id
stringlengths 30
34
| text
stringlengths 0
68.5k
| industry_type
stringclasses 1
value |
|---|---|---|
2016-50/3796/en_head.json.gz/2207 | College of Agricultural, Consumer and Environmental Sciences (ACES) Publications & Videos How-To Publications
Economics Publications
Guide Z-114
Onion Cost and Return Estimates, 2008
Jerry M. Hawkes and James D. Libbin
College of Agricultural, Consumer and Environmental Sciences, New Mexico State University
Authors: Assistant Professor and Professor, respectively, Department of Agricultural Economics and Agricultural Business, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces. (Print Friendly PDF)
Long-run continued success of New Mexico’s commercial onion crop will, as always, depend upon the profitability of the crop in any or all of its various forms. Table 1 presents typical costs and returns of producing onions in the primary producing areas of New Mexico. These estimates provide comparisons that can be used by current and prospective onion producers and processors to assess the profitability of onion production.
Table 1. Costs and Returns for Producing Onions in New Mexico for 2008.
Onions are one of the top ten commodities grown in New Mexico. New Mexico produces three separate onion crops that differ in their harvest times: fall, mid-season, and spring. Onions are primarily grown in the southern counties of the state. Supplies peak in early June and July as fall-planted onions mature. Unlike onions grown in northern states, which are stored over the winter, New Mexico’s crop goes straight to stores, mostly in southern and eastern states. New Mexico’s onions are sold as fresh-market onions, but a portion of the crop is also used for onion rings and frozen products. Regardless of the end use of the onion, the crop must provide an adequate return to cover all of the producer’s costs.
Obtaining a higher price or reducing costs can generate increased profit. The cost-return relationship must be examined carefully by every producer of every commodity, whether in agricultural, manufacturing, or service industries. Because of the economic structure of agriculture markets, cost and return relationships are particularly important. The basic building blocks of cost and return analyses are enterprise cost and return estimates (CAREs), which are later organized and compiled into other budgets, including whole farm, partial, and cash flow budgets. An enterprise CARE includes all costs and returns associated with producing an enterprise in some particular manner. Enterprise CAREs are constructed on a per-unit basis, such as per acre, to make a workable comparison among alternative enterprises. An enterprise is any activity that results in a product used on the farm or sold in the market, and a farm can be made up of any one or many enterprises. Each enterprise requires a certain combination of resources, such as land, labor, machinery, capital, and purchased inputs.
Enterprise CAREs can estimate costs and returns on enterprises currently in the farm plan, as well as new enterprises being considered. Most enterprise CAREs also list physical resources needed for production, which is useful information for prospective new producers of a commodity. In addition to producers, many other professionals in agriculture find enterprise CAREs to be valuable information sources. These include lenders, assessors and appraisers, consultants, and lawyers. The New Mexico State University Cooperative Extension Service publishes representative CAREs for various regions of the state annually. These enterprise budgets represent typical costs and returns for a given size and method of production in a particular region of the state. The CAREs are not averages, but represent typical situations. NMSU CAREs represent current conditions for farming situations where management is above average. Adjusting these CAREs for prices and yields expected in the future would increase their value as decision-making tools. Projections based on a farm’s unique set of conditions would be most valuable. Some items can be modified easily to build more personalized CAREs. Quantities and prices of purchased inputs, yields and prices of crops, fuel costs, and labor costs may be readily adapted to individual farms. Another example of a modification to these CAREs is to analyze each operation performed on each crop. If these operations are performed in a different pattern, the CAREs should be changed. Yields and prices of the crops are highly variable from year to year. In analyzing historical budgets for use in forward planning, the astute manger will decide how much risk can be adsorbed and will select cropping patterns accordingly. In forward planning, the manger should consider both optimistic and pessimistic price and yield combinations to account for risk, and should consider crop rotation plans.
The effect of the various costs on planning decisions and business analyses is very important. These estimates present a full-cost approach to enterprise analysis. Many of the costs are opportunity costs; that is, they are real costs of doing business, but may not be cash expenditures. For example, if all labor is provided by the operator, then the entire amount listed in these estimates is money that can be kept by the operator—it represents a return to operator and family labor. Similarly, all land and all capital is charged at competitive rates regardless of whether land is rented or owned or whether capital is borrowed or owned.
The key to interpreting the “bottom-line” figure calculated in these estimates lies in the type of decision at hand. For next year’s crop, the important point is the level of gross margins (the returns minus all cash expenses). Can enough cash be generated to meet reasonable family living needs and to cover all financial debt commitments? In the long run, all expenses must be covered (of particular importance when trying to determine whether to buy a farm). In the short run, a negative net income is not desirable, but it may not necessarily be enough to cause business failure. For a short while, deprecation and other non-cash costs can provide a cushion to allow producers additional financial flexibility.
CAREs like these are updated annually. More detailed estimates and a guide to using the CAREs (NMSU Extension publications 400 Z-32) may be obtained from each county Extension Farm Management Specialist.
Depreciation expense: Annual allowance for the deterioration of an asset whose productive life is more than one year. Depreciation is not paid in cash, but is an expense to the business since the purchase price of a long-lived asset cannot and should not be deducted in any one year.
Enterprise cost and return estimates: A detailed full-cost listing of all returns and costs (whether paid or unpaid) associated with a particular crop or livestock enterprise.
Fixed costs: Expenses that do not vary with the level of production, such as depreciation and personal property taxes. For example, personal property taxes are the same on a tractor regardless of whether that tractor is used on one acre or 300 acres. (Line E)
Gross margins: Returns minus variable costs; the most important short-run planning figure.
Gross returns: Total cash receipts from a crop, i.e., total yield times price. (Line A)
Interest on operating capital and equipment investment: A calculated cost, or opportunity cost, on the use of capital in the farm business. For some farmers, interest cost will be an outlay, while for others it will be an imputed cost. (Lines I and J)
Net farm income: Returns to labor management, capital, land, and risk, i.e., gross returns minus purchased inputs, fuel, oil, lubricants, repairs, and fixed costs. (Line F)
Net operating profit: Gross returns minus total operating expenses. (Line H)
Operating capital: Operating expenses minus fixed costs, i.e., the amount of cash required for all purchased inputs (including labor, fuel, oil, and repairs) to produce a crop, without regard to machinery, equipment, or land investments.
Operating expenses: The total of all costs of pro- ducing a crop, except interest.
Opportunity cost: The cost of using a resource in one enterprise when it could be used in alternative enterprises or investment opportunities, measured by the return that could be obtained from using the resource in an alternative investment. For example, if cash used in crop production could be placed in the bank at a 10% rate of interest, the opportunity cost of cash to the crop would be 10%.
Overhead expenses: Expenses not directly associated with production, such as insurance, employee benefits, land taxes, and utilities. These costs occur without regard to the level of production or whether production exits at all.
Partial budgeting: A planning procedure that lists only items of receipts and expenses that are affected by a particular change in procedure or organization.
Rate of return on investment: Net operating profit divided by the total machinery, equipment, and land investment. A measure of profitability of assets in percentage terms.
Return over cash expense: Gross returns less all cash operating expenses. (Line C = A − B)
Return to capital, labor, land, and risk: Charges for the listed factors of capital, labor, and land have not yet been subtracted from gross returns. Typically, these three factors are owned.
Return to land and risk: Net operating profit minus the interest change on the use of machinery, equipment, and operating capital. This return figure shows the final return before a land charge is calculated. (Line L)
Return to risk: Return to land and risk minus a charge for land investment, i.e., the amount of gross returns left over after charges are made for every factor of production.
Variable cost: Expenses that vary with the level of production, such as labor, fuel, oil, repairs, fertilizer, and seed.
Whole-farm budget: Projected crop mix revenues and expenses for a production year. A projected plan and income statement.
To find more resources for your business, home, or family, visit the College of Agricultural, Consumer and Environmental Sciences on the World Wide Web at aces.nmsu.edu.
Contents of publications may be freely reproduced for educational purposes. All other rights reserved. For permission to use publications for other purposes, contact [email protected] or the authors listed on the publication.
New Mexico State University is an equal opportunity/affirmative action employer and educator. NMSU and the U.S. Department of Agriculture cooperating.
Printed and electronically distributed November 2008, Las Cruces, NM. | 农业 |
2016-50/3796/en_head.json.gz/2980 | Sugar beet price outlook weak in near term
An oversupply of sugar in the U.S. and abroad dropped the sugar beet price 21 percent this year to $40 a ton. Prices will remain weak in the near term until sugar supplies work through the system. But the potential loss of the sugar title in a new farm bill could have long-term consequences for the U.S. sugar industry.
Carol Ryan DumasCapital Press
Published on December 18, 2013 11:02AM
John O’Connell/Capital Press
Sugar beets are harvested Oct. 7 at Pahl Farms in Aberdeen, Idaho. Ag economists say a global sugar glut should keep beet prices low in the near term.
BURLEY, Idaho — Idaho’s sugar beet growers suffered a tough year in 2013, with the price for their crop falling 21 percent to $40 a ton – the lowest since 2007.With a global sugar supply glut caused by large sugar cane crops in Asia and Brazil this year, growers can expect low prices to linger in the near term, said Paul Patterson, University of Idaho ag economist, during the University’s ag outlook seminar in Burley on Dec. 11.It’s a matter of how long it’s going to take to work that sugar through the system, he said.The world sugar price dropped 18 percent this year, from 28 cents a pound to 23 cents, and dropped 30 percent from 33 cents in FY 2011, he said.That decline brought the U.S. price for wholesale sugar beet sugar down 41 percent this year, from 49 cents to 29 cents per pound, and down 48 percent in the last two years from 56 cents in FY 2011.Declining prices are also the result of this year’s increase in U.S. sugar production from both sugar cane and sugar beets. Sugar beet production set a record this year.A 98 percent increase in sugar imports from Mexico in FY 2012, following a 37 percent decline the previous year, also helped push U.S. market prices down this year, Patterson said.The U.S. government spent $51 billion this summer buying sugar in an attempt to support sugar prices and reduce defaults on USDA loans, selling the sugar to ethanol producers usually at a loss. But the program was not effective in raising sugar prices above breakeven default levels, and sugar processors forfeited some of their production to the government, he said.Market fundamentals are expected to keep sugar prices weak in the near term, with a possible slight improvement in the 2014/15 marketing year, he said.A big uncertainty, however, is whether the sugar title will be maintained in a new farm bill, he saidU.S. sugar producers can’t compete against sugar cane produced in countries that aren’t subject to the cost of U.S. labor and environmental regulations or against subsidized sugar dumped on the world market, he said.Without a domestic sugar program, the U.S. industry could see a replay of the 1970s when the Utah-Idaho Sugar Co. closed a plant in Idaho, one in Utah and two in Washington, he said.According to the American Sugar Alliance, 103 sugar mills, refineries and processing plants have closed since 197, leaving only 48 remaining in 2013. Since passage of U.S. sugar policy in the 2008 farm bill, which sought to balance domestic supply and demand, the widespread closures that plagued the industry have largely subsided, with only two processing plants shutting their doors.Patterson projects 2014 sugar beet prices between $38 and $45 a ton, but lack of a sugar program could mean a lower price. If the sugar title is maintained and there is a government loan program this coming year, it would put a floor price under sugar beets in the high $30s per ton, he said. | 农业 |
2016-50/3796/en_head.json.gz/3115 | More seasonal workers from overseas head to Mid-South farms Nov 28, 2016 Where do new Arkansas dicamba regulations stand? Nov 28, 2016 Growers considering switch from flood to furrow in Mid-South rice Dec 02, 2016 Hessian flies emerging: 6 things to know before spraying wheat Dec 07, 2016 March 3-4: Farm & Gin Show set for Memphis
As you're marking off events on your brand new 2006 calendar, be sure to highlight March 3-4 for attending the 54th annual Mid-South Farm & Gin Show at Memphis. The event, which will give growers an opportunity to see firsthand the latest equipment, products, and services, will be held at the downtown Cook Convention Center. And, says Tim Price, executive vice president of the Southern Cotton Ginners Association, which sponsors the annual event, the '06 show is expected to be a sellout, with more than 450 exhibits. The show is co-sponsored by Delta Farm Press. In addition to offering growers and ginners a firsthand look at a broad array of new ag products and technologies, program sessions will also focus on two topics of major interest: cottonseed and energy. “There is a great deal of concern about trends in cottonseed usage and price,” says Price. “At our association's annual meeting March 2, we'll have experts on hand to discuss cottonseed concerns.” That meeting will be at the Peabody Hotel Thursday afternoon. At 1:30 p.m., Saturday, March 4, at the convention center, there will be a special seminar on energy. “Escalating energy prices have had a major impact on every sector of agriculture,” Price says. “Gins have been affected by the huge increase in natural gas and electricity rates. The natural gas situation has also has a major impact on farmers, since gas is the key feedstock for nitrogen fertilizers.” Price says a number of specialists will be on hand to discuss the energy situation and what producers may expect as they plan for the coming season, and there will be an opportunity for one-on-one dialogue. The Saturday afternoon special seminar, inaugurated at last year's show, provides another venue for getting critical information to producers and ginners, Price says. “Our seminar on Asian soybean rust last year was extremely well-received, and we're expecting a lot of interest in this year's energy seminar.” In addition to the special energy seminar, show attendees will have access to a broad range of additional information in the annual Ag Update sessions held Friday and Saturday mornings at 8:30. These will include Friday sessions on market outlooks for cotton, soybeans, and cash grains by leading industry specialists, and Saturday sessions on legislation, politics, and other key issues. “We feel the Ag Update programs and the energy seminar will offer a forum for issues of key importance to farmers this year,” Price says. This year's show will have exhibits running the gamut from the latest equipment, to seed, chemicals, and services. “We've had a tremendous amount of interest by exhibitors and all our showrooms will be filled with companies offering a wide range of products and services. “Since our show comes just before the start of the new season, the show will offer growers an opportunity to interact with industry suppliers and to get the latest information for use in making key crop management decisions. “We have many new exhibitors, bringing a new array of products,” Price says, “and a lot of our every-year exhibitors are increasing their space, so it's going to be a very diverse show spanning all the major Mid-South crops. “While we're proud of the cotton and ginning heritage of the show, it has evolved over the years into a stage for exhibitors representing all of our crops. We believe it is the premier indoor farm show in the South.” “Memphis is a fun place for the entire family to spend a weekend,” Price says, “and we hope everyone will plan to come and be a part of this year's big show.” Coinciding with the show is the annual meeting of the Southern Cotton Ginners Association and its member associations from Louisiana, Tennessee, Mississippi, and Arkansas-Missouri, and a number of ginner events are held during the week of the show. | 农业 |
2016-50/3796/en_head.json.gz/4078 | Extreme poverty
Periodic droughts
Erratic rainfalls
Poor harvests due to soil erosion and exhaustion
Overview Lesotho's 2009 harvest saw a 10% drop in maize production compared to 2008 due primarily to more land being left fallow because of the high cost of inputs, such as seeds and fertiliser. However, there was a 57% increase in sorghum - the third annual increase in succession. Overall, Lesotho produced around 86,000 mt of cereals, which was slightly less than the previous year. Lesotho is the only country in southern Africa to harvest less in 2009 than in 2008.
The Lesotho Vulnerability Assessment Committee (LVAC) estimates that between 400,000-450,000 people will require some form of humanitarian assistance before the next harvest in April 2010 - compared to 352,000 in the months leading up to the 2009 harvest. The LVAC found that the increasing cost of essential items coupled with reduced opportunities for casual labour (such as weeding etc) had exacerbated the food security situation for many vulnerable households, leaving them dependent on assistance.
While erratic weather has affected Lesotho’s staple maize harvests in recent times, annual cereal production has been shrinking for years because of a combination of long-term soil erosion, lack of sufficient access to agricultural inputs and the impact of HIV/AIDS on farming families. In 1980, cereal production met about 80 percent of the national requirements; by the 1990s, it was contributing about 50 percent. By 2004, however, cereal production was estimated to contribute only 30 percent of national cereal requirements – and the percentage is still falling.
Farmers are starting to switch to sorghum, which is more resistant to the changing weather patterns. However, the increase in sorghum production cannot yet compensate for the substantial fall in maize production in recent years.
The declining maize harvests are exacerbating the country’s already-high levels of chronic vulnerability since extremely poor families are forced to purchase even more of their food needs – at a time when prices are high and household income is falling.
Studies indicate that HIV/AIDS is the leading factor in the drastic reduction of household income for much of the population. In addition, there is a decline in income opportunities outside the country, particularly in South Africa ’s mining industry. Lesotho has a population of around 1.8 million and a significant proportion endures chronic and persistent vulnerability to hunger and poverty.
According to the results of the national nutrition survey conducted in December 2007, 42 percent of children below the age of 5 suffer from stunting (chronic malnutrition), which indicates a lack of nutritious food for a long period of time. The HIV prevalence rate in Lesotho ranges from 24 percent in rural areas to 33 percent in urban areas.
HIV mainly affects individuals in their economically productive and family-rearing years. Grandparents often need to care for children who have been orphaned as their parents have died from HIV/AIDS. There are about 180,000 orphans in Lesotho.
WFP has been working in Lesotho since 1965. Currently, WFP has a Protracted Relief and Recovery Operation (PRRO) and Development Project (DP) in the country. WFP started the new PRRO in May 2008 with the main focus on social protection. WFP used the 2007 UNAIDS report on HIV prevalence and 2007 national nutrition survey to target 158,000 people in six districts with HIV prevalence above the national average. However, due to the combined impact of the financial crisis and high food prices,
WFP has scaled up its operations and is now targeting around 178,000 beneficiaries in 10 districts. Food assistance is targeted at chronically poor and food insecure beneficiaries involved in Prevention of Mother To Child Transmission (PMTCT), Anti-Retroviral Therapy (ART) and Tuberculosis (TB) treatment in remote, mountainous and inaccessible areas. To complement this programme, WFP has a joint partnership with UNFPA on ART counselling. Mother and child health (MCH) and orphaned and vulnerable children interventions are implemented throughout the country under UNICEF/WFP joint programming, the former targets malnourished children below 5 years and pregnant and lactating mothers in targeted health centres.
WFP supports the Government of Lesotho in providing two free meals a day (morning porridge and lunch) to 66,000 pupils in 400 primary schools located in remote and economically-disadvantaged highland and mountainous regions of the country. The project supports the government’s priorities as defined in the Poverty Reduction Strategy and Education Sector Strategic Plan 2005-2015 and contributes to outcome 2 of the United Nations Development Assistance Framework: ‘to achieve improved and expanded equitable access to quality basic health, education and social welfare services for all by 2012’. School meals provide a powerful incentive for parents to keep their children in class, while the food also improves their health and gives them the energy they need to concentrate on their lessons. | 农业 |
2016-50/3796/en_head.json.gz/4317 | Report: Top 12 ways the world can eliminate agriculture's climate footprint
Impact of eating less red meat, more efficient production and use of fertilizer calculated; emissions can be cut while boosting food production globally
SAN FRANCISCO, CA (24 April 2014)--Annual carbon emissions from global agriculture can be reduced by as much as 50 to 90 percent by 2030--the equivalent of removing all the cars in the world--according to a comprehensive new report released by Climate Focus and California Environmental Associates. The study highlights twelve key strategies--led by reduced global beef consumption, reduced food waste and better farm nutrient management and production--that can deliver big climate wins while maintaining food security and building resilience. The report, Strategies for Mitigating Climate Change in Agriculture, offers a silver lining to the grim prognosis delivered by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) this month. Overall, opportunities in Brazil, China, the European Union, India and the U.S. can provide the largest impact on global emissions. The report, which reviewed and synthesized a wide range of literature on agriculture and climate change, including some unpublished data, stresses the fundamental yet under-emphasized role that consumption plays in fueling food-related emissions. It estimates that changing diets and reducing food waste in key countries could cut over three gigatonnes of carbon dioxide per year. "By reducing the climate impact of the food we eat, we can improve our health and the health of the planet," said Dr. Charlotte Streck of Climate Focus, co-author of the study. "By making the way we produce food more efficient, farmers can reap the benefits of increased production while decreasing the environmental impacts of farming. The energy and transport sectors have seen a significant growth in innovation needed to ensure the long term sustainability of the sectors. It is time that agriculture followed." The study also shows that making our food system more efficient and eating healthier food would allow us to feed the growing population, expected to surpass 9 billion people by 2050, and limit the sector's significant climate footprint. "There are so many ways in which policymakers can help farmers boost productivity while mitigating climate change," Streck said. "We need to dispel the notion, once and for all, that productivity and sustainability can't work hand in hand." Too Much of a Good Thing is Not a Good Thing
The report finds that 70 percent of direct greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture come from livestock, in particular from cows, sheep and other grazing animals. Much of these emissions could be eliminated if beef demand were reduced, particularly in two countries: the U.S., currently the world's biggest consumers of red meat, and China, where demand for beef is set to rise rapidly.
The U.S., where Meatless Mondays have taken hold and doctors increasingly advise patients to lay off the red meat, is already beginning to consume less beef. Per capita beef consumption dropped from its peak of 88.8 pounds in 1976 to 58.7 pounds in 2009, and consumer research indicates that the recent economic downturn alongside concerns of red meat's health impacts have suppressed beef consumption further--though consumption remains excessive by global standards. Considering beef's immense share of livestock carbon emissions--six times greater than poultry on a per unit basis--and its impact on tropical deforestation, the report recommends national public relations campaigns to continue this trend. China, on the other hand, could avoid emissions if it were to shift away from its projected trend of becoming a beef eating nation. Increasingly affluent, and influenced by western culture, the country's consumers are poised to ramp up their red meat consumption by 116% by 2050.
"Because China already has a climate-friendly diet and hasn't yet embraced beef, it's still possible to discourage the consumption of more beef without changing the country's traditional beliefs and culture," said Amy Dickie of California Environmental Associates, co-author of the study. "Steering the Chinese diet in a more climate-friendly direction would yield enormous benefits for the country's health and food security--as well as the global climate." The report cites the global public relations campaign designed to curb shark fin soup consumption in China, underpinned by the national government's prohibition on serving the dish at official banquets. These efforts cut shark fin imports by an enormous 50-70 percent, helping to conserve dwindling shark populations around the world. The report suggests that a similar effort could persuade diners to eat less meat altogether or, at least, to appreciate healthier, less water-intensive and less climate-intensive meats like pork or chicken. Waste Not, Want Not
Eliminating food waste in the U.S. and China, as well as food loss in Sub-Saharan Africa and South and Southeast Asia, could also put a major dent in agricultural emissions. Globally, between 30 and 40 percent of all food is lost as it travels along the supply chain from the farm to the consumer. As food waste is a byproduct of inefficient production, storage, distribution and consumption practices, there are vast opportunities for savings for farmers, the private sector and consumers. Some affordable fixes include the following.
In the U.S., confusion surrounding 'sell by' and 'best by' dates and other food labels, which often mislead consumers into tossing perfectly good food, should be addressed.
In the U.S. and the European Union, the practice of tossing an enormous amount of food for aesthetic reasons--not having the right shape or color--before it even reaches consumers should be discouraged. In China and the U.S., portion sizes in restaurants and catering should be slimmed down. In Southeast Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa, improving cooling and storage practices would prevent spoilage and food losses. Chew on This
Similar to the demand-side findings, many of the production-side recommendations focus on reducing emissions from ruminants, animals--including cows, sheep, goats and buffalo--with a four-chamber stomach that emit methane during the digestion process. This process, called enteric fermentation, more fondly referred to as 'cow burps,' is responsible for over 40 percent the agricultural sector's direct emissions. "There's no way around it," said Streck. "Cows are incredibly inefficient food sources. They eat an enormous amount of feed and require a lot of land and water resources. Pigs, chickens and sustainably caught or raised fish, not to mention non-meat proteins are so much better for the climate--and healthier for people as well." Streck noted, however, that for millions of farmers in Sub-Saharan Africa, cattle often offer a variety of benefits, such as providing essential protein and pulling ploughs and carts, that need to be considered when gauging what regions to target. The report recommends two key tactics for eliminating livestock-production emissions. In Brazil, it can take up to 36 months for cows to reach slaughter weight. In the U.S., it only takes around 18 months. Improving grazing management in South America's cattle hub would make the country more efficient beef producers. Likewise, in India, feeding cattle and buffalo healthier diets would ramp up milk production while reducing the per-gallon climate footprint. Farmers can also drastically reduce emissions by changing the way they grow food on their fields and pastures. In industrialized countries, particularly China, agriculture uses too much fertilizer. Most farmers in China could reduce fertilizer use by 30 to 60 percent without harming yields. Exacerbating this problem, coal--rather than more efficient natural gas--is used as the primary feedstock in Chinese fertilizer production. Fertilizer is also over-applied in India and the U.S., although domestic production is much more efficient. Production Potential
The report recommends pairing demand-side interventions with efforts to improve the efficiency of production. One of the largest challenges in containing the growth of agricultural GHG emissions is the diffuse nature of production. In the aggregate, the emissions reduction potential of the agricultural sector through supply-based approaches is nearly 2 Gt CO2e per year by 2030, including efficiencies gained in fertilizer production in China. These emissions reductions represent about a 30 percent reduction from 2030 levels. In most cases, these interventions would yield productivity gains and ought to be in the best interest of farmers and governments. Priority focus areas include: reducing emissions from the largest cattle herds that are not produced as efficiently as they could be (e.g., Brazil's cattle population and India's dairy herd), reducing fertilizer use and production in China, reducing rice emissions in Southeast Asia, and improving stored manure practices in industrialized livestock systems.
The report also stresses the unique role that agriculture can play in sequestering, or storing, carbon in croplands, grazing lands and agroforestry. The study suggests, for example, that Brazil could integrate silvopastoral systems--a combination of crops, trees and livestock--and boost the quality of the grasses on its pastures as a means to store carbon. In turn, feeding cattle higher-quality food could lead to fewer emissions from deforestation, as ranchers would not need to chop down forests to create new pastures. "There is a scientific debate about how effective different practices are at sequestering carbon, and quantifying the impacts of these efforts can be a challenge. Nonetheless, it's undisputed that increasing carbon leads to increased soil fertility and water retention, a boost to farmers," Dickie said. "The world should embrace available opportunities to boost the carbon in agricultural systems as long as they complement efforts to reduce emissions and boost food security. Especially in cases when these practices require little effort but offer significant potential benefits." Productivity Matters
On par with the transportation sector, the production and consumption of food is responsible for around a fifth of global greenhouse gas emissions. And when ranchers and farmers need new land for food production, they clear forests, making agriculture the leading cause of forest destruction, another major contributor to climate change. "Agriculture is the largest cause of deforestation worldwide," Dickie said. "Improvements to agricultural practices, as we've highlighted in this report, have so many benefits, including a reduction in deforestation and pollution of waterways." However, despite agriculture's massive contribution to climate change--as well as its potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions--agriculture still hasn't received the attention it deserves at the international climate talks, the report states. One reason for the holdup, Streck said, is the belief that agricultural productivity and sustainable farming are mutually exclusive. The report shows that this is not the case, she added.
About California Environmental Associates Since 1984, CEA has worked at the nexus of markets, policy, and science to address environmental challenges in California, the United States, and around the world. CEA has three practice areas: regulatory strategy, recruiting services, and philanthropic services. CEA's philanthropic services practice has supported some of the largest environmental foundations and non-profits on programmatic strategy design and development. CEA brings an intricate knowledge of key environmental issues, including climate change, energy policy, marine conservation, sustainable agriculture, forest management, goods movement, air quality, toxic chemicals, and land-use planning. http://www.ceaconsulting.com
About ClimateFocus
Climate Focus is an advisory company committed to the development of strategies, policies and projects that reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Its international and multidisciplinary team in the U.S., Europe, Bangkok and Colombia works closely with companies, governments and non-governmental organizations on reducing emissions in energy, households, industry, transport, agriculture and forestry. http://www.climatefocus.com
Susan Tonassi
[email protected]
http://www.burness.com/ More on this News Release
ClimateFocus, California Environmental Associates
ENERGY/FUEL (NON-PETROLEUM)
FOOD/FOOD SCIENCE
More in Agriculture
Study finds less fragmentation in muzzleloading and black powder cartridge rifles
Soil pHertility
Common insecticides are riskier than thought to predatory insects
Conservation effort spreads seeds of destruction across the Midwest
View all Agriculture news Trending Science News | 农业 |
2016-50/3796/en_head.json.gz/4897 | Future Farms Of America Might Not Include Much Family By Jessica Stoller-Conrad
Jan 31, 2013 TweetShareGoogle+Email Honey, what if the kids don't want it?
Goran Ljubisavljevic
It may sound like a line from The Godfather, but some agricultural specialists advise that farming isn't personal; it's business. And family farms need to think and act more like a business to survive in a competitive world, says Bernie Erven, professor emeritus in the department of agricultural economics at Ohio State University. Last week, Erven spoke to farmers at the Growing Michigan Agriculture Conference about how to improve their practices to recruit, hire and keep the best employees by using modern methods, like social media. But the message may be a tough sell. Family farms are an iconic American institution, and they make up nearly 96 percent of farms in America, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. And it's hard for some folks to hear that the best hire might not be your sister's kid who needs a summer job baling hay. "If you hire a family member who isn't qualified, who doesn't fit the position, and maybe doesn't even want the position, then it's ... unlikely the person would succeed," Erven says. "Thus [it's] not helping the business and not helping the family." If family farms don't approach hiring in a professional way, there are some uncertainties for both the farm and its employees, he says. "[Will] they treat adding employees as a family matter or is it a business decision?" he says. According to the 2007 USDA Census of Agriculture, U.S. farms spend a total of $21.9 billion per year employing 2.6 million hired workers. Streamlining and standardizing hiring processes on family farms could have a significant economic impact. New outside hiring practices could even help farm families alleviate the expectations of both parents and children. "This argument that you owe it to your children to have a place for them in the farm business, I have trouble with that. Because the other side of that coin is that then your children owe it to you to stay home, even if they don't want to," Erven says. Additionally, a diverse labor force can help boost the farm's main goal: efficient food production. For example, dairy workers who have experience working with different cattle breeds may bring fresh perspectives and new techniques — additions that can improve farming practices, Erven tells The Salt. But pushing the family out of family farms can have disadvantages, too, Jennifer Fahy, communications director at Farm Aid, says in an email. "The family farm is a place where kids grow up and learn responsibility and skills ... they're also learning values and traditions," she says. Fahy says that the American farming workforce is aging and in desperate need of young farmers to carry on the tradition. "A major factor in young people being interested in becoming farmers is the exposure they receive on their family's farm," she says. "That process of farmers passing down their life's work and traditions to the next generations is so important to the fabric of our food production system and culture." Farm managers might be able to find the most qualified employees outside of the family, but Fahy says that family tradition is also an important consideration. "There's something beyond experience and skills at work when a family farmer can involve the next generation," she says.Copyright 2013 NPR. To see more, visit http://www.npr.org/. TweetShareGoogle+EmailView the discussion thread. © 2016 New Hampshire Public Radio | 农业 |
2016-50/3796/en_head.json.gz/5239 | Monsanto’s GMO Seeds Contributing to Farmer Suicides Every 30 Minutes Published: April 4, 2012
By Anthony Gucciardi
BlacklistedNews.com
In what has been called the single largest wave of recorded suicides in human history, Indian farmers are now killing themselves in record numbers. It has been extensively reported, even in mainstream news, but nothing has been done about the issue. The cause? Monsanto’s cost-inflated and ineffective seeds have been driving farmers to suicide, and is considered to be one of the largest — if not the largest — cause of the quarter of a million farmer suicides over the past 16 years.
According to the most recent figures (provided by the New York University School of Law), 17,638 Indian farmers committed suicide in 2009 — about one death every 30 minutes. In 2008, the Daily Mail labeled the continual and disturbing suicide spree as ‘The GM (genetically modified) Genocide’. Due to failing harvests and inflated prices that bankrupt the poor farmers, struggling Indian farmers began to kill themselves. Oftentimes, they would commit the act by drinking the very same insecticide that Monsanto supplied them with — a gruesome testament to the extent in which Monsanto has wrecked the lives of independent and traditional farmers.
To further add backing to the tragedy, the rate of Indian farmer suicides massively increased since the introduction of Monsanto’s Bt cotton in 2002. It is no wonder that a large percentage of farmers who take their own lives are cotton farmers, the demographic that is thought to be among the most impacted. Dr. Mercola, an osteopathic doctor that has been educating the world about natural health for many years, recently saw the destruction of traditional Indian farmers first hand. Dr. Mercola found out about the notorious ‘suicide belt’ of India, where 4,238 farmer suicides took place in 2007 alone.
Many families are now ruined thanks to the mass suicides, and are left to economic ruin and must struggle to fight off starvation:
‘We are ruined now,’ said one dead man’s 38-year-old wife. ‘We bought 100 grams of BT Cotton. Our crop failed twice. My husband had become depressed. He went out to his field, lay down in the cotton and swallowed insecticide.’
In India, around 60 percent of the population (currently standing at 1.1 billion) are directly or indirectly reliant on agriculture. Monsanto’s intrusion into India’s traditional and sustainable farming community is not only concerning for health and wellness reasons, but it is now clear that the issue is much more serious.
This post first appeared at Natural Society Share This Article... | 农业 |
2016-50/3796/en_head.json.gz/5642 | A Bad Climate for Food
Ben Grossman-Cohen
Writes about climate change and food security
Every day seems to bring a new story of the impacts of climate change on poor farmers and families around the world. Last week, the New York Times brought us a dramatic report of scorched farmland in the "heartland of the Fertile Crescent" where hundreds of thousands of people have fled as dispossessed farmers and their families in Syria and Iraq adjust to four consecutive years of drought.
From the Times:
"For Syria, which is running out of oil reserves and struggling to draw foreign investment, the farming crisis is an added vulnerability in part because it is taking place in the area where its restive Kurdish minority is centered. Iraq, devastated by war, is now facing a water crisis in both the north and the south that may be unprecedented in its history. Both countries have complained about reduced flow on the Euphrates, thanks to massive upriver dam projects in Turkey that are likely to generate more tension as the water crisis worsens."
It doesn't take a very limber imagination to see how these dynamics (drought, poverty, war, ethnic unrest, scarce resources shared by neighboring countries with competing priorities) might be a recipe for dangerous and destructive outcomes. And if we listen to the expertise of military experts and climate scientists, it is precisely these dynamics that increasingly put our national and global security at risk. That is, unless we stand up and do something about it.
Climate change is undermining food security from Iowa to India. As situations like those in Iraq, Syria, Pakistan, Mozambique and countless other places show us, the line between food security and global stability is dim at best. That is why as we mark yet another World Food Day, we must find solutions that support those on the front lines of both the fight against hunger and the fight against climate change. And if you know where to look, those solutions are all around us. Just last week the White House's Interagency Climate Change Adaptation Task Force released a report, which recommends investments in the resilience of communities in the US and developing countries that are vulnerable to climate change. The report shows that the administration is committed to helping communities on the front lines of climate change. It has the added benefit of being a fiscally responsible approach. If we've learned anything from the horrific images of this summer's extreme weather from Russia to Pakistan, it's that we need to prepare for the consequences of climate change now or we will inevitably pay the expensive and punishing price later, not just in dollars but also in lives lost.
Fortunately, there are very tangible ways to support the efforts of at risk populations to adapt to climate change and fight hunger. One example is an innovative but very simple way of growing rice that significantly increases yields with less water. Called by the fancy name of "System of Rice Intensification, this technique could have significant impacts if applied widely around the world. After all, rice is the major source of calories for half the world's population, and is the single largest source of employment and income for people who live in rural areas, where the poor are. But climate change is putting rice production at risk, which could dramatically increase hunger. By 2050, climate change could depress world rice production by 12-14% according to the International Food Policy Research Institute.
Rice production is also highly water intensive, accounting for one-quarter to one-third of the planet's annual freshwater use. Yes, you read this right: between one quarter and one third of freshwater used in the world is for rice production. With climate change putting pressure on freshwater resources, like in Syria, the status quo of rice production comes into question.
SRI can be a game changer helping to increase farmer incomes and reduce hunger for millions of poor people around the world. If governments and donors are serious about efforts to protect our food supply and build resilience to climate change, they will give serious support to SRI programs. But SRI is just one example of the countless ideas out there to support small farmers in the face of climate change. SRI can help us get there, but first the world's leaders must get on board.
Follow Ben Grossman-Cohen on Twitter:
www.twitter.com/bengroco
Food Climate Change Sri System Of Rice Intesification Adaptation | 农业 |
2016-50/3796/en_head.json.gz/6197 | Rep. Jason Smith Capitol Report: Missouri Farmers Now Have to Tag Dairy Cattle
On Monday this week many Sale Barn Owners found out about new Federal Tagging Requirements
Rep. Jason Smith (R-Salem)
On Monday this week many Sale Barn Owners found out about new Federal Tagging RequirementsIt was the late, great President Ronald Reagan who quipped that the nine most terrifying words in the English language are, “I’m from the government and I’m here to help.” Our federal government and our state department of agriculture reminded us again this week why Reagan’s words are still relevant.The latest example of government interference being more harmful than helpful comes in the form of new national animal identification requirements handed down by the United States Department of Agriculture. These regulations require livestock owners to obtain veterinary inspection, register, and tag certain animals that will be shipped out of state. The idea is to make it easier to trace animal ownership. But the end result is that Missouri farmers are again saddled with a burdensome, costly federal regulation.If you remember a few years ago, the state legislature fought valiantly against the intrusions of the federal government as it tried to force states to adopt the National Animal Identification System (NAIS). The messaging for NAIS was the same as it is today for the new Animal Disease Traceability Rule – that we must have these burdensome requirements in place to control the outbreak of infectious diseases. While I want to protect all Americans from a contaminated food supply, I also know such requirements do little more than make our livestock owners jump through hoops and pay fees they cannot afford.In 2008 we stood up to the federal government on the NAIS issue. The General Assembly was able to pass SB 931 to ensure the NAIS requirements would be voluntary rather than mandatory. It was a huge victory for Missouri livestock owners and something that I was proud to support as a member of the Missouri House.Today, we again deal with another attempt by the federal government to implement a shortsighted policy that will hurt our farmers more than it will help protect our food supply. It’s also concerning that our own state department of agriculture has been aware of these new requirements but has done very little to inform livestock owners and sale barns of the change. In fact, many sale barns were caught completely off guard by the new requirements that took effect this week.The truth is that this will be a costly change for livestock owners as it will cost between $3 to $5 to tag each animal under the new requirements. On top of that, animals will need to be run through chutes at the sale barn to put the tags in place. It may seem like a minor inconvenience to some, but it’s an extra step that can cause a cow to lose as much as 25 pounds of weight. When you add up the total weight lost for a semi-truck load of cattle being tagged the final dollar amount lost can be as much as $3,500. It’s yet another reason this new requirement has been poorly conceived and implemented.We need better leadership for our agriculture community on both the national and state level. We need actual farmers and livestock owners involved in making the decisions that impact family farmers in all parts of the state and the nation. Instead we have government bureaucrats pretending to have the best interests of rural Missourians at heart. The result is an ill-conceived policy like the new animal disease traceability rule. It’s a policy I will continue to fight against because I believe it’s the wrong thing to do for Missouri’s most important industry and the many farm families who work so hard to make a living. | 农业 |
2016-50/3796/en_head.json.gz/8287 | Landreth catalogs help plant seeds for future gardeners
SUNDAY, JAN. 10, 2010
By Susan Reimer
The 70-page D. Landreth Seed Co. catalog, which features the cover of the 1884 centennial edition, is available online at landrethseeds.com or by calling (800) 654-2407. Production costs have escalated so this is the last year the catalog will be free.
