release, crop residue destruction, and pheromone confusion technology to keep PBW infestations below economic impact levels for decades. Since 1968, at last 20 trillion irradiated, sterile pink bollworm moths have been aerially distributed over the San Joaquin for 38 years this to keep PBW at bay. “Bottom line is that the California cotton industry would not be here today without the pink bollworm program,” said Earl Williams, president of the California Cotton Ginners and Growers Association. Williams has logged 40 years in the California cotton industry and added, “We would have run out of options a long time ago and likely would be where the Imperial Valley and other desert cotton growing areas are today had growers not formed the cotton pest control board and funded out of their own pockets the pink bollworm program.” In 1977 there were 140,000 acres of cotton and 12 cotton gins in Imperial Valley. Today there is one gin and less than 12,000 acres, and the pink bollworm is largely responsible for that. At the height of the pink bollworm infestation, desert cotton producers were spending annually an average of $125 per acre in Palo Verde Valley and $175 per acre in Imperial Valley trying to control pink bollworm. It was not uncommon at the height of the pink bollworm problems for a grower to spend $300 per acre on pesticide sprays. Not one SJV cotton producer has spent a single dime to apply a pesticide to control PBW. It costs SJV producers about $2 per bale or about $5 per acre annually for that rare privilege. At four or five bales, it is still a bargain at $8 to $10 per acre. Mid-’60s problem PBW became a major problem for Arizona and Southern California cotton producers in the mid-1960s. Jack Stone, Stratford, Calif., cotton producer, like Shropshire, is one of the two original board members still serving, recalled a group of SJV producers going to Arizona and Southern California to see first hand what type of threat they were facing. Less than 300 miles separate Blythe, Calif., where the PBW was wreaking havoc at that time and Bakersfield, Calif., where there were no pink bollworms. Growers and researchers were convinced it would only be a matter of time before PBW would reach the San Joaquin without an area wide exclusion effort, recalled Stone. “We realized early on that it would jeopardize our livelihoods, and we decided to form the cotton pest control board to develop a plan to address the problem,” said Stone. The producers went to the legislature to get the authority to levy an assessment to support the use of sterile insects to overwhelm native populations. Surprisingly, it was not a novel idea 40 years ago. It had been used since 1953 to control screwworm, an insect that feeds only on the living tissue of warm-blooded animals. It was a major problem for American livestock. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) entomologist used the technique first to eradicate screwworm in the Southeast and then the program was expanded to eventually eradicate the screwworm from the entire United States, Mexico and most of Central America. Screwworm eradication from the U.S. began in 1962 under the direction of ARS labs in Kerrville and in Mission, Texas. Shropshire said it was from the work at Mission that the California sterile release pink bollworm program had its beginning. Few objections “The amazing thing to me back then and still today, is how very few cotton growers objected to the bale assessment we used to start and maintain the program,” said Stone. “Growers have always willingly paid it and it has been a tremendously successful program over the years. It has exceeded my expectations by far. “I am almost certain that the pink bollworm program is why we are still growing cotton in the San Joaquin Valley today,” said Stone. Bill Tracy, partner in the family-owned Buttonwillow Land and Cattle Co. in Kern County, was introduced to the idea of releasing sterile moths to control native pests when he returned to the farm after Army Reserve active duty in the late 1960s. Informational meetings were being conducted in the valley at that time and “you can imagine the initial reaction of pre-bio engineering farmers when state bureaucrats (from the California Department of Food and Agriculture) were suggesting releasing the most devastating cotton critter in the world over the San Joaquin Valley.” It took some convincing that there would be no non-sterile moths inadvertently released as part of the sterile drops. Fortunately, said Tracy, Shropshire was at those early meetings telling SJV growers, “Gentlemen, the Palo Verde Valley is already infested, and I’d give a million dollars to be in your shoes with the opportunity to prevent the pink bollworm from getting into your valley.” In 1967 the state of California paid to spray every acre of cotton in the Palo Verde Valley 13 times with Sevin to prevent the pink bollworm from getting into the desert valley, recalled Shropshire. And the state even mandated that cotton trailers crossing into California from Arizona across the Colorado River had to be fumigated before going to the gins on the California side. Attempts to keep pink bollworm on the Arizona side of the river failed and desert cotton growers have had to live with the pinkie ever since. ‘We were naive’ “We were naive to think the pinkie would not cross the Colorado,” he said. “There was no question in my mind had we not had the sterile program all these years, we would have a hellacious pinkie problem in the San Joaquin today,” said Shropshire. Jeff Hildebrand of Bakersfield, Calif., recently went off the cotton pest control board after having served since 1984. His family has farmed in California since 1937. “The pink bollworm program is one of the least known, most environmentally sound pest control programs in the country. It has saved California growers millions of dollars while costing them next to nothing. Just the environmental significance of the amount of pesticides it has saved growers is staggering,” said Hildebrand. One of the key people in the success of the program has been USDA entomologist Bob Staten who has been involved with the program since 1970. He has been an adviser to the board and has conducted numerous PBW research projects both in the San Joaquin and in the desert valleys. "The success of this program is huge, (See CALIFORNIA, Page 30) you just look at what hasn't happened in the SJV. In the history of the program, there has only been one incidence of a measurable infestation in the SJV. (Buttonwillow). No grower in the SJV has ever had to apply pesticides for pink bollworm control,” said Staten. CDFA brought that Buttonwillow infestation under control. CDFA has managed the program since its inception. Bob Roberson was branch chief of the CDFA Integrated Pest Control branch and worked with the program from 1977 until he retired in 2000. Amazing vision “It was amazing how visionary the board was in seeing the importance of keeping pink bollworm out of the valley — how growers and ginners like Wally and Jack and others had the vision to see what was needed,” said Roberson. “And these men followed the direction of an outstanding group of scientists like Bob Staten, Fred Stewart and Tom Miller. Dr. James Brazil was another entomologist who was a key part of the program, especially when the board got involved in eradicating the boll weevil in Arizona and from Southern California,” said Roberson. Working with the cotton pest control board and these scientists “was the highlight of my career,” said the retired CDFA administrator. Jim Rudig is program supervisor for the program. He began his CDFA career as a temporary employee working on the new technology of releasing sterile PBW moths to overwhelm any native populations in 1967. When a sterile moth mates with a native, there is no offspring and it breaks the generation cycle. “Everything we did in the beginning was new technology and it was not very sophisticated,” said Rudig. One of the challenges initially was find how to effectively release the sterile PBW moths. “In the screwworm program, they irradiated and released larvae. They found you could not do that with pink bollworm. We had to release the moths,” recalled Rudig. The first releases were done by hand with moths inserted into toilet paper tubes stuffed with excelsior—“bunny grass. Yea, the stuff you find in Easter baskets. I remember going to the drug store in Bakersfield and buying all the bunny grass in the store to stuff in toilet paper tubes. We would walk the cotton fields putting out the moths in those paper tubes,” said Rudig. Aerial release That quickly gave way to the successful development of aerial release equipment to blanket the valley weekly with sterile PBW moths during the growing season. “In the beginning it amazed me how careful the members of the cotton pest control board were to protect the cotton industry. In the 60s, most of the leaders were young men yet they have always exhibited a vision into the future for their industry,” said Rudig. Rudig brings a unique perspective to the program because interspersed with his work on the PBW program have been stints eradicating Medfly infestations from urban areas. “It has been extremely gratifying to work on the pink bollworm program because of my experience in using pesticides to eradicate Medfly,” he said. “I am not against the use of pesticides. They are important to control insect pests if done properly, but when you can do what cotton growers have done working with CDFA for almost 40 years, it is truly amazing,” said Rudig, who was a leader in moving the PBW technology to the fight against Medfly. Rudig said it is almost impossible to keep Medfly out of California’s urban areas like Southern California, and CDFA now aerially drops sterile Medfly over the Los Angeles area to minimize infestations. Using sterile insect releases to keep a pest at bay is a numbers game, but those numbers can be deceiving, pointed out Rudig. Trapping to capture both sterile and native PBW is an integral part of the program. “In 2005 we released 231 million steriles and captured 231,000 in traps. Because we are trapping only males, that represents only two-tenths of 1 percent. We trapped only 116 natives at the same time,” said Rudig. However, if you use the same trap percentage as sterile moths, “it is easy to recognize that a native population can quickly get away from you without a sterile release program. Just because you caught one native moth does not mean it is the only one out there.” Overwintering Early on in the program there were doubts expressed that the pink bollworm could overwinter in the San Joaquin Valley. Staten researched the issue with caged cotton plots in the middle of Kern County cotton field one season. He recorded five generations in those cages; end of debate about overwintering. Williams has high praise for the board and the CDFA crew that runs the program. In recent years the board has approved funding for CDFA trapping for silverleaf whitefly, a potentially devastating pest that can cause severe damage to cotton lint and the valley’s high quality cotton reputation. The California growers and ginners groups have conducted an aggressive campaign to prevent sticky cotton caused by whitefly. “The trapping by CDFA has been very extensive and very informative. It gives us a clue as to where sticky cotton issues may arise and allows us to address it quickly,” said Williams. With cotton acreage declining, revenue for the cotton pest control board PBW program has been declining. “The board was facing budgetary constraints and were looking to cut back whitefly trapping. We encouraged them to stay with the program and they accommodated us. Every cotton grower in the San Joaquin appreciates that very much. “And, I might add Jim Rudig has done a fantastic job with the program,” he said. Another critical element in keeping PBW at bay is a mandatory plowdown regulation to reduce overwintering habitat for the pest. Conservation tillage is a new technology several SJV growers are trying and in that system, complete plowdown may not be possible. CDFA flexible “The board and the CDFA people did not stonewall these efforts. Instead they adopted some rules that will allow growers to experiment with conservation tillage without compromising the integrity of the pink bollworm program,” said Williams. “That is the kind of flexibility and continued support for the cotton industry that has been repeatedly displayed by CDFA and the board.” While the majority of the funds collected have been to support SJV pink bollworm suppression, Southern California cotton growers have not been ignored. The board has funded research there over the years. Ironically, the next and possibly final chapter of pink bollworm story in the Western U.S. and Mexico may be written in Southern California along with Arizona, New Mexico, Far West Texas and Northern Mexico where the pink bollworm has been a constant threat since the mid-1960s. Growers in these area have been able to stay in the cotton business with the use of pheromone confusion and reduced pesticide use. Now eradication may be possible. “Bt cotton could be the final piece of the puzzle that will allow us to truly consider eradicating the pink bollworm from the U.S. and Mexico,” said Shropshire. Pheromones and Bt cotton have reduced pink bollworm populations in many areas to levels where massive sterile release drops like are done each year in the San Joaquin can possibly eradicate pink bollworm by overwhelming native populations. Bob Hull is a long time Palo Verde Valley cotton grower who was a young man just out of college when pink bollworm greeted his return to the family farm near Blythe, Calif. “There were airplanes flying all over the place when I came back to the farm. I did not know what was going on,” he said. He quickly found out and also found himself in a leadership role of talking to growers about area wide programs to keep the PBW at bay. Bt cotton value “Bt cotton is keeping us in the cotton business today. Without that technology, cotton would be little more than a rotation crop,” said Hull is a member of the National Cotton Council Pink Bollworm Action Committee, which has been the focal point of the emerging eradication program. “I was so pleased to make the motion to support an eradiation effort. If we can use the same technology to eradicate the pink bollworm as has been used to keep it out of the San Joaquin Valley — Wow!” Sterile moths for this eradication effort will come from the rearing facility built in Phoenix 10 years ago with California cotton grower money. "Wally and the board came through in 1994 with support to build a new state of the art 60,000-square foot rearing facility in Arizona that has allowed us to exponentially increase our rearing capacity and scientific knowledge,” said Staten. “At that time we were hoping to rear 8 million to 10 million insects per day. Today because of that resource, we expect to turn out 22 million insects per day. It's all been possible because San Joaquin Valley growers had, and continue to have, the foresight to invest in the future. It was a huge unleashing of energy, and the board made it happen," said Staten. If the eradication effort in Southern California, Arizona, New Mexico, Far West Texas and northern Mexico is successful, sterile moth drops would likely end in the San Joaquin. However, trapping would continue. “The combination of Bt cotton, pheromones and sterile releases is a pretty bright light at the end of the tunnel toward that elusive goal of eradication,” said Shropshire. “Eradication may put me out of a job, but I would not be happier.” Shropshire began his California cotton career in 1954 when he moved to Palo Verde Valley to manage a cotton gin. He farmed cotton from 1955 to 1992. Today he’s “semi” retired, but keeps official ties to the industry as a business associate with Hull Farms. Shropshire is known as a joke teller. He always has a new one to share, but make no mistake he takes seriously the job of pest control board chairman. Tracy credits Shropshire’s leadership in always keeping the future of the cotton industry on the table in making visionary decisions. Pink bollworm bull “Every successful organization or program has their share of worker bees, but there is always one old range bull whose unflagging energy, through good and bad times, keeps everything heading in the right direction,” said Tracy. “I know the intention of Western Farm Press and the Cotton Foundation is to salute the whole cotton pest control board program and the many state and university staff plus the myriad of current and past board members, but Wally Shropshire is that old bull in the pink bollworm world.” And, everyone knows you don’t mess with an old range bull. If you don’t believe that, ask Wally about the time he called the governor of California a “thief” for “borrowing” $4 million of cotton grower money to fund a state budget shortfall. He got the money back — with interest owed — and then led a legislative effort to allow state boards funded with grower money to deposit funds in a private bank, safe from greedy bureaucratic hands. Now most state boards keep funds in private bank accounts. Along the way, the governor refused to re-appoint Wally to the local fair board. It didn’t faze the old range bull. He collected interest from the governor.

