Search is not available for this dataset
text
stringlengths 0
383k
| industry_type
stringclasses 18
values | text_length
int64 0
383k
|
|---|---|---|
October 19, 2009 Issue
The Gates Foundation in Africa
By Our Readers, Raj Patel, Eric Holt-Gimenez and Annie Shattuck September 30, 2009
Seattle Ad Policy
At the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, we believe an open exchange of ideas is essential to tackling urgent global challenges. Our approach to agricultural development recognizes hunger as a complex challenge with no single solution. It is unfortunate that Raj Patel et al., the authors of “Ending Africa’s Hunger” [Sept. 21], chose to mischaracterize the foundation’s strategy despite our detailed and frank conversations. We support a broad range of solutions. In addition to quality seeds, small farmers need locally appropriate farming practices, access to markets and a policy environment that supports their success. We invest in all these areas. Environmental sustainability is critical for long-term impact, which is why we fund projects like micro-irrigation for efficient water use and planting legumes among other crops to fertilize the soil naturally. We also recently made a grant to Worldwatch Institute to undertake a comprehensive study of the highly complex intersection between the environment and agriculture. Women do the majority of the farm work in Africa, so we have funded a major career development program for sub-Saharan women in agricultural research, and another to engage women farmers in agricultural policy development. Our agricultural work is focused on helping small farmers to live healthier, more productive lives. The “uniquely African Green Revolution,” called for by African leaders in 2004, recognizes that reducing hunger and poverty begins with such farmers and their families, and that is why we and our partners are working to ensure that their voices are heard and their needs are met. Ultimately, it will be up to countries and farmers themselves to decide what approaches are right for them. (See gatesfoundation.org/agriculturaldevelopment/Pages/default.aspx for a detailed overview of our agricultural development strategy.) MARK SUZMAN Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Patel et al. Reply
Oakland, Calif. We agree that an open exchange about Africa’s agricultural development, and the philanthropic interventions to shape it, is tremendously important. We welcome the chance to continue the debate here. We’re grateful that the Gates Foundation talked with us for over an hour in Seattle and responded to our questions on e-mail, but we note that there is nothing specific in our article with which it disagrees. Mark Suzman seems unhappy that we didn’t faithfully reproduce the foundation’s public relations materials, but that’s not our job. Rather, we strove to put its projects in context, revealing the industrial connections the foundation fails to make evident on its website. Most Popular1Why Thousands of Texas Students Carried Dildos to Class This Week2Returning to His Roots, Sanders Launches ‘Our Revolution’3Is Angela Corey the Cruelest Prosecutor in America?4A Basic Income Would Upend America’s Work Ethic—and That’s a Good Thing5France Has a Strange Concept of Feminism—and Secularism Yes, the Gates Foundation funds the planting of beans and micro-irrigation. But as a proportion of disbursement, these projects are marginal to the technological investments in the development of genetically modified crops. That is why we couldn’t in good conscience report the more trivial examples as representative of the organization’s broader thrust. We’re happy to add Worldwatch Institute to the list of organizations the foundation funds. We’re disappointed, however, that in choosing to fund it, the foundation did not consult with the farmers’ organizations and NGOs in Africa, which for years have been doing excellent agro-ecological work raising production, reducing environmental costs and improving livelihoods. The complex links between agriculture and the environment have been extensively documented and peer-reviewed. Wouldn’t the money have been better spent on the dissemination of this proven knowledge within Africa? We agree that it will ultimately be up to farmers to decide what is best for them. Our concern, however, is that farmers’ choices are systematically skewed, with some ideas amplified over others. Policies that involve redistribution–such as land reform–are off the foundation’s agenda, despite being a live concern to many African farmers’ movements. This demonstrates our broader point. Despite its best efforts to be accountable, the Gates Foundation’s interventions reflect the undemocratic vision of a single very powerful and unaccountable organization. RAJ PATEL ERIC HOLT-GIMENEZ ANNIE SHATTUCK Food First Hunger Hurts, at Home and Abroad
Austin, Tex. As an anti-hunger activist, I was disappointed to find not a single reference to domestic hunger in your “Food for All” issue. According to the USDA, 36.2 million Americans live in households facing hunger. Most of these families are not particularly interested in the nutritional value of CSAs, school gardens or “food justice.” They are interested in putting something–anything–on the table tonight so their children go to bed with food in their bellies. They worry about making it through the weekend without the help of school meals, or through the month with the food stamps they have left. GET A DIGITAL SUBSCRIPTION FOR JUST $9.50!
Subscribe J.C. DWYER House Food Bill Is Rotten
Athens, N.Y. I was disappointed to read John Nichols’s “Food Without Fear” with an endorsement of the House food safety bill. One of the biggest impediments to local, sustainable food production is the regulatory structure. We have two food systems. One depletes topsoil, pollutes waterways, tortures animals, eats up fossil fuel, then processes everything in huge facilities that smear pathogens and toxins around and turn out the denatured food that lines supermarket aisles. The other system builds topsoil, maintains balanced ecosystems, treats animals humanely, supports rural communities and produces healthy food. The trouble with the bill is that it takes the industrial system as a universal given, doing nothing to address unsustainable practices, and applies its regulations to both the industrial and the small, local producer, making it so expensive and onerous to comply with that it will either drive the small producer out of business or force her to become part of the industrial system. The bill will keep sustainable food output low and prices high. LYNN KRAMER Regrets: Hijacked History
On page 27 of “Food for All,” our illustrator took a historic photograph out of context to make a food-related collage. The woman in the photo is Barbara Gittings, a pioneer in the lesbian and gay rights movement. In 1958 Gittings founded the New York chapter of the first US lesbian organization, the Daughters of Bilitis. She also helped organize gay rights demos in the years before Stonewall, challenged the American Psychiatric Association’s antigay views and headed the American Library Association’s Gay Task Force. The photo, of a 1966 demonstration in Philadelphia, was taken by Kay Tobin Lahusen, Gittings’s lifetime partner and a key player in the movement as the first openly gay photojournalist. Lahusen helped found the Gay Activists Alliance and has had her work featured in several exhibits, including “Standing Tall Before Stonewall” in 2000 in Philadelphia, which she curated. In last week’s “Goldstone Reports” [“Noted”], the second sentence of the second paragraph should have said, “The mainstream media here [not in Israel] have downplayed the report’s significance.” Facebook
Letters submitted by our readers are read and published in the magazine.
Raj Patel
Raj Patel is a fellow at the Institute for Food and Development Policy, and author of Stuffed and Starved and, most recently, The Value of Nothing.
Eric Holt-Gimenez
Eric Holt-Gimenez is executive director at Food First and has recently co-authored (with Raj Patel and Annie Shattuck) Food Rebellions! Crisis and the Hunger for Justice (Food First Books).
Annie Shattuck
Annie Shattuck is a policy analyst at Food Firstand has recently co-authored (with Raj Patel and Eric Holt-Gimenez) Food Rebellions! Crisis and the Hunger for Justice (Food First Books).
Letters From the August 29-September 5, 2016, Issue By Our Readers and George Joseph Oct 07, 2009
Obama Trapped Behind Wall of Mideast Containment By Ira Chernus Oct 07, 2009
Russian Journalists Still Under Threat By Adam Federman “AN INDISPENSABLE VOICE IN OUR POLITICAL DIALOGUE.” | 农业 | 8,520 |
Alpen Cellars Builds Its Own Grid
Remote Northern California winery powered by creek waters
by Jane Firstenfeld
At about 2,700 feet in elevation, the vineyard at Alpen Cellars is one of California’s highest.
Trinity Center, Calif.—When Mother Nature knocks out the energy grid during or after a hurricane, tornado or “super storm”, even wineries that generate all or part of their power requirements via solar or wind installations are left out of luck and in the dark. While they save money by selling their excess production to the power company at peak times, most have no way to bank those kilowatts when the power lines go down for hours, days, even weeks. Wineries can lose product when they cannot control fermentation or storage temperatures, and even the hardiest tourists won’t be trekking to unlit, unheated, unrefrigerated tasting rooms.
Alpen Cellars, in the northern extreme of California near the Oregon border, is 10 rugged miles from the grid, but never without power. Winemaker Keith Groves, who owns the 4,500-case winery with his wife and parents, originally planned only to grow winegrapes on the 300-acre property. When he investigated bringing in power to start a winery in 1984, he was told it would cost him $6 million. “And after that, we’d then get power bills every month,” he commented. Groves said that Trinity County was California’s second-most populated during the Gold Rush era; his little valley had power lines about 100 years ago, but during the Depression, when the Central Valley Water Project dammed rivers to create Shasta, Oroville and Trinity lakes, the lines were removed. Trinity Lake’s west side, accessible by State Highway 3, has power, marinas and tourism. The county is home to six wineries, according to WinesVinesDATA. Alpen Cellars, northeast of the lake, has neither power nor easy access. Its tasting room, open from Memorial through Labor Days (and otherwise by appointment), draws only about 3,000-4,000 visitors yearly. Yet the winery functions smoothly all year, thanks to China Creek, the east fork of the Trinity River. “We are above the dam, and it’s still a wild river,” Groves said. “We have an enormous amount of water. If we lived in Sonoma, we’d be very wealthy.”
Hardly powerless
After being priced off the grid, Groves, a graduate in enology from Fresno State University, consulted with a local alternative energy company. Its experts measured the amount of gallons flowing in the creek, and the amount of “fall” to determine what equipment he needed to power both the winery and the family’s separate homes in the valley.
“I installed it all,” he said. “It’s a Trinity County trait: Jack of all trades, master of none.” The rushing creek water is diverted by a small 1-foot dam (or weir) through pipes to a turbine that generates 3-phase power. "At max, we get 3.5 kilowatts of power," Groves said. This is converted to DC stored in battery banks, and 110, 220 or 3-phase AC power accessed through regular sockets, “Same as a regular house,” Groves explained. He claimed not to recall the amount he’s invested in the system. “It’s been a slow process of upgrading over the years,” Groves said. “About five years ago, we put in new turbines and new pipeline.”
One of the real beauties of the system is that, although it employs running fresh water, it doesn’t actually use any. The water is cooled by the turbines and underground pipes before returning to the creek. Using the system does demand discipline and energy conservation. “We operate on what we produce. You have to make yourself produce a surplus and manage your power loads to match the power available,” Groves said. “Most of the time we have excess power, which goes into water heaters.” There are abundant springs on the property, producing about 10 gallons per minute. “We don’t even use all that,” he said. The winery operates on gravity feed, and the fresh water comes out at about 55°F, which circulates through cooling jackets on the outdoor fermentation tanks.
Grapes and business thrive
At about 2,700 feet in elevation, Alpen is one of California’s higher vineyards, and this week already has a couple of inches of snow on the ground. Groves said he’s expecting a two-foot fall this weekend. It is an excellent location for vineyards, according to Groves, who toiled weekends developing the vineyard for 20-some years while working for Sonoma County’s Korbel and Napa County’s Round Hill. Although the air temperature may drop to 15°F, his vines are almost always blanketed by snow, which keeps them at a healthful 32°F. Unfortunately, warm November temperatures don’t allow him to produce ice wine: Grapes rot and fall before they freeze. On the other hand, mildew problems are virtually nonexistent, and he sprays only twice per year, vs. as many as eight times annually in a typical Napa Valley vineyard. Although the vineyards are not certified sustainable, organic or Biodynamic, Groves is an advocate of minimal interference in the vineyard. He grows Riesling, Chardonnay, Merlot and Gewürztraminer on about 16 acres, selling about 20% DTC and the majority at Northern California retailers, including Costco and Safeway, with distribution as far south as Santa Cruz.
With house boating and fishing popular summer recreation on Trinity Lake, Groves has been known to pick up float-in tasters at the nearest dock. “One lady had never ridden in the back of a pick-up truck before,” he recalled. “It was like she was on safari.”
“You go to school, learn to make a business plan, and all’s good until the first change in plan,” Groves said. His business is profit able, in fact, “The only place I’ve ever made money.
“Water is the key, but to be off the grid, you have to use less energy. Most people don’t know how to do that. We’re 50 years behind the times, and 50 years ahead.” SHARE » | 农业 | 5,832 |
2013 dairy exports expected to break record
USDEC projects another record-breaking year for dairy exports in 2013 and credits manufactuerers' commitment to make the U.S. a reliable global supplier and efforts by industry organizations to expand trade.
Carol Ryan DumasCapital Press
Published on January 13, 2014 11:34AM
Last changed on January 14, 2014 8:51AM
Carol Ryan Dumas/Capital Press
Cows enjoy fresh straw in a corral at Bokma dairy in Twin Falls. U.S. Dairy Export Council reported Jan. 8 that exports in the first 11 months of 2013 were valued at $6.1 billion and were on pace to approach $6.7 billion for all of 2013.
Buy this photo The 2013 year-end tally on U.S. dairy exports won’t be known until next month, but given the fact that exports through November were 17 percent higher than all of 2012, it’s destined to be another record-breaking year.U.S. Dairy Export Council reported Jan. 8 that exports in the first 11 months of 2013 were valued at $6.1 billion and were on pace to approach $6.7 billion for all of 2013. That compares with exports worth $5.2 billion in 2012.Exports of nonfat dry milk/skim milk powder, cheese, high-value whey protein concentrates and isolate, lactose, and fluid milk were all on pace for record highs in 2013. On a volume, 2013 is on track to be the fourth-consecutive record year and the ninth record year in the last 10 years, USDEC reported.Strong global demand, domestic supply shortages in China and Russia and milk production shortages for major exporter New Zealand resulted in tight global dairy supplies in 2013, and U.S. prices were competitive with those of other exporting countries.That helped boost exports in 2013 by a projected 30.4 percent in value and 17.5 percent in volume over 2012, representing 15.5 percent of U.S. milk production.But the real highlights of the year lie behind the numbers, USDEC President Tom Suber said in a press release.“The past year marked a major step in U.S. Dairy export expansion, not only because of the value and volume gains but because of the activities of U.S. suppliers and industry organizations to lay the groundwork for future growth,” he stated.Last year’s success is the result of long-term investment by U.S. suppliers as they demonstrated greater commitment to meeting the needs of global buyers. Those efforts were bolstered by years of USDEC programs designed to reduce exporters’ risk in entering and remaining in overseas markets, USDEC reports.U.S. manufacturers ramped up production of skim milk powder, leading to record exports of milk powder. Multiple U.S. manufacturers also began producing whole milk powder for export, and new shipments of ultra-high temperature shelf-stable milk to China tapped some of that country’s growing demand for the product.The outstanding performance of dairy exports in 2013 was the result of manufacturers’ commitment to global markets by making the right products with the right specifications and expanding their product portfolio, USDEC reports.“More than in previous years, we are seeing a broad acknowledgment of the critical role exports play in the health and growth of the U.S. dairy industry,” Suber stated.It took a while, but products are being made to higher international and ingredient specifications and new products are being produced, said Jerry Dryer, chief market analyst for Rice Dairy brokerage firm, in his Dairy and Food Market Analyst newsletter on Friday.“Kudos to USA dairy manufacturers,” he said, adding that Suber and his team at USDEC have “moved mountains” over the years“The U.S. Dairy Export Council and yours truly have been talking about this happening for almost 20 years. Watching it unfold has been a delight and there is a lot more on the horizon,” he said.Additional highlights of industry efforts in 2013 included:• USDEC marketing activities to drive demand and preference for U.S. dairy product through programs to bring buyers and sellers together, which helped increase sales and U.S. market presence.• USDEC assisting U.S. suppliers with compliance to new Chinese regulatory procedures as well as broader global efforts to clarify certification and inspection standards and labeling and product standards.• USDEC working with U.S. trade negotiators, who made substantial progress toward completing the Trans-Pacific Partnership to open major new markets to U.S. exports and reduce non-tariff trade barriers.• A checkoff-funded initiative for a voluntary, enhanced product traceability program to boost competitiveness in meeting the needs of global buyers and address ever-stricter U.S. food safety regulations. | 农业 | 4,611 |
Niman Ranch network grows 75 percent in five years
ALAMEDA, Calif. – Niman Ranch, has expanded its network of independently owned US farms and ranches from 400 independently owned farms five years ago to 700 today — a 75 percent increase. The expansion includes the addition of its cage-free egg program in 2010, which includes 26 egg farmers, and its East Coast hog program, in November 2011, which partnered with 20 new farms in Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia and New York. The company works with family farmers and ranchers in more than 26 states who have agreed to raise livestock according to specific sustainable and humane protocols developed under the direction of Temple Grandin, Ph.D., animal handling expert, Colorado State Univ. professor and long-tome MEAT&POULTRY columnist. All farmers and ranchers within the network are paid a premium to adhere to the rigorous protocols, the company said. “In 1972, the term ‘sustainability’ wasn’t making headlines, yet Niman Ranch founded a company based on the belief that raising livestock according to traditional agriculture practices was better for the land, the animals and the farmers,” said Jeff Tripician, chief marketing officer. With increased demand for its meats that are never treated with hormones or antibiotics — Niman Ranch relies on its partnerships with these family farmers to bring the highest quality beef, pork and lamb to best-in-class food service and specialty retail locations in the US. “The Niman Ranch farmers’ commitment to sustainability is one of the reasons I’m confident serving Niman Ranch meats to my guests,” said Joseph Kudrack, assistant executive chef at Red Rock Casino Resort and Spa. Niman Ranch’s fresh, smoked and prepared meats are available at restaurants and select grocery stores nationwide. | 农业 | 1,797 |
Equipment [1] Higher carbon prices could spur adoption of methane digesters
A market price for carbon emission reductions would allow livestock producers with methane digesters to earn additional revenue from trapping and burning methane from manure.
Greater income from reducing methane emissions could substantially increase the number of livestock producers who would find it profitable to install methane digesters.
Large-scale hog and dairy operations with lagoon manure management systems are likely to benefit most from a higher carbon price, which could have longrun structural implications for the livestock sector. Nigel Key, Stacy Sneeringer: Amber Waves, USDA | Feb 16, 2011
Methane digesters that collect and burn methane from manure can provide numerous benefits to livestock producers and the environment. Still, digesters have not been adopted widely, mainly because the costs of constructing and maintaining these systems have exceeded the benefits accruing to operators. Currently, there are 157 methane digesters operating in the U.S., of which 126 are on dairies and 24 are on hog operations.
Methane is a potent greenhouse gas (GHG), and burning 1 ton of methane is equivalent to eliminating about 24 tons of carbon dioxide. There are a number of policies that could encourage farmers to use a digester to reduce methane emissions, either by providing financial inducements for those who install a digester or by penalizing those who do not.
A carbon offset market is one mechanism currently used for valuing methane emissions reductions. An offset market allows livestock producers who reduce methane emissions to sell these reductions, or “carbon offsets,” to other greenhouse gas emitters who face emissions caps or who voluntarily wish to offset their own emissions. Currently, only a few U.S. livestock operators sell offsets in regional or voluntary carbon offset markets. This is partly because the carbon prices in these markets have been low. However, future efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions could result in substantially higher carbon prices.
If farmers could earn a higher price for their methane emissions reductions, then digesters could become profitable on many more operations. However, there is likely to be wide variation in the scale, location, and characteristics of the operations that would benefit. The main beneficiaries would be producers whose operations emit substantial quantities of methane—particularly, dairy and hog operations with lagoon or pit manure storage facilities. Among these, larger scale operations will likely profit more from higher carbon prices because it is generally more cost effective to construct and operate larger digesters than smaller ones. Consequently, in the long run, valuing emissions reductions could encourage further concentration in the dairy and swine industries unless ways are found to promote the adoption of digesters on small-scale operations.
Digester profitability and adoption
Methane digesters, also known as “anaerobic digesters,” “biodigesters,” or “biogas recovery systems,” can be used to capture and burn methane from lagoon or pit-type manure storage facilities. With lagoons (earthen storage ponds), covers are installed to capture the methane. With pit systems (concrete or metal tanks located above or below ground), manure can be heated to encourage methane production. Digesters collect manure, optimize it for the production of methane by adjusting temperature and water content, capture the biogas, and burn it for heat or electricity generation. Burning methane reduces its global warming potential, which corresponds to a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions that could be marketed as a carbon offset.
Several factors influence the profitability of methane digesters and consequently determine which types of producers are likely to adopt the technology. These factors include an operation’s manure management method, startup and ongoing costs of a digester, buying and selling price of electricity, onfarm electricity expenditures, and carbon offset price. Many of these factors vary with farm size and location.
Only operations that generate a significant quantity of methane are viable candidates for biogas recovery systems. When manure is kept in oxygen-free (anaerobic) conditions that exist in lagoons, ponds, tanks, or pits, it decomposes to produce a biogas containing about 60 percent methane. When manure is in oxygen-rich environments, such as when it is deposited on fields, it generally produces little methane. Many dairy and swine operations employ anaerobic manure management facilities. Dairy cattle and swine are each responsible for 43 percent of U.S. methane emissions from livestock manure. Other livestock sectors predominantly using aerobic manure management methods, including beef cattle, sheep, poultry, and horses, are collectively the source of only 13 percent of emissions.
Anaerobic manure management methods are generally more common on large-scale operations. For example, only 38 percent of dairy operations with fewer than 250 head use anaerobic manure management systems, compared with 56-73 percent of larger operations. Consequently, larger operations produce a disproportionate share of methane emissions; dairies with more than 2,500 head accounted for 19.7 percent of total emissions in 2005, though they only produced 13 percent of dairy output.
There is substantial variation across regions in manure management methods and, consequently, methane emissions. Dairies in the West and South are much more likely to have lagoon systems than those in the Midwest and Northeast. Dairies in the West produce 43 percent of all emissions from the dairy sector, reflecting that region’s large share of output and the prevalence of lagoon systems.
The costs of building, maintaining, and repairing manure storage facilities and electricity generators generally decline on a per head basis with the size of the operation, which makes digesters more cost effective for larger scale operations. In addition, there can be substantial transactions costs associated with selling electricity or certifying and marketing carbon offsets. Larger operations can spread these costs over a larger revenue base.
Digester profitability depends on the value of the electricity generated, which varies by farm size (electricity use per head declines, on average, as herd size increases) and by region (electricity is most expensive in the Northeast and least expensive in the West). In most States, operations that generate more electricity than they use can sell their surplus electricity to the grid. However, the selling price of electricity varies widely and depends, in part, on whether local utilities are required to purchase renewable energy. Renewable energy mandates can substantially raise the selling price for digester-generated electricity and make adopting a digester more profitable. Whether an operation has surplus electricity depends on its generating capacity relative to its demand. On average, dairies in the West and South use substantially less electricity per head than farms in the Midwest or Northeast, and so have more electricity to sell.
Carbon revenues would accrue to Western dairies
ERS researchers used data from USDA’s Agricultural Resource Management Survey (ARMS) and a model of digester profitability to estimate the number, size, and location of dairy and hog operations that might adopt a methane digester at different carbon offset prices. ARMS is conducted by ERS and USDA’s National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS). The researchers also estimated the distribution of the discounted stream of revenues over the life of the digester from emission reductions, the value of electricity generated, and total profits.
Research results indicate that even with moderate carbon offset prices, offset sales could substantially increase revenues for farms with digesters. At $13 per ton for carbon, the revenues from offset sales for dairies would exceed the value of digester-generated electricity by almost 30 percent. The revenues from digesters would accrue mainly to large-scale operations. Over 15 years, digesters would be worth $419 million to dairy operations with at least 2,500 head, or about 46 percent of the total value of dairy digesters.
Profits per farm and per head increase with farm size, which could give larger operations a substantial competitive advantage. At $13 per ton, it would not be profitable for operations with fewer than 250 head to adopt a digester. Regionally, dairies in the West would receive almost 60 percent of total digester profits, reflecting the prevalence of large-scale dairies in the region.
As carbon offset prices increase, more small-scale operations would find it profitable to adopt a digester. When there is no offset market (a price of zero), only operations with at least 1,000 head earn profits from operating a digester. However, if the offset price increases to $13 per ton, 15 percent of farms with 250-499 head and 45 percent of farms with 500-999 head would earn profits. If the price increases to $26 per ton, 3 percent of farms with fewer than 250 head and 39 percent of farms with 250-499 head would find it profitable to adopt a digester.
The substantial share of dairy operations without anaerobic manure management systems likely could not sell carbon offsets even if they were to install digesters. Farms that replace an aerobic manure management system (such as depositing manure on fields) with a pit or lagoon system would actually increase methane emissions. Even if the same farms then added digesters and reduced emissions to prior levels, these reductions likely would not qualify as carbon offsets. To be eligible as carbon offsets, emissions reductions usually must be “additional” to “business as usual”; as the level of emissions with aerobic manure management would be about the same as with anaerobic manure management plus a digester, there would be no additional reductions in methane emissions.
Higher offset prices would increase the profits that the livestock sector could earn from digesters. Over 15 years, the value of digesters to dairies is about $11 million with no offset market, about $908 million with a carbon price of $13 per ton, and $2.6 billion with a price of $26 per ton. Digester profits accrue mostly to large farms regardless of the carbon price. However, higher prices increase the number of smaller farms that could benefit from an offset program, which causes the distribution of benefits to become somewhat less skewed toward the largest operations. Dairies with at least 2,500 head earn 94 percent of digester profits with no offset market, compared with 48 percent at a price of $13 and 37 percent at a price of $26.
Policies and facility sharing
Depending on the price of carbon, the additional income from offset sales could substantially increase the number of livestock producers who would find it profitable to install methane digesters. In recent decades, the scale of production in the dairy and hog sectors has increased dramatically. Dairies with at least 1,000 head now produce almost a third of output, despite accounting for only about 2 percent of all operations. The additional profits that large farms could earn from digesters could enhance existing economies of scale in dairy and hog production and promote further consolidation of production over time.
One way for smaller scale livestock operations to achieve a more efficient scale is by supplementing manure with food waste from nearby crop or meat processing facilities, breweries, bakeries, and restaurants. When mixed with manure, food waste can provide an efficient feedstock for biogas production, and as an added incentive, livestock operators could collect waste disposal fees from the food facilities. However, the availability and suitability of food waste for use in methane digesters may restrict the feasibility of such mixtures to certain locations.
A centralized digester is another way that smaller scale operations could take advantage of a more efficient digester size. With several nearby farms using a single large digester, participating operations could share construction and maintenance costs; increase their leverage to negotiate electricity sales; improve access to financing, tax credits, or grants; and allow a manager to develop specialized skills in digester maintenance and operations. The main disadvantage to centralized digesters is the additional cost of transporting manure to and from the central facility.
If carbon offset prices are sufficiently high, a lower cost biogas system that flares methane rather than uses it to generate electricity may become profitable. This approach removes electricity generation from the biogas system, which eliminates the costs of the generator, electrical connections, and much of the maintenance. The lower cost biogas system might be economically viable for smaller scale operations that would find it difficult to finance or maintain an electricity generator. This option has the greatest potential for operations with lagoons, since lagoon covers can be installed relatively inexpensively, and offers other benefits to producers, such as reducing odor and increasing lagoon storage capacity by excluding rainwater.
Policies that raise returns to or lower costs of digesters can provide incentives for smaller scale operations to adopt the technology. Policies could include grants, such as USDA’s Rural Energy for America Program Grants, and incentive payments, such as the U.S. Department of Energy’s Renewable Energy Production Incentive. Other policy options include tax credits, such as the Renewable Electricity Production Tax Credit, accelerated depreciation (allowing construction costs to be written off faster for tax purposes), property and sales tax exemptions (usually at the state level), and other regulations, such as renewable energy mandates that raise the effective price of electricity sold to the grid. Many of these policies can be targeted toward smaller scale operations.
Source URL: http://www.westernfarmpress.com/equipment/higher-carbon-prices-could-spur-adoption-methane-digesters | 农业 | 14,244 |
Food Co-ops and the Road to Organic Valley: Part 1
By Dave Gutknecht Endcap Articles
PDF download of article: Rootstock_1.pdf
[First published 2008 in Organic Valley's Rootstock.]
Click here for Part 2.
Twenty years ago, organic agriculture was a glimmer of light in a declining farm economy. From the beginning, many of the retailers and distributors of organic products from CROPP Cooperative and other producers were themselves cooperatives. Today, millions of households recognize both elements of organic and cooperative. Yet these two movements only partially overlap.
The confluence of cooperative and organic movements continues to be central to building a better food economy. A cooperative, owned and patronized by its members, models business relationships that are more fair and democratic and also more consistent with stewarding of natural resources and human communities. A co-op business works on behalf of its member owners. But the best co-ops also recognize a triple bottom-line responsibility: to the owners of the business, to the community in which it operates, and to the environment that sustains it.
Food cooperatives made possible the early success in bringing organics to the public. When CROPP was launched twenty years ago, natural food co-ops (as they often are known) were ten to fifteen years old. Such food co-ops had been launched all across the country, and in most regions these stores and distributors pioneered in finding and supporting organics.
Food co-ops founded in the 1970s had in turn been preceded by a generation of consumer co-ops begun in the 1930s and 1940s. During those depression and war years and afterward, most farmers left the land, and most shoppers left the local store for the supermarket. The grocery co-ops of that earlier generation had joined or succumbed to the post-war growth of supermarkets, except for dwindling numbers of small town co-op stores scattered from New England to the Northwest.
The voice of inexperience
The new generation of cooperatives that planted and cultivated organics arose from discontent with the mainstream food supply and a cultural surge of desire and self-determination. The 1960s – which in some ways lasted until about 1975 – spawned a thousand efforts to improve a society that was sick with war-making, industrial and farm chemicals, and heedless consumption. Co-ops became a way to rebuild a cleaner and more localized food supply.
The new food co-ops, built more on enthusiasm than on expertise, learned through many trials and errors how to operate community-based businesses. There were several hundred storefront co-ops by the late 1970s, along with several thousand co-op buying clubs – informal and usually small – purchasing from distributors that had the right kind of food and that would accept co-op methods and orders. Food co-ops everywhere sought out farmers and local producers and developed new distribution networks. On delivery day, typically, volunteers helped sort the goods at the store or, for buying clubs, in a garage or parking lot or church basement. Liberal arts majors biked to the co-op and became marketers and store managers. Car mechanics learned compressor maintenance and small-scale distribution logistics. Young people who didn’t know their assets from a hole in the ground learned how to read balance sheets and how a board of directors functions.
At least half of these new co-ops survived an initial decade of business ups and downs that were largely self-created. Some three hundred surviving co-ops thrived and spread the news about organics and wholesome food like prairie fire. They built a foundation of farmer/distributor/public networks that would, in the next decade, make organics the fastest growing kid on the block. Like Organic Valley of today, the food co-op movement is a social experiment disguised as a business. Gradually it has garnered essential knowledge about customer service and financial management. It has persuaded more and more people to subscribe to its values and vision of a better food economy, one that is both organic and cooperatively owned.
Does co-op mean organic?
Many food co-op founders had read critiques of industrial agriculture, by figures such as Robert Rodale and Rachel Carson, as well as guides to finding and preparing more wholesome foods, such as Francis Moore Lappe. Food co-op leaders tended to take seriously the indicators and reports on the consequences of ever-increasing consumption of resources – warnings that were largely ignored until today, thirty years later.
Concerned with wholistic health, some of the new co-ops were unwilling to carry meat, illustrating their environmental and ethical concerns but also revealing some limits to their understanding of farming. Such cultural choices also reinforced widespread confusion about just what a co-op is. What constitutes a cooperative? It is an enterprise in which responsibilities and risks as well as benefits are shared democratically. Its purpose is to meet member needs, with benefits accruing to each member in proportion to use of the co-op. Modern cooperatives have a history dating to the mid-18th century and have succeeded in sectors as diverse as consumer goods, credit unions and banking, agricultural processing and marketing, housing, manufacturing, childcare, burial societies, and more. Cooperatives internationally share a common set of seven principles, and organized cooperation is a global movement of huge impact in most parts of the world.
A deeper reading about agriculture would have brought food co-op activists to Sir Albert Howard (Agricultural Testament, 1940) and his first rule of what he called farming in nature’s image: “Mother Nature always farms with livestock.” But while animals living on pasture and fertilizing the soil are essential to a sustainable farm cycle, food co-op founders were appalled at conventional feedlot operations in which animals were crowded and confined while soil and water were polluted. They gradually found sources where grazing animals lived primarily on grasses, where the chickens were not caged and the milk was more wholesome. Food co-ops sought and nurtured productive relations with both local and distant family farms. Fresh and organic were returning to the American diet, and cleaner meat and dairy found its way into most food co-ops.
Actually, some new generation food co-ops always carried a range of both conventional and organic groceries, depending on what the co-op’s members and community would purchase. Many others mistakenly thought that “food co-op” and “natural/organic” were synonymous, provoking repeated arguments and growth lessons when some members wanted to expand the co-op with more offerings for members of the community.
The food co-op movement’s journey through its first couple decades was not easy, given its experimental side and its scarcity of capital and professional experience for operating businesses. Nevertheless, through sweat and dedication along with improved professional skills, food co-ops maintained a corner on the small but growing market for organic and “natural” foods in many cities across the country. The products carried commonly reflected the desire of co-op founders and members for cleaner foods sold in bulk. They wanted flour and eggs, but they also wanted granola and bulk grains and beans, and they tended to avoid mainstream groceries that were overly processed and nutritionally depleted, excessively packaged, and frequently contaminated by industrial additives and methods. Where’s the money?
Besides demonstrating and nurturing the demand for organics, food co-ops illustrated self-reliant community improvement. They showed that ordinary people with ordinary powers can organize to meet their own needs by launching successful enterprise based on shared investment and shared benefits. This, of course, is the same business model under which CROPP Cooperative is organized. The farmer members of CROPP invest significantly in their cooperative and receive substantial returns. But in many consumer cooperatives, the capital required of each member is very low, and the level of earnings distributed to members also can be small. The money tends to stay in the co-op – but may be scarce – since the overriding purpose is to serve member needs.
Food co-ops, especially in early years, typically are grassroots efforts with high levels of member participation in the co-ops but minimal owner capital. In addition, often there is little recognition within the co-op of the need for earnings that make possible improvement of the cooperative’s services and employment opportunities. Since the co-op is organized primarily for providing services rather than for producing earnings or a return on investment, many members take this to mean that the co-op should not be making a profit!
This common undercapitalized side of food co-ops, along with the generally low margins in the grocery business, has tended to restrain growth in co-op members and services. It is key to why co-ops in the business of grocery distribution – where economies of scale are much more important than for a specialty retail – gradually merged with other co-ops and then eventually were bought by larger, private distributors. As organics began to expand rapidly, grocery store owners with deeper pockets began to capture more of organic sales – a niche that for many years most observers thought was a “fad” and found only at those hippie food co-ops. But by the late 1980s, supported by a few key allies in national and regional cooperatives, food co-ops had laid the foundation for a cleaner and more sustainable food economy.
Needless to say, although retail co-op sales are now over $1 billion a year, this movement to transform our food supply has a long way to go.
Cooperative allies
When the Organic Valley brand began, it had assured support in the network of consumer food co-ops. Food co-ops through the Midwest, and then throughout the country, have welcomed and promoted the Organic Valley line for its quality and the values inherent in both its organic methods and its cooperative structure.
When private industry and its allies in the USDA have attempted to dilute or distort the original intent of organic standards and legislation, food co-ops have rallied hundreds of thousands of members and shoppers to protest these moves. Today, there are many allies in the field of organics, and organic opportunities are as large as our imagination and our world. But with diminished resources, we also face unprecedented challenges to organic production and to sustainable communities.
The cooperative way of doing business, democratic and based in community, is much misunderstood. But such a structure, providing services to member owners who share both responsibilities and earnings, has demonstrated its value many times over. In a second part to this article, I’ll review what has changed forever the environment in which food co-ops and Organic Valley grew up. Prospects for cooperatives are both enhanced and threatened by an environment of resource declines and a crisis in the global food economy. Those prospects and threats are profound and reach into every co-op business and its member households.
Log in to post comments Member Login | 农业 | 11,318 |
Print Email Font ResizeAgave plant to produce 1 and only bloom, then dieMike Householder Associated PressPosted:
07/03/2014 12:58:01 PM MDTClick photo to enlargeIn this June 18, 2014 photo provided by the University of Michigan Matthaei Botanical Gardens, flower buds are ready to bloom on an American agave plant at the University of Michigan's Matthaei Botanical Gardens and Nichols Arboretum in Ann Arbor, Mich. The 80-year-old American agave plant that will flower once then die is close to doing the former. Housed at the University of the Michigan since 1934, the plant has been growing so rapidly since the spring that it now stands over 27 feet—too tall for the conservatory, which removed a pane of glass to make room. (AP Photo/University of Michigan Matthaei Botanical Gardens)«12»ANN ARBOR, Mich. (AP) — An 80-year-old American agave plant that will flower once then die is about to do the former. Probably. Housed at the University of the Michigan since 1934, the plant has grown so rapidly since the spring that at more than 27 feet it is now too tall for the Ann Arbor conservatory, which has had to remove a pane of glass to accommodate it. Just this week, one of the asparagus cousin's flower buds took on an orange-like blush. Could that mean the buds are ready to finally bloom? "We've been guessing and speculating about when this particular agave is going to bloom for weeks and have been proven wrong every time," said Joe Mooney, spokesman for Matthaei Botanical Gardens and Nichols Arboretum. The agave began to shoot upward in April, at which point a volunteer pointed out a flower stalk to Matthaei horticulture manager Mike Palmer. "And I went, 'Whaaat?'" Palmer said. Since then, it has grown as much as 6 inches a day and forced workers to remove the glass to make room for its rapid ascent. Palmer called the pre-branching version of the plant "a giant asparagus on steroids." The variegated American agave (Agave americana) was collected in Mexico by famed ethno-botanist Alfred Whiting, who then was a University of Michigan graduate student. Known as the century plant because it blooms infrequently, it is native to Mexico and the American Southwest and typically lives 10 to 25 years in the wild before blooming a single time then dying.Advertisement
It's a mystery why this particular agave stuck around for eight decades, Palmer said. "We don't know why it waited so long," he said. While many know agave as the source of tequila, that particular beverage is made from the tequila agave (Agave tequilana). In areas of Mexico where tequila is produced, the American agave is used to make a similar alcoholic drink called mezcal. The American agave's fibers also can be gathered from within the leaves and used for making rope or twine. Once the flower blooms it will take many months before the plant dies. But in the plant's final throes, it is expected to produce "pups," or genetic clones that look the same as the parent plant, from which Matthaei officials can propagate the species. "If we can get even one pup, we'll plant it," Mooney said. ——— Online: Matthaei Botanical Gardens' agave page: http://bit.ly/1qT8Cp3Print Email Font ResizeReturn to Top RELATEDExercising for healthy bonesStudies done over the past 30 years have shown that regular weight-bearing exercise strengthens bones. | 农业 | 3,337 |
Florida SART: Florida State Agricultural Response Team Vol. 7, No. 5, May 2011 Printer-Friendly PDF Version
Highlights: SART Advisory Board More from the SART 2011 Planning Meeting
Updated Training Opportunities
UF CVM Horse Training Event Report
APHIS Looks for Volunteers for NAHERC
Florida's Nuclear Signature
Turkey Point
Alabama SART
Laura Bevan: Aid to Alabama
Hillsborough County's Bill Armstrong Retires
SFWMC Declares Water Shortage
A Good Samaritan – True/False
A Little Bit of SART History
About the SART Sentinel Advisory Board Meeting Notes
The Florida SART Advisory Board met on April 6 in the Board Room of the Florida Farm Bureau in Gainesville. Minutes of that meeting are posted on line now and can be accessed through the SART web site at http://www.flsart.org/SART/login.
Highlights of the Advisory Board meeting were:
Review of the SART Planning Meeting
State Hurricane Exercise
Animal/Agricultural Training Exercise
New Madrid Seismic Zone National Exercise
Miami Airport Animal Import Center Exercise
Large Animal Rescue Training/Exercise
New SART Training Courses
Governor’s Hurricane Conference
Regional SART Planning Meetings
Florida Vet Corps
More from the 2011 Planning Meeting
“AVMA VMAT is pleased to have a Memorandum of Understanding with the state of Florida and I appreciated the opportunity to represent the VMAT program at and participate in the Florida SART Planning Meeting.
“As a state which has the opportunity to practice their animal emergency response plans perhaps more often than desired, Florida continues to set a very high standard in establishing and exercising animal emergency preparedness and response plans.”
Heather Case, DVM, MPH, Dipl. ACVPM
Director, Scientific Activities Division
Coordinator, Emergency Preparedness and Response
American Veterinary Medical Association
Every great meeting begins with a smooth entry through registration.Dr.J. Alice Agasan, Bureau Chief, Bureau of Diagnostic Laboratories speaks with FDACS' James Maxwell, DVM, Resident Director Florida Animal Disease Diagnostic Laboratories Live Oak.
“We have lots of large animals,” says Cecilia Patella of the Hernando Sheriff’s Department, “but no financing to take care of them and we don’t quite know what to do with exotic animals in an emergency.”
Dr. Joe Schaefer, IFAS, is South District Extension Director, Belle Glade.
John Court (right) and Bill Jeter, both of FDACS, discuss agriculture issues.
Dr. Bill Shelton, DVM, UF College of Veterinary Medicine shows off his tee-shirt.
"Our biggest problem now is accomplishing the mission of caring for animals (and agriculture) in the face of staffing cuts and budget restraints," says Paul Studivant, St. Johns County Animal Control.
Jose Tezanos represented Monroe County Emergency Management, Marathon, FL. Cecilia Patella works with the Hernando Sheriff's Dept. in Brooksville.
Patrick Hogue , IFAS, Livestock Agent, Okeechobee County Extension Service
Dr. Jennifer Chatfield, DVM, notes that TRIAGE means separating and selecting. "In an emergency, triage is not only based on the condition of the patient," she says, "it also depends on available resources. Provide the greatest good for the greatest number is the rule and euthanasia is an option. It has to be."
Major Robert Sindler, US Army ReserveDart Members (l-r): McLane Evans (Bay Area), Sheri Evans (Sumter) and Linda Graves (Sumter). Pam Browning , Franklin County
NOTE: There are plenty of additional photos from the 2011 SART Planning Meeting in Altamonte Springs posted at http://www.flsart.org/photogallery.htm.
2011 Agroterrorism Preparedness Classes
FDACS’ Office of Agricultural Emergency Preparedness collaborates with several training partners to offer DHS-certified courses in Florida. All courses are open to United States citizens and are free of charge through DHS grant funding.
Training partners include the Western Institute of Food Safety and Security at the University of California-Davis (WIFSS), the Center for Agriculture and Food Safety and Preparedness at the University of Tennessee-College of Veterinary Medicine, the University of Florida-Institute for Food and Agricultural Sciences, and the Regional Domestic Security Task Forces. WIFSS-PRESENTED COURSES
To register for one of the AWR courses or for more information: http://wifss.ucdavis.edu/agroterrorism/classes/classesbydate.php.
AWR-151
Understanding the Dangers of Agroterrorism
A ½-day introductory course on the topic of agroterrorism, aimed at raising awareness of the need to identify and defend against pathogens, chemical and biological contaminants, and other hazards that affect food safety. The course stresses the importance of responding to incidents of intentional contamination as well as natural disasters using the “all hazards” approach. This training has been approved for 3.5 CEUs for Certified Environmental Health Professionals.
Principles of Frontline Response to Agroterrorism
and Food Systems’ Disasters
A 1-day course focusing on how an effective frontline emergency response can reduce or mitigate the effects of an agricultural emergency, an act of agroterrorism or other food system disaster. Frontline agricultural and public safety response teams, including personnel from the county, regional, state and federal agencies, receive a comprehensive program formed around the principles of the Incident Command System (ICS) and the concept of Unified Command. This training has been approved for 5.0 CEUs for Certified Environmental Health Professionals.
Ft. Myers
Lee County Port Authority Training Facility, 15924 Air Cargo Lane
Sarasota County Govt. Administration Center EOC, 6th Floor 1660 Ringling Blvd.
Principles of Planning and Implementing Recovery
A 1-day course focusing on the fundamental framework for orchestrating the recovery from an incident of agroterrorism. The course covers critical factors for success in a community recovery effort: identification of the components of a recovery plan targeted at minimizing the economic impact to the community and its citizens, and the identification of community resources and assets available for building partnerships. This training has been approved for 6.0 CEUs for Certified Environmental Health Professionals.
Hillsborough County Extension Office, 5339 S County Road 579 Thursday, June 9
Seminole County EOC, Dept. of Public Safety, 150 Bush Blvd., UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE-PRESENTED COURSES
To register for one of the MGT courses or for more information: http://flsart.org/mgtcourses/.
MGT 337
Agriculture & Food Vulnerability Assessment
(Utilizing the Carver + Shock method)
A 1 ½ day course (Day 1 from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. with one hour for lunch and Day 2 from 8:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.) to assist food regulation, law enforcement, and industry personnel in the prevention and deterrence of criminal acts that target the food industry. Registration through John Burkette, FDACS Office of Agricultural Emergency Preparedness: (850) 245-1387 [email protected] or go to http://flsart.org/mgtcourses/ for information and links to online registration. Miami: At the FDLE facility, 1030 NW 111th Ave.
Tuesday-Wednesday, May 10-11
Sanford: Seminole County Sheriff’s Office, 150 Bush Blvd.
Sharing Information and Intelligence
Related to Food Importation and Transportation
A 1-day course (8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. with one hour for lunch) to prepare participants to utilize and implement effective sharing of information and intelligence to enhance food safety and security related to food importation and transportation. This course is targeted for law enforcement, state Fusion Center personnel, emergency managers and responders, extension, public health, food and agriculture professionals, the transportation industry and federal, state, local, tribal and regional officials. Registration through John Burkette, FDACS Office of Agricultural Emergency Preparedness: (850) 245-1387 [email protected] or go to http://flsart.org/mgtcourses/ for information and links to online registration.
Polk State College, 999 Ave. H NE, Student Center WST 126.
At the FDLE facility, 921 N Davis Street, Bldg. E.
Remember when?
Quotes from 2008 AVMA Disaster Medicine Symposium“The problems and plans we are working with are not just animal issues. They’re people issues, too. Animal issues compound human emergencies.”
Kevin Dennison, DVM
Colorado Veterinary Medical Association
“To have an effective response, you have to work within the system. To go out on your own, freelancing, doesn’t work.”
Scott Mason, DVM
Coordinator Oklahoma Animal Response Team [top]
UF College of Veterinary Medicine Training – May 1
“This was a multi-agency training and workshop weekend similar to what the UF College of Veterinary Medicine has helped organize over the past few years,” says John Haven, Director of the College. “This year we focused on horses. In the recent past, as a result of the Pets Act*, SART has spent a lot of time and energy focused on companion animal issues; however it recognized a need to get back to its agricultural roots and support developing its all-animal response needs.”
Haven says Sunday morning May 1 was a skills lab, taught by the outstanding IFAS Horse Teaching Unit (HTU) staff, led by Joel McQuagge. Staff instructed in basic horse handling skills and techniques. The afternoon taught horse sheltering and involved “going out and capturing horses” that needed rescue in their paddocks followed by triage, decontamination, shelter intake, medical evaluation and sheltering.
Dr. Kendra Stauffer (in PPG-left, and introducing self to horses-right) USDA Area Emergency Coordinator for Florida. Above, McLane Evans, Bay Area DART, leads a horse to decon.
The event involved more than 70 participants from many agencies – including FDACS, USDA, Vet Med VETS team (faculty, staff and students), Vet Corps reserve members, various DART teams, SARC, ASPCA, and etc. “For two-thirds of participants, this was their first time really working with horses, so this was a great first step in helping the NGO partners expand capabilities beyond companion animals,” Haven noted. “HTU instructors provided extremely gentle horses and that helped make the event safe and successful, and the UF’s HTU is an incredible facility to train in. Dr Kendra Stauffer from USDA provided PPE for the decontamination portion and demonstrated the wearing of the equipment.”
At left, Dr. Cynda Crawford of UF's College of Veterinary Medicine discusses the medical plan with CVM faculty, students and Vet Corps team members. At right, Blancy Torres , halters a horse.
The principal teaching events took place on May 1, but many people arrived the night before and camped on site. Haven says camping has been part of the deployment practice tradition for Florida training events, and it is a great time to build relationships between responders. Steps in the large animal decontamination process. "We have a deficit in horse skills," says John Haven, Director of the CVM, "and this could be a problem for SART. This class at UF's Horse Teaching Unit led by Joel McQuaggie is a great step toward fixing that situation."
In the fall of 2006, Congress passed H.R. 3858, the Pets Evacuation and Transportation Standards Act of 2006 (PETS Act). On Friday, October 6, 2006, President George W. Bush signed the PETS Act into law.
Photos courtesy John Haven
National Animal Health Emergency Response Corps
Membership Exceeds 1,400
Veterinary professors assisted by students monitor the health of sea turtles at the University of Florida College of Veterinary Medicine during the massive 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil spill. (Rick Sapp photo)
The recent massive foot-and-mouth disease outbreak in South Korea highlights the need for trained responders. APHIS’ National Animal Health Emergency Response Corps (NAHERC) has more than 1,400 volunteers – 618 veterinarians and 853 animal health technicians – who can help meet critical staffing needs in the event of a serious foreign animal disease (FAD) outbreak or natural disaster.
APHIS established NAHERC in 2001 to respond to FAD outbreaks and other disasters that affect livestock, poultry, companion animals and wildlife. Volunteers are spread throughout the nation (see map) and can be quickly mobilized to assist with activities such as disease sampling and surveillance, program support, animal care and mass evacuation. In addition to veterinarians and animal health technicians, college students are also eligible. NAHERC volunteers become temporary federal employees who are paid for their service. Tours of duty generally last 21 to 30 days.
To learn more about NAHERC and how to apply, please visit http://www.aphis.usda.gov/animal_health/emergency_management/naherc.shtml or contact NAHERC’s Coordinator Tom Cunningham at (301) 734-4933 or by email at [email protected].
Florida's Nuclear Signature Following the disaster in Japan where an earthquake followed by a tsunami wrecked three reactor units at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, many people have been wondering if something similar could happen in Florida. At present the Sunshine State has three operating nuclear power plants:
Crystal River (Emergency Management is located in the Sheriff’s Office in Lecanto, Citrus County and online at http://www.sheriffcitrus.org/EM/EOC.html)
The $1.5 billion Crystal River Energy Complex began operation in March 1977. The plant produces 860 megawatts of electricity, covers 4,700 acres and is cooled by water from the Gulf of Mexico. It is located 35 miles southwest of Ocala, in Citrus County.
In December, 2008 North Carolina’s Progress Energy applied to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for a 20-year operating license extension. The current license expires in 2016.
Having a nuclear plant in our community makes our planning more difficult because we may be dealing with anything from sheltering pets during a major event in which there is mandatory evacuation to decontaminating household pets in an effort to save their lives.
There is also the potential that our food source animals could be affected. Citrus County is the home of M&B Dairies, a huge milking and packaging operation. If these animals were affected there would be huge concerns, for example, on how to dispose of that number of carcasses.
Pattie Amon, Operations Manager Community & Recreational Programs / Animal Services Inverness, FL St. Lucie (Emergency Management is located in the Public Safety & Communications Office in Ft. Pierce, St. Lucie County and online at http://co.st-lucie.fl.us/eoc/)
Owned by Florida Power & Light the $4.6 billion St. Lucie power plant is located on a 1,130-acre site on narrow Hutchinson Island, across the Indian River from the mainland and about eight miles southeast of Ft. Pierce. It employs about 800 people, produces 1,678 megawatts of electricity and is cooled by water drawn from the Atlantic Ocean.
St. Lucie was approved for a 20-year license extension in October 2003. The license for Unit 1 expires in 2036 and Unit 2 expires in 2043. FP&L has produced a booklet “Safety planning information for neighbors of FPL’s St. Lucie Nuclear Power Plant” http://co.st-lucie.fl.us/pdfs/FPL_Planning_Book.pdf. The booklet says an emergency at this plant is “unlikely.”
Turkey Point (The Department of Emergency Management of Miami Dade County is online at http://www.miamidade.gov/oem/.) Although the $1.0 billion Turkey Point facility has four electric generation units, only Units 3 and 4 are nuclear powered; Units 1 and 2 are fossil-fired. This complex employs about 800 people and is owned and operated by Florida Power & Light. It is located on a 3,300-acre site near Miami. The nuclear units produce 1,386 megawatts of electricity and are cooled by water from the Atlantic Ocean.
Turkey Point was approved for a 20-year license extension in June 2002. The license for Unit 3 expires in 2032. The license for Unit 4 expires in 2033.
CEMP Page 26 – Nuclear Power PlantThe Turkey Point Nuclear power plant is located in the southeastern portion of Miami-Dade County adjacent to Biscayne Bay and approximately 10 miles south of Cutler Ridge. Nine of the ten areas within the ten-mile Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) are inside Miami-Dade County. All of Miami-Dade County is within the 50-mile Emergency Planning Zone. The Florida Division of Emergency Management (DEM) has the overall responsibility for the coordination of any response to a nuclear power plant emergency by federal, state or local agencies. Miami-Dade County's immediate responses for protecting its residents in the event of a nuclear power plant emergency are contained in the Turkey Point Procedure which can be found in Volume III of the CEMP. (rev. June 2008)
Florida’s nuclear capacity is only seven percent of the state’s total electric generating capacity, placing nuclear fourth behind natural gas, petroleum and coal. Florida imports 11 percent of its electric power use.
Nuclear Updates
1. A new crack in Progress Energy’s Crystal River nuclear plant’s containment building has forced the utility company to again scrap plans to fire up the facility.
2. On July 30, 2008, Progress Energy applied to build two reactors at a Levy County site about 10 miles northeast of the Crystal River nuclear plant. There are no reactors currently located here. If construction is approved, the work would begin in 2016 or later.
3. On June 30, 2009, Florida Power & Light applied to build two additional reactors at Turkey Point.
Alabama – Disaster and Readiness Because Alabama was hammered so hard by the storm system that passed through the state in late April, you may have paid attention to the disasters affecting its agriculture and animals. Indeed, poultry-raising was hit very hard.
Alabama Dept. of Agriculture & Industries: Damage Report
Preliminary Totals*
Poultry Houses
Damaged = 514+
Destroyed = + 207
Bird Deaths = 2,858,800+
Livestock Deaths = 38 cows and 19 horses
* Report dated the afternoon of May 2nd. Numbers continue to rise.
The storms devastated Alabama's $2.4 billion poultry industry, leveling chicken houses, killing birds and knocking out power to feed mills and processing plants.Composting poultry.
Photo courtesy USDA-NRCS.
Alabama has a SART program (see http://alsart.org/default.aspx?sm=a_a) with a slightly different emphasis than that of Florida and yet the traditional SART focus on planning, communicating and training stands out:
“The Alabama State Agricultural Response Team (SART) is an interagency, coordinated effort dedicated to effectively communicating and planning for agriculturally-related emergencies and disasters that will occur within the State of Alabama. The team’s mission is to develop and implement procedures and train participants to facilitate a safe, environmentally sound and efficient response to agricultural emergencies on the county, regional, and state levels.” Brad Fields, DVM/MPH (currently deployed to Afghanistan as Officer in Command, 358th Medical Detachment, Veterinary Services), a Veterinary Medical Officer with the Dept. of Agriculture & Industries, is Director of Emergency Programs and head of the Alabama State Agricultural Response Team. As such, he and acting head Ben Mullins are tasked with:
development and implementation of agriculture emergency planning and response, emergency program guidance and oversight, oversight of the Homeland Security Grant Program, as well as funding streams from other agencies, and serves as the primary liaison between private and public agencies and the AL Dept of Agriculture for disaster response and recovery. An example of training opportunities in Alabama was a Foreign Animal Disease Full Scale Exercise on June 17, 2008. Many federal, state and local agencies, as well as stakeholder groups worked for more than three months to design the exercise which was a follow-up to a Foreign Animal Disease Tabletop Exercise in October, 2007. The purpose was to give participants an opportunity to evaluate “current response concepts, plans, and capabilities” in response to a foreign animal disease outbreak. The exercise focused on local emergency responder command and control, critical decisions, notifications and integration of state and federal assets necessary to save personal property, private industry, the economy and to protect public health and security. (Photos of this and other Alabama SART exercises and interests are available online at http://216.226.177.101/photo_gallery.aspx)
Laura Bevan – Aid to Alabama
Laura Bevan at a SART Advisory Board meeting.
May 4, Tuscaloosa, AL: On Wednesday April 27, a storm front that included 28 tornadoes – at least one of them a mile wide with devastating and sustained F4-class wind* in excess of 200 mph – killed at least 236 people in Alabama and caused hundreds of millions of dollars in damage. Disaster response teams from around the U.S. were called to help, several of them from Florida.
Florida SART’s Laura Bevan is assisting on the ground along with experienced volunteers from Sumter DART, Bay Area DART, several trained individuals from Miami-Dade Animal Control and others.
“We were in Birmingham at first,” Bevan said, “but they have lots of resources and people there. We shifted to the Tuscaloosa area and it’s like night and day.
“Tuscaloosa only has a small shelter and two animal control officers. The huge tornado that came through downtown and some residential areas – heavily populated areas – just cut like a knife. The place is demolished.”
The Florida responders bring significant training and disaster experience, plus a sense of mission-related organization to animal relief efforts. “Our experiences primarily with hurricanes are a little different,” says Bevan, surveying the damage, shouting to volunteers and talking on her cell phone. “A hurricane leaves a wide swath of destruction that varies in intensity. But this – what I see here – is extreme.”
Is the ICS system for command and control being used? Well, apparently not….
“We are using the ICS system internally,” Bevan says, “but the folks here are still stunned and this is ‘their disaster.’ They’re still looking around and wondering what happened to their community, but they’re thrilled to have us here. I think it has all been pretty overwhelming for them. They don’t really have a hierarchy and they’re not using the ICS system for structure like we would use in Florida. They don’t seem to have a defined emergency management system either so we just try to figure out who is in charge when we go somewhere.”
(Laura Bevan promised a more extensive report and photos of Florida volunteers for a SART follow-up.) * Only one percent of all tornadoes in the world are classified in the F4 or higher category.
Hillsborough County’s Bill Armstrong Retires
Hillsborough County's Bill Armstrong Bill Armstrong, a strong leader in emergency response and supporter of SART is retiring on June 30th. “Retirement will give me the time and opportunity to seek other challenges, and most importantly, to spend quality time with my wife, my children, and our granddaughter,” Bill wrote in a recent retirement letter.
“His accomplishments have been many and he demonstrates the character of a true leader and public servant.”
Michael S. Merrill
Hillsborough County Administrator
“During my nearly 15 years working for Hillsborough County I have had the privilege of working with many fine professionals who are truly committed to making our community a better place. I will miss the people I worked with in Code Enforcement and the Affordable Housing Office when I was their Interim Director. But most of all, I will miss the great, professional people I have had the honor and privilege to work with at Animal Services. It is these men and women who have made a huge difference in making our community a better place for both people and pets despite the many challenges they have faced on a nearly constant basis.
“I hope to see you sometime in the future as I intend to stay active in the Humane Community and will assist where I can. The experience my staff and I have gained in working with you during disasters (the aftermath of Katrina and Florida’s 2004 hurricanes) and/or exercises has equipped us to better deal with a major disaster in our own community. This in turn will help us to better protect the public's safety and help insure the humane care of pets, and for that, I will be ever grateful.”
Bill can be contacted at [email protected].
SFWMD Declares Water Shortage – Agriculture Hit Hard
With regional water levels falling and no significant rainfall forecast, South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) Executive Director Carol Ann Wehle signed orders on March 22 declaring an official water shortage in South Florida.
Lake Okeechobee, the backup water supply for South Florida, has dropped to 11.76 feet, more than two feet below average for this time of year and levels are expected to continue to fall due to rising temperatures and evaporation rates. Also, the region has received less than half of its average rainfall, following the driest October-to-February period in 80 years.
District water shortage orders include:
- residential and business irrigation restraints that affect the district’s 7.7 million residents. (Landscape irrigation accounts for half of all potable (drinking) water use in South Florida.)
- a 15-percent cutback for all agricultural, nursery and diversion and impoundment surface water users within the Lake Okeechobee Service Area. (Cisterns and low-volume irrigation systems – such as drip, bubble and micro-jet systems that apply water directly to plant root zones – may be used at any time, although voluntary reductions are encouraged. Irrigation with reclaimed water is exempt.)
- a 15-percent cutback for golf course irrigation.
- a limit on hours permissible for irrigation.
Links to information about irrigation limits by area, current conditions and water-savings tips are available at www.sfwmd.gov/waterwatch.
The Florida Good Samaritan Law
Can you be sued when you respond to an emergency?
Are you protected? Does the law apply to you?
Florida Statute 768.13 Good Samaritan Act; immunity from civil liability.
(2)(a) Any person, including those licensed to practice medicine, who gratuitously and in Good faith renders emergency care or treatment either in direct response to emergency situations related to and arising out of a public health emergency declared pursuant to s. 381.00315, a state of emergency which has been declared pursuant to s. 252.36 or at the scene of an emergency outside of a hospital, doctor's office, or other place having proper medical equipment, without objection of the injured victim or victims thereof, shall not be held liable for any civil damages as a result of such care or treatment or as a result of any act or failure to act in providing or arranging further medical treatment where the person acts as an ordinary reasonably prudent person would have acted under the same or similar circumstances.
(b)1. Any health care provider, including a hospital licensed under chapter 395, providing emergency services pursuant to obligations imposed by 42 U.S.C. s. 1395dd, s. 395.1041, s. 395.401, or s. 401.45 shall not be held liable for any civil damages as a result of such medical care or treatment unless such damages result from providing, or failing to provide, medical care or treatment under circumstances demonstrating a reckless disregard for the consequences so as to affect the life or health of another. A Little SART History
The Florida SART concept was first conceptualized in June, 2003 during discussions between UF’s IFAS (Dr. Joan Dusky and Dr. Larry Arrington), the USDA’s FSA (Mr. Tim Manning) and FDACS’ DAI (Dr. Greg Christy). November 13, 2004 marked the first meeting and formal evaluation of the North Carolina model to judge its applicability to the state of Florida. The immediate SART goals were:
Form a working group for the development of a web site.
Form a working group to develop manuals and training modules.
Form a working group to plan the first annual training session.
Contact two counties to act as models to represent the county perspective.
Committees were subsequently formed to focus on initial curriculum development and training. The training events scheduled for fall of 2004 were cancelled due to Tropical Storm Bonnie and Hurricanes Charley, Frances, Ivan and Jeanne. Training was rescheduled for the spring of 2005.
Future challenges foreseen at the time were: adding food safety and processing issues to oversight and emphasizing bio-security issues.
About the SART Sentinel
The SART Sentinel is an e-mail newsletter prepared monthly by the members of the Florida State Agricultural Response Team. Past issues of the Sentinel are archived on the Florida SART Web Site www.flsart.org.
If you have a story or photo that you would like to have considered for publication in the SART Sentinel, please contact the editors.
Editor: Rick Sapp, PhD, Technical Writer, Florida Department of Agriculture & Consumer Services, Division of Animal Industry [email protected]
Associate Editor: Joe Kight, State ESF-17 Coordinator, Florida Department of Agriculture & Consumer Services, Division of Animal Industry [email protected]
Florida SART
County SART
SART Sentinel
County Info
EM Vector Control Foreign Animal Diseases
Animal Carcass Mgmt
Regional Equipment
Animal Response Plan
2013 SART Planning Meeting Presentations
Copyright © Florida State Agricultural Response Team, All rights reserved. Terms of Use | Contact Us | Send Comments to Webmaster
Developed and hosted by Office of Information Technology, University of Florida / IFAS | 农业 | 29,744 |
ASA Applauds House Approval of Farm Bill
After three years of waiting, Jan. 29 is a day of celebration for soy farmers, as Congress finally makes strides to provide us with the Farm Bill we so desperately need. In a vote of 251 to 166 the House passed the Farm Bill this morning.
Following the passage of the Agricultural Act of 2014 by the House of Representatives, the American Soybean Association (ASA) sent a news release applauding the vote. ASA President and Iowa farmer Ray Gaesser reiterated just how close the vote brings soybean farmers to a bill that is long overdue.
“We are very, very close,” said Gaesser. “The House has done its part and come together across party lines to pass a good bill—a compromise bill—that represents the needs of soybean farmers and so many other aspects of agriculture. "The House is to be commended for its work, but there’s no time to waste. We’ve been operating without a farm bill since the end of September; that means no certainty when it comes to risk management, export market promotion, programs that assist our industry’s growing biodiesel and biobased products sectors, and countless others.
"Moreover, USDA needs time to put these programs in place for 2014 crops, which begin to be harvested in May. "The Senate needs to take up the bill and pass it immediately so we can put this process behind us and keep producing and planning for the tough challenges ahead.”
ASA has been active in support of the bill, which provides for multiple soybean farmer priorities, most notably a flexible farm safety net that includes a choice between price-based and revenue-based risk management tools and maintains the decoupling of payments from current planted acreage under both programs.
ASA supports the bill’s risk management framework; its strengthening of crop insurance; streamlining and optimization of conservation programs; investment in critical trade development and renewables like biodiesel and biobased products; support for beginning farmers and ranchers and acknowledgment of the role of agricultural research.
“We have maintained throughout this process that we are willing to work together with all of agriculture to move this process forward,” Gaesser said. “The bill is a reflection of that willingness to cooperate and compromise and Chairwoman Stabenow, Chairman Lucas, and Ranking Members Cochran and Peterson deserve great credit for producing a bill that captures that cooperation and compromise so well.
“We can see the finish line,” he added. “It’s been a long, long road to this point, but we’re almost there. It’s up to the Senate now to bring this process to fruition by passing the farm bill.”
ASA thanks the more than 400 farmers that emailed and contacted their members of Congress on the bill. Now we turn our attention to the upper chamber, encouraging the Senate to take up and pass the farm bill as quickly as possible.