January is National Mailorder Gardening Month, and the mailboxes of gardeners will soon be stuffed with tomatoes and melons, peas and perennials.
Although most of these catalogs are photographic wonders, few will have the graceful and historic beauty of the catalog the D. Landreth Seed Co. has produced to celebrate 225 years of teaching people how to garden.
“Starting in the 1840s, the Landreths educated Americans about gardening – and about more than gardening,” said Barbara Melera, owner of the Pennsylvania company.
“With this catalog, we’ve come full circle. There is a real need to educate a new generation about gardening. That’s part of the purpose of this catalog.”
In researching this historical treasure, Melera learned that everybody who was anybody in American seed trade spent a year’s apprenticeship at Landreth, beginning in the 1790s and including members of the Lewis & Clark expedition.
Every president from George Washington to Franklin D. Roosevelt had been a customer.
In the 1840s, David Landreth Jr. realized that Americans moving west would have to live off the land, and they would need more than a list of seeds to purchase. So his catalog became a kind of almanac/newspaper/gardening manual, and included such information as the names and salaries of elected officials, capital cities, the countries on the continent and scientific discoveries.
“All the information that a responsible citizen should know if he was going to be a responsible gardener or farmer,” said Melera.
This catalog, which took more than a year to assemble, is the result of seven years of study by Melera of the company archives.
Much of that research has now found a home in the 2010 catalog, including old photos, seed lists and even a “sports story” printed in a local paper about the outfielder who lost a ball in a field of Landreth onions and fired home one of the onions instead. The umpire never knew the difference as he called the runner out.
The catalog also includes a list of heirloom seeds available today for food grown by slaves, including varieties that were brought to this country from Africa or the Caribbean, probably by slave traders who had a financial stake in feeding their slaves.
The research for this list of 34 vegetables, grains and herbs was conducted by food historian Michael Twitty, much of it on Maryland’s Eastern Shore.
It is accompanied by a print of a restored oil painting commissioned by Landreth in 1909 of an African-American woman, post-slavery, peeling vegetables.
For generations, Landreth had a Baltimore location. But the oldest seed company in the country had been reduced to a warehouse on North Point Road in East Baltimore when break-ins and vandalism forced Melera, an MIT graduate, to move the company to New Freedom, Pa.
There she has used her interests in both gardening and history to revive the company’s heirloom seed lines.
Published: Jan. 10, 2010, midnight Tags: home | 农业 |
2016-50/3796/en_head.json.gz/8942 | Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /var/www/chepauk/agro/wp-content/plugins/foogallery/includes/public/class-css-load-optimizer.php on line 54
On Going Studies
Completed Studies
Welcome to Agro Economic and Research CentreThe Government of India has established Agro Economic Research Centres throughout the country with a view to provide them with a constant flow of data on various aspects of Agriculture and Rural life. At the outset, four Centres were started each in New Delhi, Santhiniketan, Poona and Chennai. At present there are 15 Centres in the Country.
A.E.R.C. at Chennai was started on 15th April 1954 for the purpose of carrying out a comprehensive and a continuous study of agricultural economic problems in the States of Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka. Later Karnataka State was attached to a Centre at Bangalore and Andhra Pradesh to a sister centre located at Andhra University, Waltair. Currently, the Chennai Centre covers the States of Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Pondicherry and Lakshadweep.
The Centre has completed 62 Village surveys, 10 resurveys and 155 problem oriented research studies since its inception. The lists of studies completed and the ongoing studies are enclosed.(a) Continuous study on changes in the rural economy. (b) Evaluation of the Centrally Sponsored Agricultural Development Schemes implemented in the jurisdiction States. (c) Farm Management Studies in Salem and Coimbatore Districts during 1954-1955 to 1956-1957 and in Thanjavur District during 1967-1968 to 1969-1970. Using the data thrown up by the surveys of the Centre and also Secondary data, numerous Research papers were prepared on Topics of current interest by the staff members of the Centre. Research Scholars and Planners from different facilities utilize the data collected by the Centre for Academic interest and policy implementation. Works Completed: The Centre has completed 62 Village surveys, 10 resurveys and 156 problem oriented research studies. The Library / Collection: The Centre has a Library of its own which is used not only by the members of the staff but also by the staff and Research Scholars of other departments of the University. About 7500 volumes of books, reports and journals are available for reference
© 2016 Agro Economic Research centre | 农业 |
2017-04/0034/en_head.json.gz/8254 | Home >> Encyclopedia-britannica-volume-18-plants-raymund-of-tripoli >> Purification to Rabban Bar Sauma >> Quince
fruits, fruit, cydonia, cultivation, grown and native
QUINCE, a fruit-tree concerning which botanists differ as to whether or not it is entitled to take rank as a distinct genus, Cydonia, or as a section of the genus Pyrus (family Rosaceae, q.v.). The name Cydonia vulgaris is to be preferred to Pyrus Cydonia. Bailey gives five varieties of C. vulgaris, namely vars. lusitanica, maliformis, pyriformis, marmorata and pyramidalis. The quinces are much-branched shrubs or small trees with entire leaves, small stipules, large solitary white or pink flowers like those of a pear or apple, but with leafy calyx lobes and a many-celled ovary, in each cell of which are numerous horizontal ovules. The common quince is a native of Persia and Anatolia, and per haps also of Greece and the Crimea, but in these latter localities it is doubtful whether or not the plant is not a relic of former cultivation. By Franchet and Savatier P. Cydonia is given as a native of Japan with the native name of "maroumerou." It is certain that the Greeks knew a common variety upon which they engrafted scions of a better variety which they called Kv(54)vcov from Cydon in Crete, whence it was obtained, and from which the later names have been derived. The fragrance and astringency of the fruit of the quince are well known, and the seeds were for merly used medicinally for the sake of the mucilage they yield when soaked in water. The quince is but little cultivated in Great Britain; in Scotland it seldom approaches maturity, unless fa voured by a wall. The fruit has a powerful odour, but in the raw state is austere and astringent; it, however, makes an excellent preserve, and is often used to give flavour and sharpness to stewed or baked apples. The common Japan quince, Pyrus or Cydonia japonica, is grown in gardens for the sake of its flowers, which vary in colour from creamy white to rich red, and are produced during the winter and early spring months. The fruit is green and fragrant but quite uneatable. (X.) Cultivation in the United States.—Once rather commonly cultivated in America, the quince is now the least esteemed of all tree fruits for the orchards of the continent. In the heyday of its popularity, fruits were largely grown for canning and preserving, the quince being noted for its delectable products. Now, however, fruits are most commonly grown to eat out of hand; though the quince is scarcely edible in the uncooked state. The cultivation of the quince is of the easiest. It thrives under any of the several systems of cultivation given apples and pears and does well even under neglect, providing only that the soil be suitable. The quince will not grow in light or sandy soils and must have loams or clays. This fruit has comparatively few insect and fungus troubles and, therefore, should be a favourite plant in home gardens for its fruits and also because it is a handsome ornamental tree. There is not much variation either in tree or fruit. The fruits are all golden-yellow in colour, of much the same texture and flavour, and differ chiefly in shape, there being orange-shaped, apple-shaped and pear-shaped sorts, numbering, perhaps, a score or more, but of these only two or three appear in nurserymen's catalogues. Orange is the most commonly grown variety. Champion is another of the three or four standard sorts, of which only one other, Rea, is worthy of mention. (U. P. H.)
See W. W. Robbins, Botany of Crop Plants (Philadelphia, 1924) ; L. H. Bailey, Standard Cyclopedia of Horticulture (1914-27) and Manual of Cultivated Plants (1924). From Encyclopedia Britannica | 农业 |
2017-04/0034/en_head.json.gz/9035 | Small dairies see market in raw milk
Sat Feb 2nd, 2013 7:23pmNews By Gale Fiege Herald Writer
SILVANA — For more than a dozen years, the Sinnema family’s dairy barns sat empty on their farm near Island Crossing.
Jim Sinnema, his brother, Ron, and their father, Neil, had to call it quits in the late 1990s when the price paid for wholesale milk was going down while overhead was going up.
These Darigold farmers sold their herd of Holsteins and most of their pasture. They stayed on the farm, but Neil retired, Ron started making custom gun barrels and Jim drove a cement truck.
Then a few years ago, Jim Sinnema, 42, got the idea that his family should get a milk cow. He and his wife Kelli wanted to give their four home-schooled children something to do around the farm. Sinnema bought a Guernsey named Sally and put his kids in charge.
“The milk was great. The kids loved it. So I bought a few more Guernseys,” he said. “Then I started thinking seriously about getting back into dairying.”
Sinnema decided to sell raw, unpasteurized milk. He figured that because of consumer interest in fresh, local farm products and especially in raw milk, he could confidently market what he and his family drink each day. With the price of a gallon of raw milk hovering around $10, compared with about $3 for a gallon of pasteurized, it could be an opportunity to make some money.
Still, health officials remain concerned about milk that has not been pasteurized to kill harmful pathogens, which primarily occurs when even small amounts of manure contaminate the milk.
That doesn’t faze Sinnema.
“Nobody says any more that organic farming is a joke. Raw milk is a change that is happening. But for it to be sustainable, the market has to get bigger,” he said. “Some people say you’re playing Russian roulette if you drink raw milk. I’m not a gambling man, but if I was, I’d be a millionaire. People have been drinking it for thousands of years.”
Pasteurization is the process of heating milk to a temperature that kills salmonella, listeria and E. coli. It began in the late 1800s when public health issues emerged in industrialized urban areas.
In 1939, raw milk — and poorly pasteurized milk — still was considered the cause of about a quarter of all food-borne illnesses and many deaths nationwide.
After World War II, at the height of agricultural production in Western Washington, dairy farmers invested in new equipment, adopted new practices and sent nearly all of their milk off to be pasteurized.
Today, Washington and 10 other states allow retail and farm sales of raw milk. Canada prohibits the sale of raw milk, as do 17 states. Another 22 states allow very limited raw milk sales, mostly at farm stands.
About 18 dairies in Washington produce raw cows’ milk — just a fraction of all milk sales in the state — and are licensed by the Department of Agriculture. The state seeks to uphold strict standards and work hard with producers to stop problems before they reach the retail level, said Kirk Robinson, the department’s assistant director of food safety.
Raw milk producers must be licensed and are required to post warning labels on each container. Pregnant women, children, the elderly and anyone with a compromised immune system are considered most at risk of illness.
In addition, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the USDA and the state Department of Health caution against the consumption of raw milk.
The CDC in January published its two-year summary of reports of food-borne disease outbreaks. An outbreak is when two or more people get sick. For the first time in 11 years, raw and pasteurized dairy products were identified among the foods (along with beef, fish and poultry) most commonly associated with outbreaks. The majority of the dairy-related outbreaks during the 2009-10 survey period were caused by consumption of contaminated raw milk products, primarily cheese.
The Snohomish Health District has no record of any disease outbreaks related to raw milk originating in Snohomish County during the past five years. Of the 176 singular cases of illness caused by E. coli, seven found unpasteurized milk or cheese, such as queso fresco, as a possible risk factor, said health district spokeswoman Kristin Kinnamon.
Seattle attorney Bill Marler, in lawsuits filed across the country, has represented people who have fallen ill after consuming unpasteurized dairy products.
“Because their farms are small, raw milk dairymen believe it can’t happen to them and they see a profit opportunity because more and more people are getting into drinking raw milk,” Marler said. “But if you sicken just one kid, your farm is gone.”
At one time, when hundreds of dairies dotted the landscape, Silvana was a hub for farmers in north Snohomish County. A couple of creameries were located there, so when Jim Sinnema named his raw milk dairy the Old Silvana Creamery, it was a good fit.
Adjacent to his older barns Sinnema outfitted a new building with what he needed for a cooling tank, bottling and sanitation.
He opened for farm sales with an honor-system collection box on the day after Thanksgiving in 2011. An industrial-sized refrigeration unit holds gallon and half-gallon jugs, keeping the milk temperature at just above freezing. The refrigerated shelf life for raw milk is about 10 days.
In the winter, Sinnema and his family work hard to keep their 19 Guernseys and six heifers clean and happy in the barn, feeding them bales of organic alfalfa, grass and hay. In the summer, Sadie, Buttercup, Freda, and their sisters graze in the pasture out back.
The operation is not certified organic because Sinnema wants to be able to seek conventional veterinary care if the life of a cow is endangered. However, he said he doesn’t use hormones, chemical fertilizers, herbicides or genetically modified feed. The “girls,” as he calls them, get just a little barley to entice them into the milking parlor.
Machines drain the cows’ milk into stainless steel pails, which are emptied by hand through a strainer and into the stainless steel refrigerated milk tank.
“It’s the way we used to do it in the 1960s,” Sinnema said. “It’s a lot easier to inspect a milk bucket than a pipeline.”
A lot of cleaning goes on each day at the dairy: Milking equipment, boots, hands, the milking parlor floor, as well as the cows’ backsides and udders.
“The state makes an inspection once a month, but we also take our milk to a lab in Bellingham each week for testing,” Sinnema said. “I want to keep an eye on bacteria and be on top of the quality of our milk. My family drinks more than a gallon of our milk each day. I would never want them to drink anything that might harm them.”
Raw milk enthusiasts include libertarians who want the government to stay out of their food choices, environmentalists and locavores who want local food from small farms, and, increasingly, people who believe in its health benefits.
Mari Budlong said all it took was a tour of Sinnema’s dairy to feel safe about drinking Old Silvana Creamery milk. She appreciates the milk’s rich golden color and the earthy taste, but it’s also a matter of health for her family, she said.
“I don’t drink pasteurized milk and haven’t since high school. It always gave me terrible stomach cramps. With raw milk, I’ve never had that problem,” said Budlong, 33, of Marysville. “I believe pasteurizing kills the good stuff that helps our bodies use milk more efficiently.”
Budlong is not alone.
Many food activists believe that most pasteurized milk in America is from factory farms where animals are fed genetically modified grain, treated with hormones and antibiotics, and that the milk is stripped of good bacteria during the pasteurization process.
The Campaign for Real Milk, a national organization, says what is needed is a “return to humane, non-toxic, pasture-based dairying and small-scale traditional processing.”
But plenty of governmental sources suggest that it’s a myth that pasteurization makes milk less healthy. The CDC says on its website: “There are no health benefits from drinking raw milk that cannot be obtained from drinking pasteurized milk that is free of disease-causing bacteria.”
Still, the popularity of raw milk is growing, and those who drink unpasteurized milk are passionate about it.
Cass Wheelock-Rowse, 31, of Everett, is a public health nurse and a mother. She and her young children have been drinking raw milk for several years, enjoy the taste of raw milk and have fewer stomach aches.
She gets her milk at the Sno-Isle Food Co-op in Everett, where most milk sales are of raw milk, with pasteurized certified organic milk coming in second. Raw milk also is one of the top sellers of all products sold at the food co-op, said Gretchen Weimer, a member of the management team at Sno-Isle.
“People ask for raw milk all the time,” Weimer said. “We don’t promote it, but we know that people really like it.”
Among Wheelock-Rowse’s friends, she knows no one who has gotten sick from raw milk.
“I can’t help but think that opposition to it comes from the dairy industry,” Wheelock-Rowse said.
The Washington State Dairy Products Commission is quick to underscore the government health warnings. However, the commission doesn’t take a position on the raw milk controversy and believes it’s up to consumers to make their own decisions, said Mark Leader, a commission spokesman.
Sinnema figures he sells about 70 gallons a week from his Old Silvana Creamery farmstand and up to another 300 gallons a week at stores. He tells new customers to take it slow when they try his milk for the first time, to “let their guts get used to it.”
They have to get used to the price, too. At $5.50 for a half gallon at his farmstand, he admits it’s not cheap.
“People spend $5 for a mocha, well, this is the Starbucks of milk,” Sinnema said. “And if that wasn’t true, I would not sell out each week. It tastes good and people get hooked.”
Alan Shank, a farm planner with the Snohomish Conservation District, has been following the raw milk trend for about eight years. He doesn’t promote raw milk in his job, but he does encourage local farmers to find alternatives to conventional dairying in order to make money.
Successful Eastern Washington dairies producing pasteurized milk have grown their herds to include thousands of cows in order to compensate for an ever-thinning profit margin, Shank said.
“With the economic downturn and operating costs going up, we keep seeing more small dairies operating in the red or going out of business,” Shank said. “Raw milk has been a way for some farmers in Western Washington to stay in business.”
Sinnema continues to drive a cement truck and isn’t making any take-home money from his dairy yet, though he does pay his kids for their hard work and has put the profits back into the business. He was able to buy a refrigerated delivery truck to bring his milk to more than 15 health food stores, co-ops and independent grocers in Snohomish, Skagit, Whatcom and King counties.
On his way to deliver milk south of Monroe, Sinnema drives near the farm of his childhood friend, Art Groeneweg, another new producer of raw milk in Snohomish County. Like Sinnema, Groeneweg is a former conventional dairy farmer who’s been drinking raw milk most of his life.
Groeneweg, 47, owns the Art of Milk dairy, which has the motto “Back to the Basics.” The business has been up and running for about five months. Groeneweg sells milk in half-gallon glass bottles primarily from a stand on his family farm. To ensure quality, he tests his milk from 20 grass-fed Holsteins several times a week.
“My customers want the real deal, and I want to make sure they can buy it.”
Gale Fiege: 425-339-3427; [email protected].
The Art of Milk, Art Groeneweg, 22426 Highway 203, Monroe, WA 98272; 206-595-6182; [email protected].
Old Silvana Creamery, Jim Sinnema, 1105 Pioneer Highway, P.O. Box 412 Silvana, WA 98287; 425-268-7961; www.oldsilvanacreamery.com.
For more information from supporters of raw milk, go to www.raw-milk-facts.com.
For more information from those who caution against raw milk, go to www.realrawmilkfacts.com. | 农业 |
2017-04/0034/en_head.json.gz/9678 | Western food supply safer since 2006 E. coli outbreak in spinach Jan 04, 2017 New HLB positive tree found in urban Cerritos, Calif. Jan 02, 2017 American Farm Bureau plows into Phoenix this weekend Jan 05, 2017 Ag at Large: New water bill holds promise for California agriculture Dec 27, 2016 New system for NRCS called likely
Doreen Muzzi Farm Press Editorial Staff | Jun 15, 2002
The move to a system where landowners and growers receive help adopting conservation practices from someone other than the federal government is almost a sure bet, according to one state official. “It's quite likely that one way or the other we're going to implement a third party vendor type of assistance program,” says NRCS State Conservationist Chuck Bell. Bell, who spoke to growers and other landowners at a recent public hearing on the proposal of third party vendors in Davis, Calif., says, “I'm looking at it optimistically. I believe the third party vendor process can work.” One thing is for certain, he says. With the 2002 farm law substantially increasing the available dollars for conservation programs, the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) is not likely to have enough staff available to respond to landowners in a timely manner. What the folks at the USDA's conservation arm don't know is what the added focus on conservation programs means to the future of their agency. “In order to maintain our credibility and our expertise we need to be in the field doing the work as well as doing the design, but we don't know funding-wise how that's going to work out in the future,” he says. “We don't now whether, in the future, the NRCS will become the keeper of the tech guide and the keeper of the standards, or will become more of an oversight agency.” Plenty for NRCS Bell says, “I believe NRCS is certainly going to move in the direction of a third party vendor system. I also think there's still plenty of room for NCRS employees to maintain their technical expertise and local contacts, and continue in the planning and application of conservation programs.” However, he says, “We also know, no matter what business you're in, things are changing and they're not going to stop changing. We feel it's important as an agency to look within ourselves to look at our programs to determine what we can do to be ready to respond to our clients in a timely manner. “If somebody comes in and asks for help re-engineering a project and we can't get to it for a year, something is wrong somewhere. It may be a question of not having the resources or the staff available, or maybe our own internal policies get in the way. We need to be looking within ourselves and within the department to try to find those answers,” he says. No matter how a third party system is implemented in the end, Bell says his primary concern is that the specifics of the program be crafted locally. “If you design these programs at the top level, and you make it pretty intricate or sophisticated, by the time it gets down to the field office it's very, very difficult to handle,” he says. “We need the interpretation of this program to be as simple and concise as possible in order to give us the flexibility needed to implement it at the local level. If there is going to be a manual or handbook that describes how to carry this thing out, it doesn't need to be 14 volumes. Let us make some of those decisions at the local level.” e-mail: [email protected] | 农业 |
2017-04/0034/en_head.json.gz/10397 | A Fight Over Vineyards Pits Redwoods Against Red Wine by: NPR October 18, 2013 In the California wine mecca of Sonoma County, climate change is pitting redwood lovers against red wine lovers.
This Friday morning, a coalition of environmental groups are in a Santa Rosa, Calif., courtroom fighting to stop a Spanish-owned winery from leveling 154 acres of coast redwoods and Douglas firs to make way for grapevines.
Redwoods only grow in the relatively cool coastal region of Northern California and southern Oregon. Parts of this range, such as northwestern Sonoma County, have become increasingly coveted by winemakers.
Chris Poehlmann, president of a small organization called Friends of the Gualala River, says the wine industry is creeping toward the coast as California’s interior valleys heat up and as consumers show preferences for cooler-weather grapes like pinot noir.
“Inexorably, the wine industry is looking for new places to plant vineyards,” says Poehlmann, whose group is among the plaintiffs.
California’s Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, or CalFire, approved the redwood-clearing project in May 2012.
“So we sued them,” says Dave Jordan, the legal liaison for the Sierra Club’s Redwood Chapter, another of the plaintiffs. The Center for Biological Diversity is the third plaintiff.
The groups filed suit in June 2012 on the grounds that state officials violated California’s environmental protection laws by approving the plan.
Redwoods are considered among the most spectacular of all trees. The biggest trees on Earth by height, redwoods can stand more than 350 feet tall. Some are more than 2,000 years old.
However, the redwoods at the center of this conflict are not old-growth trees. The area was clear-cut more than 50 years ago, and most of the redwoods on the site are less than 100 feet tall. Which is why Sam Singer argues: “There are no forests [on this site].”
Singer is a spokesman for Artesa Vineyards and Winery, which is owned by the Spanish Codorniu Group and which first proposed the development project in 2001. Singer says that the two old-growth redwood trees on the property will be spared.
But the thousands of trees slated for removal are between 50 and 80 feet tall, according to Poehlmann. He says the trees provide wildlife habitat and stabilize the soil against erosion, which has been a major problem for streams in the area that once harbored runs of salmon and steelhead trout.
The project planners have even estimated this timber to represent 1.25 million board feet of “merchantable” lumber.
Dennis Hall, a higher official with CalFire, says his department’s approval of Artesa’s project in 2012 came only after a lengthy review process found that it would not significantly damage the environment.
“We did an [environmental impact report] for the project,” Hall says. “It was an extreme and exhaustive analysis of potential impacts to the environment.” The report deemed most of these potential impacts to be “less-than-significant.”
Still, Poehlmann feels CalFire has been too lenient on proposals by developers to level trees. “They are acting as if they are actually the ‘department of deforestation,” he says.
The tensions go beyond this case: Friends of the Gualala River and the Sierra Club’s Redwood Chapter have gone to court several times in the past decade to successfully stop timberland conversion projects proposed by winery groups and which had been approved by the state. Among these fights was the battle to save the so-called Preservation Ranch, a 19,000-acre parcel that developers planned to partially deforest and replant with vines. Earlier this year, the developer sold the property to The Conservation Fund.
But from 1979 to 2006, 25 conversions of forest to agriculture occurred in Sonoma County at an average rate of 21 acres per year, according to county officials.
At least a few tree clearing projects have occurred without permission. High-profile winemaker Paul Hobbs didn’t bother getting a permit before he leveled eight acres of redwoods in 2011 with plans to plant wine grapes. He remains a superstar winemaker and was tagged earlier this year by Forbes as “The Steve Jobs of Wine.“
And it’s not just redwoods that are at stake as vineyards expand their terrain. California’s oaks aren’t subject to the same environmental protections as more commercially valuable species like redwoods and Douglas fir, according to CalFire’s Hall. And Northern California’s oak forest, near the coast as well as inland, is being lost at fast rates to vineyard expansions, says Adina Merenlender, an environmental biologist with U.C. Berkeley.
Merenlender says oak trees tend to be overlooked by the general public, which is more easily impressed by redwoods. Yet oak forests, she says, provide habitat for vastly more species than do redwood forests.
Sara Cummings with the Sonoma Vintners, a wine industry trade group, says new vineyards are usually planted within what she calls the region’s “agricultural footprint”—land that is already designated by county planners as “agricultural.” Moreover, she says, more than half the county’s winegrowers are members of the California Sustainable Winegrowing Program.
But Merenlender is concerned about future expansion into land not previously farmed.
“We’re already seeing a lot of acquisition of coastal lands,” she says. “Investments are moving north and west, toward the coast.”
The issue, it seems, is a global one. A 2013 study predicted that global warming will cause a dramatic shift in the world’s wine regions. The report warns that wilderness areas in British Columbia and remote regions of China—one of the world’s fastest-growing winemaking regions—may become increasingly coveted by the industry.
“But at least we’ll have plenty of wine to drink, “Poehlmann quips, “while we bemoan the fact that our forests are all used up.” Copyright 2013 NPR. To see more, visit http://www.npr.org/.
Keywords: , The SaltPrevious‹In France, Deportation Of Teenage Girl Ignites Fierce DebateNext
Enthusiasts Encourage More Women To Give Hunting A Shot›Support for NEPR.net is provided by:Become a NEPR UnderwriterAudition | 农业 |
2017-04/0034/en_head.json.gz/10775 | Hale brothers regain control of onion company
Brothers Bob and Rick Hale have led an investment group to regain control of River Point Farms, the largest onion producer in the United States, based in Hermiston, Ore. President and CEO Bob Hale said the company wants to ensure it can meet the expanding needs of its customer base. The Hales expect to invest in facilities and equipment with strategic partners.
Matthew WeaverCapital Press
Published on September 10, 2013 5:27PM
Last changed on September 13, 2013 1:19PM
HERMISTON, Ore. — Brothers Bob and Rick Hale have led a group of investors in regaining control of River Point Farms, part of a massive onion growing and processing operation that includes strategic partners and growers in the Pacific Northwest and California.Bob Hale said he was “elated” with the deal, which took effect Sept. 9.In August, the investment group, which includes several existing and new shareholders, closed the deal. Hale declined to give the specific value of the investment, but said it is an “eight-figure transaction.”The family began Hale Farms in 1976. In 1982, they started American Onion. The Hales purchased a customer, Rivergate Farms, and sold controlling interest in the combined River Point Farms in 2007 to private equity firm CIC Partners, which remains an investor under the new structure.“Even since 2007, the Hales have been closely involved in the operations at River Point,” said Bob Hale, president and CEO. He has served as River Point's president since 2007 and has been CEO for nine months.Hale Farms and River Point are separate but interdependent, he said. River Point rents land and storage from the Hales and others and has about 520 full-time employees.“It was important for us to make sure the company had a foundation to move on into the future and was sustainable,” Hale said. “We want to make sure the company is sustainable in the short run and we have expansion to meet customer needs in the long run.”Customers include food service companies, industrial ingredient companies, national restaurant chains and grocery stores and retailers with strategic partner Curry and Co. in Brooks, Ore.“We were already the largest onion producer in the country, we have a strong customer base,” Hale said. “Some of those restaurant chains are expanding, and we want to be able to meet their expanding needs, as well as other customers who are new to us.”The onion producer also has several new “strategic partnerships” that will allow it to expand its growing, production, packing, shipping and product offerings in the next few months.The shareholders have a total land base of about 85,000 acres, Hale said. River Point Farms grows 450 million pounds of onions. About 85 percent is grown by the company’s farmers, and 15 percent by outside growers in California, Idaho, Oregon and Washington, Hale said.“Certainly that provides opportunity for meeting our expanding customer needs,” he said.The Hales expect to invest in facilities and equipment for the operation, including plans for offering retail-ready products with strategic partner Taylor Farms, based in Salinas, Calif.The farm produces whole and fresh-cut onions. Hale expects to continue to be a leader in the onion category.“I see us being innovative in new onion products on the fresh-cut side, on packaging and service to our customers,” he said.Onlinewww.riverpointfarms.com | 农业 |
2017-04/0034/en_head.json.gz/10783 | Industry Climate, weather and farming: What is history telling us?
By Michigan State University Extension
December 20, 2012 | 12:41 pm EST
As we finish 2012, a year in which the growing season began with an abnormally warm March, was plagued by a severe drought that impacted much of the corn belt, and ended with farmers reporting both record high and record low yields in corn and soybeans, it is fitting to discuss climate and weather and its impact on our agriculture industry.
Last year, the Great Lakes Integrated Sciences and Assessments Center (a NOAA-funded collaboration of Michigan State University and the University of Michigan) and the USDA National Laboratory for Agriculture and the Environment assembled a team of experts to provide input to the U.S. Global Change Research Program’s forthcoming National Climate Assessment. This Midwest Technical Input Team produced a series of reports in 2012, representing the current state of knowledge on what climate change and variability mean to the most critical sectors in the region.
According to the team’s report on historical climate trends, weather and climate remain among the most important uncontrollable variables involved in the region’s agricultural production systems. This is particularly critical for the Midwest as agriculture is a major player in this region’s economy, with over $200 billion in farm gate value.
Let’s begin by discussing the difference between climate and weather. Climate is long-term, based on statistics of observations taken over a large number of years. It is what you can “count-on” in Michigan, for example cool crisp falls, snow in the winter, etc. Weather, on the other hand, is what you get on a day-to-day basis. The abnormally warm March of 2012 was a weather event; this was not typical of Michigan’s climate. This article is the first in a series where Michigan State University Extension will discuss the report as it relates to agriculture in the Midwest. The full report is available on the Great Lakes Integrated Science Assessment website.
In the Midwest, mean temperatures have increased since 1900 and the rate of increase is greater from 1980 through 2010. Precipitation has also increased since the late 1930s. In fact, the last three decades have been the wettest on record. However, the changes in rainfall and temperature have not been the same in all regions or in all four seasons of the year. In Michigan, annual precipitation has remained the same, but we are getting less rain in the fall and more precipitation in the winter and spring. Michigan has gotten warmer over the last 30 years as well with the winter and spring temperatures increasing the most.
Whether you are growing a garden, corn or fruit trees, growing season length is an important factor in the success of your operation. In our region, the growing season has been getting longer. Much of the change has been due to earlier springs. As a result, green-up of overwintering crops in the Midwest is occurring 10 days earlier than just a few decades ago[ja1] . While the increase in growing season has benefits, there is also a downside. When it gets warm early, perennial plants break dormancy early and are then more vulnerable to freeze.
Rain is necessary for crop growth, but is not easily stored. The frequency and intensity of storms has increased since the beginning of the 20th century. On average, about 30 percent of the annual precipitation total across the region comes from just 10 daily events, and the number of these events has increased in recent decades. For Michigan, we see a range of 24 to 36 percent of our annual rain in just 10 daily events.
This is a summary of what historic data tell us about trends over time for the Midwest and, more specifically, Michigan. More details can be found in the full report.
Watching the weather is still an important part of day-to-day management decisions. However, studying historical trends may provide some insight into longer-term planning.