农业

2017-09/1014/en_head.json.gz/11985

Please enable JavaScript to access the full functionality of BusinessUSA. Skip to Content Home About Resources Business Needs Access Financing Explore Exporting Explore Government Contracting Learn About New Health Care Changes Browse Resources for Veterans Learn About Taxes and Credits Help with Hiring Employees Invest in the USA Seek Disaster Assistance Find Regulations Find Green Opportunities Understanding Intellectual Property Choosing a Retirement Solution Find More Tools Socially & Economically Disadvantaged American Indians and Alaska Natives Explore State and Local Resources Find International Trade Leads In Your Industry Events Training Translate Twitter LinkedIn email updates Skip to Content Business Needs Search mobile Business Centers Near You Business Events Near You Sign Up for Email Updates Contact Us hover to see wizard hover to see wizard Discover Events In Your Area American Indian and Native Alaskan show search bar ResourcesBusiness NeedsStart a Business Special GroupsWomen BusinessUSA Export Dashboard You are hereHome » Article » USDA Announces Availability of Funding to Develop Advanced Biofuels Projects USDA Announces Availability of Funding to Develop Advanced Biofuels Projects 0 0 0 0 Select which email service you want to send an email with WASHINGTON, Oct. 21, 2013 –Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack today announced the availability of $181 million to develop commercial-scale biorefineries or retrofit existing facilities with appropriate technology to develop advanced biofuels. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) remains focused on carrying out its mission, despite a time of significant budget uncertainty. Today's announcement is one part of the Department's efforts to strengthen the rural economy. "This financing will expand the number of commercial biorefineries in operation in the U.S. that are producing advanced biofuels from non-food sources," Vilsack said. "USDA's Biorefinery Assistance Program is yet another way USDA is helping to carry out the Obama Administration's 'all-of-the-above' energy strategy to develop every possible source of American-made energy. But the benefits go beyond reducing our dependence on foreign oil. These biorefineries are also creating lasting job opportunities in rural America and are boosting the rural economy as well." The Biorefinery Assistance Program - http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/BCP_Biorefinery.html was created through the 2008 Farm Bill and is administered by USDA Rural Development. It provides loan guarantees to viable commercial-scale facilities to develop new and emerging technologies for advanced biofuels. Eligible entities include Indian tribes, State or local governments, corporations, farmer co-ops, agricultural producer associations, higher education institutions, rural electric co-ops, public power entities or consortiums of any of the above. Sapphire Energy's "Green Crude Farm" in Columbus, N.M., is an example of how this program is supporting the development of advanced biofuels. In 2011, USDA provided Sapphire Energy a $54.5 million loan guarantee to build a refined algal oil commercial facility. In continuous operation since May 2012, the plant is producing renewable algal oil that can be further refined to replace petroleum-derived diesel and jet fuel. According to the company, more than 600 jobs were created throughout the first phase of construction at the facility, and 30 full-time employees currently operate the plant. The company expects to produce 100 barrels of refined algal oil per day by 2015, and to be at commercial-scale production by 2018. After receiving additional equity from private investors, Sapphire was able to repay the remaining balance on its USDA-backed loan earlier this year. In 2011, USDA issued a $12.8 million loan guarantee to Fremont Community Digester for construction of an anaerobic digester in Fremont, Mich. The digester, which began commercial operations late last year, is the largest commercial-scale anaerobic digester in the United States. It has the capacity to process more than 100,000 tons of food waste annually to produce biogas and electricity. Biogas from the digester runs generators that total 2.85 megawatts in capacity. The electricity produced is sold to a local utility and is providing power for about 1,500 local homes. Applications for biorefinery assistance are due by January 30, 2014. More information about how to apply is available in the October 2, 2013 Federal Register announcement - https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2013/10/02/2013-24081/notice-of... or by contacting your regional USDA Rural Development Energy Coordinator - http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/BCP_Energy_CoordinatorList.html. Since the start of the Obama Administration, the USDA Biorefinery Assistance Program has provided approximately $684 million in assistance to support biofuels projects in eight states. Secretary Vilsack noted that today's funding announcements are another reminder of the importance of USDA programs such as the Biorefinery Assistance Program for rural America. A comprehensive new Food, Farm and Jobs Bill would further expand the rural economy, Vilsack added, saying that's just one reason why Congress must get a Food, Farm and Jobs Bill done as soon as possible. President Obama's plan for rural America has brought about historic investment and resulted in stronger rural communities. Under the President's leadership, these investments in housing, community facilities, businesses and infrastructure have empowered rural America to continue leading the way – strengthening America's economy, small towns and rural communities. USDA's investments in rural communities support the rural way of life that stands as the backbone of our American values. President Obama and Agriculture Secretary Vilsack are committed to a smarter use of Federal resources to foster sustainable economic prosperity and ensure the government is a strong partner for businesses, entrepreneurs and working families in rural communities. USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. To file a complaint of discrimination, write: USDA, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, Office of Adjudication, 1400 Independence Ave., SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (866) 632-9992 (Toll-free Customer Service), (800) 877-8339 (Local or Federal relay), (866) 377-8642 (Relay voice users). Business.USA.gov is an officialwebsite of the U.S. Government. Business.USA.gov is an official website of the U.S. Government.

农业

2017-09/1014/en_head.json.gz/12463

Missouri 2011 Growing Season Climate Summary A challenging growing season was experienced by farmers this year as floods, drought and extreme temperatures impacted the Show Me state. With the exception of May and September, all months from April through October witnessed above normal temperatures, and a wet spring transitioned to a hot, dry summer creating stress on crops and livestock. Statewide precipitation averaged above normal in April and May and below normal from June through October. The clash of air masses was frequent over Missouri during the spring of 2011 and resulted in large weekly temperature swings and unsettled weather. A very mild weather pattern dominated during the first two weeks April and was warmer than the latter half of the month. There were numerous precipitation events during the month including a week long historic rain event across southern Missouri that brought record rainfall and flooding to the region. Most counties across southern Missouri recorded their wettest April on record. Generally, more than a foot of rain fell southeast of a line extending from Newton to Sainte Genevieve counties. Some southeastern locations in Shannon, Carter, Butler and Cape Girardeau counties reported more than 20 inches of rain for the month. Overall, average April rainfall was 7.45 inches for the state, making it the 5th wettest April in the past 117 years. The cool, wet weather during the latter half of the month halted spring planting opportunities across the state May had below normal temperatures and above normal precipitation, but much of the month was dominated by highly contrasting air masses, leading to periods of much warmer than normal and much cooler than normal weather. Numerous rain events throughout the month led to above normal precipitation for most locations. Preliminary numbers indicate the statewide average total for the month was just over 6 inches, or 1- inch above normal. An unusually warm air mass established itself over Missouri during the first ten days of June with oppressive heat impacting the state and several high temperature records broken. Temperatures averaged 8-10 degrees above normal during the period and it was the hottest June 1-10 period since 1934. Most locations experienced 90 degree plus temperatures on a daily basis and some locations in the Bootheel witnessed several days with triple digit heat. A pattern change led to a more seasonable and below normal temperature regime for the remainder of June and was a welcome change for many. Overall, monthly temperatures averaged 1-3 degrees above normal across the northern half of Missouri whereas southern sections averaged 3-6 degrees above normal. Springfield, Joplin and West Plains had their 6th, 4th and 4th hottest June on record, respectively. Precipitation was highly variable during the month with a sharp gradient extending from northeastern through southwestern Missouri. Generally, above normal rain fell across the northeastern half of the state with below normal precipitation across the southwestern half. Amounts increased northeast of a St. Joseph to Cape Girardeau line, from 4.5 inches to more than 12 inches. Totals decreased southwest of this line, from 4.5 inches to less than 1-inch. Some of the highest June rainfall totals occurred in Scotland, Lewis and Clark counties where the communities of Memphis, Monticello and Kahoka reported 13.29, 15.47 and 17.88 inches, respectively. Some of the driest communities were in Christian and Greene counties. A couple observers living near Nixa and Springfield reported 0.53 inches and 0.61 inches, respectively. Flooding along the Missouri River was ongoing for much of June due to record water release occurring from upstream reservoirs in Montana and the Dakotas. These record releases translated to major flooding downstream to St. Joseph, MO and moderate flooding along the Missouri River from Kansas City to Jefferson City, MO. Thousands of acres of cropland were flooded in northwestern Missouri where overtopped levees and levy breeches worsened the situation. Atchison and Holt counties, in the northwest corner of the state, were experiencing numerous impacts with flooded residences, closed roads and inundated cropland. A ridge of high pressure over the southern Plains intensified and expanded northeastward in July, profoundly influencing the weather pattern across the Show-Me state. Hot and dry conditions spread across Missouri and had adverse impacts on people, animals and vegetation. Missouri witnessed its hottest July in more than 30 years. The average statewide temperature for the month was 83°F, slightly over 5 degrees above normal, and the hottest month since July 1980. It was also the 6th hottest July on record and will go down as the 8th hottest month of all time when final numbers are tallied. Hot temperatures and high humidity in July and early August combined to produce very uncomfortable and life threatening conditions. There were lengthy and continuous periods of various heat advisories and warnings impacting the state and, unfortunately, heat related fatalities were reported. Another feature of the prolonged heat wave was high minimum temperatures. The average July minimum temperature for most areas of Missouri was between 72-74°F, or five to six degrees above normal. Most areas of the state reported dry conditions in July and preliminary data indicated a statewide monthly average of 2.34 inches, or more than 1.5 inches below normal. The majority of precipitation events were scattered and highly localized, but there were a few instances of significant rainfall. Heaviest monthly precipitation was confined to northwestern, north central and east central sections, and the eastern Ozarks region. Several northwestern counties reported four to six inches of rain whereas three to four inches were common over north central Missouri and parts of the eastern Ozarks. Less than two inches were typical over northeastern, central, west central, southwestern and far southeastern sections. Some exceptionally dry pockets were found in parts of northeast, west central, southwest and southeast Missouri where less than 0.75 inches were reported for the month. The southwestern district was especially hard hit by the heat and lack of precipitation during July. According to the Missouri Agricultural Statistics Service, 84% of the corn and 91% of the soybean crop was in very poor condition by the end of the month. Complete crop failures were reported in southwest Missouri and burned up pastures were forcing livestock producers to feed hay in some areas. Above normal summertime temperatures persisted throughout much of August, wrapping up another hot summer for the Show Me State. Preliminary numbers indicate average June-August temperatures for the state were slightly under 79°F, and rank the summer of 2011 as the 7th hottest on record, 0.1°F warmer than the summer of 2010. The hottest temperatures for the month occurred during the first and last week of August with more seasonable temperatures occurring during the second and third weeks. Precipitation events were more numerous, and heavier, across parts of Missouri during August than the previous month, bringing some relief to the state. Preliminary numbers indicate a statewide average of nearly 3.7 inches, which is near the 30-year normal. Specifically, totals across the southwestern half of Missouri were near to above normal and averaged between 3-6 inches, whereas rainfall totals were below normal, less than 3-inches, across the northeastern half of the state. Heaviest monthly totals were confined to some south central counties where more than 8-inches were reported across parts of Dallas, Laclede, Phelps, Texas, Dent, Howell, Shannon and Oregon counties. Driest conditions were reported across the northeastern border counties where some locations reported less than 1-inch of rain. A significant weather pattern change in early September translated to cooler conditions for Missouri where monthly average temperatures ranged 2.5 to 3.5 degrees below normal for many locations. Some parts of the Ozarks and far northwestern Missouri had cooler departures running 3.5 to 4.5 degrees below normal for the month. A fairly active and progressive weather pattern dominated much of the month as several frontal boundaries swept through the state and brought periods of precipitation. Most rain events, however, were not widespread, nor heavy, and preliminary data indicated an average statewide total of nearly 2.90 inches, more than 1-inch below normal for the month. According to the Missouri Agricultural Statistics Service, the generally dry weather during September hastened fieldwork activity over much of the state and allowed producers to harvest nearly two thirds of the corn by the end of the month. Soybean harvest was going at a normal pace and nearly 10% was harvested by the end of the month. Nearly 50% of the pastures were in poor to very poor condition at the end of the September due to lingering effects of summer heat and drought that impacted much of state, especially across west central, southwestern and northeastern sections. There were numerous reports of farmers feeding hay as well as hauling water due to dry ponds, springs and creeks. Pasture deterioration was also noted across north central and northwestern sections due to unusually dry September weather. Generally, mild and dry conditions were the rule during October with temperatures averaging near normal across southern Missouri and one to two degrees above normal across northern and central sections. All locations reported below normal rainfall with some unusually dry conditions in northwestern and west central Missouri. Several counties in northwest and west central Missouri received less than 0.25 inches for the month and a couple precipitation observers in Atchison and Harrison counties reported no measurable rainfall for October. Preliminary data were indicating it was the driest October in nearly 50 years across northwestern sections and extreme west central Missouri.