ASA will keep you updated as the process moves forward. | 农业 | 2,954 |
University horticulturalist planting a better community
Marguerite ClineColumnist
July 18, 2013 11:45 PM | 1248 views | 0 | 25 | | slideshow
Probably no one is having more fun than Zach White. He is the horticulturist at Reinhardt University in Waleska. Zach and his wife, Loretta, a pharmacist, live in Pickens County. He is one of those people with a proverbial green thumb and uses it well. Anyone who goes on the campus or just drives by knows he and his staff are doing their jobs well. Beautiful flowers, shrubs, trees and manicured lawns are everywhere. On the day Zach came from his home in Lilburn to Reinhardt, a man was in front of Cline’s Store. The man waved. Zach knew he would like a small town where people waved at others whether they knew them or not. When he enrolled in college, Zach had not decided what his life’s work would be. Then he met Cecil and Ann Atchley. They were in charge of the grounds and greenhouses at Reinhardt. He was working with them when he recognized he was blessed with that green thumb. Not only did he like growing and working with plants, he was good at it. So, after two years at Reinhardt, he was off to the University of Georgia to study horticulture. One of the things horticulture students must learn is the genus and species of plants. They are usually Latin words. Zach says he speaks “redneck Latin.” After graduating from UGA, he worked at the Atlanta Botanical Gardens in the children’s area before coming to Reinhardt. Zach and Elizabeth Smith, a teacher at Reinhardt, had an idea. Waleska should have a farmers market. They wanted to encourage people to eat healthy food and shop locally. Plus, they wanted the people of the community and those at Reinhardt to mix and mingle. When Zach gets an idea, he runs with it. He was on a mission. Banners were made, signs were put out and vendors were recruited. It was an immediate success. Buying fresh fruits and vegetables is the number one reason customers come. But they also come for the fun events. Zach is fun-loving. One market day, he had a putt-putt competition. The winner won a watermelon, a bird house and $20 in “market money.” The pie-baking contest was popular, too. One of the things customers liked was that after the pies were judged, the crowd was invited to “clean the plates.” They ate pie until they ran out. Upcoming is the Salsa Challenge on Aug. 1 from 4:15 to 7:30 p.m. To get there, come to Waleska and just follow the signs. After the salsa is judged, the crowd will again “clean the plates.” Dr. J. R. Burgess was president of Reinhardt for 28 years. In addition to his presidential duties, he planted 550 trees and 800 shrubs on the campus. Wherever he was, Dr. Burgess was getting trees to plant or transplant to Reinhardt. It was not unusual to see him going across campus, even after he retired, with a shovel in one hand and a seedling in the other. The “Fortson Oak” is named for then-Georgia Secretary of State Ben Fortson. It grew from an acorn taken from the state Capitol grounds. Other trees have their own story. In 1972, a paper bark maple and a trident maple came from the campus of Harvard University. Zach says it is a piece of Harvard at Reinhardt. As Dr. Burgess planted the trees and shrubs he put identification tags on many of them. The area where he planted many of the trees and shrubs is called the Burgess Arboretum. Recently, it has been upgraded. The names of many of the trees on campus are catalogued, mapped and old tags have been replaced. While the age of many of the trees on the campus is not known, one is identified as a pecan tree planted by the Class of 1914. That means it is almost 100 years old. There may be others on campus that are older than that. Zach is a wonderful, down-to-earth person. Dr. Burgess would be pleased to know that the trees and shrubs he planted are in Zach’s capable hands. He likes people and people like him. So, come to the Waleska Farmers Market and meet him yourself. Just follow the signs. You will be glad you did. Or he will welcome your call at (770) 720-5988. You might talk to him about gardening. People often ask him for advice such as what plants deer are least likely to eat. And, if you were the man who waved at Zach White on the day he first came to Waleska, I want to say, “Thank you very much. You did the whole town and the college a favor.”Marguerite Cline is the former mayor of Waleska. Copyright 2015 Cherokee Tribune. All rights reserved.
November tips
Marcia Winchester
Vineyard taking root in Ball Ground
Keeping the main thing the main thing
Kina Mallard Cherokee Tribune
Green Thumbs: Long-time garden club beautifies island for 52 years | 农业 | 4,666 |
∞ http://www.oac.cdlib.org/findaid/ark:/13030/kt3m3nd10c
Inventory of the Saratoga Horticultural Research Foundation Collection 1938-2008
The Saratoga Horticultural Research Foundation Collection is the organizational and research records of an association of
California horticulturalists active from 1952 to 2006. The Foundation's goal was to improve and enrich western ornamental
horticulture through the promotion of shade trees, California native plants, and drought-tolerant plants. The collection spans
the years 1938-2008 (bulk 1950-1998) and includes minutes, correspondence, financial records, research notes and data, project
plans, and photographs relating to the Foundation's operation and horticultural research.
The Saratoga Horticultural Research Foundation (SHRF) was founded in 1952 by a small group committed to improving western
horticulture. Named after the location of its original headquarters on Verde Vista Lane in Saratoga, California, the SHRF
grew out of nurseryman Ray Hartman's vision of a horticultural experiment station for developing hardy, reliable trees and
shrubs for the California landscape. Hartman engaged his longtime friend Maunsell Van Rensselaer, a horticulturalist, and
a handful of others interested in examining the possibility of establishing an experiment station as a foundation. Ultimately,
the SHRF was established as a non-profit organization under the direction of a Board of Trustees, which was guided by a Board
of Councillors drawn from prominent figures in the fields of western horticulture, arboriculture, landscape design, and botany.
The Foundation's activities were guided by a director who reported to the Board of Trustees.
of the Department of Special Collections, University of California, Library, Davis as the owner of the physical items and
is not intended to include or imply permission of the copyright holder, which must also be obtained by the researcher.
Historical Files Officers' and Trustees' Records Associates of the Saratoga Horticultural Foundation Records Financial Records Card Files Plant and Tree Research Records
Specimen Data Sheets Propagation and Production Records Evaluation Files Project Files Reference Files Ephemera and Realia
Visual Materials
General Photographs Specimen Photographs Film Plant Samples | 农业 | 2,299 |
Industry Raw milk problems give dairy farmers a 'bad name,' says one
By Angela Bowman
A veteran dairy farmer from central Missouri has heard about an E. coli outbreak in his area that has sickened 13 people and now wonders aloud if raw milk is harming the reputation of other dairy farmers.
"We've been opposed to this raw milk thing for a long time because it gives dairy farmers a bad name," David Braun, owner of a 120-cow, 400-acre farm in Cole County, Mo., told KRCG13 News.
The 77-year-old noted that his farm follows strict sanitation guidelines. Raw milk has been linked to E.coli outbreaks in Missouri and Oregon, and the number of adults -- and children -- sickened by the contaminated milk continues to grow. At least 17 people in Oregon have fallen ill after drinking raw milk from the Foundation Farm near Wilsonville, Ore., according to a report by OregonLive. Of the 17 confirmed cases, four are children who are have now been hospitalized. Three of them, including a one-year-old, are currently on kidney support. Owners of the Foundation Farm have voluntarily suspended distribution of their milk.
In Missouri, the number of people sickened has grown to 13, including two young children. Six of those cases have been linked to raw milk sold from an unnamed dairy farm in Howard County, Mo., as reported by the Associated Press. The Columbia (Mo.) Daily Tribune first reported the outbreak last week. By Thursday, health officials reported a 17-month-old with symptoms of hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS), a severe condition that can lead to permanent kidney damage in some who survive the illness. According to the Center for Food Security and Public Health, HUS is fatal in 3 to 10 percent of children.
Supporters of raw milk often take risks in consuming the unpasteurized milk, which is 150 times more likely to be the cause of an outbreak than pasteurized milk. Alvaro Garcia, extension dairy specialist at South Dakota State University, has addressed some of the common misconceptions surrounding the issue. He refutes the notion, often cited by raw milk supporters, that raw milk is healther because enzymes and nutrients are destroyed during pasteurization. "Research has not been able to prove these claims," Garcia says. "In fact, recent research has proven that aside from 10 percent loss in vitamin C, the rest of the vitamins were not affected. In the same trial the main milk enzymes lactoferrin, lacto-peroxidase, and lysozyme maintained highly significant activity after pasteurization."
Read more from SDSU Extension here. Topics:
raw milke.colimissourioregon About the Author: | 农业 | 2,609 |
Follow @thefishsite News & Analysis Features Markets & Reports Knowledge Centre Business Directory Events Our Shop Forums News Cooperation In Fisheries Practice With Viet Nam18 July 2011 INDONESIA - The Republic of Indonesia wishes to establish cooperation with Viet Nam to share best practice in fish processing and agriculture. Such intention was conveyed by the Indonesian Consul General, Bambang Tarsanto, in Ho Chi Minh City (HCMC), when meeting with the Chairman of the People’s Committee of Vinh Long province, Nguyen Van Diep in the People’s Committee office.
The cooperation will be concentrated in Vinh Long province, considering its potential as one of the 13 provinces situated in the Mekong Delta. “This province is superior in its agriculture and fishery,” said Bambang Tarsanto, according to a press release of the Indonesian Consulate General in HCMC.
“Indonesia’s proposal to cooperate was warmly welcomed,” he added.
Concerning social and cultural cooperation, Mr Bambang explained that Nguyen Van Diep said that his side would always welcome any promotional activities of Indonesian culture in Vinh Long. “Whenever the Indonesian Consulate General announces their promotional plan, Vinh Long is willing to welcome Indonesian art team’s visit,” he continued.
In the context of ASEAN, Mr Bambang expected the readiness from both governments and societies in anticipating the ASEAN Community 2015. Bambang also hoped for the increase of people-to-people contacts between Indonesian and Vinh Long societies, considering both are a part of one ASEAN community.
“We wished for more cultural exchanges and social activities to be jointly organised by the Indonesian Consulate General and the Vinh Long local government through the Vinh Long Union Friendship Organisation, in order for the society of both countries to know and understand the cultures of each other,” he added.
The Potentials of Vinh Long From the meeting, Mr Bambang said his side had a clear grasp of the economic potentials Vinh Long province has. The province has approximately 1.1 million inhabitants, and its agriculture sector contributes around 50 per cent to its GDP.
Every year, Vinh Long produces approximately one million ton of rice and 400,000 ton of fruit. In addition, Vinh Long is also superior in the aquaculture, especially tra fish and catfish, which produces 136,000 ton of fish a year. There are approximately two industrial parks that facilitate the industry in the province, with an industrial area’s size of 2500 ha.
To improve its human resources, there is one university and five institutes that produce high quality graduates in Vinh Long. TheFishSite News Desk Catfish / Pangasius, Government and Regulatory, Training and Development, General Share This | 农业 | 2,760 |
My DU
Conservation > Public Policy
America's 2014 Farm Bill
Conservation provisions in this new legislation will help protect and restore vital waterfowl habitat across the United States
Photo © Michael Furtman By Eric Lindstrom
After two and a half years of delays and gridlock, Congress passed a new Farm Bill in February 2014. This bipartisan legislation provides more than $28 billion in funding for a variety of conservation programs on private lands. Following is an overview of important conservation provisions included in the new Farm Bill, and how they are likely to impact waterfowl and their habitats across the United States over the next five years.
Renewed Wetland Protections
Since the passage of the 1985 Farm Bill, federal agricultural policies have encouraged producers to cultivate the most productive lands and minimize impacts on wetlands and highly erodible soils in exchange for federal farm program benefits. This policy of "conservation compliance" has helped to provide an effective safety net for America's farmers, ensure an abundant and safe food supply for consumers, and conserve crucial habitat for waterfowl and other wildlife. Research has confirmed that this policy has been very effective in conserving wetlands and other wildlife habitats on private lands over the past three decades. In fact, the U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates that more than 3 million acres of "farmed wetlands" (areas that can be cultivated and planted in dry years, but can't be drained or filled by producers without losing farm program benefits) may have been conserved nationwide thanks to this policy. In addition, conservation compliance has helped reduce soil erosion by approximately 295 million tons each year on more than 140 million acres of U.S. farmland.
In recent years, however, crop insurance has replaced traditional farm subsidies as the most important safety net for many producers, particularly in the Prairie Pothole Region (PPR), where farming can be risky business due to a short growing season and unpredictable weather. Since 1996, farmers have not had to comply with wetland conservation policies to receive federal crop insurance. Taxpayers fund roughly 62 percent of total crop insurance premium costs as well as some underwriting and claims supports. Recent estimates suggest that this assistance could total nearly $90 billion over the next decade. Ducks Unlimited and its partners firmly believe that farmers need a strong safety net, and that public resources should help support it. But we also think it's a fair deal and sound fiscal and conservation policy to discourage wetland drainage in exchange for this assistance. Without effective wetland protection policies linked to farm program benefits like crop insurance, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service estimates that nearly 1.4 million small seasonal wetlands located in cropland-dominated landscapes in the eastern Dakotas and Montana—the heart of the U.S. "Duck Factory"—would be at high risk of drainage. These wetlands support nearly 3 million breeding ducks each year, or roughly one-third of the current U.S. breeding duck population. Widespread wetland drainage in this region would create the equivalent of a permanent man-made drought that would be catastrophic to continental waterfowl populations. During Farm Bill negotiations, DU played a key role in bringing together a broad coalition of leading commodity, crop insurance, and conservation groups that supported recoupling conservation compliance with crop insurance and opposed efforts to weaken the safety net for producers. Notable members of this diverse coalition included the National Farmers Union, National Corn Growers Association, American Soybean Association, American Farmland Trust, National Cotton Council of America, American Association of Crop Insurers, Crop Insurance and Reinsurance Bureau, National Wildlife Federation, Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, Pheasants Forever, Quail Forever, the Nature Conservancy, World Wildlife Fund, and many others. This historic alliance played a vital role in the passage of a new Farm Bill that renewed important wetland protections. While this was a big win for DU and our partners, the upcoming rule-making and implementation process will be just as important to ensure that the Farm Bill's conservation provisions achieve their objectives. Preserving Native Prairie
Waterfowl need a combination of secure upland nesting cover and wetlands to successfully nest and raise their broods. Native prairie provides the ideal mix of these habitats, supporting millions of breeding waterfowl across the northern Great Plains. Native grasslands are also essential for livestock and forage production on the prairies. Maintaining a healthy livestock sector is vital to the future of waterfowl and their habitats in the PPR, as ranchers manage much of the most important waterfowl breeding habitat in this region. In recent years, federal policies, improved farming technologies, and other economic drivers have fueled large-scale conversion of native prairie across the Great Plains. During 2006−2011, the Dakotas, Minnesota, Iowa, and Nebraska suffered a net loss of 1.3 million acres of grasslands—a rate and scale not seen since the Dust Bowl era. In the PPR, grassland loss has exceeded the rate of protection by 500 to 600 percent. Widespread conversion of native prairie is harmful not only to waterfowl and other wildlife, but also to livestock producers, who in many areas of the PPR are dependent on native rangelands to sustain their herds. Thankfully, the 2014 Farm Bill provides much-needed relief to native grassland habitats on the northern Great Plains. The new law includes a stronger Sodsaver provision, which creates a federal disincentive for converting native prairie to cropland. While Sodsaver does not prohibit producers from breaking new land, it ensures that they do so at their own financial risk, and not at the taxpayer's expense. Under the new law, farmers who plow native sod will see their crop insurance premium subsidies reduced by 50 percentage points during the first four years of production on newly converted lands. This provision also prohibits landowners from applying yield performance from more productive acres in their operations to less productive newly broken lands. Bringing this often marginally productive land into production provides little benefit to taxpayers, increases soil erosion and nutrient loss, and ultimately leads to reduced water quality, increased flooding, and the loss of valuable wildlife habitat. Unlike the 2008 Farm Bill, which created a PPR-only Sodsaver program that required each state's governor to "opt in" to the program (none of them did), the new law is mandatory; there is no opt-in requirement. Furthermore, the new law includes the entire states—not just the PPR portion—of North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana, Iowa, Minnesota, and Nebraska. If the risk of growing crops on recently plowed native prairie is not underwritten by taxpayer-subsidized crop insurance and disaster assistance programs, much of this land may never be cultivated. This will help slow the loss of crucial waterfowl breeding habitat across the nation's Duck Factory. Other Major Reforms
In an effort to achieve budget savings and streamline existing programs, the 2014 Farm Bill consolidates several former conservation programs. The new law will merge the Grassland Reserve Program, Farm and Ranch Lands Protection Program, and Wetlands Reserve Program into the new Agricultural Conservation Easement Program (ACEP). Through ACEP, producers can enroll land in either agricultural or wetland easement programs, which will receive more than $2 billion in federal funding over the next five years. Wetland easements are highly popular with private landowners and an effective tool for conserving key waterfowl habitats in the Mississippi Alluvial Valley; Gulf Coast; Chesapeake Bay watershed; Pacific Northwest; Great Lakes; PPR; Central Valley of California; the confluence of the Mississippi, Illinois, and Missouri Rivers; and many other areas of the United States. The law also created a new Regional Conservation Partnership Program, which merges several existing programs and provides funding incentives for state, federal, private, and nongovernmental organizations to form conservation partnerships to improve the health of iconic watersheds such as Chesapeake and Delaware Bays. Most of the conservation program cost savings in the new Farm Bill will come from reductions in the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP). CRP pays landowners an annual rental payment for 10 to 15 years to restore marginal cropland back to perennial cover. This program has been a huge success in many parts of the country, but particularly so on the prairies, where CRP grasslands have been a boon to populations of waterfowl, pheasants, and many other wildlife species. During the program's peak enrollment, CRP land in the PPR was credited with adding an estimated 2 million ducks to the fall flight each year. The 2008 Farm Bill authorized a national CRP enrollment cap of 32 million acres, although current enrollment is around 25.6 million acres. The 2014 Farm Bill will step down the national enrollment cap from 27.5 million acres in 2014 to 24 million acres by 2017. While funding cuts to conservation programs such as CRP present challenges, DU and its partners must also explore and develop new ways to make these programs more economically competitive and attractive to producers in an era of high commodity prices. This paradigm shift will require habitat managers to think outside the box when developing new incentive options to promote conservation on private lands. Clearly, federal agricultural policies can have a huge impact, either positive or negative, on wetlands, waterfowl, and our hunting traditions. As the new Farm Bill's rule-making and implementation process proceeds over the next several months, DU and our partners will be working together to ensure that the law's hard-fought conservation provisions will result in more habitat on the ground and more waterfowl in the sky over the next five years and beyond. Eric Lindstrom is a government affairs representative at DU's Great Plains office in Bismarck, North Dakota.
DU SUPPORTERS HELPED PUSH FARM BILL OVER THE GOAL LINE Ducks Unlimited members, volunteers, and staff played a key role in passing a new Farm Bill in 2014 with sportsmen's top priorities intact. They scheduled meetings and on-the-ground tours with members of Congress, and used social media to ensure that their elected representatives in Washington heard what waterfowl and other wildlife needed in this legislation. During four scheduled "social media days," DU supporters sent messages to members of Congress in every state, generating more than 10 million impressions. DU supporters pushed hard for two main proposals in the new five-year Farm Bill: recoupling conservation compliance to crop insurance and creating a stronger Sodsaver program. The messages got through, and after a three-year struggle, Congress passed the 2014 Farm Bill, which included both of DU's top priorities. Many thanks to everyone who joined DU in telling their legislators how important Farm Bill conservation programs are to waterfowl, other wildlife, and people. Your efforts truly made a difference!
Freshwater Enhancements Projects to Benefit Coastal Louisiana Wildlife
Plowing the Prairie
Photo Essay: Spring on the Prairies
About Ducks Unlimited
Contact Ducks Unlimited
National Fact Sheet
Advertise with DU | 农业 | 11,660 |
About Us Log in
Darjeeling: The Champagne of all teas
Steven Popec
Darjeeling is the Chinese variations of the Camelia sinensis tea grown on Indian plantations in the province of Darjeeling and considered one of the most exquisite and expensive teas in the world. By the methods of cultivation and production, Darjeeling is closer to the Chinese teas rather than to the Indian teas. This is a small leaf tea, with slightly astringent taste and rich delicate floral aroma. Although Darjeeling is marketed commercially as "black tea", almost all of them have incomplete oxidation (<90%), so they are technically more Oolongs than black teas. This tea has a delicate taste due to the unique natural conditions of the region where it grows: cold and humid climate, high altitude location of plantations and the characteristics of the soil. Depending on the location and time of collecting, the taste, aroma and characteristics of Darjeeling are highly different. The most significant impact on tea quality has seasonal factors. Not everyone will be able to distinguish the differences, for example, between Darjeeling Makaibari and Darjeeling Lingia. The difference between a drink obtained from the leaves collected in the spring, versus leaves from the same plantation, but harvested in early summer, will be obvious. The best varieties of Darjeeling is consider the "champagne of teas". The methods of processing tea leaves are very traditional, it includes withering, rolling, fermentation and drying, which is why this tea is so highly valued. First of all, today there are only 86 existing plantations of Darjeeling with a total area of about 19.000 hectare. Annual production on average is 11-12 thousand tons. This is about 1% of the total cultivated tea in India. It should be be noted that it would be impossible to obtain the taste qualities if Darjeeling if cultivated outside this region, therefore, making it an exclusive beverage. The labor on plantations is very tedious and demanding, the normal requires a production force of about 52 thousand people that are constantly engaged. While in the tea harvesting season, which lasts from March to November, an additional 15 thousand workers are hired. More than 60% of workers in the tea gardens are women. The collection of tea leaves takes place 4 times per year. The first harvest is the so-called Easter (March-May) begins immediately after the winter lull. Leaves collected at this time are light-green color. The characteristics of a good First Flush Darjeeling are a lively fresh, delightful flowery aroma and a honey color infusion. The connoisseurs of Darjeeling tea compare the first collection to tasteful green grapes "muscatel." Perhaps, that is why Darjeeling is called “champagne of teas”. Tea mixture of the first collection is very highly regarded by experts; it consists only of the upper leaves and buds that give this tea such exquisite taste. First Flush Darjeeling is sold at auctions, and prices are several times higher than the subsequent harvest from the same plantation. The second collection takes place during the months of a May - June. Tea leaves collected during this period have a reddish color. Infusion is softer, intense, featuring a bright amber color. Because this tea is collected in the last month of spring and early summer, it has a light fruity aroma and a peculiar aftertaste. Darjeeling from the second collection, also called "In-Between", is considered a tea of high quality and is recommended as an afternoon tea. The leaves and the infusion are already turning darker and the diversity of the flavors varies from full-bodied to slightly aromatic. The "In-Between" is often used as a profitable blend, due to the high demand, the prices are not as cheap. The summer collection takes place from June - July. During this period, the properties of the tea leaves are changing, along with the nature of the infusion. It becomes more robust, but it retains all the traditional characteristics of Darjeeling. The taste is a full-bodied, with a distinctive nutmeg note. The third collection is no less interesting and appreciated by connoisseurs, sometimes higher than the first crop. The last collection, "Autumnal", is October - November. The infusion obtained from the leaves of the autumn collection, has a unique characteristic, the leaves are a light-copper color and has a somewhat milder taste. All this together ensures the highest quality of the famous Darjeeling. Because of its exclusivity and small production volumes, forgery of this tea was very popular. It is a big problem for world trade, the number of Darjeeling sold each year is more than 45 thousand tons, despite the fact that its official production is only about 11-12 thousand tons. The falsification and blending of tea has led to a drop in prices for real Darjeeling, resulting in considerable losses for the Indian economy. To prevent further tampering, the Tea Board of India jointly with the Darjeeling Tea Association have agreed that only 86 tea plantations, with special certificates, will be entitled to call their tea "Darjeeling".
Ceylon Tea - A Brief History Of Sri Lanka
Ceylon (Sri Lanka) tea can also be attributed to "India". This island located close to India which produces the same amount of tea as the mainland plantations, and even more generating roughly $700 million annually. Cultivation of tea in Sri Lanka started accidentally. Up until the 1860’s, Ceylon was only for coffee plantations, but due to sudden fungal disease called “coffee rust” most of the coffee trees have died and brought the downfall of coffee production, then igniting an era of tea. In 1867 the first tea plantation in Ceylon was laid by Scott James Taylor in Kandy. He became the father of tea cultivation in Ceylon. In 1890’s Sir Thomas Lipton visited Ceylon and founded his own tea plantations and factories for tea processing focused on the needs of British consumers. Ceylon black teas are divided into three main types: high-grown (1,200 meters above sea level), mid-grown (600-1,200 m) and low-grown (up to 600 m). The share of high-altitude, high-quality tea is relatively small; it is the finest plantations in Nuwara Eliya that are located at an altitude 6,128 ft. Good quality tea are also harvested on the plantations: Dimbula ( altitude ranging between 3,500 ft to 5,000 ft), Uva province( altitude ranging between 3,500 ft to 5,000 ft) and Ratnapura (low-grown tea). Indian tea Nuwara Eliya is the highest tea region in the world and considered one of the most important locations for tea production in Sri Lanka. Tea produced in Nuwara Eliya has a very unique flavor. Tea leaves gather year around, but the best yields are in January-March. Tea leaves in this region are plucked at dawn, it is the time when leaf retains its freshness and then displays it in the brewed beverage. Sometimes the tea from Nuwara Eliya called the "champagne of tea", as well as some teas from Darjeeling province in northern India. This tea gives a tincture of golden color, delicate and refined flavor and slightly astringent taste. Uva region is situated in the south-eastern part of Sri Lanka in the mountains, which are located on the slopes of the plantation growers an excellent tea. Uva area’s tea is widely used for blends such as English Breakfast Black Tea Blend, Irish Breakfast Black Tea Blend, Morning Tea…etc. A distinctive feature of tea from this district is a golden-reddish infusion, excellent flavor and a wonderful taste. In the Dimbula area most tea plantations are located on the south-eastern slopes. The best tea is obtained in January-March, when the weather is dry and cold (for this latitude) and is determining factor of flavor. The main characteristic of the local tea is the aroma of a faint lemon note. The taste of the tea is full, with a little tartness, the infusion is bright and reddish color.
The History Of Tea From India
Tea consumption in India has a long history, South Asians viewed tea as an herbal medicine rather than as a recreational beverage. Although commercially, tea is being cultivated in India is relatively recently - within the second half of the 19th century. However, in the foothills of the Himalayas in the north and north-eastern regions of country, tea trees grew before the arrival of the British. For centuries, tea has not been cultivated but only gathered from wild trees. There is a legend that British merchants transported a few tea bushes from China and planted them in the plains of India, by the time they occupied and colonized by Britain. From those few bushes, started a global cultivation of tea in India and Ceylon. It happened in the thirties of the 19th century when the British East India Company became concerned about the Chinese monopoly on tea that constituted most of its trade and supported the enormous consumption of tea in Great Britain. After the first successful experience in 1863, the British East India Company brought to India a large batch of germs and after 10 years of hard work, the tea plantations give the first crop. In 1870, over 90% of the tea consumed in Great Britain was still of Chinese origin but by 1900, this had dropped to 10%, largely replaced by tea grown in India and Ceylon. Success has created several companies, many of which still sell tea and are known throughout the world. India's success on the international market is mainly due to accommodating the special English taste for strong tea, adequate for chalky water.High quality tea in India is growing on mountain slopes which are very steep (up to 70 degrees). Plantations are located on terraces which rings encircle the mountain slopes. These high quality grades of tea gather exclusively by women and only manually. The tea plucking process takes place usually at the break of dawn. Manufacturers are trying to make tea of the highest class, twisted leaf tea and no broken leaves. There are two main areas of growth of Indian tea: Darjeeling and Assam. Important cultivation areas are, apart from Darjeeling and Assam:Dooars - west of Assam, mainly production of CTC teas.Nilgiri - South Indian tea district, fresh teas, similar to those of Sri LankaSikkim - north east of Darjeeling, high-quality teasTerrai - south of Darjeeling, similar to Darjeeling, somewhat more herb in taste.
Today India is the second largest producer of quality black tea and the first one of the middle and low-grade "bulk" teas, CTC. A large portion of this "simple" tea stays in the country; locals are very fond of drinking tea (a modest 750 grams per person a year), it is quite different in Sri Lanka (Ceylon). Although these countries are close neighbors, the locals hardly drink tea, and the entire Ceylon crop is exported. A small proportion of green teas are produced in India as well and mainly for Japan that buys simpler varieties to add them to their own production. Assam is a tea district in Northern India across the Brahmaputra. It is the largest connected tea growing region in the world. The plateau with highly arable rainforest soil contains a lot of humidity due to the prevailing monsoon winds. The local climatic conditions, especially rainfall, create a greenhouse effect which positively affects the quality of tea leaf. Tea plants are cultivated in tea gardens on large cultivatable land of up to 1,000 hectares. There are about 2,000 plantations in Assam. Assam tea is generally heavy and spicy, dark in the cup. It is the main component of the classical English and East Frisian blends which are prepared for water with high chalk contents and are usually drunk with milk and sugar. Since the appearance of the young tea traders on the international market, especially from Africa, Assam was largely driven out of this market by the cheaper tea varieties. Harvesting PeriodsMid April to Late May: First Flush. These qualities are of rather little economic significance for the European or US market. These teas are mostly aromatically fresh, light and of rather tart character. For this reason they do not meet the traditional Assam features.Early June/Mid August: Second Flush. The second flush, harvested in June/August, before the large monsoon rain starts, is highly demanded. Assam teas from the second plucking period are of greater relevance in terms of quality and the export business. These qualities are often very “colored” in tips, with a pouring that is mostly very dark and has a typical strong, full-spicy and malty character. The oldest tea gardens in Assam were founded in 1832-33 by English trade agencies. In 1839, the first Assam tea appeared in a London action. The Assam region is bordered by China, Bhutan, Burma and Bangladesh. Assam is one of the most beautiful places in the world and in all respects, is one of the best places for the cultivation of black tea. Darjeeling is a region in the North-Eastern India, located at the southern slopes of the Himalaya Mountains. Darjeeling is the most famous tea region of India. Tea gardens are located at altitudes of up to 2,600 meters above sea level on an area of 20 thousand hectares and produce the most exquisite types in the world. Darjeeling borders with China and Bhutan. The special microclimate of the region is ideal for growing elite types of tea also called “champagne of tea”. Black Orthodox tea from Darjeeling (Indians pronounce the name with the accent on the second syllable) are considered one of the most delicate and fragrant teas in the world, competing with the best Chinese varieties and very often surpassing them. The unique taste of tea from Darjeeling is highly valued by tea lovers and experienced connoisseurs. The best tea grows in the coldest part of the terrain, at an altitude of 2,600 meters. The color of the infusion is deep burgundy with a green tint. Harvesting PeriodsMarch-May: First Flush is in March, as soon as the weather is good after the end of the vegetation break, the first soft leaves and buds of the first period are plucked. The characteristics of a good F.F. Darjeeling are a lively fresh, delightful flowery aroma and a honey color of the infusion. This tea is sold at auctions, and prices are several times higher than the subsequent charges from the same plantation.May-June: In between crop – the qualified “trailer” of the first flush season does have a particular connection with the first touches of the second flush period. The leaves and the infusion are already turning darker and the diversity of the flavors varies from full-bodied to slightly aromatic. The In-between is often used as a profitable blend-quality. Due to the high demand, the prices are not as cheap.June-July: Second Flush. The summer crop is the summit in a crop year. The tea leaves develop more aroma by the longer exposure to sun. The most important quality features of a classical S.F. tea are dark brown leafs with golden tips and the color of infusion is soft amber. Taste is full-bodied with a distinctive nutmeg note. The second collection is no less interesting and appreciated by connoisseurs, sometimes higher than the first crop.October-November: Autumnal crop. After another period of rain in late summer and until the vegetation lull in November, fully aromatic but somewhat mild teas are plucked.Nilgiri is one of the major tea regions of India, located in the south of the country, at the foot of the Blue Mountains. The tea gardens in Nilgiri are small compared to plantations in Assam. Tea in Nilgiri is cultivated on altitudes between 800-2,000 meters above the sea level. Tea plantations are surrounded by snow-covered mountains and luxuriant growing jungle. In 1840, the first tea seedlings had been planted, thanks to good climatic conditions, the seedlings became well acclimated and the basis for future plantations.Nilgiri takes second place in India in volume of black tea production. Frequent monsoon rains, high average annual temperatures, allow the great cultivation of tea all year. Tea gathers unite in Nilgiri twice a year: in spring (April-May) and second flush in autumn (September-December), the best being the spring collection. The Nilgiri tea is a main component of so-called English blend. The tea of these regions is full-bodied, with a bright infusion, mild taste and can be distinguished by a fresh citrus scent which is reminiscent of the Ceylon high-growns.
Most of the Indian tea is used for mixtures or blends. Different companies make a blend for a large consignment of tea, which is then packaged and sent to consumers. Naturally, the composition of blends from time to time changes, so there is a practice such as a sampling of tea. Similar to the in the selection of wine, tasting is needed prior to purchase of product in order to understand which tea is the best. There are companies (mostly British) that have their own tea testers in the tea factories located in India, whose main task is to monitor the quality and stability of tea taste, regardless of the crop. To do such, they select from several tea plantations and make trial blends, the best of them becomes a model for the party. There are four varieties of Indian tea that is sold unblended: Darjeeling, Assam, Nilgiri (also used in blends) and Sikkim. Sikkim Tea is a new variety introduced in late 1980, but has already won the position on the market of tea. This delicious and sweet tea is reminiscent to the taste of Darjeeling tea and Assamese tea aroma. One can say that it occupies an intermediate position between these two titans.Black tea from India can be brewed in several ways. Brewing methods of tea depends on its type and grade. Chinese method: more loose leaf tea leaves and less time of brewing, English method: 1 tsp of tea leaves per 6oz cup and a long (3-5 minutes) brewing process, or Indian method: very strong tea infusion, hot milk and a lot of sugar. All three methods have their unique characteristics, and each way is good for its type of tea. The Chinese way is suitable for any Indian tea, but best of all, it reveals aromas of delicate high grade tea varieties such as teas Darjeeling. The English method does not allow steeping the tea more than twice. If you prefer to drink tea, as it is loved in England, with milk or cream, then pour the cream into a cup prior to the tea slightly heated. Fine broken leaf grades are very popular in India, where English tradition of drinking tea with milk has spread in a transformed way. Brewing using the Indian style is a very intense brewing method. Tea leaves are steeped with hot milk, water and a lot of sugar. Then the infusion is poured from one tall glass into another to create the appearance of abundant foam. This very thick drink, with a nice color, can hardly be called tea; however, the Indians are very fond of it and consumed in large quantities. This method is also used to prepare a strong tea with milk and spices called Masala Chai. Some of the chai masala spice mixtures are still in current use are derived from Ayurvedic medical texts.ESP Emporium offers an amazing selection of black tea – the most popular drink in the world. Vast selection of high quality tea from India presents all the most magnificent types from Darjeeling and Assam, First and Second Flush, pure and blended. Worth to give it a try!
Newer posts >>
Follow ESP Tea
RecentPosts
An American Tea LoverTea Production in AfricaThe Very Cool History of Iced TeaTea Harvesting Times of the Main Tea Producing CountriesA Short History of Chinese Tea DrinkingThe Art of Tea BlendingThe Health Benefits of Different TeasThe Benefits of Polyphenols & Flavonoids Found in TeaL-theanine and What it Means to TeaThe Importance of Teaware to a Great Cup of Tea
January (3)February (10)March (5)April (10)May (10)June (18)July (6)August (2)September (6)October (2)November (5)December (1)
January (2)February (1)March (2)April (1)May (1)July (2)August (11)September (2)November (2)December (1)
January (1)February (1)April (1)June (7)July (12)August (13)September (6)October (2)
March (1)April (1)June (6)July (7)August (4)
Assam (3)Ayurveda (3)Benefits (1)Black Tea (11)Blended Tea (1)Cancer (3)Ceylon (3)Chai (1)Contest (1)Cooking with tea (1)Darjeeling (1)Decaffeinated (3)English (1)Facebook (3)Flavored Tea (3)Fruit Tea (3)Green Tea (15)Gunpowder Tea (1)Health Benefits (51)Herbal (8)Herbal Tea (2)History (9)Iced Tea (3)India (3)Japanese (4)Japanese culture (1)Jasmine Green Tea (1)Loose Tea (44)Mood (5)Myth (1)News (1)Oolong (8)Organic (1)Pregnancy (1)Preparation (6)Press Release (8)Production (1)Promotion (3) Pu-Erh (2)Recipes (3)Rooibos (6)Sencha (1)Shop Tab (1)Tea Gifts (1)Tea Plant (2)Tea Talk (17)Traditions (15)Twitter (3)White Tea (8)Yellow tea (1)Yerba Mate (1)
antioxidants aroma benefits black black tea blend blends blood body brewing caffeine cancer cholesterol color cup diet different disease drink drinking flavor green green tea health health benefits healthy lifestyle herbal tea infusion leaf leaves loose loose leaf green tea loose leaf tea loose tea oolong oolong tea people prevent process properties quality rooibos several taste tea tea leaves tea plant tea types tisane used water weight white tea world Copyright © 2016 ESP Tea - Powered by BlogEngine.NET 3.1.1.0 - Design by Compunix | 农业 | 21,240 |
What is policy monitoring? Why should agricultural polices in developing countries be subject to monitoring? What aspects of those policies should be monitored? What indicators are available to be used? And how should one proceed to develop those indicators in a constructive and transparent manner? These questions are central to the theme of this paper, and so some basic definitions and propositions are useful at the outset.
In this paper we define the process of monitoring a policy or set of policies as assembling quantitative (and in some cases qualitative) indicators that can be traced over time and compared across countries. The indicators themselves are inputs into the distinct processes of quantitative modelling of market and trade effects of policies and the assessment of how well the policies are achieving their objectives. Thus for monitoring to be useful it should provide a framework for the regular collection of data and have as its output indicators that can be used directly in further analytical work. But it is important that the indicators be distinguished from the results of that further analysis: the most common problem with policy monitoring is the tendency of the casual user to read more significance than warranted into the reported level of the indicator. Such policy indicators should be thought of as necessary building blocks for models and evaluations, not as an end in themselves.
The reason to monitor policies is likely to vary by country. For developed countries, much of the interest surrounding policy monitoring has focused on the impacts on trade. For developing countries, the key issues are more likely to be on domestic performance of the agricultural sector. The main questions that such a monitoring system would address would be the extent to which the polices of the country concerned are influencing, in a positive or a negative way, the performance of the sector. Subsequent uses of the quantitative indicators derived in the study could include the trade impacts of policy change or the impacts on producers and consumers in the country of trade policy changes. But the main objective of the monitoring exercise itself is to benchmark the set of policies currently in place.
The definition of monitoring used here implies that the answer to the question “what should one monitor” is itself crucially dependent on the end-use of the indicators. For present purposes we assume that the objective of FAO (and the Consortium) is to provide countries with information that will be useful in their attempts to improve agricultural policies. This suggests that the policies that are the target of the monitoring are clearly identified and that these policies are under the control of the government concerned. Specifically this means that a “policy” is considered as a conscious act of legislation as opposed to a circumstance or economic condition.1 How should one monitor such governmental actions? The method that seems to best to provide the input into decision making is to measure the effect of the policy on the incentives of the actors in the sector concerned and on their capacity to react to those incentives.2 It is convenient to translate those incentives into a quantitative indicator in the price dimension, as a rate of protection, a rate of assistance or a subsidy equivalent.3 The appropriate measure for capacity is more likely to be investment or spending on capacity increases rather than being represented in the per unit (price) dimension. Other policies operate at the macroeconomic level and will be expressed in terms of overall taxes or subsidies to the sector through the operation of the price system. Regulations also reflect policies and their impact must be considered in any full analysis of the incentives to the agricultural sector.
A variety of indicators are available for the purposes of monitoring in a price dimension the incentive effect of agricultural policies. Six of the most usual measures are shown in Table 1. The most straightforward measure is based on the standard analysis of a tariff: the nominal rate of protection (NPR) is given as the increase in the revenue per unit (producer price) in the presence of the policy relative to that which would be obtained in the base (no-policy) state. The adjusted nominal rate of protection (ANR), also found in tariff studies, measures the change in net income per unit, taking into account any taxes and subsidies on purchased inputs, relative to income per unit in the no-policy state. The effective rate of protection (ERP) takes into account the change in value added per unit of output but relates it to the no-policy value added. The added information gained by tracking changes to value added rather than revenue per unit (adjusted or not for input taxes) comes at a cost in terms of more data: all non-factor inputs have to be accounted for regardless as to whether their prices are affected by the policies under study. The choice is therefore governed by available resources and data and by the set of policies whose effects are being measured.
In agricultural policy, as discussed below, an additional set of indicators not so focused on border tariffs has become useful. As countries have moved from price protection (at the border or through subsidies on outputs or inputs) to income protection, it has been necessary to include direct payments and other forms of non-price subsidy. Particularly in the situation of developed countries, it became evident that the analysis of agricultural support would be incomplete without consideration of the influence of government outlays on farmers' returns in the form of capital grants, input subsidies, and various other transfers involving government expenditures. Thus the nominal rate of assistance (NRA) was developed to record the change in income as a result of both price and direct income support as a proportion of income in the no-policy situation. The effective rate of assistance (ERA) measures the same change relative to value added in the no-policy case. Finally, the producer subsidy equivalent (PSE) measures the transfers through price and non-price policies as a proportion of with-policy income.4 If tariffs are the only protective measure used, and there is complete price transmission from border to domestic prices, the NPR is a good approximation of the impact of protection on domestic producer prices. Principal data sources in this case would be the tariff schedules of the countries concerned, and the specific policy information needed would be minimal.5 Where non-tariff barriers to trade such as import quotas, or export subsidies are in operation, then the tariff-equivalent measure of both tariffs and non-tariff barriers is more appropriate. Thus, even when border measures predominate, an important decision has to be made as to whether to rely on explicit border measures (e.g. tariff schedules), or alternatively to estimate the tariff equivalent of tariffs and non-tariff barriers by a direct price comparison approach.6 However, it is important to note that the NPR measure takes no account of the possible effects of protection for major tradable inputs used in a particular product or production process. Resources move between alternative activities not according to the gross revenue from the sector but in accordance with the return to factors employed in that sector. Thus, even when protection is given mainly at the border, a measure of protection that involves value-added, such as ERP, is useful. The more inclusive measures of protection were developed in large part because the protection given to agriculture at the border is only one part of the impact of policies. The concepts of NRA, ERA and PSE were developed in an attempt to measure in one integral measure the effect of both price and non-price related interventions on farmers' income.
The exchange rate is explicitly involved in the calculation of both NPRs and ERPs in so far as it is used in comparing domestic to border prices. Therefore a misalignment of the exchange rate can significantly affect the measures of the protection given to agricultural goods. It was concern about the possible exchange rate misalignment in developing countries that induced economists in the 1980s to incorporate some measure of this exchange rate phenomenon in the measures of agricultural protection, and to calculate what is often referred to as the “indirect” rate of protection.7 Moreover, the “domestic” measures that aim to include the effects of policies inside the border are also impacted by exchange rate misalignment. So long as any of the goods purchased by the farm sector are “tradable” their price will tend to reflect exchange rate conditions.8 In practice, the calculation of NRA, ERA and PSE does make use of border price comparisons, and so the exchange rate is crucial to the estimation process.
Less easy to categorize are the possible measures of structural policy, factor market conditions, and regulations regarding health and safety. Conditions in the factor markets are important to agriculture, and the provision of infrastructure is an important aspect of government policy. In practice, limited quantitative evidence is likely to be available on the impact of structural policies. However, as discussed below, some indications of the possible effects of these policies on the farm sector should be available. In most developing countries an important role of government is to identify the main bottlenecks in infrastructure, marketing, regulations on health and standards, water markets, and other factors that affect the competitiveness of agriculture and to design appropriate interventions for their removal. However, making such calculations necessitates investigating the whole production and marketing chains to perform such analysis. As a consequence, it is rarely done in cross-country studies. We suggest below that such a systematic analysis of the food chain be a part of the policy monitoring only in those cases where reliable information, or the means to collect it, is available. The following discussion illustrates the way in which this menu of measures has been employed in agricultural policy monitoring.
1 An example may make this clear. If the agricultural sector in a developing country is inadequately served by roads to connect with urban markets, we do not identify the under-provision of roads as a "policy". In this case the policy is the investment in roads, and would be monitored as such. The indicator may show that this investment is low by various standards, and quantitative analysis may suggest the benefits from increasing such investment. By the same token, if a country chose to have no protection or intervention in a market this would be monitored as "no policy" rather than a policy to allow market forces to determine prices and trade. 2 Of the alternative methods of monitoring, a purely qualitative description of polices has limited use in policy analysis and in cross-country (or even over time) comparison. Indeed, quantitative monitoring takes as its premise that qualitative information about policies is inadequate in itself, though it is often a useful complement to qualitative monitoring.
3 Some policies would be easier to handle in the volume dimension (quotas, acreage restrictions, etc.) but then these policies would need to be converted to a price measure to be aggregated into convenient indicators.
4 The fact that the PSE, in contrast to the other measures, uses the policy-inclusive base as the denominator, is not a significant difference. The transformation to no-policy base can easily be made if this is problematic. It was chosen originally to allow the intuitive interpretation "x percent of income comes from support". Similarly, the ERA is often calculated with the policy-inclusive value-added as the denominator to avoid having to work with a small or often negative non-policy value-added.
5 This is not always straightforward, however, as there is often a difference between bound and applied tariff rates and different rates for imports coming from different sources. These issues will be taken up later.
6 Based on the identification of the point in the marketing channel from which domestic producer prices and corresponding border-price equivalents can be contrasted, such as the price paid at the buying agency for wheat (usually the flour mill), or at the slaughterhouse for pigs, or at the milk processing plant. It is seldom the farm gate price. After the border price has been transformed into domestic currency, all costs relating to transport, storage, loading and marketing, as well as taxes and subsidies to trade in the commodity in question, must be subtracted from/added to the border price up to the point in the marketing channel where domestic and border prices can be compared.
7 Strictly speaking, indirect protection at least in the Krueger, Schiff and Vald�s approach is not confined to exchange rate misalignment alone; it attempts to capture also both the influence of industrial protection and of macroeconomic variables (specifically, the "excess" deficit in the current account) on relative prices from an economy-wide perspective. 8 Conceptually, the return to factors producing exclusively non-traded goods and purchasing no traded inputs (as might happen in low-income subsistence agriculture) is not influenced by the exchange rate, but the purchasing power of those factor incomes will still be influenced by the traded goods sector. In practice, it may make sense to concentrate on tradable goods, as the impact of policies in such a case would be much more direct. | 农业 | 13,704 |
Don’t wait till April to prepare your taxes
Sometimes you just want carpeting
HomeLivingIn the garden: What to make of the poppy?
In the garden: What to make of the poppy?
David Hobson
The poppy is November's symbolic flower.
In Flanders fields the poppies blow . . . What to make of this flower that holds such significance? It grew, of course, in the fields of Flanders, in Belgium, where it inspired the First World War poem of Lt. Col. John McCrae of Guelph. Appearing in disturbed ground, it found no shortage of opportunity on battlefields, where the seeds germinated freely in no man’s land.
This particular red poppy is Papaver rhoeas, also known as corn poppy, field poppy and Flanders poppy. It has also been referred to as red weed, due to its propensity to form a soil seed bank, a concentration of seeds that germinate at variable rates — lying dormant for years, only to sprout in profusion when the conditions are right, often when a field is freshly plowed for crops.
For as long as crops have been cultivated, it has been the bane of old world farmers, an agricultural weed. Prior to modern cultivation and the use of herbicides, a blanket of red might appear on cultivated land as poppies flowered in late spring or early summer, becoming well established ahead of the desired grain. With a preference for fertile ground, the poppy redeemed itself slightly by revealing the presence of rich soil.
The plant is native to Europe, probably southern Europe or Eurasia, where in Persia (today’s Iran) it was known as the flower of love. It may also have originated in North Africa, but thanks to such prolific seeding, its origins are vague. Beside the Stork Family Y on Fischer-Hallman Road in Waterloo, a whole swath grows in a patch of meadow there, part of the new landscape design.
The familiar red Papaver rhoeas also grows freely in the south of England and is, in fact, the county flower of both Essex and Norfolk. But it was in Surrey where changes began. In the village of Shirley, Rev. W. Wilks, a local vicar and a determined horticulturalist, happened upon a poppy in his garden that had a slight variation in colour — a white border on the petals. With diligence and care, he bred, crossed and selected further variations, which resulted in the colourful series of poppies we now know as Shirley poppies. They are available in yellows, pinks, orange and bicolour, and in different forms — singles, doubles, semi doubles, peony and picotee. The Royal Horticultural Society was so impressed with the good vicar’s work he was awarded the Victorian Medal of Honour in 1912.
Besides Papaver rhoeas, there are other, equally colourful species, including Papaver somniferum, the opium poppy. This is the same plant that is grown in Afghanistan to produce heroin and, yes, the poppy seeds on your bagel are from this species. As far as I know, Papaver somniferum is still listed in Schedule 1 (Sections 2 to 7, 29, 55 and 60) of the Controlled Substances Act as a plant we are not supposed to possess. I confess that, like most gardeners, I’ve grown it for years without a visit from the RCMP. I suppose if I filled the backyard with it, I might attract a little unwelcome attention.
Like the Shirley poppies, this one has also been hybridized to produce similar forms in a range of colours. One of my favourites is Danish Flag, so named because of the resemblance, a white cross on a red background.
Other poppy species to brighten up a flower bed at random are Icelandic poppies. Mostly shades of yellow and orange, they’re short lived perennials, hardy enough around here but they don’t like hot weather. Papaver orientale, or Oriental poppy, is a much larger, true perennial that will stick around in the garden. It’s the one with the hairy, toothed leaves and big floppy flowers.
As colourful and popular as these poppies are in the garden, it’s the simple red poppy that this month has such meaning. For me, it’s a reminder of a grandfather I never knew.
David Hobson gardens in Waterloo and is happy to answer garden questions, preferably by email: [email protected]. Reach him by mail c/o Here, Guelph Mercury, 8 – 14 Macdonell St., Guelph, Ont., N1H 6P7.
Bugs are bad for business: Let Kubassek give you a pest-free workplace
Along with residential pest control, Kubassek Pest Control & Extermination in Cambridge is...
Big savings for small business
Two years ago, Ira Kargel and Kevin Wallace of Gears Bike Shop decided they’d had it with halogen...
Home insurance: What you as a new homebuyer need to know
New homebuyers need to be aware of home insurance options that are specific to them; an area of...
The taxi’s clear advantages over ridesharing
Red Top Taxi in Guelph has been providing cab service to the area since 1978, when it started with...
Local self-storage facility is the safest place for your valuables
Everyone wants a safe place to store their possessions, and the logical place for that in Guelph is...
At Shoeless Joe's Sports Grill in Guelph, you'll find the perfect combination — the latest sports...
Host the perfect event with Oryan Catering
Oryan Catering in Guelph can help you host the perfect birthday party, wedding, retirement party or...
Understanding ears and the way we hear sound
Steffler Hearing Aid Service in Guelph shares some information about how your ears work in the hope...
As a teen, I saw myself in Rory. Now I strive to be like Lorelai
When the ants go marching in
Hamilton’s Junior Press Club captivated kids
Wines and spirits: Brights Wines vintner now runs his own show in Chile Lessons could be learned in rise of Jedi adherents | 农业 | 5,606 |
Buckwheat, 100% Whole Grain, Organic Buy Online
Eden Organic Buckwheat is North Dakota family organically grown and simply milled to remove its hard hull, leaving the whole grain intact. Often referred to as hulled or raw buckwheat groats, it should not be confused with roasted buckwheat or 'kasha", which has stronger flavor.
Buckwheat seems to have originated simultaneously around Lake Baikal in Siberia, in the Himalayas, and in Manchuria where it was domesticated and cultivated around 6,000 BC. It spread to other Asian countries and Japan via Buddhist monks. During the Crusades, Saracen traders brought buckwheat from Asia to Europe where it has remained a staple food, especially in Russia and central Europe.
Despite the name, buckwheat Fagopyrum esculentum is not related to wheat and is gluten free. It ranks quite low on the glycemic index.
Buckwheat is a hardy, herbaceous plant with broad leaves and very fragrant white and pink flowers. Often mistaken as a wild grass, it is not a grass, but rather related to Chinese rhubarb and sorrel. Buckwheat belongs to the Polygonaceae family. Although not a member of the cereal grain family Gramineae, it is eaten and used as a cereal grain.
Buckwheat gets its name from the Anglo-Saxon words 'boc' meaning beech and 'whoet' meaning wheat. The name refers to buckwheat's brownish-black pyramidal seed that although much smaller, resembles a beechnut from the beech tree. Dutch settlers introduced 'boecweite' to colonial America, planting it in New York State and Pennsylvania. Buckwheat was once one of American's most popular breakfast porridges.
Buckweat is extremely versatile with mild flavor and superb nutrition.
Its protein is superior to that of most cereal grains, providing all amino acids including the essential ones. It is Nature's best source of the important nutrient rutin, an efficacious vitamin C complex flavonoid. Eden Organic Buckwheat is 100% whole grain. According to the FDA, "Diets rich in whole grain and other plant foods, and low in total fat, saturated fat, and cholesterol may reduce the risk of heart disease and some cancers." Also, "Low fat diets rich in fiber-containing grain products, fruits, and vegetables may reduce the risk of some types of cancer, a disease associated with many factors." Eden Organic Buckwheat is low fat, saturated fat and cholesterol free, and sodium free. Mild, light, and energizing Eden Organic Buckweat is high in fiber, thiamin B1, and magnesium, and a good source of protein and niacin B3.
Eden Organic Buckwheat is quick cooking whole grain, just 20 minutes. Enjoy as an entrée, or in porridge, in soups, salads, stuffed cabbage, grain burgers and croquettes, pierogi, tabouli, and more. 100% whole grain. Buy Online | | 农业 | 2,746 |
The Secret To Foie Gras That Keeps Its Fat Is In The Liver By Joe Palca
Nov 16, 2011 TweetShareGoogle+Email A jury member feels a piece of duck foie gras during a contest of local producers and producers from southwestern France. BOB EDME
People get very riled up about foie gras, the fatty liver of ducks and geese. Some are bothered by the force feedings the ducks and geese undergo to produce those fatty livers, which are 6 to 10 times the normal size. Others fear the fat itself – although foie gras enthusiasts insist that the delicacy is "surprising low in bad fats, and high in good fats." But reliably raising birds with a liver that retains its fat once it hits the pan is a tricky business. Part of the challenge is knowing how long to stuff the birds with food — typically mashed corn. Now science may be coming to the rescue. Writing in the Journal of Agriculture and Food Chemistry, Caroline Molette, an animal protein expert, and her colleagues at the French National Institute for Agricultural Research have found some of the key proteins that can tell you whether you've got a good liver on your hands. One requirement, the scientists say, is that the liver retain its fat when cooked. It's that retained fat that gives the liver that buttery taste gourmands crave. More than 30 percent fat loss is forbidden. The livers that showed signs that they were still growing when the birds were slaughtered produced more desirable proteins than those that were larger but had stopped growing. According to the paper, if you reduce the time you overfeed the ducks, you get livers that lose less fat during cooking. The findings might mollify those riled up about the way the ducks and geese are force fed, but probably not much. The French government, meanwhile, is bothered by people who fail to make foie gras properly. A government decree, originally issued in 1993, is very explicit about what constitutes and acceptable foie gras, and what doesn't. For example, it's OK to add truffles, water, salt, nitrite, ascorbic acid or sodium ascorbate, but not more than 10 percent water, s'il vous plait. China has been trying to get an edge on the foie gras market in recent years. A few years ago, NPR's Louisa Lim did a foie gras and truffles taste test with a pair of expatriate chefs in China to see if they could tell the difference. Copyright 2013 NPR. To see more, visit http://www.npr.org/. TweetShareGoogle+Email © 2016 KENW | 农业 | 2,440 |
Organic Agriculture's Resilience Shows Untapped Potential
Wednesday, June 1, 2011 - 9:50amWorldwatch InstituteContact: Supriya Kumar, [email protected], (+1) 202-452-1999 x510Organic Agriculture's Resilience Shows Untapped Potential
New analysis highlights organic agriculture as an eco-friendly means of improving livelihoods and preserving natural resources. WASHINGTON - Despite the crippling effects of the recent economic slowdown on many industries, the organic agriculture sector not only sustained itself during this period but also showed signs of growth. "In 2009, organic farming was practiced on 37.2 million hectares worldwide, a 5.7 percent increase from 2008 and 150 percent increase since 2000," writes policy analyst E.L. Beck, in the latest Vital Signs Online release from the Worldwatch Institute.
The International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM) defines organic agriculture as: "a production system that sustains the health of soils, ecosystems and people. It relies on ecological processes, biodiversity and cycles adapted to local conditions, rather than the use of inputs with adverse effects. Organic agriculture combines tradition, innovation and science to benefit the shared environment."
Although organic agriculture is practiced around the world, certified organic agriculture tends to be concentrated in wealthier countries. The Group of 20 (G20), comprising both developing and industrialized countries, is home to 89 percent of the global certified organic agricultural area. But nongovernmental organizations, including Slow Food International and ACDI/VOCA, are working with farmers to promote organic agriculture in developing countries as a means of bettering livelihoods and rejuvenating the land.
In western Tanzania, organic agroforestry practices have helped rehabilitate some 350,000 hectares of desert land over the span of two decades. And in Ethiopia, coffee farmers are learning how to protect wild coffee plants, fertilize them using organic compost, and process them in a manner that retains the quality of the crop, without damaging the environment.
Although the global organic market has shown growth in the past few years, the rate has slowed since 2000, and there are several challenges that impede large-scale expansion of organic practices. The price premium on organic foods, for example, may dissuade many consumers from buying organic products, despite the potential environmental, ethical, and health benefits these products provide.
Two other challenges are the lack of organic standards and the scarcity of equivalency agreements. An equivalency agreement between two countries acknowledges each other's organic standards and allows for a smooth flow of certified organic goods between the two countries. The Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation finances the Global Organic Market Access (GOMA) project, which facilitates the trade of organic products by establishing organic standards and negotiating equivalency agreements, but more progress is needed in this area.
Rising farmland prices are putting a further strain on organic agriculture. Research by the International Food Policy Research Institute shows that foreign investors have spent up to $20-30 billion on land purchases since 2006. These price hikes are threatening global food security and are especially detrimental to small-scale farmers' ability to enter the organic agriculture field.
Despite all these challenges, organic agriculture holds untapped potential for helping farmers and consumers alike build resilience to food price shocks, climate change, and water scarcity. By turning to organic agroforestry and switching from synthetic to organic fertilizers, farmers are not only raising their incomes by reducing input costs, but also adapting to the effects of climate change and helping to protect the environment.
"In order to keep feeding humanity for generations to come, and to feed people better, farming must reinforce conservation goals by adding diversity to the food chain and by healing ecosystems," said Danielle Nierenberg, Worldwatch senior researcher and co-director of the Institute's Nourishing the Planet project.
Worldwatch's Nourishing the Planet (www.NourishingthePlanet.org) project has traveled to 25 countries across sub-Saharan Africa, shining a spotlight on communities that serve as models for a more sustainable future. The project is unearthing innovations in agriculture that can help alleviate hunger and poverty while also protecting the environment. These innovations are elaborated in the recently released report State of the World 2011: Innovations that Nourish the Planet.
###The Worldwatch Institute is an independent research organization recognized by opinion leaders around the world for its accessible, fact-based analysis of critical global issues. Its mission is to generate and promote insights and ideas that empower decision makers to build an ecologically sustainable society that meets human needs. Organization Links
Worldwatch InstituteWorldwatch Institute (Press Center)Share This Article | 农业 | 5,107 |
News USDA-AMS deputy administrator to retire in October
By Tom Karst
With connections that go back 35 years in the fresh produce industry, Bob Keeney plans to retire from the U.S. Department of Agriculture in October.
Keeney, 61, confirmed through the USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service press office that he plans retire from his post as AMS deputy administrator this fall.
Industry leaders say his familiarity with issues of concern will be missed.
“Bob’s career has been devoted to serving the produce industry, first in the private sector, heading government relations at our association, and for the past 25 years at the Agricultural Marketing Service at USDA,” United Fresh Produce Association Tom Stenzel said in a statement. “Throughout his leadership on (the Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act), produce inspection and other AMS programs, Bob has been a great friend of the industry and I’m fortunate to say, a personal friend,” according to Stenzel’s statement.
Keeney was hired by the then-United Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Association in Alexandria, Va., in 1977, working ten years at the association and eventually becoming vice president for government relations and international trade.
Keeney was selected deputy director of fruit and vegetable programs at AMS in 1987.
His duties as deputy administrator for USDA AMS fruit and vegetable programs have made him one of the most recognizable figure at USDA to fresh produce industry leaders. Keeney oversees USDA programs responsible for fruit and vegetable inspections, marketing order and marketing agreement oversight, market news, enforcement of the Perishable Agriculture Commodities Act and $350 million in annual commodity purchases for domestic feeding programs.
Keeney has been present at every meeting of the USDA’s fruit and vegetable advisory committee, which was first appointed in 2002 and last met in 2011. The committee has provided USDA with input on a wide range of issues, including nutrition programs, farm bill funding, commodity purchasing, and Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act regulations.
“Bob’s legacy is that, when he retires, he will be leaving an agency that reflects his willingness to listen to the produce industry and tailor programs to facilitate the marketing of fruits and vegetables,” Tom O’Brien, Washington, D.C., based-representative for the Newark, Del.-based Produce Marketing Association, said in a statement.
Nancy Foster, president of the U.S. Apple Association, Vienna, Va., said Keeney will be missed.
“I have deep respect for Bob Keeney, not only for his knowledge but his humor and quick understanding of the issues that the industry deals with,” Foster said.
Kam Quarles, director of legislative affairs for the Washington, D.C.-based McDermott Will & Emery law firm, said Keeney has been a counselor and a sounding board for the industry.
“He uniquely understood our needs and was able to merge those needs into the regulatory process at USDA,” Quarles said.
usdabob keeney retiresagricultural marketing service Related Articles
USDA's Keeney honored for service to the industry
USDA consolidation includes fresh produce branch
Successor ready to take over AMS post in October
Tom Karst
Tom Karst is national editor for The Packer and Farm Journal Media, covering issues of importance to the produce industry including immigration, farm policy and food safety.
He began his career with The Packer in 1984 as one of the founding editors of ProNet, a pioneering electronic news service for the produce industry. Tom has also served as markets editor for The Packer and editor of Global Produce magazine, among other positions.
Tom is also the main author of Fresh Talk, www.tinyurl.com/freshtalkblog, an industry blog that has been active since November 2006.
Previous to coming to The Packer, Tom worked from 1982 to 1984 at Harris Electronic News, a farm videotext service based in Hutchinson, Kansas.
Tom has a bachelor’s degree in agricultural journalism from Kansas State University, Manhattan.
He can be reached at [email protected] and 913-438-0769. Find Tom's Twitter account at www.twitter.com/tckarst. View All Posts | 农业 | 4,156 |
Simplification and better regulation for the common agricultural policy
The Commission plans to simplify the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) by improving the structure and presentation of agricultural legislation. This Communication examines the possibilities and limits of such a simplification and proposes measures, including a single common market organisation (CMO) and the drawing up in 2006 of an action plan containing specific measures.
Communication from the Commission of 19 October 2005 on Simplification and Better Legislation for the Common Agricultural Policy [COM(2005) 509 final - not published in the Official Journal].
In the communication the Commission sets out past and future measures aimed at simplifying the CAP. One of the major steps envisaged is to create a single common market organisation (CMO) for all agricultural products.
The aim of this communication is to revise the legal framework, administrative procedures and management mechanisms to make them more transparent and understandable while preserving the basic policy principles. This initiative is to make simplifying the CAP part of a process of awareness-raising, dialogue and planning. These objectives were followed up on in October 2006 in an action plan and a conference of stakeholders.
THE PURPOSE OF SIMPLIFICATION:
The aim is to identify and eliminate unnecessary obstacles. Simplification will take two forms:
technical simplification meaning revision of the legal framework, administrative procedures and management mechanisms to achieve streamlining and greater cost-effectiveness;
political simplification meaning reducing complexity and improving agricultural support and rural development policy instruments.
Simplifying the CAP is an ambitious task. It must be compatible with other political objectives such as environmental protection, food safety and safeguarding the Community's financial interests. It must also respect the different economic, environmental and political realities in the Member States. At the same time, it is important to find a balance between simplicity in administration and sufficient flexibility to reflect local needs.
STOCKTAKING: HORIZONTAL MEASURES
Streamlining of agricultural legislation
At the time of publication of this communication, the Commission has already reduced the number of agricultural acts in force and improved the presentation of the texts. As part of the two-year programme on Updating and simplifying the Community acquis the Commission screens the acquis to identify obsolete agricultural legislation. In addition, all Community agricultural legislation, most of which is available in a consolidated version, is freely accessible to all citizens.
State aid rules
Since 1999, the rules governing State aid have been simplified and made more transparent. Part of this rationalisation has involved repealing a number of legal texts.
Informal guidelines have been established and the number and frequency of reports have been reduced. Certain acts on irregularities in CAP expenditure and the Structural Funds are being or will be reviewed to reduce the administrative burden on the Member States.
STOCKTAKING: POLICY MEASURES
2003 CAP reform
This reform, which radically changed the CAP, was an important step towards improving the quality of the European Union's legislation. Nine Council regulations and many other provisions were repealed. Other regulations have been reformulated and procedures have been simplified via the creation of a single management committee for all direct payments.
The reform's potential for simplifying the way agricultural income support is granted, managed and controlled is significant. Realising that potential is a matter for the Member States, who may choose between two decoupling models *, apply partial decoupling or exclude certain aid schemes from decoupling, implement a separate support system and make use of various derogations. If they decide to make use of the full range of possibilities the heterogeneous application of the reform will increase the complexity of the system.
Single Area Payment Scheme for the new Member States
For a maximum of five years after accession, the new Member States may grant simplified direct income support. The Single Area Payment Scheme (SAPS) authorises the grant of a flat rate per hectare of farmland. In addition, only area-related checks are required.
The Council Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 on support for rural development for the period 2007-2013 simplifies the content, scope and implementation of the policy by establishing clear priorities and streamlining programming. It also establishes a single financing, programming, financial management and control framework.