weatherclimate managementagricultureplanning About the Author:
Michigan State University Extension | 农业 |
2017-04/0034/en_head.json.gz/11010 | Sylvia Mathews Burwell: International Food Policy Research Institute“Leveraging Agriculture for Improving Nutrition & Health” February 2, 2011 Remarks by Sylvia Mathews Burwell, President, Global Development Program Prime Minister Singh, President Kufuor, Ministers, Distinguished guests... I am truly honored to join all of you this evening to help kick off this important conference to discuss how we can tap the power of agriculture to help the world’s poorest families lead healthier, more productive lives. I am struck by what a wide range of dedicated professionals – from plant scientists to policymakers –we have assembled here. Such a diverse gathering is a reminder that improving the nutrition of world’s poor is a complex problem with no simple solution. Decisively combating undernutrition will require contributions from the fields of agriculture, health, water and sanitation, education, and social protection. It is my hope that this conference will foster greater collaboration between our areas of expertise and help us find solutions to the world’s nutrition challenges. While agriculture alone cannot defeat undernutrition, at the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation we believe agriculture can play a much bigger role than it has been in improving the diets of the world’s poorest families. Three-quarters of the world’s poorest people get their food and income by farming small plots of land. If we can make smallholder farmers more productive and more profitable, we can have a massive impact on hunger, poverty, and nutrition. Agriculture and nutrition are part of a virtuous cycle. Not only does increasing agricultural productivity improve the health of smallholder farmers through better nutrition, but healthier smallholder farmers are also more productive, giving them the opportunity to grow more food, earn more income, and contribute to further economic growth. It’s no surprise that a recent study shows that countries which pursue pro-agriculture policies have faster reductions in their stunting rates. Agricultural productivity has not only raised incomes, it has also reduced food prices, making it easier for the world’s poorest people to feed their families. And yet, while agriculture has done so much to combat malnutrition and undernutrition, we believe it can do much more. It’s not enough for us to just increase the quantity of food available to the world’s most vulnerable communities, especially women and children. We must also improve the quality of their diets by ensuring they have access to diverse, nutritious foods. Over 2 billion people in the world still suffer from poor nutrition. Each year, more than 3.5 million mothers and children under five die unnecessarily because of a lack of key nutrients in their diets. Many countries with impressive gains in agricultural and economic growth have not experienced the full benefits of improved nutrition. India’s tremendous economic achievements and dramatic increases in food production, for example, have not allowed it to break free from the challenges of chronic undernutrition and malnutrition among its poorest citizens. India is home to one-third of the world’s undernourished children. Undernutrition is also widespread among India’s adults too. I’d like to share three examples of how the Gates Foundation is working to realize agriculture’s full potential to help overcome these nutrition challenges. Through our work with HarvestPlus, we are supporting a game-changing effort to increase the levels of vitamin A, zinc, and iron in staple crops widely grown and consumed by the poor. By breeding higher levels of these vitamins and minerals into seven key crops --beans, cassava, maize, pearl millet, rice, sweet potato, and wheat --HarvestPlus aims to improve the nutrition of millions rural poor in Africa and Asia. The first high vitamin A sweet potato bred in Africa has been readily adopted by about 500,000 farming families over the last decade, helping to improve the health of their children. And over the next three years, HarvestPlus plans to release four more improved crops. But we know that more nutritious crops are only beneficial if the world’s poorest farming families have enough land and support to grow them. That’s why we are working with Landesa, an organization securing land rights for the world’s poorest families, to give women farmers access to land and training to help them grow nutritious foods to feed their families. By 2013, Landesa is on track to help 200,000 women farmers in West Bengal and Odisha become legal landowners, giving them the opportunity to grow homestead gardens that can help them build better, healthier lives for their families. At the same time, we recognize there’s a lot we still don’t know about the links between agriculture and nutrition. To better understand why high levels of malnutrition in India persist despite sustained economic and agricultural growth, we have teamed up with the International Food Policy Research Institute to explore the links between agriculture and nutrition. This initiative is promoting platforms where agricultural experts, nutritionists, and other partners can address key knowledge gaps and drive changes that will accelerate the reduction of undernutrition in India. Too often, even within our own foundation, we have not taken advantage of the linkages between our fields. Agricultural scientists and nutritionists have traditionally worked apart. But it’s our belief that these sectors have a lot to learn from each other if we are to reach the common goal of improving nutrition. Cooperation must start with conversation. I challenge all of you to use this conference to knock down the walls that separate your fields, share your knowledge and insights, and build new bridges that will lead us to better, healthier lives for the world’s poor. There’s a saying we take to heart at the foundation, “If you want to go fast, go alone. If you want to go far, go together.” It’s the goal of this gathering to go far, together. So let the conversation begin. Thank you. Visit Our Blog | 农业 |
2017-04/0034/en_head.json.gz/11610 | ShareForestry’s future: a favourable forecastTumblrPinterestGoogle PlusRedditLinkedInEmail
Forestry’s future: a favourable forecastJohn Allan
(Special to The Vancouver Sun)
Published: July 11, 2012Updated: July 12, 2012 7:01 PMFiled Under:The Province > ShareForestry’s future: a favourable forecastTumblrPinterestGoogle PlusRedditLinkedInEmailJohn Allan, president of the Council of Forest Industries.The B.C. forest industry has contended with both the mountain pine beetle and the U.S. housing market collapse.Harvesting trees, replanting seedlings and constantly regrowing our forests for future generations has always been a foundation of our economy. And it will be even more so in 2035.Forestry is an industry that has built entire B.C. communities, created millions of jobs since Confederation and created the wealth through employment and exports that makes British Columbia one of the best places in the world to live and raise a family.It is also an industry that has shown remarkable resilience throughout the history of our province. Whether it faced economic depressions, recessions or the cyclical market downturns that can shut mills and devastate communities, B.C. forestry has always survived and thrived.As we look toward 2035, there’s no doubt the business of sustainably growing and harvesting our forests will continue to be a dominant industry, one that offers young British Columbians well-paying and exciting jobs for their future.The proof for this optimism is both in the hard numbers but also in the forestry industry’s proven ability to respond to shifting markets. The last fast few years have demonstrated this beyond doubt.It has been a perfect storm. The mountain pine beetle infestation has devastated wide swaths of the province’s northern forests, meaning a sharp reduction in supply in that region for many years ahead. That has coincided with a historic collapse of the U.S. housing market, sharply cutting demand for B.C. lumber products in our biggest market.But is forestry a sunset industry, where the good jobs are a memory, as some suggest? Hardly. Just consider the numbers, even after enduring this staggering downturn.Forestry still supports approximately 160,000 direct and indirect jobs in B. C. It represents five per cent of provincial GDP, 30 per cent of provincial exports and has generated nearly $1 billion in provincial tax revenue last year and $15 billion over the last decade.Those are big numbers. And they are going to get dramatically larger as we move toward 2035. The reason is that during our perfect storm, B.C.’s forestry industry has done what it always does when the times get tough — innovate for the future.The B.C. forestry industry is really a global industry with a global perspective. It knows it must have the right products to meet the export demands and works relentlessly to do so. Our success is evident in China.B.C. producers, with the help of provincially run trade missions, spent much of the last decade attempting to convince China’s government and construction industry officials that wood is an environmentally friendly and earthquake-safe building material. It was an uphill battle, but the diligence paid off just as U.S. demand for B.C. wood products was collapsing.In the last five years, B.C. forest product exports to China have soared to over $3.1 billion, from $850 million in 2006.Exports of forest products to China as a percentage of total B.C. exports quadrupled from 2.5 per cent in 2006 to 9.5 per cent in 2011.British Columbia is now an established player in the world’s most dynamic marketplace.Being immediately adjacent to the U.S. will continue to be a competitive advantage in the future. Our largest trading partner is expected to come out of its housing slump in the next few years, resulting in renewed demand for B.C.’s softwood lumber. This means forestry will be a strong generator of jobs as we move into 2035.It would be a mistake, though, to see our forestry workers as old-style hewers of wood. Forestry has become one of the most innovative and science-driven sectors in the province, where some of the most exciting professions and skill-demanding jobs will be found. And they will be strengthening the economic stability of entire communities.Our trees are not simply two-by-fours to export. In a world concerned with climate change and the exigencies of housing a soon-to-be nine-billion-person planet, forestry jobs are increasingly centred on making our B.C. forests part of the solution for economic and environmental sustainability.To be sure, there will be jobs in the important work of harvesting and sustaining our forests. But there will also be jobs in pushing the envelope of what’s possible in wood design and architecture — even the possibility of highrises made of wood products instead of steel.There will be jobs in research and development, to find wood-derived chemicals and additives to be used in everything from food to high-definition TVs. Jobs in developing biofuels and energy systems are waiting to be filled. Young British Columbians will be world leaders in discovering and marketing these exciting new byproducts of wood.Challenges remain, of course.To thrive in our global marketplace, B.C. must remain competitive. We need to keep corporate taxes low, we need to ensure the move back to the PST does not add costs to our exports, making us uncompetitive. We must continue to partner with government to develop new markets, as we did with spectacular results in China.We can do all those things, I believe. And if we do, we can safely update that famous line from The Graduate when Dustin Hoffman is told, “There’s a great future in plastics.”For the next generation of British Columbians, the future is wood.John Allan is president of the Council of Forest Industries.CommentsShare your thoughts
Fibre optics in the forest sector
A new way of viewing the woods
The problem of poor returns | 农业 |
2017-04/0034/en_head.json.gz/11706 | Close Window Muck and Magic - Organic and Biodynamic Wines By Marco Originally published at Beltane 2001 In my previous article, The Sacred Vine (Beltane 2000 - Ed), I described the relationship that wine can have to the seasons of the year, its link to the very substance of the earth itself, and how this can be traced through the medium of the vine. This article looks at that particular thread in more detail by examining some of the concepts behind organic and biodynamic viticulture and vinification practices. It focuses on how the use of such techniques may add to a wine's character and fit in with many ideas held by those of "alternative" beliefs and philosophies. A Bit About Organics In the EU there is no such thing as organic wine per se. EU Directive 2092/91 defines organic wine as wine made from organically grown grapes. It does not certify the finished product itself. All wines produced in the EU that have certificates provided by bodies in their own country, which are certified by the EU, will get 2092/91 certification. Wines from countries outside the EU must meet the requirements of a body that has been approved by the EU within the country in which the wine is to be sold before they may be sold as wines produced from organically grown grapes. Frequently wineries following organic practices are more energy efficient in that they use integrated pest management schemes and have abandoned expensive fertilisers, pesticides, insecticides and fungicides. The use of high energy vehicles and machinery is frowned upon and all vegetable matter from the vineyards and winery is recycled. Cover crops between rows of vines and earthworms are encouraged in order to aerate the soil rather than ploughing, which requires tractors. In the cellar the use of chemicals is forbidden. However, in the EU and many other countries, a minimal amount of sulphur is permitted in processing, although it is carefully regulated as high quantities of sulphur dioxide (SO2) may be harmful to asthmatics. SO2 is a useful cleaning agent and preservative. It kills bacteria and protects the finished wine from oxidisation. Sensible use of SO2 is often considered vital for the production of clean, healthy wines that last in the bottle. Curiously in the US a wine may be sold as "organic wine" if it contains no sulphur. If sulphur is present in the wine it may only be sold as wine produced from organically grown grapes. In the EU, sulphur is often a permitted organic component, but it is technically illegal to advertise any wine as organic in the EU. Many growers and winemakers interested in organic practices are based on small estates and as such do not have the time or the money to get involved in the long and expensive bureaucratic process that leads to certification. This means that there are wines on the shelves and in the glass that, although produced organically, are unable to claim so. A point of which to be wary is that many people consider wines produced from organically grown grapes to be vegetarian or vegan. This is not necessarily true. Many of the fining agents used to remove colloids from the wine before bottling, which would otherwise turn the wine cloudy over time, are vegetarian - but not all of them. Biodynamics In the early 20th century there was a growing concern in Europe over the decrease in the quality of agricultural products and the degradation of cultivated plants. In 1942 an Austrian called Rudolph Sterner, who founded Anthroposophy, was invited to give lectures to farmers who were worried about the condition of their soils. The principle underlying the tenets of Anthroposophy is the attunement of man with the spirit of the Earth and the universe. From these lectures emerged the method used to counter the negative trends emerging in farming; the method now known as biodynamics. Biodynamics operates on certain precepts: 1. The planet is a living being. 2. The cosmos, the planet, earth and Man are intimately interconnected. 3. Man can either destroy or embellish that which he has been given. For Sterner, the elements nitrogen, calcium, silica and oxygen were imbued with spirit or astrality. Everything worked on a spiritual as well as a physical level. Soil itself was filled with spirit. Farming was a holistic process in which plants absorbed spirit from the soil and cosmos and man absorbed spirit from the plants. Biodynamic farming calls for extensive use of natural processes and preparations in conjunction with a calendar of lunar and planetary cycles. These ideas were not all new, for in the first century BC Pliny the Elder wrote on the influence of the waxing and waning moon upon plant growth. German Anthroposophist Maria Thun developed the most widely used calendar in the 1960s, after forty years of personal research. This calendar groups plants into four distinct sets; flowering, leafy, fruit bearing and root plants. Three zodiac signs are assigned to each group. Under each sign there are subdivisions into fruit, leaf, root and flower days. The best time for sowing, cultivating and harvesting the plant is when the moon is moving through one of a plant's three signs. The use of this calendar is said to maximise the cosmic and elemental forces working upon the plants. Biodynamicists are concerned about the quality of the atmosphere and soil their plants inhabit. Perticides and herbicides are not used as they destroy the natural microbial life in the soil, which biodynamics enhances. Biodynamic Preparations Biodynamicists use several natural preparations, which are made to exacting recipes. These are Horn manure (preparation BD500), a quartz preparation called BD501, a number of plant preparations (BD502-508) and the dung compost developed by Maria Thun. This latter is a mixture of animal manure, straw and water seasoned with small amounts of the preparations BD502-507, and is applied to the vineyards in autumn on root days. This dung compost is said to support and reinforce the decomposition of organic matter, and is full of bacteria so as to introduce life to the soil. Brief descriptions of the composition and supposed qualities of the preparations follow. Many of them mention "dynamised liquid". The process of dynamising consists of stirring liquids and solids into water, both clockwise and anticlockwise, to mimic the effect of water at the poles. The stirring tank is usually wood in the Old World (Europe) and metal in the New World (Americas, Australia, New Zealand), and is approximately four feet high. The mixture is stirred for between ten minutes and one hour. The vortex is considered a manifestation of the transfer of energy from the solid matter to the water. Solutions are used in quantities of 30 litres per hectare. BD500 Horn Manure - Dung is placed in a cow's horn and buried in the vineyard over winter. The Horn manure is applied to the vineyard as a liquid spray of warm water with 2.5oz of horn manure per acre steeped in the water for an hour. This preparation is applied during root days: in spring to halt winter decomposition and bind energy and vitality to the roots, and in autumn to stimulate the germination of the covering crop seeds, which are sown at that time. The horn is considered to be a natural energy captor and the manure put into it is allowed to fill up with vitalising cosmic and elemental energy while it is buried over winter. Horn Manure claims to have four principle effects. 1. It stimulates activity in roots, causing them to grow thicker and longer and increasing the absorption and uptake of nutrients. The roots also become less susceptible to drought and disease and the sap circulates more readily. 2. It attracts planetary and earth forces into vine sap. The silica present in the dung compost provides the complementary cosmic forces. 3. It stimulates micro life and increases beneficial bacterial life in the soil. 4. It helps regulate levels of lime and nitrogen in the soil and facilitates the release of trace elements. All in all it makes the soil "work" so it is neither too acid, too fertile nor too stagnant. BD501 Horn Silica/Silicum - Finely powdered quartz crystals are placed in a cow horn and buried during summer. This is to allow the quartz to "capture" the sun's life forces. When applied it is said to enhance the way plants metabolise light and allows them to assimilate micro-nutrients found in the atmosphere. When applied on leaf days around flowering, at the moment the embryonic berries form, and also when verason occurs (the changing of the grape's colour when it ripens, approximately one month before harvest), it will act as a quality impulse in the vine. This gives a crop with a better colour, flavour, aroma and keeping qualities. BD501 is also used to stimulate photosynthesis. When applied before and after harvest it hardens the vine for this traumatic experience and the coming winter, while keeping it receptive to the weakening sun to help ward off diseases. 2.5 grams per hectare dynamised in cool water for one hour. BD502 Yarrow - 1 teaspoon of composted flowers are added per 10-15 tons of Thun compost or as a dynamised spray. It is said to reactivate the vine by allowing potassium in the soil to combine with the sulphur in the yarrow. It works well with BD501 to attract cosmic forces. BD503 Chamomile - Said to enhance the decomposition of organic matter to provide humus. 1 gram to 10-15 tons of Thun compost or as a dynamised spray. Also stabilises nitrogen within the compost and increases soil life so as to stimulate plant growth. BD504 Nettle - Said to stimulate a flow of sap in vine roots and trunk even under drought conditions, so the vine keeps its "bones" healthy. In the soil it acts to prevent Chlorosis (iron deficiency in chalk soil such as in champagne and chablis). 1 gram to 10-15 tons of compost or as a dynamised spray. BD505 - Oak Bark - Rich in calcium it is used to help the plant increase its resistance to harmful diseases. 1 gram to 10-15 tons of compost or as a dynamised spray. BD506 Dandelion - Petals contain traces of silica crystals which have an affinity with light. The flower itself also looks like the sun. When this silica combines with potassium in the soil it is said to attract cosmic forces to the vineyard. 1 gram to 10-15 tons of compost or as a dynamised spray. BD507 Valerian - An important source of phosphorous and it also acts as a heat blanket. It attracts and intensifies warmth in the vineyard, protects against frost and augments the ripening of the grapes. It is said to take several years for the vineyard to become acclimatised to it this treatment. The valerian is composted before half is inserted into a Thun compost pile and the other half is made into a solution of 1ml valerian compost per gallon of water, stirred for 10 minutes, and sprayed onto the Thun compost pile. It is said that the valerian allows phosphorous in dung compost to be properly used by soil. BD508 Horsetail - This has the highest concentration of silica (light) in the plant kingdom. It is said to draw in light, which works against mould and mildew and discourages spores. It is harvested on the summer solstice and boiled into a tea. It is not used on compost but sprayed during flowering at midmorning when the flowers are open to receive the highest concentration of solar forces. Conclusion We can see how these biodynamic preparations bear certain similarities to "magical" concoctions and, in fact, many people have described them as sorcery and mumbo-jumbo. Indeed, the goal of harmonising man with the environment and cosmos while embellishing the whole will be familiar to many pagans and occult practitioners. There are good reasons for considering how a wine is produced when purchasing for ritual use. A biodynamic wine may very well enhance the whole experience, as effort has gone to harmonise its production with natural cycles. Of course, it is up to you as to how harmonised you wish to be. Biodynamics cares for the environment. It is a holistic approach, whether you agree with the spiritual explanation for its efficacy or take a more scientific approach to its application. Belief is not necessary to make it work. As to whether it truly works and if so, how so, well, I'm afraid the jury is still out on that one. | 农业 |
2017-04/0034/en_head.json.gz/12595 | Here's Where Farms Are Sucking The Planet Dry By Daniel Charles
Aug 8, 2012 TweetShareGoogle+Email Check out some of the world's most important - and threatened - aquifers. Click to see a high-resolution version of this map.
Originally published on August 8, 2012 5:49 pm This map is disturbing, once you understand it. It's a new attempt to visualize an old problem — the shrinking of underground water reserves, in most cases because farmers are pumping out water to irrigate their crops. The map itself isn't hard to grasp. The colored areas show the world's largest aquifers — areas which hold deposits of groundwater. The blue ones are doing fine; more rainfall is flowing into them than is being pumped out of them for homes or irrigating fields. As a result, these aquifers can continue to play a vital role in the environment. (Water in most aquifers doesn't just sit there. It flows slowly, underground, and ends up sustaining rivers and lakes and all the creatures who live there.) The aquifers that are painted red, orange, or yellow, meanwhile, are being drained rapidly. How rapidly? That brings us to the complicated part of this graphic. See those large grey shapes, below the map? Each one is a magnified reflection of an over-exploited aquifer. The amount of magnification represents the amount of water that people are currently pumping out of that aquifer, compared to the rate of natural replenishment. Tom Gleeson, at Montreal's McGill University, and Ludovicus P. H. van Beek, at Utrecht University, in the Netherlands, created this graphic for an article they published in this week's issue of the journal Nature. They call those magnified shapes the "groundwater footprint" of each aquifer's exploitation. The footprint of the Upper Ganges aquifer, for instance, is 54 times bigger than the aquifer itself. Think about that footprint this way: It's the size, on a map, of the area that would be required to catch enough rainfall to replenish that aquifer and make up for all the water currently being pumped out of it. Some of these aquifers are being exploited at a stunning rate, but what's truly alarming is how many people depend on that over-exploitation for their food. These aquifers include the Upper Ganges, covering densely populated areas of northern India and Pakistan, and the North China plain, which is the heart of corn-growing in that country. The aquifer of Western Mexico has become a large source of fruit and vegetable production for the U.S. The High Plains aquifer in the United States, meanwhile, is having a particularly bad year. Farmers are pumping even more than usual, because of the drought afflicting this part of the country, and it is getting less replenishment from rainfall. So water levels in the aquifer are falling even faster, leaving less water for the region's rivers, birds, and fish. This can't go on forever. Already, many farmers are being forced to dig deeper wells to get at that water. But bigger changes are on the way: New irrigation technologies that use water much efficiently; a shift to different crops that demand less water; and in some areas, they'll just have to stop using those underground stores of water altogether.Copyright 2012 National Public Radio. To see more, visit http://www.npr.org/. TweetShareGoogle+EmailView the discussion thread. Our Partners: | 农业 |
2017-04/0034/en_head.json.gz/12758 | Specialty grants bear fruit and complaints
Published on March 23, 2012 3:01AM
Last changed on April 19, 2012 10:29PM
Sean Ellis/Capital Press
Snake River Produce Manager Kay Riley helped establish Certified Onions Inc., a nonprofit coalition of 24 growers in the region which has launched a marketing effort into Asia with the help of a USDA Specialty Crop Block Grant.
Buy this photo Growers say money helps create new industry opportunitiesBy STEVE BROWNCapital PressNYSSA, Ore. -- Onion growers in Oregon and Idaho have their sights set on the Asian export market, but they needed a way to assure foreign customers that no excess pesticide residues are on their crops.By combining their money with federal specialty crop block grants, they were able to do that.Kay Riley, owner of Snake River Produce, said he and other onion growers were concerned that any level of pesticide residue posed the risk of disaster for their plans to enter the export market."We knew the only way we can control this is to test our onions for residues," he said. "So we formed a nonprofit and applied for a grant."In 2009 they formed Certified Onions Inc., which received an $85,000 specialty crop grant to provide third-party certification testing -- through the Oregon Department of Agriculture and Oregon Laboratory Services -- for pesticide residues and pathogens."We're testing 92 to 94 percent of the onions in the valley," Riley said. "The first year we tested for off-label. Now we do (maximum residue level) testing so the tolerances are in line."The coalition of 24 growers also received $92,500 and $91,900 in 2010 and 2011 to promote their voluntary testing. All were dollar-for-dollar matching grants, Riley said, meaning growers pitched in equal amounts of money.Certified Onion growers sell about 22,000 truckloads of onions into the domestic market every year, but breaking into the Asian market represents a big step."If it becomes a brand of choice and we sell 50 loads a year (into the Asian market), that's a phenomenal benefit," he said. They now supply Costco stores in Japan and attracted more business at the recent Food Ex show in Tokyo.Certified Onions is one of several success stories for the specialty crop grants, farmers and state and federal agriculture officials say. Over the past six years, $182 million in the grants have been distributed nationwide.Of that, 42 percent went to producers and cooperatives in California and the Northwest. Proponents said the grants are an offset to subsidies for program crops such as corn, wheat, soybeans, rice and cotton that received the lion's share of federal funds in the 2007 Farm Bill.Each year state departments of agriculture invite specialty crop growers and cooperatives to apply for grants, which the state officials award. In 2011, the USDA spent more than $54 million on 740 projects across the country.California received $18.7 million -- by far the largest amount sent to a single state. Idaho received $1 million, Oregon $1.7 million and Washington $3.1 million.CriticismWhile many of the grants have drawn praise for sparking specialty crop sales and marketing, others have come under fire from critics like U.S. Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla.A member of the Senate Finance Committee, Coburn recently released his "2011 Wastebook: A Guide to Some of the Most Wasteful and Low Priority Government Spending of 2011." The book targets several specialty crop grants:* The Hawaii Department of Agriculture awarded $48,700 to the Hawaiian Chocolate Festival. The festival charged $25 at the door, lasted five hours and gave attendees the chance to taste 10 different chocolates, according to Coburn.Hawaiian officials defended the festival. Hawaii is the only state that produces commercial cacao, and it is finding its niche market, said Janelle Saneishi, a public information officer with the state's Department of Agriculture."There are many companies now using Hawaii-grown cacao in their products, not only for chocolate bars and confections, but in baked goods, soaps and beverages," she said. "It is a growing industry in Hawaii and helps to diversify our agricultural base."* A $75,000 grant promoted Michigan Christmas trees, a $40 million a year industry, Coburn said."It is unclear why the state needs help promoting a very successful industry," he wrote.The "Make It a Real Michigan Christmas" promotion offered three messages: Real trees and poinsettias are great for the environment, they enhance seasonal moods and they're great for the economy, said Marsha Gray, executive director of Michigan Christmas Tree Association."I understand everyone is looking for something to point a finger at," Gray said, "but this follows the very terms this (block grants) project was designed for."* The Washington State Fruit Commission received a grant of $100,000 for a "Celebrity Chef Fruit Promotion Road Show in Indonesia." Indonesia was selected as a potential market for cherries, apples and pears.However, the country produces twice the amount of fruit it consumes, Coburn said."Here's the reality: We ship 2.5 million boxes of apples there already, and this year 3,500 boxes of cherries," B.J. Thurlby, president of the fruit commission, said. "We believe we can increase that up to 20,000 to 30,000 boxes."Coburn and others in Congress have the responsibility of making sure money is spent correctly, Thurlby said. "But when we export one box of cherries, that trickles back $11 to U.S. taxpayers."Becky Bernhardt, Coburn's deputy press secretary, said the listing of projects and grants is intended to ask whether the funding is a priority during a time of fiscal crisis."Additionally, these grant programs are not a core mission of the USDA," she said.SupportThe grants are designed to enhance the competitiveness of the industry, said Rep. Kurt Schrader, D-Ore., a member of the House Agriculture Committee.Specialty crops make up nearly half of the farm gate value nationwide, but funding for them accounts for a small fraction of spending in the farm bill, he said.They have been effective, he said, because state agriculture departments have "strict guidelines for eligible projects, and I believe they do an excellent job at distributing funds in an effective and judicious manner."Often grantees have skin in the game and provide matching funds, creating an important private-public partnership," he said.Schrader said accountability is built into the process. Recipients are required to provide progress reports twice a year and a final performance report to be posted on the specialty crop block grant program website.State officials have the responsibility to select the projects, and the USDA's authority is limited to ensuring the projects selected enhance the competitiveness of specialty crops, Agricultural Marketing Service spokeswoman Gwen Sparks said.Each state receives a base grant that is the higher of $100,000, or a third of 1 percent of the total amount of funding made available for that fiscal year, Sparks said.In addition, AMS allocates the remainder of the grant funds based on the value of specialty crop production in each state in relation to national production.Schrader said he was heartened when the leadership of the House and Senate ag committees recommended a $1 billion increase in program funding to the super committee last year."I will continue to push for a similar level of funding when the House Agriculture Committee takes up the farm bill later this year."Application deadlineSpecialty Crop Block Grant Program-Farm Bill grants are designed to help strengthen the market for specialty crops like fruits, vegetables, tree nuts, dried fruits, horticulture and nursery crops, including floriculture.Applications for FY2012 will be accepted through July 11.Information: www.ams.usda.gov | 农业 |
2017-04/0034/en_head.json.gz/12921 | The Future of the Ogallala Aquifer
The Ogallala aquifer irrigates some of the most important cropland for food and fuel. For years, it's been steadily depleting leaving some to wonder about the sustainability of tapping into it for increased corn irrigation and ethanol production.By Anduin Kirkbride McElroy | January 01, 2008A summer's flight from Chicago to Denver can give one a new perspective on water use. Before the plane climbs above the clouds, one can see vast stretches of prairie land, cut into rectangles of dark green crops. From the sky, the crops seem to go on and on, delineated only by roads, trees and winding rivers. According to the National Corn Growers Association, more than 85 percent of all corn produced in the United States is nonirrigated, and much of it is raised on this fertile land that's been under agricultural production since white men settled the region in the 1800s.
As the flight continues over Illinois, Iowa, Nebraska and eastern Colorado, one might notice that the farmscape begins to change. Circles, one-half mile in diameter, start to be dispersed amongst the rectangles. Further on, the land looks like a pale green and yellow checkerboard with dark green checkers placed atop of the squares. As the plane descends over eastern Colorado, the prevailing color of the land is brownish yellow, a striking contrast to the circles full of dark green crops.
The land west of the Missouri River is fertile, but crops must be coaxed out of the ground with irrigation. The dark green circles are a result of center-pivot irrigation, which enables the arid prairie states to be as fruitful as the Midwestern states. Colorado, for example, with its mountains and high prairies, is the 13th largest corn-producing state in the United States, according to Dave Kramer, general manager of Sterling Ethanol LLC and Yuma Ethanol LLC in northeastern Colorado. What's more, Yuma County is one of the top three largest corn-producing counties in the country, producing 42 million bushels per year.
Irrigation has also enabled Nebraska to be an integral part of the Corn Belt. About 60 percent of corn acres in the state are irrigated, according to the Nebraska Corn Board. The state's corn supply and ambitious development recently bumped its ranking to the second largest ethanol-producing state, after Iowa. Nebraska has more than 1,565,000 gallons of annual capacity built or under construction.
Yes, the land is fertile, thanks to a generous supply of groundwater. The High Plains aquifer, also known as the Ogallala aquifer, lies under portions of eight states: South Dakota, Nebraska, Wyoming, Colorado, Kansas, Oklahoma, New Mexico and Texas. It is one of the largest aquifers in the world, spanning about 175,000 square miles. According to the U.S. Geological Survey, approximately 27 percent of the irrigated land in the United States is in this region, and about 30 percent of the groundwater used for irrigation in the United States is pumped from the Ogallala aquifer. In 2000, irrigation withdrawals were 17 billion gallons per day and 1.9 million people were supplied by groundwater from the Ogallala aquifer with total public supply withdrawals of 315 million gallons per day, according to the USGS. The aquifer is not only large, but it's also accessible. "It's relatively shallow, the quality is relatively good, so it's very user friendly," says David Hume, a hydrogeologist and senior associate at Leggette, Brashears & Graham Inc.
The aquifer was formed over millions of years, but has since been cut off from its original natural sources and is being depleted faster than it can be recharged. The water table in the Ogallala Formation is separated from overlying land-use practices by as much as 400 feet of unsaturated sediments, and recharge has been estimated to take at least 50 years. Over extraction has led to substantial declines in the water table in many places, complete exhaustion of extractable groundwater in others, and debate and legislation about the aquifer's future, according to a report by Environmental Defense, a nonprofit environmental advocacy group formerly known as the Environmental Defense Fund. The report, "Potential Impact of Biofuels Expansion on Natural Resources; a case study of the Ogallala aquifer region," was released in September. Large portions of the aquifer show declines in the water table of more than 100 feet. Some reports have found that the water level is dropping by 3 to 5 feet a year in some areas. Estimates for its lifespan range from 60 to 250 years, depending on the area.
In the arid Plains, states have developed complicated legal arrangements for issuing water rights and developing water diversions. Water is appropriated by the government and the rights to it are traded and sold to the highest bidder. Lately, expanding cities have bought water rights from irrigation districts�essentially putting irrigated agriculture out of business. "Some areas in the Ogallala aquifer region, particularly in parts of Colorado and Nebraska, have existing groundwater protections that will reduce opportunities to convert new land to irrigated production," the Environmental Defense report states. "Strengthening and expanding any existing local and regional groundwater conservation efforts may be one of the most effective ways to minimize groundwater depletion and the destruction of significant remaining blocks of wildlife habitat."
Indeed, water rights are a significant issue in Colorado, as current producer Front Range Energy LLC found out when developing its plant in Windsor. According to BBI International Project Development Vice President Mark Yancey, who did project development for the plant, the company spent about $1 million just for the right to use the water; sourcing the water was a separate endeavor.
Years of drought have made aquifer resources even more important in the Plains states. Now that ethanol has moved into all corners of the aquifer people are starting to express concern over the industry's impact. Ethanol brings an increased demand for corn, which must be irrigated, and production of the fuel also requires significant amounts of water.
Like many industrial processes, water is vital to ethanol production. The majority is used in the cooling process; the amount used can be influenced by the quality of the water, Yancey says. The production process uses between 3 to 5 gallons of water for every gallon of ethanol produced. In the past few years, the lack of water has stopped the development of some plants. Proposed plants from Florida to northern Minnesota to California have faced opposition from those concerned about the facilities' water use. "Regulatory agencies and the public are more aware of the volume of water required," Hume says. "Opposition at public meetings has certainly increased in the past few years compared with when the industry first took off�you might have a few residents who would be concerned about the impact a plant could have on their water supply. In general, the industry has become more aware of possible oppostion and the importance of water for plant operations." Some of the awareness likely comes from media coverage of recent reports about ethanol's water requirements.
A report issued in October by the National Research Council titled "Water implications of biofuels production in the United States" analyzed the potential impacts on water quality and supply from increased use of corn for ethanol production. The NRC formed a committee to look at how shifts in the nation's agriculture to include more energy crops, and potentially more crops overall, could affect water management and long-term sustainability of biofuels production. It found that an increase in ethanol production from corn could significantly impact water quality and availability unless new practices are employed.
The report acknowledged that the water consumed in the ethanol production process is similar to most other industries, but could still substantially affect local water supplies. It estimated that a 100 MMgy plant would consume as much water as a town of 5,000 people, using the national average water use per person per day of 180 gallons. "Biorefineries themselves generate local, but often intense, water supply challenges, while irrigated agriculture can generate regional-scale problems," the report says. "If, however, the agriculture is rain-fed, water for the biorefinery may be the primary source of groundwater or surface water extraction in the area. Compared to the water incorporated in the feedstock, water use for the biorefineries is quite small." The report concluded that producing 1 gallon of ethanol from irrigated corn requires 780 gallons of water, using statistics from 2003 when 2,100 gallons of irrigation water was used to produce a bushel of corn, which yielded 2.7 gallons of ethanol. This number doesn't include the water required to make the ethanol, and is actually about 200 times greater than the 4:1 water to ethanol ratio. Yancey confirms these findings. "The water used to produce ethanol at a 100 MMgy plant is equal to one center pivot�1,000 gallons per minute," he says.
Growing biofuels crops in areas with limited water supplies is a major concern, the report says. According to the NRC, "the committee found that agricultural shifts to growing corn and expanding biofuels crops into regions with little agriculture, especially dry areas, could change current irrigation practices and greatly increase pressure on water resources in many parts of the United States." Biofuels crop irrigation could compete with, or even be constrained by, regional water demands for drinking, industry and other uses. "In the next five to 10 years, increased agricultural production for biofuels will probably not alter the national-aggregate view of water use," the report reads. "However, there are likely to be significant regional and local impacts where water resources are already stressed."
The Ogallala aquifer is certainly stressed. "This aquifer is currently being pumped at a rate of more than 1.5 billion gallons per day for agriculture, municipalities, industry and private citizens," the report reads. "Thus, 15 million gallons per day for bioethanol would represent only 1 percent of total withdrawls. But it is an incremental withdrawal from an already unsustainable resource. Current water withdrawals are much greater than the aquifer's recharge rate (about 0.02 to 0.05 foot per year in south-central Nebraska �), resulting in up to a 190-foot decline in the water table over the past 50 years. It is equivalent to �mining' the water resource, and the loss of the resource is essentially irreversible."
The Environmental Defense study looked at the Ogallala aquifer as a "microcosm of the environmental concerns that may accompany rapid and unplanned expansion of biofuels production." According to the report, the aquifer supports the majority of irrigated agriculture in the southern Great Plains. "However, in recent decades it has experienced substantial water table declines in areas where rates of groundwater pumping have far exceeded rates of replacement," the report says.
The report found that the water demands for individual plants from ethanol processing and feedstock production aren't exceptionally higher than other industrial or agricultural users. However, the construction of new plants in areas where water is already scarce can impact the level of the aquifer. "Water demands from new ethanol plants in areas of Ogallala aquifer depletion may reach 2.6 billion gallons per year for corn-to-fuel processing alone, and between 59 [billion] and 120 billion gallons per year for increased water demand if there are local increases in irrigated corn production," according to the study. Interestingly, the region is experiencing ethanol production growth in areas where water resources are most stressed. The report points to southwest Kansas and the Texas panhandle, where several plants are proposed or under construction, as areas with the highest depletion, defined as within 50 miles of aquifer zones where water tables have dropped by more than 10 feet between 1980 and 1996.
Other Water Users
The Environmental Defense report didn't go over very well with the Nebraska Corn Board. "It made for sensational headlines and is just the latest in a series of attacks on corn and ethanol producers in regard to water," said Jon Holzfaster, a farmer and chairman of the board. "Those who want to blame the expansion of ethanol for increased water usage are ignoring the fact that corn is going to be produced in Nebraska, whether or not there is an ethanol industry. And that those same acres will likely be irrigated whether they are growing corn, soybeans or any other crop." Holzfaster compared the water used to raise corn to that used to water homeowner's lawns and golf courses. "It is estimated that it may take around 1,750 gallons of water to produce a bushel of corn," he said. "That sounds like a lot, but did you know it takes 684,000 gallons of water per acre per year to irrigate a golf course? And that, on average, a homeowner uses 21,600 gallons to water his or her lawn each year?" The NCGA has also found it useful to put the numbers in perspective. Based on USGS statistics, NCGA Chief Executive Officer Rick Tolman points out that it takes 1,851 gallons of water to refine a barrel of crude oil and 1,500 gallons to produce a barrel (42 gallons) of beer.
Regardless of these justifications, Environmental Defense advocates for policy changes that would encourage sustainable ethanol development. "Current biofuels policy makes few distinctions between different biofuels production pathways," the group says. "But plant location, production techniques and choice of feedstocks strongly influence the environmental footprint of ethanol production." Ideal policy changes, which would by nature need to be local and regional, would guide ethanol production toward more sustainable locations by making local approval of ethanol plant siting contingent on analyzing the impacts on water resources in areas of existing water scarcity. "Local agencies should be careful to consider indirect effects of ethanol in driving new irrigated cropland acres as well as calculations of water use directly for ethanol plant operation," Environmental Defense says.
Anduin Kirkbride McElroy is an Ethanol Producer Magazine staff writer. Reach her at [email protected] or (701) 746-8385.Related ArticlesBlog: Ethanol’s GHG profile sees impressive improvementEIA: Ethanol production expected to increase slightly in 2018Crushings analysis shows increases in corn oil, DDGS productionDual-purpose biofuel crops could extend productionUSDA report demonstrates GHG benefits of corn ethanolWASDE: Corn supplies down, ethanol use up Join Our Mailing List | 农业 |
2017-04/0034/en_head.json.gz/13695 | Management [1] Cogongrass: 'mother of all invasive species'
“Cogongrass is so aggressive, if left unchecked it can replace an entire ecosystem,” says Jim Hancock, invasive plant control program coordinator for the Mississippi Forestry Commission at Brookhaven. It has been called “the weed from hell” and “the mother of all invasive species.” Hembree Brandon 2 [2] | Dec 03, 2010
I woke up this morning,
I looked out at my fields.
What I saw out there,
It made me want to squeal.
Them little white flowers,
They was growin’ everywhere.
It’s enough to make a man
Pull out all his hair.
I got the cogongrass blues.
What am I gonna do?
I got the cogongrass blues…
It may not make the Hit Parade, but “The Cogongrass Blues,” a ditty by The Blues Rangers band, mirrors the woes of landowners in Mississippi and other southern states who’ve seen their pastures, forest lands, and wildlife/recreational areas gobbled up by a weed that many liken to an invasion of aliens in a sci-fi movie.
And like the movie monsters, the grass just keeps spreading and spreading.
It has been called “the weed from hell” and “the mother of all invasive species.”
“It is so aggressive, if left unchecked it can replace an entire ecosystem,” says Jim Hancock, invasive plant control program coordinator for the Mississippi Forestry Commission at Brookhaven.
It is so solidly entrenched in many areas of Florida — with more than a million acres infested — that, he says, “It will still be there when Jesus returns.”
Like kudzu, another “foreigner” used for early era erosion control, the grass is spreading rapidly across the South — now as far west as eastern Texas and as far east as South Carolina.
In addition to Florida, heaviest infestations are now found across broad areas of southern Georgia, Alabama, and several counties of south Mississippi, and a multi-million dollar effort is now under way to try and curb its advance northward.
In 1979, only 19 counties in southern Mississippi had infestations; today it is in 50 counties across the state and continuing to spread.
Mississippi has just finished the first year of spraying in a $1.1 million suppression program, while Alabama has a $6 million-plus eradication program in progress.
“We’re running a lean, mean operation — everything we’re doing is geared to the spray program,” says Hancock, who briefed landowners on the weed and the control effort at a meeting at Starkville, Miss.
Cogongrass (Imperata cylindrica), thought to have originated in southeast Asia, is designated by many authorities as the seventh worst weed in the world. It is found in 73 countries on all continents.
Came into U.S. in 1912
It was introduced into the U.S. at Grand Bay, Ala., in 1912 as packing material for a shipment of satsuma orange rootstock from Japan. It was later used in Mississippi and Florida in forage test trials and for erosion control.
Various cultivars (Japanese bloodgrass and Red Baron grass among them) have been used by landscapers and new varieties continue to be introduced, much to the dismay of invasive plant managers and researchers.
No northern boundary for overwintering has been established, but researchers say most of the eastern U.S. and Pacific Northwest may also be at risk.
In a video presentation, “Cogongrass — The Perfect Weed,”
produced for the Mississippi Coastal Plains Resource Conservation & Development Council, Inc., which serves six coastal counties — George, Hancock, Harrison, Jackson, Pearl River, and Stone — Randy Browning, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service/Mississippi Fish and Wildlife Foundation, says cogongrass “has no known value and no known enemies.
“Researchers found out pretty quickly it had no value as a forage crop because of its high silicon content.”
The grass spreads by seeds and by underground rhizomes. Its fluffy white seedheads can produce up to 3,000 seeds which, like dandelion seeds, can be blown up to 15 miles by winds, and are transported by animals when the seeds are caught in their fur.
Spreading also occurs from rhizomes and seeds on earthmoving and road maintenance equipment that has been used in infested areas. Land managers working on food plots and loggers often spread the grass in moving from one area to another, as do fire plows when wildfires occur.
“It takes four weeks from time a mature seed germinates until it starts producing rhizomes,” Browning notes. “With good soil and moisture conditions, it can spread up to 43 square feet from the time it germinates. Across an entire landscape, it doesn’t take long for an exponential spread.
The grass is also allelopathic — it produces chemicals that suppress growth of other plants.
“All this is a bomb waiting to happen,” Browning says.
Thinning of commercial pine plantations, which opens up the canopy and allows more sunlight, often opens the door to cogongrass invasion, which can quickly spread throughout the forest understory, hampering productivity of the trees and choking out desirable wildlife habitat.
Expense to fight grass "enormous"
Judd Brooke, a Hancock County, Miss., landowner, says the expense of fighting the grass has been “enormous — but we had to do it, because it was starting to smother out areas of the forest — there was no natural vegetation at all; it even choked out yaupons and wax myrtles. It was totally changing the characteristics of the forest. In areas where we were planting trees, no seedling would grow, the plant and root mass is so thick.”
J.B. Brown, a Stone County timber producer, says, “Until we thinned pines about five years ago, didn’t notice much cogongrass, but after thinning it was sprouting everywhere.
“It also has a negative impact on wildlife. Birds won’t consume the seeds. The grass is so thick, there’s no way turkey poults or quail chicks can navigate through it; they can’t nest in it or forage in it”
Randy Merritt, Mississippi Forestry Commission ranger, says cogongrass represents a major fire threat.
“Due to its high vegetative density and biomass, burning grass produces a very volatile fire that can reach temperatures of up to 850 degrees with flames five feet high, and spread very quickly. This high heat usually kills trees and surrounding vegetation, as well as endangering homes and farm buildings. If there’s any wind, we have trouble with it jumping firebreaks. Even with no wind, it’ll spread much faster than any other kind of fire, and it’s extremely hard to extinguish.”
John Byrd, Jr., Mississippi Extension professor of weed science, says one of most important identification features of cogongrass is that it blooms in the spring.
“It grows during summer, but unlike other warm season grasses, except zoysia, it blooms immediately after turns green for summer growth, and then forms white, fluffy seedheads.”
Another identification feature is its rhizome system. “Johnsongrass has rhizomes, but cogongrass rhizomes arefar more extensive and numerous,” he says. “Each of the many nodes on a rhizome is capable of producing roots and a new plant above ground. Over 60 percent of the plant’s biomass is in roots and rhizomes, and that’s what you have to kill to completely eradicate a population.”
Herbicides for control program
Two products are available for use in a control program, Browning notes — glyphosate (Roundup ProDry) and imazapyr (Arsenal Powerline and Chopper). Recommended rates for foliar application, he says, vary from 2 percent to 3 percent percent glyphosate product to 1 to 1.5 percent Arsenal products.
“You can safely use Arsenal around pine trees and it will hammer cogongrass,” he says. “I prefer a mixture of 1.5 percent solution of Roundup with 1/2 percent to 1 percent of Arsenal and a good surfactant, which gives a good synergistic response.
“Be aware, though, you can’t use this mixture around hardwoods; in those areas, you’ll have to use only a glyphosate product. It will take more applications, but over a period of time you can take out the grass. The more you can do to cogongrass, the more control you’ll get.”
Jim Hancock says the Mississippi spray program isn’t using the herbicide mixture. “We feel we get a more permanent kill with the Arsenal products. We use a 2 percent solution and spray enough to thoroughly wet the plants.”
In agricultural or pasture environments, disking the ground will put additional stress on the cogongrass, Browning says. “Deep disking will knock it back; continued deep disking will really hamper it. If you can mow or burn the grass, come back and disk, then let it sprout back up and apply herbicide, it will be more effective than just one spray application or one technique alone.