农业

2017-09/1014/en_head.json.gz/12515

Classifieds Directory Kids East Flooding Fix Could Put Town In Hot Water Drainage basin on ag land lacked proper permits By Joanne Pilgrim | July 26, 2012 - 11:18am Work on a drainage basin being built by East Hampton Town was halted when Suffolk officials learned the work was being done on farmland over which the county owns development rights. David E. Rattray Excavation for a stormwater drainage basin being built by the town off Route 114 in East Hampton to alleviate severe flooding in a nearby neighborhood was halted this week when it was discovered that the property is agricultural land for which the county owns the development rights. The project lacks Suffolk County and State Department of Environmental Conservation permits and should have been reviewed by the county farmland committee, which discussed the situation at a meeting on Tuesday night. A “big concern,” according to Katherine Stark, the chief of staff for Suffolk Legislator Jay Schneiderman, who attended the meeting, was the disposition of the topsoil being dug up — prime, highly rated agricultural soils, Mr. Schneiderman said Tuesday. Besides permission from the farmland committee, Ms. Stark said, the town should have obtained a D.E.C. mining permit for excavation of the amount of soil that has been removed. In addition, before approving such a project, the committee, which includes a member from the county soil and water conservation district, would have examined the proposed placement of the sump in terms of potential erosion. The county could assess penalties of up to $5,000 a day, but, Mr. Schneiderman said, “I don’t think that’s going to occur in this case.” County officials could, however, require the town to replace the soils and restore the property to its original condition or ask the town to deed an equivalent property to the county, “because you have an area that the taxpayers paid to preserve as farmland that’s not going to be used as farmland,” the legislator said. No determination was made at the committee meeting Monday night. Among those who attended were John Jilnicki, the town attorney, Tom Talmage, the town engineer, and representatives of Sidney B. Bowne and Son, an engineering company that was paid $35,100 to design the project, prepare and review bids, and obtain permits. The project was spearheaded by Councilwoman Theresa Quigley. Keith Grimes, the contracter hired by the town for the project, has been digging the hole at the site, which has now been abandoned. According to a May resolution hiring Mr. Grimes, he was to be paid $293,000 for the work. That bid, the lowest of “at least five” from different companies, according to the town purchasing agent, included Mr. Grimes taking the topsoil, and was chosen over a $321,000 option that called for spreading the excavated soil at the property. Last September, Elizabeth Fonseca granted the town a drainage easement on the property. However, Ms. Stark said that Real Property Tax Service Agency records show the owner of record as the Richard Cornuelle 2010 Marital Trust. Nonetheless, the previous property owner, J. Kaplan, had sold the development rights to the county in 1985, precluding any future grants of easements. The county has ordered an examination into the chain of title to the underlying ownership of the property, Ms. Stark said. “The homeowners in Hansom Hills have been suffering for years with the massive flooding destroying their homes, flooding their streets, basements and pools,” Ms. Quigley said in an e-mail yesterday. “The farmers have been losing prime agriculture soil as it has washed across the highway with the surging waters, and all of us who drive along Route 114 have been impacted by the hazardous conditions caused by the waters flooding the road.” “The recharge basin has been contemplated since at least 2001, and after all these years, it is finally almost a possibility due to the generosity of the landowner who unquestioningly signed off on allowing the town to install a recharge basin,” she wrote. “The fact that the process has been delayed yet again is disappointing, but I hope only a delay and not a permanent obstacle to seeing this much needed and long overdue fix to a hazardous and damaging situation,” Ms. Quigley said. Randy Parsons, a former town councilman, said Tuesday that he had noticed the excavation as he went to and from his office at the Nature Conservancy headquarters close to the site. “We drive by it every day,” he said. “The construction started, and in the back of my mind I was kind of thinking about the county agricultural review board.” He also thought, he said, about provisions in the town code requiring excavation permits and barring the removal of prime agricultural soils from farmland. “I saw huge quantities of topsoil being trucked away,” Mr. Parsons said. “They kept digging deeper, taking more topsoil out,” Mr. Parsons said. He said that in the course of other business with a county contact, he asked about the final design of the sump. “And that was when they said, ‘What sump?’ “ he said. “I think it’s important that these programs are respected,” Mr. Parsons said of the development rights purchase program, through which the county and other municipal entities pay property owners to eliminate the potential to develop agricultural land, preserving it as farmland. “It’s public money. It’s important that the public investment and development rights restrictions are respected,” he said. Mr. Schneiderman said Tuesday that he supports the idea of a sump to provide a solution to the flooding in the area, which regularly fills the Hansom Hills subdivision across Route 114 and surrounding areas with deep water, something he said he remembers well from his days as town supervisor. Officials have been seeking a solution to the problem since then. The water runs across the farm fields stretching all the way from Long Lane, he said. “I don’t think it’s a bad solution,” he said of a recharge basin at the site in question. Both Ms. Quigley and Mr. Schneiderman said that the recharge basin, by stemming flooding, would help to prevent runoff and soil loss. “At the end of the day I don’t think anyone’s acting in bad faith,” Mr. Schneiderman said. “They’re trying to solve a really perplexing drainage problem.” “The county was made aware of this issue last week and we are in the process of reviewing the details. We are working with members of the farmland committee to investigate this issue thoroughly,” Sarah Lansdale, the county director of planning, said through Suffolk County Executive Steve Bellone’s press office. The town has been asked to submit an application to the county farmland committee, which will then begin to address the issues raised by the project, Ms. Stark said. The subject will be on the agenda at the committee’s next meeting on Sept. 25. About the Author Joanne Pilgrim

农业

2017-09/1014/en_head.json.gz/12924

Follow us on: FFA students help with farm energy audits Issue Date: November 6, 2013 By Christine Souza Woodland High School student Nancy Martinez completes an on-farm energy audit for farm owner Blake Harlan. Harlan says having FFA members conduct the audits provides farmers with an opportunity to stop and look at their accounts. Photo/Christine SouzaYolo County farmer Blake Harlan talks to Woodland High School FFA member Nancy Martinez about opportunities to improve irrigation efficiency. Photo/Christine Souza With some assistance from high school students, agricultural customers of Pacific Gas and Electric Co. can learn how to save money and increase energy efficiency in a program developed through a partnership between the utility and Future Farmers of America. Students are trained in conducting energy assessments via the online "My Energy" tool on the PG&E website. "We have students who are comfortable using the technology and are able to show producers how to access the program, how to plug the variables in and create an energy plan they can use to decide whether or not to implement parts of it or all of it," said Jim Aschwanden, executive director of the California Agricultural Teachers' Association. "It's a neat program because it will actually tell you about the rebates that are available." Since June, for example, agricultural students at Woodland High School have been trained to use the PG&E energy tool. If farmers haven't done so already, FFA students can help them register for a "My Energy" login on the PG&E website by entering their agricultural account number, name and address. This allows farmers and students to look at account information in real time, and continue with the energy assessment. Nancy Martinez of Woodland High School FFA recently completed her first on-farm energy audit outside of the classroom during a visit to Blake Harlan's nearby farm. "The basis of this program is to help growers save money by conserving energy," Martinez said. "Basically, FFA students go out to local farmers and show what kinds of different changes they can make to their facilities to conserve energy. We are able to see energy conservation in action, a valuable real-world experience. It may sound like a long and difficult process, but it is actually very simple and straightforward." Harlan, a diversified grower who produces crops such as alfalfa, processing tomatoes and sunflowers, said he appreciates the opportunity to view details about the farm's energy usage, and to work with Martinez on the energy assessment. "The important part of this program is that it stimulates the exercise of reviewing your accounts," Harlan said. "It's a simple format, and having a fleet of students that are at least trained to go through the exercise helps you to get through it." He added that most farmers "are excited to help the FFA kids when we have the chance, so to have a bunch of kids that you can work with and promote their training and skills in a way that can help benefit you as well is worthwhile." During the online audits, the farmer and student select "agriculture" as the industry, to ensure that they are looking at the farm's agricultural account, not a residential account. Dean Kunesh of PG&E said an "Energy Checkup" feature on the website is intended to help farmers create an energy plan to reduce energy costs. "(The students) sit down at the computer with the farmer and the farmer will input their account number, and then they go through the steps that we've got outlined in the lesson plan," Kunesh said. A grower may be able to pre-answer a few questions, Harlan said, but he or she will need to be on-site to answer questions regarding facilities on the farm such as buildings and irrigation pumps. Patrick Mullen, PG&E regional director for agriculture and customer service, said the audit may offer ways to improve energy efficiency on the farm, such as energy-efficient lighting in barns or other areas, improved heating, cooling and ventilation systems, and improvements in irrigation pumps, variable-speed motors and pump tests. "The savings can be significant," Mullen said. "The programs change, so that is why it is helpful periodically to go in and do an assessment." Aschwanden said an energy audit of a dairy, for instance, could help determine the potential benefits of switching from one type of flourescent light to a more energy-efficient type. "This program will allow you to enter the number of lights that you are going to convert and it will tell you what the energy savings would be," he said. "It tells you what the new lights will cost and how many weeks or months it would take to recover that in terms of energy savings." PG&E provided examples from farmers who made pump improvements, irrigation system pressure reductions and improvements to lighting and refrigeration. The savings varied from almost $1,000 to $17,000 per year, the utility said, and in some cases PG&E issued rebates of between $8,000 and $12,500. PG&E and FFA have set a goal of completing 5,000 on-farm energy assessments by the end of the school year. "Completing these assessments is a win-win situation: The growers are able to save money, FFA members are able to build new relationships and gain experience that will help us now as well as in the future, and PG&E is able to help us conserve energy," Martinez said. "I have definitely enjoyed this experience and can't wait to be able to show others how easy it is to save both money and energy." Farmers can learn more by reaching out to their local FFA chapters or by visiting www.pge.com and logging into the "My Energy" portal. (Christine Souza is an assistant editor of Ag Alert. She may be contacted at [email protected].)

农业

2017-09/1014/en_head.json.gz/13598

Asia Pacific|Indian Farmers Turn to New Crops as Climate Gets Drier Asia Pacific | Letter from India Indian Farmers Turn to New Crops as Climate Gets Drier By AKASH KAPURDEC. 16, 2010 ELVALAPAKKAM, INDIA — The monsoon has been vigorous this year, with heavy rains for days and even weeks at a time. The roads are in bad shape, potholed and filled with puddles. Low-lying areas of the countryside are waterlogged. Village reservoirs are dangerously full.The monsoon brings its share of hardships: flooding, leaking roofs and round after round of the flu. But it is also a beautiful time. Trees and forests come to life. Birds, butterflies and the occasional rabbit surface between downpours.One of my fondest childhood memories is of the rice fields that emerge after the monsoons. I remember hectare after hectare of emerald green stretching to the horizon.This year, I have been struck by an unmistakable sense that there are fewer rice fields. Along highways, agriculture has given way to real estate development. Even deeper in the countryside, the fields look different. There are fewer rice and other traditional crops like peanuts and sugar cane, and more casuarina, palm oil and other so-called cash crops. Continue reading the main story Recently, I have had several conversations with farmers in this area. They confirm a shift in farming patterns. Partly, this development is underpinned by a familiar tale of agricultural decline. Many traditional crops are labor or water intensive, drawing on two commodities in increasingly short supply. Farmers around Elvalapakkam can no longer afford to grow what their ancestors did. But the shift is also an indication of hope — however incipient — for agriculture in this part of South India. It is a sign that farmers are trying to adjust, coming up with new crops and strategies to accommodate what has in many respects been a painful decade.On recent rainy afternoon, I paid a visit to an 80-year-old farmer named V. Venkatavaradha Reddy. He lives in a high-ceilinged mansion with elegant arches and cool cement floors at the edge of more than 40 hectares, or 100 acres, of land. He has been farming that land since 1950.Sitting in a cane chair on his veranda, Mr. Reddy provided a brief history of agriculture in the area. He said that, when he started, farming was a tough business. By the late 1960s, with the advent of the Green Revolution, things started getting better. The best years were the 1970s and ’80s, when water was plentiful, labor was cheap and chemical fertilizers increased yields.Recent years have been harder. Chemicals have depleted the soil. Cheap pumps and bore wells have lowered the water table. New opportunities in local industries and the cities have increased incomes. This last development is good for people in the villages, but it has made it almost impossible to find affordable labor for the fields.“The whole agriculture sector is falling,” Mr. Reddy said. His three sons live in the cities, he said, and aren’t interested in working on the farm.None of this was new to me. I had heard similar stories from scores of farmers over the years. They are repeated across the nation. M.S. Swaminathan, often called the father of the Green Revolution in India, has written about “the crisis of Indian agriculture.”The Peterson Institute for International Economics, a research group based in Washington, estimates that climate change could lead to a decline of 30 percent in Indian agricultural output by the 2080s.But when Mr. Reddy started talking about changes on his farm, walked me around and showed me how different things had become, I heard something new: the possibility of a turnaround, a pathway that could possibly — just possibly — stem the rot in agriculture. Mr. Reddy is in remarkably good shape. He walks with the aid of a stick, but he is steady on his feet and unhesitant in the slippery mud. He showed me the new irrigation techniques he had implemented to conserve water. He pointed to the aluminum pipes that ran through his fields, the backbone of a sprinkler system. Elsewhere, he had installed a drip irrigation network.He told me, also, that he was increasingly turning to organic methods. He showed me a bed of organic fertilizer (mostly cow manure) 4 meters, or 13 feet, deep that he used in his coconut plantations. The resulting fruit, he said, was bigger and tasted better.He said that going organic was the only option remaining for farmers. He couldn’t imagine agriculture surviving if it continued to rely on the chemicals that had for so long poisoned the soil.Mr. Reddy talked a lot about the new crops he was growing. Like so many farmers, he had moved away from traditional crops. Instead, he found fruits and vegetables more economical. He said that over the past few years, his bananas and coconuts and mangoes had really sustained the farm.Mr. Reddy was particularly hopeful for a crop that had recently been imported into the area from Malaysia. He pointed to 10 hectares of short, stubby trunks that in a few years he said would yield pot after pot of palm oil.Some groups have expressed concern about the environmental effect of palm oil cultivation, particularly in Southeast Asia. But Mr. Reddy said that palm oil was healthy and friendly to the environment. He said that it was used for biofuels and that many farmers were turning to it. He was convinced that it was the future of farming in this area.A farmer walking with us, a relative of Mr. Reddy, agreed. He said that when he switched to palm oil, he was told by an agronomist that he would soon be able to afford a Mercedes-Benz. Like Mr. Reddy, he is waiting. In a few years, they both expect the oil to start flowing.On the way back to the house, with the sky grown a little darker, I asked Mr. Reddy whether he really thought his farm could be saved. “It’s still an experiment,” he said, of the palm oil in particular. “We’re still waiting to see.”Talking more generally, he said: “I have hope. I have to have hope. Without all these new techniques, agriculture would have died. I’m watching it, day by day.” Join an online conversation at www.akashkapur.com A version of this article appears in print on December 17, 2010, in The International Herald Tribune. Order Reprints| Today's Paper|Subscribe