Financing the CAP
Through Council Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005, the rules for financing the two pillars of the CAP have been combined in a single legal text setting up two Funds - the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD). As far as possible, the same rules apply to both, simplifying the financial management of rural development measures in the next programming period and the treatment of irregularity cases
THE WAY FORWARD: TECHNICAL SIMPLIFICATION
The Commission intends to explore new ways of improving the structure and presentation of agricultural legislation. A "legal audit" will be carried out to identify and eliminate superfluous rules, replace multiple sectoral rules with horizontal rules and provide for sunset clauses where appropriate.
A single CMO for all agricultural products
The 2003 reform simplified the CAP's legislative environment by establishing a horizontal legal framework for all direct payments and amalgamating an array of support systems into a single payment scheme. The Commission intends to extend that approach to the 21 common market organisations and to create a simplified and rationalised legal structure for the first pillar of the CAP. The extent to which harmonisation is possible and sectoral approaches can be replaced with horizontal ones needs to be examined.
The Commission intends to test the feasibility of an "EU net administrative cost method" which would help national administrations to quantify and reduce the administrative costs imposed on farmers by CAP mechanisms.
The seven texts currently in force will be reduced to three: the exemption regulation, one set of guidelines and the de minimis regulation.
THE WAY FORWARD: POLICY MEASURES
Reform of the sugar CMO
In 2006, the reform of the agricultural sector instituted a significant number of simplifications:
introduction of a single quota system;variable production levies linked to quotas replaced by fixed charges;intervention replaced by private storage;simplification of the rules on trade with third countries;inclusion of direct income support in the sugar sector in the Single Payment Scheme.
Simplification will play an important role in the various scheduled policy reviews, including the wine CMO, organic farming and quality policy.
CAP simplification needs to be embedded in a process of awareness-raising, dialogue and planning, providing for the following measures:
action plan (PDF): simplification proposals made by Member States and stakeholders were taken into consideration in the development of a CAP action plan drawn up by the Commission's departments in October 2006;
: a conference on simplification of the CAP brought together stakeholders' viewpoints and requirements in October 2006;
training: staff training and awareness raising on the purposes of simplification are an important part of the ongoing simplification work;
information technologies: the use of IT tools is essential for the implementation of the mechanisms for data collection and the exchange of information with the national authorities.
This communication is part of the simplification of legislation (PDF) provided for in the Community's Lisbon programme.
Key terms used in the act
Decoupling: This consists in breaking the link between production and subsidy. From now on the major proportion of aid will be paid regardless of production volume.
For more information on the simplification of the common agricultural policy, please consult the website of the Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development and the information (PDF) on that topic. | 农业 | 8,360 |
Ag Biotech News
Alexander J. Stein
onto Ag Biotech News
Genetically modified Golden Rice - DW (2014)
www.dw.de
Biologists Peter Beyer and Ingo Potrykus succeeded in developing a new type of rice named Golden Rice... some 15 years ago. The two scientists genetically modified the rice to produce and accumulate provitamin A - or beta carotene - which the human body then converts into vitamin A... Vitamin A deficiency is a huge problem that is widely unknown to people in developed countries. According to estimates of the World Health Organization (WHO), some 250 million young children suffer from the vitamin deficiency. Every year, about 250,000 to 500,000 children go blind due to malnutrition, with half of them dying within a year after going blind. Children in poor African and Southeast Asian countries are among the most affected. Maternal mortality figures are also high in countries in these regions. But the genetically modified rice is still not available on the market and has numerous critics. The rice prototype has to pass a number of tests to receive approval -- and this might take a while. It takes years to optimize the prototype, which then is tested on outdoor fields. Finally, the rice has to pass the regulatory process, which takes into account all data that has been collected in trials. But delays are also caused by the massive resistance to the project. In summer of 2013, activists destroyed fields in the Philippines where the scientists were carrying out trials... they believe the rice is simply a PR stunt... It's a claim British journalist Mark Lynas has often heard when it comes to genetic engineering. Lynas, who used to oppose that technique as well, is convinced of the Golden Rice's advantages. "There are a lot of conspiracy theories... It is always the case with the GMO debate -- the opponents always try to show that there is some evil industry plot. The reality with Golden Rice is that it is a publicly owned and publicly funded project." But the project wouldn't work without at least some industry support. At an early stage, Beyer and Potrykus brought in agro-chemical and seed specialist Syngenta which also owns the patent on Golden Rice. According to the Golden Rice Humanitarian Board's website, Syngenta no longer has a commercial interest. "The technology has been donated by the inventors and Syngenta to the resource-poor-farmers of developing countries... Golden Rice is being introduced into publicly owned rice varieties via national and international public sector research institutions, to be made available by government institutions, free of charge, to resource-poor farmers." ... For now, WHO helps fight vitamin A deficiencies by distributing pills or foodstuff enriched with the vitamin. Beyer... argued that these measures haven't helped solve the problem.... Beyer said he is hopeful that the rice will get the necessary approval this year once he has handed in the proper papers. http://www.dw.de/genetically-modified-golden-rice-variety-stirs-up-controversy/a-17396082
Alexander J. Stein's insight:
"In the Philippines, there are many rice varieties that have a yellowish color as well. How does one make sure it's actually 'Golden Rice' that's sold?" >> Interesting point from the critics -- the argument used to be that people will not eat rice that deviates from the preferred white rice, and now the argument is that people already eat yellow rice and cannot tell the difference, even if they want to eat it? I'd say that'd be a great problem to have, that people would be so eager to eat Golden Rice that criminal rice dealers see a market for fake Golden Rice... (Again, so far the argument was that Golden Rice would be a failure because nobody would want it.) Probably the reality will be in-between: It will not be a failure because of its colour (taste, texture, cooking time, etc. will all be the same), but neither will it become so quickly so wildely popular that farmers cannot produce enough of it. But even if it becomes so popular, the rice seed multiplication and distribution systems in most Asian countries should be able to provide enough seeds to supply the demand within a few seasons, and given the great demand -- and thus consumption -- of Golden Rice, vitamin A deficiency would become eliminated much more rapidly than even enthusiastic supporters of the rice would currently dream... Moreover, if criminal energy is supposed, this could also be used as argument against the distribution of vitamin A pills -- where the companies producing them have an incentive to reduce the amount of vitamin A in the pills, or where those who distribute the pills have an incentive to cut short their trip through poor remote areas and thus skip families who are most at risk (but who might very well get new rice seeds every once in a while, whether through the formal seed market or through their informal networks, and therefore eventually also cultivate Golden Rice) "Beyer... argued that these measures haven't helped solve the problem." >> I guess he meant to say that pharmaceutical supplements haven't solved the problem despite being used since many years, because "help" they did, only not enough -- which is why complementary measures are needed. more...
Scoops on GMOs, agricultural biotech, innovation, breeding, crop protection, and related info (not necessarily endorsements). CLICK on the titles to get to the full, original, and possibly hyperlinked versions! Curated by Alexander J. Stein
Bringing light into the discussion about GMOs? – A rather long reading list
ajstein.tumblr.com
[updated July 24, 2016] These days I received an apparently easy request: “Do you have any recommendations for reading about the debate on GMOs? I think there is a lot of heat, but too little light in the discussion; I trust you can send me some…” To which I answered carelessly: “Sure, I will look into it, select a few references and post them…” I thought I’d have a quick look into my collection of bookmarks and references and post some of the links to satisfy the request. Obviously there would be too many individual studies and crop-specific or country-specific reports, but focusing only (i) on what was published in recent years, (ii) on sources where all this information was already aggregated (literature reviews, meta-analyses, authoritative statements, FAQs, etc.), and (iii) on academic or publicly funded sources should produce a fairly concise list, I thought. While not unmanageable, the list has become quite long. To get a rough idea of the current state of knowledge, it may be sufficient to peruse the first 1-2 (starred *) references under each heading, and to have a quick look at the abstracts and summaries of some of the others. (Given the controversy surrounding this topic I did not want to suggest just one or two sources, but show a bit the width of the scientific consensus, and to offer some titbits of related information.) ... http://ajstein.tumblr.com/post/40504136918/ more...
Jennifer Mach's comment, March 30, 2013 9:05 AM
I admit I haven't read this list... but for future reference, I'll definitely have a look.
Karen Ashby's curator insight, April 5, 2016 4:26 AM
Conflicted about how your view on GM ties in with a career in Biotech? Look no further
Targeted genome editing, an alternative tool for trait improvement in horticultural crops - Subburaj &al (2016) - Hortic Environ Biotechnol
Improving crops through plant breeding, an important approach for sustainable agriculture, has been utilized to increase the yield and quality of foods and other biomaterials for human use. Crops, including cereals, vegetables, ornamental flowers, fruits, and trees, have long been cultivated to produce high-quality products for human consumption. Conventional breeding technologies, such as natural cross-hybridization, mutation induction through physical or chemical mutagenesis, and modern transgenic tools are often used to enhance crop production. However, these breeding methods are sometimes laborious and complicated, especially when attempting to improve desired traits without inducing pleiotropic effects. Recently, targeted genome editing (TGE) technology using engineered nucleases, including meganucleases, zinc finger nucleases (ZFNs), transcription activator-like effector nucleases (TALENs), and clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeat (CRISPR) nucleases, has been used to improve the traits of economically important plants. TGE has emerged as a novel plant-breeding tool that represents an alternative approach to classical breeding, but with higher mutagenic efficiency. Here, we briefly describe the basic principles of TGE and the types of engineered nucleases utilized, along with their advantages and disadvantages. We also discuss their potential use to improve the traits of horticultural crops through genome engineering. http://doi.org/10.1007/s13580-016-0281-8 more...
From classical mutagenesis to nuclease‐based breeding – directing natural DNA repair for a natural end‐product - Pacher & Puchta (2016) - Plant J
onlinelibrary.wiley.com
The production of mutants of crop plants by the use of chemical or physical genotoxins has a long tradition. These factors induce the natural DNA repair machinery to repair damages in an error-prone way. In case of radiation, multiple double strand breaks (DSBs) are induced randomly in the genome, leading in very rare cases to a desirable phenotype. In recent years the use of synthetic, site directed nucleases (SDNs), also referred to as sequence specific nucleases (SSNs), like the CRISPR/Cas system, enabled scientists to use exactly the same naturally occurring DNA repair mechanisms for the controlled induction of genomic changes at predefined sites in plant genomes. As these changes are not necessarily associated with the permanent integration of foreign DNA, the obtained organisms per se cannot be regarded as genetically modified as there is no way to distinguish it from natural variants. This applies to changes induced by DSBs, as well as single strand breaks (SSBs)... The recent development of SDN-based “DNA-free” approaches makes the discrimination between mutagenesis strategies in classical breeding indistinguishable from SDN-derived targeted genome modifications, even in regard to current regulatory rules. With the advent of the new SDN technologies, much faster and more precise genome editing becomes available at reasonable costs and potentially not requiring time consuming deregulation of newly created phenotypes. This review will focus on classical mutagenesis breeding and the application of newly developed SDNs in order to emphasize similarities in context of the regulatory situation for genetically modified crop plants... Considering the initially discussed process of breeding and mutational breeding, in comparison with the possibilities that arose with the advent of reprogrammable customized SDNs, it has become evident that plant biotechnology has reached a new era. While classical and mutational breeding were time-consuming and potential mutations happened unnoticed elsewhere in the genome, the new technologies allow for fast and highly accurate GE, exploiting the natural DNA repair mechanisms of plants. Harnessing the knowledge of those pathways and the availability of the new biotechnological tools, it is now feasible to create precisely predictable genome modifications at affordable costs that are based on much better defined changes than classical breeding induced mutations and are by no means different than naturally occurring varieties. Given those new possibilities of editing plant genomes, even without a permanent or even temporary presence of stably integrated DNA, regulatory burdens for commercialization of new agronomically relevant crops should be lowered and hopefully public acceptance enhanced. It is our strong opinion that the currently available tools will significantly boost the potential of plant biotechnology and this way support the increasing nutritional need of a steadily growing world population. http://doi.org/10.1111/tpj.13469 more...
Genetically modified crops, regulatory delays, and international trade - Smyth (2017) - Food Energy Sec
Genetically modified (GM) crops have been produced in the initial adopting countries for 20 years. Over this period of time, hundreds of articles and reports have been published by academic journals, government regulatory agencies, and national science organizations on the safety aspects of biotechnology and GM crops. In addition to this, there is a growing body of quantified peer reviewed literature on the economic and environmental benefits following the adoption of GM crops in both developed and developing countries. Some estimates place the economic benefits in the billions of dollars a year range. In spite of the documentation of these economic and environmental benefits... environmental nongovernmental organizations (eNGOs) are relentless in their campaigns of misinformation about the [alleged] dangers and hazards of GM crops. While eNGOs are unable to quantify their claims and accusations, their political and policy influences continue, particularly in Europe and numerous developing nations. The result of this is regulatory delays for the approval of new GM crops and frequent international commodity trade failures, where shipments have been rejected due to the low-level presence of a GM crop. Taken in combination, the regulatory and trade challenges facing GM crops are having a detrimental impact on improving food security. This article quantifies the benefits of GM crops, highlights the regulatory costs of delayed approval, and provides insights into the spillover effects from GM crop trade. http://doi.org/10.1002/fes3.100 more...
GMOs: a scapegoat of the American food system - Medium (2016) From
Avoid the Non-GMO Project’s label because it does not tell consumers any information regarding the item’s healthfulness, its impact on the environment, or the pesticides used to grow crops. Comments we received expressed that although GMOs may indeed be safe, there are socio-economic factors surrounding these crops which give consumers pause. Today, we write... that such socio-economic factors are not unique to GMOs. Non-GMO Does Not Mean Free of Patents The development of any crop can take years, leading companies to patent these new varieties to protect their investments. However, this is done regardless of the method used to modify the crop... Even seeds used in organic food production can be patented and can be developed by large agricultural companies. In contrast, some GMOs are no longer patented, such as Round-Up Ready Soy. Most farmers buy new seeds every year and have been doing so since before GMOs were developed. Because crops grown from saved seeds do not necessarily bear all the traits that farmers and consumers desire, most farmers choose to buy their seeds every year whether they grow GMOs or not. GMO Is Not Synonymous With Monsanto Speaking out in favor of genetic engineering automatically gets one labeled a Monsanto defender, even though any party can wield the technology... Business practices of massive corporations can and should be questioned and criticized when unethical, conflating “GMOs” with Monsanto... stifles innovation. This crude narrative... discourages smaller entities from developing and commercializing GE products. At the same time, Monsanto develops... even seeds approved for use under the USDA’s organic label. Consequently, shunning GMOs does not result in boycotting Monsanto’s products... Some examples of non-Monsanto genetically engineered crops... are: Bananas resistant to bacterial wilt, a scourge threatening the crop in Uganda and eastern Africa... Gluten-free wheat, developed by public sector scientists in Europe, with the potential to help celiac disease patients. Oranges resistant to citrus greening, a disease that eventually kills the orange tree and is wreaking havoc across several U.S. states. Papaya that is essentially vaccinated against Papaya Ringspot Virus (PRSV), which nearly wiped out the Hawaiian papaya industry... GMOs and Monocultures GMOs are blamed for an increase in monoculture and a decline in seed diversity... However, this is a gross oversimplification... Depending on how we define monoculture and what our concerns are, we can look at various measures to see how GMOs have affected these issues. On a system-wide level, currently adopted GMOs have led to reduced monoculture and protected biodiversity by protecting 13 million hectares of land from conversion to agriculture... Another area of concern is that biotechnology could lead to a reduction of genetic diversity within the crops themselves. However, this is not a problem specific to GMOs, as farmers plant a homogenous batch of seeds no matter what kind of seed they buy. Farmers choose from a very wide variety of seeds, GMO or non-GMO, to fit the needs of their particular farms. In addition, when scientists look at crop diversity, they actually find that many measures of crop diversity have increased over time.... Early seed catalogs had many varieties with different names that actually referred to the same variety. Other Myths and Falsehoods... Farmers have not been sued for inadvertent cross contamination. There is no evidence that organic food is healthier, nor is it free of pesticides. GMO seeds are not sterile. GMOs are not associated with the suicide of farmers in India. The concerns that many readers have regarding the strength of multi-billion dollar agricultural conglomerates, the undue power of these companies in our political and regulatory system, and other such factors... are not factors unique to discussions on GMOs or even exclusive to agriculture. These factors impact all of agriculture... using conventional or organic farming practices. As tempting as it may be to simplify these complex political and economic problems to a GMO debate in search of silver-bullet fixes, by reducing our scope we are prevented from finding genuine solutions to these issues. https://medium.com/@BioChicaGMO/5813eae795fb more...
Genetically Modified Food Labeling: A “Right to Know”? - Gostin (2016) - JAMA
jamanetwork.com
For decades, small organic farmers, environmentalists, and consumer advocates have claimed the “right to know” what is in our food. They have expressed particular dismay that food labels fail to disclose that a product is or contains ingredients from genetically modified organisms... What could be wrong with transparency and disclosure? The answer is that there exists a scientific consensus that genetically modified foods are safe for human consumption. Potential benefits of genetically modified crops include development of disease and drought resistance crops, decreased use of pesticides, more nutritious and tastier food, and food with longer shelf life. The benefits of GMO products are important in highly developed countries like the United States, but in lower-income countries whose people experience food insecurity... it can be a matter of life or death. Consider “golden rice,” genetically modified to be enriched with vitamin A. This food has the potential to benefit poor African and Southeast Asian communities where rice is a dietary staple, but vitamin A-deficient children suffer from preventable blindness... Genetically modified corn, cotton, and soybeans emerged on the US market in 1996. By 2012, GMO crops as a percentage of total crop plantings were about 88% for corn, 94% for cotton, and 93% for soybeans... After reviewing nearly 900 studies and other publications, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine recently found that GMOs were safe and did not harm the environment. Moreover, new techniques such as genome editing, blurred the distinction between genetic engineering and conventional plant breeding, making reliable labeling regulation virtually untenable. The report called for regulation focusing on the attributes of crops rather than how they were created.Medical, scientific, and public health organizations agree. In 2012, the American Medical Association said, “no scientific justification [exists] for special labeling of bioengineered foods,” and “voluntary labeling is without value” absent intense consumer education... The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) warned, labels could “mislead and falsely alarm consumers.” The World Health Organization found that GMO foods currently on the market “are not likely to present risks for human health”... The USDA has found GMO foods to be just as safe and nutritious as other foods... Despite near unanimity among scientists, the public is deeply skeptical... 93% of respondents approved of GMO food labeling... Could GMO labeling stir a new transparency movement? There is a great deal that consumers may wish to know about their food and how it is produced: where the food was grown, whether food animals were treated humanly and without antimicrobial drugs, and whether food workers were underpaid and exploited. The big question marks going forward are should consumer demand drive law, the private market, or both? Or should public policy hew to scientific evidence? When scientists and consumers have diametrically opposite views, which should prevail and why? As far as GMO labeling is concerned... would labeling stifle innovation? If we yield to consumer preferences absent scientific evidence, would this really benefit the public’s health and safety? http://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2016.17476 more...
In the pink: FDA gives 'all clear' to GM pineapple - The Packer (2016) From
www.thepacker.com
After winning U.S. Department of Agriculture approval in 2013, the genetically engineered pink pineapple from Del Monte Fresh Produce now has passed muster at the Food and Drug Administration. The FDA said... that there are no unresolved regulatory or safety questions for the fruit... Del Monte is working with the government of Costa Rica on its production plans, according to the FDA... The pink flesh pineapple is as safe and nutritious as its conventional counterparts, according to the release.The pineapple has been genetically engineered to produce lower levels of the enzymes already in conventional pineapples that convert the pink pigment lycopene to the yellow pigment beta carotene. Lycopene is the pigment that makes tomatoes red and watermelons pink.According to the FDA’s release, Del Monte plans to identify it... on tags attached to the crown of the fruit to distinguish the pink-flesh pineapple from Del Monte’s “golden” pineapples... Del Monte voluntarily submitted the pink pineapple for FDAs review, which allows marketers to make sure that derived from new plant varieties are safe and comply with the FDA regulations... http://www.thepacker.com/news/pink-fda-gives-all-clear-del-monte-pineapple Alexander J. Stein's insight:
So it seems the world will have pink pineapple (for more colourful fruit salad?) before it has golden rice (to help combat malnutrition). Sounds right... Seems Del Monte is not concerned with crops changing colour, though, but to think they can be sold as a speciality? more...
The Adoption of Genetically Engineered Alfalfa, Canola and Sugarbeets in the United States - Fernandez-Cornejo &al (2016) - USDA
www.ers.usda.gov
After their commercial introduction in 1996, genetically engineered (GE), herbicidetolerant (HT) varieties of corn, soybeans, and cotton were rapidly adopted... The success... led to the deregulation that enabled the commercialization of HT canola in 1998 and of HT alfalfa and sugarbeets in 2005. Although legal/regulatory issues limited the spread of GE sugarbeets and GE alfalfa during the first decade of the 21st century, adoption rates for these crops have increased rapidly in recent years. This report uses data... to analyze the adoption of GE alfalfa, canola, and sugarbeets in the United States. It also discusses legal/regulatory issues associated with the commercialization of these crops, trends in adoption rates, and the economic impacts of adoption. Some 95 percent of U.S. canola acres and over 99 percent of sugarbeet acres... were planted with GE seeds containing HT traits. Only 13 percent of U.S. alfalfa acres were planted using GE seeds... but this... is expected because alfalfa is a perennial crop and only about one-seventh of the alfalfa acreage is newly seeded each year. https://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/pub-details?pubid=81175 more...
Fighting contaminated land with help from the humble fruit fly - Univ York (2016) From
www.york.ac.uk
Scientists have discovered that a gene found in the common fruit fly can be successfully expressed in a plant and used to detoxify land contaminated with TNT. The breakthrough could pave the way for millions of hectares of land contaminated by munitions to be cleaned up. The study... shows how a gene found in the common fruit fly... can be expressed in Arabidopsis, a member of the cabbage family, to improve TNT removal from contaminated soil. When scientists engineered the plants to express the glutathione transferase gene found in fruit flies, they found that plants expressing the gene were more resistant to TNT and were better able to remove it from contaminated soil... The fruit fly has an enzyme which attaches itself to the TNT molecule and is able to modify it and make it less toxic, not only to the plant itself, but the environment... “it converts TNT into a product that could be more amenable to being broken down in the environment... there are sites going back to the Second World War which are still contaminated”... “Areas of land contaminated with explosives are a threat to human health and the environment.” The team from York has previously worked on a new transgenic grass species that can neutralize and eradicate RDX, an organic compound, which along with TNT, forms the base for many common military explosives... http://www.york.ac.uk/news-and-events/news/2016/research/contaminated-land-tnt-fruit-fly/ Underlying article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/nph.14326 Alexander J. Stein's insight:
... so instead of posing a threat to human health and the environment, as some fear, one more example how specific GMOs might actually improve both... more...
GE Cowpea Seeds to be Available for Nigerian Farmers in 2019 - ISAAA (2016) From
www.isaaa.org
Nigeria's National Biotechnology Development Agency... announced that GE cowpea will be commercially available... before 2019. Prof. Lucy Ogbadu, NABDA Director General... said that GE cowpea is currently under field trials and has shown positive results. "Rules are being followed... Nigerians should be assured that the GM beans and other crops... would be safe for consumption. In 2-3 years' time, cowpea should be ready in commercial quantity"... She also stressed that GM foods are not unhealthy, highlighting the initiative of 100 Nobel Laureates who signed a petition to guarantee the safety of GE crops. http://www.isaaa.org/kc/cropbiotechupdate/article/default.asp?ID=14991 more...
The Interface Between Trade and Technology Policies - Anderson (2016) - Springer
Concerns that products containing genetically modified organisms (GMOs) may be unsafe as food or animal feed, or may harm the environment, have led European countries to procrastinate on approving their production or use despite no evidence of their harm. This policy stance, which has discouraged many developing countries from adopting too, is unfortunate because modeling results show that GM crops offer welfare gains that could alleviate poverty and food insecurity directly, substantially, and relatively rapidly in countries willing to allow adoption of this new biotechnology. The stakes in this issue are very high because the prospective gains from this new technology will increase as climate change proceeds and requires adaptation by farmers to warming and to increased weather volatility and higher costs of irrigation water. http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-46925-0_7 more...
After A Sour Decade, Florida Citrus May Be Near A Comeback - NPR (2016) From
In Florida, oranges are so important that they're on the state's license plates. But after 11 years of fighting a debilitating disease, Florida's citrus industry is in a sad state. The disease, called citrus greening, is caused by a bacterium that constricts a tree's vascular system, shriveling fruit and eventually killing the tree. The bacterium is spread by a tiny insect called a psyllid. Florida's signature orange crop is now less than a third of what it was 20 years ago because of this disease... But, at Florida's Citrus Research and Education Center, researchers are now optimistic they'll win the battle to save Florida oranges, thanks in part to recent advances in developing tougher varieties of citrus... One tree that stands out. Unlike the others, it's full of fruit and looks healthy. He says, "Our growers wanted to call this variety 'Bingo.'" It's a small mandarin orange variety, seedless and easy-to-peel, that was developed over years using painstaking conventional breeding... It's one of a few varieties of greening-tolerant citrus that are beginning to provide short-term answers for growers while scientists look for a long-term solution... One short term solution that's working is physically protecting the plants from the disease vector... The screened enclosure has shown growers a simple and effective way to protect citrus trees from greening. "It's been a hundred percent successful so far of excluding the psyllid and the disease... We expect it to be a long-term protection system that works"... He unlocks the door to one of his massive screened greenhouses. We're immediately buffeted by fans. They're part of a system that makes sure bugs, like the disease carrying psyllids don't get in. Inside, the sun filters through the enclosure's fine mesh screens. There are ten acres of mandarin oranges here. Because it requires a big capital investment, growing under screens is an option just for farmers who raise fruit that's sold fresh in supermarkets and farm stands. That leaves out the majority of Florida growers whose crop goes to orange juice... For growers, some of the best news in the battle against citrus greening is coming, not from the groves, but from research labs... Researchers are using cutting edge technology to develop citrus varieties resistant to the disease... making progress with the gene editing system, CRISPR, which allows scientists to tinker with targeted pieces of DNA... that they can manipulate to make trees resistant to greening... Already used CRISPR technology to produce plants resistant to another citrus disease... "a genome-modified plant... written against Canker." It's another disease that brought big headaches to citrus growers, but it's effects paled in comparison to the devastation caused by greening... Dundee is one of Florida's oldest grower cooperatives... With greening, the co-op has lost growers. Packing houses and juice plants have closed as the size of Florida's crop dropped by two-thirds. But after years of shrinking crops and growing despair... the new developments have returned hope to the citrus industry... http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2016/12/04/503183540/after-a-sour-decade-florida-citrus-may-be-near-a-comeback more...
Genetically modified bananas: To mitigate food security concerns - Ghag & Ganapathi (2016) - Sci Hort
www.sciencedirect.com
Banana and plantains are one of the world’s most important food crops and widely consumed by people of all age groups. Bananas are a rich source of carbohydrates, important vitamins like vitamin B and C and minerals like potassium and phosphorous. Banana is an economically important cash crop as it fetch large revenue share in the domestic and international market. However, most of the production is consumed by the domestic population as it serves as the staple food for them. Bananas are vulnerable to both biotic and abiotic stress factors which limits their production. Improvement of this crop to enhance the nutrient quality and better adapt to the changing environmental conditions and to produce new disease resistant varieties is essential. Genetic engineering of banana is considered a perfect alternative for improvement of sterile cultivars or ones which are not amenable to traditional breeding methods. Several successful attempts have demonstrated the strength of this technology in developing abiotic stress tolerance and disease resistant transgenic banana varieties. Only few of the GM bananas have qualified for field studies and some are currently undergoing nutritional human trials. GM bananas aim to increase productivity and nutritional value and so could effectively contribute towards food security in the near future. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2016.11.023 more...
GMOs in Russia: Research, Society and Legislation - Korobko &al (2016) - Acta Naturae
Russian legislation lags behind the rapid developments... in genetic engineering. Only a scientifically based and well-substantiated policy on... organisms that are created with the use of genetic engineering technologies and an assessment of the risks associated with them could guarantee that the breakthroughs achieved in modern genetic engineering technologies are effectively put to use in the real economy. A lack of demand for such breakthroughs in the practical field will lead to stagnation in scientific research and to a loss of expertise... It is vital to revisit our legal framework and guidelines related to the safety and risk assessment of GMOs... in the Russian Federation. The [concept] suggested herein... enables to conduct an efficient evaluation, while eliminating wasteful studies depending on the specific features of a GMO, the conditions of its intended handling, and the features of the derived GM product. The creation of a system that enables a broad involvement of GMOs in the real economy will also provide incentives for research in this dynamic and growing field, where the Russian Federation today has sufficient expertise and potential. However, if the situation with the regulatory system remains unchanged, with a total ban on GM plants and GM animals remaining in place, the existing expertise might be rapidly lost because it won't be needed. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5199202/ more...
From risk perception to information selection… And not the other way round: Selective exposure mechanisms in the field of genetically modified organisms - Bardin &al (2016) - Food Qual Pref
Risk perceptions concerning genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are often considered to reflect media coverage. However, it might be said that people seek out information consistent with their attitudes and avoid information which could challenge them. This process refers to the selective exposure principle derived from cognitive dissonance theory. Although this principle is now well established, the only two studies carried out to date in the field of GMOs have produced contradictory results. Additionally, no study has considered the link between risk perceptions, threat perceptions and attitudes as possible antecedents of selective exposure in the field of GMOs. The aim of the present research was to fill this gap. Results... showed that people did in fact expose themselves selectively in the field of GMOs: The higher the level of general risk perception they reported, the higher the perceived threat, the more negative their attitude towards GMOs and the greater their inclination to expose themselves to information on the harmful effects of GM food. We discuss the consequences of selective exposure and the potential levers which could favor exposure to pros and cons, thereby also favoring informed food choices. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2016.12.015 more...
Innovations continuously enhance crop breeding and demand new strategic planning - Flavell (2016) - Global Food Pol
Food security relies on continuous supplies of improved products from plant breeding and their assimilation into agriculture. Extraordinary innovations in the life sciences have brought plant breeding into a new phase of opportunity. These include the means to discover, manage and select better versus poorer versions of genes and the ability to change gene sequences in situ by gene editing. Genomics is also revealing the thousands of different microbes in all plants and the roles that their genomes play in determining crop traits that can be further improved by addition of the right microbes. Assimilation of such innovations into breeding strategies can have major impacts on rates of breeding gain but to achieve this will require comprehensive strategic leadership, planning and investments by scientists, leading global agencies and all governments based on appreciation of (i) the continuous streams of innovations underpinning crop improvement and (ii) the necessities for more rapid crop improvements everywhere... What increased rates of gain in crop yields are attained from new innovations and what improved traits emerge as deployable will depend on the value of the trait, costs, regulations and consumer acceptance, size of market, profitability, public and market acceptance and export potential. All these are critical and need to be assessed better by public institutions as well as industrial companies. However, a failure to embrace today's technologies and anticipate future opportunities to solve food, feed, fiber and fuel problems safely and sustainably by plant biotechnology will surely only increase the probability of human suffering and misery. Today's crop breeding is slow, laborious and complex. It needs to be speeded up. There is now perhaps a window of opportunity to work more closely with publics all over the world to enable scientific innovation to continue to serve the world better in the crucial matters of food security and the best use of land. However, strategic planning and leadership at global and local levels are urgent to find and achieve the best ways forward. The links between innovation and food security need to be fully recognized and built into global and local plannings. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2016.10.001 more...
CRISPR/CAS9 Genome Editing Technology Is A Plant Breeding Dream Comes True - Gal-On (2016) - J Plant Pathol
www.sipav.org
Crop improvement depends on genetic variation within a population. This variation based on mutations in the genome’s DNA occurring during evolution. The genetic variation can be increased by random mutation of the DNA, by mutagenic chemicals or radiation physical treatment. Such artificial mutagenesis have been widely used in conventional plant breeding for decades as deregulated food products. In contrast to random mutations, genome editing technologies allow specific changes in a DNA target gene.... Recently, a new biotechnology system called the CRISPR/Cas9 has been developed for genome editing... This technological revolution is highly efficient, simple and allows DNA editing in all organisms tested to date... Additionally, genome editing can occur without a transgene remaining in the plant, so that edited plants are equivalent to non-transgenic mutants. Thus, the CRISPR-Cas9 is a promising technology that can modify genes without rendering corresponding plants as classical Genetic Modified Organism, paving the way to its implementation in agricultural biotechnology. We have utilized this technology to develop novel crops with improved stress-resistance. These include climate-tolerant tomato and virus-resistant cucumber cultivars. We believe that this novel technology has the potential for expediting development of disease resistance in many crops without the need for extensive backcrossing and genetic manipulation with wild sources of resistance. http://doi.org/10.4454/jpp.v98i4sup.3774 Alexander J. Stein's insight:
Researchers model how ‘publication bias’ does – and doesn’t – affect the ‘canonization’ of facts in science - U Washington (2016) From
www.washington.edu
Arguing in a Boston courtroom in 1770, John Adams famously pronounced, “Facts are stubborn things,” which cannot be altered by “our wishes, our inclinations or the dictates of our passion.” But facts, however stubborn, must pass through the trials of human perception before being acknowledged – or “canonized” – as facts... Carl Bergstrom believes facts stand a fighting chance, especially if science has their back. A professor of biology... has used mathematical modeling to investigate the practice of science, and how science could be shaped by the biases and incentives inherent to human institutions. “Science is a process of revealing facts through experimentation,” said Bergstrom. “But science is also a human endeavor, built on human institutions. Scientists seek status and respond to incentives just like anyone else does. So it is worth asking... if, when and how these incentives affect the practice of science”... Bergstrom... explores whether “publication bias” – the tendency of journals to publish mostly positive experimental results – influences how scientists canonize facts. Their results offer a warning that sharing positive results comes with the risk that a false claim could be canonized as fact. But their findings also offer hope by suggesting that simple changes to publication practices can minimize the risk... Neither Bergstrom nor most of the scientists engaged in these debates are questioning the validity of heavily studied and thoroughly demonstrated scientific truths, such as evolution, anthropogenic climate change or the general safety of vaccination... “Evolution happens, and explains the diversity of life. Climate change is real. But we wanted to model if publication bias increases the risk of false canonization at the lowest levels of fact acquisition”... “The net effect of publication bias is that negative results are less likely to be seen, read and processed by scientific peers... Is this misleading the canonization process?” ... The lower the publication rate is for negative results, the higher the risk for false canonization... “It turns out that requiring more evidence before canonizing a claim as fact did not help... Instead, our model showed that you need to publish more negative results – at least more than we probably are now”... “As a community, we tend to say, ‘Damn it, this didn’t work, and I’m not going to write it up... But I’d like scientists to reconsider that tendency, because science is only efficient if we publish a reasonable fraction of our negative findings.” http://www.washington.edu/news/2016/12/20/researchers-model-how-publication-bias-does-and-doesnt-affect-the-canonization-of-facts-in-science/ Underlying article: http://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.21451 more...
Organic Farming Doesn’t Mean Fairer Labor - National Geographic (2016) From
The terms “organic” and “unionized” rarely appear together for a reason. Gaining organic certification and unionizing workers is expensive and time-consuming. To farmers already operating with tight profit margins, the prospect of doing both can be daunting... Washington, D.C., nonprofit Farmworker Justice, estimates that of the roughly 2.5 million farmworkers in America, only around 25,000 are unionized. And only a small percent of those 25,000 work on organic farms... Most berry pickers in California are paid based on how much they pick—a system that incentivizes rapid work and favors the young and healthy. While it’s possible for fast pickers to earn a decent hourly rate, employees are usually given only seasonal work, forcing them to move or find other jobs for the rest of the year... Swanton is one of a small but growing number of farms adopting a new consumer label called Food Justice Certified. The nonprofit Agricultural Justice Project oversees the Food Justice certification of farms by monitoring and advising farms to ensure that they meet dozens of strict standards covering worker safety, compensation, transparency, and fairness. Co-founder Elizabeth Henderson, herself an organic farmer, hopes the label can correct a common misconception: that food labeled organic has also been produced by workers who are treated well and paid a decent wage. There are currently six Food Justice Certified farms in North America, but more than 25 others are making the improvements and undergoing the inspections necessary to earn the label. “I’ve been doing organic agriculture since 1979,” Henderson says. “It took us 20 years to really get that term recognized. I think that Food Justice is today where organic was in 1979”... http://www.nationalgeographic.com/people-and-culture/food/the-plate/2016/12/organic-farming-doesnt-mean-fairer-labor/ Alexander J. Stein's insight:
"Organic" does not guarantee that workers are treated well (nor that the food is more healthy, better tasting, more sustainable or anything else -- it's been produced without certain, rather arbitrarily excluded inputs, but that's pretty much about all such a label says.) more...
Stories from the lab, stories from the field: advancing crop biotechnology - Vanderschuren (2016) - Univ Liege
orbi.ulg.ac.be
The use of crop biotechnology is steadily increasing in the agrosystems of industrialized countries. Recent advances in genome editing are anticipated to further accentuate this trend. Given its potential for low input agriculture, there is a need to bring the benefits of crop biotechnology to developing and emerging countries. The challenge goes beyond the mere generation of transgenic crops because development and deployment of genetically engineered crops require local capacities and support from the authorities. In the recent years, we have used biotechnological approaches to improve cassava, the most important root crop in the tropics. Cassava production and processing suffer from several constraints, including viral diseases, drought and post-harvest deterioration. A better understanding of crop responses to biotic and abiotic stresses combined with genetic engineering approaches can be particularly instrumental to generate plants with improved traits... Smallholders and industries... need traits such as resistance against cassava mosaic and brown streak diseases, prolonged shelf-life, drought tolerance, modified starch and improved nutritional content. Importantly those technologies should be implemented in local germplasm to secure impact for the local value chains. We actively collaborate with local institutions for technology transfer and assessment of cassava technologies in the field. http://hdl.handle.net/2268/204070 more...
Recombinant pharmaceutical protein production in plants: unraveling the therapeutic potential of molecular pharming - Dirisala &al (2016) - APP
There is an increasing demand for the generation of recombinant pharmaceutical proteins for a wide array of therapeutic applications. In comparison to bacterial, yeast and animal cells, the production of recombinant proteins in plants with economic and therapeutic importance has only started recently. The most important prerequisite of any expression systems is that it should be simple and inexpensive. In this regard, plant-based expression has emerged an as accepted alternative to conventional expression platforms due to economic feasibility, rapid scalability, higher stability of recombinant proteins, safety due to lack of harmful substances... and capability of producing proteins with desired secondary modifications... Overview about the current status, various strategies and advantages of pharmaceutical protein production in plant expression systems. We also present a summary of expression of therapeutic monoclonal antibodies, vaccines, clinical trials and the regulatory aspects of plant-based expression. Furthermore, the challenges encountered in plant expression such as costs associated with existing purification strategies are discussed. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11738-016-2315-3 more...
Gene editing yields tomatoes that flower and ripen weeks earlier - CSHL (2016) From
www.cshl.edu
Using a simple and powerful genetic method to tweak genes native to two popular varieties of tomato plants, a team... has devised a rapid method to make them flower and produce ripe fruit more than 2 weeks faster than commercial breeders are currently able to do. This means more plantings per growing season and thus higher yield. In this case, it also means that the plant can be grown in latitudes more northerly than currently possible... “Our work is a compelling demonstration of the power of gene editing – CRISPR technology – to rapidly improve yield traits in crop breeding,” says... Lippman, who led the research. Applications can go far beyond the tomato family... to include many major food crops like maize, soybean, and wheat that so much of the world depends upon.Lippman clarifies that the technique... is about more than simply increasing yield. “It’s really about creating a genetic toolkit that enables growers and breeders in a single generation to tweak the timing of flower production and thus yield, to help adapt our best varieties to grow in parts of the world where they don’t currently thrive.” At the heart of the method are insights obtained... about the evolution of the flowering process in many crops and their wild relatives as it relates to the length of the light period in a day... A well-known hormonal system regulates flowering time – and hence the time when the plant will generate its first ripe fruit. The hormone florigen and a counteracting “anti-florigen” hormone called SP act together... to, respectively, promote or delay flowering... Lippman and colleagues traced the loss of day-length sensitivity in domesticated tomatoes to mutations in a gene called SP5G...The team’s principal innovation... arises from the observation that... “there was some residual expression of the anti-florigen SP5G gene”... This led the team to employ the gene-editing tool CRISPR to induce tiny mutations in the SP5G gene. The aim was to inactivate the gene entirely such that it did not generate any anti-florigen protein at all.When this tweaked version of SP5G was introduced to popular roma and cherry tomato varieties, the plants flowered earlier, and thus made fruits that ripened earlier. Tweaking another anti-florigen gene that makes tomato plants grow in a dense, compact, shrub-like manner made the early-flowering varieties even more compact and early-yielding... “What we’ve demonstrated here is fast-forward breeding... Now we have a simple strategy to completely eliminate daylight sensitivity in elite... plants that are already being cultivated. This could enable growers to expand their geographical range of cultivation, simply by using CRISPR to rapidly ‘adapt’ tomato and other crops to more northern latitudes, where summers have very long days and very short growing seasons.” http://www.cshl.edu/news-and-features/gene-editing-yields-tomatoes-that-flower-and-ripen-weeks-earlier.html Underlying article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ng.3733 more...
Golden Rice: no progress to be seen. Do we still need it? - Wesseler & Zilberman (2016) - Env Develop Econ
www.cambridge.org
In the December 2014 issue... we published the article, ‘The economic power of the Golden Rice opposition’... The paper generated substantial interest, not only in academia but also among civil society groups. In this note, we address some of the concerns that have been raised... Our main conclusion remains that misguided regulations in the case of Golden Rice have cost millions of healthy life years and billions of dollars... a claim that has recently been supported by more than 100 Nobel Prize Laureates. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355770X16000292 more...
Genetically Altered Goats May Produce Milk that Causes Fewer Allergic Reactions - Wiley (2016) From
eu.wiley.com
The presence of the allergen β-Lactoglobulin (BLG) in the milk of goats and other ungulates restricts the consumption of goat’s milk by humans. In a new study, researchers bred goats to lack BLG or to express human α-lactalbumin in place of BLG... Milk from these goats triggered less severe allergic reactions in susceptible mice, suggesting that this technology might be an effective tool to reduce allergic reactions to milk and improve nutrition... http://eu.wiley.com/WileyCDA/PressRelease/pressReleaseId-129928.html Underlying article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/febs.13950 Alexander J. Stein's insight:
... so in the end instead of causing allergies, GMOs may well reduce them... more...
Development and field performance of nitrogen use efficient rice lines for Africa - Gomez &al (2016) - Plant Biotechnol J
Nitrogen (N) fertilizers are a major input cost in rice production and its excess application leads to major environmental pollution. Development of rice varieties with improved nitrogen use efficiency (NUE) is essential for sustainable agriculture. Here, we report the results of field evaluations of marker-free transgenic NERICA4 (New Rice for Africa 4) rice lines over-expressing barley alanine amino transferase (HvAlaAT)... Field evaluations over three growing seasons and two rice growing ecologies (lowland and upland) revealed that grain yield... was significantly higher than sibling nulls and wild type controls under different N application rates. This genetic modification can significantly increase the dry biomass and grain yield compared to controls under limited N supply. Increased yield... was correlated with increased tiller and panicle number in the field, and evidence of early establishment of a vigorous root system in hydroponic growth... Expression of the HvAlaAT gene can improve NUE in rice without causing undesirable growth phenotypes. The NUE technology... has the potential to significantly reduce the need for N fertilizer and simultaneously improve food security, augment farm economics and mitigate greenhouse gas emissions from the rice ecosystem. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/pbi.12675 more...
Stop buying organic food if you really want to save the planet - New Scientist (2016) From
www.newscientist.com
Wander around the local supermarket and you will struggle to find any clues to the environmental impact of the food you eat. If you are lucky, some of the seafood might bear the mark of the Marine Stewardship Council, which certifies fish caught in a sustainable way, but that’s about it. Yet farming is the second largest source of greenhouse gas emissions worldwide, only slightly behind heating and electricity. And while it’s relatively easy to cut emissions from electricity by switching to solar, reducing emissions from farming is a tougher nut to crack. You might think buying local food is always preferable to imported food when it comes to carbon emissions, but even this is not a reliable guide. Food flown thousands of miles can still have a much lower carbon footprint than, say, local produce grown in heated greenhouses. The one label you’re likely to find on many food items is the “organic” one. But if you care about the environment, don’t buy it (it’s not healthier either, but that’s another story). For starters, you are not helping wildlife. Yes, organic farms host a greater diversity of wildlife than conventional ones. But because the yields are lower, organic farms require more land, which in the tropics often means cutting down more rainforests. And organic food also results in higher greenhouse gas emissions than conventional farming. The trouble is, there is no way to tell whether that basic loaf of bread is better in terms of greenhouse emissions than the organic one sitting next to it on the supermarket shelf. This divide will become ever greater in the future, because the organisations that set the rather arbitrary standards for what counts as “organic” have firmly rejected the technology showing the greatest promise for reducing farming emissions: genetic modification. Existing GM crops may already be reducing carbon emissions even though they were not designed to do so. Next up: crops that can capture more of the sun’s energy, require less fertiliser and tolerate drought or salt. But the organic movement will have none of it. There was a faint hope that some might at least accept gene editing, given that gene-edited crops can be genetically indistinguishable from conventional crops. But no... What we really need are climate labels on foods... This isn’t going to be easy. Measuring all the emissions associated with producing food and getting it onto a supermarket shelf is extremely complex... Most schemes so far have foundered. Tesco tried introducing its own carbon labelling in 2007... but eventually abandoned the idea. And it’s pointless unless the labels are easy to follow. One promising proposal is to describe the greenhouse emissions associated with particular food items in terms of what percentage of a person’s typical daily carbon footprint they represent. Climate labelling is definitely worth pursuing despite the challenges. The only alternative is to allow consumers to continue being hoodwinked by feel-good mumbo jumbo – and the stakes are far too high to let this happen. https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg23231022-900-stop-buying-organic-food-if-you-really-want-to-save-the-planet/ more... | 农业 | 57,468 |
Huie, Cavallin recognized by Bee SWCD
Jun 10, 2011 | 1030 views | 0 | 6 | | view image
Bee Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD) recently nominated Matt Huie as the Resident Conservation farmer for Bee County and Nancy Cavallin as the Conservation Teacher for Bee County this year.Matt Huie was recognized for his efforts in implementing practices to help conserve natural resources on the farms that he operates in Bee County such as: reduced tillage methods for residue management, conservation crop rotation, terraces, grassed waterways and contour farming. Matt is a fourth generation farmer and has been farming for 12 years and a cooperator with the Bee SWCD for eight years. Huie is a 1994 graduate from A.C. Jones High School and received his B.A. in science from Texas A&M University in 1998. He is currently on the Beeville ISD board, the Southwest Cotton & Grain Board and the Board of Southwest Counsel of Agri-business.Nancy Cavallin was also entered into the TSSWCB’s Region III contest and won first place as the Conservation Teacher out of many other Soil & Water Conservation districts in Region III for her efforts in teaching her students the importance of conservation and agriculture. Cavallin teaches fifth and sixth grade science and coordinates lesson plans for K-4th grade at St. Mary’s Academy Charter School. She earned two degrees in horticultural sciences (B.S. from Texas A&M University in 1981, and M.S. from Oklahoma State University in 1997) and has created her own sixth grade curriculum around a large school garden, a memorial butterfly garden, landscaping newly acquired school property, hatching and raising chickens, chuckers and pheasants, recycling, composting and conservation.The purpose of the Conservation Awards Program is to recognize and honor Soil and Water Conservation Districts (SWCDs) and individuals who have dedicated their time, efforts and talents to making wise use of renewable natural resources. | 农业 | 1,961 |
The Myth of Good Italian Food
The Myth of Good Italian Food recounts a two-year investigation into the Italian food system, debunking the common belief that ‘Italians eat better’ with a story of homogenization and globalization common to agro-industrial food production worldwide. First published in 2006 in Italian, the best-seller has been revised and translated into English, published in e-book format, with a preface from Slow Food’s president Carlo Petrini. Too often, and almost everywhere, food is insidious, dangerous and carries a long list of problems that are repeated worldwide: pesticides, mercury, bird flu, E-coli 0157 and so on. What the author Paolo Conti describes, however, is a kind of war. A fight in Italy as well as the rest of Europe and the world, between technofood and ecofood: food produced with the indiscriminate use of technology and ruling over nature as opposed to production in harmony with the Earth and its resources. Regarding this argument, Conti writes: «The era that we live in is dominated by technology. By using a range of techniques, we believe that we can rule over nature. Food is no exception. There is no establishment in the Western World that seriously opposes the indiscriminate use of technology in the preparation and processing of food. Technofood is now the norm in supermarkets. Even in Italy, where a less elaborate, more natural diet has been the preference for decades. Ecofood, the combination of less technological food alternatives that are more sustainable on a long-term basis, does exist: it offers a universe of alternatives and represents a practical answer to the problem, in many ways it is the better, more economically viable solution. But it is losing the battle. Even in Europe, where precautionary principles should force us to be more careful. Even in Italy, where we still believe in eating and exporting good, wholesome and genuine food. Many Italian food companies use “all-natural” as their primary selling point. The words “nature”, “field”, and “real flavors” stand out on the packages, but the aroma and flavor we get when we open the box seldom belongs to the food contained within it. Artificial flavors are now customary in many products: they deceive our senses by convincing our brains that we smell and taste things that no longer exist. Food has changed. Food companies use very few raw materials and transform them to increase their profits, while leading us to believe that food is the same as it once was».
The solutions aren’t simple, but they are possible. The first key to overcoming technofood and restoring a natural balance is knowledge: a necessity of life, to continue to enhance our collective consciousness and to ensure that we eat a better future.
Click here to purchase the The Myth of Good Italian Food e-book.
5% of sales revenue will be donated to Slow Food Foundation for Biodiversity
Click here to read an extract from the preface by Slow Food president Carlo Petrini. | 农业 | 2,979 |
Del Monte testing genetically modified pineapple
By Coral Beach, The Packer
May 07, 2013 | 12:17 pm EDT
Genetically modified pineapple grown in Costa Rica by Del Monte Fresh Produce Co. Inc. gained the approval of the U.S. Department of Agriculture earlier this year.
However, according to a statement from Del Monte officials April 26, the new pineapple variety — dubbed Rosé — is “in a testing phase.”
“The USDA’s decision does not mean that Rosé is in commercial distribution; it is in a testing phase. Del Monte intends to continue to test Rosé and will communicate more details when appropriate,” according to the statement from Dennis Christou, vice president of marketing in North America for the Coral Gables, Fla., produce company.
“Del Monte Fresh Produce has a very active research and development program designed to explore new varieties and new agricultural techniques. The results of these research projects may or may not lead to commercialization depending on many factors including regulatory approvals by the relevant governmental authorities where and when applicable.”
Del Monte officials wrote to the USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service in July 2012 seeking approval for its patent-pending Rosé pineapple. Michael Gregoire, deputy administrator of biotechnology regulatory services at APHIS responded with the agency’s OK on Jan. 25, but the response was not made public until late April.
Before the new pineapple can be imported to the U.S., Del Monte must complete a food safety consultation with the Food and Drug Administration. The FDA’s website listing approved consultations did not show any pineapple reqults as of April 26.
“APHIS confirms that the harvested Del Monte Rosé pineapple as described in your documentation does not require an importation or interstate movement permit under (federal code),” according to Gregoire’s letter.
“… fruit from the Del Monte Rosé pineapple cultivar does not have the ability to propagate and persist in the environment once they have been harvested.”
In its request to APHIS, Del Monte described the new pineapple variety as having rose-colored flesh.
“To achieve its novel fruit color, Del Monte Fresh has altered expression of genes involved in lycopene biosynthesis to increase levels in edible tissues of pineapple fruit,” according to Del Monte’s request. “The genes of interest are derived from edible plant species, pineapple and tangerine.”
Various Costa Rican media report the Coral Gables, Fla.-based fresh produce company has been working with Costa Rican growers to develop the new pineapple variety since 2005. When the Costa Rican government OK’d expanded plantings in 2011, some environmental groups in the country expressed concerns.
According to its letter to APHIS, 65% of the pineapple Del Monte imports to the U.S. is sold to the fresh sector. Another 15% goes to fresh cut, with the remainder going to juice and frozen products. The new genetically modified variety would be sold in the same channels and at about the same percentages as Del Monte Gold pineapple, according to the letter.
The 2012 financial report from Del Monte showed about a third of the company’s fresh produce sales are from commodities grown in Costa Rica.
genetically modifiedbiotechnologypineappledel montecosta rica About the Author:
Coral Beach, The Packer | 农业 | 3,338 |
Cooperative Grocer Network Home › Library › Articles › Farming Cooperatively Farming Cooperatively By David Thompson
#154 May - June - 2011 The largest single farmer in Britain is The Co-operative Farms, a subsidiary of The Co-operative Group. They farm 55,000 acres at 15 locations throughout England and Scotland. Of those acres, 20,000 are owned by The Co-operative Farms and the other 35,000 are rented or leased to The Co-operative Farms by other landowners, including the Crown Estate. The Co-operative Farms is one of the most progressive farming organizations in Britain, although they have now been farming since the 1860s. Their history is as fascinating as their future—but more on the past later.A commitment to responsible farmingToday's commitment of The Co-operative Farms to responsible farming is also a commitment to their customers, the environment and the communities in which they farm. Here is how The Co-operative Farms fulfills this commitment:Biodiversity: expanding their farming practices to increase the diversity for wildlife; cutting hedges less frequently, creating wider field margins; establishing ponds and planting more trees.Green energy to combat climate change: for example, on the oldest farm owned by The Co-operative Farms (1912) the Coldham Wind Farm was established in 2005. The energy created provides 4 percent of the annual needs of The Co-operative Group and is enough to power over 9,000 homes. Many more wind farms are now in the planning stages on land managed by The Co-operative Farms.Pesticide reducing, controlling and monitoring: The Co-operative Farms uses Integrated Pest Management (IPM) techniques, which eliminate or reduce the use of pesticides such as crop rotation, encouraging habits for pest predators and taking other actions which lessen the impact on the environment.Recycling: The majority of plastic (70,000 containers a year) and cardboard used by The Co-operative Farms is now recycled. At their Lincolnshire farm, they work with Agricycle, Ltd. to provide a recycling service for all the farmers in the county."Grown by Us" is The Co-operative Group's program for growing, packing and distributing the agricultural crops from its 50,000 acres. The Co-operative Farms has four packing houses. The key items packed for Grown by Us are potatoes, broccoli and strawberries.The main crops grown on The Co-operative Farms are grains such as oats, rapeseed, wheat, cereals, spring and winter barley; vegetables such as asparagus, beans, beetroot, carrots, onions, sweet corn, shallots, sugar beets, vining peas; honey; and fruits such as apples, cider apples, apricots, cherries, pears, plums, and strawberries."From Farm to Fork" is an educational program initiated by The Co-operative Farms in 2005 to reach out to schoolchildren. Since then, 30,000 schoolchildren have visited one of the farm sites. "From Farm to Fork" describes its objectives:The farm visits aim to inspire children to get passionate about fresh, good quality ingredients and cooking with them. We hope that children who have visited will be encouraged to make healthier lifestyle choices about the food they eat.For some, it will be the first time they have experienced the countryside and all it has to offer. We hope they will leave with a greater appreciation for the outdoors, gaining an understanding of the importance of farming, both in supplying food and protecting wildlife within its natural habitat.The origins of cooperative farmingThe active role of The Co-operative Farms today traces back almost 200 years in the history of cooperatives in Britain. Seminal thinkers who wrote about cooperatives and agriculture included Robert Owen (1771–1858) and an Irish landowner-turned-philanthropist, William Thompson (1775–1833). By the mid-1800s, cooperative communities were the ideal of many different political movements. In particular, the Chartists (1830–1850) were imbued with cooperative farming. Many of the Rochdale Pioneers (1844) had invested in Chartist settlements.The Chartist legacy can be seen in the early objectives of the Rochdale Pioneers:As a further benefit and security to the members of this society, the society shall purchase or rent an estate or estates of land, which shall be cultivated by the members who may be out of employment, or whose labour may be badly remunerated.That as soon as practicable, this society shall proceed to arrange the powers of production, distribution, education and government, or in other words to establish a self-supporting home-colony of limited interests, or assist other societies in establishing such colonies.Acquiring land for farming and housing continued to be an objective of the co-ops in their pursuit of an ideal society.In 1863, co-op leaders from around Manchester decided they should create a Cooperative Wholesale Society (CWS) as a central purchasing and distributing organization. They chose to meet at Lowbands, a Chartist farm near Rochdale. Concurrently, changes in the law would soon remove the smothering restriction that co-ops could not own more than an acre of land.From that meeting, and with their foresight, the CWS leadership plunged into making their own products, building their own factories and running their own shipping fleet. The immense success of the consumer cooperatives was heightened by their unity in support of the CWS as a secondary co-op. The small shopkeepers of England were no match for the organizational efficiency of the cooperatives. Both the individual co-ops and the CWS entered an era of sizeable profitability. Part of the profitability went back to the members in the form of dividends, and the remainder went into funding the local and national development of cooperatives.From the 1860s to 1915, local cooperatives used their capital to buy land and build over 50,000 homes for their members and staff. Quite often, the local co-ops also bought farms and farmland.In the "Co-operative News" of Nov. 4, 1871, an ad appeared requesting capital investment in the Co-operative Farming Society: "The object of this society is to raise a sufficient capital to establish a farm in a convenient location, within easy reach of Manchester, for the purpose of supplying its members and the public with pure and unadulterated articles of farm produce."In 1896, the CWS bought its first farm at Roden, and they have been adding more farms since. The CWS, now The Co-operative Group, is the only British retailer to also oversee a national farming operation. Clearly, during this next century, The Co-operative Farms will increase its emphasis on sustainability, meet a preference for British-grown produce and uphold its reputation as a responsible farmer.For more on these efforts, see: www.co-operative.coop/farms. See other articles from this issue: #154 May - June - 2011 Login to post comments | 农业 | 6,851 |
'King Corn' reveals consumers’ food concerns
6a00d10a7b5fbf8bfa0100a7f04314000e-500pithumbnail1.jpg
Recently, I attended a documentary, sponsored by the South Dakota State University Film Club, titled, King Corn. Produced by Bullfrog Films, King Corn tells the story of two college graduates from Boston, who decide to uproot their lives to move to Iowa and plant an acre of corn. Their goal was to plant this crop and trace it to an end product. Sometimes corn goes to high fructose corn sugar that is used for sweeteners. Other times it is used in cereals and breads. Most often, corn is utilized for energy and livestock production. These two men were bound and determined to trace their corn crop to its finally destination. The documentary was created to portray an innocent story of self-discovery and education on agriculture. Instead, the documentary craftily twisted and turned to make farmers and ranchers seem like ignorant, greedy barbarians. The film even featured the infamous Michael Pollan (the inspiration behind the film) from the University of California. His notorious writings that criticize the food system include books such as The Omnivore’s Dilemma and In Defense of Food. Pollan shared his thoughts throughout the film, blaming our environmental and health problems on corn. More interesting and thought-provoking than the documentary itself were the questions and comments from the audience. The moderator asked what the audience felt about the United States’ cheap food policies? People stood up in support of only buying natural, organic or grass-fed beef from the local farmers’ market. While this is a fine and viable option, I have to wonder what’s wrong with conventionally raised beef from the supermarket? Others thought that farmers were making too much money? Ha! Many wanted to see subsidies for “healthy” food. What constitutes as healthy? Isn’t everything healthy in moderation? Isn’t it time we point the fingers at ourselves and take responsibility for what we put into our own mouths? Without a doubt, the American consumer wants to know where their food comes from, and they are looking to inaccurate documentaries like these to fill them in. I believe King Corn missed one huge point as they criticized the efficiencies of farmers and ranchers. In the United States, consumers spend less disposable income on groceries than any other place in the world. Farmers and ranchers dedicate their lives to producing a safe, healthy, readily available, affordable product to put at the center of the plate, and I’m proud to be a part of it as a fifth generation livestock producer. The big question of the day is this: when are we going to create an accurate documentary to tell the world the REAL agriculture story? BEEF Daily Quick Fact: On a low-fat diet? Say thank you for corn. Many low-fat foods depend on corn-derived food starches to provide qualities that used to come from fats. Examples include everything from low-fat salad dressing to baked goods and meat products. (Courtesy of Iowa Corn Producers)
Source URL: http://beefmagazine.com/blog/king-corn-reveals-consumers-food-concerns | 农业 | 3,132 |
Home Farm Bill could offer Vt. farms a safety net strict warning: Non-static method view::load() should not be called statically in /home/addison/public_html/sites/all/modules/views/views.module on line 1118.
October 11, 2007 By CYRUS LEVESQUE MIDDLEBURY — Congressman Peter Welch this week in Middlebury voiced concerns about some parts of the 2007 Farm Bill, but he said that the parts most important to Vermont’s agricultural community, such as the Milk Income Loss Contract, were preserved in the version of the bill passed by the U.S. House of Representatives. “The first job was to keep that safety net part of the Farm Bill,” the Vermont Democrat said at the annual Addison County Farm Bureau meeting on Monday.
The Farm Bill recently passed by the House and now awaits discussion by the Senate agricultural committee. The 2002 Farm Bill was set to expire last month, but was extended until November. Details of the bill will have a significant effect on the agricultural community, and Welch said the bill could affect the rest of the state nearly as much. “A lot of the benefit is that those of us who live in Vermont … get the collateral benefit of this local, cultivated land,” Welch said, referring to side benefits like tourism dollars. “The more there is local agriculture, the better.”
However, there were some portions of the House’s version of the bill that Welch disapproved of, such as a price support program for commodities like wheat, corn, rice and other staples. He argued that too often the program wound up funding farms that didn’t need any extra help. “These programs should basically be a safety net. I don’t think it should be an ongoing subsidy,” he said.
IMMIGRANT FARM LABOR
Immigration was another issue about which the Farm Bureau members were concerned, although it is not part of the Farm Bill itself. Some at the meeting said a too-restrictive immigration policy may make farm workers hard to find, and already poses a problem for some. Middlebury resident and farmer Bob Foster argued that national security concerns could be addressed relatively easily. “If (workers are) identified, there’s no security problem,” he said.
Some asked Welch about identification programs that are developing at the state level in other places. Welch was not familiar with those proposals, but he said that such proposals might avoid overly broad or unnecessary requirements, which he said were likely with a federal approach. “You’re going to get a one-size-fits-all approach in Washington,” he said.
Identification requirements were also debated among farm bureau members later in the meeting. Premise identification and animal identification proposals that could require tagging individual farm animals with computer chips are in the works at both state and federal levels, partly out of concern of a disease outbreak. But many farmers around the country are concerned about how stringent the requirements would be and exactly what animals they would apply to. A resolution was proposed at the meeting that in the event of a disease outbreak where indemnification is owed to the animal owner, payments should only be made if the owner has both registered premise ID and animal ID. Some objected, but Jane Clifford of Starksboro argued that a system like that would be better than any other system likely to be put into effect. “If we’re going to be leaders of the industry and do something before it’s mandated by Wal-Mart, or mandated by McDonald’s, I think it’s a good idea,” Clifford said. In the end, the resolution passed unchanged.
Despite these concerns, the agricultural industry has done relatively well overall in 2007, especially compared to last year. “There wasn’t any part of the country that felt like they could live through another 2006,” said Whiting’s Kylie Quesnel, of the low milk prices farmers got last year.
Andrea Ochs, secretary of the farm bureau until new officers were elected at the meeting, said that the financial difficulties of farmers were reflected in the farm bureau’s membership, and were not limited to Vermont. STRUGGLING FARMERS
“All the New England states (were) losing members, either because members are going out of business or because they were trying to tighten their belts.” The membership dues for the Addison County Farm Bureau are $75 per year. Ochs said that it has not increased in recent years, but if something has to go, it’s easier for many to stop paying the membership fee than to stop paying another bill.
In Vermont in 2006, bad weather, high production expenses and low milk prices combined to cause a crisis for the state’s dairy producers, driving the price of milk below $14 per hundredweight and prompting an emergency state allocation of $8.6 million to help struggling dairy farmers. This year the price of Boston blend milk reached $22.94 in August. New officers of the Addison County Farm Bureau board of directors were elected at the Monday meeting. Bill Scott of North Ferrisburgh was elected president, Andrea Ochs of Orwell was elected vice president, Sean Stearns of Cornwall was elected treasurer, and Bill Paine of New Haven was elected treasurer. | 农业 | 5,148 |
Agribusiness: Pioneer’s ‘gene shuffling’ technology
Few technologies have had a greater impact on agriculture over the past decade than glyphosate-resistant seed. Now researchers at Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc., are developing the next generation of herbicide-resistant seed, using groundbreaking technology commonly referred to as “gene shuffling.” In addition to offering an alternative to current glyphosate-resistant technology, gene shuffling holds the promise of introducing a range of desirable traits to Pioneer seed. “Pioneer Hi-Bred’s proprietary trait optimization technology of gene shuffling includes multiple formats and methods that are tailored for each individual trait,” says Linda Castle, research coordinator at the Pioneer Research campus in Redwood City, Calif. “We apply this technology to a wide variety of traits in the Pioneer pipeline.” Gene shuffling technology is highly sophisticated, yet based on the simple principle of transforming genes with poor trait properties into genes with high value. That process begins with identifying genes with potentially valuable traits, such as glyphosate tolerance. Researchers initially found a few genes with a weak enzyme that inactivated glyphosate. Through a repetitive process similar to traditional plant breeding, researchers began to improve this trait. Finally, at about a 2,000-fold improvement level, they had a gene that provided plants with a sufficient level of herbicide resistance. This improved gene is being incorporated into Pioneer elite germplasm for further testing. Although commercial introduction is several years away, the technology will offer a number of benefits for growers using glyphosate-resistant production systems. “The introduction of this proprietary glyphosate-resistant trait will give growers expanded options to choose among the glyphosate-resistant traits,” says Castle. “It will allow companies like Pioneer to offer expanded choices, including stacked traits, to growers in a variety of different seed products. The glyphosate-resistant trait will be stacked with sulfonylurea herbicide resistance to provide additional options for sound weed resistance management and to fill key weed gaps.” Gene-shuffling technology may lead to a wider application window and greater range of rates, which will give growers more application flexibility without having to change their management programs. “Growers experienced with glyphosate-resistant crops should see a seamless transition in management practices when changing to the glyphosate-resistant trait,” says Castle. “In addition, they will be able to apply one or a custom blend of DuPont sulfonylurea herbicides over-the-top of the crop for added weed control and resistance-management options.” Yields of soybeans with the new gene will not be held back as they are by today’s glyphosate resistant traits, a difference university research suggests could be more than 5 percent. In addition to improving weed control in soybeans, gene shuffling technology can be applied to any crop to address a broad range of trait optimization objectives. “In some cases the same optimized gene can be used in multiple crops, and in other cases, part of the optimization process includes crop-specific aspects,” says Castle. “Gene shuffling technology should help Pioneer identify and develop a number of next-generation traits to help plants survive and perform better against agronomic and environmental stresses, including numerous diseases, plant pests and drought.” “We are committed to providing superior traits at a faster pace that, when combined with Pioneer’s elite germplasm, will deliver the highest value to our customers,” says Castle. For additional information about Pioneer and Pioneer products check the Web site at http://www.pioneer.com.