“But, you have to be vigilant in going back to see how well the herbicide applications have worked and which areas you may have missed. In one field that was sprayed three times with Roundup, there were still spots coming back. So, you may have to spot treat over two or three years. Be sure to spray 6-8 feet beyond visible cogongrass to get any tillers.”
Charles Bryson, USDA/ARS botanist, says cogongrass similar in invasiveness to kudzu. “It has not yet reached level of importance of kudzu, but has potential to spread and become as bad or worse than kudzu.”
In 1948, Browning says, Weed Scientist R. L. Pendleton warned, “Steps should be taken at once to completely eradicate this noxious weed from the Western Hemisphere.”
“Now, in the 21st century, we’re behind the curve,” he says. “It’s time to get busy working on stopping this pest. Fortunately, a lot of groundwork through Mississippi’s Bureau of Plant Industry and the Mississippi Department of Agriculture and Commerce.
“But landowners, land managers, utility rights-of-way managers, and others need to start being very aggressive with cogongrass, and work on it week-to-week, year-to-year. A one-time application won’t do it — we’re going to have to be very vigilant.”
Applications for spraying program
Hancock says the state is continuing to take applications for participation in the cogongrass spraying program.
“We have over 600 applications at this point, and thus far we’ve sprayed for 300 to 400 people.
“If someone requests assistance, we’ll come out and walk over the property with a GPS unit, then overlay locations of cogongrass on an aerial map. Our contractor can then use the GPS coordinates to go right to the infestations. We’ll be mapping all winter and expect to start spraying again about May 1.”
There is no cost to landowners, he notes. They need only to sign a contract and release. If they have cows on the land, they have to either take them off prior to treatment, or if they leave them on the land they must agree not to take them to market for at least 30 days following treatment.
“This can be an effective program if everyone works together,” Hancock says. “But it’s not something to be complacent about — if you think just a few plants can’t constitute a problem, you need to go to South Mississippi or Florida and see what it has done there. It can radically change an entire ecosystem.”
Julie White, Extension director for Oktibbeha County, says “There are spots of it pretty much everywhere in this county. The main thing in controlling it is persistence — making a control effort part of a good land stewardship program. If we do this, we’ve got a good chance of keeping it from getting out of control like it has done in south Mississippi and other areas.”
USDA also has a program that has been renewed for another year, Hancock notes, that will provide herbicide to landowners for cogongrass control. NRCS also offers a 75 percent/25 percent cost share through its EQIP program.
Cogongrass plants are more easily identified in the fall, says John Byrd.
“They stand out better in the landscape than in the spring when everything is green. Also helping to confirm ID are the sharp-pointed rhizome tips that protrude from the soil surface — but be cautious, they’re like a toothpick; they will pierce your skin and it hurts like the devil.”
• The Mississippi Landowners Assistance Program to help suppress cogongrass spread is cost-free to eligible landowners. It is made possible through an American Recovery and Investment Act of 2009 stimulus grant. Administered, with oversight by the USDA Forest Service and implemented by the Mississippi Forestry Commission.
It is available in Attala, Choctaw, Clarke, Clay, Kemper, Lauderdale, Leake, Lowndes, Neshoba, Newton, Noxubee, Oktibbeha, Scott, Webster, and Winston Counties.
• For more information, contact the Mississippi Forestry Commission Invasive Plant Control Program: 1-877-708-7651 or check the website www.mfc.ms.gov [3] for details. The program will also provide assistance to landowners in identifying cogongrass.
• The informative video, “Cogongrass — The Perfect Weed,” may be viewed online at http://www.mfc.state.ms.us/Videos/Cogongrass.wmv [4]
• The Blues Rangers Band is Dave Allen, wildlife biologist, and Tate Thriffiley, district ecologist, for the DeSoto National Forest in Mississippi. They perform all over the U.S. and have recorded two nationally-distributed CDs of blues songs highlighting current natural and cultural resource management issues.
Their Blues Rangers Interpretive Program is a public outreach and environmental education tool designed to entertain and inform audiences of all ages and to encourage appropriate public use and stewardship of national forests and grasslands, as well as other public and private lands. Further information is at http://www.fs.fed.us/r8/mississippi/desoto/blues_rangers.shtml [5] and www.myspace.com/thebluesrangers [6]
Source URL: http://www.westernfarmpress.com/management/cogongrass-mother-all-invasive-species?page=4 | 农业 |
2017-04/0034/en_head.json.gz/14863 | Urban Stormwater Workgroup Face-to-Face Meeting, January 2017 - 01/17/2017 Climate Resiliency Workgroup Conference Call Jan 2017 - 01/17/2017 Local Government Engagement Initiative Conference Call - 01/18/2017 Integrated Monitoring Networks Meeting Jan 2017 - 01/18/2017 HomeIn the NewsChesapeake Bay NewsPost
Many Pennsylvania farmers taking voluntary action to improve water quality, survey finds
Streamside buffers like those on Brubaker Farms in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, are one of many agricultural conservation practices that farmers can use to reduce nutrient and sediment pollution.
Many farmers across the Pennsylvania portion of the Chesapeake Bay watershed have taken voluntary action to improve water quality, according to research from Penn State’s College of Agricultural Sciences. Results of the study were presented to the Chesapeake Bay Program’s Agriculture Workgroup, which approved the survey methodology and recommended that the verified practices be credited in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Model.
Agricultural conservation practices reduce the runoff of pollution: for example, planting cover crops help prevent nutrients from running off cropland, while streamside buffers can uptake nutrients before they enter waterways, stabilize stream banks and provide habitat for wildlife. The research effort—funded in part by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP)—provides the first comprehensive inventory of conservation practices farmers have voluntarily implemented to reduce nutrient and sediment pollution flowing into streams, rivers and the Chesapeake Bay.
The PSU Survey results were presented to the Bay Program's Agriculture Workgroup at their December 15 meeting. The Workgroup approved the survey methodology and recommended its use in the effort to document and verify practices in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Model. The latest version of this model, Phase 6, is currently under development and review.
In early 2016, 6,782 farmers from 41 counties in Pennsylvania’s portion of the Chesapeake Bay watershed completed the survey. More than 700 respondents were then randomly selected for farm visits, which confirmed farmers were accurate in their reporting. Respondents reported voluntarily implementing a range of agricultural conservation practices, including 475,800 acres of nutrient management plans, 228,264 acres of conservation plans, 7,565 acres of grass and forested streamside buffers and more than 1.3 million feet of fencing along streambanks.
Keywords: Pennsylvania, agriculture, water quality, watershed model, best management practices Dec
Photo of the Week: A big lift to help restore the American shad
American shad larvae start to hatch from eggs collected from the Potomac River at the Van Dyke Research Station for Anadromous Fishes in Port Royal, Pennsylvania. Anadromous fish, like shad, live their adult lives in the ocean, but migrate back to freshwater rivers and streams to spawn.
Shad are an iconic species of the Chesapeake Bay region, but a combination of pollution, overfishing and the blocking of their migratory paths has led to a decline in their populations. To help boost shad numbers, federal, state and tribal governments have raised young shad in hatcheries and released them in rivers across the region.
But in order to sustain a stable population, shad need to be able to reproduce for themselves. As migratory fish, they require clear passage from the ocean to where they spawn in the Chesapeake’s freshwater tributaries, but barriers such as dams and culverts block waterways and separate shad from their spawning areas. The Chesapeake Bay Program’s Fish Passage Workgroup works with state agencies, local governments and nonprofits to remove these barriers where possible.
There are some places where barriers can’t be removed, such as the Conowingo Dam on the Susquehanna River, so the dam’s owner, Exelon Corporation, built a fish lift to help transport shad upstream. Unfortunately, despite some early success with the lift—transporting as many as 193,000 shad in 2001—annual catches have been steadily declining, with only 8,341 shad transported in 2015.
In an attempt to increase those numbers, in April 2016, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announced a 50-year agreement with Exelon to help American shad migrate up the Susquehanna River to spawn. Exelon agreed to make structural changes, including improvements to the fish lift, to help attract shad to the lift and create enough room so they aren’t crowded out by other fish. The company also pledged to truck up to 100,000 shad upstream.
Learn more about the important role shad play in the Chesapeake Bay ecosystem and the work being done to restore them.
About Joan Smedinghoff - Joan is the Communications Office Staffer at the Chesapeake Bay Program. Originally from Chicago, she was introduced to the Chesapeake Bay region through the streams of central Pennsylvania. She received her Bachelor's in Environmental Studies from Dickinson College in Carlisle, Pa., where she first discovered her passion for storytelling.
Keywords: fish, fish passage, shad, American shad, Conowingo Dam, photo of the week Dec
By the Numbers: 100
With more than 150,000 miles of riparian forest buffers growing in the Chesapeake Bay watershed, it’s clear that planting trees and shrubs along rivers and streams is a popular practice for protecting waterways. While it stands to reason that wide forest buffers could generate more benefits than narrow ones, it was not until 2014 that the Stroud Water Research Center set about to determine just how wide a buffer needed to be to work.
Trees and shrubs planted alongside rivers and stream can prevent pollution from entering waterways, stabilize stream banks and provide food and habitat to wildlife.
When Stroud Water Research Center President, Director and Senior Research Scientist Bernard W. Sweeney and Research Scientist J. Denis Newbold dove into research on forest buffer width, they were already decades into forest buffer history. In the seventies, wide zones of streamside vegetation were known to protect streams from the impacts of logging. In 1985, the sixth U.S. Farm Bill funded the planting of streamside vegetation to slow farmland erosion. And seven years later, research from Sweeney himself revealed the quality of streamside vegetation was likely the single most important human-altered factor affecting the structure, function and quality of our streams. But would width amplify all the benefits a forest buffer has to offer? And how wide is wide enough?
After examining eight ecosystem functions streams are known to support—including nutrient removal, sediment trapping and the health of macroinvertebrates and fish—Sweeney and Newbold found that the integrity of small streams can only be protected by forest buffers at least 30 meters—about 100 feet—wide. In other words, the ideal width of a forest buffer is only slightly shorter than three school buses laid end to end!
Gunpowder Valley Conservancy President Charlie Conklin visits trees planted along Dulaney Branch in Baltimore County, Maryland. The average forest buffer in the Chesapeake Bay watershed is 103 feet wide. Of course, Sweeney and Newbold recognized the layout of a particular piece of land could limit the width of any forest buffers that may be planted there. The scientists also acknowledged forest buffer policies may need to accommodate site-specific factors. In the Chesapeake Bay watershed, a forest buffer must be at least 35 feet wide to count as a pollution-reducing practice that supports work toward the Bay’s “pollution diet.” Even so, the average forest buffer in the watershed is almost three times this size, and the benefits of a wide forest buffer are clear.
According to Sweeney and Newbold’s literature review, which synthesized the results of hundreds of scientific studies, effective nitrogen removal requires buffers that are at least 30 meters wide. Buffers of this size can also be expected to trap about 85 percent of any sediment delivered by water moving over the land (which is 30 percent more than a buffer only 10 meters wide!). A 30-meter width can also ensure a buffer protects streams from measurable increases in water temperature during summer months; sends a natural level of stems, branches and other large woody debris into a waterway; and supports natural macroinvertebrate and fish communities.
Wide forest buffers can support natural macroinvertebrate and fish communities, which can mean good news for the anglers in Pennsylvania’s Little Juniata River.
In our watershed, the planting and care of forest buffers can be limited by a lack of technical assistance and maintenance support. Indeed, buffer restoration has slowed in recent years. While the Chesapeake Bay Program has set a goal to restore 900 miles of buffers every year until at least 70 percent of the watershed’s riparian areas are forested, plantings continue to fall short of this annual target: last year saw the lowest restoration total of the last 16 years.
As part of our work to restore forest buffers, our partners have committed to increasing efforts to teach landowners about buffer establishment and care. Our partners have also committed to better tracking and spending technical assistance funds, seeking out additional funding for the suppression of interfering weeds and determining whether current payments that support buffer care should be raised.
Learn about our work to restore forest buffers.
About Catherine Krikstan - Catherine Krikstan is a web writer at the Chesapeake Bay Program. She began writing about the watershed as a reporter in Annapolis, Md., where she covered algae blooms and climate change and interviewed hog farmers and watermen. She lives in Washington, D.C.
Keywords: rivers and streams, forest buffers, by the numbers Dec
Report explores variations in water quality among small watersheds
The upper part of the Chester River in Maryland was one of four small watersheds targeted for implementation of best management practices. The Upper Chester River watershed is made up of 64 percent agricultural land use.
A new report from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) explores variations in water quality in four small watersheds in Maryland, Pennsylvania and Virginia. Results of the study will aid in efforts to understand how pollution-reducing practices affect the health of waterways in these areas.
When agricultural best management practices—or BMPs—like cover crops and streamside fencing are implemented, the water quality improvements that may result are more likely to first be detected at a smaller scale. But although water quality throughout the Chesapeake Bay watershed is monitored through a large-scale network, fewer resources exist for monitoring smaller watersheds.
In 2010, the USGS partnered with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to monitor water quality in four small (i.e., less than 150 square miles) watersheds: Smith Creek in the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia; the Upper Chester River on Maryland’s Eastern Shore; Conewago Creek near York, Pennsylvania; and Difficult Run near Great Falls Park in Virginia. Representing a wide range of land uses and geologic features, these four regions had been targeted as “showcase projects” for the increased use of BMPs as part of the Chesapeake Bay Executive Order Strategy.
From 2010 through 2013, experts monitored water quality in the four areas, measuring aspects of water chemistry—such as dissolved oxygen, temperature and pH—as well as nutrient and sediment pollution. The results, available in the report, will allow scientists to characterize current conditions, identify sources and sinks of pollution and understand the movement of pollutants like nutrients and sediment in each watershed. Future work building off of these results may improve knowledge of how water quality in these areas responds to BMPs, allowing for the focused implementation of practices to reduce nutrient and sediment pollution.
Keywords: Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), water quality « Older Entries Newer Entries »
Animals and Plants (195) | 农业 |
2017-04/0034/en_head.json.gz/15016 | ISU Extension & Outreach
Ag & Natural Resources
College of Ag & Life Sciences
About AgDM
Ag Decision Maker
Information Files
Voiced Media
Outlook & Profitability
Whole Farm > Legal and Taxes > Taxes
Cost & Return
Budget & Record Summaries
Storage & Markets
Crop Marketing 101
Outlook & Prices
Current Outlook & Profitability
Custom Operations
Machinery Management
Organic Crops
Specialty Crops
Whole Farm
Record Summaries
Budgeting & Analysis
Rental Rate Surveys
Leasing Forms
Cash Leases
Share Leases
Land Values
Farmland Value Surveys
Corn Suitability Ratings
Recordkeeping & Computers
Employee Labor & Management
Human Relationships
Legal & Taxes
Transition & Estate Planning
Business Arrangements
Evaluating Your Estate Plan
Transferring Assets & Management
Weight & Measurements
Weights & Measurements
Specialty Production
Business Start-up
Business Development Process
Feasibility & Business Plans
Contracts & Agreements
Business Organization & Structure
Understanding Marketing
Operations Decision Making
Economic & Business Analysis Concepts
Glossaries of Terms
Co-op 101
Equity Management & Capital Structure
Cooperative Performance
Prices & Profitability
Roger McEowen
former director of the ISU Center for Agricultural Law and Taxation
[email protected]
Neil Harl
Charles F. Curtiss Distinguished Professor in Agriculture and Emeritus Professor of Economics
Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa
Member of the Iowa Bar
[email protected]
Stay up-to-date with AgDM
Income Tax Basis: The Forgotten Concept
File C4-26
Written September, 2005
pdf format The drive to repeal the federal estate tax and the generation skipping transfer tax (GSTT) almost totally ignored the matter of income tax basis until recently. Ironically, for more than 98 percent of U.S. citizens, income basis is actually more important to them economically than either federal estate tax or GSTT. Unfortunately, many do not fully understand:
1. the concept of income tax basis and
2. the long-term consequences of abandoning the commitment to a new basis at death. The U.S. House passed an estate tax repeal bill on April 13 that eliminates the rule that assets take on a fair market value basis at death in the hands of the heirs. In its place, the bill creates a modified carry-over basis rule – the heirs receive an income tax basis equal to the decedent’s basis in the assets with the estate executor having the authority to allocate additional basis (up to fair market value) of up to $1.3 million per estate and $3 million for property passing to a surviving spouse. Some groups advocating for permanent repeal have claimed that this modified carry-over basis rule sufficiently protects farm and ranch families from transfer taxes at death. That claim is unfounded. The issue is critical because the Senate is scheduled to vote on repealing the federal estate tax in September.
The key question is whether agriculture is better served with a repeal of the federal estate tax with a modified carry-over basis rule, or retaining the tax with higher exemptions and maintaining new basis at death.
The Long-Standing Rule of New Income Tax Basis at Death
Historically, gains on most assets have been eliminated at death with the notable exception of assets producing income so close to being earned that it has been viewed as inappropriate to eliminate the gain at death. That category of asset is referred to as producing “income in respect of decedent.” Those assets do not receive a new basis at death now and no proposal has suggested that such assets should receive a new income tax basis in the future. Those assets include:
1. accrued interest on government bonds, 2. gains from qualified retirement plans such as individual retirement accounts, 3. gains from installment contracts entered into before death and 4. growing crops and stored crops (and livestock) produced under a share rent lease where the landowner is inactive (referred to as a “non-material participation” share rent lease).
But for other assets, gains on assets held at death by a decedent are eliminated. Technically, the “income tax basis” on such assets is adjusted at death to the fair market value of the assets (or the value used for figuring federal estate tax if different from fair market value). That adjustment is commonly referred to as a “step up” in basis inasmuch as fair market value of assets is often higher than the income tax basis of the assets before death.
Example: A tract of farmland was purchased for $50,000 in 1950. Since then, improvements of $300,000 have been made to the property and $200,000 of depreciation has been claimed. The purchase price was the initial income tax basis less the tax investment in the farmland. That figure ($50,000) is adjusted upward for improvements made ($300,000) and downward for depreciation claimed ($200,000). Therefore, the current basis for the farm is:
($50,000 + 300,000) - $200,000 = $150,000
If the farmland is sold by the owner for $500,000 in 2005, the gain would be $350,000. That’s the selling price of $500,000 minus the current basis of $150,000. In all likelihood, part of the gain would be reported as ordinary income (because it represented depreciation previously claimed on the property) and the balance would be capital gain. The capital gain would be reported as long-term capital gain if the land had been held for more than one year (which it has in the example).
So what happens if the farmland owner dies owning the land? Under current law (through 2009), the income tax basis would be “stepped up” to $500,000, the fair market value at death. What would have been gain had the land been sold before death ($350,000) is eliminated at death. The gain is effectively wiped off the books. The land would then have a new basis in the hands of the estate (and ultimately the heirs) of $500,000. That value would then be used for purposes of figuring gain or loss on later sale or other disposition and for purposes of figuring depreciation after death.
That treatment of gain is especially advantageous to farm estates because:
1. the income tax basis of raised animals, for farmers on the cash method of accounting (and more than 90 percent of farmers are on cash accounting) is zero;
2. inventories of raised grain and feed likewise have a zero income tax basis for cash accounting taxpayers; 3. machinery and equipment are often depreciated at a faster rate than the decline in value over time; and 4. land, for many farmers, has a relatively low income tax basis because it was purchased decades ago when land values were lower.
The 2001 Tax Act Provisions
Under the 2001 Tax Act, the new income tax basis at death is scheduled to end, for deaths after December 31, 2009, with repeal of the federal estate tax. In its stead will be a one year system of “carryover basis” with the decedent’s basis (or the fair market value of the property, whichever is less), carrying over to the estate and thus to the heir or heirs of the decedent. The executor of the estate, under rules scheduled to be in effect for deaths in 2010, would have authority to allocate up to $1.3 million per estate and an additional $3 million for property passing to a surviving spouse, to increase the income tax basis of eligible property but not above fair market value. Most property of a decedent, other than property producing income in respect of decedent, would be eligible for the adjustment in basis. However, some other categories of assets are also not eligible for the adjustment.
Example: A farm couple married in 1940, the husband worked as a hired man for a neighbor until World War II service was completed. After the war, the couple were tenant farmers for 10 years. In 1955, using an inheritance from the husband’s aunt, the couple bought two sections of land for $125 per acre for a total purchase price of $160,000. The couple added improvements of $100,000 which were depreciated out by the time the wife died of cancer in 1992. Because the money to buy the farm came from the husband’s aunt to him, the farm was considered the husband’s so there was no adjustment of income tax basis at the wife’s death in 1992. The husband dies in 2010 when the farmland is valued at $2,700 per acre for a total value of $3,456,000.
Result: The husband’s estate would have $1,300,000 to increase the basis of estate property. If that amount is allocated entirely to the land, the income tax basis of the land would be $1,460,000 ($1,300,000 plus the basis at the time of death of $160,000). Yet the fair market value is $3,456,000. The difference is $1,996,000. Assume the two children, neither of whom is farming, sell the land for $3,456,000. The gain of $1,996,000, ($3,456,000 minus the basis of $1,460,000) assuming a combined state and federal capital gains rate of 20 percent would result in income tax liability of $399,200. Had the husband died in 2009, one year earlier, the exemption of $3.5 million would eliminate all federal estate tax liability. More importantly, the heirs would receive a step up in basis to $3,456,000 and there would be no income tax liability on sale. Therefore, the heirs would be better off by $399,200 under current law on new basis at death than under repeal of current basis rules and repeal of federal estate tax as is proposed.
This example illustrates two important points that proponent of permanent repeal overlook:
1. the provision for a $3 million basis increase for a surviving spouse is of no benefit at the death of the surviving spouse; and 2. if the $1.3 million and $3 million allowances are exceeded, carryover basis rules apply.
The Reason for Congressional Action
Because of Congressional budgetary rules, the carryover basis system, along with repeal of the federal estate tax and the generation skipping transfer tax, is scheduled to end for deaths after December 31, 2010, with the system returning to a new income tax basis at death for deaths thereafter. That result is not expected to happen and current efforts to reach an agreement in Congress over the future of the federal estate tax and generation skipping transfer tax are directed toward either repeal of the two taxes or continuation of the taxes at lower rates and with a larger exemption. The House-passed bill that the Senate will consider in September permanently repeals the federal estate tax (and GSTT), but would also make permanent the modified carryover basis rule. Thus, the discussion now occurring in Congress concerning repeal of the federal estate tax also involves the income tax basis issue.
Income tax basis is tied to the other two taxes (federal estate tax and GSTT) only because of two features of the current system:
1. the adjustment in basis occurs by reason of death and uses fair market value at death (or the value used for federal estate tax purposes if different from fair market value) and 2. repeal of the federal estate tax would result in the loss of approximately $20 billion of federal tax revenue, and a completely new basis at death would cost approximately the same amount. The impact on the Treasury is why Congress cannot repeal the federal estate tax while at the same time retaining new basis at death. The revenue loss would be too severe unless, of course, Congress increases taxes somewhere else to make up for the shortfall. That move would be politically unpopular. However, IRS data indicates that the federal estate tax can be retained with an exemption of between $3 million and $4 million along with the longstanding rule of new basis at death, and preserve almost all of the revenue presently generated by the tax.
Problems Presented by a “Modified Carry-Over” Basis Rule
Although the concept of a new income tax basis at death has been costly in terms of lost revenue, there are several important advantages of restarting the basis “clock” at the death of property owners. Proponents of complete repeal of the federal estate tax fail to tell this part of the story.
The “lock-in” effect. From an economic perspective, the most significant advantage of a new income tax basis at death is avoidance of the “lock-in” effect. Without a new income tax basis at a decedent’s death, the potential income tax liability on sale of assets after death would tend to rise over time with the result that property owners would become increasingly unwilling to sell the assets and trigger the gain. The result is that market forces would become less and less effective in guiding assets into their highest and best use because of the rising income tax liability. That may seem like a minor factor for asset sales in the first few years after death. Over time, assets would be effectively locked into families. Keep in mind that the proposal to adjust basis (in 2010 under current law, and permanently as proposed in the House passed bill) is sufficient to apply to only a relatively small portion of assets of decedents, leaving other assets subject to the “lock-in” effect. Over time, the expected result would be a reduced rate of economic growth. That would not be good for agriculture.
Difficulties in obtaining necessary records. A regime of carryover basis would necessarily rely on a recordkeeping system to ascertain the original purchase price, improvements added to the property and the depreciation claimed on the depreciable assets. With a new basis at death, those records are needed only for sale or taxable exchange occurring after death. Under carryover basis, those records would be needed for all time.
Complexity in calculating basis. The type of carryover basis mandated by the 2001 legislation (and the 2005 House proposal) would assure complexity (and conflict) in the allocation of basis adjustment allowances after death. We have been down this road before - a carryover basis system was created by legislation passed in 1976, was postponed twice and finally repealed in 1980 under pressure from tax practitioners who objected to the complexity of the calculation procedure. The proposed modified carryover basis system in the House bill will pose more problems than the 1976 version because the executor has discretion to allocate the basis increase (within the limits specified above) as the executor wishes. That will provide the possibility of greater family conflict and animosity if certain heirs are favored with a basis increase and others are not. Wills and trusts will have to be rewritten to specify the basis increase allocation in an attempt to prevent potential problems.
Untaxed Asset Value at Death
Proponents of permanent repeal often state that it is unfair to tax assets at death that have already been taxed during life. What they fail to explain is that under the existing system of new basis at death, a significant proportion of asset value at death is never subject to income tax. So, the federal estate tax is not the “double tax” that proponents of permanent repeal claim that it is. In fact, much of the value of assets held at death is unrealized appreciation in value. Poterba and Weisbrenner have found that 37 percent of all value in estates above $500,000 in value is unrealized and untaxed capital gain. Among estates valued at more than $10 million, 56 percent of value is unrealized and untaxed capital gain. As estate size grows, the proportion of value that has never been taxed (due to asset appreciation) also grows.
Federal estate tax is paid by estates of fewer than two percent of the decedents, and an even smaller percentage of the estates of farmers and ranchers, under current law. Yet gain on assets held at death is ultimately taxed to everyone who inherits property, up and down the income and asset scale. Therefore, the issue is more than revenue collected or not collected. A major change in the federal estate tax and the determination of gain on property after death, as has been proposed, represents a significant shift in who bears the overall federal tax burden. The House-passed bill shifts this burden to the heirs of the relatively smaller-sized estates.
Unquestionably, agriculture (and the economy as a whole) will be better served if the Congress retains the federal estate tax (albeit with a higher exemption and, perhaps, a lower top rate (which is currently 47 percent for taxable amounts exceeding $2,000,000)) along with new basis at death.
Revised from Estate Planning, Pm-993
Roger McEowen, former director of the ISU Center for Agricultural Law and Taxation, 515-294-5217, [email protected]
Neil Harl, Charles F. Curtiss Distinguished Professor in Agriculture and Emeritus Professor of Economics, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa,
Member of the Iowa Bar,
515-294-6354, [email protected]
Ag Decision Maker, Iowa State University Extension and Outreach, Department of Economics, [email protected], 641-732-5574
Copyright © Iowa State University Extension.
All rights reserved. | Policies | State & National Extension Partners | Text Only | | 农业 |
2017-04/0034/en_head.json.gz/15170 | Dustin Vande Hoef 515/281-3375 or 515/326-1616 (cell) or [email protected]
NOMINATIONS SOUGHT FOR 2013 IOWA FARM ENVIRONMENTAL LEADER AWARDS
2nd annual recognition highlights farmers serving as local leaders in environmental stewardship
(DES MOINES) – Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad and Lt. Gov. Kim Reynolds today were joined by Iowa Secretary of Agriculture Bill Northey and Director Chuck Gipp from the Iowa Department of Natural Resources to announce that nominations are open for the 2013 Iowa Farm Environmental Leader Awards.
Nominations are due by June 15, 2013 and the nomination form can be found here.
“These awards are an opportunity to recognize the many farmers that are taking significant voluntary steps to protect the soil and improve water quality here in Iowa,” Branstad said. “Iowa farmers take great pride in caring for the soil and water, and we want to lift them up as examples for other farmers to follow.”
“Iowa is fortunate to be at the forefront in agriculture and to keep our leadership position we must protect and conserve our state’s natural resources and fertile soil for future generations,” Reynolds said. “Agriculture plays a critical role to Iowa’s global competitiveness and economic status.”
The award is a joint effort between the Governor, Lt. Governor, Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship, and Iowa Department of Natural Resources to recognize the efforts of Iowa’s farmers as environmental leaders committed to healthy soils and improved water quality.
It seeks to recognize the exemplary voluntary actions of farmers that improve or protect the environment and natural resources of our state while also encouraging other farmers to follow in their footsteps by building success upon success.
Farmers that are nominated should have made environmental stewardship a priority on their farm and adopted best management practices throughout their farming operation. As true stewards of the land, they recognize that improved water quality and soil sustainability reaps benefits that extend beyond their fields to citizens of Iowa and residents even further downstream.
“A critical component of the recently revealed Iowa Nutrient Reduction Strategy is to increase the amount of voluntary, science-based conservation practices that are on the landscape,” Northey said. “Recognizing farmers who are taking the lead in conservation is a way to encourage others to consider adopting some of the same practices on their land.”
An appointed committee of representatives from both conservation and agricultural groups will review the nominations and select the winners. The recipients will be recognized at the Iowa State Fair.
The award was created in 2012 and 67 Iowa farm families were recognized during the inaugural award ceremony at the Iowa State Fair. Winners receive a certificate as well as a yard sign donated by Monsanto.
-30- Mailing Address: IDALS, Wallace State Office Building, 502 E. 9th Street, Des Moines, IA 50319: PH: 515-281-5321 | 农业 |
2017-04/0034/en_head.json.gz/17127 | PlantsTrees & ShrubsTrees What Is a Ficus Tree?
What Is a Ficus Tree?
Ficus is a family of tropical plants with shiny oval leaves. The rubber tree plant is one of the members of this plant family. When people refer to a "ficus tree," however, they are referring to the benjamina ficus plant, which is also called the weeping fig tree. The ficus tree is found outdoors in temperate climates, and indoors in all gardening zones. Ficus trees require specific care in order to remain healthy.
The ficus tree is an evergreen plant that has a narrow trunk and droopy, cascading branches. The tree's leaves are bright green and shiny, with wavy edges. Because the trunks do not get very thick, three juvenile ficus trees are often braided together, to create a striking braided trunk with a full triple canopy.
Ficus trees prefer high-quality soil that drains quickly. Ficus trees grown in containers need drainage holes to allow for proper drainage. If your soil is water-retaining, amend the situation by adding gardening sand or peat moss, at a ratio of 1:1.
Ficus trees like to be on the dry side of moist most of the time. These trees are known to be very particular, and protest by turning yellow or dropping leaves if too much or too little water is provided. For best results, provide water only when the top two inches of soil feel dry to the touch.
Light Needs
Besides water, lighting is the thing ficus trees are most finicky about. These trees like light, but not too much of it. Filtered light--as provided by the sparse canopy of an overhead tree or through a window with blinds--is best. The ficus tree does not like change, and protests when it is moved from an area to which it has become accustomed. If it's moved from one area of the yard or home to another, even if the temperature stays the same, the ficus protests by dropping up to a quarter of its leaves. With proper care, the leaves grow back once the tree is acclimated to its new surroundings.
Ficus trees are poisonous, and cause topical and respiratory symptoms. The plant produces a substance that is chemically similar to rubber and latex. The substance causes itching, redness or stinging when it comes in contact with skin. This substance also seeps onto the leaves, where it becomes enveloped with dust. If this dust is inhaled by people with allergies or latex sensitivity, reactions include cough, itchy eyes, wheezing, or--in highly sensitive people--anaphylaxis.
ficus tree cultivation, ficus tree information, growing ficus trees About this Author
Cyn Vela is a freelance writer and professional blogger. Her work has been published on dozens of websites, as well as in local print publications. Vela's articles usually focus on where her passions lie: writing, web development, blogging, parenting, gardening, and health and wellness. She studied English literature at Del Mar College, and at the University of Texas at San Antonio. New in Trees | 农业 |
2017-04/0034/en_head.json.gz/17128 | Creating Gender-Responsive Agricultural Development Programs
Rob Horsch
Rob Horsch, deputy director, leads the Agricultural Research and Development team which manages a portfolio of grants aimed at improving agricultural productivity, reducing farmer risk, and developing more nutritious versions of the staple crops grown and consumed by farm families, including varieties that thrive in different soil types and are resistant to disease, pests, and environmental stresses such as drought. Prior to joining the foundation in 2006, Rob was the leader of International Development Partnerships at Monsanto Company and involved in a number of public private partnerships for agricultural development. Rob is a plant biologist and has served on the editorial boards of several leading journals in the plant sciences and as an advisor to the National Science Foundation and the Department of Energy. He was awarded the 1998 National Medal of Technology by President Clinton for contributions to the development of agricultural biotechnology. Rob received his Ph.D. in Genetics at the University of California, Riverside, in 1979, and then conducted postdoctoral work in plant physiology at the University of Saskatchewan. | 农业 |
2017-04/0034/en_head.json.gz/18435 | Silence of the bees: ‘It has to stop. It just has to stop.’
Nicole Mortillaro ;
A bee collects pollen in a sunflower field. THE CANADIAN PRESS/AP/Charlie Riedel
TORONTO – Davis Bryans is a fourth-generation beekeeper at Munro Honey in Alviston, Ontario. It’s a lifestyle he loves. It may be a long day – 12 to 14 hours in the summer – but he’s outside, learning about the natural world around him and watching as life flourishes season by season.But what he’s noticed lately is that life is declining around him. In particular, that of insects.For the past six years or so, Bryans has noticed a steep decline in his bee crop. Davis Bryans, owner of Munro Honey, with just some of his hives.
Courtesy Munro Honey
“We’re out the environment and we’re really noticing other pollinators that aren’t there,” Bryans said. “Like the leaf-cutter bee, the bumble bee, the butterflies…they’re just not there.”And it’s not just his crop, others are also in decline. The culprit responsible, Bryans believes – along with other beekeepers around the world – are neonicotinoids, known as neonics or NNIs. In fact, in 2013, the European Union put a temporary ban on NNIs. Story continues below
Beekeepers warn 6/10 of Ontario’s bees died during harsh winter Garden centre flowers test positive for pesticide harmful to bees: study Up to 20 million bees swarm after truck overturns in Delaware READ MORE: EU bans pesticides in effort to save beesThe first time Bryans started to notice something was wrong was around 2007. His crop was declining, but cropping practices had remained the same.He and other beekeepers in the same area were perplexed.Bryans tried replacing the queens. But that didn’t stop the bees from dying, sometimes a twitching mess in front of the hive, sometimes just laying dead in a pile.Finally, in 2012, the Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA), a branch of Health Canada, sent investigators to the region from both the Ontario Ministry of Environment and the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (OMAFRA).Full Episode: 16×9’s Flight of the Bees (Encore) The report from this investigation was published in October 2013. In part, it read:“The information evaluated suggests that planting of corn seeds treated with the nitro-guanidine insecticides clothianidin and/or thiamethoxam contributed to the majority of the bee mortalities that occurred in corn growing regions of Ontario and Quebec in Spring 2012…The unusual weather conditions in the spring of 2012 were likely also a contributing factor.”Clothianidin and thiamethoxam are two types of insecticides. Part of the neonicotinoid (NNI) family, they are used on about 95 per cent of corn crops in Canada and the U.S., as well as about 70 per cent of soy. The report clearly identified the pesticide as contributing to the majority of bee losses in a key region of corn and soy production. But there was no ban.Then in July 2014, the Ontario government made an unprecedented move: the Liberal government confirmed that it was seeking to restrict the use of these pesticides.But for some beekeepers, it wasn’t enough. That’s why on Sept. 3, a proposed class-action lawsuit was launched against Bayer AG and Syngenta, two major manufacturers of neonics. Two of the beekeepers involved in the $450 million lawsuit were Munro Honey and Sun Parlour Honey. Countries are reporting widespread bee deaths, attributing them to the use of insecticides.
Photo by Ralph Orlowski/Getty Images
Ontario beekeeper Tibor Szabo said that he plans on joining the lawsuit as well.“I have been heavily affected by these chemicals for sure,” he said. This year, he’s lost 1,165 hives, each with 1000 bees.READ MORE: California honey production dries up amid record droughtSzabo is a third-generation beekeeper. His father, once a leading bee research scientist, was awarded the Order of Canada in 1987 for his work with bees.Trying to make a livingBoth Bryans and Szabo question why NNIs are being used straight across the board when not all farmers may need it.“To put it on 100 per cent of crops without knowing if they need it?” Bryans said. “That’s a crime.”“It’s mobile, persistent and systemic,” Szabo said. “Putting it on every agricultural field in southern Ontario is nothing but insanity.”And the use of the pesticides, these men believe, is making it harder to run their businesses.“We try to run 2,700 hives,” Bryans said. In each of those hives there are 80,000 bees. “But it’s hard to keep those numbers up.”For Szabo, who raises queens, this year he was only able to produce 2,000. He used to be able to produce 6,000-7,000.“We just can’t keep the hives going,” he said.The dismaying part is that bee losses used to be largely relegated to winter, but that is no longer the case. At any point during the year, Szabo is faced with the possibility that a large part of his crop is dead or unhealthy. And Szabo lays the blame on NNIs.“It has to stop. It just has to stop.”WATCH: ‘Neonic’ pesticides killing bees, harming environment: scientists The key to keeping their businesses going, both men agree, is diversifying.“You do what you can,” Szabo said. “You have to adjust and do different things, but it’s crazy.”Bryans said that his losses are making his business more costly and labour-intensive. One example is trying to find a sick bee in 2,700 hives.“You have to go down and try to find that one bee in 80,000. It’s very labour-intensive. It’s gotten to the point…we’re having a hard time of it.”Bee losses across Ontario this past year are estimated to be around 58 per cent, Szabo said. While some may blame last winter – a particularly long and harsh one – Szabo said that it’s not the winter. It’s that unhealthy bees – bees that are “essentially brain damaged” – can’t make it through the winter. They lose their ability to function properly – such as clustering to stay warm.WATCH: Manitoba apiarist concerned about bees’ survival And don’t try to tell him it could be varroa mites, a mite that can be lethal to bees.“Poisoning symptoms are so, so different,” he said.As for the lawsuit – put before the courts by Munro Honey and Sun Parlour Honey – Bryans said that he feels like there was little else he could do.“When your back is up against the wall you’ve got to do something. And if they’re going to take our industry away, they’re going to have to pay us to do it. But I don’t think the average person wants this industry gone.”“We feel if we don’t say anything, the rest of the environment is suffering,” Bryans said.CropLife, who represents the manufacturers of these pesticides, declined to comment on the suit.Syngenta only issued a release that read in part, “While Syngenta has not received the complaint in question and cannot comment on any specifics, we do take concerns about bee health very seriously. The scientific evidence, including field studies conducted in Canada, clearly shows that bees and other pollinators can coexist safely with modern agricultural technologies, including neonicotinoids.”WATCH: Beekeepers to launch lawsuit But both men hope that the lawsuit will stop the widespread use of these pesticides.READ MORE: U.S. wildlife refuges phasing out GMO crops, some pesticides to help bees“I would like to see, realistic and proper risk-assessment on all insecticides, especially systemic insecticides, before any of it is released,” Szabo said. “This stuff shouldn’t happen… Regulators need to get with the program. I’d like to see some accountability from the federal government.”Bryans said that bees – believed to be responsible for more than half of the world’s pollination – are too important to lose.“They pollinate stuff that you hardly even realize that they’re pollinating, like wild flowers, maple trees, clovers, hay in the hay fields,” he said. “It’s very important and we feel like we’re doing a service to the environment.”Follow @NebulousNikki © 2014 Shaw Media Report an error
bee deaths
Ontario Beekeepers Association | 农业 |
2017-04/0034/en_head.json.gz/18694 | NSAC's Blog
New ACEP Rule Guides Long-Term Conservation of Farmland, Grassland, and Wetlands
California buffer strip. Photo credit: USDA NRCS.