农业

2017-09/1014/en_head.json.gz/14569

DuPont and Rosetta Green Sign Research Agreement to Identify Drought Tolerance Genes in Corn and Soybeans Dec. 16 2011 08:50 AM Collaboration Aims to Identify Additional Modes of Action for Drought Tolerance DuPont and Rosetta Green Ltd. have entered into a strategic research agreement to identify drought tolerance genes in corn and soybeans. Under the agreement, Rosetta Green will use proprietary technology and bioinformatics capabilities to identify microRNAs. DuPont, through its Pioneer Hi-Bred business, will test candidate genes in target crops. Pioneer will have an exclusive commercial license for genes identified through this collaboration which will improve drought tolerance in corn and soybeans for farmers. Financial terms of the agreement were not disclosed. "Drought can lead to losses for corn growers of up to $13 billion annually," said John Bedbrook, vice president, DuPont Agricultural Biotechnology. "We are pleased to collaborate with Rosetta Green to identify new genes leads which can help farmers protect yield and feed a growing population, and build on our strong pipeline of leads for drought tolerance." Water is one of the most significant inputs for farmers. On average, 85 percent of corn acres experience some level of yield reduction due to drought stress during the growing season. Improved drought tolerance in corn and soybeans will enable growers across the world to increase productivity while responsibly managing water resources. "We are greatly honored by Pioneer's decisions to work with Rosetta Green," said Amir Avniel, Rosetta Green CEO. "Signing this agreement is a significant milestone for the company and a vote of confidence in its technology. We believe that microRNA genes have great potential in the agriculture industry and in crop improvement." MicroRNAs are small RNA molecules in corn, soybeans and other plants. They represent an additional mode of action to develop important trait solutions in corn and other crops. Rosetta Green Ltd (TASE:RSTG) has a database of microRNA genes which it uses to develop improved plant traits using innovative genes called microRNA. The company specializes in the identification and use of these unique genes that function as "main bio-switches" to control key processes in major crops such as corn, wheat, rice, soybean and more. Rosetta Green's current trait development portfolio includes improved abiotic stress tolerance, increased yield and improved nitrogen use efficiency. For additional information please visit Rosetta Green's website at www.rosettagreen.com. Pioneer Hi-Bred , a DuPont business headquartered in Des Moines, Iowa, is the world's leading developer and supplier of advanced plant genetics, providing high-quality seeds to farmers in more than 90 countries. Pioneer provides agronomic support and services to help increase farmer productivity and profitability and strives to develop sustainable agricultural systems for people everywhere. Science with Service Delivering Success™. DuPont (NYSE: DD) has been bringing world-class science and engineering to the global marketplace in the form of innovative products, materials, and services since 1802. The company believes that by collaborating with customers, governments, NGOs, and thought leaders we can help find solutions to such global challenges as providing enough healthy food for people everywhere, decreasing dependence on fossil fuels, and protecting life and the environment. For additional information about DuPont and its commitment to inclusive innovation, please visit www.dupont.com. 12.16.2011 2012 Alltech Lecture Tour – The Path to a Profitable Future - to Visit 24 Cities across North America Next American Farmland Trust Announces Farm Bill Webinars Previous

农业

2017-09/1014/en_head.json.gz/16294

Promotions Home Free Stuff Newsletters & Texts Flyerboard Best of Seattle 2010: Gail Savina Best Fruit Savior By Angela Garbes Wed., Aug 4 2010 at 12:00AM Sitting over coffee and just-picked plums—soon to be supplemented with homemade pickled green beans, feta cheese, and bread—Gail Savina is remembering a call that recently came in to her organization, City Fruit."She said she had some fruit trees that she doesn't know how to care for. When I paid her a visit, what I saw was almost unbelievable." Savina pauses, throwing out her arms and leaving her mouth agape for a moment. "She's basically sitting on an orchard. All these fruit trees in her backyard, hidden on Beacon Hill, just above Rainier Avenue. It's just incredible."Thousands of fruit-bearing trees are scattered and clustered throughout Seattle, on private property and in public parks. Every summer, thousands of pounds of this fruit fall to the ground and rot, attracting pests and creating both a waste-management problem and a public-health hazard. Savina's aim is to teach people how to properly care for trees and harvest the fruit, then make sure that fruit is put to use by people who need it.For Savina, it's new but not unfamiliar territory. For several years, she led the Community Fruit Tree Harvest for antipoverty group Solid Ground. There she coordinated and oversaw the harvest of massive amounts of fruit (last year Solid Ground collected nearly 10 tons), which was donated to people with limited access to fresh produce. Savina, whose background is in horticulture, couldn't help but notice that for as much fruit was put to use, just as much went to waste because of worms, pests, and other preventable factors."I started to see a real need for stewardship of these trees, to educate people on how to take care of the fruit, to ensure future harvests." This was the beginning of City Fruit.Savina's position at Solid Ground was grant-funded, meaning that every year she was hired in the spring, then laid off in the fall. So in November 2008, after the harvest was over, she gathered a group of associates, including a dedicated fruit fan who calls himself Donny Appleseed, to create City Fruit.Savina's roster of experts ("Let's see...there's a Mason Bee guy, a planting person, an apple-maggot expert, plus a coddling-moth specialist, and someone who knows a lot of about apple varieties, to name a few") reflects the variety of City Fruit's programs. They offer classes on pruning (seasonal pruning and espalier, a labor-intensive method of getting fruit trees and shrubs to grow in a single plane), protection from pests, and canning and preserving. They also run an online mapping project of fruit trees throughout the city.City Fruit has established strong programs in Phinney Ridge and the South End, where fruit is delivered to local food banks and parents learn to dry fruit and donate it to their children's schools for healthier snacks. The next phase is to create a system that can be replicated easily in other neighborhoods. A grant which currently gives City Fruit authority to steward trees in Seattle city parks is also helping Savina's group develop a training curriculum for volunteers, so the army of fruit experts will grow.After talking to Savina, your own view of Seattle may change. Adjust your gaze, even slightly, and you begin to see the "urban orchard" Savina describes, fruit trees rising from the landscape: plums, apples, pears, cherries, figs, quince. City Fruit's work strengthens communities now, but in a town that was once home to many farms and orchards, it also paints a lovely, almost ghostly, portrait of Seattle's past. Savina sees Seattle as an “urban orchard.” cityfruit.org

农业

2017-09/1014/en_head.json.gz/16925

0 Tenth Navaisha Fair show report Tuesday, 18 September 2012 14:52 Image source: Naivasha Horticultural Fair.Mwangi Mumero reports from the 10th Navaisha Horticultural Fair in Kenya With exports currently valued at US$640 million, the Kenya horticultural sub-sector has continued to attract investors and service providers in the last couple of years. The sub-sector now employs about 4.4mn people in the country directly in production, processing and marketing, while another 3.5mn benefit indirectly from horticulture. It is a major contributor to the nation’s GDP, third only to tourism and tea on the list of biggest contributors to the economy. Horticulture is big business with many trade and business fairs catering for the sub-sector taking place across the East African region. The recent Naivasha Horticulture Fair attracted more the 250 exhibitors, 50 of which were multinationals in the flower, vegetable and fruit industries. Exhibitors included flower breeders, marketing firms, transportation and logistics companies and service providers. Most of the flowers exported to the European Union originate from the Naivasha region in the Rift Valley, which is 80 km from Nairobi and known for its saline lake which provides most of the irrigation water used by the flower farms. “The horticulture industry continues to contribute to the Kenya economy through the generation of income, creation of employment opportunities for rural people and foreign exchange earnings in addition to providing raw materials to the agro processing industry”, said Joram Kiarie, Kenya Commercial Bank director of mortgage business and one of the guests at the two-day event. Currently on its 10th year, the Naivasha Fair has been sponsored by the Kenya Commercial Bank for the past three years. “As a leading financier of agribusiness in the region, the KCB Group has invested Ksh12mn (US$140,000) in the fair over the period”, Kiarie said during the opening ceremony, which was also attended by Kenya’s Agriculture minister, Dr Sally Kosgei. According to Dr Kosgei, the Naivasha Horticultural Fair is a ‘one-stop shop’ that brings together all industry stakeholders to showcase their products and services and discuss how to move the sub-sector forward. “As the government, we have received complains from producers on the slow pace of VAT refund and we are working closely with the ministry of finance to streamline the payments,” said Kosgei regarding the government’s incentives to enable farmers to boost production. “We have also removed tax on farm inputs such as fertilisers and pesticides to increase access to farmers and also reduce production costs.” Kosgei added that the government has worked closely with large scale and small scale horticulture producers to smoothen their operations by removing obstacles. “The horticulture industry is in private hands and the only thing the government can do is to create an enabling business environment for the private sector to achieve their targets,” she said. Exhibitors interviewed by African Farming felt that the fair provided a good opportunity to interact with farmers, breeders and service providers. It is also provided a forum for new business contacts to be made and business relationships forged. “The fair has provided us with a platform to show case our irrigation kits and other farm technologies from the smallholder to large scale horticulture farmers,” said Yariv Kedar, the deputy managing director of Amiran Kenya Ltd. “We have been able to interact closely with the consumers of our products and services.” In the last decade, Amiran has pioneered the introduction of affordable irrigation technologies that have seen smallholder farmers initiate green house project for the production of vegetables such as onions, cabbages, tomatoes and capsicum. The company has rolled out an irrigation kit suitable for schools colleges, and even for small scale farmers. “A minimum land requirement is an eighth of an acre,” said Kedar. “At affordable prices, the schools can access a greenhouse, collapsible tank, drip lines, agro-chemicals, fertilisers and a spray pump. “We also offer protective gear and formal training for at least three persons in a school on irrigation techniques.” Depending on the size of greenhouse, prices vary. A 15 by eight metre greenhouse retails at Ksh177,000 ($1,770) while a bigger one of 24 by eight metres costs Ksh240,000 ($ 2,400). According to Kedar, the company offers training and extension services to buyers of their products for over two years. Information technology was also well represented the fair as companies showcased solutions for horticultural farmers. “With this mapping software, a farmer will be able to identify parts of land according to the yields obtained from that section,” said Khurram Mohamed, the precision sales engineer with Crop Nutrition Laboratories. “This will enable the farmer to evaluate how their piece of land yielded – where most grain was harvested and where the least produce was obtained.” He was showing farmers new software - known as Farmworks - that can map a piece of land on their yield production capability. Mounted on a combine harvester, the device collects data using GSM and then transmits it to a nearby laptop for interpretation which is displayed in the form of a shaded colour map. “With this information the farmer may decide to add more manure or fertiliser on the poor yielding areas, may change farm practices such as ploughing or may decide to introduce new crops to boost soil fertility”, said Mohammed. Another company Two Way Communications was showcasing new communication gadgets. “Communication within the flower farms mainly on operations and security are a must for any grower,” said Stephen Ndung’u, the technical sales officer with the firm as he explained to farmers on their latest products. “Over 99 per cent of the flower farms are users of our products.” Farmers attending the fair also had the opportunity to learn new farming technologies and skills. “We always come to this show to seek new ideas,” said David Kibyego, a smallholder farmer from Kericho County, which is located about 150 km from Naivasha. “As a small-scale farmer, it is important we keep up with the trend in the horticultural industry so that we are abreast with emerging issues in the sub-sector.” Like many farmers in his region, Kibyego grows cabbages, kales and tomatoes on his five acre piece of land that overlooks the Mau Escarpment. “I have acquired an irrigation kit and I plan to expand my horticultural enterprise in the coming years,” he said. “I have to learn to be better informed of new ideas.” Smallholder farmers have been credited with producing most of the vegetables and fruits consumed in the country over the past decade. Mwangi Mumero