Source URL: http://deltafarmpress.com/agribusiness-pioneer-s-gene-shuffling-technology | 农业 | 3,899 |
Replace Reduce Refine
Published: Friday, July 18, 2014
Last Updated: Friday, July 18, 2014
A way forward for antibiotic use in agriculture.
A framework for replacement, reduction and refinement needs to be established for the responsible use of antimicrobials along the food supply chain. This is one of the main findings put forward by a top-level roundtable, Antimicrobials - Who Needs Them, chaired by the sustainable farming research and development business, the Food Animal Initiative, and pharmaceutical company, Ceva.
The roundtable, which was held last month, also agreed a path for establishing new and standardized measures for antibiotic use that can be implemented at producer level, as well as to direct changes in the way antibiotics are used at both national and regional level.
A common understanding and definition of the term “Critically Important Antimicrobials” (CIA) and which antibiotics that are used in food producing animals can be described as ‘critically important’ is also urgently required.
The roundtable drew together vets, food scientists, farmers and representatives of the food and animal health industries to discuss concerns over the use of antibiotics and the growing problems that are being encountered regarding antibiotic resistance and human health.
Managing Director of Ceva UK and Ireland, Alan Doyle, commented: “We convened the roundtable to explore ways to effectively and responsibly manage antimicrobial use in food production in a way that decelerates the development of resistance in both humans and animals, protects animal welfare, and ensures our ability to feed the world in a safe and sustainable manner.”
“There is now clear public consensus that we need to take action to protect the future of antibiotics. Our objective in organizing this roundtable with the Food Animal Initiative was to identify practical steps through which we can restore the central roles of the veterinarian and the animal at the centre of a rational prescription process. The 3R's and other practical resolutions resulting from the coming together of all stakeholders are the first steps to influencing real action at the farm level”.
The roundtable recognized that there is variation in the attitudes of farmers and vets to the use of antibiotics and that poor practice in their use is often the result of a lack of knowledge or understanding about them. By changing existing behaviour and through training and standard practices, the situation could be improved.
Chair of the roundtable and Veterinary Director of the Food Animal Initiative, Ruth Layton, commented: “Vets must ultimately be responsible for prescribing antibiotics and vets too need training and support to ensure this is carried out responsibly. A new way of measuring the use and dosage of antibiotics - bringing the measurement for animals closer to the definition of a defined daily dose (DDD) that is used for humans - would support this.”
The roundtable concluded that the most important way forward to stimulate responsible use of antibiotics in livestock production was to adapt measures introduced in the 1950’s to replace, reduce and refine their use. And the measures that should be implemented by vets, farmers, producers, retailers and the pharmaceutical industry, need to be communicated to consumers.
The measures were brought in 60 years ago to address concerns about the responsible use of animals for experimental scientific research, but the round table said that the principles are equally applicable to the use of antimicrobials. | 农业 | 3,551 |
Drone experts see booming ag market
Speakers say agriculture will be an early adapter of drone technology.
Published on December 11, 2013 11:26AM
Eric Mortenson/Capital Press
A four-rotor, camera-equipped drone hovers during a demonstration flight at a McMinnville, Ore., forum.
Buy this photo Eric Mortenson/Capital Press
About 100 people, including farmers, students and researchers, attended a McMinnville, Ore., forum on the use of drones in agriculture.
Buy this photo MCMINNVILLE — Young Kim is a former U.S. Air Force pilot and familiar with the “outcome oriented” use of drone aircraft by the military. Get them over a target, conduct the surveillance or fire the missile – that’s how success is gauged.Putting drone technology to work in agriculture, as he does now as general manager of Bosh Precision Agriculture in Virginia, requires an entrepreneurial mind-set.“Do not waste growers’ time,” he said at drone technology forum in the heart of Oregon’s wine country this week. “You’ve got to deliver value very, very quickly. Show them how it will increase yield and lower inputs costs.”Kim believes unmanned planes, equipped with sensors and cameras, will rapidly transform agriculture by providing quick, detailed information on plant health, soil and water conditions, disease or pest outbreaks and more. He said it’s a change similar to moving from analog to digital technology.Agriculture is in the midst of a significant transformation, he said. The “biggest ag boom since the 1980s” is accompanied by a trend in which the number of farmers is declining but the acreage farmed by each is increasing, Kim said. At the same time, those farmers working large plots of land want the intimate knowledge they used to have of smaller acreage. Drones can provide that, but Kim said people shouldn’t get hung up on the “sexiness” of the technology.“The real value is the data,” he said. “Focus on the problem of the grower and work backward from there.”Kim was among a series of experts speaking at a day-long precision agriculture forum held in McMinnville, at the Yamhill County Fairgrounds. The county’s part-time economic developer, Jeff Lorton, believes the area’s renowned vineyards will benefit from the technology and hopes the county can attract drone makers and the legions of engineers and programmers who will follow the industry.The forum included a brief outdoor demonstration of a small, four-bladed helicopter equipped with a video camera, which zipped about 50 feet in the air and hovered above the crowd. Images captured by the video camera were displayed on screens mounted on a control truck. About 100 people attended the forum, including vineyard owners, researchers and students.John Parmigiani, an OSU mechanical engineering professor, displayed a fixed-wing drone painted to resemble a predatory hawk and programmed to mimic its flight patterns. A student team under his direction built it as a project in 2012. The team wanted to find out if the “Mock Hawk” would scare damaging robins, starlings and cedar waxwings from vineyards, but the birds didn’t show in numbers enough to make the tests conclusive, Parmigiani said. The university is eager to test the drone again, he said.“You can tell this thing what to do and it will go out and do it,” he said. “This really looks promising, the technology is there.”Researchers with the University of California-Davis have test-sprayed vineyards and nut orchards with a 200-pound, unmanned helicopter made by Yamaha Motor Co. About 2,000 of the devices are in use in Japan, said Ken Giles, a UC-Davis agricultural engineering professor. Regulations have limited the researchers to spraying only water so far, not actual pesticides, but application coverage, speed and cost considerations appear favorable, Giles said. The ability to spot spray crops could be a significant advantage, he said.To reassure potential critics, university researchers opened flight demonstrations to the public.“You want to talk about a couple things people get jumpy about, it’s pesticides and drones,” Giles said.Eric Folkestad, president of the Cascade chapter of the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International said groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union are worried police agencies will use drones to peek into people’s backyards without a search warrant. Agriculture has no such interest, he said.“We don’t use these systems to spy on people,” he said. “We’re the good guy drones.”In farming, the technology can mitigate risks, Folkestad said. He predicted drone use will become like other specialized crop services offered by companies or co-ops, rather than taken up by individual farmers.Ryan Jenson, chief executive of the Portland-based HoneyComb Corp., said his company will begin selling its fixed-wing Ag Drone in January 2014. The drone, “ready to go out of the box,” costs $14,995, can be launched by hand and comes in a case that can be thrown into the back of pickup for transport to fields. “It’s a flying robot,” he said.The drone’s cameras, including infrared sensors, will provide early detection of disease or pest outbreaks, irrigation problems, plant stress or other issues, Jenson said. His company will process the data at a per acre charge to be determined later, with the first month free.A key point in the forum discussion came when an audience member asked Jenson if his “drone in a suitcase” is legal for farmers or service companies to fly. The short answer is “not yet,” but the Federal Aviation Administration is working to establish drone guidelines by 2015. For now, unmanned aerial systems may be flown for pleasure or in conjunction with university research, but advocates are optimistic the FAA will recognize the value of agricultural applications.When the FAA integrates commercial drone use into the national airspace, backers expect an industrial boom. The Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International projects the idustry will produce an $82 billion economic impact and create more than 100,000 jobs by 2025.Agriculture is likely to be an early adapter of the technology, speakers at the McMinnville forum said.Michael Wing, an OSU forestry professor who will test drones over three Yamhill County vineyards in the coming year, said the industry is just getting started.“It’s a revolution in the application of remote sensing, and it’s happening right in front of us,” he said. | 农业 | 6,411 |
» Submit Ag News
Drought takes toll on rangeland, honey production
Tim HeardenCapital Press
Published: September 10, 2013 11:05AM
Tim Hearden/Capital Press
People drive down onto the lake bed to launch their boats from the shore of a receding Shasta Lake in Northern California. The lake is less than half full, according to the California Department of Water Resources.
Buy this photo Drought in California is taking its toll on rangelands while causing a drop in honey production. The USDA recently declared most of the state a disaster area because of dry conditions, and reservoirs around the state are well below their average for this time of year.
PALO CEDRO, Calif. — The persistent drought that has developed in California this year is beginning to take its toll on a variety of commodities.Honey production, for instance, is way down this summer because of drought and agricultural water curtailments that have caused wildflowers to suffer, said Shannon Wooten, a beekeeper and bee breeder here.Wooten has been feeding his own bees carbohydrates and protein throughout the summer, he said.“The hives (around the state) probably look pretty good, although I’m not sure what their nutrition value is going into winter,” he said. “Historically when you have a lack of nutrition in the summer, you have high losses ... This is what’s happened in the past.”The reduced honey production comes as range and non-irrigated pasture remains in fair to very poor condition, as available water at all elevations is limited and continues to diminish, according to the USDA’s National Agricultural Statistics Service office in Sacramento. Livestock supplemental feeding of hay and grain is ongoing, according to the agency.The conditions prompted the USDA’s Farm Service Agency recently to designate 57 of California’s 58 counties as natural disaster areas. The only county not included was San Francisco.The designation enables agricultural operators in those counties to apply for low-interest emergency loans from the agency, which will consider each application based on such factors as the extent of losses, available security and repayment ability, according to a news release. The maximum loan amount is $500,000.For state Farm Service Agency director Val Dolcini, this year’s drought is one of the worst he’s seen.“It sure seems to be more significant that past years,” he said. “In my travels, I’ve seen that dry conditions and inadequate water supplies are emblematic from north to south.”After a wet start to last winter, the drought worsened throughout this year as a lack of rainfall persisted in the late winter and spring. Now California’s reservoirs are holding about 76 percent of their normal amounts for this time of year, according to the California Department of Water Resources.In all, nine of the state’s major reservoirs are below their historic average levels, and six of them are below 50 percent of capacity. One of those is Shasta Lake, the centerpiece of the Central Valley Project, which was at 45 percent of capacity as of Sept. 9, according to the state’s water agency.Dry conditions were blamed this year for bolstering populations of the beet leafhopper, which carries a virus that infects tomato and other plants and stunts their growth. The beet curly top virus was reported to cause as much as 50 percent damage to processing tomato fields in Fresno County.The state Board of Food and Agriculture and the California Water Commission were holding a joint meeting on Sept. 10 to gather ideas concerning the state’s water supply. The meeting comes after Gov. Jerry Brown in May ordered streamlined approvals for water transfers to protect the state’s farms.Even with normal rainfall and snowpack this winter, growers throughout the state are preparing for a reduced water supply next year. | 农业 | 3,818 |
Biography of Leroy S. Dyar - Access Genealogy
Biography of Leroy S. Dyar
This page is part of a larger collection.Access the full collection at An Illustrated History of Southern California.
by Dennis | Sep 12, 2011 | California, Maine, Oregon | 0 comments
Among the pioneers of Ontario and representative men of that beautiful colony, mention should be made of Leroy S. Dyar, who was born in Franklin County, Maine, in 1833. His father was Colonel Joseph Dyar, a well-known agriculturist of that county. His mother was Mary S. Gay. Both of his parents were natives of that State. Mr. Dyar was reared and schooled in his native place, closing his studies in the high school and academy. He was reared as a farmer. In 1858 he decided to try his fortune on the Pacific coast, and came by steamer to San Francisco. After a short stay in that city he proceeded to Yuba river and engaged in mining until the next year. He then located in Salem, Oregon, and was employed in farming and teaching until 1863, when he established himself in mercantile pursuits in Salem, under the firm name of N. O. Parrish & Co. In 1864 he was appointed Postmaster at Salem, and held that office until 1868. He was engaged in various enterprises in Salem until 1871, when he accepted a position in the Indian Department as superintendent of schools of mechanical and agricultural instruction, and was stationed on the Yakima Indian Reservation until the fall of that year, when he went to the Grand Ronde Reservation as commissary in charge. In the spring of 1872 he was appointed Indian agent of the Klamath Reservation, located at Klamath Lake.
It was this reservation that the notorious Modoc Chief, Captain Jack, and his band had left two years before and were then at war with the United States troops among the famous lava beds. Mr. Dyar filled the position admirably, and so conducted the affairs of the reservation as to prevent any further dissatisfaction among the Indians and also to prevent their aiding Captain Jack or his associates. His ability was soon recognized by the department, and he was appointed a member of the peace commission which was to treat with the rebellious Modocs for a return to their reservation.
This commission was composed of General Canby, Dr. Thomas, Colonel Meacham and himself. The history of the massacre of General Canby and Dr. Thomas, and the miraculous escape of Mr. Dyar and Colonel Meacham-the latter severely wounded is an oft-told chapter in the history of our Indian wars. Mr. Dyar never had any confidence in the plan of meeting the Indian chiefs, for he had no confidence in them, and he protested strongly against the members of the commission uselessly exposing their lives to the murderous savages. He warned them that they were going the road to sure death, and that he should of course accompany them and share their fate. Nothing could change them in their belief of the honesty of Captain Jack. They met the chiefs, who had secreted arms at the place of meeting, or had them concealed upon their persons. The conference was but a short time in session before Mr. Dyar saw what he believed conclusive evidence that a massacre was intended. He managed upon some slight pretext to get outside of the circle composed of the members and the chiefs, and did not again take the place reserved for him. This saved his life, for upon the first outbreak he was enabled to run toward the encampment of troops. He was fired upon and pursued, but before he could be overtaken relief from the camp met him.
Mr. Dyar remained in charge of his reservation until 1877, and then engaged in stock raising until 1882, when ill health compelled him to seek a southern climate. In that year he came to San Bernardino County, and being pleased with the location and future prospects of the Ontario colony, in December, 1882, purchased a twenty-acre tract on the corner of San Antonio avenue and Fourth street. The next spring he came to reside upon his purchase, and at once commenced its improvement. The first orchard set out in the colony was by Mr. Dyar early in the spring of 1883. Since his arrival in Ontario he has been identified with many of its improvements and has been engaged in dealing in real estate and improving places. His present residence is a neat cottage with well ordered grounds upon a villa lot on the west side of Euclid avenue, between Third and Fourth streets. In its varied horticultural and floral productions this is one of the finest places in Ontario. He is a thorough and practical horticulturist, and makes a success of whatever he touches in this line. Among his real-estate interests in Ontario are ten acres between Seventh and Eighth streets, in lemons, now in bearing, seven acres on San Antonio avenue and Twenty-second Street, in Washington navel oranges, and some twenty acres of unimproved land.
He is a firm advocate of Ontario and its wonderful resources, and has done much toward advancing the interests of the community in which he resides. A strong supporter of churches and schools, he is a member of the Methodist Church and a trustee in the same. He is also president of the board of regents of the Chaffey College. He has for many years been a member of the Odd Fellows organization, and is a charter member and Past Grand of Olive Lodge, No. 18, of Salem, Oregon.
Mr Dyar has been twice married. His first marriage, in 1854, was to Mary J., daughter of Luther and Mary (Bartlett) Tubbs. She died in 1857, leaving one child, Charles Herbert, who married Miss Annie M. Ryan. Mr. Dyar’s second marriage was in 1863, when he was united with Miss Mary T. Gleason, daughter of Ryal and Rebecca (Tyler) Gleason, of Maine. They have one child, Helen L.
MLA Source Citation:The Lewis Publishing Company. An Illustrated History of Southern California embracing the counties of San Diego San Bernardino Los Angeles and Orange and the peninsula of lower California. The Lewis Publishing Company, Chicago, Illinois. 1890. AccessGenealogy.com. Web. 26 July 2016. https://www.accessgenealogy.com/california/biography-of-leroy-s-dyar.htm - Last updated on Sep 12th, 2011This page is part of a larger collection. Access the full collection at An Illustrated History of Southern California.
Topics: BiographyLocations: Franklin County ME, Klamath Reservation, Marion County OR, Ontario California, Salem Oregon, San Bernardino County CA, San Francisco CaliforniaSurnames: Dyar | 农业 | 6,429 |
Fresh market fruits and vegetables (Stock)
The argument that a vegetarian diet is more planet-friendly than a carnivorous one is straightforward: If we feed plants to animals, and then eat the animals, we use more resources and produce more greenhouse gases than if we simply eat the plants. As with most arguments about our food supply, though, it's not that simple. Although beef is always climatically costly, pork or chicken can be a better choice than broccoli, calorie for calorie.Much of the focus on the climate impact of meat has been on cattle, and with good reason. Any way you slice it, beef has the highest environmental cost of just about any food going, and the cow's digestive system is to blame. Ruminants — cows, sheep, goats and also yaks and giraffes — have a four-chambered stomach that digests plants by fermentation. A byproduct of that fermentation is methane, a greenhouse gas with some 20 times the heat-trapping ability of carbon. One cow's annual output of methane — about 100 kilograms — is equivalent to the emissions generated by a car burning 235 gallons of gasoline.Advertisement
Methane isn't the only strike against ruminants. There's also fertility. Cows can have one calf per year, which means the carbon cost of every cow destined for beef includes the cost of maintaining an adult for a year. Pigs, by contrast, can have two litters a year, with 10 or more pigs per litter.Then there's feed conversion. It takes six pounds of feed to make one pound of beef, but only 3.5 pounds for pork and two pounds for chicken. Considering the methane, the babies and the feed, it's clear that the ruminants do more damage than their one-stomached barnyard compatriots (monogastrics, they're called).Comparing cows with pigs, and meat with plants, is often done using data from the Environmental Working Group, which produced a report in 2011 that detailed the environmental cost of meat. The report includes a chart that ranks various foods according to the amount of emissions generated in the course of production. Ruminants are the worst offenders, with lamb generating 39 kilograms of carbon dioxide (or its equivalent) for each kilogram of meat, and beef generating 27. Then come pork (12), turkey (11) and chicken (7). Plants are all lower, ranging from potatoes (3) to lentils (1).But there's another way to look at the same information. If you stop eating beef, you can't replace a kilogram of it, which has 2,280 calories, with a kilogram of broccoli, at 340 calories. You have to replace it with 6.7 kilograms of broccoli. Calories are the great equalizer, and it makes sense to use them as the basis of the calculation.When you reorder the chart to look at climate impact by calorie, the landscape looks different. The ruminants still top the chart, but the monogastrics look a whole lot better. Low-calorie crops like broccoli don't do so well. Although beef still looks bad and beans still look good, pork and poultry are on a par with green vegetables. (Which means that a beef-and-leaf paleo diet is the worst choice going, environmentally speaking.)The claim that vegetarianism is kinder to the planet also fails to consider a couple of kinds of meat that aren't on the Environmental Working Group's chart. Deer and Canada geese do active damage in the areas where they're overpopulated, and wild pigs leave destruction in their path wherever they go. Eat one of those, and do the planet a favor.Most people, though, are most likely to get their food from the farm, and it's important to note that, although the chart attaches one number to each kind of food, farming styles vary widely and not all pork chops — or tomatoes, or eggs — are created equal. Unfortunately, it's all but impossible for us consumers to figure out the climate impact of the particular specimens on our dinner table, whether they're animal or vegetable.According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, organic agriculture's CO2 emissions per acre are significantly less than those of conventional agriculture. But yields per acre are also generally lower, and that mitigates the savings. Counterintuitively, the strawberry you buy from the farmer down the road might have a bigger environmental footprint than the strawberry you buy from far away, where a large farm in an ideal climate may grow it more efficiently. But it might not. You can't know. It's maddening.When it comes to meat, trying to eat responsibly presents a genuine conundrum: What's best for the planet is often what's worst for the animal. The efficiencies of modern conventional livestock farming do indeed decrease greenhouse gases, but they also require the confinement and high density that draw the ire of animal welfare advocates.Growing an animal as quickly as possible decreases climate impact because it's that many fewer days (or weeks or months) the animal is here to pollute. Increasing feed efficiency likewise decreases the acreage devoted to growing the animal's food. Rich Pirog, senior associate director of the Center for Regional Food Systems at Michigan State University, has studied the environmental impact of various ways of raising livestock; he has co-authored studies of Iowa cattle and pigs. For beef, he found that feedlots, where cattle are kept at high densities and fed grain, beat pastures, where animals are allowed to graze, in the tally of environmental impact. (A study just published in the Proceedings of the National Academies of Science reached a similar conclusion.)For pigs, there was some overlap in conventional farming and “niche” systems, in which pigs have deep bedding and outdoor access. Pirog says that “the most efficient niche producers were pretty comparable to the average conventional producers.” There's less research on poultry, but what has been done indicates that chickens raised in confinement also use fewer resources.Confinement equals efficiency, but confinement also equals, well, confinement. Although no farmers I've ever spoken with believe their animals are unhappy, many welfare-minded meat consumers (including me) prefer to support a system in which animals have elbow room and outdoor access; where cages aren't used, tails aren't docked and antibiotics aren't routinely administered.There are other arguments, on both sides — so many that it's easy to pick the ones that make the case for whichever kind of agriculture you're inclined to support. Grass-fed cows don't compete for plants humans can eat, and animals grazing on non-irrigated pasture don't compete for water that could be used to grow food (true!), but grass digestion creates more methane than grain digestion (also true!). Grazing cattle on grasslands can sequester carbon in the soil, but improperly managed grazing can make things worse rather than better. Pollution from manure reservoirs on conventional farms can threaten water and crops, but manure in reservoirs, from animals in confinement, can be converted to energy by methane digesters. Then there's the price of meat, inevitably higher in less efficient systems.The meat-vs.-other-meat debate is irrelevant to the committed vegetarian, but there are issues other than greenhouse gases in the meat-vs.-plant debate, too. The case for meat includes the ability of an animal to contribute constructively on an integrated farm (chickens help with pest control), the potential for turning food waste (spent grain, whey, expired dairy) into high-quality protein, and the ability to use grasslands, inappropriate for row crops, to produce human food (with grazing cows or goats).The case for plants has to include their nutritional value. Carbon aside, broccoli beats pork, hands down. And it has to consider killing, which many plant eaters find unacceptable. While the moral implications are beyond the brief of a column devoted to matters of fact, we all have to acknowledge that agriculture is an animal-killing enterprise. Does the rat, poisoned because it's a threat to the grain stores, count for less than the pig, raised and slaughtered with care?But let's go back to where we began, with greenhouse gases. Even if climate impact is your top priority, it's important to look at the food data in the context of other lifestyle factors. Eating beans is definitely better than eating beef. Driving a Prius is better than driving a Hummer. But one decision trumps every other — potentially by orders of magnitude — and that's how many children you have. No amount of bean-eating or Prius-driving will compensate for reproducing, and it's the childless, not the vegetarians, who are more likely to save the planet. Which doesn't mean that we should ignore the benefits of beans and Prii — or that we shouldn't have kids — it just means that we should acknowledge that human survival takes a climatic toll. Our obligation isn't to minimize our carbon footprint at the expense of all other considerations; it's to try to be prudent, taking those considerations into account.There are many ways to do that, but no one label — vegetarian, local, organic — has the corner on responsibility. For me, animal welfare is important, and my take on meat is that we should eat less of it, pay more for it, use all of it, and know where it's from. But that's not the last word. There isn't a last word, which means there's not a lot of room for sanctimony. While I think we all need to pay attention, vegetarians shouldn't tell omnivores to eat quinoa instead of pork any more than omnivores should tell vegetarians to eat venison instead of quinoa.- – -Haspel farms oysters on Cape Cod and writes about food and science.Print Email Font ResizeReturn to Top RELATED | 农业 | 9,664 |
Fonterra Director of Research Elected President of IDF
Managing Director Fonterra Nutrition Sarah Kennedy today congratulated Jeremy Hill on his election to President of the International Dairy Federation (IDF), becoming the first New Zealander to do so in the Federation’s 109-year history. “This reflects New Zealand’s leadership on the international dairy stage and Jeremy’s contribution to the industry,” says Ms Kennedy. “Fonterra is a world-leader in dairy research and innovation and, since 1991, Jeremy has been at the forefront of that research at Fonterra and its legacy organisations.”
Fonterra’s Director of Research Science Technology & Development, Dr Jeremy Hill Dr Hill was elected to the position at the IDF’s General Assembly at the IDF World Dairy Summit in Cape Town this week and will take the seat on 9 November 2012. He replaces current President Richard Doyle, who has completed a four-year term. With a PhD in biochemistry, over 100 publications and four patents, Dr Hill has held senior research and development leadership roles throughout the value chain. These include stints as General Manager Research & Development at the Livestock Improvement Corporation, General Manager Fonterra Research Centre and General Manager Manufacturing Innovation. He has also served at Fonterra’s Director Regulatory Affairs and Food Assurance.
Dr Hill is based at the Fonterra Research & Development Centre in Palmerston North, one of the leading dairy research facilities in the world. The Centre’s innovative products include cheese starter technology, spreadable butter, Anlene, DR10™ and DR20™ probiotics, and ‘instant mozzarella’. Founded in 1903, the IDF is a non-profit private sector organisation representing the interests of various stakeholders in dairying at the international level. The Federation is the leading source of scientific and technical expertise for all stakeholders of the dairy chain. Areas of work include sustainable development, nutrition, methods of analysis, farm management, hygiene and safety, and many more. Dr Hill has been involved in the work of the Federation for over two decades. | 农业 | 2,132 |
January 2010 Archive for The Truth about Trade
By: Truth About Trade & Technology
Truth About Trade & Technology and the Global Farmer Network – farmers committed to inserting their voice and perspective in the global dialogue regarding food and nutritional security.
A Trade Tool By Any Other Name
The Obama administration recently informed Congress of plans to launch its first round of trade talks. In March, it will start negotiations with a group of Asian-Pacific nations, perhaps with an eye toward striking a deal at a 2011 summit in Hawaii.
That’s all well and good. The United States has seen its market share slip in Asia. Removing trade barriers would boost exports for U.S. manufacturers and farmers and create jobs for American workers.
Yet the White House can’t sell this potential accord at home or abroad because President Obama lacks an indispensable legislative tool. Congressional Republicans should lead an effort to give it to him.
In the 1990s, when Bill Clinton was president, this tool was called “fast track.” In the decade that has just passed, it went by “trade promotion authority.” Whatever the name, the concept is simple: It requires trade agreements to go before Congress for an up-or-down vote, and Congress has a time-certain for that vote.
Every president since Gerald Ford has had this power--until now. Obama is the first not to possess it. Trade promotion authority expired on the watch of George W. Bush and Democrats in Congress refused to renew it.
The GOP should push to restore it, finding allies on the other side of the congressional aisle and working in cooperation with the White House. Republicans fell from power because voters lost confidence in their ability to govern. As they try to reboot in 2010--possibly with a serious bid for control of the House of Representatives--they would be wise to identify opportunities in which they can demonstrate bipartisan leadership.
Free trade is about more than political advantage, of course. It’s for the good of the country. Unfortunately, without this special legislative mechanism, the president’s ability to negotiate new agreements is neutered.
Imagine trying to buy a car from a dealership. Once you’ve finished the haggling, the sales representative usually has to get a manager’s consent. This is essentially the role Congress plays: It has to approve any pact negotiated by the executive branch.
The difficulty with Congress is that it’s made up of 535 managers--or, perhaps more accurately, micromanagers. Their instinct is not merely to approve or disapprove. Just as they routinely lard up legislation with earmarks, they would tinker with trade agreements. It would become virtually impossible to conclude anything.
Parliamentary governments avoid this problem. Prime ministers can enforce their will on backbenchers. This is not the case in the United States, with its form of divided government.
Other countries know this. They won’t negotiate seriously with the United States without knowing that it has an effective method for getting a final agreement through Congress.
It may make sense to come up with a new name for this legislative tool. Former U.S. trade diplomat Carla Hills once joked that “fast track” was a lousy term because trade talks were never fast and they were rarely on track. I’ve never cared for “trade promotion authority.” It sounds like an obscure federal agency.
How about the Bipartisan Trade Initiative? Or the Congressional Export Opportunity Review? Or Dean Kleckner’s Bright Idea?
Now you know why I didn’t pursue a career in advertising: Someone with a mind for marketing probably can do a lot better. The important thing is to get the policy right. As Shakespeare might have said, a legislative trade tool by any other name is just as useful.
The Obama administration’s plan to pursue a trade deal with the Trans-Pacific Partnership is wise. It’s also bold. Many of the president’s fellow Democrats will oppose him because they are beholden to the special-interest protectionism of Big Labor. If a new trade agreement is to become a reality, Obama will need help from Republicans. The best trade agreements are win-win opportunities for all of the partners involved. So is trade legislation, but only if the White House and congressional Republicans have the foresight and courage to set aside their differences and take it up.
Dean Kleckner, an Iowa farmer, chairs Truth About Trade & Technology. www.truthabouttrade.org
A Good Dose of Judgment Needed
The other day, I went to the grocery store for beef tenderloin. Only one kind was available. A sticker on the package advertised that the meat was “antibiotic free.” It wanted to make me feel like a health-conscious consumer. In other words, it was a sales ploy.
As a cattle rancher, however, I know beef. This supposedly special meat almost certainly wasn’t any better than the 'ordinary' beef. The big difference was the price, which was about $5 per pound higher than beef tenderloin should have been.
This experience may provide a glimpse of the costly future of food--at least if a few members of Congress have their way. Congresswoman Louise Slaughter (D-NY), has proposed legislation to ban a variety of common antibiotics in farm animals. At last count, her bill had nearly a hundred co-sponsors. A collection of advocacy groups has lined up behind it and the White House has indicated its possible support.
But a new ban on antibiotics won’t improve anybody’s health. It may even make us sick.
Slaughter’s goal is worthy enough: She wants to guarantee the continuing effectiveness of antibiotic drugs in people. They are a vital tool of medicine, after all. Their job is to kill or inhibit the growth of harmful bacteria. Doctors prescribe them to treat infections.
Yet sometimes too much of a good thing can be a bad thing: The overuse of antibiotics allows bacteria to build up resistance. Then the drugs are less able to prevent disease.
When it comes to antibiotics, we’ve come a long way in the livestock industry. Just as medicine has improved over time, so has our understanding of how to make the most of these drugs as we raise livestock. Nowadays, we don’t use antibiotics indiscriminately. We take advantage of them only when they’re truly needed--and that usually means to treat specific problems in individual animals.
Most cattle don’t receive any antibiotics at all. So even if your beef doesn’t carry a label that says “antibiotic free,” there’s a very good chance that it’s antibiotic free anyway. You just won’t pay “antibiotic free” prices for it.
Even so, we shouldn’t have to act as if antibiotics are toxic. There’s nothing wrong with supplying antibiotics to farm animals. It makes them healthier in life--and therefore healthier later on, for consumers.
Marie Bulgin, a veterinarian at the University of Idaho, recently shared the story of a sheep raiser who thought it was smart to quit using antibiotics--apparently so he could slap those special stickers on his lamb chops. “The only problem was ... the animals he was taking in to have butchered were small, thin, and scouring, because they had been severely affected by coccidiosis,” she said. (Coccidiosis is the disease caused by coccidia, a single-celled intestinal bacterium.)
Maybe those “antibiotic free” stickers should also include a warning label about bacterial infections.
When producers don’t use antibiotics, animals get sick. It hardly needs to be said that sick animals shouldn’t enter the human food chain.
In the 1990s, Denmark had a debate over antibiotics similar to the one we’re wrestling with in the United States right now. It decided to prohibit low-level antibiotics in farm animals, on the grounds that this would improve human health.
A decade later, the data don’t back up this claim. The incidence of foodborne illness hasn’t budged, according to John Waddell, a Nebraska veterinarian who has crunched the numbers. (It has actually gone up slightly, though it tracks per-capita population trends.) What the ban has done, however, is drive thousands of Danish pig farmers out of business and raised the cost of pork for consumers.
Maybe this is what Shakespeare meant when he wrote his immortal words: “Something is rotten in the state of Denmark.”
Let’s contain the rot. Just as antibiotics prevent the spread of bacterial diseases, we should apply a dose of good judgment to this discussion. The alternative is to slap stickers on the foreheads of politicians: “Commonsense free.”
Carol Keiser owns and manages cattle feeding operations in Kansas, Nebraska and Western Illinois. Mrs. Keiser is a Truth About Trade & Technology board member. (www.truthabouttrade.org)
If you don’t play FarmVille, you probably know someone who does. In just a few months, it has become the most popular game on Facebook. More than 70 million people around the world have used it to build virtual farms, according to Zynga, the company that’s behind this phenomenon.
I’m not one of them. I work in the fields for a living. After a long day of toiling on a real farm, running a virtual one isn’t high on my list of leisure-time priorities. But it's okay if others do. I’m actually encouraged by FarmVille’s popularity. It’s a healthy sign for agriculture--but only if players don’t come to think that running a farm is as easy as FarmVille makes it seem.
The concept behind FarmVille is simple: You plant seeds, grow crops, and make money. These activities earn experience points, which allow your operation to expand. The key to the game’s popularity lies in its social-networking features. Friends on Facebook can become neighbors in the virtual world of FarmVille. By helping with various tasks, such as fertilizing fields, neighbors can give each other a boost.
Success at FarmVille requires foresight, persistence, and a willingness to help others--just like farming in the real world.
The game includes plenty of whimsical elements. Ugly ducklings turn into beautiful swans. Pink cows make strawberry milk. A field of crops can grow to maturity in just a few hours. That’s not how things work on my farm, of course. If FarmVille was as difficult and complicated as actual farming, probably no one would play it. A realistic depiction of farm life would require a simulation of what it’s like to lie on the ground in six-degree weather to fix a harvester whose chain was knocked loose by a clump of frozen corn stalks. This was something I had to do just a few weeks ago, during an abnormally late harvest. It wasn’t a pleasant chore, but it was part of the day’s work. When it was done, there was no strawberry milk waiting for me at home on the kitchen counter, virtual or otherwise.
I don’t want to give the impression that I don’t like my job. I love to farm. But the work is hard. It has its moments of real frustration and discomfort.
The challenges of running a successful farming operation are enormous. Success depends upon adaptation. We have to respond to all sorts of factors that are beyond our control. The weather may help or hinder. Pests can be anything from minor irritants to major forces of destruction. The financial markets, the price of energy, and the intrusiveness of government regulations also have a significant impact on what we do.
There’s no such thing as a typical year. Sometimes the lessons from one season will apply to the next, but nothing is ever exactly the same. You have to change to meet the conditions of the time.
For this reason, farmers need every advantage they can get. Free-trade agreements with other countries allow us to export our products to foreign consumers. Biotechnology allows us to plant seeds that can withstand attacks from insects and weeds. In the near future, it will help us combat other challenges, such as drought. Our prosperity in the years ahead will depend upon new trade talks and emerging technologies.
FarmVille doesn’t even begin to address these complexities. That’s okay. It’s a game--and it’s supposed to be fun.
And it may even have real value. We live in a time when agriculture is so efficient that the vast majority of people in the developed world are cut off entirely from food production. Many have never set foot on a farm, let alone had to worry about raising and protecting crops. They have very little understanding of how food travels from farm to fork.
FarmVille won’t fill in all of these gaps in knowledge. Yet it may serve as a useful reminder that food doesn’t just come from the grocery store. It comes from the dedication of men and women around the world who work the land.
John Reifsteck, a corn and soybean farmer in western Champaign County Illinois, is a Board Member of Truth About Trade and Technology (www.truthabouttrade.org). | 农业 | 12,730 |
PlantsPerennial Plants & FlowersPlanting & Growing Perennials How to Plant & Grow Jatropha
How to Plant & Grow Jatropha
Overview The jatropha curcus plant is a small shrub believed to have originated in Mexico and Central America, but is now cultivated throughout the world and particularly in India, where the plant is grown as a cash crop. This rugged, drought-resistant perennial is fast-growing and lives for 50 years, producing seed the entire time. The oil contained in the seeds can be combusted as fuel without any refinement and burns with clear smoke-free flame. Scientists have found the jatropha seed oil to be successful as fuel for simple diesel engines. The jatropha plant is also easy to propagate and thrives in arid and semi-arid climates, but is most successful in drier regions of the tropics at lower altitudes with average temperatures well above 68 degrees Fahrenheit.
Plant your jatropha bush in low-nutrient, well-drained soil. The jatropha will grow and thrive in a wide range of poor-quality soils, including sandy, saline and even gravelly soils. However, the plant does prefer soil with a lot of earthworm activity, as this increases the soil's fertility and oxygen to the plant's roots.
Plant the seeds 1 1/2 inches down into the soil, if you're growing your jatropha plant from seed. Use a well-draining potting mix. Barely moisten the soil.
Grow your jatropha in a hot, dry environment. Although jatropha plants can withstand lower temperatures and even a slight frost, they prefer warmer climatic conditions that resemble the tropic and sub-tropic regions.
Position the jatropha plant in full sunlight. Water your jatropha sparingly, giving it only enough water to slightly dampen the soil.
Look for the inedible fruits on the jatropha in winter when the shrub is leafless. Each inflorescence grows a cluster containing 10 or more fruits. Harvest the seeds approximately three months after the jatropha flowers. The seeds are mature after two to four months, when the outer capsule turns from green to yellow.
Allow the jatropha's leaves to remain on the ground after it sheds them during winter. Don't clean up the leaves or remove them. These shed leaves form a sort of mulch layer around the plant's base and attract earthworms toward the roots.
Don't eat the fruits or seeds from the jatropha plant. They are both inedible and have poisonous qualities.
Jatropha plant or seeds
Potting mix (optional)
Sand (optional)
Jatropha World
Practical Environmentalist
grow jatropha curcus plant, jatropha plant bio diesel crop, jatropha oil cultivation About this Author
Sarah Terry brings 10 years of experience writing novels, business-to-business newsletters, and a plethora of how-to articles. Terry has written articles and publications for a wide range of markets and subject matters, including Medicine & Health, Eli Financial, Dartnell Publications and Eli Journals. | 农业 | 2,901 |
What climate change could mean on farm
Experts examine range of possible effects
Rural Revival By: Laura Rance Posted: 05/10/2014 1:00 AM | Comments: Tweet Post Reddit ShareThis Print
This article was published 9/5/2014 (941 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current. OK, the climate is a changin'. We get it. But what does it mean for us?The steady stream of reports and dire warnings about global climate change have hammered the point home and gone a long way toward silencing the deniers. Now, the challenge is spelling out how it's going to affect how we live, where we live and what we need to do about it.As a U.S. government report released last week pointed out, the effects will be regionally specific. As the weather becomes more volatile, the related effects become more pronounced, whether it's tornadoes in the Midwest, floods and storm surges in the East, droughts or mudslides in the West.When a group of Canadian academics and researchers set about preparing a series of essays on what might be in store for Prairie agriculture in coming decades, one of the first things they acknowledged was a variable, volatile, unpredictable climate is really nothing new to Prairie farmers.
'Perhaps the most important message emerging from this report is that Prairie agriculture has thrived because of the industry's ability to adapt quickly'
"Future resilience will be affected by the many variables that impact agriculture's ability to adapt, with climate perhaps being one of the more predictable variables," says the report, Moving Toward Prairie Agriculture 2050, released last month by the University of Manitoba.The 23 essays cover a range of topics, from how the cropping mix might change or not and how weeds and pests might behave, to how the education system can better prepare the next generation.Scientists predict global warming will extend the Prairie growing season by 25 to 50 per cent, which translates into an extra 15 to 50 days. Hot spells will be hotter by 1 C to 2 C and cold spells will be 2 C to 4 C colder.That seems relatively small when the variation in mean monthly temperatures on the Prairies can vary by as much as 50 C from one year to the next, says the essay by Brian Amiro and Paul Bullock, two soil scientists specializing in agricultural meteorology. "It is more likely that we will need to adapt to a new frequency of events, even if the agricultural impact of each event (cold or warm) is not a new experience," they said.Charles Grant, an agricultural economist with the University of Manitoba, notes payouts due to severe weather events in Canada have been increasing since the 1980s. Public and private insurers will have to limit their exposure through higher premiums, higher deductibles and more requirements for self-insurance -- which, for farmers, means the cost of risk management will rise.Even though the total amount of precipitation isn't expected to change much, the manner in which it falls and the timing, combined with the warmer climate, is expected to make water management key.Some have speculated increased corn and soybean production on the eastern Prairies in recent years is evidence it is becoming the new Iowa or Illinois.South Dakota might be a more accurate comparison, says Bruce Burnett, the weather and crops specialist with CWB Research.To be sure, a longer growing season gives Prairie farmers more cropping options. But again, when we are talking about a region that already produces more than 17 crops, it's all relative.Wheat, barley and canola have been the big three western crops over the past two decades, accounting for 79 per cent of the planted acreage over the past five years. Burnett thinks it's unlikely climate change alone will modify that.However, other things, such as technology or shifting markets, might. For example, 50 years ago, farmers had never heard of canola.Burnett points to the 73 per cent drop in oat production on the Prairies from a peak of 10.7 million acres in 1943 to 1.1 million acres in 2013. Farmers grew oats to feed their horses. Then tractors replaced horses.Trying to predict what transformative technologies will appear between now and 2050 makes weather forecasting look simple.Perhaps the most important message emerging from this report is Prairie agriculture has thrived because of the industry's ability to adapt quickly to new opportunities and stresses. That adaptability will be even more important in the future. Laura Rance is editor of the Manitoba Co-operator. She can be reached at 204-792-4382 or by email: [email protected] Read more by Laura Rance. | 农业 | 4,611 |
Home > Oklahoma deer may be a little thin this year Oklahoma deer may be a little thin this year November 21, 2011 By
OSU Extension Service deer3a.jpg [1] stock photo
Oklahoma has a lot of deer. Estimated populations are anywhere from 550,000 to 650,000, so this year’s rifle season harvest should be a good one, as far as total numbers go.
However, the quality of deer that hunters harvest may be slacking a little due to the extreme hot and dry weather over the summer and continuing into the fall, said Jerry Shaw, Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation big game biologist.
Check in stations may see some pretty big differences in body weight of deer, especially in the western and southwestern parts of the state, where the drought hit the hardest.
“Most of the forage down there is dry and not very palatable,” Shaw said. “Some of the deer in that part of the state are in pretty bad shape, as far as body weight. They’re going to start slimming up pretty quick.”
Mature deer should not quite feel the same effects as they are not trying to gain weight, rather maintain their bodies. However, these breeding age bucks may have a difficult time even doing that as they search for does.
“The more mature bucks are going to be doing the majority of the breeding and that’s going to be pretty difficult on them,” he said. “They will be spending a lot of energy trying to find does, and they’re going to be hard pressed to try and replace that energy.”
It will not be just the bucks that are hurting, either.
“It’s been really difficult for does that conceived and actually had fawns over the summer,” said Jim Shaw, professor in the department of natural resource ecology and management at Oklahoma State University. “It’s difficult for them to try to get body weight on themselves and have enough nutrition to be able to lactate and feed their fawns.”
There have been reports of fawns being abandoned in western Oklahoma where the does simply cannot produce enough milk to feed her offspring, forcing her to leave in an effort to save herself.
Also, a lack of forage is not the only problem for Oklahoma deer.
“As the habitat gets depleted there is no regrowth of the undergrowth,” said Jerry. “Not only the food component, but the cover component is now missing, which increases predation.”
An increase of fawn carcasses has been reported, which indicates coyotes and bobcats have had some easy pickings.
“There’s not a whole lot of places for deer to hide, and they’re having to move a whole lot more to get their nutrition requirements,” Jerry said. “In that regard, we’re probably going to have a pretty good deer harvest this year.”
Hunters with artificial feeders should have great success as deer are on the prowl for food. And, it’s not too late.
“If you were to put out a bait pile, you could have deer show up in a day,” he said.
The 16-day rifle season opens Saturday.
Source URL: http://www.theantlersamerican.com/content/oklahoma-deer-may-be-little-thin-year
Links:[1] http://www.theantlersamerican.com/sites/default/files/deer3a.jpg | 农业 | 3,054 |
Development prohibited on more than 1,000 acres of Howard farms
Jessica Anderson, The Baltimore Sun
Howard County's agricultural preservation program committed over the past two years to buy development rights to more than 1,000 acres of farmland, as a slow housing market helped boost landowners' interest in the easements. The county announced last week that all of the money in the program has been spoken for, and said a continued down market will likely slow the process of collecting enough to protect more land.
The Agricultural Land Preservation Program — funded through real estate transfer taxes — allows agricultural property owners to apply for easements that would "extinguish the development rights and limit the use of the land," said program administrator Joy Levy. The county will spend $39.5 million on the easements over two decades. Levy said it's unclear when the county will again seek out new land for another round of easements. In order to fund another group of properties, the county must wait for transfer tax revenue to catch up. Thirteen property owners applied for the easements program in June 2009. The Agricultural Land Preservation Board then ranked the properties, evaluating size, soil capability and productivity, and proximity to other preserved properties before offering a price. Each deal went before the County Council for approval. "It's important," Levy said of the program. "The development pressure has always been pretty high." But Levy said the program will likely not begin to dole out another round of easements any time soon. The program had more money when the economy was better, but in a thriving housing market, it was difficult for the county to compete with developers. "This was the first competitive batch we've had in years … an upside to the downside." she said. After this latest round of easements, the county's agricultural land preservation program has prohibited development on 21,637 acres in rural western Howard, where the majority of the land does not have public water and sewer system, Levy said. Howard's program began in 1984, while the statewide program was established by the General Assembly in 1977, making Maryland one of the first states to adopt such a program. Levy said most areas have some sort of similar program established or rely more on the state's program; "There just has to be a dedicated source of funding," she said. "Each county does it differently," she said. "Preserving our farmland goes hand-in-hand with protecting the quality of life in Howard County," said County Executive Ken Ulman in a statement. "Local farms provide us with healthy, locally grown food, scenic landscapes, jobs, recreational opportunities," he said. The latest batch includes 274 acres in Sykesville, 70 acres in Lisbon,107 acres in Woodbine, and more than 700 acres in Ellicott City. One Mount Airy resident, Calvin Murray, donated an easement on his 53-acre farm to the program in November. About 500 acres in Ellicott City will come from a portion of the 892-acre Doughoregan Manor estate, which was the home of Charles Carroll of Carrollton, a signer of the Declaration of Independence. About 1,430 acres surrounding Doughoregan were previously preserved. The owners of the estate, descendants of Carroll, want to develop part of the remaining land into homes to help raise money to restore the estate, which once totaled more than 10,000 acres. Residents along the eastern edge of the property, nearest the proposed development, have complained about the potential increase in traffic, sewage problems and the visual impact of new homes. Up to 325 houses have been proposed for 221 acres in the northeast corner of the estate near Frederick Road. Howard County would get 36 acres to expand Kiwanis-Wallas Park. The rest of the land, between Route 108 and Frederick Road, would be preserved, including the nearly 300-year-old family mansion and several dozen outbuildings. [email protected]
Calvin Murray
Ken Ulman
Charles Carroll
Former Howard County farm envisioned for children's garden
Teachers bring 9/11 events to classroom
Columbia entomologist finds wide audience for bug talk | 农业 | 4,166 |
Agriculture and Life Sciences
Department of Plant and Soil Science
The Department of Plant and Soil Science
Discover Plant and Soil ScienceUndergraduate ProgramsGraduate ProgramCoursesFaculty, Staff and Areas of ResearchStudent OpportunitiesAlumniExtension/OutreachSeminarsContact Us
Resources for: Prospective
Students | Current
Students | Faculty, Staff & Graduate Students
Remaking MapleNew method may revolutionize maple syrup industry
By Joshua E. Brown
Last year, the value of Vermont maple syrup was more than $26 million. UVM professors Abby van den Berg and Tim Perkins have revealed an invention that can yield vastly more syrup per acre than what producers currently get from the forest. It starts by cutting the top off a maple sapling. (Photo: Sally McCay)
A new sap collecting technique invented at the University of Vermont. It could work for maple--or walnut, birch, or even palm trees. (Photo: Sally McCay)
Four years ago, Tim Perkins and Abby van den Berg cut the top off a maple tree. As researchers at the University of Vermont’s Proctor Maple Research Center, they wanted to learn more about sap flow.
Instead, they discovered an entirely new way to make maple syrup. “It’s revolutionary in some ways,” says Perkins.
Their new technique uses tightly spaced plantations of chest-high sugar-maple saplings. These could be single stems with a portion — or all — of the crown removed. Or they could be multiple-stemmed maples, where one stem per tree can be cut each year. Either way, the cut stem is covered with a sealed plastic bag. Under the bag, the sap flows out of the stump under vacuum pressure and into a tube. Voilà, huge quantities of sap.
In short, these plantations can allow maple syrup production in a farm field.
Typically, a traditional sugarbush produces about 40 gallons of maple syrup per acre of forest by tapping, perhaps, 80 mature trees. With this new method, the UVM researchers estimate that producers could get more than 400 gallons of syrup per acre drawing from about 6,000 saplings.
The new technique has the potential to enhance business for existing syrup producers, the researchers think, and defend Vermont’s maple industry from threats that range from climate change to spiking land costs to Asian long-horned beetles.
“We didn’t set out to develop this system,” says van den Berg. “We were looking at ways to improve vacuum systems.” But, during a spring thaw, the tapped tree, from which they had removed the crown, just kept yielding sap under vacuum pressure. And more sap and more sap.
“We got to the point where we should have exhausted any water that was in the tree, but the moisture didn’t drop,” says Perkins. “The only explanation was that we were pulling water out of the ground, right up through and out the stem.” In other words, the cut tree works like a sugar-filled straw stuck in the ground. To get the maple sugar stored in the trunk, just apply suction.
While the cut plantation saplings will regrow branches and leaves from side shoots — and can be used year after year — “the top of the tree is really immaterial for sap flow under vacuum-induced flow,” Perkins says.
“Once we saw that we could get yields without tops it was — wow! — this changes the basic paradigm,” says van den Berg. Large, mature trees are no longer needed to provide the sugar. “It became clear that we could deal with an entirely new framework,” she says.
Parallel production
Maple syrup production is a rich part of Vermont’s working landscapes. Some people make it their full-time profession, using hundreds of acres and tens of thousands of taps. Others supplement farm income or other work with smaller sugaring operations. At all scales, maple syrup producers face increasing challenges.
One of the most pressing is the rising cost of land. “There is a great deal of expansion in Vermont’s maple syrup industry right now, and forestland prices have gone up a lot,” says Perkins. “This can help those producers who are at the stage where they can’t afford to go out and buy a few million dollars worth of land to be a full-time producer.” But they could add some acres of plantation production — for more syrup with less land.
“If you are using 10 acres of abandoned farmland or a regenerating forest that you already own, this technique makes a lot of sense,” says van den Berg. With lower start-up costs, and quicker expansion (or contraction) of one’s business, “it’s another way to help us maintain the traditional working landscapes of Vermont,” she says, letting people continue to make a living — and remain — on their land.
The researchers estimate that the cost of production using the plantation technique will be roughly the same as current methods. Though the sap yield per acre is much higher on a plantation than a forest, so, too, are the potential costs of equipment, labor and maintenance. “I think you’re going to find sugarmakers who are doing both,” says Perkins, “standard sugarbush and plantation.”
Coming threats
With climate change, this dual approach may become increasingly attractive — even a matter of business survival. “If this region is going to warm more — then with a plantation we don’t have to rely as much on strong freeze/thaw cycles,” to get sap flowing, Perkins says, “because these smaller trees freeze faster and thaw faster.”
Any form of maple syrup production relies on freezing temperatures to transform starch in the wood into sugar. But in larger trees, it’s much more important to generate sap pressure from a freeze/thaw cycle, van den Berg explains, than in a plantation system with small trees that can rely predominately on vacuum-assisted flow.
“The spirit of this work is to augment and help out existing producers,” she says/ “With a semi-wild harvest you’re always going to have limitations.” One of which may be a deadly limitation in the form of an invasive pest. Though Asian long-horned beetles are not currently found in Vermont, they are infesting trees in Ohio, Massachusetts, New York and Ontario. They kill mature maple trees, and so federal and state officials have been vigorously cutting and burning any trees where the beetles are found. “This pest likes big trees,” Perkins says, “they don’t like saplings.”
Jacques Couture, a maple syrup producer in Vermont’s famed Northeast Kingdom, and chair of the Vermont Maple Sugarmakers Association, sees how this new technique might help producers be more nimble or recover from trouble. “One of the really interesting aspects (of the plantation approach) is the possibility to establish some maple syrup production in a much shorter time-span than is the current norm,” he notes.
“If we had a natural disaster such as a widespread hurricane or some insect pest that would wipe out a large percentage of the maple stands,” he says, “this might appeal to some who were affected as an alternative way of getting back into production sooner than the normal 40-plus years for trees to grow to tap-able size as we know it today.” Plantation saplings could be ready in seven years.
Another potential advantage of agricultural-style maple plantations is, well — they’re agricultural. “We can control the system much better by fertilization and irrigation,” Perkins says. “One of the limiting factors on sap production in the spring is soil moisture. Typically we have enough in Vermont — but during years where it’s a very dry winter we may not have enough,” he says, and that hurts production.
Unknown outcomes
Still, despite the potential for more predicable and profitable management of maple sugar operations that plantations might bring, much remains unknown about the implications of this research. “It’s too early to make any predictions,” says Eric Sorkin, a producer of organic maple syrup from Cambridge, Vt., who was briefed on the new project.
“Any time something comes along which fundamentally undermines the status quo, there will be clear winners and losers — and that is what this could be,” he says. “This could lead to a fundamental shift in the way we make maple syrup, so certainly there will be people who benefit from it.” But just who benefits is hard to say, and many other changes are afoot in the industry and the world that make the impact of plantations hard to foresee.
“I don’t think there will be a sudden shift; the lifecycle doesn’t permit it,” Sorkin says. But if over the next 20, 30, 40 years, the plantation technique is combined with efforts to select seedlings with improved “sweetness” (that is, the amount of sugar they yield) or faster growth, this could give plantation syrup a distinct market advantage.
“If you can grow these sweet trees that have twice the sugar content, then your price of production drops in half,” Perkins says. “In 20 or 40 years from now this method could be considerably less expensive than the standard methods used now.”
For Sorkin, the future seems unclear. “If this leads maple syrup from a semi-wild crop to something farmed, plantation-style, I think that would be tremendously sad,” he says. “And that would have implications for multi-generational operations and landscape-scale implications for the working forest in the Northeast. But that’s a huge, huge ‘if.’”
To date, the UVM researchers have made one presentation to a conference of maple syrup producers about their research and applied for a patent. Perkins will make another presentation this week. The new equipment needed for plantation syrup is not yet on the market. “This is research,” van den Berg says, “and there’s a lot more research to be done before we know what the implications of this research will be.” It could be that plantations become the lifeline for multigenerational operations and allow small-scale and family landowners to retain ownership of working forests instead of going broke or selling them off for development. “This could prevent condos,” says Perkins.
Forest futures
The cultural mythology around maple syrup production is strong and deeply sentimental. Even brand-new books on the modern maple syrup industry have cover images of trees covered with metal buckets and plaid-shirted woodsmen toting sap behind horses and sleighs.
Except as tourist attractions and a kind of rural theatre, this method of producing syrup is mostly gone, having been displaced by efficient networks of plastic tubing, reverse osmosis devices that quickly remove water from sap, and vacuum pressure pumps to bring sap out of trees to storage tanks.
“Tubing was going to destroy the industry; reverse osmosis was going to destroy the industry; vacuum was going to destroy the maple industry. We’ve heard this again and again,” says Tim Perkins. But the opposite is true, he says. “The maple industry is at the strongest it’s ever been because of all these changes.” Plantation maple syrup may be next.
“The natural progression of the industry is to look at more controlled ways of managing resources,” says Sorkin. “Whether it’s good or not, only time will tell.”
For Perkins, the past of other Vermont forest businesses provide clues about possible futures. “Today, no one thinks at all about going to cut a Christmas tree in a tree plantation,” he says. “But fifty or seventy years ago you didn’t do that. You went to the woods. Nobody planted Christmas trees. And then somebody said, ‘well, it would be a lot easier if we planted Christmas trees’ — and now the Christmas tree farm is our heritage."
“We don’t know whether this will happen with maple,” Perkins says, “but this new method is a tool for producing maple syrup that we didn’t have before.” | 农业 | 11,561 |
Ag secretary says rural people need to sell agriculture Written by Wauneta Breeze Thursday, 14 November 2013 00:00 By Mary Kay Quinlan
Nebraska News Service
People who care about agriculture need to do a better job of selling themselves to urban dwellers, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack told a Lincoln audience Tuesday.
“We’ve got to market agriculture differently,” Vilsack said, expressing frustration over the congressional logjam that has blocked passage of a new farm bill.
National news media have focused on crop subsidies and food stamps, Vilsack said, but the bill also contains critical support for research, jobs, international trade, food security, energy and conservation in addition to its role as a safety net for farmers who need the bill’s provisions that help reduce the inherent risks of farming enough so they’ll keep farming and assure the nation’s food independence.
Farmers comprise just 1 percent of the population, but one out of every 12 jobs in the country is associated with agriculture, Vilsack said, adding: “We ought to be talking about that all the time.”
Vilsack was the final speaker at a three-day conference sponsored by the University of Nebraska’s new Rural Futures Institute and by the UNL Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources’ Heuermann lecture series.
Vilsack, a former two-term governor of Iowa, said the pending farm bill is an opportunity “to remind all of America why rural America matters.” In addition to providing all the food the nation needs, rural America provides critical exports, is the source of all the nation’s energy, from coal mines to hydroelectric dams, wind farms and biofuels, and is the place urban people go to get away from it all, he said.
Moreover, Vilsack added, the nation depends directly on rural people for its national security because people from rural areas represent 40 percent of the military although they comprise just 16 percent of the overall population.
The agriculture secretary attributed the willingness of rural young people to join the military to a value system instilled in rural youth who understand the importance of giving back to their communities.
It’s a lesson, he said, that they learn from the land. “You can’t keep taking from the land. You’ve got to give something back,” he said. “The country’s no different.”
Vilsack urged people who want to enhance the rural economy to take their message to foundations and investment bankers as potential sources of new capital for bio-based manufacturing and new product development that will create more jobs in rural communities. He cited as examples a Virginia firm that is using plant material to make a Fiberglas-like substance and a Wisconsin manufacturer that uses wood chips to make a type of armor.
In addition to cataloguing the virtues of rural America, Vilsack also noted some shortcomings. “Rural America needs to take a different attitude toward diversity than we’ve taken,” he said. Hispanic workers in particular are a critical part of the agriculture labor force, Vilsack said, yet immigrants encounter resistance in many rural areas.
Congress needs to create a “pathway to legitimacy” for them, he said, referring to an immigration reform bill that also has been stalled in Congress. The agriculture secretary also noted that poverty remains a persistent problem in many rural counties and that it’s often difficult for young farmers and ranchers without family land they can inherit to gain a toe-hold in agriculture.
USDA programs aim to help young farmers and ranchers with loans and other support, and also help communities with support for housing, libraries, hospitals, schools and broadband access, all of which are investments that support the quality of life in rural America, he said.
© 2008 The Wauneta Breeze All rights reserved. | 农业 | 3,811 |
Home > Gardens | CANBR > Plant Information > Growing Native Plants Zieria cytisoides
Downy Zieria
Zieria cytisoides Sm.
The genus Zieria is confined to Australia and contains some twenty to twenty-three species. Zieria cytisoides is a low bushy shrub with attractive grey-green foliage. This species is widely distributed and is found growing naturally in many parts of Australia's eastern states.
Without any pruning at all Z. cytisoides forms an attractive compact shrub. The specimens in the Australian National Botanic Gardens attain a height of 120 cm with a spread of 120 - 160 cm. Zieria cytisoides belongs to the Rutaceae family, and like many members of this family the leaves are strongly aromatic when crushed. This is due to the presence of oil glands in the leaves. Zieria cytisoides does not have the very colourful fragrant flowers of some of its cousins, but its handsome, all-year-round foliage makes it an ideal contrasting garden specimen. The foliage is covered with fine, short hairs, giving it a soft, grey appearance and this accounts for its common name, Downy Zieria. The leaves are trifoliate and the obovate to elliptical leaflets are 1 - 1.5 cm long, with their undersurfaces much greyer due to the presence of extra silky hairs. The margins of the leaflets are curved or rolled underneath.
In spring small clusters of inconspicuous flowers appear along the branches. The petals are pink or white, 3 - 5 mm long and about twice as long as the sepals. The flowers closely resemble Boronia, but have only four stamens whereas Boronia has eight. In the Australian National Botanic Gardens there has been no significant record of pests or diseases attacking this species. It does produce seed, but the best method of propagation is by cuttings. Cuttings 6 -8 cm long taken at most times of the year are easy to strike.
Text by ANBG staff (1975)
Name meaning: Zieria cytisoides Zieria - after M.(or J.) Zier, an 18th century Polish botanist; cytisoides - like Cytisus, the exotic Broom, but the allusion is not clear.
Contact us | Copyright and public access | Privacy Statement | Sitemap | Last updated: 11 February, 2013 | 农业 | 2,145 |
Industry FDA may finally get serious about milk imitators By Tom Quaife, editor, Dairy Herd Management
A warning letter sent to the makers of Muscle Milk has created optimism that there will be some type of federal enforcement against milk imitation products, including soy milk. The warning letter was sent by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration on June 29 to CytoSport, Inc., the maker of Muscle Milk. The letter claimed that the use of the word “milk” is misleading. Despite the name “Muscle Milk” appearing in bold letters on the packaging, in smaller print there is the notation “contains no milk.” Chris Galen, senior vice president of communications for the National Milk Producers Federation, says the recent action against Muscle Milk is a good start, but when it comes to enforcement against milk imitators, FDA still has a long ways to go.
“We need to see more action from FDA on a variety of fronts and not just against Muscle Milk,” he told Dairy Herd Management. “We have dozens of products that we contend are similarly mislabeled,” he says. For examples, go to the Facebook page, “They don’t got milk.”
And, the National Milk Producers Federation has been trying to get something done on this for more than 10 years.
NMPF contends that many of the products that brand themselves “milk” do not fit the legal definition.
According to Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations, milk is the lacteal secretion that comes from one or more healthy cows.
Soy milk does not meet that definition, since it comes from beans rather than cows. Indeed, soy milk is the “granddaddy of the ones we feel are misappropriating dairy terms,” Galen says. The FDA gave Cytosport 15 days to address the labeling issues mentioned in the warning letter. The company’s web site says it is “proactively and openly addressing the FDA’s labeling concerns.”