The pressure on farmers and rural landowners to turn wetlands and grasslands into production, or productive farm and ranchland into commercial and residential developments, has been increasing for decades. In order to combat development pressures and incentivize conservation over elimination of ecologically valuable lands, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) offers the Agriculture Conservation Easement Program (ACEP), one of the four major farm bill conservation programs. ACEP helps private landowners, land trusts, and other entities preserve working farms and ranches and restore, protect, and enhance wetlands and grasslands through long-term easements.
On Tuesday, October 18, USDA published its final rule for ACEP, dividing it into the two tracks established by the farm bill – a Wetland Reserve Easement (WRE) component and an Agricultural Land Easement (ALE) component. Under WRE, reserve easement funds go directly to landowners and the focus is on restoring wetlands on farmland. In the ALE, easement funds are provided to non-profits, state and local agencies, and Indian tribes to purchase easements from farmers and landowners to retain and protect farmland and grasslands.
Last year, the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition (NSAC) submitted detailed comments on the interim rule, which USDA first published in February 2015. Our recommendations, some of which USDA adopted in the final rule, focused primarily on enhancing natural resource conservation and increasing land access for beginning farmers and ranchers. See below for a detailed breakdown of the changes.
The ACEP final rule requires ALE agreements to conserve or enhance a diversity of natural resources, and allows USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) to waive a portion of the cash contribution requirement if the landowner agrees to implement a comprehensive conservation plan according to NRCS conservation practice standards. In NSAC’s comments on the interim rule, we recommended that NRCS make comprehensive conservation planning a core component of ALE easements. Allowing a reduction in the eligible entity’s cash contribution is certainly a step in the right direction by creating new options for farmers to conserve natural resources on easement land. However, it is our opinion that by neglecting to include specific language and directives, the rule leaves too many of ALE’s conservation goals up to chance.
For example, the rule:
“encourage[s] the development of a robust and comprehensive agricultural land easement plan, such as a plan at the NRCS Resource Management System (RMS) planning level,” but doesn’t require such a plan;
explains that ALE plans may improve natural resources, but don’t have to;
notes that eligible entities (e.g., land trusts) may work with NRCS to develop and implement a conservation plan, but don’t have to work with NRCS;
gives states authority to limit the amount of ALE funding that goes to easements that protect Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) by modifying state ranking criteria, but doesn’t encourage or direct them to do so; and
allows states to consider climate benefits (carbon sequestration and climate resiliency) when ranking ALE applications, but doesn’t encourage or require them to do so.
NRCS has, however, added a new national ranking criterion to prioritize easements that protect permanent grassland against development or conversion to cropland; a move NSAC wholeheartedly applauds. The addition of this criterion means that when ranking ALE applications, NRCS will consider whether or not there has been a “decrease in the percentage of acreage of permanent grassland, pasture and rangeland, other than cropland and woodland pasture in the county in which the parcel is located between the last two USDA Censuses of Agriculture.” This change will help to stem the ongoing loss of prime grasslands.
Beginning and Socially Disadvantaged Farmers and Ranchers
In our comments on the ACEP interim rule, we urged NRCS to make it easier for beginning and socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers to access land through ACEP. We focused in part on a tool known as an “Option to Purchase at Agricultural Value” (OPAV), which allows land trusts and other entities to sell easement land at the agricultural value rather than the non-agricultural market value, reducing land costs and increasing the likelihood that farmers can purchase the land and that beginning farmers may have a better chance of gaining access and taking over in the future.
NRCS adopted our recommendation that an OPAV should qualify as a succession plan, though the agency only made the change in the ACEP policy manual, not in the rule itself.
The final rule also incentivizes land transfer to beginning, socially disadvantaged, and veteran farmers and ranchers. If the covered parcel is part of a comprehensive plan to facilitate transfers to new and beginning farmers, or if a beginning, veteran or socially disadvantaged farmer or rancher has a purchase and sale agreement to acquire the property, the rule now allows for a reduction in the eligible entity’s cash contribution.
Funding Limitations
The preface to the final rule helps explain why more federal funding is necessary to achieve ACEP’s goals. The 2014 Farm Bill cut funding for conservation easements dramatically. ACEP’s predecessor programs – the Wetlands Reserve Program (WRP), Grassland Reserve Program (GRP), and Farm and Ranch Land Protection Program (FRPP) – received an average of $780 million per year annually under the 2008 Farm Bill. When these programs were amalgamated into ACEP in the 2014 Farm Bill funding was slashed 47 percent, to approximately $368 million annually.
At this funding level, NRCS is able to fund only 30 percent of the eligible applications that it receives. While reduced funding resulted in reduced enrollments across ACEP compared to prior years, the reduction in ACEP-WRE enrollments has been disproportionately larger than ACEP-ALE.
Looking toward the 2018 Farm Bill, NSAC will work to increase the amount of funding dedicated to ACEP and improve funding for both halves of the program. We will, however, oppose any effort to move funding from its wetland easement component to the agricultural land easement component. Currently, NRCS bases the allocation of funding between WRE and ALE on the level of demand, an approach supported by NSAC. According to the final rule, “demand under ACEP [in terms of both number of applications and funding requested] has been approximately 65 to 70 percent demand for WRE and 30 to 35 percent demand for ALE.”
As the 2018 Farm Bill discussions get underway, we look forward to working with our partner organizations to increase funding for ACEP and help USDA more effectively protect and conserve agricultural working lands and wetlands.
Beginning and Minority Farmers, Conservation, Energy & Environment Comments are closed.
RSS - Subscribe to blog
January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 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
Commodity, Crop Insurance & Credit Programs
Competition & Anti-trust
Conservation, Energy & Environment
Grants and Programs
Local & Regional Food Systems
Marketing and Labeling
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 |
2017-04/0034/en_head.json.gz/18759 | View this email in your browser
WABA Press Release Right to Food and Nutrition Watch 2014 LAUNCHED!
WABA announces the launch of the global report, Right to Food and Nutrition Watch 2014, which focuses on the 10th Anniversary of the FAO Right to Food Guidelines
Oct 8, 2014 - Ten years ago, in November 2004, the FAO Council adopted the Voluntary Guidelines to support the progressive realization of the right to adequate food in the context of national food security (known as the ‘Right to Food Guidelines’). As a contribution to the 10th anniversary of the Guidelines, the Right to Food and Nutrition Watch 2014 report is dedicated to celebrating and critically assessing ‘Ten Years of the Right to Food Guidelines: Gains, Challenges and Concerns’. WABA is a member of the Global Network for the Right to Food and Nutrition. The Global Network, together with other civil society organisations (CSOs) and social movements, has seized this anniversary as an opportunity for stocktaking and, more importantly, to call for renewed commitment by governments, UN agencies, civil society and other stakeholders, for the full realisation of the right to adequate food and nutrition.
“As an alliance of individuals and organisations concerned with the protection, promotion and support of breastfeeding worldwide, WABA asserts that breastfeeding has a vital role in making food security a reality for millions of babies born every year. Breastfeeding has been shown repeatedly to be the single most effective way to prevent infant death. It plays a major role in children’s nutrition, health and development, and significantly benefits the health of mothers” notes Jay Sharma, WABA Executive Director. “While included in the Voluntary Right to Food Guidelines, current statistics show that breastfeeding rates are abysmally low across the globe due to a confluence of factors including aggressive marketing of breastmilk substitutes, and lack of political will and a reluctance to make resources available by governments” adds Sharma. This dire scenario becomes even more critical when countries are ravaged by emergencies and disasters, whether natural or man-made, as has been the case in recent times. WABA’s representative to the WATCH Consortium board, Dr Marcos Arana, in his co-written article for WATCH 2014 argues that, “Disasters are not exceptional situations in which states are exempt from their responsibilities with regard to the right to adequate food and nutrition. On the contrary, their responsibilities to respect, protect and fulfill this right have to be more strictly observed, both when addressing the urgent and immediate needs of the affected populations as well as when foreseeing the long-term impact of disasters”. In the article entitled ‘Restoring Self-reliance through Local Knowledge after Disasters: Lessons for Maternal, Infant and Young Child Feeding and from Small-holder Farmer Solidarity’, Dr Arana states that the tendency to handover the implementation of relief operations to private corporations has been justified by some governments that argue for reducing relief operations cost and the promise of higher efficiency and technical effectiveness: “During emergencies, support for exclusive and continued breastfeeding is absolutely critical for the health and lives of infants and young children. Exclusive breastfeeding during the first six months accompanied by continued lactation and adequate complementary feeding is crucial for preventing infant deaths and malnutrition. Failure to breastfeed significantly increases the risk of diseases because the lack of clean water and infrastructure make it difficult to ensure safe and efficient preparation of baby food without adequate refrigeration and clean boiled water, which compound the already unstable access to infant formula in times of crises. Also during emergencies, it is critical to support and invest immediately in smallholder farmer recovery to re-build a base for local and national self-determination, and food and nutrition sovereignty”. Dr Arana also states corporate control of aid programs has facilitated the indiscriminate distribution of breast-milk substitutes by corporations and other actors, including governments and non-governmental organisations (NGOs). “Donations and untargeted distribution of breast-milk substitutes and ready-to-use foods (RUFs), together with the distribution of globally marketed seed varieties, create dependence, discourage breastfeeding by interfering with women’s options to decide the best manner in which to feed their children, erode local food culture, and undermine food sovereignty”, he contends. “In the process towards the restoration of self-reliance following crisis situations, women’s knowledge concerning infant and young child feeding must be at the centre as it is precisely this local knowledge that is passed on from generation to generation enabling communities to feed themselves, and supporting women’s independence and empowerment” concludes Arana.
The contributions in the Right to Food and Nutrition Watch 2014 reveal, among others, that: Efforts towards the realisation of the right to food are undermined by the lack of a holistic approach, which would require a greater focus on access to, and control over food production resources, as well as providing direct links for those defending worker’s rights for the urban poor, nutritional-well being and the rights of future generations, within the food sovereignty framework.
WABA is a member of the Watch Consortium and the Global Network for the Right to Food and Nutrition, which are closely linked since the majority of their members participate in both. This synergy ensures that the Watch is the most prominent monitoring tool of the Global Network. Members of both platforms hope that the initiatives and issues presented in this 2014 edition of the Watch will enrich readers’ understanding of the progress, limitations and challenges that lie ahead with regard to the progressive realisation of the righty to food and adequate nutrition. Together we will continue to fight for sustainable and human rights-based alternatives for improved systems where all people will enjoy all human rights – including the right to adequate food and nutrition.
Dr Marcos Arana Cedeño is member of IBFAN and WABA. He is Director of the Training and Education Centre of Ecology and Health for Peasants (CCESC) in Chiapas, Mexico; researcher of the National Institute of Nutrition and Medical Sciences of Mexico; and Co-Founder of aliMente project. See Right to Food and Nutrition Watch 2014 Press Release in WABA Advocacy section
See WATCH 2014 publication in WABA Advocacy section See WABA’s World Breastfeeding Week 2009 Action Folder on Infant Feeding in Emergencies here.
Copyright © 2014 World Alliance for Breastfeeding Action (WABA), All rights reserved.
Our mailing address is:
World Alliance for Breastfeeding Action (WABA)
P.O.BOX 1200
George Town, Penang 10850
Email: [email protected] Website: www.waba.org.my
unsubscribe from this list update subscription preferences | 农业 |
2017-04/0034/en_head.json.gz/18866 | How much longer will we import feeder cattle from Mexico? Jan 12, 2017 How to build a low-maintenance cowherd Dec 20, 2016 How docility plays a role in rebreeding success Jan 12, 2017 Does the beef industry have the drive to promote itself? Jan 12, 2017 Farm Operations Opinion: Get Ready For The Next Media Attack
Hot on the heels of the lean finely textured beef debacle, the popular media is sharpening its incisors for another attack on beef. Burt Rutherford | May 11, 2012
Just as the media-fueled furor over lean finely textured beef has died down, and just when you thought it was safe to turn your attention back to producing the safe, wholesome beef that the industry has long been proud of, the popular media can again be heard popping its jaws in anticipation of their next attack on the beef industry.
Get ready. The first slashing thrusts have already been made in the next media debacle. This time, it will surround the use of what the media has mislabeled as “meat glue.”
At issue are enzymes used as binding agents – transglutaminase (TG) and beef fibrin, to be exact. These products are, according to their manufacturers, naturally occurring proteins that can be found in all animals and even in some plants.
These enzymes are used to bind meat proteins together; for instance, in sausage making. In fresh beef, the most-often used application is in portion control for filet mignon. In addition, creative culinary chefs use the binding enzymes to create new, cutting-edge beef dishes. TG is used in a number of other food products as well, including bakery applications and yogurt. TG has been approved for use in the U.S. for 16 years; beef fibrin for 17 years. During that time, the manufacturers say there has never been a food safety concern with the products. Both products are also approved for use in Europe.
The tenderloin, from which filets come, is triangular-shaped. The enzymes are used to bind two filets together to create a larger steak, which is cut into smaller, portion-controlled steaks for use in banquet and catering situations, in theme parks, casinos and other places where large numbers of people will be served the same dish. It is a way, the manufacturers say, to reduce the incidence of “steak envy,” where Uncle Ed gets a bigger steak than Uncle Joe.
And its use is very, very limited. If all the TG and beef fibrin sold in the U.S. were used in beef, it would be applied to about 8 million lbs. of beef. Given that about 49 billion lbs. of beef and pork are consumed in the U.S. each year, these enzymes would be used in products that account for about 0.016% of total red meat consumption, according to the American Meat Institute (AMI).
The media would have us believe that foodservice operators are taking lower-quality, smaller cuts of meat, creating a jigsaw puzzle of a steak and passing it off as a filet mignon. In a hastily called news conference Thursday afternoon, Mark Dopp, AMI general counsel and senior vice president for regulatory affairs, said that practice is not only patently illegal, but AMI has no evidence it is occurring.
“The old adage that you can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear totally applies in this scenario,” says Dana Hanson, North Carolina State University Extension meats scientist. “If you’re going to use cuts that would have poor eating quality, defined as tenderness, they’re going to be tough. If you restructured them into something that looks like a filet, it would eat just like a whole-muscle steak that was cut from the chuck,” he says. And most consumers know that a filet is not, in general, a hard-chewing cut of meat.
In addition, the media has attacked the use of these binding agents by throwing the transparency card. However, as the speakers pointed out in the news conference, any product that is bound with the enzymes must, by law, declare them on the label.
In a restaurant setting, however, those ingredients aren’t declared on the menu, the media accuses. When several speakers pointed out that all the ingredients used in producing the vegetable soup or the bread consumed with the meal aren’t declared on the menu either, the reporter pressing the point was unwilling (unable, perhaps?) to comprehend the analogy.
Around 650 hard-working people, who used to make a good wage producing lean finely textured beef and whose families depended on them, will shortly be out of a job, thanks to the popular media and irresponsible social media users. If you’re tuning in the evening news to learn of their plight, don’t hold your breath – it’s likely you won’t see their stories on ABC World News Tonight.
Let’s hope the effects of this upcoming media debacle aren’t as heartbreaking.
For more information on TG and beef fibrin, click here. For a video explaining the issue, click here. 0 comments Hide comments
RelatedPicture Perfect Summer Grazing Scenes From ReadersJul 21, 201155+ photos celebrating spring on the ranchMar 25, 20169 innovative new products for beef producersApr 26, 20165 Trending Headlines: Tips to help cattle drink from ponds: PLUS; Get it in writingJul 01, 2016 Load More | 农业 |
2017-04/0034/en_head.json.gz/19055 | China’s stock reductions could provide new opportunities Jan 06, 2017 2017 Mid-South Farm and Gin Show: Register online Jan 09, 2017 Target spot: A disease of ‘high yield’ cotton Jan 05, 2017 Tinkering with exports: serious implications Jan 02, 2017 Management Only scattered relief seen for drought-plagued Southeast
• The climate outlook for July, August and September, shows some hope the Southeast might be seeing the light at the end of the tunnel, but this is based on the possibility of tropical weather systems and probably won’t occur until after mid-August. Paul Hollis | Jul 11, 2011
Late June and early July brought a few scattered showers to the parched lower Southeast, but the long-term prognosis isn’t good for farmers in the region, says David Stooksbury, state climatologist for the University of Georgia.
The climate outlook for July, August and September, shows some hope that we might be seeing the light at the end of the tunnel, but this is based on the possibility of tropical weather systems and probably won’t occur until after mid-August, said Stooksbury, speaking at the Drought Management for Forage/Livestock Producers Workshop held in late June in Tifton, Ga.
“In the short-term, we’ll have minimal relief from scattered afternoon thunderstorms. But even if we have normal weather over the next few weeks, that will not recharge the system due evaporation. Our soils will continue to dry and streams and groundwater levels will continue to drop. Right now, I’m leaning towards it being warmer than normal and drier than normal in the coming weeks. We need an active tropical system that will impact the United States,” he says.
Drought conditions continue to intensify across most of Georgia, says Stooksbury. Since the end of May, conditions in the southern two-thirds of the state have deteriorated from extreme to exceptional drought, the highest drought category. Portions of northwest Georgia have now entered moderate drought conditions.
All counties in Georgia south of Harris, Talbot, Upson, Pike, Lamar, Monroe, Jasper, Putnam, Hancock, Warren, McDuffie and Lincoln counties, inclusive, are either in extreme or exceptional drought.
Soil moisture levels in the extreme and exceptional drought counties are between the first and fifth percentiles, says Stooksbury. At the first percentile, the soils in late June would have more moisture 99 out of 100 years. At the fifth percentile, the soils would have more moisture 95 out of 100 years.
Streams flows across the southern half of the state also are extremely low. Daily record-low flows are occurring along Pachitla Creek near Edison, the Flint River at Newton, Spring Creek near Iron City, the Alapaha River near Alapha and at Statenville, the Satilla River near Waycross, the Ocmulgee River at Lumber City and at Doctortown, Black Creek near Blitchton, and the Ogeechee River near Eden.
Groundwater levels in the Coastal Plain are at or near record-low levels for all long-term monitoring wells. Some communities in the region are drilling deeper wells to maintain water supplies.
Stooksbury says the drought conditions being seen in Georgia now have been in the making for several months.
“Last summer, late in the summer and into the fall, we just didn’t receive the rainfall we needed,” he says. “Much of the rainfall during this time of the year comes from tropical weather systems. While the tropics were very active last summer, none of the storms affected Georgia.”
The state went from abnormally dry to extremely dry from July to August of last year. By late September of 2011, moderate drought conditions were being seen across the southern quarter of the state while remainder of the state was abnormally dry, he says.
“In late October, the rains still were not coming from the tropics, and the Southeast really started to be impacted. By November, most of the state of Georgia was in moderate drought and the southern portion of the state was in a severe drought.”
Half normal rainfall
By late May, says Stooksbury, many parts of the state were receiving half the normal rainfall for an extended period, with the Coastal Plain region of Georgia being in an extreme drought by late May. The most recent ratings are showing exceptional drought in the southwest region of the state and inching into Alabama and Florida. The remainder of the Coastal Plain is in extreme drought.
“That’s how we got to this point,” he says. “Much of the Southern Piedmont and the Coastal Plain has received less than 70 percent of normal rainfall since Oct. 1, 2010. Over the last 60 days, much of southwest Georgia has received less between 50 percent, and in some areas, less than 20 percent, of normal rainfall.”
According to the final U.S. Drought Monitor report for the month of June, beneficial rainfall ranging from 2 to 5 inches have improved drought conditions in north Alabama, north Georgia and extreme northwest South Carolina.
However, long-term precipitation deficits remained in the region. During the past six months, the area is 15 inches or more behind normal along coastal Alabama and Mississippi and parts of southern Florida, and rainfall deficits of 20 inches or more are widespread for the past 12 months. Hot temperatures through late June resulted in continued above-normal evaporation, with maximum temperatures in the 90s and low 100s, setting new records in some locations.
The U.S. Drought Monitor reports that the lack of rainfall has resulted in extremely low river and creek levels, with many wells going dry, and this has begun to impact southwest Georgia water utilities that rely on groundwater. Dry weather and hot temperatures have ravaged crops, with a fourth to half of several crops (corn, cotton, peanuts, sorghum and soybeans) rated in poor to very poor condition across several Southeast states (Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina and North Carolina). The hard soils and hot temperatures have made successful sprouting of seed difficult and, due to lack of forage, farmers are sending cattle to feedlots or selling cattle.
U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack has declared 22 drought-stricken counties in Georgia as disaster areas. With the USDA Secretarial Disaster Designation, Georgia farmers will be able to apply for emergency loans and other benefits to ease losses.
“Secretary Vilsack went above and beyond our request, naming an additional 26 counties as contiguous disaster counties,” said Sen. Saxby Chambliss, Republican of Georgia who is a member of the Senate Agriculture Committee. “I am thankful these drought-stricken counties in Georgia will have access to the aid they need to bounce back from this unfortunate situation. Now we need rain.”
The counties that will become eligible to apply for emergency loans and other benefits provided by the Food, Conservation and Energy Act of 2008 are Appling, Atkinson, Bacon, Ben Hill, Brantley, Brooks, Bryan, Chatham, Coffee, Colquitt, Cook, Dodge, Effingham, Irwin, Jeff Davis, Lanier, Lowndes, Pierce, Telfair, Thomas, Wayne and Wheeler.
Vilsack also wrote that he is naming the following areas as contiguous disaster counties: Berrien, Bleckley, Bulloch, Camden, Charlton, Clinch, Echols, Evans, Glynn, Grady, Laurens, Liberty, Long, McIntosh, Mitchell, Montgomery, Pulaski, Screven, Tattnall, Tift, Toombs, Treutlen, Turner, Ware, Wilcox and Worth
Like those in primary disaster counties, farmers in contiguous disaster counties may be considered for assistance under the Farm Service Agency (FSA). This includes FSA emergency loans and the Supplemental Revenue Assistance Payments program. Farmers in eligible counties have eight months from the secretarial disaster declaration to apply for emergency loan assistantance.
Farmers may contact their local FSA office for more information. | 农业 |
2017-04/0034/en_head.json.gz/19502 | Olden Days of the Dairy
By Christine Hyatt
Growing up a mere two hours north of Philadelphia practically guaranteed a childhood steeped in awareness of and appreciation for colonial American history. On the history of the evolution of the West Coast, however, my background was much more limited. My latest project, producing a 100th anniversary documentary for Oregon Dairy Industries (ODI), a trade and academic group formed to promote and elevate interest in the dairy products of the Pacific Northwest, has proved a fascinating lens through which to view the development of the West Coast.
This small slice of history touches on westward expansion, agriculture and the growth of a nation. It explores the unique and effective public-private partnership that developed among the Dairy Science program at Oregon State University, Oregon dairies and the processors who bring products to market. Dark chapters include extensive consolidation and a changing rural and food economy with interesting sidetracks into the evolution of probiotics and the influence of the counterculture.
Perhaps most interesting is that, while other states rely increasingly on large-scale centralized models of bringing dairy to market, Oregon has maintained a higher-than-average number of small, independent dairies and processors who produce a wide range of products from fluid milk, butter, cheese and ice cream using some of the highest quality milk in the nation. The future is hopeful with a few stalwart family operations, which have managed to survive and thrive for generations, and an emerging renaissance in cheese and dairy production for local consumption and export. I found the project fascinating and thought it might make for an interesting column or two. Hope you feel the same! Early History of Oregon Dairy
The history of dairy in Oregon dates back to the days when the area was still a disputed territory with French, British, Russian, Spanish and American claims on the land. In 1836, American Navy officer and diplomat Lieutenant William Slacum (1799-1839) was selected by President Andrew Jackson to explore the area and evaluate its potential for statehood. He arrived via the ship Loriot by way of the Columbia River. In his report, Slacum stated: “I consider the ‘Willhamet’ to be the finest grazing country in the world.” He noted there were “no droughts” as in California and Buenos Aires. Instead, “the ground abounds with richer grasses, both in winter and summer.” He concluded that “Dairying could become one of the greatest industries in the Oregon Territory.” Slacum helped pioneers organize a joint venture to procure cattle not owned by the Hudson Bay Company, a powerful British interest that leased cows to settlers. Led by fur trapper and trader Ewing Young, settlers formed the first joint venture in the territory, the Willamette Cattle Company. Slacum even financed part of the venture with $500 to cover expenses. Another $1,100 was raised from the settlers themselves who became stakeholders in the company.
In January 1837, Young and several others joined Slacum on his ship and sailed for San Francisco, where they purchased 700 head of cattle and drove them northward over the Siskiyou Mountains and into the Willamette Valley. About 100 head were lost to the “adversities of the trail, the natives of the Siskiyou Mountains and Rogue River area.” This original dairy herd formed the basis for stock, which quickly populated the area and gained the settlers’ independence from the Hudson Bay Company. Young died unexpectedly in 1841 without a known heir and with extensive land and cattle holdings and debt. His estate was in limbo, precipitating the need to form a provisional government that could administer his estate. By 1850, there were close to 10,000 cows in the area, and by 1860, the number had risen to 53,000, forming the basis of a burgeoning industry, which exported butter, and later cheese, along with lumber and furs to San Francisco and the Yukon Territory. By 1900, there were 122,000 head.
The 1890s saw a rise in the dairy factory system in Coos and Tillamook counties. Supplied by dairies along the fertile banks of the Coquille River, four buttermaking factories opened in Coos County. Milk was transported by sternwheel steamboats which would traverse the river before roads.
In Tillamook County, the first cheese factory was opened in 1894, followed by a second in 1895. The factories produced 50,000 pounds of cheese in the second year. Aided by technical expertise of Peter McIntosh, a Canadian from Ontario, the cheeses from Tillamook County quickly gained renown and a premium price at market. By 1903, 20 Tillamook factories were producing two million pounds of cheese a year. In 1901, Professor F.L. Kent of Oregon Agricultural College embarked on a survey of all Oregon dairies west of the Cascades. He found 72 dairy plants in the state. From this initial survey, Kent realized the need to form a group that would improve the quality of butter in the state.
In 1910, the Oregon Buttermakers Assoication, a precursor of Oregon Dairy Industries was formed to improve quality of butter, which suffered from rancidity in early operations, limiting its value as an export to booming cities throughout the region. Educational seminars were held through OBA and County Extension agents to inform agricultural and production practices, setting the stage for future expansion later in the century.
Oregon Cheese Festival
Say “cheese” and mean it at this year’s Oregon Cheese Festival at Rogue Creamery in Central Point on March 19.
Thousands of visitors will sample cow, sheep and goat cheese from Oregon creameries, including Fraga Farm, Juniper Grove Farm, Pholia Farm, Tumalo Farms, Tillamook County Creamery, Willamette Valley Cheese Co., Fern’s Edge Dairy, Rivers Edge Chèvre, Ancient Heritage Dairy, Fairview Farm Goat Dairy, Goldin Artisan Goat Cheese, Briar Rose Creamery, Mossy Oak Creamery, Rogue Creamery and more.
Other culinary artisans include Lillie Belle Farms, Dagoba Organic Chocolate, Gary West Meats, Rising Sun Farms, Applegate Valley Artisan Breads, Butte Creek Mill, Pennington Farms, Slagle Creek Vineyards, Paschal Winery, Madrone Mountain Vineyard, EdenVale Winery, Valley View Winery, Agate Ridge Vineyard, Daisy Creek Vineyard, Wandering Aengus Ciderworks, Deux Chats Bakery, Dry Soda, Cascade Peak Spirits and Rogue Ales.
To begin the festival, a multi-course meal introducing guests to participating artisans will be held at the historic Ashland Springs Hotel in Ashland, March 18. Prepared by the hotel’s executive chefs, David Georgeson and Kate Cyr, the dinner’s proceeds will benefit the Oregon Cheese Guild.
The Oregon Cheese Festival will be open to the public March 19 from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. at Rogue Creamery, 311 N. Front St., Central Point.
Tickets are $15 and include tastings and demonstrations; a $5 wine tasting fee includes a wine glass. Tickets to the dinner are $85 and available by calling 866-396-4704. For more information, visit www.roguecreamery.com. | 农业 |
2017-04/0034/en_head.json.gz/20504 | Cultivating Afghanistan: Replacing the 119th By Douglas Wissing Posted March 9, 2010
Tweet As the first Agribusiness Development Team, or ADT, finishes up its deployment, the second ADT organizes to replace them. Loading...
Image 1 of
6 Photo: To facilitate a smooth transition between the two ADTs, the teams organized a series of shuras (meetings) with Afghan leaders. This group shot was taken at a super shura at Forward Operating Base Salerno, where many Khost leaders and elders came together with the two teams. In the front row, ADT commanders sit with Afghan luminaries. Left to right, the ADT soldiers are 219th deputy commander Col. Dan McMillan, 119th deputy commander Col. Cindra Chastain, 119th commander Col. Brian Copes, 219th commander Col. Mike Osburn, and Command Sgt. Mrj. Pat Fromme. Image 2 of
6 Photo: courtesy Indiana National Guard
The ADT has a partnership with Shaiek Zayed University in Khost City. Here Col. McMillan, armed and armored because of the ubiquitous security threats, meets with a university administrator on the university campus. Image 3 of
The ADT engages in many Key Leader Engagements with Afghan officials and elders. Here Sgt. Mjr. Pat Fromme and other ADT agriculture specialists meet with Afghan officials at an old British fort high above the provincial capital of Khost City.
The ADT partners with Afghans on their agricultural development projects. Here ADT soldiers discuss an animal husbandry project with villagers.
A view of the sere landscape of Khost Province, which is situated in eastern Afghanistan adjacent to the tribal areas of Pakistan.
Col. Mike Osburn and Maj. Johnson with village elders in Khost Province.
The Indiana National Guard has made a five-year commitment to agricultural development in Khost Province, Afghanistan. As the first Agribusiness Development Team, or ADT, finishes up its deployment, the second ADT organizes to replace them.
The Indiana National Guard’s 119th Agribusiness Development Team was the first unit of Hoosier farmer-soldiers to deploy to Khost Province, a wild, insurgency-plagued region in the Afghan-Pakistani borderlands. And after a year-long mission, it’s time for the 219th ADT, to continue the development work.
Speaking from the giant American air base at Bagram, Afghanistan, 219th commander Col. Michael Osburn said the 119th team has a transition plan.
“We’ll wind up and hook up with our counterparts; the commander, sergeant major, deputy will hook up with out counterparts and see exactly what’s going on,” Osburn said. “They’ve got a robust plan for us.”
Afghans place great emphasis on personal relationships and tribal loyalty, so the ADTs are emphasizing Indiana’s commitment to the region and its people and the connections between the Hoosier teams. Osburn says the transition plan includes many meetings with tribal elders — which the military calls Key Leader Engagements — to introduce the new team.
“And I believe they’ve got the leaders coming, again, so that we can do a face-to-face, and they can see who we are and we can see who they are,” Osburn said.
Col. Dan McMillan, the deputy commander of the 219th, said his team will continue the first team’s work with hydrology, orchard management and education, as well as start some new projects of their own.
“Well, one of the things we’ve been working with Purdue is a grain storage project,” he said. “Another thing we’re toying with is possibly a micro-cannery or something like that. I know the first team’s worked a little bit with the local slaughterhouse. Hoping to expand on that, get them set up with a little more sanitary environment.”
Back in Indiana, the 219th ADT went through combat training at Camp Atterbury, as well as language and culture classes at Indiana University. Led by professor Kevin McNamara, Purdue University provided Afghan-appropriate agricultural education.
“We’ve been working with the Indiana Agribusiness Development Team and Agribusiness Development Teams from a few other states to help prepare them for going to Afghanistan as an ADT,” McNamara said. “To help them understand basic agriculture, to understand the difference between U.S. agriculture and Afghan agriculture and kind of give them types of things to look for or the types of marginal changes they might make to help Afghans improve their agricultural output.”
But Command Sergeant Major Pat Fromme said training in Indiana only partially prepares the soldiers for the Afghan reality they experienced almost immediately:
“The first big clue that we weren’t at Camp Atterbury anymore was when the missile blew up that landed back there behind the tent,” he said. “That wasn’t an artillery simulator. That was the real thing.”
In our final segment: The 119th returns home.
Indiana National Guard Soldiers Deployed To Guantanamo BayAsk The Mayor: Lienhoop On City Budget ProposalIndy Workers Could Be Part Of World’s Biggest Agribusiness | 农业 |
2017-04/0034/en_head.json.gz/21702 | Peanuts versus enough off-target dicamba can cost yield, timing matters Jan 10, 2017 Five South Carolinians inducted into Extension Hall of Fame Jan 10, 2017 Florida takes aggressive action against New World screwworm in state Jan 11, 2017 Auxin herbicide training now mandatory in North Carolina Jan 09, 2017 Cochran to fight farm bill changes
Elton Robinson Farm Press Editorial | Jan 07, 2004
Feed the children or pay the farmers? This could be the battle cry of the Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley's latest ploy to change the payment limitation legislation included in the 2002 farm bill. But Sen. Thad Cochran, R-Miss., says he's ready for the fight, which should take place during Senate consideration of the FY2004 omnibus appropriations bill, now expected shortly after the body returns from its Christmas/New Year's recess on Jan. 20. “There was some concern that riders or amendments to the agriculture title might change the 2002 farm bill, but our agriculture committee is not going to support any changes in permanent law,” Cochran said in his keynote address at the USA Rice Outlook Conference in Biloxi, Miss. “One rumor going around is that Sen. Grassley would offer an amendment to this appropriations bill, if it's in order, and offset the cost by giving money that would otherwise go to farm production costs to the Child Nutrition Program,” he said. “That would be an interesting offset and might make it difficult to vote against that payment limitation change. But we're going to resist it and try to maintain the integrity of the farm bill, no matter what. It is a commitment that we made to production agriculture. It's in the law, and we ought not to change it.” Cochran stressed that U.S. farmers have to have a stable farm law, “one that you can depend on from one year to the next during the life of the 2002 bill. Be assured that our committee is going to fight very hard to defeat any amendments. I can't guarantee that we will, but we hope to persuade other members of Congress to go along with us.” Cochran noted that the overall financial condition of agriculture improved significantly in 2003 with better prices and good overall yields. “Last month, USDA projected that U.S. net cash farm income will reach $65.1 billion in 2003. That's up 33 percent from last year and is 15 percent above average net cash income levels for the previous 10 years. “USDA has projected that the total market value of agricultural production, excluding government payments, will be up $22.3 billion this year, a 10 percent increase from 2002. For most agricultural commodities, the Department of Agriculture projects both greater production levels and higher market prices, and that's good news. “This is a testament to how strong the economy is here in the United States and around the world. U.S. rice production is down because of low rice acreage, but rice market prices are higher than last year. “Also last month, the department reported that U.S. agricultural exports reached $56.2 billion, a 5 percent increase over the year before, and the best agricultural export performance since 1997. The department is currently projecting a 6 percent increase, up to $59.5 billion, for Fiscal Year 2004.” Cochran said that international trade is a “key to future success of American agriculture and the profitability of our farmers. The Senate has ratified new trade agreements with both Chile and Singapore. These agreements are expected to increase our market access and opportunities to sell in those markets. “A new Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) is also being currently negotiated and free trade agreements with Australia and Morocco.” The most important of these for rice farmers may be the proposed Central America Free Trade Agreement. “We currently export nearly 500,000 metric tons of rice annually to five countries of that region,” he said. “It is predominantly rough rice, but we are confident that there is potential for increasing exports of milled rice as well. “There is some concern that additional milled rice will take away from the rough rice access, but I believe that this trade agreement will insure access for both rough and milled rice with adequate room to expand sales of both.” Not all trade news is as optimistic, however, noted Cochran. “Ongoing efforts to improve the World Trade Organization's development agenda has been much slower than we had hoped. The meeting in Cancun did not provide much momentum for negotiations which we hoped to conclude by 2005. “In Mexico, we know the industry is facing claims of dumping rice on the Mexico market. I believe our U.S. Trade Representative is doing an excellent job supporting the President's initiatives to take up for our traders and our businesses in that market. In Europe, agriculture is facing a completely different issue — reforms in EU agricultural policy that cuts the support for rice by half. “The price of U.S. rice has become more competitive based on a tariff calculation called the margin of preference,” he noted. “This system provides U.S. rice with the potential for unlimited growth in the European market. “The USA Rice Federation has done an excellent job of letting the USTR and his European counterparts know that the U.S. rice industry is not interested in changing the current tariff system.” Cochran is optimistic about the continuing recovery of both the U.S. and agricultural economies. “But we have to work together to insure the expansion of markets, that the expansion of markets will continue.” “We all on the same team,” he said. “We have the strongest economy in the world. We have the strongest capability for producing agriculture commodities in the world. We have to assume responsibility as the leader and move the policies in the right direction to assure greater access to foodstuffs at reasonable prices throughout the world. We can do that and still make sure that American agriculture profits by it and your families benefit by it.” e-mail: [email protected]
RelatedMIDDAY-Midwest Digest-January 16, 2017Jan 17, 2017MORNING-Midwest Digest- January 16, 2017Jan 16, 2017Farm Progress America, January 16, 2017Jan 16, 2017FFA Chapter Tribute: Vinton-Shellsburg FFAJan 14, 2017 Load More | 农业 |
2017-04/0035/en_head.json.gz/1292 | PigProgress - US: PEDV research funds - $450,000 approved
US: PEDV research funds - $450,000 approved
In less than three weeks since the positive identification of Porcine Epidemic Diarrhea Virus (PEDV) in the United States, the National Pork Board has approved $450,000 in Checkoff funds to help speed research into finding answers to this new disease threat facing the domestic pork industry. This amount, coupled with funds just approved by the Iowa Pork Producers Association's research committee, brings the current total devoted to PEDV research to $527,000 from the two producer-based organizations."The National Pork Board took this action to help get answers to U.S. producers as quickly as possible to help protect their herds from this devastating disease," said Conley Nelson, National Pork Board president and producer from Algona, Iowa. "Because of the investment producers make as part of Checkoff, we're able to respond quickly to sudden disease threats such as this."According to Dr. Paul Sundberg, the Pork Checkoff's vice president of science and technology, PEDV is not a new virus outside of the United States nor a regulatory/reportable disease, but rather a production-related disease that hits young pigs under three weeks of age particularly hard. In the handful of states that have seen the disease, mortality rates have been high in pigs of this age, while older pigs that may get the virus typically recover."Since PEDV is widespread in many countries, it is not a trade-restricting disease," Sundberg said. "While PEDV may appear clinically to be the same as transmissible gastroenteritis (TGE) virus with acute diarrhea, producers who suspect their herd may be infected should work with their herd veterinarian immediately if any TGE-like symptoms appear. And, as always, they should maintain strict biosecurity protocols."The objectives of the Pork Board's swine health committee, which will oversee the PEDV research, will be to get real answers about the spread and transmission of the disease, along with measures to detect, diagnose, prevent and control it. To help facilitate this, Sundberg said that the committee and Pork Checkoff's science and technology team will work closely with the key industry partners, such as the American Association of Swine Veterinarians, the National Pork Producers Council and state pork associations."As with all of our research, we want it to be transparent and objective," Conley said. "And in this case, it must be very specific with quick turnaround times so that we can get answers quickly."Source: Pork Checkoff
Pig Progress | 农业 |
2017-04/0035/en_head.json.gz/2860 | China’s stock reductions could provide new opportunities Jan 06, 2017 2017 Mid-South Farm and Gin Show: Register online Jan 09, 2017 Target spot: A disease of ‘high yield’ cotton Jan 05, 2017 Tinkering with exports: serious implications Jan 02, 2017 Funded by checkoff: USDA approves soy technology center
Forrest Laws Farm Press Editorial Staff | Dec 27, 2002
The USDA Agricultural Marketing Service has approved the establishment of the soybean checkoff-funded Technology Utilization Center, a new “virtual center” with no office, lab or staff, according to the United Soybean Board. The center, whose board of directors will range from farmer-leaders to researchers, soybean processors and end-users, will serve as a clearinghouse of information needed to advance the competitiveness and profitability of U.S. soybeans. “TUC will serve as a facilitator between the private sector, government, and industry to create the pull-through needed to commercialize new soybean varieties with improved traits,” said Richard Borgsmiller, chairman of the United Soybean Board and a soybean farmer from Murphysboro, Ill. “Through the TUC, we hope to speed up the inclusion of specific traits in U.S. varieties, which will keep us competitive, not only with other countries, but other oilseeds as well. These quality improvements are necessary for continued success in the global market.” TUC, which is part of the checkoff-funded Better Bean Initiative (BBI), correlates with the program's goal of keeping U.S. soybean farmers competitive. A 22-man board, ranging from farmer leaders to researchers, soybean processors and end users will oversee TUC's work. The USB chief executive officer will manage the center's operations, and all TUC board members will be selected by USB. USB established the Better Bean Initiative a few years ago to address growing concerns over competition from other sources of protein and oil and other soybean-producing countries. Through the BBI, U.S. soybean farmers are funding research to improve the protein and oil composition of U.S. soybeans. “USDA is concerned about the U.S. grower losing global market share in the future and is looking for opportunities to focus on this issue,” said USB Vice Chairman David Durham, a soybean farmer from Hardin, Mo. “TUC should offer an industry platform to improve the intrinsic value of U.S. soybeans and strengthen our future competitiveness.” According to Durham, industry representatives from the public and private sector are very supportive of the checkoff-funded BBI and TUC. Through TUC, industry leaders have an additional business platform to work together to identify key market issues and jointly move forward to commercialize soybean technology that either currently exists or is being developed. Previous contributions from Monsanto are an example of how TUC can bring together technology from the public and private sector to benefit U.S. soybean farmers, according to Borgsmiller. The center has received three technology contributions from Monsanto Company — a low palmitic marker, a library of BAC-end gene sequences, and 200 simple-sequence-repeat markers, which the company developed jointly with the USDA's Agricultural Research Service. These tools should help BBI researchers breed plants more efficiently and more accurately, and shorten the timeline for development of higher-quality varieties for U.S. soybean farmers. “The USB's TUC serves as a unique venue for idea exchange that may someday lead to the development of a better bean for American producers,” said Carl Casale, vice president of Monsanto's North American operations. “Monsanto is proud to be a part of the USB's Better Bean Initiative and provide the group with support in achieving its goals.” “The center's board will serve as an industry coalition that will bring together the various research entities and their technologies,” said Durham. “It is critical that the soybean checkoff takes a leading role in order to ensure industry commitment and success. With a solid industry alliance, U.S. soybean farmers will have a stronger, unified voice.” USB is made up of 62 farmer-directors who oversee the investments of the soybean checkoff on behalf of all U.S. soybean farmers. As stipulated in the Soybean Promotion, Research and Consumer Information Act, USDA's Agricultural Marketing Service has oversight responsibilities for USB and the soybean checkoff. e-mail: [email protected]. | 农业 |
2017-04/0035/en_head.json.gz/3359 | Crop Production Services Honored for Environmental Stewardship
Crop Production Services has been selected as one of four North American Region winners of the 2015 Environmental Respect Award.