农业

2017-09/1014/en_head.json.gz/17553

North Platte Bulletin - Former ag secretaries: Outlook is positive Full Site View Agriculture - Ag News Former ag secretaries: Outlook is positive by Benjamin Welch, Nebraska News Service - 9/29/2012 The University of Nebraska-Lincoln got a quadruple opinion when it hosted former U.S. Secretaries of Agriculture John Block, Dan Glickman, Mike Johanns and Clayton Yeutter Friday at the Lied Center. The secretaries kicked off the 2012-13 Heuermann Lecture Series with discussion on the Morrill Act, the 150th year old act that created public universities in the Midwest, and they weighed in on the agricultural outlook and support for the world’s growing population. “We’ve done a wonderful job with moving forward with research and education,” said Block, who served with Ronald Reagan from 1981-85. “We’ve managed to feed the United States and countries around the world.”That's not enough, though, Block said. He said the benefits of the Morrill Act’s legacy, which created land-grant universities in 1862, made education more affordable and emphasized disciplines in agriculture, home economics, mechanical arts and other then-practical professions.“But we’ve got to continue to do this,” Block said. “You don’t do it unless you continue to focus on research and looking ahead. I don’t think we’re paying enough attention to research today.”Despite the drought and climate change, the former secretaries observed that Nebraskans are still in a prosperous period. Farm income has never been higher. About a third of the state’s production is shipped to other nations and 30 percent of Nebraska’s GDP comes from agriculture. Locally, 25 percent of Nebraskans are involved in agriculture, considerably more than the national average of 15-18 percent.However, one resource faces scarcity that is essential to growing crops: water.“Water is the oil of the next century,” Glickman said, who served as secretary from 1995-2001. Block pointed out that genetic engineering has created crops requiring less water, and Nebraskan Johanns, the Secretary of Ag from 2005-07, said the state must take advantage of being on top of the Ogallala Reservoir.Other hot topics among the panelists included livestock, organic food, women, farm bills and ethanol.“There is no reason why we shouldn’t have a guest worker program,” said Yeutter, who grew up in Eustis and served as agriculture secretary from 1989-91.Block said immigrants, whether legal or not, were necessary to take the jobs Americans didn’t want to pick berries or milk cows. Johanns said while most Americans have no problem with legal immigration, reform must be created to allow all to pursue prosperity freely. Promise exists in the youth, though, the officials said. With agricultural technology at its height, years of affluence can continue with the right work ethic and motivation.“Don’t necessarily worry so much on whether you’re going to make multiple millions of dollars,” Johanns said. “Do it because you love it and because it’s your passion, and I promise the rest of it will take care of itself.”Another reviewBy Dan Moser, IANR NewsThe discussion's title, "The Land-Grant Mission of 2012: Transforming Agriculture for the 2050 World," is a nod to the land-grant system's challenges today: Helping to feed a world whose population is expected to increase from 7 billion to 9 billion by 2050. Nebraska native Jeff Raikes, CEO of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and co-moderator of Friday's lecture, said some estimates are that agricultural outputs actually will need to increase by 70-100 percent to meet that 2050 population's needs because as people in the developing world become wealthier, they will seek out more protein-rich diets. "If you're going to feed the world … you're going to need science and you're going to need technology and you're going to need the best of land-grant universities," said Johanns, now a U.S. senator from Nebraska. "We've got to do everything better than we do it today," Yeutter said. Yeutter turned to Ronnie Green, Harlan vice chancellor of UNL's Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources and the other moderator of the lecture, to call on UNL and other land-grant universities to be "bold" in their research, extension and teaching. The panelists cited several goals for land-grant universities in the next few decades:• Increase public-private partnerships, especially given federal budget limits that mean fewer government dollars for research. • Help farmers continue to adjust to climate change and its impact on production.• Continue to pursue biofuels options, notable cellulosic ethanol, that do not pit fuel vs. food as crop uses.• Help farmers in the developing world increase their productivity and efficiency.Johanns said American farmers are justifiably proud of their role in feeding the world, but meeting the needs of 2050 and beyond will require producers in Africa and elsewhere to get more efficient. American scientists, many of them in land-grant universities, can play a key role in training them to do so."Nothing will buy more good will for the United States of America," Johanns added. "They want our help. They want to feed themselves," Glickman agreed.Although farmers now comprise fewer than 2 percent of Americans -- compared to 60 percent when the Morrill Act was passed -- the ag sector actually is positioned to have greater political, social and economic influence than ever because of concerns about the expanding population's food needs, panelists agreed. In fact, Glickman said, if the movie "The Graduate" were made today, the one-word career advice to Benjamin Braddock would be "agriculture.""Over the long term agriculture and food is poised to be a very dominant industry in America," Glickman said.This year's punishing drought has increased the interest of people who normally don't think about agriculture, Block said."They don't know about farming, they don't care about farming, but they do care about having enough food," he said.The four former agriculture secretaries, all but one of whom -- Glickman -- served Republican presidents, generally agreed on the issues and challenges, but for a good-natured exchange between Block and Glickman over organic agriculture, which the former dismissed as largely insignificant, while Glickman noted that consumers nowadays do want food that's been treated with fewer chemicals."That doesn't mean they want to be vegetarian hippies from the 1960s," he joked.Johanns and Glickman agreed that today’s consumers do want more information about the food they eat, and they expect choices in the marketplace they didn’t expect in years past. This lecture will be archived later at heuermannlectures.unl.edu, as well as broadcast later on NET2 World, RFD-TV and RURAL TV.The Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources’ Heuermann Lectures are made possible through a gift from B. Keith and Norma Heuermann of Phillips, long-time university supporters with a strong commitment to Nebraska's production agriculture, natural resources, rural areas and people. The North Platte Bulletin - Published 9/29/2012

农业

2017-09/1014/en_head.json.gz/20243

Aylward reiterates support to retain Regional Veterinary Lab in Kilkenny 3rd February 2017 Fianna Fáil Spokesperson on Farming and Skills Bobby Aylward says the Regional Veterinary Lab in Kilkenny is an essential piece of infrastructure for farmers in the South – East and must remain open. Deputy Aylward made the comments after the Irish Creamery and Milk Suppliers Association (ICMSA) pledged their support for retaining the veterinary lab. “Last year it was revealed that the Government was overseeing a review of the veterinary lab in Kilkenny. It has been suggested that this review could be used as a way for the Government to close the lab. I made it clear when the review was announced that the farmers in the South – East could not stand over the closure of this lab,” said Deputy Aylward. “The veterinary lab provides an invaluable service to farmer’s right across the south-east, and its importance has been enhanced in recent months given the additional threats that farmers face as a result of Brexit. The Government should be looking at ways to provide additional reassurance and support for farmers, but instead Fine Gael is overseeing a review which has made farmers anxious about the future of services in the south-east. “I’ve stated it before and I’ll state it again – the veterinary lab in Kilkenny must not be allowed to close. I have requested a special Dáil debate to be held on this issue so that I can ask the Minister for Agriculture Michael Creed to provide an update on the ongoing review. I will use this debate to highlight the importance of retaining the veterinary lab in Kilkenny. “I’m delighted to see the ICMSA come out and support the campaign to retain the lab. I’ve spoken to many ICMSA members in recent months and they have all stressed the importance of keeping Kilkenny’s veterinary lab in place. Without it farmers will be forced to travel to Dublin or Athlone to access a veterinary lab.” Filed Under: Latest News, Rural Ireland Tagged With: Bobby AylwardNews Archives

农业

2017-09/1014/en_head.json.gz/20429

Texas A&M Forest ServiceTexas A&M Veterinary Medical Diagnostics LaboratoryTexas A&M AgriLife Extension ServiceTexas A&M AgriLife ResearchTexas A&M College of Agrculture and Life Sciences Algae For FuelHome About AgriLife Research About General Atomics Texas AgriLife Research Bioenergy Program General Atomics BioFuels Program Evaluating algae co-products as potential sources of livestock feed Stock Media Algae: From Raceway to Runway Opportunities for Renewable Energy and Economic Development Biofuels and biopower will soon play a significant role in providing energy for the United States. Key components of a successful agriculture-based bioenergy industry are securing an economical and environmentally sustainable supply of biomass, creating value-added coproduct streams, and improving delivery logistics. With its high oil content, algae garners interest for production of diesel and jet fuel as well as other bioproducts, and it can be produced using underutilized land with brackish water. Algae is also biodegradable. In 2007, General Atomics and Texas AgriLife Research formed a strategic, collaborative alliance to research, develop, and commercialize biofuel production through farming microalgae in Texas and California. The U.S. Department of Defense awarded a multi-year grant to General Atomics and AgriLife Research for algae research and development. Soon after, Texas AgriLife Research, with General Atomics as a partner, was awarded a $4 million grant from the State of Texas Emerging Technology Fund to develop an algae test facility at the Texas AgriLife Research Pecos (Texas) Research Station. These two grants provided impetus that led to additional funding, from the Department of Defense and the U.S. Department of Energy, for commercialization of algae production. Additional funding was awarded in large part as a result of research advancements at the Pecos facility and expands the project scope to include algal coproducts, such as feed additives for the livestock and mariculture industries. Through collaborations with the military and major universities, AgriLife Research and General Atomics are also expanding their efforts in cellulosic-derived biofuels and bio-oil production processes. And they are working to demonstrate the feasibility of large-scale biofuels production from wastewater treatment facilities, using a combination of algae and microorganisms, for applications throughout the world. With technical support from General Atomics, Texas AgriLife Research constructed and operates the Pecos Algae Research and Development Facility. At their headquarters in San Diego, General Atomics made major research, development, and commercialization commitments, building a world-class microalgae facility. Together, these two lead organizations have built a team of the most advanced industry, university, national laboratory, and government partners synergistically working on development of this technology. In Pecos, the goal of this phased research and development program is to develop and demonstrate algae growth and harvesting techniques and bio-oil extraction processes that can be commercially scaled and economically replicated in the Southwestern desert regions of the U.S. for industrial production of biofuels. High-Yielding, Cost-Effective, Sustainable Alternative Fuels Energy efficiency, new energy systems, conservation, and advanced conversion processes are all part of the equation for energy independence. Coastal production of microalgae for biofuels presents another significant opportunity. Projects at the AgriLife Research Mariculture Laboratory in Corpus Christi are designed to establish and optimize a cost-effective prototype system for high-density microalgae in open systems (raceways), using seawater and flue gas carbon dioxide captured from power-generating plants. In production, large-scale microalgae systems annexed to power-generating plants could effectively reduce carbon dioxide emissions while producing a range of high-value products. In College Station and Galveston, Texas AgriLife researchers focus on determining characteristics of algae species to increase the oil content and on the economic analysis of microalgae and potential bioproducts. Through innovative, science-based programs, expertise, infrastructure, and partnerships, General Atomics and the Texas AgriLife Research Bioenergy Program are leading the way in developing alternative fuel solutions. Research Components Algae Coproducts for Animal Feed Propagation Laboratories Construction and Installation Microalgae Raceway Production At the Pecos Algae Research and Development Facility, research in bioenergy and bioproducts spans the full range of discovery: Developing high-tonnage biomass plants at the molecular level and more efficient processes in the manufacturing of biofuels Testing algae under various conditions for maximum growth and oil production Investigating harvesting methods to reduce operating costs Transportation for bioenergy production, including environmental aspects Using modeling to determine economic and sustainable production areas Tracking of all unit costs to determine cost per kilogram of biomass Commercial microalgae farms in West Texas would generate significant employment opportunities and dramatically enhance economic activity. Additionally, the economic viability of microalgae is enhanced by all aspects of production, including coproducts. Deriving value from post-extraction algal residues is also essential to the overall economic sustainability of algal fuel production. Learn more about Texas AgriLife Research Learn more about General Atomics Photos and Videos from the Pecos Algae Research and Development Facility Contact Information regarding ‘Raceway to Runway’ Download the program from the 6/4/10 event, 'Algae: From Raceway to Runway Texas Veteran's Portal