Tom Quaife, editor, Dairy Herd Management
| Tom Quaife has served as editor of Dairy Herd Management since 1992. During that time, the magazine has evolved from one that emphasized government policy and industry issues to one that has a strong business focus. Quaife believes in publishing articles that producers can act upon directly, particularly as it relates to the management of the dairy farm business. Quaife graduated from Iowa State University and his areas of expertise include health, milking equipment, dairy genetics, facilities, and milk quality. Prior to joining the Dairy Herd Management team, he spent four years as editor of Swine Practitioner and five years as an associate editor with Pork magazine. Quaife's experience in the pork industry gave him valuable insight that he applies to the dairy industry. He is located in the Lenexa, Kan., office. View All Posts | 农业 | 2,732 |
29th annual show; Big Iron celebrates as premier ag expo
By Karen Huber
Business Fargo,North Dakota 58102 http://www.westfargopioneer.com/sites/all/themes/westfargopioneer_theme/images/social_default_image.png Karen Huber
29th annual show; Big Iron celebrates as premier ag expo Fargo North Dakota 101 5th Street North 58102 Big Iron, the Midwest region's largest agricultural expo is back bigger and better than ever, with organizers hoping to outperform last year's record-breaking attendance figures during its three day run September 15, 16 and 17. The event is held from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. daily at the Red River Valley Fairgrounds, located on the west edge of West Fargo, with convenient access off of Interstate 94. Over 80,000 people took in last year's production and organizers are hoping to best those numbers this year with the 800 exhibitors representing over 600 companies, showing off the latest in farm equipment and technology in both indoor and outdoor display areas on approximately 200 acres of easy-to-maneuver ground space. Big Iron General Manager Bryan Schulz said that response to this year's show has been overwhelming, crediting event coordinator Chaun Merkens with doing an outstanding job of trying to accommodate as many vendors as possible. "Chaun is finding every crevice possible to fit a booth," Schulz noted. "We are completely full, and that is a nice thing to have happen." In anticipation of accommodating the growing numbers Schulz said that those involved never "take the show lightly. Because of its size, it takes us weeks to get ready and our crews have been heavily involved in that process for quite some time." In addition to the grand array of booths and displays, infield and GPS demonstrations will be featured each day on the area south of the show grounds, with free shuttle service to and from the demonstration area. Those planning to attend are encouraged to check in the show office for times and details. A tractor pull at 5 p.m. in the grandstand area will also be part of the action, with the Tuesday event featuring modifieds, and the Wednesday pull antiques. Ladies programming will also be part of the fun, with the Ladies Day Brunch taking place Wednesday, Sept. 16, at the Doublewood Inn, Fargo, with tickets available at the door. Registration begins at 9 a.m. The event will run from 10 a.m. to 1 p.m. with a style show courtesy of Catherine's, Coldwater Creek and dress barn. Sandy Buttweiler of KFGO will serve as the master of ceremonies. A craft show will be staged from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. each day of Big Iron in the Cass County Bureau Ag Education Center. A bloodmobile will also be on the grounds each day for those wishing to donate, with times to be posted, and health screenings will be conducted from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. daily in the Horticulture Building. Demonstrations will also feature the most powerful new equipment hitting the market across the nation, featuring manufacturers from the region and beyond. Overall, the show is a great opportunity to view firsthand the latest in farming technology in action. Also providing a significant presence are the growing number of global guests, with 175 international visitors from various parts of the world with a high interest in agricultural equipment expected to attend, thanks to efforts of the North Dakota Trade Office. A large variety of daily speakers have also been coordinated by the Red River Valley Farm Network for the Issues and Events Center. Among the sessions is "Agriculture: A conversation with North Dakota Governor John Hoeven and Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty (invited) on Wednesday at 10:30 a.m., as well as an Agricultural Policy Roundtable on Thursday at 10:30 a.m. featuring American Soybean Association CWO Steve Censky. As always, admission to the grounds and parking will be free. People movers will also be available to transport people, also free of charge, from parking areas to the grounds and around different areas of the grounds. There will also be camping available just east of the show. For more information about Big Iron, visit their Web site at bigironfarmshow.com. or call 701-282-2200.
Explore related topics:BusinessNewsbig ironBusinessbusinessbusinessNewsNorthlandAgricultureagribusiness
Karen Huber
[email protected]
4. Courts: May 4, 2016
5. Police Department adds officers, clerks | 农业 | 4,362 |
75 YEARS OF CLAAS COMBINE HARVESTERS 75 Years of CLAAS combine Harvesters
Combine harvesters make a substantial contribution to worldwide food production – virtually no other invention has had the kind of impact on world production that this workhorse has. The combine harvester performs an operational process which has historically demanded an enormous physical output in the field and on the farm: the combine travels across the field cutting the crop, threshing out the valuable grain with minmum losses, and finally collects the harvested grain in a large grain tank. It does this very quickly, and on a huge scale. This year, CLAAS marks a special anniversary of the combine, its 75th year in operation. The CLAAS combine harvester came onto the agricultural scene in Europe in the summer of 1936. In that same year, at the Zschernitz Manor near Halle in the German federal state of Saxony-Anhalt, August Claas unveiled a tractor-trailed machine which he had developed at his plant in Harsewinkel in Westphalia. From day one, this “reaper-binder” delivered a perfect flow of grain as it traversed the field, with the material transported away in sacks – a revolution in agriculture was born. A number of American combine harvesters, also tractor-trailed, had been used in Europe as early as the 1920s, but these machines proved to be unsuitable for the compact, often damp or flat-lying European crops. A widespread opinion soon developed among hands-on farmers and agricultural scientists in Europe that a combine harvester approach as pioneered in the United States would not be suitable for European cereals harvesting, with its long straw, and often weed-infested characteristics. Up until that point, cereals in Germany had been chopped manually by scythe and were dried in sheaves, or placed or stored in loft environments to dry. Stationary threshing machines later came into use, which right up until the very darkest days of winter were used to separate the grain from the stalks and heads. August Claas, who in 1913 founded an agricultural machinery company together with his brothers Theo and Franz, was resolute in his belief that European cereals, too, could be suitable for combine harvesting. His son Helmut Claas, who would later go on to lead the agricultural machinery company to world recognition, recalls: “My father, together with Walter Brenner, an assistant of Professor Vormfelde at the University of Bonn, had developed a prototype as early as the beginning of the 1930s. It was a machine built around the Lanz Bulldog, making for a highly modern combine harvester with a cutterbar at the front. Up to that point in time, there had never been anything like it anywhere in the world.” The concept itself was ingenious, although the idea came many years too early. Many of the necessary technologies such as high-performance tractors, hydraulics, electrics, etc. had yet to be developed for tractor-hitched combine harvesters. The prototype was officially showcased to the German agricultural machinery industry with the hope of winning the industry over to the combine harvester concept. However, nobody showed any interest. “In that case, we’ll go it alone”, said August Claas, vowing to continue the design.
The breakthrough came in 1936 as a trailed combine harvester with side-mounted cutterbar. Claas unveiled his model at the Zschernitz Manor before a large number of experienced and highly sceptical farmers from the central German regions; the first fully functional reaper-binder to be manufactured in Europe. Provided all went to plan, the machine facilitated a daily harvesting output of 1,100 bushels (30 tonnes) of wheat. In the following six years, 1,450 prototypes of the successful machine were manufactured. The first self-propelled combine harvester, i.e. with integrated engine, was launched on the market by CLAAS in 1953. This self-propelled harvesting system went on to prove itself time and again. In the following decades, CLAAS developed ever more efficient combine harvesters for all types of crops, climates and fields around the globe. The latest combine harvester from CLAAS, the award-winning LEXION 700 Series was introduced in August 2010. As part of a 10 Hour Challenge, the second largest machine in the new range, the LEXION 670 TT harvested over 51,000 bushels of corn over a ten hour period outside of Yorkville, Illinois. Today, 75 years on from the first CLAAS combine harvester, CLAAS continues to push the limits of the capacity and performance of the modern day combine. To learn more about the history of CLAAS combines and watch videos of machines in action, visit www.mycombine.claas.com What memorable experiences have you had with your CLAAS combine? We would like to hear your stories and experiences and to see your pictures and films documenting the 75-year-long partnership between CLAAS combines and those who use them. And – if you like – we will show them to others. Our idea is to create a book containing the greatest CLAAS combine stories from all over the world.
mycombine.claas.com
CLAAS of America Inc. offers a wide variety of technologically innovative hay tool, baler, self-propelled forage harvester and combine harvester products to provide growers optimum performance in the field. These products are designed by a dedicated engineering staff located at numerous worldwide factories focused on the production and design of harvesting equipment. The design, performance and reliability of this equipment have made CLAAS an international market leader. For more information, visit www.claasofamerica.com. Click here to download a collection of photos over the years. | 农业 | 5,660 |
Attack on the Heart of Biodiversity
Mexico, the homeland of corn and cradle of its genetic diversity, is waiting with baited breath for an important decision that could seriously compromise its agricultural biodiversity. In June, the authorization granted to Monsanto to sow 250,000 hectares of GM soy made news. At the time, beekeepers’ organizations protested because the entire production and export of honey from highly productive regions like Yucatán and Chiapas was threatened. The European Union is one of the leading importers of Mexican honey, but it has banned the sale of honey containing traces of GMOs. The sowing of GM soy risked crippling the whole sector. Later this year, in September, an uproar was caused by a study conducted by Gilles-Eric Séralini on rats fed with varying percentages of GM feed, opening up disturbing possibilities about the long-term consequences of GMO consumption. (read more here).
While the world resounded with reactions to the studies carried out on the transgenic corn Mon603, the agribusiness giants Monsanto and Pioneer Hi-Bred refused to take a step back, instead soliciting official authorizations for sowing the same GM seeds from the Mexican government, as reported in the newspaper La Jornada. The ETC Group, an international organization active in the defense of ecological and cultural diversity and human rights, launched the alarm, communicating data also reported recently in a detailed article by the NGO Grain: the applications concern a total area of 2.4 million hectares, a surface area larger than the entire nation of El Salvador. And over half of this land would be sown with the notorious Mon603. With the end of President Calderón’s mandate fast approaching, it is feared that the government will grant these authorizations in the very near future, or at latest within a few months with the new government, as the deputy agriculture secretary Mariano Ruiz told Reuters, opening up the country to an unprecedented invasion of GMOs in both fields and food. Local varieties will be threatened by contamination and the food sovereignty of communities will be seriously jeopardized. “We are going through a crucial time,” commented Alfonso Salvador Rocha Robles, a researcher at the Universidad de las Américas, leader of the Slow Food Puebla Convivium and recently elected to the Slow Food International Council as a representative of Mexico and Central America. “In recent years new environmental, economic and social problems have emerged, mostly connected to a single factor: agroindustry. Now, with the arrival of biotechnologies, with the development and sowing of transgenic corn, we are endangering an agricultural biodiversity that has developed over millennia of history. We must unite the forces of civil society organizations, farmers and researchers, with the support of the academic world, so that together we can change our country’s agricultural policies and have a Mexico free from GMOs.”
“We must promote sustainability, basing ourselves on independent research,” echoed biotechnologist Hilda Irene Cota Guzmán, a university lecturer and president of the Mexican commission for the Ark of Taste, Slow Food’s online catalog of local products at risk of extinction. “We need scientific knowledge that is not funded by the same companies that produce and sell GM seeds.”
“Corn’s genetic heritage is an intangible asset for all of humanity,” said Carlo Petrini, Slow Food’s president. “We must avoid it being put at risk to further the private interests of certain multinationals. We hope that the Mexican government follows the precautionary principle adopted by Europe and other countries, including recently Kenya.”
Since 2009, when Calderón dropped the decade-long moratorium on GMOs, 177 authorizations have already been granted for sowing transgenic corn in Mexico. Now the country is waiting for the outcome of a case whose dimensions and potential impact make it significantly more serious. Read the call to action launched by UCCS, the Union de Cientificos Comprometidos con la Sociedad.
Read the study by the NGO Grain. | 农业 | 4,106 |
Technological advances helping improve efficiency, trim costs
Hembree Brandon
I couldn't help but think, as we were putting together our twice-yearly special section on agricultural technology and irrigation (included in this issue), just how far we've come. It hasn't been that long ago, 15 years or so, that I'd go to meetings where specialists would talk about the potential in satellite-based global positioning systems, field mapping systems, prescription chemical/nutrient applications, and other Buck Rogers-type scenarios, and you could watch farmers in the audience shaking their heads or nodding off. Same thing with computers: Only a decade ago, the percentage of on-farm computers was relatively small, and while a few farmers became immersed in computing to the extent they learned esoteric programming languages and wrote their own software, in many farm offices a computer was little more than an expensive paperweight. Now, the processing power in the average desktop computer is greater than early era machines that occupied an entire room and required special cooling systems, while software has masked the complicated operating code and made them increasingly user-friendly. For most farmers today, they're indispensable tools, and it's taken for granted all the things they do daily to facilitate a myriad of recordkeeping, communications, marketing, analytical chores that previously involved a lot of man hours and tedium. Another component of the technology package that has helped revolutionize farming is the cell phone. Who'd have thought the clunky, unwieldy, unreliable phones of just 10 years ago would evolve into sleek devices that fit in a pocket and not only keep farmers in voice contact, but allow Internet/e-mail access and dozens of other functions, as well as storing thousands of tunes, photos, and even TV shows. Or tied in with an electronic monitoring system, they can perform such chores as automatically telephoning a farmer — anywhere — to let him know a remote irrigation pump is running low on fuel or has shut down and needs attention. GPS technology has become one of the hottest sectors in agriculture, with a constant stream of new devices coming to market to serve a broad range of tasks. “Prescription” application of chemicals and fertilizer is now commonplace — saving farmers labor and money, improving efficiency, reducing the environmental footprint, and importantly, boosting productivity. When linked to the steering of tractors, combines, and other equipment, GPS guidance systems allow virtually hands-off tracking across the field, with pinpoint precision, hour after hour, that no human can match — even at night or in other low visibility situations. Aerial applicators use GPS to make more precise applications, helping to eliminate off-target errors. Equipment dealers are finding ways to use GPS to enhance services they provide to farmers. The devices can report to the dealer the number of hours a tractor or combine has operated and note when an oil change or other servicing is due. The dealer can even use the GPS coordinates to send a service truck to the machine's location in the field. And law enforcement agencies can track and locate stolen farm machinery that is GPS-equipped. Given the rate that technology is advancing, who knows what another 10 years will bring?
Source URL: http://deltafarmpress.com/technological-advances-helping-improve-efficiency-trim-costs | 农业 | 3,444 |
You Can Have Strawberries All Summer LongIf I had to pick one fruit as my favorite (thank goodness, I don't!), it just might be the strawberry. Specifically, I love the wild strawberries that used to grow along the railroad tracks near my childhood home, but they're like peas - you have to pick hundreds of them before you really have enough to eat or use in recipes. Can't beat that wild strawberry flavor though.For years, we grew a June-bearing variety of strawberries, but when you love them as much as I do, one picking of berries just isn't enough. So this year, we're making entirely new raised beds and we're trying a different kind of strawberry. We're planting a day-neutral variety.There are three types of strawberries: June-bearing, everbearing and day-neutral. The first produces fruit for two to three weeks in June and then they're done. Everbearing strawberries will produce two to three crops throughout the summer and day-neutral plants bear berries intermittently all summer. June-bearing produces lots of runners and the fruit is generally larger than the other two types, which don't produce many runners.There are varieties that can be grown in just about all zones in the U.S., from zone 3 to zone 10. Be sure to check the tag. They are typically planted in the spring, making sure they are sited in full sun and have good drainage.With all types, it's recommended to remove the blossoms and runners for the first year, although blossoms can be left after July 1 to mature into fruit on day-neutral and everbearing plants. The idea behind this is to allow the plants to focus their energy on growing strong roots and parent plants, which means there will be better fruit production.Strawberry plants produce best in the first three years. They tend to decline every year after that, so it's advisable to replant new runners or new plants and get rid of older plants to keep your strawberry bed working to its best potential. This is the same for all varieties.According to NutritionData.com, a cup of strawberries provides 149 percent of your recommended daily allowance of Vitamin C! They're also high in folate, potassium and manganese, and provide 12 percent of our dietary fiber recommendation. Strawberries are one of my favorite snacks and one of the few that I love that's actually good for me! | 农业 | 2,326 |
ESTABLISHMENT AND TERMS OF REFERENCE
The Panel of Eminent Experts on Ethics in Food and Agriculture was established by the Director-General in accordance with Article VI.4 of the FAO Constitution and Rule XXXV of the General Rules of the Organization, for a period of four years as of 1 January 2000. Its Terms of Reference, to raise public awareness and advise the Director-General on ethical issues in food and agriculture, are provided in Annex 1. MEMBERSHIP
The Director-General appointed eight eminent experts from different scientific and other disciplines to serve on the Panel in their personal capacity for four years. The members of the Panel are Mr Francisco J. Ayala from the United States, Ms Chen Chunming from China, Mr Asbjørn Eide from Norway, Ms Noëlle Lenoir from France, Mr Mohammed Noor Salleh from Malaysia, Mr Mohammed Rami from Morocco, Ms Lydia Margarita Tablada Romero from Cuba and Mr Melaku Worede from Ethiopia. A summary biography for each Panel member is contained in Annex 2.
ORGANIZATION OF WORK
The Panel held its first session at FAO headquarters in Rome from 26-28 September 2000. The Director-General had requested Mr Asbjørn Eide to serve as Chair of the first session. At the end of that session, the Panel requested Mr Eide to continue to function as Chair for the four-year duration of the Panel. The Panel adopted the draft agenda with the understanding that slight revisions could be made during the session. It discussed three main themes: i) the basic ethical concerns flowing from its Terms of Reference; ii) ethical issues in food and agriculture; and iii) biotechnologies and genetically modified organisms in relation to the consumer, food safety and the environment.1 Future work was also discussed. The Agenda of the Panel's first session is provided in Annex 3.
1 The secretariat provided the Panel with draft versions of the FAO Ethics Series Nos 1 and 2, entitled Ethical issues in food and agricultureand
Genetically modified organisms, consumers, food safety and the environment. | 农业 | 2,035 |
Overview Stories News Releases Media Contacts 1.02 Billion People Hungry
Published on 19 June 2009 share + One sixth of humanity undernourished – more than ever before
ROME – World hunger is projected to reach a historic high in 2009 with 1,020 million people going hungry every day, according to new estimates published by FAO today.
The most recent increase in hunger is not the consequence of poor global harvests but is caused by the world economic crisis that has resulted in lower incomes and increased unemployment. This has reduced access to food by the poor, the UN agency said.
“A dangerous mix of the global economic slowdown combined with stubbornly high food prices in many countries has pushed some 100 million more people than last year into chronic hunger and poverty,” said FAO Director-General Jacques Diouf. “The silent hunger crisis - affecting one sixth of all of humanity - poses a serious risk for world peace and security. We urgently need to forge a broad consensus on the total and rapid eradication of hunger in the world and to take the necessary actions.”
“The present situation of world food insecurity cannot leave us indifferent,” he added.
Note to editors: counting hunger
The number of hungry has increased from 825 million people in 1995-97, to 857 million in 2000-02 and 873 million in 2004-06.
For 2008, FAO revised its provisional estimate of hungry people from 963 down to 915 million, due primarily to a better-than-expected global food supply.
FAO’s estimates of the number of hungry people in 2009 were derived in part from analysis by the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) Economic Research Service (ERS). The ERS/USDA analysis examined the percentage increase in the number of hungry people in different regions due to the global economic crisis of 2009.
Applying this approach to FAO’s revised hunger figures for 2008 would add about 100 million to the global number of hungry people, which is thus projected to rise from 915 million in 2008 to 1.02 billion in 2009.
Poor countries, Diouf stressed, “must be given the development, economic and policy tools required to boost their agricultural production and productivity. Investment in agriculture must be increased because for the majority of poor countries, a healthy agricultural sector is essential to overcome poverty and hunger and is a pre-requisite for overall economic growth.”
“Many of the world's poor and hungry are smallholder farmers in developing countries. Yet they have the potential not only to meet their own needs but to boost food security and catalyse broader economic growth. To unleash this potential and reduce the number of hungry people in the world, governments, supported by the international community, need to protect core investments in agriculture so that smallholder farmers have access not only to seeds and fertilisers but to tailored technologies, infrastructure, rural finance, and markets,” said Kanayo F. Nwanze, President of the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD).
“For most developing countries there is little doubt that investing in smallholder agriculture is the most sustainable safety net, particularly during a time of global economic crisis,” Nwanze added.
"The rapid march of urgent hunger continues to unleash an enormous humanitarian crisis. The world must pull together to ensure emergency needs are met as long term solutions are advanced,” said Josette Sheeran, Executive Director of the UN World Food Programme.
Hunger on the rise
Whereas good progress was made in reducing chronic hunger in the 1980s and the first half of the 1990s, hunger has been slowly but steadily on the rise for the past decade, FAO said. The number of hungry people increased between 1995-97 and 2004-06 in all regions except Latin America and the Caribbean. But even in this region, gains in hunger reduction have been reversed as a result of high food prices and the current global economic downturn.
This year, mainly due to the shocks of the economic crisis combined with often high national food prices, the number of hungry people is expected to grow overall by about 11 percent, FAO projects, drawing on analysis by the US Department of Agriculture.
Almost all of the world's undernourished live in developing countries. In Asia and the Pacific, an estimated 642 million people are suffering from chronic hunger; in Sub-Saharan Africa 265 million; in Latin America and the Caribbean 53 million; in the Near East and North Africa 42 million; and in the developed countries 15 million in total.
In the grip of the crisis
The urban poor will probably face the most severe problems in coping with the global recession, because lower export demand and reduced foreign direct investment are more likely to hit urban jobs harder. But rural areas will not be spared. Millions of urban migrants will have to return to the countryside, forcing the rural poor to share the burden in many cases.
Some developing countries are also struggling with the fact that money transfers (remittances) sent from migrants back home have declined substantially this year, causing the loss of foreign exchange and household income. Reduced remittances and a projected decline in official development assistance will further limit the ability of countries to access capital for sustaining production and creating safety nets and social protection schemes for the poor.
Unlike previous crises, developing countries have less room to adjust to the deteriorating economic conditions, because the turmoil is affecting practically all parts of the world more or less simultaneously. The scope for remedial mechanisms, including exchange-rate depreciation and borrowing from international capital markets for example, to adjust to macroeconomic shocks, is more limited in a global crisis.
The economic crisis also comes on the heel of the food and fuel crisis of 2006-08. While food prices in world markets declined over the past months, domestic prices in developing countries came down more slowly. They remained on average 24 percent higher in real terms by the end of 2008 compared to 2006. For poor consumers, who spend up to 60 percent of their incomes on staple foods, this means a strong reduction in their effective purchasing power. It should also be noted that while they declined, international food commodity prices are still 24 percent higher than in 2006 and 33 percent higher than in 2005.
The 2009 hunger report (The State of Food Insecurity in the World, or shortly known as SOFI) will be presented in October.
Voices From Mosul
Food Assistance Helps Drought-hit Families in Malawi
Namibia to Expand its School Feeding Programme | 农业 | 6,670 |
Precision ag paying dividends
Hembree Brandon
Tools must be profitable
Guidance system excellent return on investment
Transition should be well-planned
For farmers, says Chip Davis, “There are toys and there are tools. We all have our toys — but for something to be a tool, you have to make more from it than you pay for it.
“For me, a guidance system is a tool that not only helps to be more efficient, it also gives an excellent return on the investment.
“I love farming and all the ‘feel good’ aspects of it, but the name of the game is making a profit. If you can’t pay the bills, you don’t last long.”
For Davis, who has a diversified row crop operation near Philipp, Miss., in the heart of the Mississippi Delta, the transition to guidance systems was well-planned and thought out.
“In 2003, my father, Hiram Davis Jr., and I had been researching systems for some time. We made a trip that fall to Sunbelt Expo at Moultrie, Ga., so we could see systems firsthand and have them demonstrated in the field. We looked at a half-dozen or more systems.
“We settled on the Trimble system because we felt it was the most user-friendly and offered the most versatility for our particular operation. We bought the RTK equipment from Delta Positions, Cleveland, Miss., and got it installed in early March 2004.
“We’d been doing some practice runs to get familiar with it and about March 10, we were ready go to the field and start planting corn.”
But fate stepped in.
“My father, who’d gone out for his morning walk, died of a heart attack. He was only 56. We were devastated, and everything came to a screeching halt. When we were able to turn attention back to the farm, we were three weeks behind our planned start date for corn planting.”
It was then that Davis got firsthand experience with one of the system’s advantages.
“We’d been told it would allow us to go to 24 hours a day. We put it to the test. We ran 24/7 and we were able to catch up and finish planting about on time. There’s no way we could have done it without this equipment.”
“Almost every year now, when we’re planting or harvesting, we’ll run 24 hours a day. Digging peanuts last year, during a period when we got 40 inches of rain, we got a lucky break and were able to go night and day until we got the crop in. It was a nightmare digging in wet ground, but we had no quality problems with the peanuts.
“We were fortunate to get most of our corn out before the worst of the rains started. We had one of the best soybean crops ever in late summer, probably 40-50 bushel potential, but with all the rain they rotted on the stalk. We ended up cutting them for salvage.
“2009 was one of those years you hope never to see again. With the weather adversities, I’m just happy to still be farming.”
For a free subscription to Delta Farm Press Daily, click here .
Davis has one Trimble stand-alone system that he shares between a tractor and a combine, and another Trimble/Mid-Tech system that is devoted to a single tractor and is capable of both guidance and variable rate application. The shared system only takes about 10 minutes to swap from the combine to the tractor.
Although the manufacturers don’t guarantee or promote it, he says, studies have shown RTK systems can be accurate to one-half centimeter, about a fourth the width of a penny.
“We’re big on no-till, and with that kind of precision, we can put a seed right back in the same trench as the previous year, and we can do it row after row.
Configuring crops, fields
“We can do straight A-B guidance, or we can set up irregular patterns, or pivot circles. Pretty much whatever you need, you can do.”
He has the systems configured for various fields and crops and for various operations — fertilizing, planting, chemical applications, etc.
Davis’ main farm here is 2,000 acres, and he has another 750 acres in adjacent Grenada County that is rented out.
“My father bought the farm here in 1987, and I joined him in 1991 after I’d graduated from Mississippi State University with an ag economics degree. I bought the farm from his estate in 2005.”
There are three center pivots on the farm here — one covers 507 acres, another 249 acres, and another 161 acres — and a 37-acre field is furrow irrigated.
“All the acreage here is contiguous, and the fields are large, which gives us a lot of long rows.”
Davis says his family has been in farming “going back to my great-grandfather, and we’ve always grown cotton.” The only exception was 2009, “and it was just because the margins weren’t there. But, there’ve been a lot of years when cotton kept us in business.
“Last year was our first year with peanuts. We had 325 acres, which was somewhat more than I had intended, but I needed that much to make them pencil out.” The peanuts are trucked to Birdsong Peanuts, which has a buying point at Prairie, Miss.
“This year, we’ll go heavy on corn again, with a smaller acreage of peanuts, about 600 acres of cotton, and some shirttail acres of soybeans.”
“I do most of the combining myself, and these systems have sure made that less stressful than before.”
Davis says a pressing need in his operation is grain storage, and “as soon as I get over 2009, that’s the direction in which I’m going to be moving.”
Changing trends
The widespread and increasingly rapid adoption of GPS-based guidance systems has resulted in significant changes in Delta farming operations, says Jay Rose, agriculture sales specialist, Thompson Machinery, Greenwood, Miss., which sells Challenger tractors, Lexion combines and other farm equipment.
“Most of our customers are now using GPS-based systems,” he says. “They started with tractor units, then migrated to systems combines, sprayers, , and other equipment. In the last couple of years, RTK guidance systems for combines have really taken off.”
In addition to offering sub-inch accuracy in tillage, fertility, chemical application, and harvesting operations, Rose says, producers are able to realize greater efficiencies in fuel, equipment, and inputs. The result has been a reduction in equipment needs.
“Ten years ago, a 4,000-acre farmer might have eight or nine tractors; today, he does it with three or four. These systems allow him to extend the workday in critical spring/fall operations; now, he can go 24/7.
“Instead of running eight or nine tractors 10 hours a day to get the job done, he can now run three or four tractors 24 hours a day. You don’t see spare tractors sitting around any more; farmers are buying what they need and getting the most out of them.”
With the big move to corn in the Delta and wider combine headers — 40-foot headers are now commonplace — Rose says, the operator can’t watch everything at once.
“It’s more important than ever to have accurate alignment as the combine goes through the field. It’s practically impossible to eyeball it and keep it straight hour after hour. Not to mention that it’s extremely tiring.
“Without guidance, the combine may be missing as much as five feet of crop per trip down the field. Over the harvest season that adds up in time and fuel and yield loss. With guidance, trips across the field are precise. Because he doesn’t have to concentrate on steering, he’s better able to eyeball what’s happening behind the tractor or to monitor other functions.”
Systems pay for themselves
For farmers wanting to get the most out of their equipment, these systems pay for themselves very quickly, he notes — sometimes in as little as a year, but more typically over two years.
As is typical of most electronics these days, the systems have steadily been offering greater functionality at lower price.
“For a new tractor or combine, a system that three years ago would have been $22,000 is now $8,000 to $9,000,” Rose says, “and of course we can retrofit older equipment with these systems.
“Everything we order from the manufacturer now is guidance system-ready, with wiring/hydraulics in place. The customer can then choose the systems and displays to fit his particular needs.”
“Our Lexion combines, sold by Class in North America, are German-built and assembled in Omaha, Nebr. Our Challenger tractors are from AgCo. Most of the combines are tracked, which is an advantage for heavy Delta soils, and really paid off in last year’s abnormally wet harvest season.”
With the big swing to corn, more farmers are using 40-foot headers on their combines, Rose says. “Chip Davis was one of the first of our customers to put one on his combine.”
RTK systems have been widely adopted by farmers, he says, because of the superb accuracy they offer in all field operations, prescription chemical/fertilizer application, yield mapping, etc.
“Just about every combine we sell now has Ag Leader mapping equipment.”
Another trend with these systems, Rose says, is on-the-ground involvement of the farm owner-operator, particularly for harvesting.
“A farmer may have multiple business enterprises, but when harvest comes, he’s out there on the combine. They not only want to leave as little crop in the field as possible, they also want to be sure they get vital yield mapping data. If you don’t get that right, you’ve just lost a year’s data that you can never get back.”
While the farmer’s on the combine, Rose says, he usually has a laptop computer so he can monitor markets, keep up with e-mails, have access to needed information. “Thanks to the time freed up by the guidance system, and with all communications capabilities available nowadays, he can run his business from the combine cab.”
There are three levels of guidance, all based on the Earth-orbiting geosynchronous satellite network. The basic government system provides GPS signals with no correction and offers 6-inch to 8-inch accuracy.
At the second level is a paid subscription service that corrects the government signals to 2-inch to 4-inch accuracy.
The third level is RTK (real-time kinetics) which corrects the signal to sub-inch accuracy. This signal is usually fed through an on-farm base station, or through farmer or dealer networks of stations.
e-mail: [email protected]
Related Media: Chip Davis
Promote as Editor's Pick
Source URL: http://deltafarmpress.com/management/precision-ag-paying-dividends-0 | 农业 | 10,188 |
Making The Call
It all boils down to looking in the mirror, believes Dale Blasi, a Kansas State University stocker cattle specialist. He's talking about cow-calf producers
“It all boils down to looking in the mirror,” believes Dale Blasi, a Kansas State University stocker cattle specialist. He's talking about cow-calf producers deciding to keep their calves and add weight to them prior to marketing, especially those who have never done it, or have done so infrequently. After all, the stocker and backgrounding business or enterprise requires different skills and a different mindset. “The stocker business is a margin business, and that's a different situation from looking at return on investment in a fixed-cost business like the cow-calf enterprise,” explains Jason Sawyer, Texas A&M University stocker specialist. “As a cow-calf producer in a fixed-cost business, the focus is on least cost; how little can I spend to bring in a calf? With the stocker enterprise, as a margin business, the focus needs to be on the value of gain.” Keep it separate Sawyer emphasizes that even though a producer owns the calves, keeping them past weaning should be managed as a separate enterprise, with the calves valued appropriately as a cost to that enterprise. “The key is to place an appropriate value on the weaned calves, assess what they're really worth,” Sawyer says. “When producers want to hold their own calves, they sometimes forget to value them going into the enterprise.” Or, when they do value them, Sawyer says some producers think their calves are worth more than the market says they are. Others undervalue them relative to the market. “Consult with order buyers, or price the cattle so you know what you could actually sell the calves for today. Without that information, there is no way to make a breakeven estimate, or to decide whether to keep or sell them,” Sawyer says. The same goes for pasture. “You get the argument, especially in a year when there's abundant forage, that any grass you own would go to waste if you didn't use it, so the grass is basically free,” Sawyer says. “But I think it's always appropriate to budget in an opportunity cost.” In this case, other than using it yourself, you could lease the acres to someone else; or take in someone else's stockers on a gain basis. That's the value you're trading away if you decide to use it yourself. Likewise, labor represents opportunity. That's why Sawyer and Blasi recommend including a labor charge in the stocker budget, above and beyond estimated profit. “Opportunity cost is really your risk premium in the venture, above the value of the cattle,” Sawyer says. It boils down to considering what else you could do with the money you'd be “investing” via the increased risk and delayed cash flow associated with keeping your calves to heavier weights. That means having some idea of what you believe the cattle will be worth when you plan to market them. “If this is an occasional enterprise, those projections might not be accurate, and that creates risk in the marketing process,” Sawyer explains. “Have an idea of what you think cattle will weigh, because there are weight classes you want to avoid. Six-weight heifers are the classic example — nobody really wants to own them. “Make comparisons on a net basis. Look at what's selling today. Look at the futures market and figure out the basis. That will tell you something about freight costs. When forecasting prices, you need to deduct the basis price from the futures price to see what you can expect to receive in the cash market,” Sawyer says. He notes basis for feeder cattle has widened beyond historical averages during the last 12 months, partly because of increased feed and freight costs. “I also encourage producers to evaluate the return on equity rather than the return on investment. Agriculture is a leveraged business,” he adds. Ironically, that means cow-calf producers who see an opportunity to market more of their forage, feed and labor in growing calves can find it more profitable to sell their own calves, then buy others with more economic leverage. Buying more return Think of it. A five-weight calf is worth $117/cwt., let's say, or $585. That's the equity you're investing to retain that calf. With reasonable credit, you can borrow money for $120/head or so equity. “If I buy those calves outright (or own them), I have to net $30/head to make 5% return on equity. If I borrow $120, that same $30/head return is making me in the neighborhood of a 25% return on equity,” Sawyer explains. “So, for a cow-calf operation fortunate enough to be debt-free, the opportunity has to make more return to make it worth doing. That operation is well positioned to sell its calves and buy someone else's with borrowed money.” This is especially true if your calves typically top the market. The equity you'd be investing in the stocker phase is even higher, meaning that enterprise would have to return you more than average to account for the risk. “If I own the calves and can sell them for a $10 premium to the market today, why would I keep them?” Sawyer wonders. Of course, if you know how your calves perform beyond weaning, you'd be selling a sure thing and be buying more risk. “But risk is how you make money in a margin business,” Sawyer says. “Can I sell mine and buy someone else's at a discount price? It's all about scenario-building and budgeting.” Most land-grant universities and Extension offices make an effective starting point for constructing budgets based on local values (see sidebar “What if?”). However you come by the knowledge, Blasi says, “You have to understand the mechanics behind risk management so that you're not just trading dollars or worse. You have to make sure you're accomplishing more than making some work for the hired hand. There should be a return to the asset to compensate for the risk.” Key considerations Even when the potential economic rewards relative to the risk make a stocker enterprise appear viable, new or infrequent players to the stocker business must address some basic logistical questions. For instance, there's a reason so many of this nation's calves are weaned on the interstate each year — lack of facilities. Depending on how a cow-calf producer intends to manage calves, Blasi encourages them to make sure their facilities are adequate and they have any necessary environmental permits in place they may not have needed previously. Moreover, you can be the poster child for everything that a cow-calf producer should be. But the skills and stomach required in the stocker business aren't necessarily the same. As an example, Blasi says it's hard for someone who's never been through a health wreck with weaned calves to understand how taxing it can be physically, mentally and emotionally. In the cow-calf business, there's not much you won't do to save a calf. It's the same in the stocker business, up to about three treatments then money and the necessity to concentrate on the rest of the calves may mean there's not much else you can do. “Certainly, with non-commingled cattle and no transportation stress to speak of, you would expect the calves to be low-risk, but that doesn't mean no risk,” Sawyer says. “I'd encourage those who infrequently hold calves past shipping to work with their veterinarian in setting up pull-and-treat parameters, so they go into it knowing when they'll pull calves and what they'll treat them with, and how they'll evaluate the response. “Those who haven't preconditioned or weaned before need to pay more attention to health management and should probably budget that factor in up front. Make sure your herd vaccination and calf vaccination protocols are up to snuff; don't try to save $2/head by skimping on vaccine.” Sawyer adds that the dynamic nature of the stocker business requires more flexibility. With cows and calves, the primary marketing decision usually revolves around whether you're going to wean or precondition. Once those calves are part of a stocker enterprise, every day could be their sale day. In other words, you start with a game plan: Add so many pounds for a projected cost of gain to market in a seasonably favorable timeframe. But if the required profit can be had before then, you pull the trigger. Selling feeder cattle rather than calves also requires more commitment to making rather than taking a price, Sawyer says. “If part of the reason you're keeping calves is to add value to them, you should have the same commitment to retrieving that added value from them,” Sawyer says. “Three different people price the cattle three different ways. My temptation might be to take the highest price, but other variables such as shrink and basis within the transaction might mean a lower price offers me more return.” Keeping calves does increase marketing options. Blasi points to the opportunity to participate in specific preconditioning programs tied to marketing. He adds, “Cow-calf producers also have the unique opportunity to age- and source-verify.” Plus, Sawyer points out producers who can't make a load with calves, may find it possible with feeders. “Load-lot size opens up a huge number of opportunities for producers, whether they do it with their own cattle or by pooling them with others,” he says. Even when all of this adds up, Blasi explains tax implications can keep some producers from charging on. Especially if this will likely be a one-shot enterprise, odds are you'll be selling two calf crops next year and none this year. “With some planning and working with your accountant, you can usually create enough of a loss to carry forward to next year,” says Sawyer. But it requires planning ahead. “You can turn your money so much quicker in the stocker business, in a margin business,” Blasi says. “But, there's a lot that goes into it.” What if? Here are some sites that contain stocker budgeting and breakeven help. Be sure to check with your local land-grant university and Extension Service, too. Auburn University — www.ag. auburn.edu/agec//pubs/budgets/2005/livestock05.html. Beef Stocker USA — http://beefstockerusa.org/calc.htm. Kansas State University — www.beefbasis.com/ForecastingTools/tabid/73/Default.aspx and www.naiber.org/cattleriskanalyzer/. University of Missouri — http://agebb.missouri.edu/commag/beef/downloads.htm. Montana State University — www.montana.edu/wwwextec/livestockdownloads.html. Oklahoma State University — www.ansi.okstate.edu/software/. South Dakota State University — http://sdces.sdstate.edu/Lyman/spreadsheets.html. West Virginia University — www.caf.wvu.edu/~forage/enterprise/enterprise.htm. Syndicate
Source URL: http://beefmagazine.com/sectors/cow-calf/making_call | 农业 | 10,720 |
> News > Verdict not yet in on response to Autumn Glory Verdict not yet in on response to Autumn Glory
As the Christmas holiday approached, Domex Superfresh Growers marketing and communications manager Loren Queen toured California retail produce departments to gather early reactions to the company’s new Autumn Glory variety.
Harvesting of Autumn Glory began in mid-October. Superfresh Growers showed it at the Produce Marketing Association Fresh Summit.
“We’ve shipped out a few thousand cases,” Queen said in mid-December. “I’m doing store checks to talk with produce managers, and shoppers to a lesser extent, to find out what the reception has been and how we can do better.”
Although the variety is out in small quantities, Yakima, Wash.-based Superfresh Growers gave most major U.S. markets a taste.
The variety took nearly a decade to develop.
“A lot goes into the decision to market an apple,” he said. “It has to be grower- and packer-friendly; it has to align well. It’s not, ‘Boy, this apple tastes great and that’s all there is to it.’ The one exception to that is Honeycrisp — it doesn’t matter how hard it is to grow, pack or ship, consumers will continue to pay a premium. You’re lucky to get 50% of the apples packed, but the returns are such as to make it worthwhile.”
Autumn Glory, a cross between a fuji and golden delicious, is not Honeycrisp, but it, too, will be marketed on taste.
“It’s sweet like a fuji and very firm, but there’s also a background flavor to it, like cinnamon or nutmeg,” Queen said. “It’s very much like you tasted an apple pie or apple cider.”
One thing that causes the most diehard of marketers to pause before sending a new variety out is the sheer number of varieties already on offer.
“You’ve got a lot of apple SKUs out there, but they’re in and out,” Queen said. “You’ve got to time it correctly. But Autumn Glory has a huge window of marketing opportunity. We could sell it in June and July if we wanted to.”
For first adopters, he said, the appeal is to be the new kid on the block.
“When there’s limited product early on, retailers have an opportunity to be unique and be the first to market a variety,” Queen said. “They can say they were the first in Chicagoland, L.A. or wherever, to have this apple. They can capitalize on that and drive traffic to their store as it gains popularity.”
Superfresh Growers also is doing consumer surveys for Autumn Glory on Facebook. | 农业 | 2,423 |
You are here: Home / News & Press / SOTA Pulls In Big Small Area MarketSOTA Pulls In Big Small Area Market 08/10/2010 EDITORIAL – The Land.
In the professional farming game, it’s generally hard to resist the lure of big, brand spanking new machinery, but a Melbourne based company is making its mark nationally, with a thriving market for small, budget priced tractors. The Australia wide boom in small area, or lifestyle, farms in the past decade has opened up a niche market for small, easy-to-use tractors, plus other farm machinery sales and support activities, that has been successfuly tapped by SOTA Tractors.
SOTA (an acronym for ‘state of the art’) began importing tractors in 2003, originally supplying a fledging dealer network, but according to SOTA director, Bruce Cooper, many machinery dealers were slow to recognise the market potential. “Traditional dealers were accustomed to working with career farmers. They didn’t really relate to inquiries from people who may never have even started a tractor or used a power take off attachment before,” he said. “Sota was the first tractor company to realise and embrace the fact that small acreage owners required guidance and support because they usually came from non-agricultural backgrounds. We became the first small-acreage specialist in Australia.”
What began as a rubber tyre and components importer in the late 1980s has now grown to a serious farm machinery enterprise. Starting with fully supported, remanufactured, low-hour, secondhand Kubota tractors, SOTA soon expanded to new tractors, becoming the exclusive importer for the APOLLO range of tractors. APOLLO tractors are manufactured by the huge Changfa Corporation – the world’s biggest manufacturer of diesel engines (a million every year) – which boasts 10,000 employees and a plant covering 162 hectares.
“We’re very excited by the APOLLO range. We believe they are the best tractor to come out of China, offering a lot of metal for your money. The APOLLOs are heavy duty, powerful machines and are fully featured, including a self levelling, four-in-one front end loader as standard kit.” Mr. Cooper said. “Our typical customer could be a teacher, solicitor, a businessman or just about anybody with a yearning to own a bit of country. Most don’t need an expensive, new tractor. In many cases, they are not sure what they really need on their lifestyle block, but they do not want to waste money on high tech gear they’ll hardly use.”
“SOTA is able to offer a fully supported remanufactured Kubota and loader package, which is usually about 60 per cent cheaper than a comparitively new machine. Alternatively, we can offer a brand new APOLLO package.”
The tractor and implements are prepared at service centers in Melbourne, Brisbane and Sydney and then sold as ready-to-work packages with up to eight attachments, including a front end loader, going as far afield as Western Australia, Papua New Guinea and Norfolk Island.
Mr Cooper said the business was continually adding new product lines and had just become the exclusive importer for the Italian Del Morino range of small acreage implements.
“Del Morino is a premium Italian brand that has been in production for 130 years,” he said. Del Morino tractor implements were specifically designed for small acreage compact tractors. “They have never manufactured implements for broad acre tractors. The benefit of this is that the implements are not over-engineered. The gauge of steel is appropriate for a compact tractor and the gearboxes purr like a Porsche. Better still, the prices are far lower than other Italian implements on the market.”
Written by Andrew Marshall.
A hearty thank you to your team…
… for the help and professionalism shown to me when I picked up this machine…this was very comforting, having made a trip to buy a tractor sight unseen from a company I had never dealt with. Secondly…whilst I am still learning, I am already quite impressed by the strength and versatility of this little machine. Thanks again.”
Gavin Pitman – Mannum, SA | 农业 | 4,041 |
Advertisement Home > National conservation cotton/rice conference: Set for Jan. 29-30 at Houston, Texas
National conservation cotton/rice conference: Set for Jan. 29-30 at Houston, Texas
Comments 0 More than 100 breakout sessions presented by 59 university and industry researchers and 43 full-time farmers from the southern states will be a feature of the 10th annual National Conservation Systems Cotton and Rice Conference, to be held at the Omni Houston Hotel Westside at Houston, Texas, Jan. 29-30. “These farmers bring something that can't be found at any other conference in the U.S. — firsthand information about the production systems used on their farms to profitably produce cotton, rice, corn, sorghum, and soybeans,” says John LaRose, chairman of the conference steering committee. “These producers are innovators; some are even ahead of the researchers. Their techniques have been proven on large-scale operations as well as small acreage fields. They have taken ideas that researchers have developed and added innovative ideas of their own, integrating them into successful moneymaking operations. All this expertise will be available to those who attend the conference.” The conference is sponsored by Cotton Incorporated and US Rice Producers Association. Ways to increase agricultural production while lowering costs will highlight the topics on the conference roster. The conference, a production of MidAmerica Farm Publications, is co-sponsored by the University of Arkansas, Louisiana State University, Mississippi State University, University of Missouri, University of Tennessee, Auburn University, Texas A&M University, USDA-NRCS in Washington D.C., and USDA-ARS centers in the southern states. It also has four corporate co-sponsors: Delta and Pine Land Co., Helena Chemical Co., Horizon Ag, and RiceTec. Ag-Media co-sponsors are Delta Farm Press and Southwest Farm Press. In addition to the breakout sessions, attendees can participate in eight specially focused roundtable sessions, where in-depth discussions by attendees wanting to talk about specific concerns will be addressed. Those who have an interest in the latest precision agriculture technology and applications can take part in any or all of the breakout sessions on that topic, presented by leading researchers and producers. “This conference is a must-attend event for honing production methods, and offers farmers ways to trim inputs while boosting yields,” LaRose says. “In recent years, farmers and their landlords have found that, beyond tillage, there are many other farming resources that can be conserved through a properly designed conservation systems program. Reducing costs “The importance of conserving soil moisture and reducing fuel, labor, seed, chemical, and other input costs has been a key factor in economic survival for many producers. The main emphasis of the conference is reducing production costs and increasing yields in cotton, rice, corn, sorghum and soybeans through precision agriculture in its many forms.” Addressing the conference during the opening session will be Bob Stallman, president of the American Farm Bureau Federation. The keynote speaker for the noon luncheon will be Dr. Elsa A. Murano, vice chancellor and dean of agriculture and life sciences and director, Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, Texas A&M University. Another highlight of the conference, LaRose says, will be farm bill panelists who will discuss the outlook for 2007 legislation. Experts on the panel will be Pat O'Brien, economist, American Farm Bureau Federation, Washington, D.C.; Craig Brown, vice president of producer affairs, National Cotton Council, Memphis; and Louie Perry, vice president of Cornerstone Government Affairs, Washington. Following their presentations, the session there will be discussion from the floor. “This is expected to be a very lively and informative session,” LaRose says. “Don't pass up this perfect opportunity to get out and communicate with the presenters and others attending the conference. It's not often you have the chance to learn from the experts — researchers and producers — who have made these new ideas work.” For further information on the conference or to register, visit the Web site at www.nctd.net, or telephone Robin Moll at (573) 547-7212. Print
Please Log In or Register to post comments. Advertisement Related ArticlesNational conservation cotton/rice conference set for Jan. 29-30 at Houston, Texas Cotton/rice tillage conference scheduled in Houston, Jan. 30-31 National conservation cotton/rice conference set Conservation Tillage Conference set for Houston Jan. 13-14 Focus will be on reducing production costs Cotton/rice con-till conference set Advertisement Connect With Us TwitterFacebookRSSPodcast Hot Topics | 农业 | 4,780 |
Rural communities NAFTA 23 years later TTIP Leak Big Meat Targets TTIP Home » Issues » Documents » IATP Reports The Need for Feed: China’s Demand for Industrialized Meat and Its Impacts
By Shefali Sharma Published February 17, 2014
ChinaIndustrialized MeatLivestock
China’s need for feed and the globalized supply chain of the industrial livestock industry is contributing to land use change in China and abroad. It is transforming the government’s approach to grain self-sufficiency, land-based investments abroad and its policies on trade in meat versus feed. The Shuanghui (now called the WH Group) acquisition of Smithfield is an example of one clear way in which global meat companies are responding to and seeking to profit from China’s exploding demand. This paper presents an overview of China’s feed “needs” and its feed sector. It also examines the critical linkage between China and the Americas in procurement of feed and highlights the impacts that a growing Chinese demand for meat (and hence feed) are having in Latin America and increasingly in other parts of the world. How Chinese policy makers address industrial livestock production and situate meat in their definition of food security has and will continue to have a critical impact on global land use, global agricultural trade, rural livelihoods and food security issues.
Only 12 percent of total cereals produced are globally traded, of which a large proportion is feed—particularly corn, oilseeds and soybean meal. The FAO projects that per capita global meat consumption will reach 52 kg by 2050 for over 9 billion people. That’s 480 million tons of meat compared to 293 million tons in 2010. Today, China produces and consumes half of the world’s pork, produces nearly 20 percent of the world’s poultry, 10 percent of the world’s beef and is the fourth largest milk producer of the world.
Water, land and labor shortages make grain production expensive in China relative to the global market. Twelve percent of China’s land is arable. And rapid urbanization has created a massive exodus of rural labor into cities with agriculture now employing 37 percent of the population. These factors create real limits on China’s ability to expand meat production and raise critical questions about the ecological and social tradeoffs involved given that urban Chinese are now consuming much more meat than their rural counterparts.
With increasing food and feed imports, the government and Chinese experts are revisiting their definition of grain self-sufficiency in wheat, rice and corn. Such debates have thus far largely focused on whether China should import meat or feed from a national security point of view, rather than question China’s meat demand and health problems associated with overconsumption.
China liberalized soy for feed production in the 90s. China’s soy imports increased by 253 percent from 03-04 from nearly 17 million tons to nearly 60 million tons (mt) by 2011-2012. The next largest buyer of soy, the EU 27, bought a little less than 12 mt. Brazil and the U.S. alone accounted for 84 percent of total soy exports to China in 2011-2012. While foreign transnationals controlled more than 70 percent of the soy crushing market in the mid-2000s, new laws enacted in 2007 have scaled back foreign control. Foreign TNCs including Wilmar (working with ADM), Cargill, Bunge, Noble and Louis Dreyfus today control less than 40 percent of the soy crushing market in China.
In 2011, China used approximately 70 percent of its total corn production for feed, 20 percent for industrial use and only 5 percent for food. The total global trade in corn is much less than China’s entire corn feed demand. Further consolidation and “modernization” of Chinese livestock farms is only increasing the demand for corn (and other grains such as wheat). Though China has seen phenomenal growth in domestic corn production in the last ten years, corn imports have risen sharply in recent years. The U.S. Grains Council predicts that China will incur a deficit of 19-32 million tons of corn by 2022. Thirty-two million is nearly a third of the entire world trade in corn today. This has huge implications for the world price of corn. China has also begun importing dried distillers grains (DDGs), primarily from the U.S. and grains such as barley, wheat and sorghum for feed from several countries. Unlike soy, however, where TNCs are deeply embedded, Chinese domestic agribusiness firms like the New Hope Group are poised to become the key corn traders.
Eight Chinese companies are listed in the top 20 feed companies worldwide (by volume). Already in 2010, 16 companies were producing 33 percent of total feed in China--each with an individual output greater than one million tons annually. The high return on investment combined with thin margins incentivizes these companies to vertically integrate into other parts of the livestock supply chain for greater profit margins.
In 2008, China’s state planning agency issued a directive that sought direct investment in Brazil and other countries. The “going out” was part of a broader national security strategy to diversify sources of imports from different countries for food generally, but particularly for feed and meat. Chinese private companies are indeed “going out” to source feed and fodder in Africa, Southeast Asia and Eastern Europe. Though, Latin America still remains one of the primary regions of interest and investment—particularly for soy. Chinese state-owned and private companies are investing directly in Brazil’s soy supply chain, competing with the oligopolistic might of foreign transnational corporations through direct access to soy and by mimicking their methods of vertical and horizontal integration of the commodity chain including through contracts and storage.
Producing “cheap” feed grains has come at a great ecological and social cost in Latin America. Twenty-seven million hectares of Brazilian land are being used to cultivate soy (large tracts of it forest, previously). Efforts to reduce deforestation rates in the Amazon have resulted in the intensification of soy production, 75 percent of which is GM--further increasing pesticide and herbicide use, flowing into major tributaries of the Amazon. As in Brazil, the soy boom in Argentina has also led to land use change and land and environmental conflicts (almost all Argentine whole soy exports go to China) associated with widespread use of GM crops, herbicides and toxic chemicals.
In April 2012, China authorized GM corn imports from Argentina, creating competition for U.S. GM corn. In June, China also approved three varieties of GM soy, all grown in Brazil, for processing.
Sky-rocketing meat production has already changed the grain production landscape in China as well. Many soy farmers have switched to planting corn as they have not been able to compete with much cheaper U.S. and Brazilian soy. The government has invested in the intensification of corn--largely for feed needs, but also for manufacturing. The intensification has brought about monoculture plantations, rapidly declining biodiversity and like Argentina, increased use of strong agro-chemicals and hybrid seeds. From 1998-2003, a massive shift occurred from the traditional grain producing areas of central, south and east regions to the north and northeast. High yields have resulted in high degrees of environmental stress including high levels of soil salinity and acute water shortages. In addition, the shift northward to fragile ecosystems that are even more water-scarce may actually add to challenges. Grain is therefore ironically migrating to areas that are even more susceptible to environmental degradation.
China’s agriculture policy makers face a number of challenges: There is a growing demand for meat aided by the government’s prioritization for abundant and cheap meat (see IATP’s China’s Pork Miracle? Agribusiness and Development in China’s Pork Industry for a detailed analysis) and grain self-sufficiency; while the government tries to raise rural living standards even as rural labor migrates to cities and agriculture faces ever more degraded and scarce land and water resources. Which issues should take priority, and how can competing goals be balanced? Increasingly intransigent environmental, health and food safety problems associated with the livestock industry are beginning to make some Chinese experts, government authorities and consumers question the current approach to meat production and consumption. The debate has thus far largely centered on whether to import feed or meat. (Though some are also beginning to raise critical questions about China’s seemingly unquenchable appetite for meat, its massive industrialization and whether, in fact, China has reached “peak meat.”)
Proponents of meat imports believe that livestock imports will alleviate China’s livestock-related environmental, health and food safety problems--thereby externalizing its worse effects. While other Chinese experts believe quite the opposite. They, along with other foreign experts, believe that if China started depending on the world market for meat imports—it would be hard-pressed to find the supply and thus encourage feed imports to support the large investments that have established the Chinese meat industry. On the other hand, state-led support for large scale meat production over the last two decades has created a powerful and increasingly globalized domestic constituency of companies vested in the supply chain (meat processing, feed, vaccines) and financiers—creating strong incentives to import both “cheap” meat and feed and/or exporting them--depending on the bottom line and agreements between them and other global entities along the supply chain.
While the FAO, the OECD and other investment banks take the appetite for industrial meat for granted—much of it projected to come from China and India--they fail to address the natural resource intensive, climatic, social and public health impacts of this unquestioned appetite in OECD countries (which still far exceed all healthy norms of meat consumption) and in developing countries. This paper shows the evolution of China’s feed-related supply chain and the policies that have helped shape it. It demonstrates the increasingly global and domestic impacts of this evolution and the domestic challenges this forces on China: How much more meat production and consumption? By and for Whom? What production model? The paper has tried to provide a picture of the ecological and social challenges that Chinese and policy makers in exporting countries must confront in order to assess the future direction and model of industrial meat production, distribution and consumption. It is hoped that the findings and analysis in this report help catalyze a more holistic debate about these deliberate policy choices.
Download the full document to continue reading.
Think Forward blog
European Farm Crisis at center of CETA and TTIP Debate The CETA Vote: Will the European Parliament learn from BREXIT and Trump? Most popular content | 农业 | 11,099 |
GMO labeling: Good policy or blind hysteria?
Washington state's GMO label proposal is bad public policy, and here's why.
By FRANK PRIESTLEYFor the Capital Press
Published on October 18, 2013 5:13PM
According to one of the nation’s leading natural food retailers, consumers have a right to know what’s in their food and labeling of genetically altered food is good public policy.Labeling of food products that contain GMOs is popular in Europe. Voters in Washington will decide on a ballot initiative this fall to require such labeling in that state. A similar ballot initiative failed in California last year. Food producers and the many companies that process and distribute food to grocery stores across the nation are watching closely as the debate gains momentum.The policy, adopted last spring by Whole Foods Market (WFM), seems straightforward. Consumers definitely have a right to know what ingredients they are buying and eating. But upon closer examination, it becomes suspect whether WFM’s means attain their goal. In fact, in reality, and especially pertaining to animal products, the verification process by which the retailer will decide which products get a non-GMO label and which will carry a “this product contains genetically modified organisms” label, is no more than a charade.Last spring, Whole Foods Market (WFM) announced plans to label every product in their stores by 2018. WFM has contracted with and provided major financial backing to a non-profit organization in Bellingham, Wash., called The Non-GMO Project. The Non-GMO Project is staffed primarily by political operatives and others who adamantly oppose genetic modification of crops and support labeling. WFM has also supported the voter initiatives in California and Washington and made public its belief that the federal government should step in and regulate a new labeling system.Where the argument loses credibility is in the verification process. But before we delve into the difficulty of verification, consumers should understand that the only crops in production and that currently utilize genetic modification are corn, soybeans, sugar beets, alfalfa, papaya, canola, cotton and summer squash. For the vegetable-eating public, there is little change at stake whether non-GMO labeling gains public acceptance or not. This overlooked fact makes a nice, but hollow talking point for WFM and the Non-GMO Project to tout the thousands of products they have already verified. It’s not difficult to verify carrots, potatoes, onions and many others as “non-GMO” when there is no seed to begin with.However, when you consider that most of the main ingredients in livestock feed are corn, soybeans and alfalfa, and that significant percentages of these crops currently in production are genetically modified, it becomes a much stickier issue for producers of meat, cheese, milk and other dairy products.Although labeling advocates point to a host of undocumented and unproven allegations about the dangers of eating food that contains GMOs, and perceived threats to the environment, it’s important to understand a few simple, proven facts. First, genetically altered crops have been in production in the U.S. for nearly 20 years, have been deemed safe through extensive testing by the federal government, and have shown zero adverse effects on the health of the general public.In addition, it has been acknowledged by both WFM and the Non-GMO Project that no test exists that can tell the difference between sugar, corn, soy or any of the others that came from GMO seed being any different than commodities that came from conventional seed. In addition, if a cow, a pig or a sheep eats crops that come from GMO seed, there is no test in existence that can tell any difference in the meat or milk from that of any other animal.So how does WFM, the Non-GMO Project or any of the other advocates of this policy intend to verify their label? The short answer is they can’t. But what they are telling consumers is that products earn a non-GMO label by going through a “process-based” verification process. Ultimately what that means is that livestock feed must first be certified organic and second, it must be traceable and tested. Without a major paradigm shift in U.S. livestock production, neither of those processes is possible at a meaningful level.If WFM wants to develop and fund a verification process to provide its shoppers with a meaningless label, we don’t see a problem. But creating a new government bureaucracy that essentially does the same thing is absurd.Frank Priestley is president of the Idaho Farm Bureau. | 农业 | 4,606 |
Why (sigh!) farm subsidies survive
The farm bills now before Congress -- one from the Senate, the other from the House -- attest, if nothing else, to the inertia of politics. There is no "public interest" (a phrase often meaningless in Washington) in having government subsidize farmers. Food would be produced without subsidies. The uncertainties and insecurities faced by farmers from unpredictable weather and global markets, though often compelling, are paralleled by the uncertainties and insecurities faced by many industries from disruptive technologies, erratic business cycles and shifting public tastes. Yet, unlike most industries, agriculture is lavishly subsidized and protected by government.The explanation is force of habit. Since the Great Depression of the 1930s, when there were plausible reasons to aid farmers, government has consistently accorded agriculture special treatment. The politics of doing so long ago became self-perpetuating. Without the massive subsidies, the Agriculture Department would be far less important. So would the congressional agriculture committees and the crowd of farm groups (sometimes, it seems, one for almost every crop) that lobby for benefits. And certainly the farmers who receive payments and protections feel entitled to them. All this creates a powerful and shared vested interest in safeguarding the status quo, even as different interest groups and their congressional champions fight ferociously over the structure and distribution of benefits. The cost has been considerable. From 1995 to 2012, the various subsidies totaled $293 billion -- more than $16 billion annually -- according to the Environmental Working Group (EWG), a critic of present programs. This understates the true costs, because it includes only the on-budget costs of explicit subsidies. Excluded are higher consumer prices paid on some products (sugar, for instance) that are partially shielded from market competition. The congressional agriculture committees faced a special challenge this year because huge federal deficits have put pressure on spending. The committees straddled this difficulty by claiming to make substantial savings while actually extending expensive programs. In press releases, the Senate Agriculture Committee says its bill will cut deficits by $24 billion from 2014 to 2023. This sounds like a lot but isn't. Even if the savings occur, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that farm subsidies will total almost $190 billion over the decade. And the savings may not materialize. The projections depend on assumptions about market prices and crop yields that, in the past, have often proved optimistic, says the EWG's Scott Faber. According to Faber, the projected spending for the 2002 and 2008 farm bills significantly underestimated actual costs. (In fairness, errors in the other direction could reduce costs.) Consider the farm bills as a public relations exercise. To make subsidies more acceptable, Congress is repackaging them. "Direct payments" to farmers are ending, because they seem (and are) a straightforward giveaway. Instead, "crop insurance" -- which seems prudent protection against droughts and other misfortunes -- is being expanded. In reality, crop insurance resembles "a farm income support program" more than standard insurance, writes economist Bruce Babcock of Iowa State University in a report for the EWG. Farmers' premiums cover only 40 percent of costs; taxpayers pick up 60 percent. With premiums subsidized, farmers buy generous coverage that produces payouts even in many good years. The CBO puts the 10-year cost at $89 billion. The survival of farm subsidies is emblematic of a larger problem: Government is biased toward the past. Old programs, tax breaks and regulatory practices develop strong constituencies and mindsets that frustrate change, even when earlier justifications for their existence have been overtaken by events. It's no longer possible to argue that ag subsidies will prevent the loss of small family farms, because millions have already disappeared. It's no longer possible to argue that subsidies are needed for food production, because one major agricultural sector -- meat production -- lacks subsidies and meat is still produced. The larger lesson must be discouraging. Among other qualities, good government requires the capacity to adapt to change. It needs to discard what doesn't work or is no longer necessary. It needs to devote its limited resources -- in time, skill and money -- to the problems where it might do some good. In the best of circumstances, this is difficult. But routine politics compounds the difficulty, as the immortal farm subsidies and endless debates over budget deficits attest. Robert Samuelson is a columnist for the Washington Post Writers Group. His column and weekly blog also appear online at telegram.com. | 农业 | 4,873 |
NSAC's Blog
What Does the President’s 2017 Budget Mean for Sustainable Agriculture?
The President’s final budget proposal to Congress potentially has major implications for all aspects of our food and agriculture systems–everything from conservation to rural development, nutrition and food safety. While White House budget proposals are routinely characterized in the press as “dead on arrival” on Capitol Hill, that obscures the fact that at the level of individual government programs, the requested funding levels often have a big impact on congressional action. In turn, changes to program budgets can dramatically influence the performance and availability of sustainable agriculture programs.
On Tuesday, February 9 the Administration released its budget request for fiscal year 2017 (FY17), which includes significant proposed changes to the budgets of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Those proposals will be considered by Congress this spring and summer as they work through the process of adopting appropriations bills for FY17.
In general, NSAC views this budget request as good news for sustainable agriculture, as detailed in the sections below. Quite a few of our funding level proposals to the Administration last summer have found their way into the budget proposal.
Overall, the President’s budget is requesting $24.6 billion in discretionary funding for USDA, up from the $21.75 billion actual funding level in the current fiscal year. For FDA, the President’s budget proposes $5.1 billion in total resources, a 4 percent increase over FY16 levels. This includes an increase of $26 million to support food safety, including for implementation of the Food Safety Modernization Act. It also, however, includes proposed user fees that Congress will almost certainly reject.
Our annual agricultural appropriations chart showing funding levels and the President’s requests for key sustainable agriculture programs is available on our appropriations page.
A full review of the budget proposals, highlighting NSAC priorities, follows.
Beginning Farmers and Ranchers
Socially Disadvantaged Farmers and Ranchers
Rural Business and Community Development
Research, Education, and Extension
Food Safety Outreach and Training
What’s Next for Budget and Appropriations?
For the first time during the Obama Administration, the budget request includes no cuts to farm bill funding for private lands conservation programs, including the Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP) and the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP). By leaving funding for CSP and EQIP intact, the budget proposal also provides for full funding of the Regional Conservation Partnership Program (RCPP), which promotes coordination between the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) and its partners to deliver conservation assistance to farmers and producers. These voluntary conservation programs are the primary means through which farmers, ranchers, and foresters build soil health, sequester carbon, improve water quality, and enhance wildlife habitat.
NSAC has consistently advocated against re-opening the farm bill to reduce conservation program assistance to farmers and ranchers, and we applaud the Administration for recognizing the importance of these programs in the face of a changing climate, more extreme weather events, and serious water quality programs across the country.
On the discretionary spending side of the ledger, we are pleased to report that the Administration requests a small, but important, increase in funding for USDA’s Conservation Operations account. This funding ensures that the NRCS can help producers assess their operations, develop conservation plans, and enroll in conservation programs. Farmers and ranchers depend heavily on the direct, on-the-ground conservation technical assistance (CTA) that is funded through the Conservation Operations account. The President requests a 1 percent increase to the Operations account, from $851 million to $860 million, which will help provide much needed assistance to more farmers interested in adopting conservation practices on their farms.
Recognizing the challenges the next generation of farmers face, including accessing credit to finance their operations, the President’s budget request increases funding for direct farm operating loans (DOL) by 16.6 percent, from $1.25 billion to $1.46 billion. Producers use these annual loans, made by the Farm Service Agency (FSA), to cover the cost of livestock, farm equipment, feed, seed, fuel, insurance, minor improvements to buildings, land and water development, and other operating expenses.
As the lending market grew more cautious due to fluctuations in crop prices, demand for DOLs grew significantly over the last year. The President’s requested increase would help ensure that beginning farmers and other family farmers who cannot be fully serviced by commercial credit are able to secure the loans they need to stay in business.
The budget also maintains last year’s historic funding level of $1.5 billion for direct farm ownership loans (DFO), which help farmers buy land. About three-quarters of DFOs are made to beginning farmers, and these loans are often used to help new farmers buy their first piece of farmland. FSA administers both DOLs and DFO loans.