Sustainable agriculture depends on our expertise, which in turn will prove to be a worthwhile investment into the future of CPS
Hi River, Alberta (PRWEB)
Crop Production Services (CPS) has been selected as one of four North American Region winners of the 2015 Environmental Respect Award. CPS is one of 14 agribusiness companies worldwide to receive recognition for their efforts in promoting environmental stewardship. Winners were selected in early April at the headquarters of Meister Media Worldwide in Willoughby, Ohio.
The Environmental Respect Awards, sponsored by DuPont Crop Protection and presented by CropLife® magazine, are the agricultural industry’s highest recognition for environmental stewardship. The Awards are given to North American agricultural retailers, those who serve farmers and ranchers with the nutrients, crop protection and agronomic information and services critical to effective crop production. Each year a panel of industry experts gathers to recognize achievement in environmental stewardship, professional excellence, and community involvement.
2015 marks the program’s 25th year honoring stewardship, safety and community outreach efforts of the world’s leading agricultural retailers and distributors.
“Environmental stewardship is a partnership between growers and product suppliers such as us,” says Location Manager Alan Gaja. “In order to be successful and productive, growers must have a clear understanding of what crops work best on their land, and they must have a strategy in place to identify what fertilizer or crop protection products will be most effective. We must be knowledgeable and confident in our products in order to be able to advise the grower of what product to apply, what time to apply it and how much to apply.”
CPS won the award based on excellence in site design, in-plant storage and handling procedures, proper application and leadership in safety and stewardship among customers and employees. The company has taken many extra steps to ensure the environmental impact of their business is minimal including: 1) concrete pads at all transfer points for dry fertilizer to aid prevent ground contamination in case of a spill; 2) fencing around the facility with video surveillance; 3) safety training for all employees and proper personal protection equipment for staff handling hazardous materials.
According to Gaja, CPS has worked hard to create and maintain a workplace that is safe for the employees, the community, and the environment. “Sustainable agriculture depends on our expertise, which in turn will prove to be a worthwhile investment into the future of CPS,” Gaja says. “It boils down to relationships, and that is why the CPS motto is ‘Come in and let’s talk farming.
Each regional winner will receive a personalized, distinctive Environmental Respect Award crystal trophy and a public relations campaign. “DuPont is pleased to congratulate the winners of the 2015 Environmental Respect Awards and applauds their accomplishment in environmental stewardship,” said Rik Miller, president, DuPont Crop Protection. “These leaders are helping to advance environmental safety as well as the safe use of agricultural products, and we hope they will inspire others who share our passion and commitment to elevate environmental stewardship around the world.” “It’s through the conscientious efforts of these ag business and the crop producers they serve that this nation is assured of a safe and bountiful food supply,” said Paul Schrimpf, executive editor of CropLife® magazine. “We’re delighted to be able to gain them some recognition for their environmentalism.”
Thirteen regional winners will receive their trophies and four of those will be named Ambassador of Respect; one each from North America, Asia Pacific, Latin America, and Europe/Middle East/Africa. A Spirt of Respect Award is also conferred to a past winner who has shown continuous improvement since their last honor.
Find more information on the Environmental Respect Awards at http://www.EnvironmentalRespect.com. ###
For 25 years, the Environmental Respect Award has been the premier award in agricultural stewardship among agricultural retailers and distributors around the world. Since its inception in 1990, more than 6,000 businesses in the U.S. and Canada have shared their stories of environmental stewardship, sustainability, product safety standards, and customer and community outreach. More than 600 have earned state/provincial awards. Over the last 10 years, the international extension of the Environmental Respect Awards has seen involvement from more than 550 businesses in 30 countries. ERA 2015 marks the inauguration of a fully integrated and global selection and recognition process. The program is sponsored by DuPont Crop Protection and is managed and conducted by CropLife magazine and Farm Chemicals International magazine, Meister Media Worldwide publications.
Michael DeLuca
Meister Media Worldwide+1 (440) 602-9193 | 农业 |
2017-04/0035/en_head.json.gz/3437 | Sage (Salvia officinalis) is an herb which has been valued for centuries for its fresh scent, the peppery depth of flavor it adds to foods and for its special constituents which help to keep skin healthy and beautiful. Sage grows as a small perennial shrub, usually no more than 24 inches tall;the oblong leaves have a slightly rough texture and hair-like growths. It is a member of the mint family and is related to rosemary. The plant is believed to have originated in the Mediterranean region, but spread to northern Europe during Medieval times. It is now, of course, a treasured garden herb grown throughout the world. Salvia officinalis, usually called common sage or kitchen sage, should not be confused with Russian sage (Perovskia atriplicifolia, which has a similar scent), sagebrush (Artemisia tridentate, native to the plains region of North America) or Jerusalem sage (Phlomis fruticosa).Sage has been used as both an herb for food flavoring and as a source of healing ingredients for more than 2,000 years. The earliest records of its use show that the Egyptians prepared a tea-like beverage from its dried leaves to increase fertility. The Romans apparently introduced the plant into Europe, where it quickly found favor as both as a culinary ingredient and as a medicinal plant. The scientific name for the genus, Salvia, is taken from the Latin word meaning "healthy" and is the root of the modern English word "salve," reflecting the curative value associated with the plant. Throughout the Medieval period in Europe, sage was credited with the power to heal almost every ailment. It was even an ingredient, along with thyme, rosemary and lavender, in "vinegar of the four thieves," a concoction believed to provide protection against infection by bubonic plague. It was considered such a valuable herb that it was perhaps the only spice" that was traded to the Far East;during the 16th century | 农业 |
2017-04/0035/en_head.json.gz/3658 | What is Celtis?
Mangos are the product of a species of Celtis.
Alex Tree
Edited By: Melissa Wiley
Celtis is a genus of deciduous trees belonging to the Cannabaceae family that contains 60 to 70 species. Many species of Celtis are highly valued as ornamental trees and can thus be found in botanical gardens throughout North America, while other species face the possibility of extinction due to loss of habitat. These medium-sized trees can be found all around the temperate regions of the northern hemisphere. They bear small drupes as fruit, and the trees themselves are generally eaten by caterpillars of the Lepidoptera order.
One species, Celtis occidentalis, or hackberry, is a large tree that grows from 40 to 60 feet (12 to 18 m). It has leaves very similar to the elm tree, and one can identify the hackberry by the distinct warts and ridges on the bark. During the summer, this tree produces drupe fruit; some examples of drupes are olives and mangos. In North America, the tree is very popular as a subtle accent or shade tree due to its full and graceful crown, ability to survive extreme weather conditions, and its fruit, which attracts many animals. Celtis tenuifolia, or the dwarf hackberry, is native to the eastern states of the United States. This species is frequently mistaken for the more common Celtis occidentalis, but it can be easily identified if one knows what to look for. For example, the warts or bumps on the common hackberry’s trunk are never present on the dwarf hackberry. The dwarf hackberry also prefers very dense growth, while the other specie thrives best in open spaces. This species is wind-pollinated, and the fruits are spread about by small birds and the occasional mammal.
A commonly cultivated species, the Celtis reticulata, also known as the Texas sugarberry, palo blanco, and netleaf hackberry, is much smaller than most species belonging to this genus. It is an important tree for both birds and certain species of moth. The birds eat the drupe fruit of the tree, and moth caterpillars feast on its leaves.
Celtis luzonica is a species that is native to the Philippines, but as of 2010, it is classified as vulnerable due to habitat loss. The rapid decline in its numbers are owing to the country’s shifting cultivation and logging industry. Some effort has been made to monitor the species’ reproduction, and Philippines researchers have taken an interest in finding treatments for antibiotic-resistant fungi that can afflict the species. Ad
What is an Alpine Currant?
What is a Silk Tree?
What is Clethra?
What is Eremurus?
What is Combretum?
What are Deciduous Shrubs?
What are Deciduous Trees? | 农业 |
2017-04/0035/en_head.json.gz/4098 | City Slicker Farms breaks ground on new West Oakland urban farm
By Oakland North on February 4, 2013 at 1:38 PM
GroundbreakingWEB-620x413Breaking ground at City Slicker Farms' new West Oakland Urban Farm and Park on 28th and Peralta Streets. Photo courtesy of Anna La. On Thursday, City Slicker Farms broke ground on its latest project, the West Oakland Urban Farm and Park, a new community garden and open park space expected to serve more than 3,000 residents.
Located at 28th and Peralta Streets, the park will be City Slicker Farms’ newest and largest park to date—at 1.4 acres—once it’s completed in 2014. In addition to orchard and farming spaces used to grow produce for the organization’s farm stands, community gardening beds are also tentatively planned in the park’s design.
But the soon-to-be green space wasn’t always so eco-friendly: for 50 years, the lot was once the site of a former paint factory before deteriorating into a vacant lot and being designated by the state as a brownfield—reusable property that may be contaminated by pollutants or hazardous substances. From 2005 to 2006, the site was rehabbed and cleaned up under supervision of the State of California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC).
Planning for the West Oakland Urban Farm and Park began in 2010 and included a three-month long community design process open to residents in the area to brainstorm proposed features for the park space. So far, blueprints include a dog park, play area and outdoor event space in addition to beds for community gardens, an orchard and native plants. Designated spaces for beekeeping and raising chickens are also tentatively included in the park’s design.
Read the rest of the story by Madeleine Thomas at Oakland North. Connect with Oakland North on Facebook, or follow us on Twitter.
Oakland North View Comments Recent Posts Oakland North’s 2016 year in review — our top stories | 农业 |
2017-04/0035/en_head.json.gz/4249 | A Day in the Life of a (Sustainable) Ag Lobbyist
By Margaret Riche |
Tweet photo courtesy of Pleasantview Farm (USDA/Flickr)
Margaret Riche is GRACE’s Public Service Scholar. Riche is in her final year at Hunter College, where she is studying public service, creative writing and is participating in the interdisciplinary Thomas Hunter Honors program. "Lobbyist." It’s one of those words so often spoken with contempt, carrying as it does connotations of mega-corporations and industry leaders wielding undue power over government. One is hard-pressed to think of it in a positive light. But while industry lobbyists may indeed wield too much influence over US lawmakers, it is also important for concerned individuals to remember that we too have the right to lobby. And though we may not have the resources as large corporations do, regular citizens still can and should meet with state and federal leaders to discuss important legislative issues. I write this after having spent a day in New York’s State Legislative Office Building in Albany with about 100 other advocates for the third annual No Farms, No Food Rally. Organized by the American Farmland Trust, we gathered in the capital, representing an eclectic mix of urban and rural farmers, environmental activists, anti-hunger advocates and food-related business owners. Despite our varied backgrounds, we all answered AFT’s call to Albany to "urge state leaders to strengthen the farm and food economy, protect farmland and the environment and increase access to nutritious food grown in New York." My day began at 7:00 am as I boarded a bus in New York City’s Union Square with about 20 others. After arriving in Albany, bleary eyed but excited, we gathered with others from all over the state for an introductory meeting at which at which we discussed our legislative goals, which included: Increased funding for the Environmental Protection Fund(EPF). This year’s budget provides the EPF with the same amount as last year: $134 million. We asked that legislators adopt measures to boost EPF funding, like increased allocation of revenue from the state’s Real Estate Transfer Tax, authorizing the use of bonding by the Environmental Facilities Corporation and enactment of S 5403- A, an allocation of funds from the Bottle Bill.
Increased funding for the Hunger Prevention and Nutrition Assistance Program, which works to increase the quality of food provided at Emergency Food Release Organizations (EFRO).
Support for an expansion of the New York State Linked Deposit Program to include farmers, so that that they can have access to reduced-rate financing.
Expansion of New York’s Fresh Connect program to increase the availability of farmers' markets across the state, and to facilitate the use of food stamp benefits at local farmers' markets.
Support for the Buy from the Backyard Bill, which would require state agencies to buy 20% of their food from New York state food producers/processors.
We also thanked our officials for their work, particularly for not reducing the Environmental Protection Fund from last year’s budget, despite the challenging economic climate. We were also given tips toward effective lobbying, and directed to make our stories personal, and to relate how the legislation we were discusssing directly impacted our lives. We were given detailed information packets and sent on our way." The composition of my group effectively illustrates the diverse nature of food advocacy. It included: John Halsey, group leader, founder of the Peconic Land Trust, a non-profit organization working to protect Eastern Long Island’s farms, natural lands and heritage.
Jennifer Small, New York farmer, major gifts officer of the American Farmland Trust
Bonnie Mairs, originally from Minnesota, NYC AFT supporter
Carrie Blackburn, Development Associate at New York non-profit Just Food, an amazing organization that connects local farmers with the resources and support they need to make fresh, local food available to New Yorkers through CSAs, city farms, and food pantries.
After introductions, we made rounds to the offices of Senator Dean Skelos and Senator Kenneth LaValle. In both instances, we spoke to staff. During our time there, aids dutifully took notes. Halsey began by giving a brief overview of the issues. In reference to the Buy from The Backyard Act, Small spoke articulately about the (ironic) difficulty of obtaining New York cider and milk for the day’s event. She described how the EPF protects her farm, which is her "only asset." Blackburn spoke about how the Hunger Prevention and Nutrition Assistance Program provides funding for Local Produce Link, a partnership between United Way of NYC and Just Food, that brings fresh vegetables from local farms to NYC food pantries. Small interjected that she remembered being in one of these food pantries and seeing the excited look on children and parents' faces when the farm-fresh produce arrived. The proposed funding of 29.7 million is actually less than last year’s budget, and at a time when demand for these services is increasing. Bonnie Mair then spoke of her 10-year experience campaigning for the New York State Returnable Container Act, better known as the Bottle Bill. She argued that now that we have access to these funds, they should be used for their intended purpose: to protect the environment. Articulate, yet down to earth, everyone’s experiences brought a human perspective to the legislative issues. During lunch, we heard from speakers about the importance of a healthy food system for economic development, job creation and the environment. Former New York District Attorney Robert Morgenthau, spoke of how Governor Cuomo has been an ally to farmers, particularly due to his understanding of their economic value. (For every $1 invested in the EPF, there is a $7 return for New York). We also heard from representatives from the Hudson Valley Agribusiness Development Corporation, yogurt producer Chobani, emergency food non-profit St. John’s Bread and Life Program, Fleisher’s Grassfed & Organic Meats and The Berry Patch of Stone Wall Hill Farm. After the final speakers, my team headed to the office of Assembly Member Robert Sweeney, who represents Suffolk County (where I grew up). During the meeting, I learned from Halsey and Sweeney’s aid that Long Island has the most intensively studied and thus best understood water system in the country, that aquifers are our sole source of drinking water, that nitrogen from pesticides is polluting the water and how stream runoff is killing wildlife. Small mentioned the success of a pilot program she is working on with a more environmentally friendly, slow-release fertilizer for sweet corn. Our next and last stop was Jose Peralta’s office, where we learned that the Senator is considering co-sponsoring s5403-A, the bill that would increase funding to the EPF from the allocated Bottle Bill funds. This was truly great news! We all delivered our by-then well-rehearsed pitches while the aid dutifully took notes. Unfortunately, our "debriefing" was cut somewhat short due to time constraints. As the steady trickle of advocates returned to the meeting rooms to collect their things, we were vigorously thanked for our work and told it seemed like we all had "positive, productive meetings." New friends hugged and exchanged numbers as they prepared to leave. As I began to head toward the bus, I heard a speaker from the podium bid us goodbye and remind that we have "friends in Albany." My time in the state capital showed me the importance of urban-rural solidarity. I heard from amazing people involved in the food movement and I was shown how well-informed and friendly political staff can be. Of the event, my new friend Carrie had this to say:Meeting with my representatives through the No Farms, No Food Rally allowed me to really participate in the democratic process. Wednesday’s rally was a powerful reminder for politicians that voters from all across the political spectrum really do care about protecting our environment, keeping small farms in business and making sure we all have access to fresh, local food. While I agree with Carrie that we did send a powerful message to politicians, it was a disappointment to not have met with any real representatives. I felt productive, and I made some important connections, but I will wait until the budget is passed in March to see which of our "friends in Albany" really heard us. © 2012 GRACE Communications Foundation
food food ag policy new york Responses to "A Day in the Life of a (Sustainable) Ag Lobbyist" | 农业 |
2017-04/0035/en_head.json.gz/5080 | Big Grower November 2006
Costa Farms: Doing It All By Bridget White
Many people in the industry still associate the Costa name with foliage. But in the past 10 years, what was a sleepy, south-Florida company has grown into a national powerhouse in both foliage and bedding. The Costa family immigrated to the United States in the early 1960s and began growing and selling foliage soon after: From its inception, Costa Farms (from the Tony Costa branch of the Costa family tree) was a foliage operation. And with last year's merger with competitor Mike Costa Foliage (Tony's brother), Costa Farms became the nation's largest producer of indoor foliage, shipping to all parts of the United States as well as parts of Canada. In 1997, when Costa started what used to be Costa Color (that was before all branches of the company and family merged into Costa Farms last year), the company jumped into bedding plants. With the 2001 purchase of the Velvet Ridge facility in Ashville, N.C., Costa became one of the major players in the Southeast, shipping bedding plants to North and South Carolina, Georgia, Florida and Alabama. President and CEO Jose Smith sat down with GPN's Big Grower recently to talk about how the company has managed to expand so rapidly, how he keeps competing customers happy and what the future holds for Costa.
Moving Fast
A fast pace must come naturally to the people at Costa: The company's entrance into the color business seems to have happened overnight, at least in the eyes of the industry, and the company continues to grow aggressively. During just the first week in October, when GPN's Big Grower was working with Smith for this article, Costa moved onto 85 acres of the Hines Lovell facility in Homestead, Fla., and was signing a contract to purchase a 60-acre farm in Pennsylvania. Costa's move into the Mid-Atlantic market is a bold step in a time of rising costs and shrinking margins. It's also the first move the color side of the business has made outside of its home region.
"There was an opportunity to service one of our major customers in an area where they are growing aggressively," explained Smith. "We don't just grow for the sake of getting bigger, but we saw an opportunity, and we took it."
Costa will use the Pennsyl-vania farm, located south of Philadelphia, for production of bedding plants headed to the local, Mid-Atlantic market. Though details have not yet been finalized, Smith expects to ship some foliage from Florida to Pennsylvania to create a more complete offering. Smith said Costa expects to take over the property this month, leaving most of the management team in place, and start shipping from there in February or March.
But Costa's biggest move is yet to come. Starting next year, the company will begin the long process of relocating its Florida operations to a new 3,500-acre site about 100 miles north of Homestead. Set to coincide with the end of Costa's lease of Hines' property and a 7-acre ç expansion in Ashville, the first step of the move will open up much-needed space for color production. But Smith said the company will take its time completing the move, perhaps taking as long as 10 years.
Can It Transfer?
By the time Costa started its first bedding plant operation, the company's principals already had considerable mass-market experience and good buyer relationships. They were accustomed to shipping long distances and succeeding in the ultra-competitive world of foliage. The question everyone was asking was would these skills transfer to bedding? Despite similarities, the two markets are very different, and other growers have struggled making the transition. But not Costa. The company is even starting to apply some of its foliage skills to bedding, namely how to handle multiple, competing retailers.
On the foliage side, Costa has serviced Home Depot, Lowe's, Wal-Mart and a host of grocery chains for decades. With the recent addition of Home Depot as a customer in the Florida market, Costa now services approximately the same customers in bedding. How do such fierce competitors feel about the arrangement, we asked Smith. "Hopefully, we're a good enough solution that they tolerate it," he said.
Smith said the entire family works very closely together to cultivate its success, and he is extremely proud of the teamwork of all of his employees. "We have an awesome team of employees here that is continually working to develop solutions for our customers," Smith remarked. Smith said Costa's formula comes down to two factors: making each customer feel special through dedicated resources and people and maintaining integrity by not sharing competitive information. "It's one of our biggest challenges," explained Smith. "It's a challenge coming up with enough programs that are good enough and not having the same program in every chain we go to. I think one of our strengths is that we try to develop fairly deep ties with our biggest customers and more than just at the sales/buyer level. We focus on marketing, transportation, information technologyÉdifferent fronts to make the business better for all of us."
More Than Plants
Certainly anyone supplying color to a mass merchant these days knows that a good in-store merchandising program is part of doing business. Costa views its merchandising program as an opportunity to stay in tune with the needs of the end consumer.
Through a separate company called Garden Vision, Costa has negotiated a contract with Lowe's to merchandise all live goods in 218 stores in the Southeast. "Obviously, this was sticky," said Smith about being a third-party merchandiser. "Lowe's made it crystal clear for us that if this program was going to work, we had to maintain a separation between our selling arm, the Costa sales team and this merchandising team."
Merchandisers are not connected with the grower, as is the typical arrangement. They don't call in outages, and they don't favor Costa's product.
Now, instead of having one sales/merchandising person cover two stores, Costa has the same person cover 12 stores and focus only on sales; everything else is handled by a service company, either Garden Visions or one of four other companies Lowe's contracts with.
From a grower's perspective, Smith argues using a third-party merchandiser is actually cheaper. "You've got to imagine a dozen companies sending service reps into the same store," explained Smith, "and those 12 people each have cars, and those 12 people would each go from store to store to store. They would spend half their time behind a windshield; now all those inefficiencies are eliminated."
Working All Angles
As if production and merchandising were not enough to keep one company busy, changes in shipping on the foliage side are starting to create tremendous opportunity, said Smith. One of Costa's largest customers recently ended its collect-freight program where the company sent trucks to small growers to pick up orders as small as 25-50 cubes, and Smith expects other customers to follow suit. This leaves a lot of small growers with no way to get their products to some of the big box stores.
"There's no question that our distribution capabilities have really given us a lot of opportunities to grow the business," said Smith. "It's become more difficult for people to deliver product to the stores because freight minimums have gone up and freight charges have gone up. And the fact that we have critical mass going to all parts of North America makes it easy for us to roll other programs into ours."
Smith said some of the buyers at his larger customers are now approaching Costa to incorporate other growers' products and include them in the Costa shipment. Smith said it is much more efficient and cost effective for multiple nurseries to ship their products together. Sometimes those are items Costa grows, but oftentimes they are not. The potential for profit can be very good with, for example, specialty items. Because the product cannot get to the store any other way, the customer is willing to pay a little more for it, and Costa takes advantage of shipping costs it's already paying. If this expansion into shipping sounds simple, Smith warns it's not. "I don't handle all that," Smith explained. "We have shipping and transportation experts to do that. There's no way I could handle this company if I tried to be an expert about everything. We sold $13 million in 1993. Next year, we'll sell more than $200 million, 15 or 16 times that, and my life is not 15 times more complicated than it was in 1993. The reason it's not and the reason I can still sleep at night is because we have a great team. We've got a great thing going, but we are never satisfied with the status quo. Our entire team will continue to work hard to reach an even higher level of success." Bridget White
For information on this article, contact Tim Hodson at [email protected] or (847) 391-1019.
REGISTER NOW for the 2012 Big Grower Executive Summit
Syngenta Flowers Announces Goldsmith Scholarship Winners
Thoughts on a Changing Industry
Suntory Offers New Grower’s Guide App
BioWorks, DCM Corp. Partner to Offer Fertilizer
Latest New England Greenhouse Floriculture Guide to Debut | 农业 |
2017-04/0035/en_head.json.gz/5142 | Canadian scientists develop first-ever Fusarium-tolerant pastry wheat
Eastern Canadian producers can now benefit from a new wheat cultivar with increased tolerance to Fusarium head blight, a fungal disease which has cost the Canadian agri-food industry hundreds of millions of dollars. The new line, a soft red winter wheat often used for pastries, exhibits nearly four-times fewer mycotoxins when exposed to the fungus, than other wheat varieties on the market. The level of mycotoxins present in wheat can greatly affect yields, as well as grade and market value.
The line has been approved by the Ontario Cereal Crops Committee, and registered for production in Eastern Canada under the name Wonder. The line was developed by scientists with Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) in Ottawa and Hyland Seeds in Blenheim, Ontario. The development of Wonder was led by Dr. Radhey Pandeya of the Eastern Cereal and Oilseed Research Centre, and Hyland cereal breeders.
"Wonder is a major step forward in the battle against Fusarium and a good example of the type of innovation that can be achieved when government and industry work together," said Dr. Pandeya. "Fusarium has cost the Canadian agri-food industry hundreds of millions of dollars over the past 20 years, and our scientists in Western Canada are continuing efforts to develop similar varieties conducive to growing in that region."
Investments in research and development are a key priority of the Agricultural Policy Framework, a comprehensive plan developed with the provinces and industry to make Canada a world leader in food safety and food quality, environmentally responsible production and innovation.
"To our knowledge Wonder is the first Fusarium-tolerant pastry wheat on the market," said Henry Olechowski, research director with Hyland Seeds. "The new variety is sure to be welcome news to growers as Fusarium head blight is an ongoing concern in Eastern Canada and the Northeastern United States."
This project was funded under a Matching Investment Initiative (MII) in partnership with Hyland Seeds, a division of W.G. Thompson and Sons Ltd.
The MII is a federal program that aims to increase collaborative research activity between the private sector and AAFC by matching the contribution of an industry investment in research and development. Wonder is expected to be in full commercial production by 2004. For more information, media may contact:
Media Relations Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Ottawa, Ontario
(613) 759-7972 Henry Olechowski
Research Director, Hyland Seeds
Blenheim, Ontario
Media Relations | EurekAlert!
http://www.agr.gc.ca/cb/news/2002/n21119ae.html | 农业 |
2017-04/0035/en_head.json.gz/5498 | SD farmers harvest record yields
January 12, 2016 South Dakota farmers harvested record yields of corn and soybeans in 2015.
The state’s average corn yield was 159 bushels per acre, breaking the old record of 151 bushels per acre set in 2009, according to a USDA report. In addition, the state’s corn crop was the second largest all-time at 800 million bushels. The only crop that was larger was 803 million in 2013 when many more acres were planted to corn than in 2015.
Soybean production is estimated at a record high 236 million bushels, with an average yield of 46 bushels per harvested acre, also a record. Those marks break the previous records, which were set last year.
“The state’s farmers were blessed with timely rains and near-ideal growing conditions most of the season,” said Keith Alverson of Chester, president of the South Dakota Corn Growers Association. “Combined with improved farming methods, genetics and technology, we had an extremely productive year. It’s pretty incredible to think that South Dakota corn yields are double what they were 20 years ago.”
The USDA’s National Agricultural Statistics Service released the official annual crop production report Jan. 12.
← South Dakota Corn Growers present awards at annual meeting Britton farmer wins John Deere Gator in SD Corn raffle → | 农业 |
2017-04/0035/en_head.json.gz/6388 | NMSU Irrigation Report TweetShareGoogle+Email By KRWG News Las Cruces – New Mexico State University researchers have gathered data to answer these questions: How much of the water diverted into acequia irrigation systems is lost to seepage and evaporation? And, what are the benefits of acequia systems to the hydrology of the surrounding areas? Entering into the seven-year, ongoing study of acequias, researchers knew the traditional, earthen irrigation ditches had hydrologic and other benefits, beyond simply delivering water to crops. "The wisdom of the ancients was the starting point of our study," said Sam Fernald, NMSU assistant professor of watershed management. "For generations, people have believed that acequias are more important than just being used to water fields. They believed that the seepage affected groundwater quality and recharged the aquifer. But, there were no supporting data." The research team has now gathered data that explains how the seepage from the earthen ditches affects groundwater quality, what percentage of the seepage evaporates or returns to the river, and what effect upstream acequia systems have on downstream farming. The study data shows that, on average, only 7 percent of the water diverted from the Rio Grande into a north-central New Mexico acequia irrigation system is lost to evapotranspiration, the sum of evaporation from all sources, including water vapor released by plants. The remaining 93 percent returns to the river: 60 percent as surface water from irrigation tailwater and 33 percent as groundwater. "We have documented that large water flows are rapidly exchanged between the river, the irrigation system and the fluvial aquifer," Fernald said of the research conducted in the northern end of the Espanola Valley, between Embudo and Ohkay Owingeh Pueblo, formerly San Juan Pueblo. "A significant amount of water being diverted into the valley returns back to the river after completing important production and ecological tasks." The findings show that water entering the groundwater through field irrigation and seepage from the earthen ditches increases the shallow water table during the irrigation season. That water then returns to the river in an average of six to 10 weeks, but can remain underground up to three months. "The irrigation system collectively takes spring and summer runoff from the river and retransmits the flow later in the year," Fernald said. "This storage of water underground should help save water on a regional scale by reducing evaporation losses." Besides showing that acequias help retain spring and summer runoff used later downstream, the researchers have also documented the value of water seepage from the earthen ditches. When Fernald and Steve Guldan, superintendent at NMSU's Sustainable Agriculture Science Center at Alcalde, began the study in 2002 at the Alcalde Center, the researchers wanted to determine the amount of water that seeped from the earthen irrigation ditches. The first phase of the study determined that, although there is seepage from the acequia ditches, the water is also seeping back into the groundwater through the irrigated land. "There was 16 percent seepage over the five-mile irrigated length of the Alcalde Ditch, while there was between 25 and 60 percent percolation below the crops growing in a sandy, loam soil," Fernald said. The study also showed that seepage helps dilute contaminants in the groundwater. "The seepage is diluting the nitrate in the groundwater and creating better-quality water that is recharging the aquifer and going back to the river," Fernald said. The researchers compared data on nitrate levels in the groundwater during the winter, when the irrigation systems are not flowing and there is no seepage from them, with nitrate levels when water is in the acequias. The data showed that nitrate levels are lowest closer to the river in winter, but at other times, when water is seeping from the acequias, nitrate levels are lower closer to the ditches, as well as the river. An additional study developed by NMSU range science research specialist Carlos Ochoa addressed the field-based characterization of water transport through the soil and into the shallow aquifer. He determined how much water percolates below different types of field soils in the agricultural corridor between the Alcalde ditch and the Rio Grande. The study, complemented with evapotranspiration estimates from crop fields and riparian vegetation along ditches and the river, helped determine how much of the total seepage from ditches and crop fields makes it back to the river as groundwater return flow. As part of the research, computer modeling developed by NMSU civil engineering graduate student Yeliz Cevik was used to understand how valley-wide surface-water hydrology and groundwater hydrology influence the hydrology of the entire agricultural corridor. "The main thing the research has shown is that acequias, operating the way they have for generations, seem to have a lot of value for New Mexico," Fernald said. "Given the increasing importance of properly managing the state's water supplies, this research is adding critical information on the hydrology of acequia irrigation systems of north-central New Mexico," Guldan said. The results of this research will be reported during the Acequia Hydrology Symposium. Presentations will address both technical and sociocultural aspects of acequias along the Rio Grande. The symposium will be 7:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Wednesday, Oct. 21, at the Santa Fe County Fair Building, 3229 Rodeo Road, Santa Fe. The symposium registration fee is $15. For more information and to register, visit http://aces.nmsu.edu/acequiahydrology TweetShareGoogle+EmailView the discussion thread. © 2017 KRWG | 农业 |
2017-04/0035/en_head.json.gz/7535 | Wednesday, 13 May 2009 16:30 The story of the fiddlehead
Fiddleheads are emerging from the leaf litter in our forests. Almost everyone, even those not especially interested in plants, has heard of fiddleheads and knows that they’re supposedly edible. Whenever I teach a plant identification workshop for the Smoky Mountain Field School or the North Carolina Arboretum or elsewhere, someone inevitably brings up the topic.
When leading field trips, my first response to fiddlehead queries is the obvious one. I point out that fiddleheads aren’t a species of fern but a growth form. Most fern species — to a greater or lesser degree — display the characteristic fiddlehead shape when they arise from the plant’s underground rhizomes. The “fern leaf” differs from the “true leaf” of the flowering plants in its vernation, or manner of expanding from the bud. In the ferns, vernation is circinate; that is, the leaf unrolls from the tip, with the appearance of a fiddlehead, rather than expanding from a folded condition.
This unfurling strategy helps the immature frond make its way upward through the soil and leaf litter. It also protects the developing leaflets (pinna) that will comprise the leafy portion of the mature frond. The first fronds to appear in a new season’s growth are purely vegetative; fronds unfurling later bear the spore capsules (sporangia).
The technical name for a fiddlehead is crozier (also spelled crosier). This is derived from the crooked end of a bishop’s staff, which is sometimes referred to as a pastoral staff. Such a staff has a curved top symbolic of the Good Shepherd and is carried by bishops of the Roman Catholic, Anglican, and some European Lutheran churches and by abbots and abbesses as an insignia of their ecclesiastical office and, in former times, of temporal power.
In addition to being highly functional, the emerging fiddleheads of some fern species are quite beautiful. Those of cinnamon fern (Osmundia cinnamomea) are a pale lime green and can stand a two feet or more high before unfurling. Species in the wood fern group (Dryopteris species) often display wooly greenish-brown fiddleheads.
But now we get to the heart of the matter. When most people bring up fiddleheads, they do so because they’ve heard they’re edible. They want to know which ones can be harvested for consumption. My answer is that few of the ferns in the southeastern United States where I live and work are edible. And the one that’s said be particularly tasty is also thought to be dangerous.
Bracken (Pteridium aquilinum) is distributed world wide, being commonly found along roadsides and in disturbed areas with poor soil. They display exquisite silvery-gray fiddleheads shaped like an eagle’s claw. My wife and I have never eaten them, but they are reputed to be delicious. I doubt that light consumption of boiled bracken fiddleheads would be harmful to anyone; nevertheless, scientific research indicates the plant contains a number of toxic substances that readily kill livestock and might cause stomach cancers in human populations (as in Japan and China) that eat substantial amounts of the rootstock or fiddleheads.
Unfortunately for us, the North American fern species bearing fiddleheads that’s reputed to be the most delicious and absolutely safe to eat doesn’t grow wild in our region. That’s the ostrich fern (Matteuccia struthiopteris). Its distribution range has been described as Alaska to Newfoundland, south to British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, North Dakota, Missouri, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, West Virginia, and Virginia in North American; Scandinavia, Central Europe, Russia, and Asia; with significant naturalization in Ireland and Great Britain.
This species is described as displaying emerald-green fiddleheads and, when mature, having clumping leaflets (somewhat like cinnamon fern) that taper all the way down to ground level. In this latter regard it resembles the well-known New York fern (Thelypteris noveboracensis), which is common throughout eastern North America as far south as Georgia. Although edible, I can attest that New York fern is not tasty, unless you like boiled cardboard.