农业

2017-09/1014/en_head.json.gz/20874

And The Winner Of The World Food Prize Is ... The Man From Monsanto By Dan Charles A pioneer in genetically modified crops, Robert Fraley has spent his entire career at Monsanto. He's now the company's chief technology officer. Photographer: Brian Schmittgens / Courtesy of the World Food Prize Foundation Ever heard of the World Food Prize? It's sometimes called the "Nobel Prize for food and agriculture," but it has struggled to get people's attention. Prize winners tend to be agricultural insiders, and many are scientists. Last year's laureate, for instance, was Daniel Hillel, a pioneer of water-saving "micro-irrigation." This year, though, the World Food Prize is likely to get some publicity, some of it in the form of anger and protests. The prize will go to three scientists who played prominent roles in creating genetically engineered crops: Marc Van Montagu, Mary-Dell Chilton and Robert Fraley. Of the three, Fraley is by far the youngest, but also the most pivotal and divisive. He's spent his entire career at Monsanto. He was hired in 1981 as one of the company's very first molecular biologists, led the company's intense drive to sell genetically engineered crops in the 1990s, and is now the company's chief technology officer. In fact, if there's a single person who most personifies Monsanto's controversial role in American agriculture, it's probably Robb Fraley. (A bit of self-promotion: I told much of this story in a book about the origins of genetically engineered crops, Lords of the Harvest, published in 2001. During research for the book, I also interviewed Fraley, Van Montagu and Chilton.) The winners were announced Wednesday at the U.S. State Department, with Secretary of State John Kerry contributing his own remarks. It's hard to imagine a similar event taking place in Europe, where government authorities have refused to approve the planting or importation of some of these GMO crops. Today's event reunited former scientific rivals. Thirty years ago, at a scientific meeting in Miami Beach, each of the award winners separately presented the results of experiments showing their first success in inserting genes into plants. At the time, Van Montagu was at the University of Ghent, in Belgium, and Mary-Dell Chilton was at Washington University in St. Louis. Both were far more prominent in scientific circles than Fraley. They also later worked with biotech companies (Plant Genetic Systems and Syngenta, respectively), but neither had as much impact in the business world as Fraley. The World Food Prize Foundation is a private, nonprofit organization with its headquarters in Des Moines, Iowa. It was set up in 1986 at the suggestion of Norman Borlaug, who had won the Nobel Peace Prize for his role in the "green revolution" that increased grain harvests worldwide. Major funding for the prize, which is worth $250,000, was provided by John Ruan, a prominent Des Moines businessman. In its early years, the award was sponsored by General Foods. The prize has been criticized in the past for close relationships with agribusiness companies. Last year, activist groups opposed to genetically modified food staged an "Occupy World Food Prize" protest during the formal awarding of the prize in Des Moines.Copyright 2013 NPR. To see more, visit http://www.npr.org/. TweetShareGoogle+Email © 2017 Peoria Public Radio

农业

2017-09/1014/en_head.json.gz/22367

Sage (Salvia officinalis) is an herb which has been valued for centuries for its fresh scent, the peppery depth of flavor it adds to foods and for its special constituents which help to keep skin healthy and beautiful. Sage grows as a small perennial shrub, usually no more than 24 inches tall;the oblong leaves have a slightly rough texture and hair-like growths. It is a member of the mint family and is related to rosemary. The plant is believed to have originated in the Mediterranean region, but spread to northern Europe during Medieval times. It is now, of course, a treasured garden herb grown throughout the world. Salvia officinalis, usually called common sage or kitchen sage, should not be confused with Russian sage (Perovskia atriplicifolia, which has a similar scent), sagebrush (Artemisia tridentate, native to the plains region of North America) or Jerusalem sage (Phlomis fruticosa).Sage has been used as both an herb for food flavoring and as a source of healing ingredients for more than 2,000 years. The earliest records of its use show that the Egyptians prepared a tea-like beverage from its dried leaves to increase fertility. The Romans apparently introduced the plant into Europe, where it quickly found favor as both as a culinary ingredient and as a medicinal plant. The scientific name for the genus, Salvia, is taken from the Latin word meaning "healthy" and is the root of the modern English word "salve," reflecting the curative value associated with the plant. Throughout the Medieval period in Europe, sage was credited with the power to heal almost every ailment. It was even an ingredient, along with thyme, rosemary and lavender, in "vinegar of the four thieves," a concoction believed to provide protection against infection by bubonic plague. It was considered such a valuable herb that it was perhaps the only spice" that was traded to the Far East;during the 16th century

农业

2017-09/1014/en_head.json.gz/23037

Dairy Today Expo Extra By: Wyatt Bechtel, MILK Dairy Today's Wyatt Bechtel brings you the latest from the World Dairy Expo. DFA’s Rick Smith Responds to Critics By Catherine Merlo For several weeks, critics have been calling for Dairy Farmers of America (DFA) to do more to help its 18,000 producer-members through 2009’s dairy crisis. An e-mail campaign is being waged questioning DFA’s “limited efforts” in helping producers survive this year’s financial disaster. Rick Smith, DFA’s president and CEO, is all too aware of 2009’s toll on dairy producers – and the target the nation’s largest dairy marketing cooperative has become. But the industry’s problems are beyond the ability of any one organization to fix, Smith told me yesterday by telephone. “There’s tremendous frustration, anger and fear out there among the producer population,” says Smith. “Dairy farmers are getting hammered, and they’re shell-shocked. It’s been extremely gut-wrenching because there’s nothing they could have done to prepare for the economics they’re faced with.” It’s natural in this environment for criticisms to be expressed about major players in the industry, “whether they’re valid or not,” Smith adds, his voice growing hoarse during the 30-minute conversation. “Almost anything we do, people will criticize,” he says. “We’re not going to get unanimity in the dairy industry. But we’re doing what we’re supposed to do.” Reacting to the Crisis The answer to the current down cycle isn’t popular or easy, he says. “We need the marketplace – supply and demand -- to be realigned,” says Smith. From 2005-2009, the industry saw five years of production growth. “What absorbed that run-up in production was the unprecedented growth in exports,” he says. But the “worldwide economic tsunami” coupled with China’s melamine scandal, hit hard in the fall of 2008. “We lost billions of pounds of exports overnight,” he says. “No one was prepared for the end of 2008.” Many in the industry, including DFA, could see what was to follow. Beginning in January, the co-op warned producers and bankers about the storm clouds that were coming. As 2009 unfolded, DFA took several steps to help producers with the crisis, Smith says. Those ranged from setting up a member hotline to handle stress-related calls to issuing a special $9.5 million cash payment in July and early 2008 patronage checks in August. DFA also worked to encourage the two herd retirements that the Cooperatives Working Together (CWT) held this year. DFA also urged USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack to re-implement the Dairy Export Incentive Program (DEIP) for 2009-2010. The co-op has continued to support the $350 million appropriations sought by Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont. Is DFA Doing Enough? Even so, critics say those haven’t been enough. If the sharp drop in exports is behind the downturn, critics ask, why hasn’t DFA worked to put tariffs on the milk protein concentrates (MPCs) or casein products that are entering the U.S.? “We’ve been supporting tariffs on MPCs for for five to seven years," Smith says. “This is not a new issue. “ The major obstacle to import tariffs is “people on the other side,” Smith says, those U.S. companies that use the imports in their own products. They are pushing for freer trade, something the dairy industry should also support because it represents opportunity in the world market. How can the U.S. oppose free trade when it seeks such a large role in global exports? Also from the critics: Is DFA more interested in protecting its profits – and those of Dean Foods – than those of its producer-members? “We supply Dean Foods less than half of their milk,” Smith says. “Other major dairy marketing cooperatives are also involved in supplying and pricing milk to Dean Foods. If there’s an over-supply of milk, it’s hard to get more for your product. “ DFA is price-competitive, he adds. “We want to have a constructive relationship with Dean Foods, but I work for dairy farmers, even if they feel we’re not working for them.” DFA’s Next Steps Smith would not venture an economic outlook, saying the industry had seen two false starts already. In part, it’s hard to forecast since no one is sure about the inventory of dairy products that exist in private hands and whether it’s large enough to impede a recovery. “I still think we’re just about there for prices to start moving,” he says. Prices will eventually recover, Smith says, but it’s important to recognize that the status quo doesn’t work. “Farmers and co-ops need the tools and a system that doesn’t create this harm, that can manage price volatility.” DFA is working with the National Milk Producers Federation, which recently announced a four-pronged proposal to change the milk pricing system. The co-op is also continuing its support of the CWT program. And DFA is talking to the Holstein Association USA about its Dairy Price Stabilization Program. While Smith wouldn’t comment on whether he supports the supply management program, he says, “I commend the Holstein Association for the quality level of their discussion.” In the meantime, one displeased DFA member tells me he will continue demanding more from the co-op. He will be writing more letters and taking other steps to get DFA to step up with more solutions. “That people have lost billions [of dollars in this downturn] is unforgivable,” he says. The story will continue to unfold, but until then, there’s one area where Smith and his detractors may agree. “It’s going to take more than one good price cycle to compensate for this down cycle,” Smith says. “Balance sheets – and psyches – have been seriously harmed. We’ll be dealing with the consequences of this downturn for a number of years.” Yes, Rick Smith is a nice guy, but that doesn't make a good CEO, does it? DFA and other co-ops have lost their grassroots. Some of the board members have been board members for years and years. There should be a change every 5 or 6 years, not stay on for life. How do they even get elected? They must be hand picked by management. Why would the farmer board members vote for some of the things they do that actually hurt farmers? Tells me they have become brainwashed. After so many years listening to management, must have worn off on them. Co-ops need to have a complete overhaul. Many co-op board members are also put on other dairy committees such as NMPF and CWT and probably the new Dairy task force. Must be whoever forms these committees thinks farmers are too dumb to be of any help or too smart that they would rock the boat. they truck milk back and forth across market orders so they can pay more where they have to compete for milk and cost producers money where milk is short and there is little competition to secure producer milk. Anonymous I have heard these kind of comments for 25 years. Milk was always been up and down. The good mangers we survie and prosper.Myself,I am very thankful for Rick Smith.Very smart,likeable,hounest,and good speaker.Waco,Texas

农业

2017-09/1014/en_head.json.gz/24685

Soil, Weedkillers And GMOs: When Numbers Don't Tell The Whole Story By Daniel Charles Farm statistics: usually illuminating ... occasionally misleading. Food and Water Watch Herbicide use on corn, soybeans and cotton — break it down per acre and it's not so dramatic. NPR using USDA data Herbicide use per acre on wheat has been going up a lot in recent years. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture/NRCS Originally published on January 27, 2014 1:12 pm I love numbers. A picture may be worth a thousand words, but I think a good bar graph can be worth a thousand pictures. But three times in the past few days, I've come across statistics in reputable-looking publications that made me stop and say, "Huh?" I did some investigating so you don't have to. And indeed, the numbers don't quite tell the story that they purport to tell. So here goes: My skeptical inquiry into statistics on herbicide use, soil erosion, and the production of fruits and nuts. First, weedkillers (and GMOs). I was struck by this graph, which appeared in a report issued by Food and Water Watch, an environmentalist group. The report was published a while ago, but Tom Philpott reused it recently in a post for the website of Mother Jones magazine. The point of the chart is to show how increases in herbicide use on soybeans, corn, and cotton have gone hand-in-hand with the rise of genetically modified, herbicide-tolerant, versions of those crops. That link seems logical, but still, farmers have been planting more corn and soybeans in recent years. How much of this soaring curve is simply because farmers have more acres to cover? I dived into the USDA numbers, and discovered, first of all, that they're fragmentary. In recent years, the USDA didn't collect such numbers for all three crops in all years. The curve, in this case, is based on just two data points. No matter. I took the numbers that were available and divided them by the number of acres planted. (I'm using a column chart to make clear for which years we have data.) Suddenly, the trend doesn't seem quite so dramatic. And how do we know if herbicide-tolerant GMOs are driving this increase? What if it's something else entirely? For comparison, I decided to look at herbicide use in wheat, since no GMO wheat is being planted. Here's a graph of herbicide use in wheat, per acre, over the same period of time. Whoa. No GMOs here, and herbicide use went up at a faster rate. (In absolute amounts, farmers still use much less herbicide on wheat than on soybeans or corn.) What could be driving this increase, if not herbicide-tolerant GMOs? I called a few wheat experts in Kansas and Oregon, who mentioned some possibilities. First, farmers are reducing their use of tillage to control weeds, in part to conserve their soil. Many are relying more on chemical weedkillers instead. Second, with grain prices high, farmers are more inclined to spend more money on anything that will boost yields. Both of these factors are probably influencing herbicide use in corn and soybeans, too. They may be more important than the popularity of GMOs. One thing, though, is perfectly clear. The rise of glyphosate-tolerant GMOs did persuade farmers to use much more of that particular chemical. Some argue that a new generation of GMOs that are tolerant to other weedkillers will drive further increases in herbicide use. Maybe they will. I'll wait for the numbers. Next up, soil erosion. Here are two maps that caught my attention. They're published in a report called the National Resources Inventory, released last week by the USDA's Natural Resources Conservation Service. (I should also tell you that the NRCS is one of my very favorite federal agencies; please don't hold this post against it.) The dramatic shrinkage of those red and orange blotches along America's major rivers is terrific news. It shows that less topsoil is washing away today, compared with 1982. Intrigued by this apparent good-news story, I called Craig Cox, in the Iowa office of the Environmental Working Group. Cox already knew about this map. He wasn't happy about it. In his view, it obscures more than it reveals. According to Cox, the good news is old news. Practically all of the dramatic progress in fighting soil erosion occurred 15 years ago, between 1982 and 1997. At that time, "we were on a really solid pathway to finally getting on top of this ancient enemy," he says. Since 1997, however, progress has stalled, so the map paints an overly cheerful picture. (In fairness to NRCS, there is another, less prominent, graph in the report that does show this stagnation in anti-erosion efforts.) In addition, there's a basic problem with these data, Cox says: "They only capture one kind of erosion," called sheet and rill erosion. This is the erosion that happens evenly across a field, and can be predicted from the amount of rain, the field's slope, its soil type and whether it is bare or covered by grass. The NRCS data are based on such predictions, and the estimated improvements since 1982 happened mainly because farmers are tilling less, and protecting more of their land with vegetation. By contrast, no models can predict when something more catastrophic will occur; when small rivulets of water combine into larger, fast-moving streams that cut deep ditches, or gullies, into a field. According to Cox, those gullies actually carry off more soil than the predictable kinds of erosion, and they were especially bad during the storms that hit the Midwest last spring and summer. So my straightforward good-news story about soil erosion evaporated. Finally, there was a second surprising statistic buried deep inside that NRCS report, and I noticed it only because of a press release that the USDA put out. According to that release, the NRCS's National Resources Inventory detected "a boom in land dedicated to growing fruits, nuts and flowers, increasing from 124,800 acres in 2007 to 273,800 in 2010." Wow! I looked at the numbers again. In fact, the boom was only in a category of production called "cultivated" fruit and nut production. Turns out, that's a tiny category, barely worth counting. It apparently refers to orchards in which there's also some tillage going on to grow a second crop. "Uncultivated" fruit, nut, and flower production, by contrast, went from 4.7 million acres in 2007 to 4.4 million acres in 2010. Sorry. No boom.Copyright 2014 NPR. To see more, visit http://www.npr.org/. TweetShareGoogle+EmailView the discussion thread. © 2017 90.3 KAZU