In addition to loans, the Administration’s beginning farmer proposals include what would be first-time funding in the amount of $1.5 million for the Beginning Farmer and Rancher Individual Development Account (IDA) program. The last two farm bills directed USDA to administer this pilot program to help beginning farmers of limited means finance their start-up agricultural endeavors through business and financial training and matched savings accounts. However, the IDA program has not received an appropriation in years past, and thus, has not yet been launched. NSAC championed this authorization and is encouraged by the commitment of the Administration to continue to pursue funding for it.
The President also proposes an additional $5 million for Department-wide enhanced outreach to beginning, women, and military veteran farmers plus $3.9 million for targeted outreach by FSA to those interested in getting into farming and farmers who are just starting out. The FSA initiative will include a certification program to help veteran farmers prequalify for loans, 25 new full-time FSA staff devoted to providing outreach to beginning and veteran farmers, a pilot new farmer mentoring network that includes stipends for 200 mentors, and funding for cooperative agreements that support organizations in providing assistance and outreach to new farmers and also those that work with landowners to help them transition their farm to the next generation.
Overall, we are very pleased with the President’s proposals for beginning farmer initiatives and look forward to working with Congress and the Appropriations Committees to make them a reality.
Socially Disadvantaged and Veteran Farmers and Ranchers
We are very pleased that the President’s budget request includes $10 million in discretionary funding for the Outreach and Technical Assistance to Socially Disadvantaged and Veteran Farmers and Ranchers Program, also know as the “Section 2501” program. When combined with the $10 million in mandatory funding that is currently provided through the 2014 Farm Bill, the additional appropriated dollars would restore total funding for the Department’s keystone minority and veteran farmer program to its historic level of $20 million per year. With funding restored to its pre-2014 Farm Bill level, the program would be in a significantly better position to meet the increased demand for outreach and technical assistance by historically underserved producers. We will work with Congress to try to get the funding restored for minority farmers.
For a second year in a row, the budget includes an increased request for discretionary funding for the Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Program (RMAP). This program provides loan capital and technical assistance funding to local and regional organizations, which in turn provide microloans and business development technical assistance to rural microentrepreneurs. The budget request includes $2.9 million for microlending and $2 million for grants to support small rural business training and technical assistance. In FY16, Congress did not appropriate discretionary funding for RMAP. NSAC strongly supports the President’s request for RMAP funding in FY17.
We are pleased that the Administration reversed its position and is no longer proposing cuts to two of the most effective and popular USDA Rural Development programs–the National Sustainable Agriculture Information Service (also known as ATTRA), which each year provides hundreds of thousands of farmers, extension agents, and other practitioners with technical information and guidance on a wide range of sustainable agriculture topics; and the Value-Added Producer Grants (VAPG) program, which provides competitively awarded grants directly to farmers to create or develop value-added producer-owned businesses.
Last year, Congress rejected the Administration’s proposal to cut discretionary funding for VAPG by 9 percent and ATTRA by 16 percent. If funded as proposed, the FY17 budget would provide $10.75 million in discretionary funding for VAPG and $2.5 million for ATTRA, which are the final funding levels provided by Congress for FY16. While we appreciate that the Administration is no longer proposing cuts, we will be working with appropriators to increase funding so that they can build upon their existing successes in FY17.
The budget also requests $18.5 million for the Rural Energy for America Program (REAP), which supports farm and rural renewable energy systems and energy efficiency improvements. Of this $18.5 million, $15 million would be set aside for grants and $3.5 million for loan guarantees. The allocation for loan guarantees would in turn support $75.8 million in private lending. This proposed discretionary funding is made in addition to the $50 million in mandatory funding provided by the new farm bill on an annual basis. The proposed discretionary level represents a 37-fold increase over the actual FY16 level of $500,000.
The President’s budget request also includes $44.6 million in guaranteed loans for local and regional food enterprise development within the Business and Industry Guaranteed Loan Program. This is a three percent reduction relative to the actual FY16 appropriation, but an 18 percent increase over last year’s budget request. By statute, five percent of funding for the guaranteed loan program is dedicated to financing local and regional food enterprises.
We are very pleased that the budget request includes increased funding for both the Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI), from $350 million to $375 million in discretionary spending, and the Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education (SARE) program, from $24.7 million to $30 million.
SARE is the only USDA competitive grants research program with a clear and consistent focus on sustainability and farmer-driven research. FY17 marks the first time in several years that the Administration has requested an increase in funding for SARE, recognizing the importance of cutting-edge research that is easily accessible, regionally appropriate, and farmer-tested. The increased funding request is in part a response to the fact that, in recent years, USDA has only been able to fund 6 percent of eligible SARE proposals due to high demand and lack of sufficient funding.
AFRI is the largest of the National Institute of Food and Agriculture’s (NIFA) competitive grant programs, accounting for 60 percent of NIFA’s total competitive funding. SARE serves as an important complement to AFRI, identifying innovations and opening new lines of research that AFRI funds can further with larger and more complex projects.
NSAC appreciates the Administration’s recognition of the importance of scaling up investments for basic and applied agricultural research through programs like AFRI and SARE. We will continue to work with appropriators to secure a comprehensive investment boost for agricultural research by increasing funding for both programs.
The president’s budget also proposes to maintain current funding levels for the Organic Transitions Integrated Research, Education, and Extension competitive grants program at $4 million, a level we support. The budget also proposes a $3 million increase to support Integrated Pest Management work with respect to pollinators in its total request of $20 million for the Crop Protection and Pest Management competitive grants program.
NSAC is extremely disappointed that the President’s budget includes no increase for food safety training and outreach to farmers in FY17; known in the budget as the Food Safety Outreach Program (FSOP).
This relatively new program is intended to help small and medium-sized farms, processors and wholesalers develop the tools they need to comply with new food safety rules issued by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to implement the Food Safety Modernization Act.
Recognizing the importance of training and technical assistance in the face of new and comprehensive regulations, Congress funded FSOP for the first time in FY15 at $2.5 million, and doubled that funding in FY16. However, this is only a fraction of what USDA needs to reach the producers, processors, and wholesalers who will be impacted by the new regulations.
We will work with Congress to increase FSOP funding in FY17 to at least double its current funding level so that the farming community can become more prepared to understand and adapt their farms to the new and wide-ranging regulatory environment it is now facing.
The President’s budget includes two crop insurance reform proposals. The proposals are the same as those proposed last year, but with slightly different budgetary scores.
While we commend the White House for continuing to look for ways to reform the existing, unbalanced crop insurance system, we do not believe these cost cutting measures will truly address many of the structural, access, conservation, and delivery related issues currently facing the program.
The first of the President’s budget proposals would reduce the premium subsidy farmers receive by 10 percentage points for polices that include the Harvest Price Option (HPO). When a farmer purchases crop insurance they can choose to use the projected price (Harvest Price Exclusion) or they can buy-up to the Harvest Price Option for an additional premium. Because the harvest price coverage can significantly increase the indemnity (payment a farmer receives for a crop loss) and because it is highly subsidized, the vast majority of farmers elect this option. The proposed change is projected to save $16.9 billion over 10 years. That is $2.3 billion more than it was projected to save in the FY16 budget.
The second proposed change would alter prevented planting coverage by eliminating the option to buy-up prevented planting coverage to 65 or 70 percent of the coverage level elected by the farmer. This proposal would also require that a 60 percent transitional yield be applied to the producer’s Actual Production History (APH) when they receive a prevented planting payment.
Currently, if a farmer does not replant after a failed attempt at planting due to weather or other circumstances, and takes a full replant payment, their APH is not impacted. If they are able to replant, then the replanting is incorporated into their APH, which serves as a disincentive to replanting. These two prevented planting proposals were developed from a September 2013 USDA Office of Inspector General audit report on the Risk Management Agencies controls over prevented planting. This proposal is expected to save $1.1 billion over 10 years.
The budget does not contain any proposal for the use of the savings from these two reforms to help improve conservation on insured land, diminish the distorting effects of crop insurance on land access, or expand crop insurance access to beginning farmers without adequate coverage.
It is clear that as Congress and the current and future administrations begin to contemplate the next farm bill, needed reforms to the federal crop insurance program will be at the top of the agenda. We look forward to pursuing reforms that support sustainable agriculture and family farms as we move towards 2018 and the next farm bill.
What’s Next for the Budget and Appropriations?
The President’s budget request kick starts the annual budget and appropriations process, during which the House and Senate Budget Committees write budget resolutions. Following that, the House and Senate Appropriations Committees will begin writing their annual spending bills.
In the coming months, the House and Senate Budget Committees will likely vote on their respective budget resolutions, non-binding agreements that guide budget and appropriations decisions, for FY17.
Budget resolutions generally have significant influence over the annual appropriations process because they include discretionary spending caps that dictate the total size of the discretionary spending pie that the appropriators will then carve into discrete pieces. For FY17, however, Congress and the President have already agreed to overall spending caps as part of a major two-year budget deal last year. Some in Congress will seek to lower that agreed-to spending cap; however, it is likely to remain intact.
One tool that Congress may consider this year is budget reconciliation. Budget resolutions occasionally include reconciliation instructions, which direct one or more authorizing committees (e.g. the Agriculture Committees or the Transportation Committees, etc.) to cut spending to meet a certain deficit reduction target by a certain deadline. Under reconciliation, the authorizing committees are generally given wide flexibility to adjust any policies under their jurisdiction to get to the deficit-reduction target. For example, if the Agriculture Committees were to receive reconciliation instructions, they could reform commodity and crop insurance programs, or cut anti-hunger and nutrition programs, or change the size and scope of farm conservation programs, or some combination. While reconciliation is possible, it seems highly unlikely, given that 2016 is a presidential election year during which the legislative calendar is compressed.
Beginning this month, the House and Senate appropriations subcommittees will hold hearings to consider the President’s FY17 budget request. Once the Budget Committees have passed their respective budget resolutions, subcommittees will begin to develop appropriations legislation for each issue area (agriculture, environment, education, etc.) before bringing that legislation before the full Appropriations Committees, and the full House and Senate. It is common for the annual appropriations process to last right up until the end of the fiscal year (September 30), and not so infrequently, beyond the end of the fiscal year.
We will be providing updates and information about the appropriations and budget processes as they unfold.
For our updated appropriations and budget tracking chart, click here.
Budget and Appropriations One response to “What Does the President’s 2017 Budget Mean for Sustainable Agriculture?” $720 MILLION FOR CONSERVATION PROJECTS GENERATED THROUGH REGIONAL CONSERVATION PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM : One Percent for the Planet says: March 1, 2016 at 9:03 am […] President’s budget proposal unveiled earlier this week contained good news – no proposals to cut farm bill conservation […]
RSS - Subscribe to blog
October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 Categories Action Alerts
Beginning and Minority Farmers
Budget and Appropriations
Commodity, Crop Insurance & Credit Programs
Competition & Anti-trust
Conservation, Energy & Environment
Grants and Programs
Local & Regional Food Systems
Nutrition & Food Access
Research, Education & Extension
Sustainable Livestock
Stay Connected Optional member code: leave blank if unsure: Take Action What's happening right now » National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition110 Maryland Avenue NE, Suite 209 Washington, D.C. 20002
Phone: (202) [email protected]
Sustainable agriculture recommends: hostgator vs bluehost | 农业 | 21,592 |
Future of beekeeping in Dumfries at risk
There are concerns about the future of beekeeping Photo: ITV News
Bees are an essential part of our eco-system, they help pollinate our crops, those crops are then used for food production in the UK, an industry worth £500million a year to the economy.
But now concerns have been raised about the future of beekeeping.
The average age of a bee farmer in the UK is over 60. It's such an expensive pastime that younger people struggle to get involved with.
But a scheme near Dumfries is trying to do what they can to help address the problem.
Louis Kitchen is an apprentice beekeeper. He is only one of two people who are training this summer, but is hoping once he is finished he can become a commercial farmer.
"Aside from the environmental benefits of it, I'm really passionate about the benefits of bringing food production, they're just fascinating animals, it's been amazing being here today and just opening up the hives, looking inside picking out the Queen bees and the worker bees and seeing all the different ones, and the little larvae inside it's absolutely fascinating."
– Louis Kitchen, Apprentice Beekeeper
The Queen bee has a red dot on her back Credit: ITV News
The scheme being run in the south of Scotland to help provide affordable bee hives for people interested in starting out but lacking the funds. They have set up a website to highlight their campaign and have a target of £5,000 which they are hoping to hit by April.
John Mellis runs the farm here near Dumfries and is passionate about his industry. He is ready to pass on his knowledge and experience to ensure the business he loves survives.
"What's going to happen when people like me can no longer do it, and most of us do go on until we're 80 years of age but we're not bringing through enough young people to replace us. "We do, the Bee Farmers Association has just instigated a trainee apprenticeship scheme, a formal three year training scheme for youngsters 16-24 and that's brilliant but it's not the whole answer, what we also need is people like Louis, middle-aged, a bit more life experience to come and learn how to do it and then take it on themselves."
– John Mellis, Beekeeper
But the country needs people like John to be training large groups of people every year for things to change. Hobby beekeepers have their place in the industry, but it's larger commercial farms that are needed to make a significant difference.
Last updated Wed 19 Mar 2014
Sting in the tail for Dumfries beekeepers
Dumfries foodbank's urgent appeal for funds
Administrators reveal financial problems at Penman
Unions and politicians pledge to try and save Dumfries firm | 农业 | 2,681 |
Finally! Growers see upside to cotton market
Elton Robinson Farm Press Editorial Staff
It's been a while since William B. Dunavant had much to say about an upside to the cotton market. But it dominated his talk during the Cotton Roundtable in New York. Dunavant said that after cotton buyers transition between old crop and new crop cotton in August, prices should move higher. Should there be a problem with production somewhere in the world, prices could get as high as 73 cents, Dunavant noted. Behind the price strength is the steady progress the United States and the world has made in reducing carryover, the chairman of Memphis, Tenn.-based Dunavant Enterprises Inc. said via telephone at the Roundtable. It was sponsored by the New York Board of Trade, Ag Market Network, Certified FiberMax Cottonseed and Farm Press Publications. “We have really made progress in this cotton marketing year. The United States started out with about 7.45 million bales of carryover, and we project 5.6 million bales starting the 2003/04-crop year. That's good. And we've seen prices respond from the 30s to close to the 60s over the last few months.” Dunavant's economists are projecting domestic consumption next marketing year to drop from 7.3 million bales to about 6.8 million bales, “as we continue to see the erosion of the domestic textile industry. It can go lower than that.” Dunavant projects exports this coming season at 11.5 million bales with the possibility of going as high as 12 million bales, “if China has problems with its crop. “Put this number together with our crop size of 16.8 million to 16.9 million bales, and we see our carryover dropping to 4.2 million bales next year, which is quite friendly to prices.” To top it off, “there is a tremendous world demand for cotton out there. Is it active today? No, it's pent up. Basically all consuming markets — including the United States — are fighting the transition to the new price level,” he said. “After the vacation period in Europe is over (around the middle of August), we will see the world coming in aggressively to buy cotton. And they need to buy cotton. Our volume of sales over the last two weeks has picked up for all new crop growths, even in the United States.” Worldwide carryover may not drop as much as USDA has projected, according to Dunavant. But his figures are friendly to prices nonetheless. He projects world carryover dropping from this year's 36.2 million bales to 33.6 million bales next marketing year. Dunavant projects world consumption for 2003/04 of “somewhere around 98.7 million bales,” which is slightly lower than USDA's 99 million bales. Meanwhile, Dunavant projects that the world will produce somewhere around 95 million bales to supply that need. Chinese players China continues to dominate the news in cotton prices, as its consumption approaches 30 million bales, noted Dunavant. “China is the name of the game for all of us as we look at prices this coming marketing year.” China's cotton crop, estimated to be above 27 million bales may actually drop below that to slightly under 26.5 million bales due to serious flooding in parts of China, Dunavant said. China's expected 8.6 million bales of carryover this year is expected to drop to about 8.2 million bales next year. “Again, China will be an aggressive buyer this marketing year. But I think it will come in spurts. They'll come in and buy 200,000 or 300,000 bales, then back out and wait a couple of months. They certainly will take a look at their own crop before they get overly aggressive buying cotton.” Dunavant also expects consumption increases in other major consuming markets, including Turkey, India, Pakistan and Brazil. The only negative for demand in the world is the United States where the U.S. textile industry continues to erode, according to Dunavant. “It is real sad to someone who grew up in the cotton industry to see this wonderful industry disappear, and it is disappearing. I don't think any of us can argue that.” Dunavant says to look for production increases in South American cotton crops. “The reason is price. It's considerably higher, and they will respond. We're looking at well in excess of a million bales in increased production in Paraguay, Argentina and Brazil.” Meanwhile, Australia is still experiencing a very severe drought. “We think the crop they just finished harvesting is going to be about 1.6 million bales versus about 3.2 million bales last year. We show an increase to about 1.75 million bales this coming marketing year. It could jump to a little over 2.0 million bales with timely rains.” Market outlook Dunavant sees a trading range for cotton from 57 to 58 cents on the low side to 73 cents on the upside. “We are going to continue to be in a very volatile price range for New York futures. “The reason we picked the 57-58 cent price range for the low is that we have seen what can happen when the commodity funds and the speculative community get too long or too short. This past Tuesday they were 37 percent long.” Any upside in the market will come later, according to Dunavant, “because customers around the world will fight, fight, fight price as they jump from current crop to new crop. “You're looking at a 350-point spread between the old marketing certificate and the new marketing certificate. I think you'll see big shipments in the next three weeks, because they are going to get it considerably cheaper than they would after the middle of August. “The equity levels for growers between now and the first of the year for new crop could get to somewhere between 2 cents and 5 cents,” Dunavant added. “If something goes wrong in any major producing areas in the United States, then I think cotton will rush higher soon.” If equity levels rush higher, “we're going to get out of the marketing loan and the grower is going to have to look at the futures market and the cash price for his return,” he said.
Source URL: http://deltafarmpress.com/management/finally-growers-see-upside-cotton-market | 农业 | 6,022 |
HomeAbout UsContactSubscriptionsDisclaimer Making It Magazine
Industry for Development
FeaturesGlobal ForumHot TopicPolicy BriefThe MagazineExtra!All PostsSubscribe
Browse: Home / All Posts, Features / Farming for the future
Farming for the future11 July 2011
For Helmy Abouleish, managing director of Egypt’s SEKEM Group, biodynamic agriculture is not only the way to address major challenges such as climate change and food security, but is also the only way to achieve long-term competitiveness.
The world is facing multiple crises – economic, social and environmental. Developing countries are particularly affected as they struggle with weak and unequal economies, and find themselves located in regions that are the most susceptible to climate change. Both socially and environmentally, the agricultural sector plays a major role in the economies of developing countries: socially, because it is the sector that provides the majority of jobs, and because it tries to ensure food security – a crucial issue in the context of rising food prices and recent food riots; and environmentally, because it uses up to three-quarters of the world’s fresh water resources, and because established farming systems can cause soil erosion, pollution, and desertification. It is absolutely essential and urgent that the world turns away from standard agricultural practices and adopts more sustainable farming systems. But can such farming systems produce enough to feed the world at an affordable price?
The SEKEM agricultural model
SEKEM – a holistic, sustainable development initiative based on biodynamic agriculture – aims to do so. Biodynamic agriculture is a specific form of organic agriculture which, as defined by the Demeter ecological association, views the farm as “a self-contained, self-sustaining ecosystem responsible for creating and maintaining its individual health and vitality without any external or unnatural additions. […] Soil, plants, animals and humans together create this image of a holistic living organism.”
SEKEM applies biodynamic agricultural methods, including the extensive use of compost, to turn desert lands into living and healthy soil. The use of resilient crops and natural predators negate the need for external inputs, such as chemical fertilizers and pesticides. Biodynamic agriculture means closed nutrient cycles, in which SEKEM rears livestock to produce its own compost, grows cereals to feed the livestock, and uses crop rotation to enhance soil fertility. The surplus is sold in supermarkets and organic shops, both nationally and internationally.
The cost factor
One crucial question posed when thinking of changing from the standard agricultural practice is: Will we face higher costs? The SEKEM model of organic, resource-efficient, and soil-protecting, sustainable agriculture requires 10-30% more manual labour on average than conventional agricultural production. Employing more workers usually leads to overall higher expenses. Also, organic products on supermarket shelves always cost more than the conventional alternative.
The logical conclusion must be that organic production is more expensive than business-as-usual production. But is that indeed the case?
The answer is no. Such a narrow economic view fails to take into account fiscal and socio-economic externalities which are not internalized in the market prize of organic products. To take Egypt as an example, there are energy and water subsidies which promote resource-intensive practices. Resource-efficient practices, such as biodynamic agriculture, do not benefit as much (if at all) from these subsidies, and are put at a disadvantage, with resultant market distortions.
The indirect cost-saving effects of more sustainable farming systems are also missing from this calculation. Healthy soils with a high content of solid organic matter increase the water holding capacity, decrease water consumption, and inhibit erosion. Compared to business-as-usual agricultural production, biodynamic agriculture’s increased energy efficiency, lower greenhouse gas emissions, and increased soil carbon sequestration, make it a superb tool to mitigate climate change. Resilient crops, crop rotation, and diversification methods such as agro-forestry, mean that the risk of crop failure is minimized. Intercropping and the absence of chemical inputs increase biodiversity. Moreover, lower expenditure on external inputs makes financial resources available to cover the costs of higher employment, thus promoting rural livelihoods. Biodynamic agricultural methods are also healthier as they don’t expose farmers, animals, soil, air, or surface water to hazardous chemicals.
To quantify the cost-saving effects of sustainable farming systems and their potential to mitigate and adapt to climate change is somewhat difficult. However, it is not only common sense, but also the opinion of the scientific community and of economic analysts, that there will be a tremendously positive economic impact. Furthermore, there is another important factor to be taken into account, and that is the savings to be made on the cost of national healthcare systems when chemical pesticides and fertilizers are replaced by natural predators and compost. The health of farmers significantly improves, and the population can enjoy a wide variety of foodstuffs that do not contain any chemical residues.
Considering all the cost aspects, from labour to machinery and from subsidies to environmental and health costs, sustainable agriculture is today already cheaper. As energy prices rise, as water becomes scarcer, and as climate change becomes more severe, only sustainable farming systems will be viable and affordable.
In 2050, mankind will have to produce enough food for nine billion people. The availability of, the access to, and the affordability of, sufficient nutrients are the defining criteria of food security that have to be taken into consideration when choosing the farming system of tomorrow.
Availability: Contradicting the long-established belief that external inputs such as chemical fertilizers are necessary in order to substantially increase food production, an increasing number of scientists, policy panels, and experts, such as Olivier De Schutter, the United Nations’ Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, are now claiming that resource-conserving, low external input techniques have a proven potential to significantly improve yields. In traditional farming systems in developing countries, and in regions where soils are degraded, yields can be increased up to 200%.
Access and affordability: The rural areas where the greatest yield increases could be achieved through eco-intensification methods, such as agro-forestry, are often the same regions where poverty and hunger are widespread. Increased yields would therefore directly tackle access to food, and nourish the farming population. As sustainable farming systems are more labour intensive, a substantial amount of jobs would be created which, in turn, would enable many more people to buy foodstuffs for their families.
Today’s prevailing agricultural paradigms need to be transformed. In the developed world, industrial agriculture achieved high productivity levels, primarily through the extensive use of chemical fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides, of water, and of transportation fuels. Traditional agriculture, mostly in developing countries, often results in deforestation and the excessive extraction of soil nutrients. Sustainable modes of agricultural production represent the only solution that can provide sufficient quantities of affordable and nutritious food for our growing global population.
In these times of change, as we have recently experienced in Egypt, the window is open for renewed and intensified efforts to promote sustainable solutions to the great challenges that we face.
SEKEM
The core businesses of the SEKEM Group are land reclamation, organic farming, food, phyto-pharmaceutical, and textile production. SEKEM was founded by Dr. Ibrahim Abouleish in 1977, and today is the leading organic farming and food processing company in Egypt, employing around 1,500 people. The herbs, fruits, and vegetables cultivated on the company’s farms are processed to create high-quality food and medicines, which are sold on the national and international market. The SEKEM companies include the largest packer of organic tea and the leading producer of herbs in the Middle East. SEKEM is well-known for its corporate social responsibility efforts in the communities where it has operations, and is internationally recognized for its sustainable development role.
Posted in All Posts, Features | Tagged agribusiness, agriculture, biodynamic, capacity, chemical fertilizers, climate change, competitiveness, compost, cost, crop failure, desertification, developing countries, eco-intensification, ecosystems, Egypt, employment, energy, enhance, environment, farming systems, food prices, food security, foodstuffs, fresh water sources, Global, globalization, health, healthcare systems, Helmy Abouleish, holistic, Industrial Development, innovation, intensive, International, issue 6, jobs, labour, livestock, living, machinery, Making It, national, Olliver de Schutter, organic, pesticides, pollution, production, rural, SEKEM, social, soil erosion, supermarkets, surplus, sustainability, sustainable, technology, UN, UNIDO, United Nations, urban, world, yields
4 responses to “Farming for the future”
Khaled 27 July 2011 at 14:47 | Permalink Helmsy Abouleish is under arrest for alleged involvement in corruption during the Mubarak era.
Khaled 27 July 2011 at 14:53 | Permalink Wed, 20 Jul 2011 Sekem managing director to appeal sentence over IMC funding for Sekem companies CAIRO (NNA) – The managing director of the Egyptian Sekem Group, Helmy Abouleish, has been sentenced to a suspended prison sentence of one year and a fine in connection with charges of illegal funding from the Egyptian Industrial Modernization Center (IMC) for Sekem companies while he was serving on the IMC. Abouleish intends to lodge an appeal against his conviction. In a press release, Sekem said that Abouleish had been released from custody on 7 July after 100 days. According to the Sekem statement, the court in its ruling had followed the application of the state prosecutor who had argued that the IMC should be considered as an ordinary Egyptian authority and not as a body whose activity is governed by separate legislation. It remained in dispute to the end, however, which legal framework applied to the way that IMC funding was disbursed, Sekem said. The IMC is an economic development fund with funds of 450m euros established by the European Union and the Egyptian government under the separate cooperation act 66-1999. It was funded originally by the EU, the Egyptian government and the Egyptian private sector, but in 2006 the EU transferred its share to the Egyptian government. Helmy Abouleish was managing director of the fund from 2005 to 2006 and subsequently on its supervisory board. According to the Sekem statement, the disbursement guidelines under the cooperation act permitted the funding of measures benefiting Sekem companies under the given circumstances. Furthermore, Abouleish had allowed a period of nine months to pass after finishing as managing director before agreeing to new funding for Sekem companies. IMC funding is not paid directly to the funded companies but goes to providers of training and modernisation measures. Furthermore, all measures were regularly audited by internal and external inspection agencies as well as the appropriate EU offices, the press release said. A legal opinion sought at the start of proceedings against Abouleish had confirmed this interpretation. Although the supervisory board does not exercise any executive functions, the state prosecutor had argued that Sekem companies had not been entitled to IMC funding while Helmy Abouleish was on the board. After sentencing, Abouleish reaffirmed his view with regard to the legal situation and announced that he would lodge an appeal against the sentence. However, he now intended to devote himself again primarily to the Sekem companies and continue to work for the sustainable development of Egypt. The Sekem Group of companies is part of the Sekem initiative for sustainable development established in 1977 by Dr. Ibrahim Abouleish and produces, processes and markets organic and biodynamic foods, textiles and herbal medicines in Egypt, the Arab world and international markets. END/nna/cva NNA is an international news agency
S. Chambers 17 August 2011 at 23:45 | Permalink I would like to know how to get more information on this organization and the kinds of activities they are currently involved in. I live and work in Egypt and have an interest in this kind of farming. Please email any information.
Charles Arthur 19 August 2011 at 14:23 | Permalink You can find plenty of information about SEKEM on their website at http://www.sekem.com/
« Previous Next » English Español Français 简体中文 Archives20162015201420132012201120102009Printed Version Login Username:
Password: Remember me
Copyright © 2016 UNIDO. | 农业 | 13,213 |
Cook's Branch Conservancy Receives Award for Private Land Conservation
by | May 24, 2012
The transformation of a clear-cut, overgrazed working ranch into Cook's Branch Conservancy a century later has earned a prominent Texas family the 2012 Leopold Conservation Award, the state's highest honor recognizing habitat management and wildlife conservation on private land. Operated as a program of the Cynthia and George Mitchell Foundation, Cook's Branch Conservancy is located on 5,650 acres in Montgomery County north of Houston. The property offers a rare glimpse into what a century of regeneration looks like in the Pineywoods region of East Texas. The Leopold award is conferred each year by Sand County Foundation, an international non-profit organization devoted to private land conservation, in partnership with the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD) as part of its Lone Star Land Steward Awards program. In Texas, the Leopold award is sponsored by the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, Silver Eagle Distributors and the Lee and Ramona Bass Foundation. "The Mitchell family's commitment to restore and enhance the land, water and wildlife in their care demonstrates that Aldo Leopold's philosophy of land management is still vibrant in Texas," said Brent Haglund, PhD, Sand County Foundation president. "Their determined, innovative approach to private lands conservation is exemplary." Businessman and philanthropist George P. Mitchell and his family accepted the Leopold crystal award and a check for $10,000 at the annual Lone Star Land Steward Awards dinner in Austin on May 22. "The Mitchell family made a commitment many years ago to demonstrate that private landowners and federal land management agencies in East Texas can support and grow habitat suitable for use by the federally endangered red-cockaded woodpecker through the use of sound forest management practices," said Jeffrey A. Reid of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. "Such management practices have also increased the habitat suitability for bobwhite quail, eastern wild turkey, white-tailed deer, and myriad migratory bird species." The Mitchells acquired the property in 1964 and, in the mid 1990s, started a process to return the area to pre-settlement condition--back to its piney woods roots--through conservation and restoration initiatives. The family continues to expand the conservancy as habitat restoration efforts decades in the making shape the property into one of the state's best-kept forests. "Thanks to the vision of the Mitchell family, Cook's Branch has witnessed astonishing increases in biodiversity, regeneration, and overall ecosystem health," said Sarah Scott Mitchell, executive director of Cook's Branch Conservancy. "My grandparents, Cynthia and George Mitchell, were instinctive naturalists who understood the dynamism of an old growth forest, and always appreciated biodiversity," Sarah Mitchell continued. "My aunt, Sheridan Mitchell Lorenz, initiated and drove the active restoration process. And, I'm proud that our family unanimously agreed to preserve the property in perpetuity." In nominating Cook's Branch Conservancy, TPWD pointed out that pre-settlement ecology is virtually absent from all southern pine forests, and that Cook's Branch is an exemplary demonstration of Piney Woods ecology. "The Mitchell family has taken a piece of degraded land and, using basic principles, with the best available technology, reclaimed a healthy and sustainable example of our natural heritage," said Dan Jones, the TPWD wildlife biologist who nominated Cook's Branch for the award. Jones also noted these accomplishments: --A continuing commitment to conservation and restoration of a representative tract of the Piney Woods eco-region of Texas. --Early baseline inventories and research into pre-settlement conditions of the area to focus on restoration of natural processes and implementing appropriate management practices to achieve this desired condition. --The overall strategic plan for this property that incorporates separate plans for different resource categories. --Restoration and management of several forest communities present at the conservancy through comprehensive timber inventories used to model regeneration and refine timber management strategies. --Transitioned away from cattle grazing, hay and timber production; initiated prescribed burnings mimicking the region's natural fire cycle; and reseeded native grasses and forbs. Practices promote pre-settlement ecological conditions, and motivated the return of species dependent on this clump grass habitat, such as the Bobwhite Quail, numerous sparrows, and migratory species like the Upland Sandpiper. --Wildlife study, conservation and management practices highlighted by the conservancy's dedication to providing habitat for the federally endangered Red-cockaded Woodpecker while researching the species. --Conservation of water resources through establishment of streamside management zones larger than the minimums and planting around 2,000 hardwood seedlings in formerly clear-cut riparian zones, establishing a federal ground water monitoring site and construction and maintenance of impoundments to reduce erosion and provide for wildlife and fisheries habitat. "We're thrilled that Cook's Branch Conservancy has been recognized as an exemplary model of sustainability in Texas, demonstrating that investment in conservation can have an enormous impact on biodiversity," said Katherine Lorenz, president of the Cynthia and George Mitchell Foundation. "The Mitchell foundation will continue to invest in this kind of visionary work to bring sustainable solutions to some of Texas' most complex problems." —courtesy TPWD You are not allowed to post comments. | 农业 | 5,755 |
Food safety and pollution in China a concern: FAO
Last Updated: Monday, June 10, 2013 - 16:16
Follow @ZeeNewsBeijing: Amid reports of contamination of food products in China, UN's Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) has expressed concerns over pollution and food safety issues in the world's second largest economy.
"We're concerned about pollution in general," Graziano da Silva, director-general of the FAO said.
"We have seen a lot of improvements in China but there is much more to be done," he was quoted as saying by state-run Xinhua news agency.
In May, three rice mills in central China's Hunan Province were investigated after rice was found to be contaminated with cadmium, a carcinogenic industrial chemical.
A food safety inspection showed that 44.4 percent of rice and rice products in the city of Guangzhou in south China's Guangdong Province also contained excessive amounts of cadmium, according to a Guangzhou Food and Drug Administration statement on May 16.
Although the source of the pollutants has not yet been found, heavy metal contained in fertilisers has contaminated irrigation water and arable land.
Agricultural authorities in Hunan said in 2012 that heavy metal pollution has been spreading from urban agricultural production bases to rural areas, he sadi.
"It's not exactly true that the more fertilizers you use, the more output you get," the FAO chief said.
China produced about 6.21 million tonnes of fertiliser in 2011, accounting for about 20 percent of global output, National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) data showed.
China, as the world's largest fertilizer user, consumed about 30 percent of total global output annually.
But its effective utilisation rate of pesticides is still lower than that of developed countries, with a 10 to 20 percentage points gap, according to the NBS statistics.
Overuse of fertiliser will increase soil's dependency on pesticides, said Pan Genxing, an agricultural expert with the Nanjing Agricultural University.
"Soil contamination and food safety problems are inevitable and are bound to occur in high-growth countries," Merritt Cluff, an FAO economist he told Xinhua noting that land and water resources per person was a problem in China.
"China is unique in the respect that land and water scarcity make difficult combinations. Some other countries may have experienced a similar period, but they did not have such high growth pressure," Cluff said.
In order to address these issues, Graziano da Silva and Cluff advised the Chinese government to invest in order to achieve high productivity.
The government should be strict in controlling the use of pesticides and fertilizers, da Silva said.
"There is also the issue of consumers rejecting food products that are not up to standard," he said. PTI
First Published: Monday, June 10, 2013 - 16:16 Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.
Food and Agricultural Organization
Graziano da Silva
Chinas population | 农业 | 2,957 |
HomeThough Quiet, Rust Still RelevantBy: Laura Skillman | September 9, 2008EmailPrintFacebookGoogleTwitterLinkedInThree years after soybean rust first arrived in the U.S., it has yet to become the disease problem many had feared. But a University of Kentucky (UK) plant pathologist says it is acting as expected.
“We’ve not been crying wolf,” says Don Hershman, plant pathologist with the UK College of Agriculture. “It takes a while for the disease to build up, and eventually conditions will come together. I doubt if it’s going to happen every year. Will it be a one-in-five-year thing or a one-in-10-year thing? There’s really no way to predict that. You just have to be tuned in and be ready to act when needed.”
Standing Sentry
Rust can cause extensive crop damage but can be successfully treated with timely fungicide applications. Timely applications depend on finding the disease and monitoring its progression into the soybean growing areas from the southern U.S., where it overwinters on kudzu. Hershman notes there are more than 12 million acres of kudzu in this country, primarily in the South.
“We are noticing that rust seems to be moving north earlier and earlier every year,” he says. “Part of that is because pathologists have learned more about how to scout for it.”
A sentinel network of soybean and kudzu plots from Mexico to Canada are intensively checked from late winter until the end of the growing season. Pathologists have been successful in identifying the disease and giving early warning through this system. Most of the finds are on leaves taken from the field to a laboratory for incubation and microscopic evaluation.
“We are having more rust finds with each passing year,” Hershman says. “In 2005, we had 40 finds and 239 in 2007. Part of that is because kudzu is becoming more uniformly infected. We are also finding that long distance spore movement is very common, and that’s the scary part.”
The spores can be lifted and sent for miles during weather events, but these spores also have to survive the trip and then find receptive conditions in order to multiply. Large spore movement does not require a major weather event, such as a tropical storm or hurricane, but can move northward on normal weather patterns. So far spores have found their way into soybean growing areas and infected plants too late in the season to impact the crop. But Hershman says as the disease develops and overwinters in the larger areas of the South, more spores will be available to move earlier in the growing season.
Defense Planning Easier
Pathologists have found that producers have more time to spray than initially thought once the disease has been discovered. They have also been able to predict locations where the disease may pop up using three models that consider spore locations, spore movement, and weather conditions. These models were used to successfully predict a soybean rust infection in Iowa in 2007.
“It’s always about two and a half to three weeks from the time it is predicted until it shows up,” Hershman says.
This helps prepare growers for the potential arrival of the disease and allows them time to spray fungicides to control its spread. Timely findings of the disease and the use of prediction models can help to ameliorate the disease’s impact. Such tools give growers information to determine when and if they need to use fungicides to protect their crop.
“The best defense is a good offense,” he says. “We’ve had three years now, and we’ve seen three different patterns. The first year it went up the east coast. The second year it went up the east coast and through Kentucky, and this year it bypassed Kentucky and went up through Nebraska.
“The key for a producer is to watch the seasonal weather trends and monitor rust detections, especially in the Deep South, from May through July,” he adds. “Obviously, the earlier anything begins to happen the worse off we are going to be — the later, the better.”
Retailers and growers can visit www.sbrusa.net to monitor Asian soybean rust and soybean aphids this season. | 农业 | 4,067 |
JR: Innov in Agri
Water, Water, Not Everywhere
So how do California farmers make do? With technology and ingenuity.
Jim Carlton
Few people in the world are more water-conscious than California farmers. The state leads the nation in farm revenue and produces nearly half of the domestic supply of fruits, nuts and vegetables. It also boasts nine of the top 10 producing counties in the nation, according to the California Department of Food and Agriculture. More in Innovations in Agriculture The Future of Agriculture May Be in Cities The Quest for a Tasty Tomato Why High Oil Prices Are Good for Farming At Harvest Time, a Hand From Robots From Corporate World to Farmstead Read the complete report . Yet California is one of the driest states in the U.S., getting an average of just 22 inches of precipitation annually compared with more than 40 inches for states like Missouri and New York. And, with nearly 40 million people, California is also the most populous state—meaning there's a lot of competition for that precious rain and snow. How do the farmers make do with so little water? They use technology and the state's topography to stretch existing supplies as far as they can. "If you have limited water supplies, you have to be as careful and efficient as you can with it," says Larry Schwankl, an irrigation expert with the University of California Cooperative Extension. Enlarge Image
See how irrigation and water conservation work in California's Central valley.
The efficiencies start at the northern end of the Central Valley, the 400-mile corridor that's home to most of the state's farmland. There, farmers along the Sacramento River use a system called flow-through, which means that the water they take but don't use flows back into the river by a network of valves and drains. As water flows to the driest southern reaches of the valley via the California Aqueduct, many farmers use drip irrigation, microsprinklers and extensively plumbed groundwater caverns—filled with runoff from the Sierra Nevada—to maximize their water usage. Daniel Errotabere, for instance, says his 5,200-acre farm's conversion to drip irrigation over the past five years has helped yield water savings as high as 50%—helping to cushion the blow during the most recent drought. "You can't deliver water much more efficiently than what we are doing today," Mr. Errotabere said on a recent tour of the farm near Riverdale, Calif. The accompanying images outline how irrigation and water conservation work in California's Central valley. Email: [email protected]. Email | 农业 | 2,566 |
Attack on the Heart of Biodiversity
Mexico, the homeland of corn and cradle of its genetic diversity, is waiting with baited breath for an important decision that could seriously compromise its agricultural biodiversity. In June, the authorization granted to Monsanto to sow 250,000 hectares of GM soy made news. At the time, beekeepers’ organizations protested because the entire production and export of honey from highly productive regions like Yucatán and Chiapas was threatened. The European Union is one of the leading importers of Mexican honey, but it has banned the sale of honey containing traces of GMOs. The sowing of GM soy risked crippling the whole sector. Later this year, in September, an uproar was caused by a study conducted by Gilles-Eric Séralini on rats fed with varying percentages of GM feed, opening up disturbing possibilities about the long-term consequences of GMO consumption. (read more here).
While the world resounded with reactions to the studies carried out on the transgenic corn Mon603, the agribusiness giants Monsanto and Pioneer Hi-Bred refused to take a step back, instead soliciting official authorizations for sowing the same GM seeds from the Mexican government, as reported in the newspaper La Jornada. The ETC Group, an international organization active in the defense of ecological and cultural diversity and human rights, launched the alarm, communicating data also reported recently in a detailed article by the NGO Grain: the applications concern a total area of 2.4 million hectares, a surface area larger than the entire nation of El Salvador. And over half of this land would be sown with the notorious Mon603. With the end of President Calderón’s mandate fast approaching, it is feared that the government will grant these authorizations in the very near future, or at latest within a few months with the new government, as the deputy agriculture secretary Mariano Ruiz told Reuters, opening up the country to an unprecedented invasion of GMOs in both fields and food. Local varieties will be threatened by contamination and the food sovereignty of communities will be seriously jeopardized. “We are going through a crucial time,” commented Alfonso Salvador Rocha Robles, a researcher at the Universidad de las Américas, leader of the Slow Food Puebla Convivium and recently elected to the Slow Food International Council as a representative of Mexico and Central America. “In recent years new environmental, economic and social problems have emerged, mostly connected to a single factor: agroindustry. Now, with the arrival of biotechnologies, with the development and sowing of transgenic corn, we are endangering an agricultural biodiversity that has developed over millennia of history. We must unite the forces of civil society organizations, farmers and researchers, with the support of the academic world, so that together we can change our country’s agricultural policies and have a Mexico free from GMOs.”
“We must promote sustainability, basing ourselves on independent research,” echoed biotechnologist Hilda Irene Cota Guzmán, a university lecturer and president of the Mexican commission for the Ark of Taste, Slow Food’s online catalog of local products at risk of extinction. “We need scientific knowledge that is not funded by the same companies that produce and sell GM seeds.”
“Corn’s genetic heritage is an intangible asset for all of humanity,” said Carlo Petrini, Slow Food’s president. “We must avoid it being put at risk to further the private interests of certain multinationals. We hope that the Mexican government follows the precautionary principle adopted by Europe and other countries, including recently Kenya.”
Since 2009, when Calderón dropped the decade-long moratorium on GMOs, 177 authorizations have already been granted for sowing transgenic corn in Mexico. Now the country is waiting for the outcome of a case whose dimensions and potential impact make it significantly more serious. Read the call to action launched by UCCS, the Union de Cientificos Comprometidos con la Sociedad.
Read the study by the NGO Grain. | 农业 | 4,106 |
Home / News / News / Research initiative tackles wheat rust, fusarium…
Research initiative tackles wheat rust, fusarium head blight
Posted Jun. 18th, 2014
by Brian Cross No Comments An international research project involving scientists in Canada and Mexico is hoping to reduce financial losses in durum caused by two common diseases: wheat rust and fusarium head blight.
The Canadian Wheat Alliance (CWA) and the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) in Mexico will collaborate on the project, which involves scientists at CIMMYT, Canada’s National Research Council, Agriculture Canada and the University of Saskatchewan.
The five-year project will receive financial support of $1.5 million from the Saskatchewan government.
The funding will come from a $5 million pool of money that the province had previously committed to support Canadian Wheat Alliance programs.
The end goal of the CIMMYT project, according to CWA spokesperson Faouzi Bekkaoui, is to increase durum’s resistance to rust and fusarium and develop new durum varieties for growers.
“We know the importance of these two diseases and how much impact they have on yield and on income for farmers and the Canadian economy,” Bekkaoui said.
The CWA is a multi-year wheat research initiative that involves scientists at key research institutions in Canada. The initiative seeks to marry the expertise and resources of Canada’s most accomplished research institutions with financial investments and resources from outside organizations, including private industry.
CWA’s partnership with CIMMYT will allow Canadian wheat and durum researchers to work with international scientists who have a wealth of experience in breeding, plant genetics and the development of new breeding tools.
“They (CIMMYT) are one of the largest, if not the biggest breeding institution in the world, so they have tremendous expertise in … wheat breeding and they have the largest collection of wheat germplasm in the world,” Bekkaoui said.
CWA identified the project as a strategic collaboration that could benefit durum growers while strengthening the relationship between Canadian wheat researchers and CIMMYT, he added. “It’s something that is … going to solidify the interaction between Canada and CIMMYT.”
Although CWA’s initial research mandate was focused primarily on spring wheat rather than durum, the CIMMYT project was viewed as a good fit for the alliance’s broader research goals. It will identify genetic resources that can be used to im-prove disease resistance in Canadian durum varieties, Bekkaoui said.
According to the NRC, fusarium head blight has cost Canadian wheat producers more than $1.5 billion in lost income since the mid-1990s.
“Our collaboration with CIMMYT, one of the world’s most reputable organizations in the field of wheat improvement, will allow Canadian wheat farmers to benefit from the centre’s world class and extensive research,” added Roman Szumski, vice-president of life sciences with the NRC.
“This strategic arrangement will help us to achieve the Canadian Wheat Alliance’s main objectives of improving the yield, sustainability and profitability of Canadian wheat.”
Popular articles
Brian Cross — Saskatoon newsroom
Feds provide $800K for seed…Wet conditions may affect pedigreed seedMillions of acres won’t be harvested Respond | 农业 | 3,335 |
print Belfer Center Home > Publications > Books and Book Chapters > Books > The New Harvest: Agricultural Innovation in Africa
Email Print The New Harvest: Agricultural Innovation in Africa
Book, Oxford University Press
Author: Calestous Juma, Professor of the Practice of International Development; Director, Science, Technology, and Globalization Project; Principal Investigator, Agricultural Innovation in Africa
Ordering Information for this publication
Belfer Center Programs or Projects: Agricultural Innovation in Africa; Science, Technology, and Globalization; Science, Technology, and Public Policy
OVERVIEWAfrican agriculture is currently at a crossroads, at which persistent food shortages are compounded by threats from climate change. But, as this book argues, Africa faces three major opportunities that can transform its agriculture into a force for economic growth: advances in science and technology; the creation of regional markets; and the emergence of a new crop of entrepreneurial leaders dedicated to the continent's economic improvement. Filled with case studies from within Africa and success stories from developing nations around the world, The New Harvest outlines the policies and institutional changes necessary to promote agricultural innovation across the African continent. Incorporating research from academia, government, civil society, and private industry, the book suggests multiple ways that individual African countries can work together at the regional level to develop local knowledge and resources, harness technological innovation, encourage entrepreneurship, increase agricultural output, create markets, and improve infrastructure.The New Harvest is a product of the Agricultural Innovation in Africa Project, funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
Integrates research and policy ideas from an international panel of some of the most influential thinkers on agricultural development
Presents enactable policy ideas for advancing agriculture throughout Africa, at the national and regional levels
Includes a wealth of case study material from Green Revolution and educational initiatives in India, China, and throughout Latin America
Download the entire book here: http://belfercenter.org/files/TheNewHarvest-rev.pdf
Individual�chapters are available for download below.
ChaptersIntroductionThe Growing EconomyAdvances in Science, Technology, and EngineeringAgricultural Innovation SystemsEnabling InfrastructureHuman CapacityEntrepreneurshipGoverning InnovationConclusions and the Way Ahead
Praise for The New Harvest
"Calestous Juma draws on a rich harvest of research to write a convincing analysis of the importance of innovation and entrepreneurship in the agricultural sectors of Africa. Hopefully, it will be widely read by scholars and policy analysts across Africa as well as outside. It is a great book."�Elinor Ostrom, Professor of Political Science, Indiana University, and 2009 Nobel Laureate in Economic Sciences
"Calestous Juma has once again produced a book that will be an important reference for scholars, researchers and practitioners in their search for ways to break the persistent conundrum that is Africa's failure to properly exploit its huge agricultural potential. The book reveals his exceptional ability to express ideas that will be relevant to the emerging trends in Africa's agricultural and political economy."�Monty Jones, Executive Director, Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa, and 2004 World Food Prize Laureate
"This book presents a timely analysis of the importance of infrastructure in improving Africa's agriculture. Leaders at national and state levels will benefit immensely from its evidence-based recommendations."�Goodluck Jonathan, President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria
"This book is a forceful reminder of the important role that African women play in agriculture on the continent.is critical that they are provided with equal educational opportunity as a starting pointbuilding a new economic future for the continent."�Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, President of the Republic of Liberia
"New technologies, especially biotechnology, provide African countries with additional tools for improving the welfare of farmers. I commend this book for the emphasis it places on the critical role that technological innovation plays in agriculture. The study is a timely handbook for those seeking new ways of harnessing new technologies for development, including poor farmers, many of whom are women."�Blaise Compaore, President of Burkina Faso
"The New Harvest the importance of global learning in Africa's agricultural development. It offers new ideas for international cooperation on sustainable agriculture in the tropics. It will pave the way for improved collaboration between Africa and South America."�Laura Chincilla, President of Costa Rica
Read "Africa Can Feed Itself in a Generation"�A policy brief based on The New Harvest�online: http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/publication/20685
It has come to my attention that some sections of The New Harvest contain inadvertent errors of attribution. I take full responsibility for the errors and sincerely apologize to the original authors as well as my readers. I am contacting the original sources of the relevant information. I am also revising the book to rectify the errors. � Calestous Juma
Front Matter (91K PDF)Acknowledgments (29K PDF)Regional Economic Communities (RECS) (33K PDF)Decisions of the 2010 COMESA Summit on Science and Technology for Development (57K PDF)Footnotes (107K PDF)Index (62K PDF)Complete Text of The New Harvest: Agricultural Innovation in Africa (747K PDF)
For more information about this publication please contact the STG Coordinator.
For Academic Citation:Juma, Calestous. The New Harvest: Agricultural Innovation in Africa. New York: Oxford University Press, January 2011. Document Length: 296 pp. MOST VIEWED PUBLICATIONS Why the United States Should Spread Democracy
"Breaking Economic Barriers in East Africa"By Calestous Juma
"Africa: From Crisis to Opportunity Through Clean Technology"By Calestous Juma and Cindy Shiner
"Climate Change a Stumbling Block to Africa's Economies"By Calestous Juma
"Get Biotechnology on the Agenda for Africa"By Calestous Juma
Starved for Science: How Biotechnology is Being Kept Out of AfricaBy Robert Paarlberg | 农业 | 6,343 |
Your article on Monsanto [“Monsanto’s Harvest of Fear,” by Donald L. Barlett and James B. Steele, May] was quite interesting but gave no idea of the hold this tentacular company has on global food production, and the havoc it has wreaked on small farmers in other parts of the world. On a recent trip to France, I had the opportunity to watch a thoroughly researched Franco-German documentary (Le Monde selon Monsanto) on the company. It showed that in one province of India alone 680 farmers—yes, you read correctly, 680—had committed suicide because of Monsanto’s stranglehold on local agriculture. Wake up, world! —JACQUELINE DE SARIGNY, Montreal, QuebecI AM ALWAYS AMAZED when a reputable magazine allows an article to be printed that has so few actual facts. “Monsanto’s Harvest of Fear” is built on insinuations and dubious phrases, such as “it’s a safe bet,” and sensationalistic phrases, like “when the stranger walked in and issued his threat.”Read the agreement. No grower is forced to sign it. There are several other seed companies that would be glad to have the grower’s business, but, as Barlett and Steele write it, Monsanto is the only game in town, so you have to play by their rules. Not true, as you would know if you had bothered to check—but that would make the article much less scary. —E. S. LOCKHART, Las Vegas, Nevada“MONSANTO’S HARVEST OF FEAR” focused a great deal on our past as a chemical company in the 1940s through the 1970s. We don’t deny this past; we accept responsibility for our activities during this period, and we’re working diligently to clean up numerous sites from our chemical-company past.Monsanto is not at war with farmers. In the U.S., we partner with more than 250,000 farmers a year who buy our seed. The vast majority honor their agreements concerning patented seed. In 10 years we’ve taken legal action against slightly more than 100 customers. Only 12 have elected to go to trial. Ten were found in violation of our patent rights, and two others settled in the midst of trials. We donate the proceeds of these settlements to charities that support youth and agriculture programs. —JERRY P. GLOVER, vice president, external affairs, Monsanto Company, St. Louis, MissouriBARLETT AND STEELE RESPOND: While it is true that only a small number of cases actually go to trial, that does not begin to tell the full story of Monsanto’s aggressiveness toward farmers. More significant than the number of lawsuits the company has filed is the number of investigations it has launched against farmers, which we estimate runs into the thousands. Most farmers settle with the company before the matter reaches court because they do not have the resources to do battle with Monsanto.DISTURBING AS BARLETT AND STEELE’S piece is, I’d like to point out the David-and-Goliath story of Percy Schmeiser, a farmer from tiny Bruno, Saskatchewan, Canada, who stood up to the bullies at Monsanto and won. After Schmeiser’s canola fields were contaminated by Monsanto’s Round-Up Ready Canola, the company goons came a-knockin’ and demanded Schmeiser pay a “technology fee” of $15 per acre. Schmeiser didn’t agree and, after a long battle, neither did the Supreme Court of Canada. What’s more, in the out-of-court settlement finalized on March 19, 2008, Monsanto agreed to pay all of the cleanup costs of the Round-Up Ready that had contaminated Schmeiser’s fields. —MARK S. TAYLOR, Regina, SaskatchewanAS I SAT READING THE ARTICLE about Monsanto, I found myself shocked and appalled that any corporation in America, in this day and age, could get away with such incredibly vicious, anti-customer, and monopolistic behavior. How can the board and employees support this blueprint for corporate bullying? And why isn’t our government involved in stopping them? Although I typically want the government to stay out of the affairs of free enterprise, this seems like one area where it should be offering some protection. —VALORIE KELLER, San Carlos, CaliforniaEveryday Eco-manMATT TYRNAUER has sustainability “prophet” William McDonough asking, “Why can’t a building be as eco-friendly as a tree?” [“Industrial Revolution, Take Two,” May.]Well, there is such a building, and it’s called a “bark house.” (There are also bark shopping centers, bark banks, bark motels, and at least one bark restaurant.) More than a century ago, the same architect who designed the Lincoln Memorial, Henry Bacon, began building resort homes of unadulterated chestnut bark in western North Carolina. Those houses still stand, unpainted and unstained but structurally intact and beautiful; alas, chestnut bark was lost forever after a 20th-century blight.Today, tree bark is roaring back to life as the most sustainable forest product yet, this time from poplar trees. Salvaged by hand during commercial timber operations, where it otherwise would be turned into garden mulch or industrial fuel or left to rot, the bark is kiln-dried without chemical additives and cut into exterior cladding.I live in a new all-bark house in Asheville. Not only will I never have to paint or stain it—and thus add to the energy waste stream—but my children, grandchildren, and probably great-grandchildren will also be spared that expensive and environmentally damaging chore. Talk about “cradle to cradle.” —NAN CHASE, co-author, Bark House Style: Sustainable Designs from Nature, Asheville, North CarolinaWILLIAM McDONOUGH’S Cradle to Cradle program is indeed provocative, promising, and inspiring. But it’s worth pointing out that there already is an automobile (which is defined as a self-mover) that is 100 percent recyclable over a 5- to 25-year period, with waste equal to food. It’s called a horse. Why not marry horses to modern lightweight buggies with pneumatic tires, and collect horse manure for fertilizer? Horses already know how to turn high-cellulose plants into fuel. Sure, this system would slow travel down a bit, but it probably wouldn’t be much slower than car-clogged traffic arteries. And it would put us city dwellers back in touch with nature and animals. —DAVID MORRIS, Peterborough, OntarioI WAS HANGING ON William McDonough’s every brilliant phrase. He’s a genuine visionary, who is transforming architecture and design into an all-encompassing plan for the future. But he should have mentioned—indeed, screamed—that unless we drastically reverse human numbers on Earth, all visions of a green planet are fruitless. We might as well all buy new Hummers and go out with a bang. No technology can sustain 6.6 billion people in even modest lifestyles. Population growth is the dark shadow over all bright visions. —PAUL LACQUES, Los Angeles, CaliforniaThe Dark Side of SolarIT IS UNNERVING TO READ an ostensibly informed environmental leader such as Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (“The Next President’s First Task: A Manifesto,” May) advocate the decimation of an endangered and fragile eco-system in the quest to feed our country’s drunken appetite for energy, renewable or otherwise.I refer to the Mojave Desert and Kennedy’s assertion “As for solar, according to a study in Scientific American, photovoltaic and solar-thermal installations across just 19 percent of the most barren desert land in the Southwest could supply nearly all of our nation’s electricity needs without any rooftop installation.” The study referenced, “A Solar Grand Plan” (January 2008), was authored by three engineers with business interests in the solar and photovoltaic industries. The “barren” land referred to includes two national parks and a national preserve that are home to a number of endangered species (both vegetation and wildlife).Kennedy is advocating that we plant huge fields of mirrors on tens of thousands of acres of pristine desert, which would require tens of thousands of additional acres for transmission towers and lines to the East Coast. This idea is as repulsive to those of us who are committed to defending the Mojave as locating a wind farm in the middle of Cape Cod Sound was to Kennedy, a renewable-energy project he ferociously and successfully fought off.Whether it is Kennedy or Bonnie Raitt and Thom Hartmann on Air America, progressive environmental thinkers have got to change their mind-set about sacrificing this precious and besieged eco-system. Just because it is desert doesn’t mean it isn’t teeming with life and an essential link in the chain. Perhaps we need to address our problems at their root: overpopulation and the excessive use of limited resources by Americans. —NICOLE PANTER, Twentynine Palms, CaliforniaThe Battle for the Polar BearLOUD CHEERS FOR VANITY FAIR and its coverage of the plights facing polar bears (“The Edge of Extinction,” by Michael Shnayerson, May). The scientific connection between global warming and its ecological impact on polar bears is now beyond dispute and validates what the rest of us already knew: our planet is in peril.Lost in the debate, however, is a lesser-known but significant threat to polar bears posed by trophy hunting. Since 1994, an amendment in the Marine Mammal Protection Act created a special loophole allowing the importation by Americans of trophy-hunted polar-bear heads and hides from Canada. With this language still in place, even a “threatened” Endangered Species Act classification could allow the horrific practice to continue. Additionally, a recent University of Alberta study found that polar-bear populations may be pushed to the brink of collapse if trophy hunters continue to target males as currently directed by the Canadian wildlife-management authorities. Despite these facts, some Washington officials insist the evidence is inconclusive and that trophy hunting is sustainable. Nothing less than an “endangered” listing or direct elimination of this loophole is acceptable. Saving the polar bear requires collaboration and shared commitment, and we have an obligation to take action. The fact is polar-bear trophy hunting will end soon; the only question is whether it will be now, while there’s still time to save the species, or in a few years, when all the bears are gone forever. —FRED O’REGAN, C.E.O., International Fund for Animal Welfare, New York, New YorkMadonna WorldI ADMIRE VANITY FAIR’S annual contribution to the green movement. So imagine my surprise when I read that the globe that Madonna is supporting on the cover of this year’s Green Issue [May] is made from polystyrene. Polystyrene! A material made from petroleum. A material that many U.S. and international cities are banning. A material that is difficult to recycle, that is not biodegradable or compostable but that goes straight to landfills to continue polluting for thousands of years. The irony is that if we continue in our current packaging-consumption habits and produce items made from polystyrene there will likely be no globe—model or otherwise. —SHANNON BOASE, founder, Earthcycle Packaging Ltd., Vancouver, British ColumbiaI FIND IT INFURIATING that you would use Madonna’s image on the cover to sell your magazine and then publish an article [“Madonnarama,” by Rich Cohen] filled with thinly veiled insults and backhanded compliments. I think an artist who has sold more albums than the Beatles, was just inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, and continues to inspire millions of fans deserves to be interviewed by someone on her same “frequency,” not a sexist pig who dismisses her career as nothing but a series of images, yet admits dating girls in high school simply because they looked like her. Surely, an entertainer who has helped sell millions of copies of your magazine merits better treatment. —AARON PENNINGTON, Denver, ColoradoI BELIEVE PUTTING Madonna on the cover of the Green Issue was a poor choice. If this issue is supposed to advocate sacrifices, such as cutting down on consumption, why would you put the Material Girl front and center? —JENNIFER DEMUTH, Chicago, IllinoisI AM BAFFLED by some of the quotes attributed to Madonna in “Madonnarama,” most notably the final one: “If your joy is derived from what society thinks of you, you’re always going to be disappointed.” Come again?The vast majority of her life’s work has centered around her image and her chameleon-like ability to re-invent herself, which is so often referred to in the press. I believe it’s fair to say that developing and presenting one’s image, in the celebrity world or in high school, is precisely meant to garner a reaction from society.If by chance Madonna is implying that she doesn’t care what society thinks of her, then I have some questions. Can we assume that there was no airbrushing, no special filtering or lighting used for her cover shot? Oh, and is that her naturally blond hair as she approaches her 50th? (Wasn’t she a brunette in the 80s?)Madonna is obviously a very smart businesswoman and has amassed a fortune on her hard work and self-promotion. Please just give us a break and leave the hypocrisy at the door. —CLARINE BROWN, Bradenton, FloridaAs Bright as DayI THOROUGHLY ENJOYED your article on Doris Day [“Doris Day’s Vanishing Act,” by David Kaufman, May]. I have been a fan of Day’s since I first saw her in I’ll See You in My Dreams, when I was only 11. I was, and still am, totally entranced by her vocals. I firmly believe she is one of America’s top female vocalists of all time. And it’s high time that she receive the credit she richly deserves for her music. They say great art is timeless. Her smash recording “Secret Love,” from her film Annie Get Your Gun, is as fresh today as it was back in 1953. With all the personal tragedy she has endured, it is only fitting that she loves animals. I very much wish she would accept the Presidential Medal of Freedom award. She is so deserving of this honor. —ROBERT K. BLAIR, Austin, TexasAS A LONGTIME FRIEND of Terry Melcher’s and an acquaintance of his mother, Doris Day, I found little new information in “Doris Day’s Vanishing Act,” except the bitter tone taken when David Kaufman mentions Terry. Contrary to Kaufman’s representation of him as a drunk who lived off his mother, Terry was a very successful music and television producer from the 1960s until the 1980s. He then devoted time to attending to his mother and her needs and to the renovation and development of the Cypress Inn in Carmel, California. It was only through his support and love that Doris was not left penniless by greedy managers, like many other stars were. It is interesting that Kaufman waited until Terry’s death to besmirch his reputation and invade his mother’s privacy, which she so values. —ROSEMARY CATALANA, Baltimore, MarylandThe Path to WaterboardingIN “THE GREEN LIGHT” [May], Philippe Sands presents a fractured and false account of what I and my Bush-administration colleagues said, wrote, and did about the Geneva Conventions and related matters. His article contains more misquotations and errors than can be addressed in this letter—and his essential point is wrong: it is not true that the Pentagon’s leadership was hostile to the Geneva Conventions.In official meetings, I proposed that the al-Qaeda and Taliban detainees get any and all the protections to which they were entitled under Geneva, for the Conventions were U.S. law, and compliance is not optional. A February 4, 2002, memo that I wrote for Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld—together with General Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff—contained strongly worded statements in support of the Conventions, including “U.S. armed forces are trained to treat captured enemy forces according to the Convention. This training is an essential element of U.S. military culture. It is morally important, crucial to U.S. morale. It is also practically important, for it makes U.S. forces the gold standard in the world, facilitating our winning cooperation from other countries.” General Myers and I urged that the U.S. government give all detainees “the treatment they are (or would be) entitled to under the Convention,” whether or not the president determined that the Conventions applied to our conflict with the detainees’ state or organization. Consistent with our advice, the president announced that all detainees at Guantánamo—al-Qaeda and Taliban alike—would be treated “humanely and consistent with the principles of the Geneva Convention.” The administration’s various legal advisers then developed the guidelines for “humane treatment.”On the issue of U.S. “moral authority,” Sands misquotes me. The actual point was: some commentators who don’t even bother to learn what Geneva says accuse the United States of immorality because we don’t give P.O.W. status to the detainees at Guantánamo. But knowledgeable lawyers—like Sands—know that Geneva withholds P.O.W. status from detainees who have intentionally endangered civilians by failing to wear uniforms and failing to comply with the laws of war. Knowledgeable people should reject the accusation that the United States is immoral when it withholds P.O.W. status from people who are not entitled to it under Geneva.I elaborate on this issue in my recently published memoir, War and Decision. I encourage your readers to read that discussion. —DOUGLAS J. FEITH, former undersecretary of defense for policy, Bethesda, MarylandPHILIPPE SANDS RESPONDS: Mr. Feith misses the point. The key issue is not whether Detainee 063, or any other Guantánamo detainee, was entitled to P.O.W. status, but whether he had rights under Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions. When I noted that the effect of his approach was to remove all constraints on interrogation under Geneva, Feith replied, “That was the point.” As for Feith’s allegation of being misquoted, he may not recall that our conversation was recorded. The quotations are accurate.HASN’T THE U.S. learned by now that not only is torture illegal and a violation of international law and American principles but it does not elicit reliable information any better than non-torturous techniques? That Bush secretly approved the use of torture but publicly denied he did shows what a deceptive, dishonest, immoral, and barbaric type of president he really is. It is disgusting that he considers himself a moral Christian. —KENNETH L. ZIMMERMAN, Huntington Beach, CaliforniaMore from the V.F. Mailbag“A truly green issue wouldn’t have been printed at all,” notes Harris Davis, of New York City. “Next time, just put it on your Web site.” Well, we tried that—pushed and squeezed and pounded—and not only wouldn’t it go inside the screen, but those blow-in subscription cards kept jamming the keyboard. Do you know of a more direct method?From green to green with envy: “I just finished reading Rich Cohen’s piece on Madonna and, wow, what a dreadful and disappointing read!” enthuses Scott Karas, of Burbank, California. “Madonna is the most fascinating, intelligent, outspoken and enduring superstar on the planet. Next time, please give this dream assignment to a gay man.”Kyle Glasser, of Shenzhen, China, finds Michael Wolff guilty of “overuse of the comma.” Dyana Rodriguez writes from Hereford, England, to say that “Monsanto’s Harvest of Fear” made her “incandescent with rage,” and that Donald L. Barlett and James B. Steele’s investigation was “excellent and meticulously researched.” (And, presumably, not awash in commas.) And Tim Corsini wonders, in London, “What’s up with the old-women movie stars and their mad obsessions with dogs?? Shirley MacLaine, Joan Fontaine, Doris Day? I’m a dog-lover, but this is weird.”We don’t have time for such questions. We have to talk about Graydon Carter’s hair, and we have to keep this short for summer. The score was 14–11 in favor of the status quo when last we checked, in May.“Please leave it be!” (Carol Ann Tack, Merrick, New York); “Bozo” (Peg Wood, Corning, New York); “Chéri, you’re cute enough but … the nest has got to go!” (Victoria Vogel, Paris); “I just love him and the hair” (Vila R. Gulley, Detroit); and, finally, “I will give you a shiny dime if you cut your hair. I will give you a shiny quarter if you ever stop talking about it” (Wendy Moore, Arlington, Massachusetts).But Graydon isn’t talking about it at all; the Mailbag is. So we’ll take that quarter, thank you very much. It’ll double our salary. (P.S. The score stands at 18–13).ShareEmailFacebookTwitterAround the WebPowered by ZergnetRELATEDSEEKAfter The Gold RushBY MARIE BRENNERSEEKNEWSLETTER SIGN UPsubscribeFollow VFVanity Fair Worldwide:United KingdomItalyMexicoSpainFranceVisit our sister sitesCondé Nast StoreReprint/PermissionsVF Media KitPromotionsContact VFCustomer ServiceAdvertisingInside The IssueCareersDigital EditionSitemapCondé Nast© Condé Nast.Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement (effective January 2, 2014) and Privacy Policy (effective January 2, 2014).Your CA Privacy Rights.The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of Condé Nast.Ad Choices | 农业 | 20,982 |
Tests Confirm Second Mad Cow Case in U.S.