The solution to the fiddlehead dilemma for persons living outside of the ostrich fern distribution area might be relatively simple. Ostrich fern is readily available from nursery sources listed on the Internet. It’s advertised as establishing “vigorous” stands rather quickly in damp, partially shaded situations. One Internet source that I located offers a “Pkg. of 2 - $5.75.”
Why not purchase, say, 8 plants from a reputable grower (i.e., one not harvesting them in the wild) and propagate them for home consumption (as with asparagus) once a stand is established? My wife and I have decided to do just that. We would appreciate hearing from anyone who has experience growing ostrich fern for consumption outside of its natural range.
There is an informative Internet site devoted to fiddleheads at, you guessed it, www.fiddle-heads.com.
George Ellison wrote the biographical introductions for the reissues of two Appalachian classics: Horace Kephart’s Our Southern Highlanders and James Mooney’s History, Myths, and Sacred Formulas of the Cherokees. In June 2005, a selection of his Back Then columns was published by The History Press in Charleston as Mountain Passages: Natural and Cultural History of Western North Carolina and the Great Smoky Mountains. Readers can contact him at P.O. Box 1262, Bryson City, N.C., 28713, or at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.
« Unusual geographic locations always get my attention Yaupon and the ‘Black Drink’ » | 农业 |
2017-04/0035/en_head.json.gz/7940 | Ag Implements
Unit 11, South Perth Enterprise Centre, 219 canning Highway
Ag Implements is a family owned agricultural machinery business with its foundations firmly grounded in the eastern wheat-belt of Western Australia. With the demise of ‘Carson’s of Merredin’ (part of the Agro Holding group) in 2001, Merredin and surrounding areas were left with no John Deere dealer, nor service for their existing machines. Local farmer and business man, John Nicoletti identified the gap in sales and service in the area and commenced negotiations with John Deere Limited. A commitment was made to establish a new dealership in Merredin - and ‘Ag Implements Merredin’ (AIM) was born. In April 2003 AIM moved operations from rented facilities, into new premises at East Barrack Street in Merredin and subsequently evolved into the ‘state of the art’ dealership which you see today - operating out of offices, workshops and storage facilities covering over 20,000 square metres in the Merredin dealership alone.
Our Manufacturers
In November 2004, the business grew with the acquisition of 'Mukinbudin Tractor and Implement' providing a springboard into the central wheat-belt. In May 2008 the AIM group purchased 'Avon Tractor & Implement' – providing two new John Deere dealerships in Northam and Cunderdin. This decision further increased the AIM footprint into the western wheat-belt and Avon Valley. 2009 was another expansion year with two new acquisitions to improve service and reliability for our customers in the eastern wheat belt. An allied industries business in Southern Cross was purchased in July, followed by the purchase of a further John Deere dealership – 'Aquip Machinery' (Narembeen) in October. In September 2013, the company opened a new branch in Kulin in order to increase its presence in this area, and provide a better support for its customers. Ag Implements now employs 90 local staff in 7 locations. We service over 30,000 square kilometers in 20 shires and consider ourselves to be long term service providers to rural Western Australia. The management team with John Nicoletti (Owner and Managing Director), Ross Withers (CEO/ CFO) and Graeme Pember (Dealer Principal) is committed to innovative and customer drive service to wheat-belt communities, not only in the form of sales and service of John Deere farm equipment, but also in providing training and long term employment in our rural communities.
Integrity We believe in long term, responsible, fair and transparent relations with our employees, customers, partners, shareholders, and the community. This means good business for us. We shall operate our business affairs to the letter and spirit of the Law and our actions must be ethical every time. Acting ethically and honorably wins loyalty from our customers.
Service excellence is more than what we provide, it’s how we think and act It’s not just “fixing a problem” or performing routine maintenance, it’s the “smile” in the voice on the phone, the prompt response to a request and the drive to always improve. It’s how we work with one another and how we work with our customers. We analyze requirements and meet them with solutions and actions that benefit our customers most. We believe that service excellence begins with each employee’s commitment to improve the things—no matter how small—that are in their control. By keeping an “at your service” attitude and striving to exceed our customers’ and each other’s expectations, we are working hard to become a benchmark for superior service—not just in WA, but in Australia.
Health & Safety for our Staff All Staff of Ag Implements have the right to a safe and healthy work environment. To achieve our vision, the prevention of injury or illness is of the foremost importance in all of the AG Implements Activities. It is committed to ensuring the health and wellbeing of its employees, and others by eliminating and reducing hazards that could result in injury or ill health; implementing initiatives that improve the welfare of its employees; and by increasing awareness of workplace safety
Customer oriented A customer centric organization and operating structure to improve customer experience and support them before, during and after sales.
People The foundation of our vision of service excellence is built on the dedication of our people and sealed with a commitment to exceed customer expectations.
Accountability Employees are expected to take responsibility for their actions and decisions. They should think and act like owners.
Passion & dedication Our customers put their heart into their work, and so do we in ours. This means working with passion. We are convinced that only with enthusiasm and commitment the best results are achieved.
cotton stripper
row crop tractor
hand-held grain moisture tester
drawn planter
row crop
fuel crop
fairway mower
forestry harvester
Model S Series - Combine Harvesters | 农业 |
2017-04/0035/en_head.json.gz/7982 | about usmembership & servicesadvertisePost a JobConnectToggleToggleHomeCommunityJobsFundingNewsFor RecruitersFor ExecutivesJoin us Sign in TrendingWorld Economic ForumWHO electionIRG acquisition2016 in reviewGlobal Views#PlanetWorthHow to secure food under the climate change pressureBy Hanne Knaepen 30 November 20150
A market in Seychelles, a country that only has 6.5 percent of agricultural land. The country was the first among African nations to start mainstreaming climate change into its development policies. Photo by: So Seychelles / CC BY
In July, I spent a week in the Seychelles. The drive across the island was a beautiful adventure, following narrow, winding roads, while watching the ocean on one side. The island is a green spot in the middle of the ocean, covered with tropical forests.To be more precise, around 90 percent of the Seychelles is forested land, and only 6.5 percent is available as agricultural land. Out of that, about 2.2 percent can be used for farming. The main farming systems in the Seychelles are registered commercial farms and household gardens. The agriculture sector is characterized by rainfed production and relatively low levels of productivity. It accounts for nearly 1 percent of total exports. Hence, importing food is necessary to feed the Seychellois population.The Seychelles is, as a low-lying coastal country, inherently vulnerable to climate change, just as the other 51 small island developing states — formally known as the SIDS — spread across the oceans. They all share the same challenges: a hurricane can almost wipe away an entire island, crossing the limits of socio-economic resilience. These small islands do not have the opportunity to create economies of scale, due to a variety of reasons, including high energy and transportation costs, and limited land available for cultivation. Moreover, climate hazards may destroy crops and kill livestock due to either extended droughts or persistent floods.The government in the Seychelles understands that the little farming land available should be cultivated in a “climate-smart” way. It was one of the first African countries that, in 1993, started mainstreaming climate change into its development policies. By now, it has embraced climate-smart agriculture as the way forward — combining an increase in production, while adapting to climate change and mitigating greenhouse gas emissions.Climate-smart projects have been implemented in the Seychelles with support from development partners, such as International Fund for Agricultural Development and the European Union. The country has climate-proofed its National Agriculture Investment Plan, and the government has been offering concessions to farmers for various types of agriculture — including those who help to adapt to extreme weather events, induced by climate change. In 2009, the Seychelles National Climate Change Strategy was adopted. An official of the Ministry of Fisheries and Agriculture explained: “Thanks to this strategy, climate change is mainstreamed into socio-economic policymaking on the island. Local experiences are being scaled up.” For example, rainwater is being harvested for the irrigation of fields that can, in turn, increase food production.Local initiatives are key. Even more so because regional programs are often characterized by the notorious implementation gap. The Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa — COMESA, the region’s economic community, of which the Seychelles is a member — has been working on climate-smart agriculture for many years now. COMESA is financing a small project to climate-proof agricultural investments in the Seychelles. But local policymakers believe that COMESA could play a stronger role in supporting their climate-smart agriculture activities.Beyond the small island states, the world is also gearing up to decide on the global agenda for climate change at the Paris conference — or COP21 — starting this week.Agriculture, however, has suffered neglect on the fringes of these negotiations. There are a number of barriers, ranging from the complexity of finding a globally agreed definition of the agriculture sector to remaining gaps in technical knowledge on the climate impact on agriculture. Yet, COP21 holds some promises: the Lima Paris Action Agenda aims to create a broad multistakeholder platform to provide a solid ground for the implementation of the expected Paris Agreement, and “agriculture” is among the targeted sectors of this action agenda.Another element that stirs hope is the importance of agriculture in the Intended Nationally Determined Contributions. The INDCs stand for the post-2020 climate actions that countries intend to take up under the new international agreement agreed in Paris. About 160 parties have submitted their INDCs to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and, for about 80 percent of these submissions, agriculture features in their mitigation targets, while it is mentioned in about 64 percent of adaptation strategies. Most countries explicitly mention that “climate finance will need to address agriculture.”The INDC of the Seychelles explains that the island’s food security faces a two-fold climate change threat. On the one side it is “heavily reliant on food imports,” and on the other side “it needs support for local sustainable and climate-smart agriculture.” Sustainable agriculture would need new and innovative technologies across all food production supply and value chains. The indirect impact of climate change will also be felt in the Seychelles: knowing that about 80 percent of what the Seychellois eat is imported, a changing climate can lead to less productivity in the exporting countries, scarcer food supplies and higher prices.A well-balanced global agreement by the end of COP21 will recognize the need to include agriculture. This could mean that agriculture projects can apply to climate funding. The global Green Climate Fund, which aims to channel $100 billion by 2020 prioritizes “climate-smart agriculture.” The Seychelles is applying to receive funding for its highly vulnerable farming sector. At the same time, in our globalized world, these funds can benefit countries that supply the Seychelles with food. A strong position of agriculture in the COP21 agreement can make sure that the Seychellois can continue enjoying its locally breaded chicken with fresh garden tomatoes and a bowl of imported rice.Planet Worth is a global conversation in partnership with Abt Associates, Chemonics, HELVETAS, Tetra Tech, the U.N. Development Program and Zurich, exploring leading solutions in the fight against climate change, while highlighting the champions of climate adaptation amid emerging global challenges. Visit the campaign site and join the conversation using #PlanetWorth.About the author Hanne KnaepenHanne Knaepen is an ECDPM policy officer, focusing on climate change issues within the program on regional and local markets for agriculture development and food security. She received her doctorate in Global Environmental Studies from Kyoto University, Japan, where she resided for a period of four years. Subscribe to Devex Newswire Top international development headlines emailed to you every day Thanks for subscribing!More on this topicData as a driver for change: How results can reshape work, but also deceiveOpinion: Climate change is a threat and an opportunity for water and sanitationClimate change, Trump and finance: A look back at COP22Breast-feeding can combat climate change Join the DiscussionDiscussion HighlightsJoin the discussion on this article | 农业 |
2017-04/0035/en_head.json.gz/8719 | Industry USDA announces new landmark conservation initiatives
By USDA
Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack announced that applications are now being accepted for new, landmark conservation initiatives created by the 2014 Farm Bill. The programs will provide up to $386 million to help farmers restore wetlands, protect working agriculture lands, support outdoor recreation activities, and boost the economy. Vilsack made the announcement at Kuhn Orchards in Orrtanna, Pennsylvania. The farm’s owners participate in the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service’s Conservation Stewardship Program, have worked to encourage pollinator health through planting practices, and used USDA program support to construct a high tunnel.
“By protecting working lands and wetlands, we’re able to strengthen agricultural operations, sustain the nation’s food supply and protect habitat for a variety of wildlife,” Vilsack said. “In addition, we’re providing states and tribal governments a tool to expand access to private lands for hunting, fishing, hiking and other recreational activities, which helps boost wildlife-related businesses and grows the economy.”
NRCS’ conservation efforts have helped mitigate the negative impacts of drought and are helping producers to manage the effects of climate change. The USDA agency enrolled a record number of acres in conservation programs that have saved millions of tons of soil, improved water quality, contributed to the national effort to preserve habitat for wildlife, and protected the most sensitive ecological areas. USDA has partnered with more than 500,000 farmers, ranchers and landowners on these conservation projects since 2009 - a record number. In addition to protecting cropland and critical habitats, conservation strengthens outdoor recreation and helps boost the economy. According to the National Fish and Wildlife Federation, annual United States conservation spending totals $38.8 billion, but it produces $93.2 billion of economic output throughout the economy - 2.4 times more than what is put in. This output takes the form of more than 660,500 jobs, $41.6 billion in income and a $59.7 billion contribution to national Gross Domestic Product, or GDP.
The new programs announced today are the Agricultural Conservation Easements Program and the Voluntary Public Access and Habitat Incentive Program. Both programs have application deadlines in early June for fiscal 2014 funding. More information can be obtained at the local USDA service center, the VPA-HIP website, or grants.gov.
Through the 2014 Farm Bill’s new conservation programs, USDA NRCS is making available up to $366 million for conservation easements under ACEP to state and local governments, Indian tribes, non-governmental organizations and private landowners. ACEP consolidates three former easement programs—the Farm and Ranch Lands Protection Program, the Grassland Reserve Program and the Wetlands Reserve Program.
VPA-HIP is a competitive grant program that enables state and tribal governments to increase opportunities for owners and managers of private lands who want to make their land available for public recreation. Up to $20 million is available this year for VPA-HIP. Both programs have application deadlines later this spring.
Funding for the ACEP and VPA-HIP programs is provided through the 2014 Farm Bill, which authorizes services and programs that impact every American and millions of people around the world. The new Farm Bill builds on historic economic gains in rural America over the past five years, while achieving meaningful reform and billions of dollars in savings for taxpayers. Vilsack said that quickly and effectively implementing new programs and reforms to existing ones called for by the 2014 Farm Bill is a top priority for USDA. Learn more about the Farm Bill at www.nrcs.usda.gov/FarmBill.
Agricultural Conservation Easements Program
USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service administers the two components of ACEP, one for agricultural land easements and one for wetland reserve easements.
Under the agricultural land component, funds are provided to eligible entities that can use ACEP funding to purchase agricultural land easements that protect the agricultural use and conservation values of eligible land.
Eligible lands for agricultural land component include cropland, rangeland, grassland, pastureland and nonindustrial private forest land. Application priority will be given to proposals preventing conversion of productive working lands to non-agricultural uses and maximizing the protection of land devoted to growing the nation’s food supply.
Under the wetland reserve component, funding is provided to landowners for the purchase of an easement and for restoration funds to restore and enhance wetlands, improving habitat for migratory birds and other wildlife. Lands that are eligible for a wetland reserve easement include farmed or converted wetlands that can be successfully and cost-effectively restored. Applications also will be prioritized based on the easement’s potential for protecting and enhancing habitat for migratory birds, fish and other wildlife.
Applications for funding consideration in fiscal year 2014 must be submitted by the individual state deadline or June 6, 2014, whichever is earlier. Applications and state deadline information can be obtained at your local USDA Service Center or at www.nrcs.usda.gov/GetStarted. Agreements will be finalized beginning in late August.
Voluntary Public Access and Habitat Incentive Program
Recipients of the Voluntary Public Access and Habitat Incentive Program can use the grant funding to create new or expand existing public access programs. These programs provide financial incentives or technical assistance, such as rental payments or wildlife habitat planning services, to owners and managers who allow public access.
Funding priority will be given to applications that propose to:
Maximize private lands acreage available to the public;
Ensure that land enrolled in the program has appropriate wildlife habitat;
Strengthen wildlife habitat improvement efforts;
Supplement funding and services from other federal or state agencies, tribes or private resources; and
Provide information to the public about the location of public access land.
Applications for VPA-HIP are due by June 16 and should be completed by state and tribal governments at Grants.gov. For more information, view the notice on Grants.gov or the program’s website.
farm billusdaconservation initiatives About the Author: | 农业 |
2017-04/0035/en_head.json.gz/8849 | Industry Dear Chipotle: Farmers respond to ‘scarecrow’ ad
September 16, 2013 | 12:15 pm EDT
Chipotle is at it again.
The company’s latest animated short film made its way around the Internet last week, earning praises from advertising critics and consumers, while angering those within the agricultural industry. According to Chipotle, the film and its coordinating game are “designed to help educate people about the world of industrial food production that supplies much of what they eat.”
To the ag community, however, the film does nothing but further mislead consumers.
“This is a well-made animated short film. Props to the marketing folks who created it. But the message is not realistic nor does it paint an accurate image of modern agriculture,” rancher and “agvocate” Ryan Goodman wrote in a blog post.
Goodman isn’t alone. The Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF) was one of the first to call Chipotle out on the video.
“There’s a larger agriculture narrative developed by city-dwellers over the years who have ideological problems with modern food technology and production,” CCF said. “Chipotle is taking advantage of it as much as possible to make money. It’s important to remember that, as one in the ag community puts it, marketing is not reality. There are plenty of videos—not cartoons—that show modern farms in a straightforward manner (that is, without the horror-movie soundtrack and editing of an animal-rights video).”
Read, “If Chipotle only had a brain…”
Other agriculturists and ag supporters have taken to Chipotle’s Facebook page to air their distaste for the ad, including:
“Sad that Chipotle is scamming all of you into believing their food is better for you. I am cool with companies labling products GMO-free, or organic... and I am cool with people choosing to buy those products and I think they should be available... but Chipotle's depiction of the treatment of farm animals is totally FALSE. Yes, there are some bad farmers out there. but there are also bad pet owners as well... I cant stand it to see dogs chained to a house, but my dairy cows all had a name and free pasture to roam and they were LOVED. 98% of the US population is totally removed from agriculture and it is so sad to see Chipotle jumping on a crazy media bandwagon misinforming people to sell their burritos.”
“I don't see the point of this ad. It turns me off on the Chipotle brand. The depiction of the food industry is so out of line with reality. Having a game that youth will play associated with it is even more deplorable. There are all ready too many misinformed consumers this will not help. It is pretty bad when you have to cut down an industry with lies to sell your product. Chipotle bashes “big,” yet the gazillions of tortillas that the company goes through aren’t exactly made in some Mexican grandmother’s kitchen. In the Pacific Northwest, Chipotle sources chips and tortillas from Don Pancho Authentic Mexican Foods, Inc., a company that brags on its website that it has “grown from a small company into a state-of-the-art processing plant.” In fact, judging from the pictures, Chipotle is sourcing food from a veritable “industrial tortilla factory.” i won't be eating at Chipotle any more.”
“Shame on chipotle! Learn what real agriculture is about!!!!!!! Your images are full of lies and misconception! What a shameful way to exploit others to magnify your profits. As an American farmer father of 4, your lies are what's going to push out country into starvation one day. But you won't care for a while.....until you run out of money that you unrightfully earned! God bless Americans! Especially those sacrificing everything so that ALL people may be fed 3 times a day”
“You're simply propagating GMO hysteria. Farmers are losing money because of people who believe these silly commercials as truth. This commercial doesn't represent where food comes from any more than a shoe box represents where shoes are made. I suggest re-thinking your ad strategy. Unless pandering to the uneducated is one of your goals.”
“I don't want to wade into the farm vs farm debate but I am going to say that I do not give my support to people and corporations that deal in negative advertising. I'm not sure why you decided to accentuate the negative when you seem so positive about what you are doing. Why not just stick to showing off your farmers and your "integrity" and let the good you are doing speak for itself? There is too much negativity and strife in our society today. Too bad you decided to add to it. I'm out!”
“I'm with you. I will not spend a single dollar at Chipotle Mexican Grill. In fact, I'm hoping the Agriculture Industry/Non-Profits sue them for false marketing and advertising. This is just plain unacceptable. And I don't even farm!”
Click here to read more or to see messages left for Chipotle. Earlier this year, Panera Bread earned similar criticism in a campaign that referred to farmers who use antibiotics to treat their animals as “lazy.” One blogger named Dairy Carrie led the charge against the campaign, uniting the industry and even prompted the company’s chief marketing officer to call Carrie directly to discuss the campaign.
The company quickly – and quietly – removed its “Easy Chicken” digital and social media campaign following the outrage, and the company has said it does not plan to bring the campaign back. Topics:
chipotleagricultureranchingfarming About the Author: | 农业 |
2017-04/0035/en_head.json.gz/8929 | Drought forces Midwest firm to ponder drier future
Published: Friday, Nov. 16, 2012 5:30 a.m. CST
DECATUR – At the height of this year’s drought, decision-makers at the agribusiness giant Archers Daniels Midland kept an uneasy eye on the reservoir down the hill from their headquarters.
At one point, the water level fell to within 2 inches of the point where the company was in danger of being told for the first time ever that it couldn’t draw as much as it wanted. The company uses millions of gallons of water a day to turn corn and soybeans into everything from ethanol and cattle feed to cocoa and a sweetener used in soft drinks and many other foods.Rain eventually lifted Lake Decatur’s level again. But the close call left ADM convinced that, like many Midwestern companies and the towns where they operate, it could no longer take an unrestricted water supply for granted, especially if drought becomes a more regular occurrence because of climate change or competition ramps up among water users.While companies in the Great Lakes region and other parts of middle America long counted on water being cheap and plentiful, they now realize they must conserve because finding new water sources is difficult and expensive – if it can be done at all.“You’ve got to plan for the worst, and be prepared for that,” said Brad Crookshank, the wastewater superintendent for ADM’s corn processing plant in Decatur. “There’s not a lot of low-hanging fruit for additional water supplies.”ADM, which pumps more water out of Lake Decatur than any other consumer, wasn’t the only big water-user affected by the drought. Two Midwestern power plants shut down for periods this summer because they lacked water to operate, according to Midwest ISO, the electrical-grid operator for the region. MISO spokesman Brandon Wright declined to identify the plants because they’re owned by grid clients.With half of Minnesota, the “Land of 10,000 Lakes,” still in deep drought, the Department of Natural Resources told 50 water users, including several major ones, to stop drawing from rivers and streams in October.They included a paper plant owned by Sappi North America and a ceiling panel factory owned by USG Corp. The companies declined to comment, but DNR officials said they expressed concern about the future of their businesses.“We have discussions like, ‘Are you going to shut us down or put people out of work?’ And we say ‘You need to identify [alternative] sources of water so we’re not put in this position,’” said Dave Leuthe, deputy director of the Minnesota DNR Ecological and Water Resources Division.
Homeowners and small businesses are used to being asked to conserve water during drought. But big companies are often the last to face restrictions. Factories provide jobs, and utilities generate the power that keeps the lights and machinery on. Limiting their access to water could mean cutting production and employment.“If you’re going to start playing hardball with those businesses, they might decide this is too much trouble, we’re going to move to another location,” said Michael Doran, a professor of water and wastewater engineering at the University of Wisconsin.In Decatur, ADM is king. The company employs 4,000 people in the town of 76,000. And it’s influential far beyond the city’s borders. ADM has 265 processing plants in 75 countries, is ranked 28th in this year’s Fortune 500 and is legendary for political influence.Twenty-five years ago, no one at the company was very concerned about water.But the Midwest drought of 1988 scared ADM into finding ways to reuse it. The result, in part, is a 25-acre pond full of waste water, which will be cleaned by bacteria in frothy, churning brown lagoons that sit nearby. Eventually, the water will be used again, mainly for cooling.“It sounds real noble to say we want to conserve water,” Crookshank said. “In reality it was, ‘Don’t shut the plant down.’”Water is now an ongoing concern. When Decatur officials started warning residents this summer that restrictions were coming, they also initiated weekly talks with ADM and another local agribusiness firm, Tate & Lyle, about the receding lake. The discussions, however, had a different tone than orders given to other businesses, such as car washes, to stop using city water.“The discussions that we’ve had with ADM and Tate & Lyle involve, what kind of restrictions can they live with?” said Keith Alexander, the city’s director of water management. Aside from hospitals and the fire department, the companies are the most critical water users in town, he added.Other companies started hauling water. Some shut down. None were happy.Billingsley Service Center & Towing installed a mammoth water tank at its car wash and hauled in $2,000 worth of water a week to stay open, co-owner Jay Billingsley said. But efforts to talk to the city about easing its restrictions were fruitless, he said, even though the car wash consumes a fraction of what the big companies drink.“I understand [car washes are] not a necessity to live,” Billingsley said, “but at the same point, the same time, there are people that depend on this industry.”
The city finally eased restrictions on car washes in late October after it rained. By then, officials were uncomfortably close to telling ADM that it, too, would have to cut back – by 15 percent.Crookshank said the company had figured out ways to avoid curtailing production, so no jobs would be lost. Tate & Lyle also found ways to reduce water use, seeing the drought as an opportunity, spokesman Chris Olsen said.But the two companies would like the city to expand its water supply, a costly endeavor. Decatur is spending $1.6 million on four temporary wells, and a water consultant who works with a number communities around the country facing similar problems recommends capturing more of the river that feeds the lake, though that could take water from other communities grappling with the drought downstream.“I hear that all the time,” said the consultant, Pamela Kenel. “We need to be designing for a new normal.” | 农业 |
2017-04/0035/en_head.json.gz/9822 | Western food supply safer since 2006 E. coli outbreak in spinach Jan 04, 2017 New HLB positive tree found in urban Cerritos, Calif. Jan 02, 2017 American Farm Bureau plows into Phoenix this weekend Jan 05, 2017 Ag at Large: New water bill holds promise for California agriculture Dec 27, 2016 Lamy text could prove to be U.S. farm programs’ undoing
Forrest Laws 2 | Jan 26, 2009
The National Cotton Council created a stir last December when it released a series of articles examining the latest proposal for restarting the Doha Round of World Trade Organization negotiations. While the articles may have ruffled some feathers among free trade proponents, Council officials felt they had little choice considering the damage the proposal offered by WTO Director-General Pascal Lamy could have done to U.S. cotton. “If we had dropped down to the levels of support in the Lamy text, the practical effect is that we would not have a cotton program,” said NCC Chairman Larry McClendon. “It would dismantle cotton, and it would dismantle most of agriculture as far as the support levels the commodities have.” McClendon’s comments came at a press briefing on the status of the WTO negotiations at the NCC’s Beltwide Cotton Conferences in San Antonio. The talks have been at a standstill since the United States and the European Union refused to agree to language providing increased tariff protection for China and India last July. The WTO’s Lamy tried to schedule a meeting of trade ministers in Geneva in December, ostensibly to try to work out a new agreement before the Bush administration left office. Some observers say they believe the Obama administration will be less willing to compromise on trade issues. McClendon, a producer and ginner from Marianna, Ark., acknowledged the U.S. cotton industry has been roundly criticized for its unwillingness to give more ground on government support for U.S. cotton producers. Oxfam International, a British and U.S.-based charity organization, has waged a public relations campaign to lay the blame for the impoverishment of cotton farmers in the African C-4 countries – Benin, Burkina Faso, Chad and Mali – at the feet of U.S. cotton producers. “The reality is that the U.S. cotton industry has already agreed to give up some of its support,” said McClendon. “We operated for many years with a cap on support of $48 billion. Under the 2005 proposal offered by the United States, we carried that down to $22 billion. We were asked to go to $14 billion in the most recent discussions, which we never agreed to.” Cotton industry leaders have been asked why they wouldn’t agree to a lower cap since the United States has not been spending all of the money it could. The answer is in the arcane rules that govern the WTO. “The government may not be writing checks for that much, but we also receive support that has an assigned value to it, such as market or import restrictions,” he said. “But there’s a lot of soft support, too, such as the cost of running a Farm Service Agency office or the cost of putting cotton in the marketing loan that counts against the spending cap.” When U.S. Trade Representative Susan Schwab attended the WTO negotiations in Geneva last summer, she said that U.S. farm program support had exceeded target levels six out of the past 10 years. “This is something that is very important that we all need to understand,” he said. “We’ve made concessions, but we are utilizing all the support that’s being offered to us in six out of the past 10 years. We don’t believe we should give up anymore.” The U.S. cotton industry has already felt the negative effects of trade agreements that were developed and ratified with the best of intentions. He cited the textile agreements the United States has signed with China, Vietnam and other countries in Southeast Asia. “One of the unintended consequences of those agreements is that over the past 10 years we have lost 60 percent of the U.S. textile industry,” he said. “That was the U.S. market; that’s where our growers sold their crop. It was our bread and butter, and we exported the difference. “This has all flip-flopped now, and 70 percent of our production has to go to the world market. The leverage you have in the world market is cheap prices. Other issues come up such as quality or phytosanitary issues, but really it comes down to who is the cheapest guy out there.” McClendon said the Cotton Council agreed to support the 2005 U.S. proposal to reduce the so-called aggregate measures of support or AMS because its leaders were told it was needed to persuade other countries to provide increased market access for U.S. products, including agricultural commodities. During last summer’s negotiations in Geneva, however, China, India and other developing countries tabled proposals that would have allowed developing countries, which China and India continue to declare themselves to be, to exempt up to 5 percent of their tariff lines from increased market access. “What happens is that agricultural products make up a large portion of the exemption,” said McClendon. “So we saw zero evidence of increased market access. We’re sitting here ratcheting down our support and getting nothing in return.” Lamy announced in mid-December that the ministerial meeting would not be held and that the Doha Round negotiations would remain suspended after members of Congress said they would not support an agreement based on the Lamy text. Cotton Council leaders, while pleased with the announcement, are not breathing a sigh of relief. “The Doha Round may be in a coma, but it will be resuscitated,” said McClendon. “Believe me it will be back, and the Lamy text will probably be at the top of the list.” email: [email protected]
TAGS: Cotton 0 comments Hide comments | 农业 |
2017-04/0035/en_head.json.gz/10823 | Now is the time to sign up for CSAs
Richard Gorelick, The Baltimore Sun
You might not be thinking about farm-fresh produce in January, but the Maryland Department of Agriculture says now is the right time to check into joining a community-supported agriculture program.Members of a CSA pay an upfront subscription fee to farmers in return for a share of the season's harvest, which is usually provided weekly. Many CSAs deliver to central locations for pickup on a certain day of the week. Still others have special rates if the subscriber helps with the harvest on the farm.
There are two main incentives for signing up now. Some of the CSAs fill up early, and at least a few of them are offering discounts for signing up early.You can find a list of CSAs in Maryland on the Department of Agriculture's Maryland's Best Agriculture website, http://www.marylandsbest.net. You'll have to visit individual farms' websites to find out about CSA pricing and deadlines.
Meanwhile, there are a few year-round markets to tide you over. The popular 32nd Street Market draws crowds all winter long to Waverly on Saturday morning. Keep in mind that the 32nd Street Market operates as a local-produce market for only half the year. From Thanksgiving through the first week of June, farmers are allowed to supplement their supplies with produce not grown in Maryland. There won't be much beyond greens for a while, but the market still has plenty in the way of specialty and prepared foods, as well as baked goods.There's also a winter market at Green Spring Station every Saturday from noon to 3 p.m. with 15 vendors selling prepared foods, baked goods and specialty foods. And if you're missing those turkey burgers at the Baltimore Farmers' Market, Regi's (1002 Light St., 410-539-7344, regisamericanbistro.com) in Federal Hill has Gary's Turkey Burgers on its menu.Hollins revival There are signs of renewal around Hollins Market, the west-side neighborhood whose fortunes have flowed and ebbed over the past few decades.The old Mencken's Cultured Pearl space on Hollins Street might be getting a new tenant soon. The Cultured Pearl flourished in the early 1990s, the neighborhood's heyday, and finally closed in 1998, after the demise of Gypsy's Cafe, the Market Cafe and the Tell Tale Hearth.In 2008, a Hollins Market booster named Jim Collins opened a Vietnamese restaurant named Baltimore Pho in the Cultured Pearl space, in an effort, he said, to bring activity and interest back to the neighborhood. Baltimore Pho did just that, and after two years, Collins sold the business.But the successor tenants flailed and foundered, and 1114 Hollins is empty again.Now a new restaurateur is considering the property. David Thomas, the co-owner of Herb & Soul, a Parkville carryout specializing in natural foods, said he's hoping to expand his natural-foods concept to the Hollins Market area.Thomas said he presented his plans at a neighborhood association meeting. "They seemed genuinely excited about our coming."The Herb & Soul menu includes chicken and fish boxes, shrimp and grits, and buttermilk frog legs, all of which, Thomas said, he strives to prepare with wholesome, natural ingredients.A new home My Thai (1300 Bank St., 410-327-0023, mythaiblatimore.com), originally in Mount Vernon's Park Plaza building, has reopened in the Tack Factory in Little Italy.The new My Thai occupies the nearly 6,000-square-foot space formerly held by another Thai restaurant, Lemongrass, and features exposed brick, a 40-foot bar, dark wood, and a combination of high-top communal tables and traditional seating. The restaurant is open seven days a week for lunch and dinner, until midnight on Friday and Saturday.The menu of traditional Thai dishes will be supplemented, co-owner Brad Wales says, with "culinary surprises," available as occasional specials, featuring liver, brain and silkworm.The website is a work in progress, but you can see photos from Wednesday's grand opening and some pretty food shots on the My Thai Facebook [email protected] | 农业 |
2017-04/0035/en_head.json.gz/12731 | Why The Farm Bill's Provisions Will Matter To You By Scott Neuman
Jun 13, 2012 TweetShareGoogle+Email Dairy cows feed on a farm in Chilton, Wis., in May. The farm bill being considered by Congress, part of a massive package that could cost nearly $1 trillion over a decade, contains a number of provisions affecting dairies.