农业

2017-09/1014/en_head.json.gz/24772

MSU report shows agriculture contributed $91.4 billion to Michigan economy By Lindsey Smith Apr 11, 2012 TweetShareGoogle+Email Apples from an orchard in Ottawa County. dailyinvention / Creative Commons A new Michigan State University study shows Michigan’s agriculture industry has grown dramatically throughout the recession. Agriculture contributed a little more than $91.4 billion to Michigan’s economy in 2010. The economic impact of farming, food processing and the supply chain is twice as much as it was in 2004. “(Agriculture’s) critical to what’s happening in the state. And the story about our growth I think is significant versus other sectors of the state’s economy that have clearly been in decline,” said Chris Peterson, director of the MSU Product Center. The center helps agriculture businesses get new products to market. Peterson says growing demand for food in big countries like China and India are a major factor in agriculture’s growth in Michigan. He says farmers and processors have also become more productive. The latest report shows 618,000 jobs come directly from Michigan’s food and agriculture business sector. Tags: Michigan agricultureagricultureMichigan State UniversityTweetShareGoogle+Email Related Content Michigan apple growers expecting a great crop this year By Lindsey Smith Sep 6, 2011 dailyinvention / creative commons Not only will there be way more Michigan apples this year, they’ll probably be bigger and better looking too. According to estimates from the United States Department of Agriculture, Michigan apple growers are likely to produce 26.1 million bushels this season. The 5 year average is 19.5 million bushels. Only Washington and New York state grow more. Denise Donohue is the Executive Director of the Michigan Apple Committee. “This is the 5th year on the rollercoaster for Michigan. It’s been an up and down thing for the last three years in particular.” Michigan asparagus farmers need workers to harvest early crop Apr 10, 2012 Lake Express / Creative Commons Michigan’s asparagus season has started early because of the warmer than usual weather this spring. But farmers are worried they don’t have enough workers to harvest the crop. “Being a former migrant worker I can tell you that in the past Michigan has had a wealth of workers coming to Michigan. It was destination state,” Belen Ledezma said. She’s the Director of Migrant, Immigrant and Seasonal Worker Services for the Michigan’s Workforce Development Agency. Ledezma says the huge crop diversity in Michigan means migrant workers have a variety of jobs to choose from throughout the year. But this year farmers are struggling to find enough workers to harvest. “I think we’re starting to recognize that the same labor pool that we’re used to is no longer coming to Michigan,” Ledezma said. Ledezma says the state is trying to help farmers recruit local workers to harvest asparagus. Her agency will host a job fair in southwest Michigan on Thursday in hopes of filling more than 220 immediate openings on asparagus farms. Hard freeze hurts Michigan cherry crop Apr 10, 2012 Photo courtesy of Northwest Michigan Horticultural Research Station by Bob Allen for The Environment Report A hard freeze has wiped out a big portion of the cherry crop in Northwest Michigan this spring. The area produces more than half the state’s cherries that end up in desserts, juice and as dried fruit. An historic early warm-up in March left fruit trees vulnerable to frost once the weather turned cooler again. Temperatures broke records for the month of March across the Great Lakes region. Climate researchers say there’s never been anything like it going back more than a hundred years. “We’re seeing history made before our eyes at least in terms of climatology.” Jeff Andresen is the state’s climatologist and professor of geography at Michigan State. “And in some ways if we look at where our vegetation is and how advanced it is, it’s probably a month ahead of where it typically is.” Andresen is careful to point out that this year’s early warm-up is an extreme weather event. He says it far outpaces the previous warmest March on record in 1945. He can’t say it’s a direct result of climate change. But it fits the predicted long term pattern of change that includes extreme fluctuations. Agriculture drives the Midwest economy – and farming is just the start of it Mar 21, 2012 Lindsey Smith / Michigan Radio This month, we’re looking into some of the hidden assets of the Midwest – the parts of our economy that don’t often get noticed when we talk about our strengths (the first part of the series is here). Agriculture is one of the biggest drivers of local economies in the Midwest – it accounts for billions of dollars worth of exports and thousands of jobs. There’s been a lot of concern about whether enough young people are going into farming these days. But the ag industry goes well beyond being just farming – and plenty of young people are interested in that. At Navy Pier, a special meeting of the Chicago High School for Agricultural Sciences’s FFA chapter is being called to order. Ringed around the room, one by one, chapter officers check in during the traditional opening ceremony. It ends when President and Senior Jennifer Nelson asks her fellow FFA members: “Why are we here?” The students stand and chant in unison: “To practice brotherhood, honor agriculture opportunities and responsibilities, and develop those qualities of leadership that an FFA member should possess.” Agriculture industry is growing, but can't find white collar workers By Sarah Alvarez Oct 11, 2011 United States National Archives The Midwest’s persistently high unemployment rate isn’t expected to fall anytime soon. But as Changing Gears' Kate Davidson reported, temporary employment agencies across the Midwest can’t seem to find enough people to fill all the open factory jobs they have waiting. These agencies are busier than they’ve been in years, because manufacturing has more open jobs than candidates willing or able to fill them. Now, another industry finds itself in a similar position: agriculture. It's a big business all across the Midwest. In Michigan, agriculture is said to be the state’s second largest industry and is still growing. But, Jim Byrum of the Michigan Agri-Business Association says agriculture producers can’t find enough people to fill jobs now, and he’s even more worried about the future. “The industry demand is pretty solid, and it’s an increasingly severe problem,” Bryum says. A large group within the agriculture industry -- white collar workers at agri-business companies -- is getting ready to retire soon. His concern is that a new generation of workers is not ready to replace those workers getting ready to leave. © 2017 Michigan Radio

农业

2017-09/1014/en_head.json.gz/25129

Oregon slows the loss of farmland A study shows Oregon is still losing farmland to development, but the pace slowed dramatically as land-use planning took hold. By Eric MortensonCapital Press Oregon continues to lose farmland to development and other conversions, but the pace has slowed dramatically since statewide land-use planning kicked in, a state Department of Agriculture specialist says.Data from aerial surveys done every three years by the USDA’s Natural Resource Conservation Service show Oregon has lost 700,000 acres of agricultural land since 1982, or about 4.4 percent of the state total, said Jim Johnson, land-use specialist with the Oregon Department of Agriculture.California has lost 2.6 million acres during that time, Johnson said, and Washington has lost 552,000 acres. Idaho figures were not immediately available. For the study, agricultural land is defined as land used for crops, pasture, rangeland or as conservation reserves.Johnson said the impact of Oregon’s statewide land-use planning system is evident in the data. The system is intended to prevent urban areas from sprawling onto prime farmland, primarily through requiring cities to adopt comprehensive land-use plans and establish urban growth boundaries. While cities and counties may expand growth boundaries, the process is strictly defined, slow, contentious and subject to legal challenge.The system has persistent critics, largely because it eliminates or restricts development options for many rural property owners, but there is no doubt it’s done what was intended. Travel outside any Oregon urban area and there is a sharply defined point where development ends and farm or forest land begins.The loss or conversion of land for crops — usually the most valuable, flattest and easiest to develop — slowed as cities adopted comprehensive land-use plans in the late 1980s and early 1990s, Johnson said. Almost 400,000 acres of crop land was converted from 1982-87. About 60,000 acres of crop land was lost from 2007-10.“You can tell when land-use laws kicked in, you can really tell,” he said.Johnson said development pressure will continue in Oregon’s Willamette Valley, from Portland to Eugene, where most of the state’s people live and also home to extensive, valuable and diverse farming operations. As population increases and cities expand growth boundaries, “We’re going to lose a lot in the Willamette Valley,” he said.Other rapidly growing areas, such as Hermiston in eastern Oregon, will face the same problems.“Sometimes those cities forget why they exist in the first place — agriculture,” Johnson said.Agricultural land also will be lost to “non-farm development” such as energy facility sitings, parks and recreation areas and gravel mining, Johnson said. The cumulative impact of such land conversion deserves attention, he said.“It’s not just the footprint of the development, but the shadow cast by development” that has an impact on farming, Johnson said.

农业

2017-09/1014/en_head.json.gz/25820

Justices skeptical of farmer who planted patented seeds CaptionVernon Hugh Bowman, a 75-year-old Indiana soybean farmer, accompanied by his attorney Mark Walters, speaks with reporters outside the Supreme Court in Washington, Tuesday, Feb. 19, 2013, after justices heard oral arguments between Bowman and high-tech agriculture company Monsanto Co. that produces genetically engineered and patented seeds. The case considers whether Bowman violated Monsanto’s patents when he planted an unmarked mix of soybeans that he bought from a grain elevator and that is often used for feed. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)By David G. Savage, Tribune Washington Bureau (MCT)WASHINGTON — An Indiana farmer who clashed with Monsanto Co. over his replanting of its patented soybean seeds ran into steady skeptical questions Tuesday from the Supreme Court. The justices strongly suggested that they would rule for Monsanto and decide that the company’s patent protection for its genetically modified seeds covers not just the first planting, but also seeds that are generated later.“Why in the world” would any company invest millions of dollars in creating a new seed if a farmer could buy one and freely reproduce it, asked Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr.Mark Walters, a lawyer representing Indiana farmer Hugh Bowman, argued that a patent holder “exhausts” his rights after selling the product.But the justices said that made no sense for products that are easily copied, or in the case of seeds, copy themselves.Justice Antonin Scalia said the farmer was free to use the seeds by planting a crop. But he can’t “grow additional seeds. It’s the other seeds we are talking about,” he said.Justice Sonia Sotomayor agreed. The patent law “doesn’t permit you to make another item. You can use the seed. But you can’t use its progeny,” she said.The court’s decision to hear the case of Bowman v. Monsanto set off alarms in the biotechnology industry and among software makers. Those companies rely on strict enforcement of patent and copyright laws to protect their innovative products from being copied by others.Bowman, a 75-year-old bachelor farmer, said he buys Monsanto’s popular and costly soybean seeds because they are engineered to withstand the spraying of herbicides to kill weeds. But for his second crop of the season, he tries to save money by buying soybeans from a local grain elevator. These seeds include a large percentage of Monsanto’s patented seeds, and the company sued him for violating its patent rights.Lower courts ruled for Monsanto, but the Supreme Court agreed to hear Bowman’s claim that the seed maker had exhausted its patent rights when it sold its seeds.An Obama administration lawyer joined sides with Monsanto in urging the court to reject Bowman’s claim.“The exhaustion doctrine has nothing to do with this case,” Melissa Sherry, an assistant solicitor general, told the justices. Otherwise, a company’s 20-year patent protection would expire after “one and only one sale,” she said.Washington attorney Seth Waxman, representing Monsanto, said the company had spent 13 years and hundreds of millions of dollars developing the herbicide-resistant seed at issue in the case. If Bowman’s claim were upheld, the value of Monsanto’s patented product would be gone “the very first time it sold a seed,” he said. Comments