Source: FoodProcessing.com
Tests have confirmed mad cow disease in a U.S. cow previously cleared of having the brain wasting illness, the Agriculture Department said today. It is the second case of mad cow disease in the United States.An internationally recognized laboratory in Weybridge, England, confirmed the case of mad cow disease after U.S. tests produced conflicting results, Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns said.To read the remainder of this Associated Press report (as published in the Washington Post), click here.USDA's official release follows:Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns today announced that the U.S. Department of Agriculture has received final test results from The Veterinary Laboratories Agency in Weybridge, England, confirming that a sample from an animal that was blocked from the food supply in November 2004 has tested positive for bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE). Johanns also directed USDA scientists to work with international experts to thoughtfully develop a new protocol that includes performing dual confirmatory tests in the event of another "inconclusive" BSE screening test.
"We are currently testing nearly 1,000 animals per day as part of our BSE enhanced surveillance program, more than 388,000 total tests, and this is the first confirmed case resulting from our surveillance," Johanns said. "I am encouraged that our interlocking safeguards are working exactly as intended. This animal was blocked from entering the food supply because of the firewalls we have in place. Americans have every reason to continue to be confident in the safety of our beef."
Effective immediately, if another BSE rapid screening test results in inconclusive findings, USDA will run both an IHC and Western blot confirmatory test. If results from either confirmatory test are positive, the sample will be considered positive for BSE.
"I want to make sure we continue to give consumers every reason to be confident in the health of our cattle herd," Johanns said. "By adding the second confirmatory test, we boost that confidence and bring our testing in line with the evolving worldwide trend to use both IHC and Western blot together as confirmatory tests for BSE."
USDA has initiated an epidemiological investigation to determine the animal's herd of origin. That investigation is not yet complete. The animal was born before the United States instituted a ruminant-to-ruminant feed ban in August 1997, which prevents the use of most mammalian protein in cattle feed. According to internationally accepted research, feed containing meat-and-bone meal is the primary way BSE is transferred to the cattle population.
The animal was selected for testing because, as a non-ambulatory animal, it was considered to be at higher risk for BSE. An initial screening test on the animal in November 2004 was inconclusive, triggering USDA to conduct the internationally accepted confirmatory IHC tests. Those test results were negative. Earlier this month, USDA's Office of the Inspector General recommended further testing of the seven-month-old sample using another internationally recognized confirmatory test, the Western blot. Unlike the IHC, the Western blot was reactive, prompting USDA to send samples from the animal to the Weybridge laboratory for further analysis.
The laboratory in Weybridge, England, is recognized by the World Animal Health Organization, or OIE, as a world reference laboratory for BSE. Weybridge officials this week conducted a combination of rapid, IHC and Western blot testing on tissue samples from the animal in question. At the same time these diagnostic tests were being run by Weybridge, USDA conducted its own additional tests.
As a non-ambulatory, or "downer" animal, the cow was prohibited from entering the human food supply, under an interim final rule in effect since January 2004. Research has shown that BSE is most likely to be found in older non-ambulatory cattle, animals showing signs of central nervous system disorders, injured or emaciated animals, and cattle that have died for unexplained reasons. USDA's testing program targets these groups of animals for testing.
The system of human health protections includes the USDA ban on specified risk materials, or SRM's, from the food supply. SRM's are most likely to contain the BSE agent if it is present in an animal. Additional measures, such as a longstanding ban on importing cattle and beef products from high-risk countries, a ruminant-to-ruminant feed ban, U.S. slaughter practices, and aggressive surveillance provide a series of interlocking safeguards to protect U.S. consumers and animal health.
USDA remains committed to protecting both U.S. consumers and U.S. livestock from BSE, and to that end continues efforts to detect the disease through its enhanced BSE surveillance program. Once sufficient data from the surveillance program has been accumulated, USDA will consult with outside experts to analyze it and determine whether any changes to existing risk management measures are necessary.
This confirmed case of BSE in no way impacts the safety of our nation's food supply. As the epidemiological investigation progresses, USDA will continue to communicate findings in a timely and transparent manner. Show More Content | 农业 | 5,307 |
Top farm family grateful for opportunity
Crystal Ledford /
Troy Milford inspects a feeder in one of the family’s chicken houses, which raise broilers for Pilgrim’s, a supplier of Chick-fil-A, in north Forsyth.
Three years ago, Troy Milford made the decision to leave his day job as a director of marketing and sales for an electrical engineering firm.
Rather than stepping into another position with the typical 8-to-5 routine, Milford’s decision led him to one that every day involves getting his hands dirty, rising before the sun and often not finishing until after it has set.
While that may not sound appealing to some, for Milford it was “coming home.”
“I’m living the dream that I had since I was a little boy,” he recalled Monday at his family’s Waldrip Road farm. “My goal had always been to work on the family farm full time and I thank the Lord for being able to do that.”
For him, farming is a tradition that began with his grandfather, Jack Milford, and is continuing with his 21-year-old son, Matt.
“My grandpa started farming here in the early 1900s, so it’s been a part of our family for a long time,” he said.
With the help of his father, Dempsey, the three generations together tend the family’s 40 acres in northeastern Forsyth.
“There’s just nothing in the world like getting to work out here every day side by side with my son and my dad,” Troy Milford said.
That passion led to the Milford family — which also includes his mother Evelyn, wife Rita and daughter Sarah — being named the 2013 Farm Family of the Year for Forsyth County by the Upper Chattahoochee River Soil & Water Conservation District.
The district includes Forsyth, Dawson, Habersham, Lumpkin and White counties. Every year, a family is named tops in their respective county and all are honored during the district’s annual banquet.
This year, that event will be Nov. 14 at the Lanier Technical College Forsyth Conference Center.
Each farm family selected for the honor uses outstanding techniques that preserve natural resources.
The Milfords’ operation consists of six chicken houses, in which they raise broilers for Pilgrim’s. Troy Milford said many of the chickens end up being sold to Chick-fil-A restaurants.
Each year, the family raises about seven flocks, each with 140,000 chickens, for Pilgrim’s Canton location.
In addition, they have about 80 head of cattle on their property. They sell several calves each year to other farmers and beef retailers.
As for the family’s conservation practices, the Milfords installed a stackhouse in 2004. The building is used to properly store poultry litter on a temporary basis until it can be spread on pastures as fertilizer.
Earlier this year, a larger stackhouse was added to handle extra litter from two additional chicken houses the family built.
A comprehensive nutrient management plan is also used to oversee litter applications on pastures. And the family uses rotational grazing of cattle, heavy-use areas and overseed pastures with wheat and winter rye.
“Our heavy-use feeding area down in the pasture is a 40-by-40 concrete pad. So when it’s real nasty, the cows are actually on the concrete so it doesn’t erode the ground nearly as bad,” Troy Milford added. “And all around our barns, we’ve got mats and gravel, so they don’t cut ruts in the ground bad.
Matt, who graduated from North Forsyth High School in 2010, has embraced the family business.
“You can’t beat it,” he said. “There’s nothing better. I guess if you didn’t grow up in it, you probably wouldn’t like it as much. But when I was a little I was up here every day … so I just grew up in it.”
As did his dad, who said he has vivid memories of helping his grandfather care for his chickens.
“It was a lot different then than it is now,” Troy Milford said. “My papa had to stoke fires to keep [the chicks] warm. Today we just turn on the gas.”
Working together, the family overcame an obstacle earlier this year when Troy Milford underwent a kidney transplant after waiting a couple of years for a donor.
He had spent more than three years on dialysis while battling polycystic kidney disease. His match to a donor came as the family was beginning construction on its new chicken houses and stackhouse.
“My dad and son really stepped up and kept everything going well on the farm while I was out of commission,” Troy Milford said.
Also an ordained Baptist minister, he noted that the family’s faith helped greatly during his battle with kidney disease. “The only thing I can say is the Lord’s blessed us. He’s done it all,” he said.
As for his former job, does he ever miss it? He doesn’t seem to.
“Look out there,” he said while overlooking some of the family’s rolling hills. “You can’t beat our office. You get to see God’s creation every day.” | 农业 | 4,758 |
The Generation That Will Turn Soil Into Gold
Around 20 years ago, the French university system was revolutionized with the aim of rejuvenating the aging teaching body, which had been causing problems not just related to employment, but also to a whole culture and vision of teaching. In a few years the system renewed itself, benefiting everyone. Now, European agriculture is in a similar situation: few operators, with a high average age, a culture tied to past decades and scant prospects for the future. Now, add to this the increasingly depressing statistics on youth unemployment. It would seem like a classic case of putting two and two together: agriculture needs young people and young people need work. It seems logical that the first concern of policies should be to assist young people (but also those in their 40s and 50s who have been stagnating without a job for years or who have recently lost a position previously considered “safe”) get into agriculture. Attempts are being made by some. For example, two graduates from the University of Gastronomic Sciences in Pollenzo. One, Nicola del Vecchio, returned to Molise to start a business on his family’s land, and the other, Carlo Fiorani, went back to Lombardy to restart an abandoned farm based on criteria of sustainability. I don’t know when they will start to break even, but I know that seeing them sell their products (bread, vegetables, fruit, cheeses and cured meats) or offer them for tasting and hearing the pride, mixed with amazement, in their voices when they say “I made this” gives me a sense of a solid future being built with tangible, extraordinary efforts, as well as courage and audacious dreams, in this era in which dreaming can be seen as an activity for losers.
Among the young people, some start from zero: no farming family behind them, no land, no capital. Sometimes even no skills, but plenty of curiosity, passion, faith, humility and gratitude towards anyone who can help out, teach, join in a network. Perhaps this is the ace up the sleeve of the younger generation: they network together, ask for training and information, use neighbors or social networks, and in the end they manage to work out why they shouldn’t have pruned when they did or why they shouldn’t work the bread in that way. And most of all they know many different things and decide to dedicate themselves to agriculture, bringing what they know and receiving whatever anyone wants to teach them. The new economy is strengthened when these young farmers know how to work throughout the whole production chain. In order to respond to their needs, in the coming months the University of Gastronomic Sciences in Pollenzo will be starting apprenticeship courses for cured meat producers, microbrewers, bread bakers and cheese agers. Because it is by taking food as a starting point that we can change the world, improving the environment, our health and the quality of life for everyone. Carlo Petrini
From La Repubblica, January 18, 2013 | | 农业 | 3,001 |
Food safety takes center stage at Florida tomato meeting by Chip Carter | September 16, 2010 NAPLES, FL — The world of food safety moves fast. In fact, it moves so fast that the self-written, just-imposed, state-regulated guidelines the Florida tomato industry adopted earlier this year are already being tweaked, experts told attendees on opening day of the 2010 Florida Tomato Committee conference held Sept. 7-12 at the Ritz-Carlton Naples, here. "This is a living, moving document that will change as science gets better," said Reggie Brown, manager of the Florida Tomato Committee and executive vice president of the Florida Tomato Exchange. “We developed the first edition almost in self-defense [because] every company that was buying produce wanted a food-safety audit and every audit was different. We wanted to develop a practically applicable program that satisfied the U.S. Food & Drug Administration, nationally and internationally.” The Florida tomato industry's move toward self-imposed governmental regulation is generally thought to have been a response to the 2008 Salmonella scare that scarred the industry. When hundreds of people were sickened that year, the FDA first pointed a finger at Florida tomatoes. And although the source was later revealed to be Jalapeño peppers from Mexico, the damage to the Florida industry was done. In actuality, the Florida tomato industry started paying close attention to food safety years ago. A four-hour food-safety workshop — which counted toward accreditation now required by the state of Florida for those doing business in the industry — consumed the opening day of this year’s tomato conference and has done so each year since 2004, pre-dating the 2008 outbreak. “Five years of learning — it’s amazing,” said Millie Ferrer-Chancy, dean of extension services at the University of Florida’s Institute for Food & Agricultural Sciences. “It began with Reggie Brown’s offer to provide space for an afternoon of training on different topics and research findings, and because of his foresight, this has been going on a long time. Food safety is very important and has been so critical to the industry — it’s very important to continue these food-safety workshops.” IFAS and the exchange developed guidelines for tomato GAPs and BMPs, with Martha Roberts, special assistant to the director of the IFAS Florida Experiment Station in Lake Alfred, at the helm. “It was much better for the industry to be proactive,” Ms. Roberts said. Now, other states — and the FDA itself — are looking to the Florida tomato industry’s self-written guidelines, which were adopted virtually intact by the state legislature and put into law earlier this year, for guidance on developing standards applicable to other produce industry segments. The federal government is promising that all produce consumed in the United States will eventually be held to similar standards. “Any program has to be based on the best science possible, whether you’re a producer with one or two acres or 1,000 acres of tomatoes,” Ms. Roberts said.
Added Mr. Brown, “There is no producer in this country or anywhere in the world that has the right to produce unsafe food. It endangers each and every one of you. The fiasco of 2008 cost us all a bunch of money. By focusing on food safety now, we avoid those kinds of problems going forward.” The goal now is to “harmonize” regulations coming from Capitol Hill with those Florida farmers are already following. Said Mr. Brown, “We have worked across the spectrum in an effort to bring about some consistency in these documents and hopefully harmonize these efforts to where there is ultimately one single tomato audit, and to gain credibility for those single audits that would avoid duplication.” The next hurdle for the industry is to avoid a game of “one-upmanship” Ms. Roberts said, with “everybody changing the protocol to get an edge on competitors and moving to a harmonized food-safety audit. And just one. If the state has audited you, you shouldn’t have to have 10 or 12 other audits from other people — that should take care of you.” The guidelines break down potential sources of food contamination into four categories: soil, water, farm laborers, and domesticated and wild animals. The original version of the regulations had 67 criteria in multiple categories. “It’s designed to prevent an auditor from making subjective judgments about you and how you operate,” Mr. Brown said. “If you’ve somehow missed doing something correctly, how do you fix it? Are you doing it right? If not, what are you doing wrong? “You all have been audited under the state TGAP program — that was the under-girding of what we started with to create these documents. There’s no new twist on it. It’s structured just slightly differently in a more straightforward, usable format. But it’s not different and should not cause any great amount of angst or consternation. It’s that simple. The biggest problem we’ve seen is that horrible thing called paperwork. None of us has been able to avoid that; if you say you did it, you have to record that you did it so we know you did it. Ninety-plus percent of all these requirements good [grower-
shipper] operations have been doing for decades. We just need to train ourselves to record our performance in those areas and enhance those areas we may be missing to ensure we don’t have a replay of 2008.” But those standards are already changing. Even as the new guidelines are going up on-line for the first time (posted at government and industry web sites, such as Unitedfresh.org), tweaks are being made and there will be minor changes to the just-published guidelines coming within the next couple of weeks. Up next is a an effort to secure a guarantee from distributors that they will accept a stamp of approval from the Florida Department of Agriculture & Consumer Services as a final audit that supersedes third-party audits. “It will be a challenge to get that agreement, but we have had discussions with a number of major brands and they appear willing to step forward and say if the audit is done by a credible auditing group — like the state government — they will accept that audit.” Videos | 农业 | 6,199 |
North Platte Bulletin - Plans set to cut back on irrigation
News - State/Regional News
Plans set to cut back on irrigation
Due to the extreme drought, irrigation will be cut back next summer on central Nebraska farms to help save water in Lake McConaughy. You've got afacebook Request!CLICK HERE!The lake is about half full and less water is expected to run into the lake from upstream this fall and next summer, Civil Engineer Cory Steinke said Monday. The board of the Central Nebraska Public Power and Irrigation District voted Monday to allocate 10 inches of water to farms instead of the normal 18 inches during the three-month-long irrigation season. Steinke said Lake McConaughy ended the irrigation season at 53 percent of capacity, at elevation 3,232.3 feet above sea level. Nearly 750,000 acre-feet entered the lake in the last �water season,� compared with a historical average of 929,000 acre-feet. Steinke projects about 546,000 acre-feet next year. The board authorized only minimum releases during the off-season and plans to use water already in the supply canals to finish the 2013 irrigation season, as well as ending all irrigation deliveries on Sept. 2. Also, no additional water will be delivered to any water users, including smaller canals that have supplemental storage contracts with Central.Coming one year after record inflows to Lake McConaughy, the hot, dry summer brought heavy demand from irrigators, Irrigation Division Manager Dave Ford said.Ford said the 10.13 inches of rain that fell in April-September was the least amount since 1957, when records began to be kept.�The drawdown at Lake McConaughy this summer could have been worse, but I think it demonstrates how Central�s customers have improved their efficiency and done a good job conserving water,� Steinke said. �We�ve also seen a continuing increase in the number of pivots on the system, which also reduces the need for diversions (irrigation water).�Steinke said irrigation has been reduced by about 50,000 acre-feet a season, while still covering approximately the same number of acres, since before 2002-09, when five years of drought forced farms to develop ways to grow crops with less irrigation water.Central will send letters containing details for next year�s irrigation schedule to irrigation customers. In a related matter, the board approved revisions to its delivery location transfer policy that was in effect during 2005-09. The policy allows for transfers of water deliveries to and from irrigated tracts during periods of allocations to provide additional flexibility for customers to meet their crops� irrigation needs. Customers can review the policy on Central�s web site.Also, the Central board of directors:Approved an agreement with EA Engineering, Science and Technology, Inc., of Lincoln to perform a study of the �groundwater mound� beneath and adjacent to Central�s service area. The �mound� is where underground water is rising. The study will provide a better understanding of the current status of the mound, changes in storage and extraction over the years, the effects of changing irrigation practices and management methods over the years and the mound�s sustainability under future scenarios.Data will be gathered during phase one of the study, with detailed analysis of the data to occur during phase two. � Approved budget revisions for 2012 to include installation of nearly 1,905 feet of buried pipeline in Kearney County (which is budget neutral due to transfers of unspent funds) and the addition of $14,000 to implement the groundwater mound study.� Accepted a $211,704 bid from Laron, Inc., of Kingman, Ariz., to transport and rehabilitate the bypass valve at the Kingsley Hydroplant. The valve, which was designed to release water through the plant when the generator is offline, has been used extensively for many years to aerate water passing from Lake McConaughy to Lake Ogallala to meet dissolved oxygen standards for fish habitat. It was previously rehabilitated in 1996.� Approved an agreement with the Platte River Recovery Implementation Program to test the use of water in Lake McConaughy�s environmental account (EA) for groundwater recharge to add to flows in the Platte River. According to terms of the one-year agreement, Central will divert up to 5,000 acre-feet of EA water into the Phelps Canal during the non-irrigation season for recharge purposes.� Approved interconnect agreements with Southwest Power Pool and the Nebraska Public Power District for the Jeffrey, Johnson No. 1 and Johnson No. 2 hydroplants, subject to legal review. The agreements cover the interconnection between the generating facilities and the electric transmission system.� Approved a motion to hold the Nov. 5 board meeting at the Nebraska Game and Parks Commission�s Visitor Center at Lake McConaughy. The meeting will begin at 10 a.m. Mountain Time. | 农业 | 4,884 |
In Seattle, plans for a harvestable 'food forest'
Published on March 8, 2012 3:01AM
Last changed on March 8, 2012 9:29AM
By MANUEL VALDESAssociated PressSEATTLE (AP) -- A plot of grass sits in the middle of Seattle, feet from a busy road and on a hill that overlooks the city's skyline. But it's no ordinary patch of green. Residents hope it will become one of the country's largest "food forests."The park, which will start at 2 acres and grow to 7, will offer city dwellers a chance to pick apples, plums and other crops right from the branch."I think it's a great opportunity for the people of Seattle to able to connect to the environment," said Maureen Erbe, who walked her two dogs next to the plot on a recent overcast day.Would she pluck some fruits from the forest?"Heck yes, I love a good blueberry. You're not from Seattle if you don't like a good blueberry," she said.For health-conscious and locally-grown-food-loving Seattle, the park is a new step into urban agriculture. Cities from Portland, Ore., to Syracuse, N.Y., already have their own versions.Seattle already is dotted with community gardens that the city helps maintain. Farmer's markets also flourish in many neighborhoods, bringing in vendors from around the state to sell everything from tulips to farm-fresh duck eggs to pricey loaves of bread.Residents raise chickens in backyards and plant their own vegetables. The more dedicated ones have goats, and forage around the city -- one woman even eats neighborhood squirrels.When a group of people interested in sustainable gardening brought the idea of a food forest for the Beacon Hill neighborhood to city officials in 2010, the city-volunteer effort began. That year, city officials had declared it the "year of urban agriculture."The plot is in one of the city's oldest neighborhoods. Next to it is a sports park, a driving range and a lawn bowling club. The food forest would be next to a heavily used road and near many apartment complexes."Seattle gets the big picture and so the focus on local food actions is a collaborative one," said Laura Raymond of the city's community garden program.The department has allocated $100,000 for the first phase of the park, roughly a 2-acre plot. The land is owned by the city's utility and through an inter-agency agreement will be developed at no land cost.Raymond said the city hasn't verified it, but the forest might become the biggest one in the country. Glenn Herlihy, who helped create the park's initial designs, believes it can grow to that size.Herlihy studies permaculture, a land management technique that aims to develop gardens modeled on natural ecosystems -- that means natural fertilization that comes with decaying vegetation and a variety of plants in one plot. Unlike orchards, which only have one type of tree or shrub, a food forest has many types.Developers use edible trees, shrubs, perennials and annuals. Fruit and nut trees are on the upper level, while berry shrubs, edible perennials and annuals are on the lower levels. Plants to attract insects are also planted for natural pest management."All of these plants work together like a forest ecosystem, but they are edible," Herlihy said.The park will have an area for the food forest, and another area for the smaller community gardens that can be used by families or community groups. One of the goals is to provide affordable healthy food at a time when such items can be too costly for low-income residents.The first harvest from the community gardens will happen in spring 2013. The fruit trees and shrubs will take a while to grow. Herlihy expects those harvests to come in about two years.Ultimately, Herlihy envisions thick plots of nut trees, such as walnuts and hazelnuts, next to apple, pears and plum trees. Underneath, there will be huckleberries, salmon berries and even salal, a native shrub. Herbs like rosemary will also be planted. The group plans to install beehives to aid with pollination.Organizers say that they will use the honor system when it comes to how much food people can take."It's simply just good ethics," he said. "Help yourself, don't take it all and save some for anybody else."___Manuel Valdes can be reached at https://twitter.com/ByManuelValdesCopyright 2012 The Associated Press. | 农业 | 4,271 |
HomeAboutArticlesPrevious issuesITC website NewsLatest NewsArticle
AboutPrevious issuesArticles
01 July 2013Sowing the seeds for a sustainable futureEnabling the world’s poorest growers to switch to more sustainable ways of increasing food production and agricultural productivityby José Graziano da Silva, Director-General, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Agriculture is a direct source of employment and income for millions of people – and a source of food for us all. With the global population expected to exceed 9 billion by 2050, we have no choice but to put agriculture at the centre of sustainable development efforts.Agriculture already uses 11% of the world’s land surface for crop production, it is responsible for 70% of all water use, and it accounts for 14% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Maintaining the same intensive approach in the use of natural resources and chemical inputs to increase production would take too heavy a toll on the environment. We need to find different ways to produce what we need.In 2011, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) launched the Save and Grow approach to help many of the world’s poorest growers make the switch to more sustainable ways of increasing food production and agricultural productivity. Through this approach, farmers in developing countries adapt to and mitigate the effects of climate change, conserve and restore nutrients to the soil, and make greater use of natural or low-chemical methods for processes such as pest and weed control. Early trials show that growers can lower crop water needs by 30% and energy costs of production by up to 60%. Still, these gains will only go so far unless they are backed by solid and consistent support to improve the economic and social well-being of farmers and other smallholder producers who make up part of the more than 70% of the world’s food insecure people living in rural areas of developing countries.Investment is key. Farmers in low- and middle-income countries already invest more than US$ 170 billion each year in their farms – or about US$ 150 per farmer. This is three times as much as all other sources of investment combined, four times more than contributions by the public sector, and over 50 times more than official development assistance to these countries. But the current level of investment is not enough and poor families who rely directly on agriculture, fisheries or forests for subsistence and income are often the most vulnerable. They lack adequate access to markets, infrastructure, financial services, resources such as land and water, training and supportive policies. Truly sustainable development must address all of these issues, including the need for inclusive trade opportunities and support for smallholders who wish to exploit those opportunities.For example, FAO recently released a series of export marketing guides in partnership with Pacific Island Trade and Invest, a regional agency dealing with export facilitation, investment and tourism promotion. These guides walk smallholder producers through issues such as complying with government regulations in target markets, meeting industry standards, and assessing product demand and competitiveness for products like coconuts, coffee and peppers.
FAO also works with the governments of emerging countries to help their producers gain improved information on forest products trade and marketing issues. In the fisheries sector, we provide guidance to countries on clamping down on economically unfair and environmentally unsustainable fishing practices.
We are encouraged that governments are increasingly addressing such issues in their national frameworks and making use of regional and international mechanisms and organizations that support such processes.
In Africa, FAO provided support and guidance for efforts to boost intra-regional trade in strategic food commodities such as cereals, oils and fats, dairy, meat and meat products, sugar and beverages. Today, a variety of obstacles limit intra-African trade, and imports of non-African origin are filling gaps between domestic production and demand when they could be filled by tradable surpluses that exist within the continent.
On the regional and international levels, greater attention also needs to be paid to ensuring the inclusion of countries in processes affecting global trade, and the recognition of the interests of small-scale producers in those processes. Developing countries also need space to articulate trade policies that are compatible with national rural development and food security objectives. Without adequate support in accessing markets, domestic, regional or international, poorer farmers risk remaining food insecure.
Last year’s Rio+20 Conference on Sustainable Development sent a clear message about the link between food security and sustainability: we will not reach the future we want if millions of people are left behind, suffering from hunger and living in extreme poverty. This idea has also been underscored by the Zero Hunger Challenge, which was launched by United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon at Rio+20.
The seeds for a sustainable future are sown not only in the ground, but also through information, policy, trade agreements, and action at the local, regional and international levels. The fruits of these efforts will improve the lives of the most vulnerable, and they stand to benefit us all.
Issue 2/2016 in PDF
HomeAboutArticlesPrevious issuesITC website | 农业 | 5,530 |
Farmers’ Guide to the Conservation Stewardship Program
National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition
Contact: Greg Fogel or Ferd Hoefner
Washington, DC September 7, 2011 – Today the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition (NSAC) releases an updated version of our popular Farmers’ Guide to the Conservation Stewardship Program. The Guide is intended to help family farmers, ranchers, and foresters understand the Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP) enrollment process. In addition, it provides clear information on conservation activities eligible for CSP payments to improve conservation performance and environmental benefits.
The CSP is a whole farm and comprehensive working lands conservation program administered by USDA’s Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS). Its primary focus is management practices. The philosophy of the program is captured by the subtitle of the Farmers’ Guide – Rewarding farmers for how they grow what they grow.
The revised Guide includes step-by-step enrollment guidance, key definitions, and helpful hints. It also includes a new five-page section with data analysis of the program’s first two sign-up periods in 2009 and 2010. This data section includes analysis of program participation by geographic region, land use type, commodity type, and the top conservation practices and enhancements chosen by farmers and ranchers who have enrolled in the program.
CSP targets priority resource issues in specific states and watersheds, paying farmers for the adoption of new conservation enhancements and the active management of ongoing conservation activities to help solve the resource concerns. CSP payments are directly calibrated to environmental benefits derived from particular practices. All CSP participants must already exceed stewardship standards for at least one priority resource concern and agree to exceed standards for additional concerns through the adoption of advanced conservation management measures.
The leading resource concerns currently addressed by the program are water quality, wildlife habitat, soil quality, and erosion. In some areas of the country water conservation and air quality are also priority considerations.
In just three years of operation, the program has enrolled nearly 30,000 farmers and ranchers operating over 37.5 million acres of farm and ranch land that is now under five-year, renewable CSP conservation contracts. CSP enrollment acreage since passage of the 2008 Farm Bill is roughly equal in size to the entire state of Georgia or Iowa or Michigan.
To date, CSP “green” payments are averaging $170 million per year per sign-up, or approximately $850 million for each annual enrollment class over the course of the five-year CSP contract. Individual farmer contracts are capped at $40,000 per year, with the average-sized contract currently running between $15,000 and $20,000 per year.
CSP is popular with producers, with twice as many applicants as there is funding competing for enrollment. Enrollment is based on environmental benefit scores as determined by the Conservation Measurement Tool (CMT). The CMT is explained in detail in the Guide.
CSP is a continuous sign-up program, meaning producers can apply to enroll at any time of the year. However, there is generally one cut-off date at which point NRCS will rank all proposals on hand, based on environmental benefits, and determine which will be awarded contracts for that year. Though NRCS has not announced anything yet, in all likelihood the 2012 cut-off date for ranking and awards will be early in the 2012 calendar year.
The Farmers’ Guide to the Conservation Stewardship Program is available for download on our website on our publications page at www.sustainableagriculture.net/publications.
Printed copies of the Guide can also be purchased. To inquire about ordering printed copies, email NSAC at [email protected]
Special Note: The text of the Guide links to the NRCS website. Currently, however, the NRCS website is down pending a security review. The agency hopes to have its website functioning again soon.
The National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition is a grassroots alliance that advocates for federal policy reform supporting the long-term social, economic, and environmental sustainability of agriculture, natural resources, and rural communities.
Conservation, Energy & Environment, Grants and Programs, Organic, Press Releases Comments are closed. | 农业 | 4,442 |
Native Farmers and Ranchers
felicep | Feb 12, 2010 02:36 PM
In my last post, I reported some of the results of the USDA’s 2008 Farm and Ranch Irrigation Survey which is part of the 2007 Census of Agriculture. The 2007 Census has given us the first good data on Native American farmers. That’s because in prior surveys the USDA treated reservations as if they were one big farm or ranch rather than containing an amalgam of farms and ranches operated by individuals and families. When compared to other US farmers and ranchers, the typical Native farmer or rancher earns substantially less income. But the typical Native agriculturalists also works more land as compared to non-Natives engaged in agriculture. So why does more land produce less income?The character of the lands involved is one explanation. Most reservations were established on lands deemed unfit for settlers. The soil was poor from the outset. Most Native farmers and ranchers live in New Mexico, Arizona, Montana and Oklahoma and most raise livestock. During the Dust Bowl shallow topsoil blew away and productivity fell even further. Given their low incomes, one would expect that Native farmers and ranchers receive more government assistance as compared to better off farmers and ranchers. But that is not the case. According to the 2007 Survey, Native farmers and ranchers are less likely to get government assistance as compared to non- native farmers and ranchers. USDA explains this by asserting that Indigenous Americans involved in agriculture have tended not to grow those crops – like corn, wheat and cotton - which receive the bulk of subsidy payments. But some Native farmers filed a discrimination lawsuit a decade ago alleging that they have been denied government loans and other help provided to white farmers raising the same crops. This mirrors discrimination lawsuits pursued for decades by Black farmers and a class action lawsuit undertaken by Hispanic farmers and ranchers. The 2008 Farm Bill expands assistance and outreach to disadvantaged farmers and ranchers. It is too early to tell, however, whether these provisions will erase the disparity in government assistance between white and non-white farmers and ranchers. _______________________
High Country News has published several articles about agriculture on reservations and Indigenous Americans involved in agriculture. Here are links to a couple of them: Pueblo Indian Agriculture Tribes reclaim stolen lands
More from Mining & Agriculture
A bison boost for Native economies
North Dakota wrestles with radioactive oilfield waste
Regulators look at raising the limit for radiation amid a rash of illegal dumping.
In North Dakota, booms past and present
A photographer returns home to examine changes to the landscape. All Mining & Agriculture | 农业 | 2,795 |
Title: Pitch Pine - Its Economic and Ecological Importance
Summary: We will show and discuss the management of pitch pine and pitch-loblolly hybrids in the context of ecological forest management in the Pine Barrens of New Jersey. We will look at a variety of harvest and regeneration methods and pitch pines importance to several globally threatened forest ecosystems! We will also discuss some of the present commercial uses of pitch pine wood fiber and some potential future uses. Lastly, we will show the great natural range of pitch pine tree quality in terms of both ecological and timber values.
Presenter: Bob Williams, Vice President of Forestry Operations, Land Dimensions Engineering, Glassboro, New Jersey
Bob Williams is a graduate of Rutgers University. He spent 12 years as a forester in the states of Washington and Alaska. Bob is presently a consulting forester in New Jersey, assisting landowners on 160,000 acres of private forest lands. He is a member of the Pinelands National Reserve Forest Advisory Committee, the New Jersey Audobon Society Conservation and Research Committee, and is the Vice Chair of the New Jersey Division of the Society of American Foresters. Bob is a Registered Professional Forester and a Certified Forester.
Penn State Mont Alto | 1 Campus Drive, Mont Alto, PA 17237 | 717-749-6000
© 2015 The Pennsylvania State University | Privacy and Legal Statements | Accessibility | Contact Us
Penn State Mont Alto is committed to making its websites accessible to all users, and welcomes comments or suggestions on access improvements. Please send comments or suggestions on accessibility to the campus webmaster. | 农业 | 1,651 |
Project Team Ray, Jeffery - Jeff Smith, James - Rusty Project Annual Reports 2013 2012 2011 Related National Programs Plant Genetic Resources, Genomics and Genetic Improvement (301) Plant Diseases (303) ARS Office of International Research Programs ARS Office of International Research Programs Regional Contacts ARS Food Security Research ARS International Research Partnerships ARS Biosecurity Engagement Research Research Project: Cooperative Evaluation of Soybean Lines for Rust Resistance in Paraguay
Facilitate cooperative research between the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Agricultural Research Service (ARS) and Instituto Paraguayo De Tecnologia Agraria - IPTA identifying and developing rust resistant soybean lines.
Collaborator research units have been identified at national research institutions in both Paraguay and the U.S. who will conduct this research. These include the Centro Regional de Investigación Agrícola (CRIA) in the Instituto Paraguayo de Tecnolgia Agraria (IPTA) and the Crop Genetics Research Unit of the Agricultural Research Service (ARS) of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). The research is directed toward identifying new sources of resistance, development and phenotyping of segregating genetic populations and the development, phenotyping and testing of resistant breeding lines.
The primary objective of this research is to identify and develop rust resistant soybean germplasm. In this reporting period, field experiments were established at the Paraguayan research station Centro Regional de Investigación Agrícola, (Regional Agricultural Research Center) in Capitán Miranda, Paraguay. In addition to continued evaluation of breeding lines and populations segregating for rust resistance, a fungicide spray/no spray experiment with a recombinant inbred population was established to investigate quantitative genetics of rust tolerance. This is the first year of an expected two year experiment. The data is now being analyzed. | 农业 | 1,993 |
Name: Will Bonsall & Molly Thorkildsen
Khadighar Farm
Location: 39 Bailey Road
Industry, Maine 04938
Email: [email protected]
Products and Services:
-Founder of Scatterseeds Project
-repository of various heirloom seed collections
-talks on sustainability and vegan gardening
-various articles on farming
-Book 1 of The Yaro Tales - Through the Eyes of a Stranger
-in the process of writing Gardens Without Borders for Chelsea Green Publishing
-apprentice opportunities
What Makes Khadighar Farm So Unique?
When Will Bonsall was invited to participate in
the Unique Maine Farms’ project, he graciously explained that he was a farm that focused on self-sufficiency and that he did not have a need to market the food that he was growing like many of the farmers involved in this project. Fortunately, he agreed to share information about his work with the Scatterseed Project and welcomed Unique Maine Farms to Khadighar Farm on two occasions. The first visit took place in pouring rain, so capturing photos was quite difficult. The second visit occurred towards the end of October, so much of the gardens had gone by, but fortunately the visit occurred when the heirloom potatoes were being dug and saved by a group of very enthusiastic and hardworking volunteers.
Will Bonsall is well-known in the seed saving
circles. He has one of the largest collections of Jerusalem artichokes that exist in the world.
He also is renown for over 900 varieties of
seed potatoes. And then there are his amazing collections of peas, radishes, beans,
and on and on!
The Scatterseed Project was founded by Will
Bonsall in order to preserve the genetic diversity of crops. Many varieties that used to be grown over a long period of time have been lost due to changes that have taken place in agriculture. Because of a grave concern for the future of agriculture, Will Bonsall was determined to save seeds before they disappeared. His passion and efforts have translated into thousands of seeds being saved. An abundance of the seedstock of vegetables, legumes, small grains, and tree fruits, which are able to grow in a cold Maine climate, are still able to be acquired because of Will.
Will has formed an impressive group of supporters who have rallied behind him. While he has visited several farms himself for sources of rare and endangered seeds, he also relies on the kindness of people through donations in the mail and from people who have learned about his work. He has received and distributed rare seeds in exchanges with plant breeders, other garden enthusiasts, tourists who travel to far-away places, and from people who are working in foreign countries in such fields as the Peace Corps or in mission work. When Will gathers a sufficient amount of a particular seed, so that he has a small amount to spare, he shares them with interested farmers and gardeners.
The Scatterseed Project works closely with the United States Plant Germplasm System. It obtains foreign varieties from them to distribute to others and also supplies them with seeds. Isolation methods are used to keep species pure which cross-pollinate. Clonal collections are watched for any signs of viral contamination.
Although Scatterseed might appear to be a seed company, it actually is not. Will does not have an abundant supply of all the seeds that he preserves. While a seed company might be able to supply a large quantity, the availability of seeds through Scatterseed is limited, if it is even offered. Instead of selling seeds, Will attempts to keep seeds alive. This year Scatterseed is not offering seeds anywhere. Will used to be a curator of many types of seeds for the Seed Savers Exchange and serve on their Board. With the many changes that have transpired at the Seed Savers Exchange and the cutback in funding to seed preservationists, Will is no longer offering his seeds through Seed Savers Exchange. Will and several individuals are working to set up an alternative organization to Seed Savers’ Exchange which hopefully will be in place for the 2014 season.
When the seed potatoes needed to be dug in late October this past year, several volunteers lent a hand. What a treat it was to see Will interact with the workers who stepped forward to help. He was more than willing to share all that he knows about different plants and vegan farming. He has a great sense of humor and a grasp on the scientific and historical backgrounds and culinary uses of just about every plant known to exist in mankind!
It’s no wonder that an assortment of individuals agree to help Will with his seed collections. He is extremely knowledgeable about propagation, pollination, terrace gardening, composting, record-keeping, virus prevention, various eco-efficient farming methods, seed preservation, and cloning. He has a handle on so much in-depth information and really is quite skilled at making potato harvesting great fun! His knack of sharing interesting stories and his pleasure in singing while he is harvesting enables people to forget that they are working so hard. He even encourages the volunteers to participate in singing rounds with him while they are working!
It’s quite fitting that Khadighar Farm is included in this project that highlights unique farms. No question about it, Will Bonsall is one unique farmer! His thirst for knowledge is immediately apparent. It came as no surprise to hear him explain his studies in college. As a freshman, he majored in forestry and wildlife. During his sophomore year, it was forestry and Russian. As a junior, his new focus was education. He graduated with a degree in anthropology. Will explained that the anthropology background actually has proven very useful in his career to understand different cultures.
Will has been blessed with extraordinary creativity and a capacity for learning. Much of
his knowledge came about from his personal research and reading. He is fluent in several languages and is very skilled in writing. His articles are highly informative and often
quite witty.
Will published Through the Eyes of a Stranger in 2010. It is a science fiction account of the futuristic land of Esperia where there is a focus on people getting along and where peace and sustainability and renewable resources are valued. The book has received excellent reviews. Anyone interested in purchasing a copy of Through the Eyes of a Stranger, can order it on Amazon, or at www.xlibris.com, or from some bookstores. Will also has a website which provides information about this book which can be accessed at: www.yarotales.com
The current writing project being tackled by
Will is a book which he has contracted with Chelsea Green Publishing called Gardens Without Borders. Will described it as “a non-fiction far-reaching book of my ideas about sustainable, eco-efficient agriculture, indeed sustainable civilization, a broad mix of grand vision and detailed practices-sort of a how-to and why-to.”
Writing is only one of Will’s talents. He appears to be a history buff and he has earned a reputation for his entertaining talks. Will enjoys cooking and welcomed the volunteers who were harvesting the seed potatoes in October into his home to enjoy some of the homemade dishes that he made from the vegetables in his garden.
As a vegan, Will consumes no animal products. He enjoys fruits, vegetables, leafy greens, and whole grain products. His gardens are filled with a variety of crops. Animal manure is out of the question for Will as he feels that relying on cow manure is tying in with a system where farmers are raising crops to feed animals in a cycle which depletes the food that should be grown for human consumption. Only green manure is used at Khadigar Farm. Will also is in opposition to farmers focusing on growing their food primarily for markets. He feels that food should be grown for a self-sufficient lifestyle.
That Will and Molly have been able to operate a successful sustainable farm for over forty years is quite a feat. Will and Molly have obviously worked very hard in maintaining their unique lifestyle. If you decide that you might want to volunteer to help Will with some of the harvesting next season, be prepared to join in singing some rounds while you’re working. It’s great fun! | 农业 | 8,236 |
A User-Friendly Gardening System For The Plant-Challenged
All Tech Considered
Tech, Culture and Connection
July 9, 20144:54 PM ET
Allie Caren
SproutsIO Inc. allows people to easily grow fresh produce inside a home or office. The system is a spinoff of research done at the MIT Media Lab.
SproutsIO Inc.
Don't have a green thumb but seeking the therapeutic nature of gardening? Want the convenience and satisfaction of growing your own produce at home? Not to worry: All you need is an electrical outlet, a flat surface and some water. Meet SproutsIO Inc., a "plug-and-play" user-friendly microfarming appliance for people to easily grow fresh fruits and veggies inside their home or office. Here's how it works: The system includes the appliance and seed cartridges. Though the seed options will vary, many of the cartridge choices are things you wouldn't typically find at the grocery store, like black cherry tomatoes. Once you pop the seed cartridge into the soil-free system, it recognizes what you're trying to grow, and sets an automatic profile for how that plant should be grown. SproutsIO uses hybrid hydroculture technology, meaning that they have combined the two main types of plant-watering: hydroponics, which involves submerging a plant's roots, and aeroponics, which waters a plant through misting. Ideally, users will interact with their plants with their mobile device through the SproutsIO app. Users can keep track of their plant's progress (at home or remotely), adjust the lighting or watering to customize the automated profiles, and also interact with others who are using the system. Article continues after sponsorship
"The main interaction is really supposed to be through your mobile device," says Jennifer Broutin Farah, SproutsIO's founder and CEO. Enlarge this image
You can view and modify your plant's profile on the SproutsIO phone app.
"What we've done is we've tried to make it as easy as possible for people to start growing." She says as soon as you plug it in, get the mobile application and add water, you're on your way. SproutsIO plants can take as little as half of the amount of growth time as a regular plant, depending on what you're growing. The system has a series of sensors that monitor the humidity, temperature, misting, lighting and nutrients for your plants. "Within the actual footprint that you're growing in, depending what you're growing, six times the amount of produce can be harvested from that same footprint," Farah says. The system needs very little water. Farah says it uses about 2 percent of the water you would normally need for growing in soil. And depending on the plant, you might be able to go a month or two without having to fill the water supply. "It's the design of the system," Farah says. SproutsIO optimizes water use based on the plant's growth cycle and what the plant wants at any given time. "The intent is that it makes it really easy for people to grow," she says. All of the prototypes are manufactured in Detroit, where her team is utilizing the city's automotive industry resources to create them. Farah says there's incredible infrastructure to do things like that in the Motor City. Before attending MIT, Farah, a trained architect, had worked on developing different prototypes for urban food systems — like how to grow fruits and veggies on the sides of city buildings and schools in New York City and Boston. The Salt If Local Farms Aren't Local Enough, Buy From The Rooftop
The SproutsIO project grew out of research that Farah was doing at the MIT Media Lab. After she finished at MIT last summer, she founded the spinoff company that would become SproutsIO Inc. With it, she hopes to connect people directly with their food. "What I realized through this process was that people don't understand or don't realize that you can grow this way," she says. Farah says many people are wary of getting into gardening because they're afraid they're going to kill their plants. She wants to "lower that barrier to entry," and hopes the system can become a part of a user's lifestyle. Because SproutsIO is largely automated, she says it helps users familiarize themselves with cultivating food in a simple way. "What we're interested in as a mission — as part of our company — is to actually engage people in the growing process. We want to create an experience around growing," she says. Farah and her team are still exploring manufacturing and selling costs. SproutsIO just finished its "complete functional prototype" phase, and the team will continue to create systems for beta testing through the fall. Farah declined to provide a price estimate for the system. The concept of integrating hydroponics, smartphone applications and the remote monitoring of plants is a growing trend. Other companies like Grove Labs and Freight Farms are trying to bring fresh produce to your home or office, too.
All Tech Considered explores how technology is changing culture and connection. Reach us on Twitter @NPRAllTech or contact us via our handy form.
@npralltech
More tech stories
Read more technology coverage from NPR. | 农业 | 5,101 |
THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY.
THE AGE OF TREES.
Messrs. Editors:
HAVING been a regular reader of "The Popular Science Monthly" from its commencement, I have, of course, noticed the various articles having reference to the value of the concentric rings in determining the age of trees which from time to time have appeared in its columns, the last of which, in your August issue, induces me to give you the result of my observations upon this subject. I have had my attention directed to it during a residence of over forty years in Florida, during which my views as to the value of the rings in determining the age of trees have undergone a change. For the first few years my efforts were directed toward securing a grateful shade for the streets of the city of Jacksonville, and for this purpose the water-oak was selected on account of its beauty, symmetry of form, and rapid growth. And now the appellation of "Forest City," applied to it by visitors, is in no sense inappropriate, for many of the older trees have attained a size which in the State of New York, whence I came, would have required a hundred years to reach. Strangers from the North are apt to overestimate the age of our trees, and the number of rings presented appears to confirm in many instances the correctness of their estimate. When first called upon to account for the discrepancy shown by the rings, and the known age of the tree, I was perplexed and at a loss to find a satisfactory solution of the problem. But, having from my first arrival here kept a careful record of the weather, an analysis of my tables, a comparison with the record made by Nature on her infallible tablets in the trees furnished me the key to it.
Here, as well as at the North, the cold of winter puts a stop to vegetable growth, and in all exogenous trees a concentric ring will be formed, embracing all woody matter deposited since the preceding stop to its growth; but here in this climate causes are in operation that frequently produce as complete a stop t | 农业 | 2,014 |
Ecologists Turn To Planned Grazing To Revive Grassland Soil
Luke Runyon
and The world's soil is in trouble. Ecologists say without dramatic changes to how we manage land, vast swathes of grassland are at risk of turning into hard-packed desert. To make sure that doesn't happen, researchers are testing out innovative ways to keep moisture in the soil.
In eastern Colorado, one way could be in the plodding hooves of cattle.
Conventional wisdom tells you that if ranchland ground has less grass, the problem is too many cows. But that's not always the case. It depends on how you manage them, if you make sure they keep moving.
"Plants actually respond to grazing. It actually stimulates growth in some ways," said William Burnidge, an ecologist with the Nature Conservancy. Burnidge runs the Conservancy's Colorado grassland program, which includes a 14,000-acre nature preserve and working commercial cattle ranch, the Fox Ranch.
A few miles west of the Kansas border in Yuma County, Colo., the land stretches north and south along a band of the Arikaree River, a tributary of the Republican River. The ranch, owned by the Nature Conservancy and leased to local rancher Nathan Andrews, is part of a grand experiment. Researchers are putting in practice something called holistic management, or planned grazing.
"When I learned about it, that style of grazing, the basis was everybody was producing more grass," said Andrews, a fifth-generation cattle rancher in eastern Colorado. "It's hard, as a producer, to argue with more grass. Because we never have enough grass."
Farmers and ranchers know in a few decades they'll have to feed a lot more people, while at the same time, keep the soil healthy and make money doing it. That's the philosophy behind holistic management. Proponents say the focus is not just on the soil's health and the prevalence of grasslands, but also tout its ability to help a rancher's bottom line. And it's way more involved than your run-of-the-mill rotational grazing, which has been used by pastoralists for centuries and is still used by ranchers today.
Here's how planned grazing works: A detailed chart drives every decision made on the ranch. At the beginning of each season, you plot out your moves on the map, like a Monopoly board. If the grass is better on the eastern part of your ranch, the cattle should stay there longer, but not too long. The cattle have to keep moving. The animals' hooves push on the soil, helping it to retain more rainfall.
The most common word tied to the planned grazing movement is "mimicry," as in mimicking the wild herds of large mammals that used to move across the Great Plains in tightly herded packs.
"You're only ever approximating what wild animals did when there weren't any people or fences to tell them what to do," Burnidge said. "But it's reasonable to think that they tried to stay on the forage that was best for them at the time."
What makes the Fox Ranch unique is its approach to documentation. The idea of planned grazing isn't new, but the Nature Conservancy wants evidence that it works before telling other ranchers to try it out.
The godfather of this grazing technique is Allan Savory, the creator of a few organizations that tout the ability of these methods to restore grasslands and pull ranchers across the world out of poverty. If his name sounds familiar you might have seen his TED talk from earlier this year. The video went viral, currently at almost a half-million views, and introduced a whole new audience to the concept of holistic, or planned, grazing.
"We really get the animals in the right place, at the right time, for the right reason, with the right behavior," Savory said. His style of grazing management focuses on the soil and how the cattle interact with it.
"We're getting the rain that falls on the ground to soak in more, runoff less, but to remain in the soil and to leave the soil through the vegetation or to underground water sources," Savory said.
But if you think the entire range land community is singing kumbaya around holistic grazing, you're wrong. Savory's methods are controversial. Most of contemporary rangeland science says Savory's basic tenets, increased cattle numbers and rapid fire grazing, have no scientific basis. In fact, many rangeland ecologists say the only way to improve grassland is to reduce, not increase, the number of animals on it.
Savory scoffed at claims that his work is faulty. He said mainstream science has been unable to turn his nuanced planning process into an academic, peer-reviewed study.
"There is no study, and no range scientist has produced a study that says that planned grazing doesn't work," Savory said.
At the Fox Ranch, the experiment is just in its initial phases. Last year, even in the midst of drought, rancher Nathan Andrews was able to build up his herd, while many other ranchers were shedding their numbers. Granted, the Fox's cattle numbers were behind the local area average, but he still counts it as a success.
"If we can benefit from it in two of the worst years on record, then I think moving forward with it will be even more beneficial than what we're seeing now," Andrews said.
Beneficial for his bottom line, and for the soil he depends on.
This is second part of a two-part report on innovative ways to revive the soil. Click here to see part one on how Iowa farmers are using man-made prairies to keep soil healthy. Copyright 2013 KUNC-FM. To see more, visit http://www.kunc.org. | 农业 | 5,478 |
You are hereHomeClimate ChangeClimate Change ResourcesClimate Change PublicationsFrom Impacts to Adaptation: Canada in a Changing ClimateChapter 7 - PrairiesAdaptation and Adaptive Capacity Adaptation and Adaptive Capacity Establishing and sustaining communities and economies in the Prairies, at the northern margins of agriculture and forestry in a dry variable climate and at great distances from export markets, have involved considerable adaptation to climate. Economic and social development will be sustained under climate change by tapping into and boosting the accumulated adaptive capacity of the region. Adaptive capacity is an attribute that provides an indication of a system or region's ability to adapt effectively to change. A system with a high adaptive capacity would be able to cope with, and perhaps even benefit from, changes in the climate, whereas a system with a low adaptive capacity would be more likely to suffer from the same change (see Chapter 2).
Nearly all adaptation in the region has been in reaction to specific climate events and departures from average conditions. The post-settlement history of the Prairies is punctuated by social and institutional responses to drought and, to a much lesser extent, floods. Planning for changing future environmental conditions is a relatively new policy and management paradigm. Many current examples of adaptation involve institutions and individuals adjusting their activities to prevent a repeat of the impacts of recent climate events, with the implicit assumption that such events will reoccur, potentially with greater frequency and/or intensity as the result of climate change.
The possible adjustments to practices, policies and infrastructure are so numerous that only categories and examples can be discussed here. For this assessment of adaptation and adaptive capacity, the authors make the distinction between the roles of formal and informal institutions and individuals, and between responses to impacts of historical events versus building adaptive capacity and developing approaches in anticipation of further climate changes.
5.1 FORMAL INSTITUTIONS AND GOVERNANCE
Institutions impose a body of regulations, rules, processes and resources that may either sustain or undermine the capacity of people to deal with challenges such as climate change (O ’Riordan and Jager, 1996; O’Riordan, 1997; Willems and Baumert, 2003). Risk-management strategies that increase coping resources and enhance adaptive capacity in a context of a sustainable future are key to reducing vulnerability to climate change (Kasperson and Kasperson, 2005). Governance institutions and political and administrative systems play a central role in developing and strengthening adaptive capacity, supporting private efforts and implementing policies that allocate resources in a consistent manner (Hall, 2005). This may require institutional arrangements that differ from those fashioned around traditional policy problems. Addressing climate change requires cutting across traditional sectors, issues and political boundaries, and dealing with complexity and uncertainty (Homer-Dixon, 1999; Diaz et al., 2003; Willows and Connell, 2003; Diaz and Gauthier, 2007).
Although led by risk-taking innovators and early adopters, adaptation will generally be slow to be implemented, and adaptive capacity slow to develop, without involvement of all levels of government and other decision-makers. Coping with the impacts of climate change requires more than a myriad of unrelated adaptation measures; it ideally involves a structured response that allows for the identification, prevention and resolution of problems created by the impacts of climate change. Policy frameworks may help achieve such a systematic and efficient response.
Provincial policy documents that provide direction on climate change (e.g. Albertans and Climate Change: Taking Action) are focused largely on emissions reduction. They make reference to adaptation, but lack specifics regarding the nature of anticipated impacts or steps to adapt. In the Prairies, programs are quite advanced in Alberta, where the provincial government has established an Alberta Climate Change Adaptation Team, which initiated province-wide and multi-sectoral assessments of vulnerability and adaptation strategies (Barrow and Yu, 2005; Davidson, 2006; Sauchyn et al., 2007). In many cases, significant adaptation could be achieved and supported with adjustments to existing programs and policy mechanisms. In agriculture, for example, the Agricultural Policy Framework, National Water Supply Expansion Program, environmental farm plans and various other federal and provincial policies and programs can both accommodate adaptation options and provide the means of enhancing adaptive capacity.
The roles of institutions and government in enhancing adaptive capacity and facilitating adaptation implementation, drawing from both observed examples and potential futures, are provided in the following sectoral discussions.
5.1.1 Water Resource Management
FIGURE 16: Irrigation on the Prairies (Frenchman River valley, southwestern Saskatchewan).
There is significant scope for enhanced institutional adaptive capacity in the water sector through changes in the management of watersheds and reservoirs (Wood et al., 1997). For example, operating rules of water resource systems, which will be especially important given earlier spring runoff and increased summer water demands, may be adjusted to increase system efficiency and capacity. Process changes, including changing the timing of irrigation (Figure 16) to after sunset and using more efficient irrigation methods, can help offset increasing water demands from other sources (Bjornlund et al., 2001). Increasing water recycling or issuing licenses to industries that are based on best water management practices and water recycling standards are other opportunities for process change (Johnson and Caster, 1999). Holistic watershed management has been recognized and adopted in many regions already (Serveiss and Ohlson, 2007), and opportunities exist for community level adaptation to climate change for watershed-scale management authorities (Crabb é and Robin, 2006).
A comparative study of two dryland watersheds, the South Saskatchewan River basin (SSRB) in the Canadian Prairies and the Elqui River basin in north-central Chile, was undertaken to understand the role of regional institutions in formulating and implementing adaptation related to water resource management (www.parc.ca/mcri). Results indicated that communities identify climate risks as problematic and that significant efforts are made to manage them. The study further noted that climate risks are compounded by non-climatic stimuli that increase vulnerability, and that communities perceive shortcomings in the capability of governance institutions to reduce the vulnerability of rural populations. A study of local involvement in water management in the Oldman River sub-basin of the SSRB (Stratton et al., 2004; Stratton, 2005) concluded that adaptation has been more reactive than anticipatory, and has focused mainly on the supply of water, rather than demand. Another project in the same basin found that, at the local level, there were both water-based consciousness and successful adaptation measures to water shortages (Rush et al., 2004). There are major challenges, however, related to attitudes towards the likelihood of climate change impacts on water supplies for all users, the long-term protection of water resources, and accepting water conservation as an adaptation approach. Policy and legislation could provide flexible economic and regulatory instruments to better manage increasing variability and scarcity of water, encourage greater efficiency, expand capacity to adapt to climate change, and facilitate trade-offs among water users that reflect their differing levels of vulnerability to water scarcity.
Given the inherent uncertainties regarding the magnitude and rate of climate change, water management and planning processes require flexibility to allow for responses to new knowledge about the expected impacts. These processes must also involve stakeholders at the local level to identify local vulnerabilities and appropriate adaptation approaches. These principles were criteria for Alberta ’s Water for Life Strategy (Government of Alberta, 2003), the province’s plan to develop a new water management approach with specific actions to ensure reliable, quality water supplies for a sustainable economy. Institutional reforms being considered include the use of economic instruments, best management practices and watershed management plans involving local communities to achieve a 30% increase in the efficiency and productivity of water use, while securing social, economic and environmental outcomes. This strategy anticipates that these instruments will be adopted on a voluntary basis and that water will be reallocated from existing users to satisfy the increasing demand from other economic sectors. It further guarantees that existing rights will be respected, that nobody will be forced to give up water. The Water for Life Strategy also includes the intention to construct flood risk maps and warning systems for communities at risk, as part of a long-term management plan.
Drought is of greater concern for cities in the Prairies than for urban centres elsewhere in Canada. In response to the 1988 drought, the City of Regina has developed drought contingency plans, including water conservation programs and expansion of water treatment and delivery capacity (Cecil et al., 2005). Other cities on the Prairies do not currently have such contingency plans in place (Wittrock et al., 2001).
5.1.2 Ecosystem Management
Managing natural capital in such a way that ecosystems already under stress continue to provide value as climate changes presents challenges for governments and resource industries. The assumption that protected areas are biogeographically stable will be proven incorrect, and biodiversity protection planning may need to protect “a moving target of ecological representativeness” (Scott and Lemieux, 2005). Aiming to build resilience into ecosystems, rather than seeking stability, is a more appropriate goal (Halpin, 1997). Proactive management of disturbance and habitat, with species-specific intervention strategies, may be the only alternative to “reconfigure protected areas to new climatic conditions” (Lopoukhine, 1990; Scott and Suffling, 2000). In Canada’s national parks, a landscape maintenance strategy may be materially impossible, whatever its philosophical merits or demerits (Scott and Suffling, 2000). Changing climate will result in areas being no longer suitable for the maintenance of the species and ecosystems they were originally designed to conserve (Pernetta, 1994). For example, Manitoba ’s Wapusk National Park, on the shores of Hudson Bay, was established for the protection of denning polar bears (Scott et al., 2002), but these bears are near the southern limits of their range and may be en route to extirpation as ice conditions deteriorate (see Chapter 3).
Managing natural ecosystems may also require challenging policies that discourage alien introductions, and developing strategies for introducing new species to maintain biodiversity and increase ecosystem resiliency (e.g. species ‘redundancy’; Malcolm and Markham, 1996). Current policies do not favour alien introductions (e.g. Alberta Reforestation Standards Science Council, 2001; Alberta Sustainable Resource Development, 2005; Manitoba Conservation, 2005), in part due to the assumption that it is possible to maintain existing vegetation mosaics. But if native species cannot regenerate, the policy options are not clear. There seem to be no legal prohibitions to the introduction of alien tree species, and alien species are already frequently planted on freehold land. The Government of Saskatchewan (2005) is heavily promoting agro-forestry, with the goal of converting 10% of the province ’s arable land base to trees within 20 years. Most converted cultivated acreage is expected to be along the fringe of the southern boreal forest, so exotic trees could potentially invade the native forest. Another potentially controversial management option is to “accelerate capture before loss” (Carr et al., 2004). Under this option, timber harvest would be accelerated if necessary to maximize one-off resource use of a forest not expected to regenerate.
5.1.3 Agriculture
Historically, federal and provincial governments have responded to drought with safety net programs to offset negative socioeconomic impacts (Wittrock and Koshida, 2005) and, more recently, through development of drought management plans. These programs have included crop insurance, the Rural Water Development Program, the National Water Supply Expansion Program, the Net Income Stabilization Account (NISA), the Canadian Agricultural Income Stabilization (CAIS) program, the Canadian Farm Income Program (CFIP) and the Tax Deferral Program. Types of assistance include helping producers access new water sources, offsetting the costs of producing crops and deferring tax income from culling herds. Claims from crop insurance and assistance from safety net programs soared in the drought years of 2001 and 2002, especially in Alberta and Saskatchewan (Wittrock and Koshida, 2005).
Soil and water conservation programs have been an integral part of agricultural adaptation to the dry and variable prairie climate (Sauchyn, 2007). Predating settlement of the Prairies, a network of experimental farms was established during the 1890s to early 1900s to develop dryland farming practices. The first Canadian government programs to combat land degradation, including the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Administration (PFRA), were created in response to the disastrous experience of the 1930s, when drought impacts were exacerbated by an almost uniform settlement of farmland that did not account for variation in the sensitivity of soil landscapes and the capacity of the climate and soil to produce crops.
Recent institutional initiatives to reduce soil degradation have included the soils component of the Agricultural Green Plan, the National Soil Conservation Program (NSCP), the National Farm Stewardship Program, the Environmental Farm Plan and the Greencover Canada program. In the Prairies, a major component of the NSCP was the Permanent Cover Program (PCP; Vaisy et al., 1996). The initial PCP was fully subscribed within a few months, removing 168 000 ha of marginal land from annual crop production. In 1991, an extension to the original program converted another 354 000 ha. The PCP represented a policy adaptation that has reduced sensitivity to climate over a large area, even though this was not an explicit objective of the program.
5.1.4 Forestry
Mechanisms that encourage sustainable forest management in Canada should help to enhance adaptive capacity in the forestry sector, even though they do not explicitly address climate change adaptation. Such mechanisms include the criteria for Sustainable Forest Management, as set out by the Canadian Council of Forest Ministers (Canadian Council of Forest Ministers, 2003), as well as certification procedures indicating that forestry products are produced from a sustainably managed forest land base.
If present practices of restocking or natural regeneration fail, it could become increasingly difficult to regenerate any forest environment as the climate becomes warmer and drier (Hogg and Schwarz, 1997). Forest loss could therefore be irreversible if adaptation is slow or only reactive. Proactive adaptation could involve introducing certain alien species, although that also brings a risk of hybridization or the import of unintended species or pathogens associated with the alien species. Introducing alien species with no hybridization potential and of low invasiveness appears to be the most reversible adaptation option, but there is no guarantee of either reversibility or successful naturalization.
5.1.5 Health and Well-Being
Protecting the most vulnerable citizens will go a long way in safeguarding the health and well-being of all residents of the Prairies under climate change. Some adaptation responses in other sectors will directly alleviate the health consequences of climate change. For example, successful adaptation in the agriculture sector to drought will decrease the stress and financial constraints experienced by agricultural workers, their families and associated communities. Health care is a defining characteristic of Canadian culture, and existing monitoring or surveillance measures may need only modification to be made more applicable to climate change. Building the capacity to link current climate-sensitive health outcomes (e.g. respiratory illnesses) to weather and climate variables will allow researchers to better determine how changes in climate might affect illness patterns in the future. Other research gaps and capacity needs are listed in Table 12.
TABLE 12: Examples of research gaps and additional capacity needed to reduce specific health-related outcomes.