农业

2017-09/1014/en_head.json.gz/26299

Ramaz Maghlaki, Georgia / Farming A loan of $3,200 helped to build a greenhouse. Ramaz's story Ramaz is a 65-year-old married man. He lives in a small village of Tskaltubo district with his wife, son, daughter-in-law and two granddaughters. His wife is a teacher at a local school and gets 300 GEL per month. Ramaz is involved in agricultural activities. In particular, he has a cow and two calves, whose milk is used in making cheese products to sell. Ramaz decided to build a greenhouse and requested a loan. The Start Up program, which is a joint initiative with Kiva and Credo, enables him to get a loan of $3200. With the received credit he will purchase building materials and will build a greenhouse, where he will sow cucumbers and tomatoes to sell. The Start Up program will be a great support for the family. This loan is part of Credo's startup loan program targeting particularly vulnerable clients who live at the subsistence level and have been unable to obtain credit due to lack of income from an existing business. This program offers them a longer repayment term and an annual interest rate that is 5% lower than the standard interest rate. By funding this loan, you are supporting a program that gives borrowers a second chance to start and grow small businesses. This has the potential to alleviate the effects of poverty, significantly improving borrowers' incomes and their families' quality of life. Learn more about Credo's startup loan program on the Kiva Blog. | #Biz Durable Asset | #Elderly | #Supporting Family | #Vegan

农业

2017-09/1014/en_head.json.gz/26357

Todd Staples: The TT Interview The Texas commissioner of agriculture on the "catastrophic" devastation he's seen from the worst one-year drought in recorded Texas history, what the feds and state are doing and what needs to happen to cope with a potential multiyear drought. by Kate GalbraithAug. 31, 2011 Texas Commissioner of Agriculture, Todd Staples - August 29, 2011. Todd Staples has seen easier days. Now in his second term as Texas agriculture commissioner, Staples is coping with a full-blown crisis as the worst one-year drought in the state's history drags on, destroying crops and forcing ranchers to sell their livestock, unless they can afford to import hay from states as far away as South Dakota. Staples holds an agricultural economics degree from Texas A&M University and has long been involved with Future Farmers of America. He got his start in politics at age 25 when he ran for city council in the East Texas town of Palestine, where he was born and raised. Later he served in both the Texas House and the Senate before being elected agriculture commissioner for the first time in 2006 (he was re-elected last year). Staples spoke to the Tribune about the devastation he's seeing around Texas. The state and the feds are trying to help, but fundamentally, Staples says, "When it comes to short-term for agriculture, there are not many options." Except rain. This interview was edited and slightly condensed for clarity. TT: Where have you traveled recently within the state, and what are you seeing in terms of the drought? Staples: Well, I had two unique experiences last week. I flew into both San Angelo and the Rio Grande Valley. And when I flew into San Angelo and you look out the window it looks like wintertime — solid brown except for green treetops. And that's pretty indicative of the entire state. But the other extreme was the Rio Grande Valley and McAllen and Mercedes and Brownsville and South Padre Island for the Texas produce convention. And there's actually green grass and cows grazing that aren't just struggling for every blade of grass. And so it was refreshing to see that at least one small area of Texas for at least another week or two has some green grass to be able to survive. But it is truly catastrophic what I've seen across Texas. TT: $5.2 billion of losses — and counting. Staples: And counting. And that is a very conservative number because it really only covers the livestock losses of a little in excess of $2 billion, cotton of about $1.8 billion, lost hay of around $750 [million], and then I think corn and maybe some grain sorghum. It doesn't include produce and vegetables. It doesn't include citrus and other row crops. So that's only a snapshot. And with each passing day, it gets worse. And I was at the Dallas farmers market, I think it was their 75th anniversary, earlier this year, and I was talking to some produce growers in different regions. And the intense heat is what has made this year and this drought cycle — I think it's what led Dr. John Nielsen-Gammon [the state climatologist] to conclude that this is the worst single-year drought in history, with the lack of moisture coupled with the intense, intense, just depredating heat that we're facing. TT: One thing I've been wondering is what percent of farmers — farmers and ranchers — have insurance? Staples: Well, that's the good news. That many of them will be able to survive potentially through this on the row crop side of things because there is a well-established crop insurance when it comes to cotton and corn and grain sorghum. Livestock and dairy, though, there is no insurance. One dairy farmer ... earlier this year, I met with her, and she said, "We're paying $300 a ton for alfalfa," and I said, "Really, what did you pay last winter?" And she said, "$185 [per ton], and we were crying then." And that was early, early in the summer. My little small operation that I still have in East Texas, I paid like $252 [per ton] for range cubes, and then I bought some along through early in the summer, and the last I paid was like $322 per ton. So producers in the beef cattle industry have never gotten out of the winter cycle. They've just gone from feeding in cold weather to feeding in hot weather. TT: What are you hearing from back home in Palestine? Staples: Devastating. Many producers have actually liquidated their herds — just carried everything they have to the sale barns, because [they were struggling to find hay and were running out of pasture]. And it was kind of a methodical process. Some early on saw it happening and read the weather forecast accurately and said, "Look, you can't survive this." Others like me were optimistic, thinking one day without rain means closer to rain one day away, and so we would keep our hay pastures that we don't graze on in wintertime, we'd turn out cattle in there and rotate them in and out, waiting for it to rain. And it never rained. And so they'd just actually — start carrying their heavier calves to sale and then the younger, lighter weight calves to sale, and then culled cows to the sale, and then you'd get into your breeding stock. It's passed onto generations sometimes, those genetics, that are gone now. TT: Talk to me about what the state and the feds are doing to assist. Staples: Couple of different fronts. The disaster declarations have been forthcoming. The feds have released the Conservation Reserve Program lands in some areas for emergency grazing and haying. Low-interest loans are available through the federal programs. Loans don't mean that much in these difficult circumstances because the ability to pay back has just been decimated. I mean, to say this is a crisis is a true understatement to the men and women who are struggling every day to manage through these circumstances. And before I talk about what the state's doing, I might point out that droughts of this nature, the worst in this state's history, are just unplanned, unexpected, unwelcome natural disasters. Texas has a great record of tracking hurricanes coming in and taking precautions to mitigate the damage and the chaos that ensues. But something of this nature is just truly catastrophic of unprecedented proportions, and so there's no amount of planning that you can prepare for. So you do have to manage through it. But nonetheless we are doing things that are of a temporary nature. We have a new and expanded hay hotline that is bringing information together of hay sellers, grazing lands that are available. They're not in Texas but in other parts of the country. [Information on transportation providers is included, too.] We have modernized that hay hotline to include those new elements, and we've also included pricing and weights in there that hasn't been in there previously. This is coming down to staying in business or just completely getting out for the foreseeable future. And so knowing the tonnage and the cost and the quality of hay is very important when you determine whether to ship it in or not. TT: Some [ranchers] I talked to several weeks ago in San Angelo at a cattle auction — I asked them about the hay hotline and they said, "Well it's not very useful because nobody's got hay." And so how do you deal with that? Staples: We've reached out with texasagriculture.gov/hayhotline. A lot of [hay providers] are from out of state even. I recently sent a letter to every commissioner or director or secretary of agriculture in the United States asking them to promote our hay hotline, to get their sellers of hay to put their information on there where [Texans] can have access to it. We've asked for hay waivers, and Gov. Perry has been responsive. And now Louisiana, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Kansas and South Dakota have all either enacted hay waivers (or I think Nebraska had regulations that were similar) that relieves height and weight restrictions so you can get more hay. Because the biggest cost, where there is a surplus of hay, is just the transportation cost of getting it to Texas. TT: So we're transporting hay from South Dakota to Texas? Staples: Yes. Yes. It's just unbelievable. TT: How much does that cost? Staples: Too much. Really too much for the economics to work out for any time period. And now, what is it, almost Sept. 1, the growing season is getting shorter. Even urban Texans know — it's getting darker longer in the mornings when they wake up and it's getting darker earlier in the evening. ... So if it starts raining today, we're still in a world of hurt when it comes to having the available resources we need. Right now farmers are preparing their wheat pastures, their winter wheat pastures, that are so important to the Texas livestock industry to graze these feeder cattle to get them up to a good weight before they put them in the feedlots, and without any moisture — I mean, it's so bad. Earlier this year, early, we had 2 million acres of dry-land cotton that was abandoned. Even irrigated crops in some instances have been abandoned this year. TT: The state climatologist, John Nielsen-Gammon, said that we are likely to be at the start of a multiyear drought. If this goes on, are there any other tools in the toolbox, so to speak, to help farmers and ranchers around the state. Staples: Weathermen have not been my best friend this year. Each weather prediction — forecast — extends it even further til now even to 2012. One thing that's important in this state is that the Legislature passed Proposition 2 that's going to be on ballot this November that will allow for a self-funded revolving bond that will be administered by the Texas Water Development Board. And this is really for municipalities and communities and and water districts. Because now over 800 water providers have issued restrictions, and that number's going to continue to grow. But when it comes to short term for agriculture, there are not many options. I mean, that's the short of it. The long of it — research has led the way where am consumers enjoy the most reliable, the safest and the most affordable food supply than anywhere in the world. We have drought-tolerant crops, greater yields have been made available through research. Our extension system is phenomenal because it takes data and puts it in the hands of farmers and ranchers, who use those production practices and techniques [of which] we're a major exporter. And it's a big part of our economy, it's a big part of jobs. Rural communities are being crippled today because there's no production. No production means no tires are bought. New tractors aren't bought. New pickups aren't bought. New clothes aren't bought. These are dire circumstances in many ares. TT: Will the Texas agriculture sector be able to recover from this drought, and ... how long will recovery take? And will some people just get out of the business to stay out? Staples: This will end the agriculture careers of some operators. Some families will be abandoning what was generations of production. But the real answer is that Texans are survivors. Texans have a heritage of overcoming difficult circumstances and being stronger than ever before. The sheer size of this state, and the diverse environmental conditions creates challenges. Our farmers and ranchers face political battles across the seas that close export markets to our products. They face policy battles internally that presents challenges. And they faced — we haven't even talked about the wildfire consequences associated with this drought. The latest numbers I saw from the Forest Service indicates that almost 20,000 different wildfires have been battled since this season began, scorching over 3.5 million acres, which, by the way, is equivalent to the combined acreage in ... several Northeastern states. TT: I talked to, again, the state climatologists, and scientists are saying that climate change could make droughts like this worse — hotter and dryer. Staples: And that's a reality of what we face. We know the climate changes. And we know that we're experiencing one of the hottest cycles of recorded history and for a prolonged period. And hopefully we will cycle out of this, back to several years of cooler temperatures that allows us to overcome and to get production practices. But it requires us to plan. And I think Texans in the 1950s recognized this. ... If you will remember there was a massive buildup in the '50s of water supplies. Because we were in a crisis. Our population then was ... substantially less than it was today. So we built up available water supplies per capita that positioned us well and we had a continual rise of available water per capita until we got to the '70s and '80s, and our construction of reservoirs stopped, and our population continued to rise, so the per capita availability started going back to where today we're about where we were in the 1950s in available water per population. So Texans have some serious issues. In 1997 I was a part of the Legislature that adopted the statewide water plan and empowered the Water Development Board to put together what I think was something that all Texans, regardless of your political perspective about what good comes out of Austin, can agree [was good]. The Legislature created a water planning system that was from the bottom up, when we created the 16 regional water plans. This was phenomenally important because it put the water planners in the local regions in the driver's seat to determine the needs of their specific communities and regions. Then that's compiled at the state level to where we were going through this water planning cycle and identifying the forecasted needs and trying to reach them. Texans have some real decisions to make. New reservoirs are a part of that water planning process. It's not the only solution, but it's a big, big part of the solution. And many people from all walks of political life don't want to see new water reservoirs constructed. And I have hunted and fished and played in a lot of river bottoms, and I love it — it is an experience that every Texan and every person even from Washington, D.C., should have the opportunity to do. But we have to have new water resources or we're going to be an economy that cannot sustain our growth and our jobs that we know are very critical. But we also need to have policies that encourage the movement of water when we have more water than we need for the planning process on the horizon but that also discourages the movement of water when it only shifts a problem from one region of the state to the other. Our friends in Oklahoma and Louisiana — we have ongoing dialogues about moving water into Texas. We have to continue that discussion, work through the legal hurdles, and it needs to be profitable for the area where that water's moved from. That is a realistic consideration that has to be factored into what we're doing. TT: You mentioned the '50s. Did your parents or grandparents live through that? Staples: They did. And [it was] just unprecedented. ... I've talked to producers in their 80s, from all walks of life, and they look me in the eye and say, "Staples, we don't know when it's been this bad. This dry. And this hot." And you'll remember, earlier this year we had sustained winds that were just drying out the topsoil. And so you have a combination of factors that led to the dire consequences that we're facing today.

农业