Climate-sensitive health outcomes
Additional capacity needed or research gaps
Drought-related stress/anxiety in agricultural workers
Linking health and well-being to agri-economic and farm employment statistics
Dust-related illnesses/conditions
Education and awareness for populations at risk; link dust levels with weather variables
Wildfire-related illnesses/conditions
Baseline incidence and prevalence rates of known health outcomes
Waterborne diseases and illness from poor water quality
Link water quality, outbreak data and boil-water orders to weather variables locally and distally (e.g. watershed)
Increasing average temperatures and foodborne diseases (FBD)
Link FBD and food-borne pathogens (along the food-processing chain) to weather variables
Air pollution and respiratory illnesses
Baseline incidence and prevalence rates needed; connect weather variables and air pollution levels; use of air mass analysis
Flooding and post-traumatic stress disorder/stress/anxiety
Additional community support for flood prevention
West Nile virus (WNV) and hantavirus pulmonary syndrome (HPS)
Continued monitoring and surveillance
The costs associated with disaster assistance and aid programs during and after disasters will be a rising expense for governments unless effective adaptation is implemented (Soskolne et al., 2004).
5.2 LOCAL ADAPTATION, INFORMAL INSTITUTIONS AND SOCIAL CAPITAL
Individual farm families manage more than 80% of Canada’s agricultural land, so much rural adaptation continues to be local innovations. This is in contrast to the other sectors, specifically forestry, mining, energy, transportation and cities, where the resources are generally owned or leased by corporations and much of the adaptation is therefore implemented at the institutional scale.
Globalization is shifting the responsibility for adaptation to agri-business, national policy makers and the international level (Burton and Lim, 2005). Larger and automated farm equipment and larger scales of production enable fewer producers to produce more commodities. This industrial scale may favour technological and economic adaptations to climate change and variability, but it tends to displace a robust and cohesive network of rural communities (Diaz et al., 2003), thereby affecting social capital for adaptation. Although the agriculture industry has become much more diversified and therefore resilient, there is evidence that this has been achieved in part by regional specialization and therefore less diversity, and greater vulnerability at the individual farm level (Bradshaw et al., 2004). Although the adaptive capacity of agriculture producers appears relatively high (e.g. Burton and Lim, 2005), coping thresholds will be exceeded by departures from normal conditions that are outside the historical experience (Sauchyn, 2007).
There are opportunities for more efficient use of agricultural water supplies, especially improved management of water use by livestock (e.g. McKerracher, 2007) and irrigated crops (see Case Study 2). Anecdotal evidence suggests that owners and managers of agricultural land are giving more thought to restoring natural storage and traditional practices, such as rainwater collection systems, and using the storage capacity of wetlands and riparian ecosystems. However, the large scale of modern farming is a barrier to the restoration of wetlands, as wetland restoration may result in greater inefficiency of operating large farm equipment and may require compensation for flooded cropland.
Because farm-scale management practices have more immediate influences than climate change (Jones, 1993), they have the potential to either reduce or exacerbate climate impacts. Soil conservation is a prime example of a ‘no regrets’ strategy, since preventing soil loss is beneficial whether or not impacts of climate change occur as projected. Since the adoption of modern soil conservation practices, particularly reduced tillage, the average number of bare soil days dropped by more than 20% in the Prairies between 1981 and 1996, with a resulting 30% reduction in the extent of land at risk of wind erosion (McRae et al., 2000). The cost of soil and water conservation is usually borne primarily by the land manager.
“Very severe wind and water erosion is dominated by infrequent occurrences when highly erosive events impact exposed soil. Such events may only happen once during the farming lifetime of an individual farmer, making it difficult to justify the expense and inconvenience of many soil conservation practices. ” (Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Administration, 2000, p. 33)
Some forms of social capital, such as knowledge sharing and participation in support networks, reduce vulnerability by intensifying mutual support and reciprocity (Portes, 1998; Field et al., 2000; Glaeser, 2001; Putnam, 2001; Policy Research Initiative, 2005). Social capital facilitates an understanding of challenges and coping instruments, and can be used to mobilize resources to ensure the well-being of persons, groups and communities. Existing adaptive capacity is “bound up in the ability of societies to act collectively” (Adger, 2003, p. 29), which involves social networks, relationships and trust. Social capital can complement, and even substitute for, the state ’s efforts in terms of dealing with climatic hazards (Adger, 2000; Sygna, 2005). Particularly in rural communities, such informal institutions as church groups and agricultural societies are an effective mechanism for helping to address issues like climate change.
Surveys of six rural communities in southern Saskatchewan provided clear evidence of high levels of social capital. Trust and participation in formal organizations and networks are distributed among community members (Diaz and Nelson, 2004; Jones and Schmeiser, 2004). Individuals who have medium or high levels of social capital are, on average, more informed, more optimistic and more empowered when it comes to climate change and water quality issues (Diaz and Nelson, 2006). Those with lower levels of social capital seem to have a more pessimistic outlook on climate change and are less optimistic about the ability to do something about it. In urban contexts, there is greater variability among neighbourhoods in terms of social capital, reflecting specific economic and social conditions within the city (Cecil et al., 2005).
The residents of rural communities may be more likely than urban residents to treat information about climate change with scepticism (Neudoerffer, 2005). This could present a barrier to participation in adaptation initiatives. Furthermore, the autonomy of community-level institutions is becoming threatened by large-scale market forces and administrative structures dominated by multi-national corporations and regional governments eager to attract new investment (Epp and Whitson, 2001). A reduced sense of autonomy could also discourage local adaptation planning.
In Aboriginal communities, the adoption of non-traditional lifestyles in recent years has eroded local knowledge and practices, while growing dependence on waged labour and external assistance have served to undermine local adaptive capacity (Ford and Smit, 2004). Traditional knowledge and land management systems served as a source of resiliency in the past, and could play an important role in restoring and strengthening adaptive capacity in the future.
Many resort-based communities and recreational facilities involve enormous fixed capital expenditures, such as ski lifts, snow-making equipment, lodges and expensive vacation homes. Where such communities are limited to winter activities, the potential for economic losses as a result of changing climate are high. However, net economic impacts could be ameliorated with diversification, to capitalize on more summer-like conditions in the spring and fall (Scott and Jones, 2005). Tourism-based communities tend to be more diversified economically than communities dependent on a single resource-based sector (i.e. agriculture, mining or forestry), and residents are likely to have a broader skill set that strengthens adaptive capacity.
Learning from past disasters provides insight into adaptive strategies. Newspapers detail the impacts of these events from the perspective of individuals and communities, and can document a crucial link between disasters and negative health outcomes that is not easily measured by conventional scientific research methods (Soskolne et al., 2004). Descriptions of the hardships endured by communities and individuals highlight those circumstances that negatively affect health and well-being during a disaster. These stories can provide insight into where community adaptation may be best incorporated, such as the development of alternative evacuation routes for remote communities. Although the current health care system is generally able to effectively handle direct health outcomes from disasters, more frequent and severe extreme climate events could cause health services to become inundated. Date Modified: 2015-11-17
Climate ChangeImpacts and AdaptationClimate Change ScienceClimate Change ResourcesClimate Change PublicationsClimate Change DataClimate Change MapsClimate Change Federal Programs | 农业 | 26,492 |
/ Fort Collins, Colorado
/ Center for Agricultural Resources Research
/ Water Management Systems Research
Research Project: Management Strategies to Sustain Irrigated Agriculture with Limited Water Supplies
Water Management Systems Research
Title: Lessons Learned From the History of Herbicide Resistance)
Author Shaner, Dale Submitted to: Weed Technology
Citation: Shaner, D.L. 2016. Lessons Learned From the History of Herbicide Resistance. Weed Technology. Vol. 62, No. 2, pp. 427-431 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1614/WS-D-13-00109.1.
Interpretive Summary: Herbicide resistance in weeds is becoming an increasing problem. Management practices will need to be changed to lessen the dependence on herbicide to reduce the selection pressure on weed populations by the herbicides. This paper reviews the history of the selection of herbicide resistance since the introduction of herbicides in the 1950s. Understanding how we got into our current situation is vital to developing new methods for managing weeds.
The selection of herbicide resistant weed populations began with the introduction of synthetic herbicides in the late 1940s. For the first 20 years after introduction, there were limited reported cases of resistance. This changed in 1968 with the discovery of triazine resistant common groundsel. Over the next 15 years the cases of herbicide resistant weeds increased, primarily to triazine. Although triazine resistance was serious, the resistant biotypes were highly unfit and were easily controlled with alternative herbicides. Weed scientists thought that this would be the case for future herbicide resistant cases and there was not much concern, although the companies affected by triazine resistance were active in trying to detect and manage resistance. It was not until the late 1980s with the discovery of resistance to Acetyl Co-A carboxylase (ACCase) and acetolactate synthase (ALS) inhibitors that herbicide resistance attracted much more attention, particularly from industry. The rapid evolution of resistance to these classes of herbicides affected many companies, who responded by first establishing working groups to address resistance to specific classes of herbicides and then the Herbicide Resistance Action Committee (HRAC). The goal of these groups was to act as a forum for the exchange of information on herbicide resistance selection and to develop guidelines for managing resistance in cooperation with academia and governmental agencies. Despite these efforts, resistance continued to increase. The introduction of glyphosate resistant crops in the 1995 provided a brief respite from herbicide resistance, and farmers rapidly adopted this relatively simple and reliable weed management system. There were many warnings by academia and some companies that the glyphosate resistant cropping system was not sustainable, but this advice was not heeded. The selection of glyphosate resistant weeds dramatically changed weed management in multiple areas and renewed emphasis on herbicide resistance management. The lesson learned from our experience with herbicide resistance is that no herbicide is invulnerable to selecting for resistance and that over-reliance on a weed management system based solely on herbicides is not sustainable. Hopefully we have learned that a diverse weed management program that combines multiple methods is the only system that will work for the long term. | 农业 | 3,418 |
Kiwifruit Strong demand greets early kiwifruit as it hits North American shores
By Andy Nelson
Demand for New Zealand kiwifruit was strong at the beginning of the deal in late spring, and importers and industry officials looked forward to a similarly strong summer and fall, with several promotions expected to get and keep consumers’ attention. “Fruit has been moving very smoothly,” said Karen Brux, North American marketing representative for Zespri International, Tauranga, New Zealand, the exclusive marketer of New Zealand kiwifruit exported to North America.
Steve Woodyear-Smith, kiwifruit category director for Vancouver, British Columbia-based The Oppenheimer Group, also reported a good start to the 2010 season.
“Sales have been very strong,” he said. “A very good mix of customers has come on board.”
Woodyear-Smith cited conventional retailers, club stores, foodservice companies, organic and natural food stores and wholesalers among the channels in that mix.
Despite bigger differences on average between the price for New Zealand kiwifruit and Chilean kiwifruit thus far in 2010, volumes to date are actually up from last year as of June 8, Woodyear-Smith said.
“That’s very exciting,” he said. Particularly encouraging, Brux said, has been the strong retail support New Zealand growers and marketers have gotten in the U.S. — even with ample supplies from competitor Chile on both coasts.
“Our top 20 accounts from last year are on board again this year,” she said. That’s no easy feat, she said, when premium New Zealand fruit routinely sells for more than its Chilean counterpart.
As of June 7, pricing of New Zealand fruit was maintaining that separation from its competitors, Brux said.
“The retail price is typically pretty consistent from season to season, and at this point we haven’t seen any changes,” she said. The week of June 7, the season was still in its beginning stages, but the promotional momentum was already starting to build, Brux said.
“So far, so good,” she said. “We’ve been working real hard on promotions right at the start of the season, and over the next week we’ll start to see more of them kick in.”
In its first two weeks, for example, Zespri’s Great Kiwi Adventure sweepstakes was generating good buzz, with more than 5,000 responses on the sweepstakes Web site. Promotions, Brux is keen to remind retailers, almost always pay off when it comes to New Zealand kiwifruit.s
“We’ve seen time and time again that when retailers work with us, it generates more movement, and they make more money, even though they have to pay more for our product,” she said.
The key is to build attractive displays that get consumers’ attention, Brux said. After all, it’s more likely than not that New Zealand kiwifruit aren’t on there shopping lists.
“We know kiwifruit is an impulse purchase,” she said. “If they’re not immediately drawn to the display, they might move on and buy other things.”
Woodyear-Smith agreed.
“One of our key focuses is to bring kiwifruit out of hiding and build bigger displays,” he said.
Another encouraging sign in 2010, he said, was that retailers were promoting kiwifruit not only on their own in circulars and other ads but as part of multicommodity, tropical-themed ads.
strong demand for kiwifruitnew zealand kiwifruit hits u.s. shoresnorth american kiwifruit imports About the Author:
Andy Nelson
, markets editor
Andy Nelson joined The Packer as a staff writer in 2001. He became the paper's Handling & Distributing editor in 2005 and markets editor in 2006. Before joining Farm Journal Media, Nelson was a staff writer for The Kansas City Star. View All Posts | 农业 | 3,628 |
HomePublicationsAdvertiser's GuideIssues & OpinionsEventsLee PittsContact Us
Animal HealthBeef CheckoffCountry of Origin LabelingEndangered SpeciesEnvironmentFactory FarmingGlobal EconomyLetters to the EditorMarketing Our ProductsThe MergerNational Animal ID SystemPeoplePrice ReportingProperty RightsStrategic Alliance Archive Search
A Race To The Bottom — by Lee Pitts
A publisher in a prominent western livestock newspaper suggests that we should not be celebrating R-CALF´s victory to keep the Canadian border closed because of the damage it will do to packers. He says we´re all in this together. In the same boat, so to speak. And when one end of the boat sinks the other will too. He says that the packers and large feeders have the same goals as ranchers, to which we say . . . horse pucky! Their goals could not be more opposite. The packers and their strategically aligned feeders want to buy your cattle as cheap as they can and you, no doubt, want to sell them as high as you can. Do those sound like common goals to you? No, this is a war and the packers were winning, cruising along in their armor plated battleships, while ranchers were paddling upstream against heavy winds in kayaks and canoes.
And then along came a mad cow and R-CALF.
The Packer´s Plan
Corporations, by nature, tend to have lots of meetings. It´s what they do best. And in those meetings they come up with five-,10- and 15-year plans and business models to find ways to reduce input costs, manage volatility, acquire greater control over the supply chain and to be more competitive than their competition. Years ago the business model in the beef business was that cow calf ranchers, stockers, feeders, packers and retailers operated independently of one another in a production system that, for the most part, produced consistent profits for the good operators. But such a system also presented problems for the packer and retailer. For one, because the parts were independent, with little communication between the segments, it also produced cattle that were not consistently good to eat. This coincided with a time in which public consumption of beef plummeted. Granted, there were other factors, significant ones like diet/health issues, but clearly ranchers were not producing a consistently good product. The beef packers looked around and saw an industry that was producing a consistent product and whose consumption was skyrocketing: the poultry industry. So, as businesses often do, they tried to incorporate the chicken model into the beef business through contract production.
Some ranchers signed on with packers in strategic alliances and most cattle publications and industry observers hailed these early ventures as the way of the future. The cattlemen´s national organization, the NCA, was infiltrated by packers and their protégés in order to push such programs. Never once did these folks stop to consider all the power they´d be handing over to the packers if all ranchers became strategically aligned. Gradually the cattle business began to go down the same path as the chicken pluckers and as a result Bill Bullard of R-CALF says here´s what happened:
According to USDA data, Bullard says the average return on investment among cow-calf producers in the U.S. was a negative $30.40 per bred cow per year for each year of the 1990s. "Your industry suffered staggering losses measured in the billions of dollars," says Bullard.
"We lost over 10 percent of the total number of beef cattle operators in the United States. We´ve lost over 108,000 producers since 1993," he said. As a result rural communities all across America have withered. The cow counties in Nebraska are among that state´s poorest, for example.
While the ranchers were facing tough times the packer was enjoying heady days. "In 1998," says Bullard, "the average retail price of beef in the United States was $2.77. In 2002, when cattlemen were getting $10 cwt. less than they did a decade before, retail prices were $3.32 a pound. The retailer certainly benefited from these very favorable economic indicators and the packer did, too. In 1992, the average packer margin was $62 a head. By 2002, that more than doubled to $142 a head."
In 1994 Bullard says the rancher received the majority of the consumer´s beef dollar: 56 cents for every buck the consumer spent on beef. But by 2000, the producer became the minority recipient. "Your share fell to 49 cents," Bullard said. "By 2002 it had fallen to 44 cents." But the packers got greedy and wanted even more so they had more meetings and decided to copy yet another business model.
Beyond Borders
The goal of this new model was to become multi-species, multinational protein providers and this they did through attrition, merger and acquisition. But still the beef part of their beef business did not fall into place like pork and poultry. The reason the chicken model did not work nearly as well in the beef business is that not enough ranchers bought the hype and signed on to become serfs on their own land. And ranchers also had something the poultry pluckers did not have: competitive bidding in the form of auction markets, video markets, country traders and retained ownership. If they were going to take complete control of the beef industry the packers knew they needed another business model. For inspiration they looked to American big businesses who were outsourcing their supply chains to the lowest bidder around the world. If ranchers in Nevada or Nebraska wouldn´t play ball maybe they would in Canada or Argentina. So the packers started looking beyond U.S. borders to other cattle-producing nations for their supply.
According to Bullard, one of the packer´s strategies was be to combine the herds of the United States, Canada and Mexico into one seamless herd. "It´s a good business strategy on the packer´s part," says Bullard. Although the results would not be very good for U.S. ranchers.
To sell meat from several countries to American consumers it was vital that the consumer not be able to tell any difference in the beef produced in this country and that produced in Mexico, Uruguay, Canada, Brazil, Argentina, or any other cattle-producing country. "They want the consumer to believe that all cattle are the same," says Bullard. "It´s not in the interest of a packer to have mandatory country of origin labeling. They want consumers to be loyal to their brand regardless of where they obtained the cattle for use in that product." Country of origin labeling would jeopardize their business model and so the packers tried to kill COOL at every turn.
A packer would also not want the 792,000 beef producers left in the U.S. to have any political power to get in their way. That is why they literally took over the NCBA. What better organization would there be to do there bidding for them than one that for decades had been the one perceived by Congress to represent the cattle industry. Congress put us all in the same boat together. But the NCBA could not do the packer´s bidding if they were dependent on dues from rancher´s for their existence. So the packers and their lackeys commandeered the checkoff funds, created the NCBA and then hijacked the organization and any credibility it had in Congress.
Say what we will, you have to admire their game plan. "That´s a reasonable, justifiable, legitimate business strategy," Bullard said, at least from the packer´s viewpoint. At the same time President Bush was pushing free trade agreements and listening closely to any advice offered by the man who bought the Texas Rangers from him and contributed heavily to his campaign. It just so happens that man and his company also owned Swift of Australia. For awhile this outsourcing of beef from foreign countries was working way better than the chicken model had.
Until a Canadian mad cow reared her ugly head, that is.
That Sucking Sound
Say what you will about Ross Perot, "Big Ears" sure had one thing right: NAFTA did produce a giant sucking sound that sucked away American jobs and dollars. For farmers and ranchers in all the countries affected, NAFTA has not lived up to the hype. But still George Bush, ever the Big Business President, is trying to sign more agreements just like NAFTA. He signed a free trade agreement with Australia that will give them unlimited access to the U.S. beef market in 18 years and he is attempting to push through Congress CAFTA or Central American Free trade Agreement, which would extend NAFTA to six additional countries in Central America: Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Nicaragua. And if CAFTA is passed this summer by Congress, Bush will then turn his attention to FTAA, or Free Trade of the Americas which would create one tariff-free free trade zone from Tierra del Fuego to the top of Canada in which goods and services would flow freely amongst a market of 800 million people.
That is the reason that Bush is pushing so hard to reopen the border to live Canadian cattle despite the health risk to American consumers. He must prove to Central and South American countries that the U.S. lives up to its free trade agreements and that we are a reliable trading partner. If Congress fails to approve CAFTA, the chances for future trade deals, including the Free Trade Area of the Americas appear dismal. "There will be no FTAA if we don´t pass CAFTA," said Mark Smith, director of Western Hemisphere affairs for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Our Disappearing Economy
The problem for beef producers is that Bush is signing trade agreements with countries that don´t want our beef but instead want to sell us beef. According to R-CALF, CAFTA countries export $53 million more in beef to the United States than the U.S. sells in the CAFTA countries. And they say those numbers will get more out of balance with the signing of CAFTA. National Farmer´s Union President Dave Frederickson says, "The Central American countries under CAFTA, for example, have a combined population of about 31 million people with limited resources that could be used to purchase agricultural products. The CAFTA, and the U.S. trade agenda as a whole, seems more inclined to negotiate with countries that want increased access to U.S. markets rather than with countries interested in buying more U.S. agricultural products, Meanwhile, we will see a flood of new imports of sugar, fruit, vegetables, ethanol and other commodities." And beef, we might add.
In a press conference Agriculture Secretary Johanns said that CAFTA would benefit U.S. agriculture because it would reduce tariffs on U.S. products exported to those countries and lock those reductions into place. When asked about the potential for beef imports under CAFTA, Johanns quickly switched the topic to sugar.
The U.S. Chamber claims that CAFTA will create 20,000 U.S. jobs in its first year and 100,000 jobs over its first nine years. But we heard those same rosy projections for employment gains after NAFTA yet we have experienced net job losses during the decade of free trade. "We heard the same projections about new jobs and economic gains from NAFTA, and now a decade later we know these were lies," said Lori Wallach, director of Global Trade Watch. "Here´s the same source using the same fraudulent methodology to try to sell us old NAFTA wine in new CAFTA bottles."
The only one these trade agreements benefit are large multinational corporations who can exploit cheaper labor and input costs. The citizens in NAFTA countries have not benefitted: 1.5 million Mexican farmers have lost their livelihoods due to NAFTA and Guatemala had to use their military and police to employ cannons, tear gas, beatings and other tactics to quash demonstrations there against CAFTA.
CAFTA looked like a shoo-in when it was written but its future is now in doubt because Americans are starting to understand that workers, ranchers and citizens have come up on the short-end in trade deals. We are starting to see troubling signs in the "disappearing" U.S. economy and the exploding trade deficit. While Bush says that America´s increasing dependence on imported goods and services is evidence of the strength of the U.S. economy others see it as transferring of our wealth and our children´s future to foreigners who have acquired $3.6 trillion of U.S. assets since 1990 as a result of our trade deficits. What happens when those countries no longer want to assume our debt? Japan has already lost $109.6 billion on their investment in America debt instruments. How much more of that action do you think they want? A study by the Bank of International Settlements concluded that "the ratio of dollar reserves held in Asia declined from 81 percent in the third quarter of 2001 to 67 percent in September 2004. India reduced its dollar holdings from 68 percent of total reserves to 43 percent. China reduced its dollar holdings from 83 percent to 68 percent." That spells trouble ahead for our debtor nation. Perhaps Bush ought to be working more on this social insecurity!
"There is no better example that our trade policy isn´t working than the fact that for the first time in nearly a half-century the U.S. will import more agriculture products than we export," says NFU´s Frederickson. He says CAFTA resembles failed trade policies of the past that further encourage a "race to the bottom" for producers.
When historians look back 30 years from now they will see that the future of the livestock industry was determined in the pivotal year of 2005. The vote on CAFTA and its effect on subsequent trade agreements, the Pickett case, BSE, the Canadian border situation, the Supreme Court´s decision on the checkoff (and the bucks that have empowered the NCBA), all these will decide the future direction of the livestock industry for decades. If ranchers lose these skirmishes and become victims of that giant sucking sound too, we wonder if they´ll see the irony in that they were put out of business by a Texas President who has a ranch and wears a cowboy hat and boots?
Office: 505/243-9515 • Fax: 505/998-6236 • NEW MEXICO STOCKMAN | P.O. Box 7127, Albuquerque, NM 87194LIVESTOCK MARKET DIGEST | P.O. Box 7458, Albuquerque, NM 87194 COPYRIGHT 2010-2013, RAINY DAY, INC. All rights reserved. Redistribution or commercial use of any editorial or images from this website is prohibited without express written permission from the editor. Reproduction in whole or in part without the express written permission of the editor is prohibited. | 农业 | 14,510 |
Sandy’s Garden
Rhododendron Ponticum ... again. Fings ain’t wot they used to be! If my memory serves, this was the title of a popular song a couple of generations ago. But Irene tells me that things are not as they used to be in Falkirk. “I came back to my home town on a visit recently,” she writes, “and cannot believe what has been done to Bantaskine Estate. There used to be lovely rhododendrons there, but I was told that they had been devastated by a contractor “improving” the area. Why destroy these lovely bushes?”I wrote these words as the opening to a piece in 2004. And seven years later, fings are still very much wot they used to be, for the Forestry Commission Scotland (FCS) has launched a new, £15 million campaign in a bid to eradicate Rhododendron ponticum from its land over the next 15 years, because those of our Victorian ancestors who owned ‘big houses’ and their adjacent estates often imported alien species of plants to add variety to the estate landscaping. And one of these so-called exotics was a particular species of Rhododendron … Rhododendron ponticum … the Rhododendron of Pontus, which is an area of north-east Turkey. It is likely that these plants were brought to Britain from Spain and Portugal, where it also occurs naturally, and the species was very popular with Victorian estate owners, who valued it for its ornamental value and for the cover that it provided for game birds. So far so good.
However, Rhododendron ponticum bears a distinct similarity to the Trojan horse … it is rather more than it seems. Lurking in the plant’s characteristics are some qualities that are not at all desirable. It likes the British climate and, where it was planted in poor, acidic soil, it thrived, spreading by seed distribution and by the fact that, where its branches bow down and touch the ground, they develop roots which generate further branches, allowing a single parent plant to cover a substantial area of ground in time. The plant becomes extremely dense and impenetrable, a feature which stifles and suffocates other plants. And Rhododendron ponticum has a powerful defence against browsing animals … potentially toxic chemicals occur naturally in the leaves and flowers, so the plant can poison sheep or cattle that eat large quantities of it through hunger or inexperience. Yet the plant’s nectar is extremely attractive to nectar-feeding insects, which prefer the flowers of Rhododendron ponticum to those of native wild plants growing nearby, dramatically reducing the germination rate of these neighbouring plants.
It is truly a neighbour from hell so far as the natural plants of an area into which it is introduced are concerned. Almost all low-growing plants that it spreads to cover with its canopy of leaves are killed off, only the taller plants surviving. But they, too, will disappear in time, for, when large shrubs and trees succumb to age, no seedlings have survived to replace them! And, to add to Rhododendron ponticum’s nasty habits, the toxins in the leaves remain when these leaves fall from the plant and biodegrade, forming a toxic mat of humus on the ground below the plants which acts as a further barrier to any other plant life becoming established. With leathery leaves that make the plant difficult to control by spraying, grubbing the things out is usually the only option, followed by the removal of the layer of humus where the plants used to grow… and it may be many years before all the seeds in a cleared area have germinated, produced shoots and themselves been cleared. And, as if these were not sufficient problems, Rhododendron ponticum harbours tree-killing phytophthora, a large group of pathogens that cause diseases in plants, including many species of tree. All of which explains why Forestry Commission Scotland wants to eradicate Rhododendron ponticum from the 16 000 acres of its land which FCS reckons it occupies. We should all wish them luck!Sandy Simpson, Polmont Horticultural Society | 农业 | 3,977 |
Farm safety refresher course offered as planting season nears
By Leonna Heuring
NEW MADRID -- As Southeast Missouri farmers prepare for the spring planting season, New Madrid County agriculture experts would like to refresh them with information on farm safety before they head back into the fields full-time. "Farming is one of the most dangerous above-ground occupations there is, and a lot of times, it's No. 1," said Jeff House, agronomy specialist for New Madrid County University of Missouri Extension office. "You can't find me a farmer that hasn't had an accident one way or another. I've got scars and have had stitches and broken bones, and it's always due to something that I knew better than to do."
Working an 80-hour week makes a person tired and accidents happen, House said.
"They don't pay attention to the little things and they add up," House said. Sometimes it's not the fact someone is injured in an accident but a piece of farm equipment is damaged, House said.
"You'll be trying to beat the rain and get things going or you're having a bad day, and if you're not careful, it will come back and bite you," House said.
As a result, a farm safety seminar is planned for 1:30 p.m. March 31 at the New Madrid Community Building. House discussed how the idea for the seminar originated. "A few weeks ago a man got trapped in a grain bin," House recalled.
House is referring to the Feb. 18 incident involving Bruce Robinson, 52, of New Madrid. Robinson was submerged in a soybean-filled grain bin for four hours before being rescued. "That individual is extremely lucky to be alive," House said. "After that, the New Madrid County University Extension Council met and decided they wanted to do something about grain bin safety, and we wanted to do it now because farmers are about to get in the field." Among topics to be addressed at the seminar include grain bin safety, earthquake preparedness and agriterrorism. Frank Wideman, natural resources engineer with University of Missouri Extension, will present information on grain bin safety. "There's a lot of hazards on the farm, and part of what I'm going to talk about is the fact that we handle commodities in big bulky forms," Wideman said. "In other words, when we talk about grain, we talk about truck loads or grain bins or hundreds of bushels at a time.
He continued: "We've got the equipment that can harvest, store and move those large quantities fairly quickly. That means we've got (bigger) equipment that can gobble up that equipment quickly, and if it can do that, imagine the damage it can do to a person and other things that might get in the way."
The flowing grain offers an additional hazard that other commodities don't offer, Wideman said. "It's not unlike a whirlpool in the water. The same hazards can occur in grain bins because of a mass of material there and the properties it has while it's moving," Wideman said.
Wideman said he'll also discuss farm safety considerations and policies such as employee and family training. New Madrid County Emergency Management Director Jerry Lathum is also scheduled to present information on earthquake preparedness. "Farmers will be a key role in trying to rebuild Southeast Missouri if there's an earthquake because they've got the equipment to help," House said. New Madrid City Fire Department Chief Jim Harris encourages area farmers to attend the seminar. "Anyone that works around or is involved in grain storage or moving grain should attend the meeting -- even if just for the information," Harris said. "It would really be helpful in preventing accidents."
Harris was on site for the rescue of Robinson. "I'm really surprised we haven't had more incidents like this. Every year more grain bins are erected. I can count eight or 10 that have been put up in the last year or two," Harris said. But whether new to farming or experienced, no one is exempt from being involved in a farm-related accident, House said. "I've been around this equipment for years," House said. "I respect it, but I don't fear it anymore -- and that's where you get into trouble." Registration for the seminar isn't required. For more information, contact the New Madrid County Extension office at (573) 748-5531. | 农业 | 4,229 |
Myths About Wheatgrass
Proponents claim that wheatgrass is higher in protein than eggs, but numbers can be misleading. Nutrition Diva reveals the truth.
By Monica Reinagel, MS, LD/N, CNS, Nutrition Diva June 25, 2013 Episode #241 Page 1 of 3
I recently got an email from Julie, taking me to task for something I wrote in my episode on juicing. “I look to you for valid information,” she wrote, “but when you said that vegetable juice has no protein, it immediately discredited you as a reliable source. Lots of vegetables contain protein. Wheatgrass is supposed to be even higher in protein than eggs!” Yikes. It doesn’t take much to discredit you in Julie’s book. Even though her email was kind of harsh, I emailed her back to tell her she was right. Vegetables do contain small amounts of protein, so I was incorrect to say that vegetable juice contains "no protein." I should have said that it contains "very little protein." For example, you'd have to drink about a quart and a half of wheatgrass juice to get the same amount of protein as one serving of chicken. >
Is Wheatgrass High In Protein?
Apparently, Julie was surprised to get an email back from me (and if that’s the kind of email she typically sends to public figures, it’s not surprising that she doesn’t get a lot of responses). In any case, old Julie was willing to give me a second chance. “I confess I’m frustrated by not knowing how to find reliable information,” she wrote. “I was trying to find protein sources and read online that wheatgrass contains 20% percent protein, while eggs only 12%. How do I know what to believe?”
Related Content: How to Find Reliable Sources
Seeing as we were now friends, I responded again and explained to Julie that expressing a nutrient as a percentage can be misleading without necessarily being untrue. Confusion about the difference between percentages and absolute amounts leads to all sorts of nutritional myths and misunderstandings. And, believe me, marketers take full advantage of that fact when trying to spin the advantages of their products! You may or may not be interested in wheatgrass as a source of protein—but it’s as good an example of this phenomenon as any, so let’s take a closer look at the numbers Julie came across.
Listen: Myths About Wheatgrass play
Subscribe on iTunesPodcast RSS More Tips from Nutrition Diva Most Popular On QDT | 农业 | 2,364 |
2012 Long Jing
2012 Long Jing harvest season started with great expectations, yielded some great tea, and, unfortunately, ended too early. This has turned out a shortest harvest season in years.
Due to the cold and dry weather in early spring, 2012 Long Jing harvest season started rather late. Cold and dry weather caused the tea leaves to grow slowly, which was actually very good for the quality of tea. Due to the late harvest, there was very small production of pre-Qingming tea. The price was very high, but tea farmers had lower pre-Qingming income than past years due to the low production. Harvest of the few days after Qingming (Apr. 4) was rather low too. So in Chinese market, tea drinkers have been complaining about Long Jing prices, yet farmers' income actually decreased. And then, due to the rapid rising of temperature and strong sunshine from early to mid-April, tea leaves have been growing faster than the pace of harvest. Then some precious Long Jing leaves grew old on the tree before ever having a chance to be harvested. With a lot sighs, farmers in Hangzhou ended their spring harvest at an unusually early time.
I was lucky to have obtained some post-Qingming (Apr. 6th) harvest from my buddy in Long Jing Village. I think it's comparable to, if not better than, the Apr. 3rd harvest of last year. But I will not be able to get the good deal of pre-Guyu Long Jing as last year's Apr. 8th harvest, because this year, 5 days of high temperature makes much bigger difference than the 5 days of last year (here is a blog post comparing the pre-Qingming and pre-Guyu Long Jing of last year) in terms of flavor change, yet the low production causes the price to remain relatively high.
Here is the 2012 Long Jing that I've got. Dry leaves on top of 1/3 bowl-ful of water:
(I used the similar "mid-way" method as described in this post, but this time I was stingy and used a small tea bowl and smaller amount of tea leaves :-p Besides, I'm in love with this red shibo set made by Petr Novak!)
With more water:
In China, price of Xi Hu Long Jing has been so high that it's not affordable to a lot of people. Many tea drinkers have switched to other Long Jing districts or switched to other green teas. This has also generated certain degree of resentment among some tea drinkers, who would say Long Jing farmers are so spoiled by their natural resources and the high market prices of Long Jing.
Although Long Jing price is very high to begin with, a more expensive Long Jing doesn't always mean more money to the tea farmer. A few years ago, a tea farmer showed me a selling receipt of their pre-Qingming tea to a brand-name Long Jing company. It was a price equivalent to about $140 per pound. I can't say I could predict the exact market price of a tea, but the above-mentioned tea looked to me comparable to the $600-700 per pound level products offered by a few top notch brand-name companies in China. I wouldn't say $140 is not a fair price, considering a brand-name company would have to hire a lot of people and invest a lot of money all over its operation. But at least, we could see there is much opportunity that tea farmers could grab in the difference between their selling price to large companies and the Long Jing price in the retail market. In recent years, more and more Long Jing farmers sell tea themselves, to friends, tourists, acquainted vendors and sometimes through family-run tea houses. If my estimation of the nearly $600 market price for the above-mentioned tea is not too far off, then for a tea like that, a price anywhere between $200 and $500 would benefit both farmers and tea drinkers. Meantime, I have to admit this is only a rather abstract and simplified discussion, and brand names sometimes do have their unique values. But there is a lot to explore about the "middle-ground" price for farmers and tea drinkers/sellers/wholesalers. In addition, some local farmers/wholesalers associations are seeking for good ways to get fair prices, and sometimes, such efforts benefit both producers and consumers. An example of such exploration is the price index of Da Fo Long Jing in its local wholesale market. Below I want to quote some writing from my Long Jing Village friend 家在龙井村. Long Jing farmers are already financially doing well compared with many other tea farmers. But still, life is not easy! The article is rather sad, not because Long Jing farmers can't make a living out of tea cultivation, but mainly because they feel their hard work is not always respected, and their voices are often not heard. Here is the article, and I added some notes at the end.
Our 2012 Long Jing harvest started on March 29. It was mainly because according to the weather forecast, there would be heavy rain and temperature would drop. My cautious parents were worried that there would be disastrous weather to ruin the new leaves. Therefore, our first harvest was carried out on March 29, with 2 liang (100g, or 3.4 oz.) of tea produced.(*) The real start of formal harvest was on March 31. In the days that followed, my whole family and 20 tea harvest workers worked from 5:30am to 6pm every day and all day in the tea field, exhausted day in and day out.(**)
But this is a bad year for Long Jing farmers. In a regular year, the harvest would end after Gu Yu till around April 25. (***) But this year, the harvest had to end on April 15, as there was already no good tea leaves to pick off. My parents worked hard for a whole year with great expectations on the harvest season, but are poorly rewarded by the yields of tea. They can do nothing but working hard on the tea fields for another year, and hoping the next year would be better. They belong to the most underrepresented group of our society. What's really outrageous is, the news media are ridiculously enthusiastic about the speculation of ￥180,000 per jin (1 jin is about 1.1 pound, this price is equivalent to $26,000 per pound) Long Jing.(****) The nonsense news reports drove away a lot of our clients, as people don't believe they could afford authentic Long Jing anymore. When we were selling good tea of reasonable prices to some clients, we had to make extra effort to convince them over and over that the tea was authentic, because all they had heard from the media was authentic Long Jing was supposed to be many times more expensive... _______________________________________
* This is not paranoia, as it happens from time to time tea leaves are ruined by disastrous weather right before harvest. However, such concern of weather conditions sometimes would cause tea harvest to be earlier than its "natural time". ** Many tea harvest workers are from surrounding counties and provinces. It's estimated that this year, the typical average cost of hiring each migrating tea worker is about $16-20 per day, and the labor cost is probably one of the largest expenses in Long Jing cultivation. According to some Long Jing Village farmers, a tea worker typically can harvest 1 - 6 pounds of fresh tea leaves per day (1 pound when it's first day harvest, and 6 pounds when it's near the end of the harvest season and tea leaves are larger). About 4 pounds fresh leaves are used to make into 1 pound of final product of Long Jing. The pan-frying of the tea is usually done by the one or a few skillful family members (usually men). The tea is usually fully manually processed when harvest is low earlier in the season, and semi-manually processed when harvest is high later in the season. *** Traditionally, lower grade tea was also produced in summer and autumn. But in recent years, summer and autumn harvests are no longer carried out because the income of low grade tea cannot justify labor costs. **** The ￥180,000 per jin price was from a charity auction on first day harvest Long Jing, run by a large tea company before the harvest started. This is not the fist time a super high auction price of a tea is created. I don't know what's behind this one, but I suspect many of such charity or commercial auctions mainly serve for advertising purposes and intend to manipulate public attention. Just my cynical thought... This is not the first time either, that news media are obsessive about reporting the high auction price of a famous tea (probably many of you have heard of auction prices of Da Hong Pao and other teas before). Often in their reports, the media omit the fact that prices of such charity auctions mean to be symbolic (as the money is supposed to be donated for charity causes) and have nothing to do with market prices. Therefore such news reports could be very misleading but continue to draw broad public attention.
***** Long Jing Village is dominated by Jiu Keng Group cultivar, the traditional cultivar of Long Jing. The above-mentioned harvest dates are all about this cultivar. In Haongzhou region, harvest of Long Jing #43 cultivar started and ended earlier than Jiu Keng Group cultivar.
****** This late start and rapid progress of warm temperature affected harvest of quite a few green teas this year. I will write about a few other teas later.
CloudMountain
But is it Organic?http://www.organicauthority.com/blog/organic/are-illegal-pesticides-brewing-in-your-favorite-teas/ | 农业 | 9,218 |
Young Farmers and the Obstacles They Face
Share Tweet E-mail Comments Print By Luke Runyon Eva Teague, 31, is trying to start her own pig farm but is having trouble breaking in to the business. (Luke Runyon/Harvest Public Media) The American farmer is getting older. Most recent census data shows the average age is 57. And while that tells us who is farming now, it also shows who’s not. While the farming community continues to age, fewer young people are filling the ranks. Harvest Public Media’s Luke Runyon asks the question: Do young people even want to farm anymore? Listen Listening... / 4:56 The quick answer is yes, just not in the same numbers as they used to. And surveys indicate many of them don’t want to farm in conventional ways. A 2011 survey from the National Young Farmers Coalition showed access to land and capital to be the single biggest factors keeping young people from getting into farming or ranching. The results also indicated young people are concerned about the environment and interested in small-scale operations. But it can be difficult to turn dreams of a farm life into reality. In Longmont, Colo., Eva Teague, 31, has learned how difficult it can be to start a financially sound pig farm. Teague is a grad school dropout turned farmer, originally from the East Coast. Jaded with academia, she moved to Colorado and began working as a farm apprentice. She bought her first pigs a couple years ago. “(I) didn’t have that much cash, so I paid for feed with the credit card just to get going,” Teague said. Right now, her biggest challenge, like many other young farmers is access to capital. She recently secured a low-interest loan from the federal Farm Service Agency, but it’s not enough to get her business off the ground completely. Teague still spends her days on the farm and every evening working full-time as a waitress. Next year she plans to take a big leap; she wants to quit her off-farm job and rely solely on her on-farm income to sustain herself. Teague lucked out and scored a lease for her 15 acres at the base of the Rocky Mountains after searching for plots of land on Craigslist. She taught herself Quickbooks accounting software through Google searches. She relies heavily on the skills she picked up during a handful of apprenticeships throughout Colorado. In short, Teague is part of the millenial generation of farmers, a group that often eschews traditional forms of agriculture and favors small-scale operations. “It’s a very rare person who’s not grown up on a farm that’s going to go out and say, ‘I want to plant 100,000 acres of corn. I want to invest $300,000 in a tractor. I want to get a confinement hog barn with 300,000 pigs,” Teague said. Of course, the millennial generation isn’t exclusively made up of farmers who’ve jumped on the local food movement. There are still young people out there who want to get involved with more conventional forms of agriculture, but many of them still find their options limited. “There’s no way I’ll ever be able to own my own ranch,” said Bo Bigler, 25, a graduate student at Colorado State University. He’ll graduate at the end of the summer with a master’s degree in beef management, which almost ensures a career working at large feedlots. “The price to buy into it, it’s too much -- the cost of land is unreal,” Bigler said. “The only way that somebody can get into it is if a ranch was handed down to them, unless they’re millionaires to begin with.” The ability to purchase land is another major hurdle keeping many young people from entering the agriculture industry as producers. Leased land is available, but it leaves farmers at the whim of a landlord who could choose to cancel or refuse to renew a lease agreement. Ranchland prices in the West have reached staggering highs. Ranch and farmland, not just in Colorado, but across the plains, is going for several thousand dollars per acre, keeping aspiring farmers from contemplating to buy. “There’s no way they can pay the student loan, and pay a land payment and still have enough money left over to live on,” said Kraig Peel, a professor of animal sciences at Colorado State University. Many of Peel’s students come into his classes with idealistic ideas about farming and ranching. These days about 80 percent of his students have grown up in an urban setting, with the rest leaving a rural life to attend school. They quickly learn to realign their expectations, he said. “It’s very frustrating for a lot of these students, that would like to [run a farm or ranch], but economically it just doesn’t make sense, and it’s not feasible and the banks won’t loan them money in the first place,” Peel said. The ranching industry has reached a tipping point, Peel said. The need to bring in young people is a concern for both large and small operations. Sixty-four percent of the nation’s cattle ranches are owned by someone older than 55. Given the economic situation, many of Peel’s students have chosen to forgo the financial difficulties of running a ranch and work for large agribusiness companies instead. “The system is not working right now to allow them entrance into the job market,” Peel said. Back at Eva Teague’s pig farm in Longmont, she’s working on a multi-year business plan to make sure she can add on a few acres of vegetables and some more pigs. “I think a lot of young people want to work outside in sort of a ‘farm camp’ fun experience,” Teague said. “There are fewer people who would like to work really hard, like 50-60 hours a week for not a lot of money, which is what working on a farm is.” Teague filled out a form for the latest agricultural census last year. When data is released in 2014, we’ll see whether enough young people have joined the ranks to keep the average age of farmers from climbing even higher. Harvest Public Media reports on farm and food issues and is a collaboration of KUNC and other public media stations in the Midwest. You can find other stories, or comment on this one at HarvestPublicMedia.org. Tags: Agriculture
RMCR | 农业 | 6,042 |
Thirsty Crops And Hungry People: Symposium To Examine Realities Of Water Security
You may have guzzled a half-liter bottle of water at lunchtime, but your food and clothes drank a lot more. The same half-liter that quenched your thirst also produces only about one square-inch of bread or one square-inch of cotton cloth.
Agriculture is in fact one of the world's most insatiable consumers of water. And yet it's facing growing competition for water from cities, industry, and recreation at a time when demand for food is rising, and water is expected to become increasingly scarce. Take irrigation, for example, says Fred Vocasek, senior lab agronomist with the nation's largest crop consulting firm, Servi-Tech, Inc., in Dodge City, KS.
"Irrigation withdrawals in the United States have stabilized since about 1980, but food consumption trends are following the upward population trend," he says. "In other words, we have an increasingly hungry world with stable, or limited, freshwater supplies for food production. So, how do we keep pace with the widening gap?"
That's the central question behind the symposium, "Green Dreams, Blue Waves, and Shades of Gray: The Reality of Water," being held Sunday, Feb. 17 from 8:30-11:30 am at the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) meeting in Boston, MA.
The principal answers, say the symposium speakers, lie in three areas: Protecting our limited stores of freshwater in lakes, streams, and the ground (blue water); optimizing the use of water in crop production (green water); and reusing "waste" water (gray water) that has already served some purpose, such as food processing or energy production.
But those answers also raise a host of additional questions, says Vocasek, who co-organized the session with John Sadler of the USDA-Agricultural Research Service. Who gets the water from an aquifer when farmers want it for irrigation, a gas company wants to pump it for fracking, or a city hopes to water a new golf course? How do we convince producers to adopt water-conserving technologies and practices when it's not in their economic interest to do so? Why can't farmers simply irrigate less?
The last question is especially complex because of the issue of "virtual" water–the hidden water in food that went into growing it, Vocasek says. If the United States, for instance, decides to conserve water in the Ogallala Aquifer by growing less corn and importing grain from China instead, it's still consuming the virtual water that grew the Chinese corn. And because Chinese farmers use water much less efficiently than U.S. producers, by "trying to save water here, we may actually be wasting water on a global scale," he says.
To portray the full extent of this complicated issue, "The Reality of Water" will begin with three talks on the three types of water–blue, green, and gray–and how they can be best used to ensure both adequate food and abundant water supplies for future generations. After those speakers "paint the picture," Vocasek says, "the next three panelists will put the frame around that picture. Because there are limitations due to economics, there are limitations due to legal and ownership issues. And there are limitations due to day-to-day operations."
For example, restricting water use in certain situations or regions can be a useful approach. But government agencies often can't require landowners to cut consumption, because water rights–the right to divert water for specific purposes–are property rights in the United States. Reusing gray water to irrigate crops can also be tricky, because wastewater often carries salts or other contaminants that can damage the soil over time.
Yet another constraint is the large size of the average farm today, which often makes it unattractive for farmers to implement practices, such as cover crops and multi-year crop rotations, that help store water in the soil but take extra time and labor. "You can have a lot of plans," Vocasek says, "but there are practicalities that we deal with, as well."
This is why the symposium includes not only the perspectives of researchers and professors, but also crop consultants and professional agronomists who are "toe-to-toe" with the farmer, Vocasek adds.
"The theory, the research, the data are important, but you've got to have someone to help put it all together, because it can't be done from a university or federal office," he says. "It's got to be done right there on the tractor seat." | 农业 | 4,480 |
Home > Conventions > 2012 > 2012 Resolutions
2012 Resolutions
Farm Bill Priorities
WHEREAS, New Jersey agriculture is diverse, spanning 10 major sectors, and depends upon the vitality of a variety of agricultural products and enterprises to make the overall industry a success; andWHEREAS, New Jersey farms’ proximity to population centers brings with it unique challenges not faced in those states where significantly lower population densities make it less likely that farmers will confront noise, odor and other complaints from neighboring residents; andWHEREAS, New Jersey’s diversified economy and various industries make it more of a challenge for farm operators to find, train and retain adequate labor; andWHEREAS, New Jersey’s continuous dedication to protecting and improving the environment has created the need for farmers to be ever-mindful of the need to be stewards of their land, water and other natural resources; andWHEREAS, for these reasons, New Jersey farmers face unique challenges in their efforts to keep their farm operations viable and thriving, creating the need to rely on certain government programs to help them meet these challenges; andWHEREAS, the State of New Jersey can cover the costs of operating these essential government programs only with the assistance of federal funding; andWHEREAS, the federal Farm Bill, set to be renewed in 2012, contains within it the spending priorities for the nation’s agricultural industry; andWHEREAS, New Jersey farms’ needs from federal programs are significantly different from those of farms in many regions of the country; andWHEREAS, New Jersey’s diverse agriculture, typified by smaller farms producing a variety of crops, benefits from a strong emphasis on Specialty Crops Grants designed to increase consumer awareness about fresh produce, improve access to foreign markets, ensure food safety, strengthen research efforts, enhance conservation programs and encourage investment and efficiency; andWHEREAS, fruit, vegetable and tree nut production in the United States accounts for $40 billion in farmgate value, and when combined with nursery and greenhouse production, accounts for more than 50 percent of total farm cash receipts; andWHEREAS, a broad array of fruit and vegetable trade associations representing United States growers and shippers are continuing to work on achieving mutual objectives for the Farm Bill and assuring a common platform across regions, commodities, and other interests, including allies in support of the production of “specialty crops”; andWHERAS, the fruit and vegetable industry is a critical and growing component of United States agriculture, deserving of full and equal consideration as is provided to other sectors in the Farm Bill; andWHEREAS, the fruit and vegetable industry would not be well served by direct payment to growers but instead by building the long-term competitiveness and sustainability of fruit and vegetable production in the United States; andWHEREAS, New Jersey works closely with the United States Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Food and Nutrition Service to support a number of feeding programs that bring nutritious products to children, the elderly and those in need; andWHEREAS, New Jersey is committed to bringing more of the fruits and vegetables produced by its farmers into these programs to ensure that the offerings are of the highest practicable nutritional value; andWHEREAS, funding targeted for these feeding programs can be stretched by ensuring, whenever possible, that products be bought locally first, regionally second and nationally and internationally as a last resort, thereby cutting the associated transportation costs, especially in times of rising fuel prices; andWHEREAS, New Jersey also is home to numerous grain and forage producers who receive a much needed benefit from the Farm Bill’s commodities funding; andWHEREAS, grain and forage producers strongly support a minimum safety net for grain producers throughout New Jersey.WHEREAS, New Jersey is also home to dairy and livestock producers whose stewardship maintains a large percentage of state agricultural lands.NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that we, the delegates of the 97th State Agricultural Convention, assembled in Atlantic City, New Jersey, on January 18-19, 2012, urge the Congress of the United States to include within the next Farm Bill, and urge the New Jersey Congressional Delegation to advocate for and support the following:
Create new definitions and eligibility standards for federally funded economic development programs, such as USDA Rural Development, so that businesses or entities with a direct connection to the agriculture and food complex that are in or near metropolitan areas will not be excluded.
Fund grant and/or loan programs for innovative projects that would: (1) catalyze investment for cooperatives and companies to develop and improve agricultural infrastructure; (2) boost research and development projects through universities and agricultural groups, through both competitive and non-competitive formula funds to advance the use of science and technology in the industry; (3) provide additional funding for educational programs designed to encourage potential future farmers and those new to the industry; and (4) provide technical assistance to farmers dealing with changing regulations or methods of production.
Provide matching funds for state farm viability programs and agricultural innovation centers. To support innovation centers, offer a round of $1 million matching grants to start new centers and $500,000 matching grants to continue developing the initial models.
An emphasis on creating a balance between commodities funding and Specialty Crops Grants /Value Added Grants to ensure that all sectors of New Jersey agriculture benefit from the Farm Bill.
Refinement of the Value-Added grant programs to ensure greater producer participation.
Due consideration to equine breeding operations as akin to production agriculture, and their eligibility for the same programs as crops that are currently considered production agriculture, especially given that the equine sector is among the largest agriculture sectors in New Jersey and contributes greatly to keeping farmland green and free from development.
Funding of a forestry title to encourage agricultural owners of forest land (42 percent of the nation’s forest land is owned by farmers) to effectively manage and improve those properties.
Distribute funding for technical assistance and conservation programs more equitably around the country, with allocations tied to the percentages of market value of a region’s agricultural production.
Streamline Conservation Program application processes by allowing a farmer to apply for multiple programs with one application.
Support increases in conservation technical assistance dollars for all producers seeking assistance regardless of their enrollment in other Farm Bill programs.
Provisions that give priority for grants and loans to young farmers determined to sustain agriculture into the next generation.
Adequate funding to supplement existing farmland preservation programs in New Jersey.
Amend USDA’s policy of distributing funds for the Federal Farm and Ranchland Protection Program (FFRPP) to allow block grants to states and/or preservation entities with qualified preservation programs, with state Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) offices developing qualification standards and determining which programs meet the standards.
Allow impervious cover/building envelope standards to run parallel to the state’s preservation program.
Provisions to encourage the continuation and expansion of Food and Nutrition Service programs, and that emphasize buying locally first in order to lower the costs and environmental impacts of transportation.
An emphasis on nutrition education in the Food and Nutrition Service programs to encourage people benefiting from these programs to make informed nutrition choices.
A focus on access to and availability of fruits and vegetables, particularly to children, through expansion of the school fruit and vegetable snack program, increased commodity purchases, higher allocations to the Department of Defense (DOD) Fresh program for schools, development of a new nutrition program to assist producers in enhancing their markets, and a general requirement that food banks and commodity purchasing programs comply with beneficial dietary guidelines, except where they illogically remove products which provide important health and nutritional benefits.
Expand support of Farm to School initiatives, including the use of a bidding mechanism that gives preference to purchasing locally produced food for school meal programs to the maximum extent practicable and appropriate.
Provide adequate funding for The Emergency Feeding Assistance Program (TEFAP) and the associated transportation and storage expenses incurred by states to increase the selection of nutrient-dense foods in concert with USDA’s Food Guide Pyramid.
Provide financial support for developing shared electronic platforms to improve customer service, help farmers better compete in a global economy and enhance food accessibility, affordability and nutrition.
Significant new investment in prevention of unintentional introduction of plant pests and diseases.
Adequate funding for the New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Station, Rutgers University, our land grant college, and Rutgers Cooperative Research and Extension, to develop and maintain their leading-edge technology and support their contributions to agriculture nationally.
Adequate funding in research for specialty crops and integrated pest management, particularly through Smith-Lever and Hatch funding, as well as both the Agriculture and Food Research Initiative and programs within the National Institute for Food and Agriculture and Agriculture Research Service (ARS).
Adequate funding for programs that educate students and young farmers, as well as those that encourage new people to enter farming.
Continued adequate funding for farm labor housing programs, with special consideration given for the higher costs of real estate and construction in New Jersey.
Dairy and livestock producers strongly support a modern safety net insurance program for dairy and livestock, a new way that protects minimum margins of milk and livestock prices over input costs, while allowing producers to increase production within their local milk shed to match consumption within the market area and export share.
Adequate funding for soil conservation practices on agricultural lands.
department: njda | consumers | farmers | 农业 | 10,679 |
Search View Archive Norton farm is growing Brazilian vegetables.
Ali Berlow
Nature & ScienceFarm & Field
A Taste of Brazil
Monday, June 23, 2008 - 8:00pm
Julian Barbosa was raised on a farm where he learned to cook with vegetables grown in his backyard. When he moved to Martha’s Vineyard four years ago, he continued cooking, both at home and later at Zephrus Restaurant in Vineyard Haven where he is the sous chef.
But Mr. Barbosa had to tweak his favorite recipes since many of the ingredients grow only in his native Brazil. He used spinach or kale in sautées instead of the traditional taioba leaves, enormous to look at and bitter to the taste. For salads, he bought cucumbers, but remembered the lemony flavor of the maxixe, a vegetable with a prickly skin.
For four years Mr. Barbosa did without.
And then, a week and a half ago, he tasted again the familiar taioba. “In Brazil, we eat it a lot. In my home there, we have it. But here, there is no taioba,” he said. “This was my first time. For four years I saw no taioba. I was excited. It was good, very, very good. I can’t put it into words.”
The taioba was part of a meal made possible by the work of many hands.
Along with executive chef Robert Lionette, Mr. Barbosa sauteed the green that night with shallots and olive oil. The two served it to Elio Silva, a Brazilian native who has lived on Martha’s Vineyard for 19 years. Earlier in the day, Mr. Silva held a taioba plant sale at his Tisbury store, Fogaça. Drawing crowds of Brazilians who, like Mr. Barbosa, had not tasted taioba in years, Mr. Silva sold 70 plants the first day of the sale and 20 more the following morning.
Zoira Barros, right, looks over taioba. — Ali Berlow
When organizing the sale, Mr. Silva had help from Ali Berlow, executive director of the Island Grown Initiative, and Frank Mangan, a University of Massachusetts (UMass) professor who for the past 12 years has worked with state farmers to grow, market and sell produce native to the many immigrant groups in Massachusetts.
In 1996, Mr. Mangan helped a group of Hispanic farmers from Holyoke grow ajicitos, a popular Puerto Rican pepper. Certain adaptations had to be made, but soon, the peppers flourished in the Massachusetts soil. The experiment left the professor intrigued. Upon further research, he learned that 40 per cent of all grocery sales nationwide are made by Africans, Latinos and Asians. In the Northeast, these groups, along with Arab immigrants, represent more than 10 per cent of the general population, according to data from the 2000 census.
Mr. Mangan figured this was a population which local farmers could tap into if they knew the size of their market and how to grow the crops. “They need to know how to grow it and how much to grow and what price they can ask for it,” he said in a telephone conversation last week. “Since we started this work, we have done $2 million in sales of crops that have never been grown in Massachusetts.”
In 2004, he turned his attention to the Brazilian community. With a population estimate of 250,000, Massachusetts has the largest Brazilian community in the country. Mr. Mangan began helping farmers to grow maxixe, jilo (a type of eggplant) and abobora japonesa (a hard squash). He brought jilo and abobora japonesa plants to the Island, where they grew at Morning Glory and Norton farms. On the mainland, the vegetables sold at farmers’ markets, which routinely attracted Brazilian immigrants from as far as 200 miles away.
Earlier this year, Mr. Mangan prepared to receive 15,000 taioba roots to plant and study throughout the state. The root had never before been grown in the country and the shipment would allow Mr. Mangan to begin preliminary research on growing conditions and market size. But, due to complications, only 800 plants arrived.
The limited crop size caused Mr. Mangan to think of the Vineyard. “The advantage of the Vineyard is that Brazilians won’t travel to buy [the taioba]. You have a captured audience,” he said. “We can get a pretty good idea of the size of the Brazilian population through this, between what Elio says and the churches.”
On June 12, Mr. Mangan came down to the Vineyard with the plants and a Brazilian graduate student working with him. The following day, Mr. Silva held his plant sale. “Thursday was a big surprise for people. A lot of people hadn’t seen taioba in five or 10 years,” Mr. Silva said. “People were very, very excited.”
Customers at the sale received a five-minute DVD which, in Portuguese, gave growing instructions adapted to the Massachusetts climate. “It’s a perennial in Brazil, but we have four months here. They like to grow in the shade in Brazil, but here, they will need sun,” Mr. Mangan said. Customers were also asked to complete a survey, answering where in Brazil they were from, how long they had lived in the states, if they grew taioba in Brazil and how often they ate it there.
Farmer Rusty Walton, Chef Elio Silva discuss crops. — Ali Berlow
And they were asked to list their contact information so Mr. Mangan can be in touch over the course of the growing season. “At the end of the season, we want to know how popular the crops are with the farmers and the consumers,” he said.
In the next few days, Mr. Mangan and Mr. Silva delivered taioba transplants to Whippoorwill and Norton farms. When the plants went into the ground, the Island became the only place in the nation where the leafy vegetable is growing commercially.
In addition to the root, Norton Farm is growing jilo this season, and Mr. Woodruff of Whippoorwill Farm has planted maxixe and abobora japonesa. Morning Glory Farm is also growing maxixe and abobora japonesa transplants.
It is an opportunity which will allow the farmers to expand their production and hopefully tap into new clientele. “It’s exciting to have a new crop on the farm,” Mr. Woodruff said this week. “It would be nice to have more Brazilians coming out to the farm. I do not have any that I know of in the CSA [community supported agriculture] program. It would be nice to reach out to that community. I don’t know if this would be that stimulus, but it will be interesting to find out.”
Mr. Silva agreed. “It’s important because it brings a crop that Island farmers can diversify their income with. The main goal is to keep the farmers farming.”
To conclude their Island tour, Mr. Mangan and his graduate student stopped by Zephrus to show Mr. Lionette and his sous chef how to cook with the crop. Dinner was not initially on the agenda. “They came in to talk to [Mr. Lionette] and he just started pulling things from the shelves,” said Mr. Silva. “He said, ‘I’ve got this and this and this. What can you make from it?’ It was one of the best meals I’ve ever had.”
Mr. Silva hopes the experiment will not only provide him with the vegetables he loves to eat, but will deepen the connection between UMass and the Island farmers. “This is a good opportunity to start up a relationship between UMass and the Islands and to look deeper into our other immigrant groups,” he said. “This is something the farmers here should be very proud of. Other state universities aren’t doing this.”
He continued: ”Massachusetts is at the forefront with all of these crops. Jilo has been growing here for the past four years and it is just now being introduced into New York and Florida.”
For more information on these crops and the work of Mr. Mangan, visit worldcrops.org.
The Martha’s Vineyard Agricultural Society is reminding all farmers and growers who intend to enter their poultry in the August agricultural fair to schedule blood-tests for their birds. All poultry except waterfowl must test negative for Pullorum-typhoid. Tests must be current each year. Free tests can be scheduled by calling state inspector Alex MacDonald by July 11 at 617-872-9961. Mr. MacDonald will be on Island for testing on July 21 and 22.
All livestock entered in this year’s fair must have a copy of a current health certificate attached to their entry form. Coggins certificates are required for horses, mini horses, mules and donkeys.
This column is meant to reflect all aspects of agricultural activity and farm life on the Vineyard. To reach Julia Rappaport, please call 508-627-4311, extension 120, or e-mail her at [email protected].
Home page Vineyard NotebookTo keep up with the news sign up for our free twice-a-week email, the Vineyard Gazette Notebook. View archive » © 2016 Vineyard Gazette Advertise with the Gazette | 农业 | 8,481 |
Freshwater Shrimp: Still Not A Midwestern Cash Crop By editor
A patron enjoys the offerings at this year's Ohio Fish and Shrimp Festival.
Maureen Langlois
A plump specimen is plucked out of a bin holding this year's local harvest at the Ohio Shrimp and Fish Festival.
Jeff Burghauser
Originally published on October 3, 2012 3:07 pm It's harvest time in the heartland, but not just for apples and squash. In small, back-lot ponds on farms across the Midwest, a different crop has been growing all summer. They're substantial, slightly sweet and a revelation to the land-locked palate, not to mention worth top dollar. Yep, it's shrimp season in Ohio. But don't ask for any Midwestern shrimp at your local fishmonger. There aren't enough yet to make it to the store. Despite recent advances in feed and concerted efforts by several Midwest states to make shrimp-farming in earthen or cement ponds a viable business in recent years, it's still fraught with too much economic risk to attract many growers. "I would not get into it if you're planning on making a lot of money," said Duke Wheeler, who owns a shrimp farm in Whitehouse, Ohio. "Economically, it's probably a break-even. On the stress level, it's a negative." A big source of stress is making the shrimp's tropical biology work in a part of the world where growing seasons are four months or less. And between spring and fall, growers also have to worry about their teeming larvae being eaten by other pond-dwellers — and by each other. It turns out that the species of freshwater shrimp most often grown in the U.S., a Malaysian specimen, Macrobrachium rosenbergii, are rapacious cannibals. They need to molt something like 11 times in the month when they're doing a lot of their growing, and every time one of them casts off its armor, its soft little body is eyed hungrily by its neighbors. Between the weather, predation and cannibalism, 50 to 60 percent survival rate is pretty standard, and growers are overjoyed when they get 70 to 80 percent, according to William Wurts, an aquaculture specialist at Kentucky State University. For Midwest shrimp farmers, one thing is certain: They can't compete with imports from the exploding Asian aquaculture industry on price. "The stuff that's importing from Malaysia and southeast Asia, frozen, that's $2 a pound — half the cost of production here," says Wurts. As the biggest importer of shrimp (including the farmed freshwater variety), the U.S. has an interest in encouraging a domestic supply. Federal agencies like the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration are funding the development of new types of feed that alleviate the need for fish meal as a protein source. Some of these feeds depend on corn and soy, which this year may be an expensive addition to the supply chain. Instead of competing on price, inland shrimpers are marketing freshness. Harvest festivals such as the Ohio Fish and Shrimp Festival in late September bring out the local community to taste the freshly caught shrimp. And while they're there, they can purchase some of the more economically favorable farm products like trout and perch. There's certainly demand for shrimp. According to Dave Smith, who runs the festival, the shrimp sold out in two hours last year. This year, the festival pooled harvests from several producers, including grain farmers who have started growing shrimp on the side. He's even thinking of ways to grow saltwater marine shrimp in his Urbana, Ohio-based aquaculture operation. "The marine shrimp are less cannibalistic, and if we can figure out the heating, we can do it year-round." But for Duke Wheeler, in northern Ohio, the economics of raising shrimp just haven't worked out. After sinking $7,000 in a new pond to add shrimp-farming to his family's Christmas tree operation five years ago, he has warned his customers that he probably won't be continuing the shrimp operation in the future. "I love shrimp, and my wife loves shrimp," said Duke Wheeler, "but this year we didn't get any, and there weren't enough for our volunteers. "If we do it another year," he says, "it's strictly because of the joy that we bring to the families. That might be motivation enough."Copyright 2014 NPR. To see more, visit http://www.npr.org/. View the discussion thread. © 2015 Valley Public Radio | 农业 | 4,311 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.