Carrie Antlfinger
Originally published on June 13, 2012 12:49 pm If you think only farmers care about the farm bill currently being considered by Congress, you're very, very mistaken. The measure will not only set policy and spending for the nation's farms for years to come, but it will also affect dozens of other seemingly unrelated programs — all at a cost of nearly $1 trillion over the next decade. Following are a few questions and answers about the massive legislation: Why is it called the farm bill, and where did it come from? First, the term "farm bill" is a bit misleading. It's simply shorthand for legislation that invariably gets saddled with a different name. In 2002, it was the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act, and in 2008, it was known as the Food, Conservation and Energy Act. The latest bill is the Agriculture Reform, Food and Jobs Act of 2012. Second, perhaps 80 percent of the bill has nothing to do with farms or farming. But more on that later. Modern farm bills date to the Great Depression and the New Deal. By the 1930s, U.S. farmers were victims of their own success. Mechanization and stepped-up production during World War I, as America fed a war-weary Europe, eventually led to huge surpluses and falling prices for basic crops. The Agricultural Adjustment Act sought to do something that to this day remains controversial: pay farmers not to grow crops in an effort to boost prices. But the Supreme Court didn't like a tax provision in the 1933 law and struck down the entire act. By 1938, Congress passed a new Agricultural Adjustment Act, sans the offending tax. Farm bills have been passed about every five years ever since. "I would say the New Deal is the great-great-grandfather of all the farm bills as we currently know them," says Dale Moore, director for public policy at the American Farm Bureau Federation. Why should you care? It's not just about farmers. The farm bill is an all-encompassing piece of legislation comprising everything from farm subsidies and crop insurance — which have an indirect impact on food prices — to energy, forestry, food stamps and school lunches. "It covers what is, in a lot of ways, the rural economy in this country," Moore says. Why is it controversial? In an age of rising deficits, the bill has come in for a lot of scrutiny. Chris Edwards, an economist with the libertarian Cato Institute, calls the farm bill "a bipartisan pork barrel spending spree." "Farm subsidies redistribute wealth from taxpayers to often well-off farm businesses and landowners," he says. "In 2010, the average income of farm households was 25 percent above the average of all U.S. households." But the largest chunk of the farm bill in dollar terms is directed to the Supplemental Nutrition and Assistance Program (SNAP), commonly known as the food stamp program. Edwards says the growth in the program in recent years has been remarkable, "not just because of the recession but because of the increase in eligibility during the Bush administration." However, Dottie Rosenbaum, a senior policy analyst at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, thinks much of the criticism of food stamps has been over the top. "In my view, one of the biggest myths is the claim that some people make that SNAP is growing out of control and is contributing in a substantive way to the deficit," she says. "To the extent it is growing, it's for reasons that we very much understand — it's about addressing the needs of people in a bad economy." How much does it cost? The details of this year's bill are still being hammered out, but the Congressional Budget Office says the cost over 10 years will be about $969 billion. The vast majority — $768.2 billion, according to the CBO — will go to food stamps. Since the farm bill represents anticipated spending over 10 years, it's difficult to assign it an exact percentage of an evolving federal budget. But it's typically more than education and less than defense spending or Social Security. What's in the farm bill? The short answer is: a lot. Here's a partial list: price supports and/or crop insurance for commodity crops conservation programs that affect land, water and soil use agricultural exports and food aid, including humanitarian assistance to other nations food assistance programs for poor Americans direct and guaranteed loans to farmers and ranchers forestry programs managed by the U.S. Forest Service programs promoting renewable fuels such as ethanol crop insurance and disaster assistance How is the latest legislation different than past bills? Sponsors of the 2012 farm bill claim it will save taxpayers $23.6 billion over 10 years. But that figure represents less than 2.5 percent of the total cost of the bill, according to the CBO. The biggest change, supporters of the bill say, will involve a planned transition away from the direct payments to farmers that were instituted in the 1990s. Those payments were meant to streamline the process, but were granted to farmers regardless of what kind of year they had. "If they had a very difficult year, they got the very same payment as if they had a bumper crop with fabulous prices," says Roger Johnson, president of the National Farmers Union. With the improvements, the balance of the equation for farmers shifts away from price supports and toward risk management. It's designed to protect against things like floods and droughts in a way that minimizes the need for Congress "to do ad hoc disaster legislation" for farmers each time there's a catastrophic event, Johnson says. But farmers in the South disagree with an end to direct payments. They argue that the yields that insurance would pay out on are set so low for "Southern" crops, such as cotton, rice and peanuts, that it would be difficult, if not impossible, to qualify even in very bad years.Copyright 2012 National Public Radio. To see more, visit http://www.npr.org/. TweetShareGoogle+EmailView the discussion thread. © 2017 WCBE 90.5 FM | 农业 |
2017-04/0035/en_head.json.gz/12846 | Mer Rouge farmer may get two honors for his skills
Mer Rouge farmer Harper Armstrong had never been acknowledged for his successful farming abilities, his leadership in agricultural organizations and the help he does in the community - until now. Armstrong was selected as the outstanding Producer of the Year for Northeast Louisiana in Jan., and now he's been nominated for the Louisiana Radio Network “Farmer of the Year.” He and two other farmers are in the running to receive this title, which is chosen by an independent panel of judges from the University of Kentucky and Texas A&M University
By Vicki [email protected]
Armstrong said he found out he'd been nominated soon after receiving the Producer of the Year award.“They called me on the phone and told me,” he said. “I felt it was a great honor to just have been nominated.”Armstrong has a background in farming that proves he knows the trade well, so well in fact, he created an organization that teaches young farmers about farming.Armstrong is currently the president of the Morehouse Black Farmers and Landowners Association, an organization he helped to develop along with other black farmers in Morehouse and surrounding Parishes. This organization offers minority producers the latest information on farm programs and farming practices.Armstrong is also a vice president of the National Black Growers Council, which covers minority producers from throughout the south. Through the years Mr. Armstrong has served on many committees with the Farm Service Association, the Soil Conservation Service and the LSU Ag Center, serving as an advisor to all farm producers in Morehouse Parish.LSU AgCenter extension agent Terry Erwin has much respect for Armstrong. Erwin told the Enterprise in Jan., “ I have worked closely with Mr. Armstrong for several decades. He has always been open to assisting our research demonstration methods by volunteering his time, labor, equipment, and his land so that other farmers could learn about hands on educational methods where the farmer could actually see how a particular practice or variety or pest control would work on his or her farm to increase profitability and allow our producers to continue to feed the world.”Armstrong said he's been a farmer for 47 years. Whether he receives this award or not, he said he will continue to do what he's doing in Mer Rouge.“I think the reason I was nominated is because of all the work I do in the community,” he said. “I try try to help young farmers who are just getting started. We have to teach our young people everything we know. I'll continue to put in the field days out at he farm and help my community in every way I can.” | 农业 |
2017-04/0035/en_head.json.gz/13030 | China’s stock reductions could provide new opportunities Jan 06, 2017 2017 Mid-South Farm and Gin Show: Register online Jan 09, 2017 Target spot: A disease of ‘high yield’ cotton Jan 05, 2017 Tinkering with exports: serious implications Jan 02, 2017 Peterson backs U.S. biofuel production
David Bennett | Dec 12, 2006
A day after he was elected chairman of the House Agriculture Committee in early December, U.S. Rep. Collin Peterson, a Minnesota Democrat, held a press conference where he spent the bulk of his time speaking on the need for a vibrant biofuel industry. For those hoping for an extension of the current farm bill, Peterson offered little. But he wasn’t dismissive or hostile to the current bill’s structure. “You can expect to see a (farm) bill that looks similar to what we have now. There are a couple of things you’ve heard me talk about before that I want to try and concentrate on. (One is) a permanent disaster program. “Once again, we’re in the process of trying to pass an ad hoc disaster bill. That doesn’t look like it’ll happen during this lame-duck (session). But we’ll be taking up this fight again right after the first of the year and hope it’ll be successful once (Democrats) take control… “I’d like to see the secretary (of agriculture) have permanent authority so we don’t have to do these ad hoc bills every couple of years.” The other area Peterson wants “a lot of focus on” in the new farm bill is renewable fuels. “I think it’s safe to say this is the most exciting thing that’s happened in agriculture in my lifetime. Farmers are excited about this. Young farmers are coming back to the farm and people are making money.” It’s a great opportunity for agriculture, he said. “Corn ethanol is doing very well and is very profitable. They’re building plants as fast as they can. Frankly, they don’t need a lot of help. We need to get out of the way and not screw things up.” Long-term, Peterson said, his goal is to have more than half of the United State’s fuel produced in agriculture. Accomplishing that “means we’ll be moving beyond corn to cellulosic ethanol. “A lot of focus of the (next farm) bill will be on cellulosic feed stocks, with research and, potentially, a CRP-type program where we’d pay people so much per acre to grow the feed stocks across the country. That’s basically to try and determine what’s the biomass crop in each (region) of the country. What will produce the most biomass for the least cost?” Peterson expects such cellulosic plants will be commercialized and “ready to go in five or six years. Initially, they’ll be run on agriculture waste like wheat straw, rice straw … and so forth. We want to be ready to go when these plants are up and operational. When this industry is ready to take off in five or six years, we must be ready to provide the feed stocks to fuel it.” Several days prior, Sen. Tom Harkin, an Iowa Democrat who will soon take over the Senate Agriculture Committee, said he’d be willing to consider doing away with the foreign ethanol tariff. When a reporter asked about Harkin’s comments, Peterson was surprised. “Are you serious? You didn’t mishear him? I’m not in favor of that. The last thing we need is any foreign ethanol being imported into the United States. We can produce plenty for the demands here. This is a product not under the WTO, and I have no interest in it being put under the WTO. “I think to stand up the cellulosic ethanol industry we need to keep this product in the United States and under our control until the industry is established, running and on its feet. I don’t how long that’ll take — probably at least 10 years.” Peterson recently returned from a trip to Brazil — a country that produces ethanol in excess. “They were bringing this up and I let them (know), from my perspective, we’re not interested. …The Brazilians are trying to build a case that we need to get more (of their) ethanol (into the United States) and therefore we should lift our tariffs. I don’t agree at all.” Peterson said he’s very concerned that politicians set the proper foundation for the U.S. biofuel industry. “I’ve been working on ethanol for 30 years. … Now everyone is trying to help ethanol out. It’s the most popular thing you could think of. So there are all kinds of bills being introduced, all kinds of members of Congress trying to help it (along). “In my judgment, probably half the bills introduced would do more harm than good. So we need to make sure whatever we’re doing will benefit the industry and fix problems that exist, not problems that existed 10 years ago but don’t any longer. “Things are going along well. But people are introducing bills to, for example, set up loan guarantees so people can buy into these (ethanol) plants. Wall Street and other big people are doing their darnedest to come in and get control of this industry and buy into these plants. “They haven’t been able to because the farmers are there and there’s no need for (other investors’) money. If you put a loan guarantee deal in and screw up the equity drive process, you may see these plant builders say, ‘Well, this is too much trouble. I’ll just get the money from Wall Street.’ “So we must be careful with how we go about this. Whatever we do needs to fix a problem that actually exists — not a problem someone perceives.” e-mail: [email protected] | 农业 |
2017-04/0035/en_head.json.gz/13880 | Western food supply safer since 2006 E. coli outbreak in spinach Jan 04, 2017 New HLB positive tree found in urban Cerritos, Calif. Jan 02, 2017 American Farm Bureau plows into Phoenix this weekend Jan 05, 2017 Ag at Large: New water bill holds promise for California agriculture Dec 27, 2016 Inductions into ARS Hall of Fame
Dennis O'Brien | Sep 29, 2009
Three Agricultural Research Service (ARS) scientists have been inducted into the agency's Science Hall of Fame for research accomplishments that include improving rice varieties, increasing crop productivity in arid climates, and enhancing human and bovine health by focusing on safeguards to dairy cattle and milk. Geneticist J. Neil Rutger, soil scientist B.A. Stewart and dairy scientist Max J. Paape will be honored in a ceremony tonight at the ARS U.S. National Arboretum. "These researchers' results have had long-term, lasting value to science and society, and contribute important national priorities of responding to climate change, food safety and health, and global food security," said ARS Administrator Edward B. Knipling. "They serve as exemplars of excellence in scientific research because of their creativity and dedication, the range of their scientific contributions and their service to both the agricultural community and the public." ARS has been honoring former and senior agency researchers with the Hall of Fame program since 1986. Nominees are retired or eligible to retire. They are selected by their peers for outstanding career-long achievements in agricultural science and technology. Neil Rutger was an ARS researcher for 18 years in California before he became director of the Dale Bumpers National Rice Research Center in Stuttgart, Ark., in 1993. Over the years, he developed semi-dwarf varieties of rice that increased crop yields by up to 20 percent. His first semi-dwarf rice cultivar, Calrose 76, was integral to the development of dozens of dwarf varieties now used to breed rice around the world. By some estimates, Calrose 76 and successors developed in California added an estimated $1 billion to California's economy. Rutger also was instrumental in developing jasmine rice cultivars for United States growers, and his search for genes among rice's weedy relatives to resist stem rot disease was the first such attempt in the United States. Subsequent research has identified several genes among weedy relatives that resist other rice diseases. In a career spanning almost 50 years, B.A. Stewart contributed to areas as diverse as animal waste management, soil and water conservation, crop production and environmental quality. As director of the agency's Conservation and Production Research Laboratory in Bushland, Texas, he focused much of his work on managing scarce water and soil resources in harsh arid and semi-arid regions. Stewart conducted the first experiments on use of anhydrous ammonia as a fertilizer, and his work on nitrate accumulation in fields and feedlots opened the door to research examining the environmental impacts of various agricultural practices. As a member and chairman of various soil and water quality management panels and task forces, he was instrumental in developing national environmental guidelines still used today. Max Paape, a researcher with the ARS Bovine Functional Genomics Laboratory in Beltsville, Md., is an internationally recognized authority on bovine mastitis, the most costly disease to the U.S. cattle industry. In studies with researchers at Oklahoma State University, he found that subclinical mastitis is common in beef cattle, but that giving antibiotics at weaning reduces its prevalence. The findings are credited with saving the beef industry $1 billion annually. He also developed several treatments for mastitis, including alternatives to antibiotics that changed the way many drug company scientists view the effectiveness of non-antibiotic therapies. Early in his career, Paape developed procedures for using milk somatic cell counts (MSCC) as an index of udder health, and he was a pioneer in using MSCC to assess milk quality. He also led research into how long dairy and meat products should be withheld from the market after cattle are treated with antibiotics. The Food and Drug Administration used the results in establishing relevant food safety standards. ARS is the principal intramural scientific research agency in the U.S. Department of Agriculture. | 农业 |
2017-04/0035/en_head.json.gz/14936 | 07/05/2013 10:04:30 AM MDTBYERS, Colo.—Life would have been much different on Gary May's farm 100 years ago. With the right kind of setup, the 400-acre farm east of Aurora could have easily sustained a family in the early 1900s. As the owner of the property, May could have figured out a way to eke out a living from the land. Sure, it would have taken a lot of work from a sizable crew of workers, but it could have worked. "If we were having this interview 100 years ago and I had 12 kids, well, we probably could make ends meet. We'd have free labor," May said as he drove an electric golf cart by rows of pepper plants on his property in Byers. "That doesn't happen . As a business person, I can't sustain a family on this small irrigation." Times have changed for farmers like May. With his relatively small tract of farmable land, May has had to find other ways to keep his business afloat. The landscape has changed since he first bought the property in 1976. Nowadays, a big stake of May's business lies in "agritainment," a buzzword that describes a whole new approach to drawing dollars to the farm. He's set up corn mazes and markets during the fall. A spacious events center on the property hosts weddings, dances and meetings. In the coming months, the farm will host 5Ks, field days, foam festivals and Riot Fest, a music festival featuring national acts like The Replacements, Iggy and the Stooges, Rancid and Public Enemy. "I'm always looking at something new," May said.Advertisement
"Lots of people in this region moved out here and wished they would have locked the gate. I say, 'If I would have locked the gate behind me, you wouldn't be here' . Change, to me, is an adventure." In lieu of looking to boost yield and output to make ends meet, May has turned to attractions that seem a bit out of place for a traditional, family farm. It's a push that's only intensified following the success of last year's "Dirty Girl" 5K. At the end of June, May Farms will host the annual "Run For Your Lives" 5K run and obstacle race. The national event produced by Reed Street Productions will be a takeover of May's farm by dozens of actors, crew and organizers. Runners will traverse the trails and fields at May Farms as they're chased by actors dressed as brain-hungry zombies. That's not the only large-scale event planned for the property in the coming months. In July, the farm will host an Independence Day car show, a "Color Vibe" 5K and a firefighters' muster. In September, May will push the envelope even further with the Riot Fest. The rock, pop, hip-hop and alternative music festival kicked off in Chicago in 2005, and has since spread to locales including Brooklyn, New York; Dallas and Toronto. Acts like Elvis Costello & the Imposters, Imagine Dragons and Fishbone have all appeared at the festival. Founders started the festival with a do-it-yourself mission in mind, a scaled-back effort in the wake of growing, multi-day festivals like Coachella in California, Bonnaroo in Tennessee and South By Southwest in Texas. That mission has remained a constant part of the festival, and it's part of what appealed to May in agreeing to host the event. "We're building a future, building a reputation," May said. "We've been trying sell this farm as a festival site for a long time with the agritainment idea. We looked at different festival concepts and what made things work. We looked at how big is too big?" Events like Riot Fest, the Zombie Crawl and the Color Vibe 5K all seemed fitting for the size and scope of May's farm. They're the type of attractions that could easily draw thousands, but ones that won't strain the capacity of the farm's 400 acres. The attractions also carry enough currency in terms of tourism to garner the attention of Visit Aurora, the city's tourism promotion arm. Officials from the organization have included May Farms in their pitches about the wealth of attractions and events in Aurora. "We've been working with (May), because the things like the Zombie Run and the Riot Fest attract out-of-town visitors," said Visit Aurora President and CEO Gary Wheat. "It's one of those things where there's not a lot of hotels out there, not a lot of restaurants. We market for those people to stay in Aurora." Considering the fact that the farm is a 30-minute drive from Aurora's main drag, it allows Wheat and the rest of city's marketers to appeal to tourists who may want to get away from the urban attractions. It's familiar territory for Wheat, who started his career promoting agritainment events in Iowa and Indiana. Even so, the menu of events coming up in Byers has made Wheat search for new sales pitches. "If you'd asked me 10 years ago, 'let's do a Zombie Run,' I wouldn't have known what you were talking about," Wheat said. "This is a new spin on agritainment." Just like all new trends, the shift in agritainment may need some time to properly take hold. May, who still considers himself a farmer first, is ready to be patient and let the word spread about the zombies, the runners and the hip rock bands regularly featured on his property. "I've made it clear with all of these events that they have to do it for three years," May said. "Any promotion person will tell you, you don't just have one year and make a decision on whether it's going to work."Print Email Font ResizeReturn to Top RELATED | 农业 |
2017-04/0035/en_head.json.gz/15409 | By Heather Hacking - Staff Writer, ChicoER.com
Confusing and sometimes misleading labeling on olive oil packaging will be improved through new rules adopted by the U.S. Department of Agriculture in April and due to be in place by October.
The new rules apply scientific standards for words such as "virgin" and "extra virgin," which are the highest quality.
Oroville olive oil producer Jamie Johansson of Lodestar Farms California Olive Oil, said the rules have been the goal for the past 15 years and will give "consumers greater confidence in what they are buying."
"It's a great thing for California olive oil and a great thing for importers who are shipping over quality oil," he said.
The enforcement will include a chemical analysis, as well as taste and smell tests.
State production of olive oil is only about 1 percent of the oil pressed in the world.
Locally, companies such as Johannson's and others are making a name for themselves.
The California Olive Ranch, based in Oroville with a production facility in Artois, began in 1998 with 500 acres and has expanded to 10,000 acres. At an economic conference in January, the company said it plans to continue to rapidly expand.
"Ten years ago, California olive oil was kind of a neat, little niche market that wasn't taken seriously as an economic generator in agriculture," Johansson said.
The California Olive Oil Council has had a program for quality testing since 2003, and was required before placing the COOC seal on bottles. The group has been asking USDA to adopt specific rules to disallow mislabeled or low-grade olive oil.
The last time the USDA visited the issue was right after World War II, when they graded olive oils with old-fashioned terms such as "choice" or "fancy," decades before California's olive oil industry took off.
Almost all U.S.-grown olive oil comes from California, and production expands about 20 percent per year.
Heather hacking can be reached at 896-7758 or [email protected]. The Associated Press contributed to this report. | 农业 |
2017-04/0035/en_head.json.gz/15890 | Economy Taiwan Finding Niche Markets in China’s Shadow Last Updated: October 19, 2015 10:30 AM
Taiwan Finding Niche Markets in China’s Shadow
http://www.voanews.com/a/taiwan-finding-niche-markets-in-chinas-shadow/3013559.html
TAIPEI — China’s economy is like a business magnet and as its influence grows its neighbors are finding it increasingly difficult to remain competitive. Like many economies in the region, Taiwan has been hit hard in recent years as China’s so-called “red-supply chain” has drained off talent and opportunities.
But some entrepreneurs, such as edamame farmer Hou Chau-pai are finding ways to carve out niche markets and thrive.
For decades, Hou’s family has been growing edamame or hairy green soybeans in southern Taiwan. For most of that time, Taiwanese farmers were reaping the lion’s share of exports to Japan, a major consumer of the tasty bean.
But the rise of production in China in the 1990s and early 2000s, cut Taiwan’s exports to Japan nearly in half and almost wiped out cultivation of the crop. At least until farmers such as Hou began switching to machinery to boost yields and looked for ways to revitalize the crop. Persistent government efforts to help create new varieties of the soybean tailored to the Japanese market also played a key role. Taiwan has developed 12 varieties of the bean.
FILE - Man holds edamame.
Blind spot Hou said it is difficult to compete with China, but it has a blind spot.
“Many in China think that just because China is a big country all it has to do is meet domestic demand,” Hou said. “Less thought is given to opening up new channels or markets, or improving the quality of products because few see agriculture as an investment opportunity in China.”
Hou travels to China several times a year to keep an eye on the competition, and when he goes there he said he does not see farmers who are involved in production of the bean, but investors who very quickly would drop the crop for more lucrative endeavors.
That and the demand of China’s domestic market will help Taiwan maintain the upper hand, but that will not last forever, he adds.
What has been key then and is just as important now, is innovation and the willingness to evolve, said Chou Kuo-lung, who heads the crop improvement section at a government agricultural station in Kaohsiung.
“We’re not afraid of competing with China. What we’re afraid of the most is that we don’t progress and get stuck in a rut,” Chou said.
In addition to selling beans to Japan, Hou has also begun experimenting with store fronts selling soybean bread, edamame soymilk and other healthy bean products.
Challenges But while the picture may be bright for some on a smaller scale, in many ways, Taiwan’s economy is facing serious structural challenges.
“There is a lack of foreign direct investment coming to Taiwan and also very weak linkage to multinational corporations,” said Liang Kuo-yuan, chairman and president of Yuanta-Polaris Research Institute.
As China’s research and development capability is getting increasingly stronger, so is the quality of its institutions of higher learning. In January, Taiwan will elect its next president and getting the economy right is one of the top concerns.
“Without a strong economy, Taiwan will not be recognizable, will not be visible in the world,” Liang said.
One key way that Taiwan can make sure that continues is by putting more emphasis on information and communication technology and shifting its focus to what is called "The Internet of Things", an emerging market the Mckinsey Global Institute estimates could be worth as much as $11 trillion in 10 years.
The Internet of Things is a term that refers the connectivity of sensor packed machines that are connected to the web, such as home heating and security systems. But to do that would mean boosting Taiwan’s capability in software, Liang said.
“Taiwan’s niche [markets] should be concentrated on those products with small volume, but diversified and [those that are] customizable,” he said.
In this Monday, June 15, 2015, photo, Gogoro electric scooters are test driven by potential customers outside a showroom in Taipei, Taiwan.
High tech Agriculture is not the only sector in which firms are using innovation to create niche markets and avoid highly standardized products, an area where China has the upper hand.
One example is Gogoro, an electric smart scooter. The bike taps Taiwan’s manufacturing prowess and high-tech know-how.
Unlike most electric scooters, its batteries can be exchanged at charging stations. The bike’s front is customizable as are all of the bike’s display features, which can be controlled by a smartphone app.
Through the technology it has on board, the bike can help understand how people consume and use energy. Local Taiwan governments are offering subsidies to purchase the bikes.
Company executives have said they hope to eventually market the idea overseas. Even before the bike went on sale the company told media in Taiwan it had been approached by more than 200 cities interested in the idea.
Behind in Polls, Taiwan's Pro-China Party Switches Presidential Candidates
Taiwan Exports in Decline, a Signal of Shifting Global Economy
Taiwan President Sounds Warning on Future of China Ties
Chinese Tourists Defy Slowing Economy to Travel Abroad | 农业 |
2017-04/0035/en_head.json.gz/16533 | Cafédirect reveals the uncomfortable truth lurking behind Britain’s favourite beverage A new investigation by Cafédirect has exposed the true extent of the crisis facing the treasured cuppa. Whilst the cost of growing tea has soared by as much as 94% in the past five years, crippling smallholder growers, the market hasn’t been keeping pace, with prices paid to these growers increasing by just 25%. Compare that to the price of tea on UK shelves, which has risen by a measly 3.8% over the last 3 years. In its new report, RealiTEA, Cafédirect reveals that in order to offer tea at the low prices seen on UK supermarket shelves, compromises have to be made. These compromises usually come at the expense of the farmers at the beginning of the supply chain and directly impact on the quality of tea that ends up in the cup. For an industry worth £629M in the UK, this is shocking. In contrast, for every box of Cafedirect Hand-Picked Tea sold, 22.5% goes directly back to the smallholder tea cooperatives. Alarmed by the situation facing their smallholder tea partners, and the future of a good cup of tea, Cafédirect conducted a series of in-depth interviews with tea growers from Uganda, Kenya and Tanzania. Their responses showed that the traditional, artisan skill of hand-plucking the tender top two leaves and a bud (widely considered the only part of the plant suitable for making tea) is being fast replaced by far less accurate machine-cutting. Machine cutting is the standard for mass market, low-grade tea, which results in twigs and the tougher lower leaves in tea bags. Until now expert smallholder growers have rejected these mechanical changes, not just because of the effect on quality, but also to protect the long-term health of the bushes and reduce the environmental impact. However, continual pressure on price is forcing farmers to make the choice between quality and survival. The tea farmers also highlighted spikes in production costs, such as the price of oil, which increases both transport and fertiliser prices. Living costs have rocketed with the worldwide cost of food increasing by over 137% in the last five years. This in turn drives up labour costs, such as bringing in extra help during at harvest season. Oxfam’s recent report on tea workers’ wages highlighted the chronic underpayment on plantations, demonstrating that it’s not just smallholders who are suffering at the hands of monopolies. UK tea drinkers have, for the most part, been shielded from the truth. As 54% of the tea category is sold on promotion it is easy to see how tea is perceived as a ‘cheap’ commodity, which in turn undermines its value. Wilson Tugei, Chairman of the 100% member-owned Siret cooperative in Kenya, describes the extent of the impact to the smallholder growers, “The farmers often have to make compromises elsewhere. When prices are low or crops fail, farmers will have to sell their food stocks, fell trees to burn or sell for charcoal or they might resort to lease out their tea farms – often at a very low price.” He continues: “They will make sacrifices in their personal lives too. It may be that they cannot afford to pay school fees for their children. Or that they might have to change their diet to save money, thereby compromising their health. Some are forced to financially overburden themselves by securing overdrafts and loans to meet their daily needs”. “The global tea industry is in crisis,” explains John Steel, CEO at Cafédirect. “Tea has long been considered a cheap commodity in the UK, a telling sign of a lingering colonial mindset that distances consumers from the real value of tea, with many large companies exploiting local resources whilst reaping huge profits for themselves. Our demand for cheap goods is twisting and buckling the supply chain and we can’t just sit in a bubble and ignore it because it’s not on our doorstep.” He continues, “Look at the horsemeat scandal and the horrifying clothing factory collapse in Bangladesh. Businesses are driving down the cost of goods to meet consumer expectation of low prices, rather than meeting their demand for quality and value. It is a downward spiral, stripping out moral and ethical standards and undermining quality. Ultimately we all lose out.” According to the Fairtrade Foundation, 85% of tea production is controlled by seven multinational companies through their factories and estates. Which poses the question of where the profits end up. When it comes to tea, the ethic of ‘buying local’ is best translated to buying from smallholders. Harriet Muhebwa Katiti, Chairwoman at Igara Tea Factory in Uganda explains, “If you buy direct from smallholders then you know the money is going back into the local economy. If you buy from a multinational then money will be taken out of the country and spent in other places.” To show their support for smallholder tea growers, Cafédirect is asking British tea drinkers to make a pledge to ‘think before they drink’. The pledge celebrates the people behind our food and urges tea drinkers to stand up for a better brew. The pledges collected will be shared with the tea industry to shape a future that is better for the farmer and ultimately delivers a much tastier brew for the tea loving public. Pledge now at www.drinkbettertea.co.uk. The cost of producing tea It was acknowledged by all the tea partners that the costs of production have increased substantially. This financial burden does not transfer up the supply chain, so is rarely born by the tea brands, or tea consumers, but by the farmers themselves because they hold the least power in the whole process. The production costs for tea include: the purchase of land and its preparation, buying seedlings, labour for planting and plucking, fertilizer (the cost of which has increased by up to 100% in five years), weeding, pest control and transportation to processing units. These costs are not controlled by the farmers, but impacted by commodity rises in other sectors, such as oil. Robert Ejiku, Group Manager at the Igara Tea Factory in Uganda, confirms, “The price of tea we receive has not gone up in line with these input costs. We need to align tea prices or smallholders risk losing their livelihoods.” Jill Pinda Birungi, Tea Farmer and Board Member at Mpanga in Uganda, shared a story of how these rising costs affect the farmers on a day to day basis: “One time in Mpanga we went two years running with no fertiliser because Mpanga couldn’t afford it.” Adolf Sabiiti, General Manager continues, “Production was very low. We were producing at a capacity of around 40%. We went to our friend, Shared Interest, they gave us a loan of 150,000 US Dollars. We purchased fertiliser, we gave it to the farmers at a subsidised price. Then from that, we saw magic. We were producing at around 40%, we started producing at around 100%.” Once the tea is matured, the single greatest cost is plucking. Labour costs in Uganda have risen from 2,000 to 4,500 Ushillings (per hr) in recent years, a rise of 225%. By contrast, the cost of tea to consumers has remained relatively stable during this time. In addition, improving education and higher aspirations have led to high urban migration and the knock on effect of a labour shortage and exodus from growing tea. Kenneth Kyamulesire, Factory Unit Maganer at Mbale in Uganda, explains, “Increased running costs force farmers to abandon tea growing and move into other crops. Issues with aging growers as youths seek other forms of employment is a problem as tea plucking is strenuous, early morning work and older people cannot do it, so they have to let their valuable land become overgrown, harming the long term productivity of the bushes.” Cafédirect’s role Cafédirect buys tea exclusively from smallholders as a direct transaction, excluding middlemen traders. Not only does this offer a direct dialogue and the ability for smallholder partners to negotiate, but it builds a partnership that results in the growers receiving a far greater proportion of profit. Calculations show that for every box of Cafedirect Hand-Picked Tea (80 tea bags) sold, 22.5% goes directly back to the smallholder tea cooperatives. In addition to this Cafédirect also reinvests a proportion of its profits back into projects at origin, equating to more than 50% of their profits to date. John Steel, CEO of Cafédirect, offers further detail on this support programme, “Recent projects have included kitchen garden schemes and bee keeping training to produce honey both to eat and to sell at the local market. Projects like this are vital for smallholders, who are unable to survive on tea sales alone and are unable to predict their income from one year to the next. Traditional tea traders are fair-weather friends and offer no long-term commitment and when climate change threatens crops. That’s why a long-term, direct relationship and support to face these global challenges are essential for survival.” Cafédirect’s direct trading model also has a positive influence on the quality of tea. Robert Ejiku, from Igara Tea Factory in Uganda, explains: “Of all our Fairtrade buyers, Cafédirect has been paying us the market price, then an additional premium, but more than that they have also been paying an incentive for farmers to produce very good quality tea.” UK consumers’ product choices can help smallholder farmers all over the world. By pledging to ‘think before they drink’ and appreciate the value inherent in traceable and personal supply chains that deal directly with the farmer. The value of smallholder production In line with many globalized products, tea growing has been affected by the drive to increase production and mechanize processes to deliver more to the market faster and cheaper. In contrast, smallholders need to rely on quality over quantity to maximize the revenue from their small plot of land. Robert Ejiku, from Igara Tea Factory in Uganda, explains the difference in quality: “Smallholder-grown tea is better than tea you get from a plantation for various reasons. It is likely to be a family business and they have to do hand picking that guarantees you the quality of the product you get; that’s what smallholders are known for all over this world.” The Fairtrade Foundation reports that seven companies control 85% of tea production through their factories and estates Local smallholder cooperatives have been increasingly squeezed as they attempt to compete with large tea plantations, often owned by multinational corporations dealing with multiple commodities and located across the globe, thereby decreasing their exposure to volatile prices in any one commodity. To further highlight the imbalance within the industry, the UK retail tea market is worth £629M. The value of a direct supply chain The issue of transparency in supply chains is an important one in tea. Smallholders may end up supplying tea to multinationals but, through various layers and changing of hands, they rarely have the ability to negotiate fair terms. These short-term relationships also reduce the ability for smallholders to effectively plan for the long term. Reducing unnecessary links in the supply chain by trading directly with smallholder farmers is beneficial for both the growers and the industry. It results in a positive impact on growers, their communities and local economies, and ultimately the consumer with better quality tea reaching the market place. Full Disclosure Statement: The GREEN (LIVING) REVIEW received no compensation for any component of this article. This article is for your information only and the GREEN (LIVING) REVIEW does not (necessarily) approve, endorse or recommend the product, service or company mentioned. Newer Post | 农业 |
2017-04/0035/en_head.json.gz/17122 | Richard Brock [2] | Sep 26, 2005
Rita Misses Most Gulf Ports Most Gulf ports escaped significant damage from Hurricane Rita, which means that further disruptions to U.S. grain exports should be limited. Preliminary projections were that most, if not all, would be able to resume full operations shortly after personnel are allowed to return to the region following the mandatory evacuation order issued for several areas prior to Rita’s approach, The National Grain and Feed Association said on Saturday. The Port of Houston Authority, which was closed due to Hurricane Rita, was reopened for employees on Monday, but said it would not receive commercial vessels or barges until the U.S. Coast Guard reopened the Houston Ship Channel. The Port Authority on Sunday said the commercial trucks would be able to transport cargo in or out of the facilities starting on Tuesday. Reports indicate that the 10 export grain elevators in the New Orleans region received heavy rains, but sustained no physical or structural damage, the NGFA said. Crops and livestock in the Gulf region also fared better than expected as Rita and its heavy rains moved quickly north as a tropical depression instead of stalling over the South for days and dumping in excess of 25 in. of rain as the U.S. National Hurricane Center had predicted. Rita did bring rainfall amounts ranging from 1-6 in. to the Mississippi Delta region, which could harm the quality of unharvested cotton there. But in Louisiana, the heaviest rains fell away from the main cotton growing areas. The storm’s fast move north brought harvest delaying rains to southern parts of the Corn Belt on Sunday. Rita’s impact on energy prices should also be limited as the petrochemical industry along the Gulf Coast received only a glancing blow, with just one major plant suffering significant damage. The 255,000-barrel-per-day Valero Energy Corp. plant in Port Arthur appeared to be the most heavily damaged. The company said on Saturday said it could take two weeks to a month to restart that plant. Editors note: Richard Brock, The Corn and Soybean Digest's Marketing Editor, is president of Brock Associates, a farm market advisory firm, and publisher of The Brock Report. To see more market perspectives, visit Brock's Web site at www.brockreport.com [3]. Source URL: http://www.cornandsoybeandigest.com/market-news-5 | 农业 |
2017-04/0035/en_head.json.gz/17325 | « Erosion-resistant nanocoating for turbine blades saves fuel, lowers costs |
| 2013 Range Rover sees 926-lb weight reduction »
Print this post BP Biofuels, Texas AgriLife Research partner to advance cellulosic biofuel feedstock development
BP Biofuels and Texas AgriLife Research, part of The Texas A&M University System, have signed a three-year agreement to develop and commercialize cellulosic feedstocks for the production of advanced biofuels. The collaboration will utilize AgriLife Research’s diverse high biomass energy crop breeding program and BP Biofuels’ position as one of the few global energy companies growing commercial-scale biomass crops for liquid fuels.
The research and development project has two integrated components: plant breeding and production agronomics:
Plant breeding efforts will be focused on developing new varieties of pearl-millet napiergrass, kinggrass, energy cane and miscane suitable for cellulosic biofuel feedstock production along the US Gulf Coast.
To expedite the selection of commercially robust feedstocks, elite progeny from the plant breeding program will be advanced for demonstration-scale production at a research farm in Texas. The integration of plant breeding and production agronomics will enable BP Biofuels and AgriLife Research to develop elite genetics and production guidelines for future growers.
Developing new varieties of energy grass is essential to commercializing a cellulosic biofuels industry that will enhance domestic energy security, create jobs for Americans and improve rural economies. Working with Texas AgriLife Research is an important step in the process of bringing clean transport fuels to scale and to market.—Tom Campbell, technology vice president at BP Biofuels
This new relationship between BP Biofuels and AgriLife Research emphasizes both entities’ commitment to make biofuels commercially competitive with more traditional fuels. Through this agreement, AgriLife Research will continue to fulfill its research mission to strengthen agriculture’s position for global renewable energy and it will allow BP Biofuels to further pioneer the cellulosic biofuels market, officials said.
Texas AgriLife Research—the state’s premier research agency in agriculture, natural resources, and the life sciences—is headquartered at Texas A&M University in College Station, but serves the entire state through its on-campus units and regional centers. It consists of its College Station headquarters, 13 research centers reaching from El Paso to Beaumont and Amarillo to Weslaco, and associated research stations. In 2005, BP made a commitment to spend $8 billion over 10 years on alternative energy. BP Alternative Energy is investing at a faster pace than this and has invested approximately $7 billion, with over $4 billion invested in the US. BP Alternative Energy has a focused biofuels strategy: the production of ethanol from sugarcane in Brazil, developing advanced fuel molecules including biobutanol, and commercializing cellulosic biofuels technology. Its cellulosic biofuels technology will use lignocellulosic biomass from dedicated energy grasses to produce advanced biofuels.
August 15, 2012 in Biomass, Cellulosic ethanol, Fuels | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c4fbe53ef016769480583970b
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference BP Biofuels, Texas AgriLife Research partner to advance cellulosic biofuel feedstock development: | 农业 |
2017-04/0035/en_head.json.gz/17506 | Market Watch: Country Fresh Herbs sprouts up
At the farmers market David Karp Brandon Dimperio of Inner Gardens and Tea Trunk sells these potted herbs, as well as nursery stock, which he grows in Topanga Canyon, at the Silver Lake farmers market. Brandon Dimperio of Inner Gardens and Tea Trunk sells these potted herbs, as well as nursery stock, which he grows in Topanga Canyon, at the Silver Lake farmers market. (David Karp) David Karp, Special to the Los Angeles Times
A relative newcomer to farmers markets, Country Fresh Herbs offers a gorgeous display of heirloom tomatoes, salad greens, specialty peppers, lemon cucumbers and Romanesco zucchini. But even more intriguing is the story of the family that brings this produce to market.A recent morning started stressfully for co-owner Michael Feig at his farm in Somis, with a worker involved in a car accident and a busted gasket in a backflow valve, which threatened to shut off the irrigation to his 13 acres of tomatoes, vegetables and herbs. But while others might have fritzed out, he dealt with the problems with an equanimity born of decades of twists and turns, as he segued from chef to farmer, selling first to restaurants and now also to farmers markets.
Feig, born 57 years ago near Worcester, Mass., still has a Northeastern accent and wears a Red Sox baseball cap. He knew as a youngster that he was going to be doing something with my hands, he said, and after serving in the Air Force he trained as a chef at Johnson and Wales University in Providence, R.I. He moved to Los Angeles and worked as executive sous-chef at Ma Maison in the '80s, where he enjoyed the license to be creative. But when his son Garrett was born in 1985, he "wanted to be able to coach his baseball team," something the grueling schedule of a chef's life wouldn't allow.At the time fresh, high-quality herbs were rare. Inspired by a supplier, Feig and his wife, Kathy, started growing herbs such as rosemary, mint, basil and chives in their backyard, and sold them to restaurants; they also did catering. As the demands for product outgrew their garden, Feig leased 3 acres in Tarzana from the Department of Water and Power, under the utility lines.
As his business expanded further, Feig and a partner also leased land in Somis, where the moderate coastal climate is better suited to year-round production, and planted arugula, spinach, squash, eggplant, cucumbers and melons. They leased a warehouse in Tarzana and a small facility for growing micro-greens in Oxnard.The Feigs bought out their partner four years ago, just before the economy soured, and the restaurant supply business became increasingly competitive and difficult. "The restaurants are going under, and they don't pay their bills," he said. "You take a couple $7,000, $8,000 hits, that's a beating for a guy like me."Looking around for another avenue for sales, the Feigs started going to farmers markets, with the aid of Garrett, who had a business marketing degree but no job. The markets are a small but increasing portion of their sales, and they sell at Moorpark (Fridays), La Cañada Flintridge and Glendale Gigi (Saturdays), Brentwood and Westlake Village (Sundays) and Sherman Oaks (Tuesdays).More recently they have sold their produce to a small community-supported agriculture program run by Napa Valley Grille in Westwood and have experimented with organic growing practices, with the hope of making a full transition eventually.In another attempt to find a more profitable niche, the Feigs leased two half-acre greenhouses in Somis to grow off-season tomatoes: heirloom (such as Cherokee Purple, Brandywine and Striped German), cherry and beefsteak varieties, and San Marzano plum tomatoes, unsurpassed for making sauce. It hasn't been easy — the humidity is higher in a greenhouse than in the field, and so the plants are more susceptible to disease — but Feig has persevered, saying, "Failure is not an option."As he wound up a tour of his farm, Feig was relieved to learn that his worker was unhurt in the accident and that a repairman for the backflow valve was on the way."It's exhausting. I haven't had a day off since New Year's," he said. "But I really dig what I'm doing. It's just so damn rewarding when you see a crop, and you go, 'Oh, my God, I did it! I'm pumped!' "CandyCotsWe are so spoiled by the abundance of great produce at Southern California farmers markets that it is rare that supermarket fruits prove alluring. But such is the case with CandyCots apricots of Central Asian origin grown in the Modesto area, which will be available starting today at Whole Foods markets in Glendale and Venice.Relatively small and tawny, they don't look impressive, but if you bite into one, your jaw will drop. The flesh is deep orange, and its texture is dense and meaty, with none of the mealyness that so often ruins other apricots. They are outrageously sweet — a recent batch averaged 29 degrees Brix, a standard measure of sugar, compared to 21 degrees for premium dry-farmed Blenheims — and they have enough refreshing acidity for well-balanced flavor. Put that together with intense, complex, very pleasant aromatics, and you've got a powerhouse fruit, unique and irresistible.When I first wrote about CandyCots several years ago, a well-known retailer in New York berated me because he was certain that a fruit that tasted so good had to be genetically modified. He refused to believe it, but in fact CandyCots are natural, highly superior apricots derived from seeds legally imported from Central Asia by John Driver, a farmer in Waterford, Calif.Driver spent more than a decade testing and selecting seedling varieties to find those that offered the best combination of fruit quality and adaptation to California conditions; then, in conjunction with several partners, he planted commercial orchards. There are 100 acres in the ground, of which 12 are bearing now, says Chris Britton, a partner. "CandyCot" is a trademarked name for Driver's varieties, including Anya, small and very intense, and Yuliya, which is larger and almost as good.The challenges for growers and marketers are considerable. In addition to their small size (about half that of commercial varieties), which makes them more expensive to pick and pack, CandyCots tend to develop scuff marks, cosmetic blemishes that appear unattractive to the uninitiated. But these scuffed fruits are actually the tastiest of all, like nectarines with sugar spots.Driver and his sons will sell CandyCots for the next two or three weeks at the San Francisco Ferry Plaza farmers market. After their debut at the Whole Foods stores in Glendale and Venice this weekend ($5.99 for a 1-pound container), CandyCots will be available at other stores in the chain next week and at Grow, a high-end produce store in Manhattan Beach. They also are going out to a few restaurants, including Mélisse, Providence and the Bazaar, although it's hard to imagine how pastry chef wizardry could improve on the natural product.
[email protected]
Herbs, berries and more
Market Watch: The latest farmers market news by David Karp
Map: Explore your local farmers markets | 农业 |
2017-04/0035/en_head.json.gz/18654 | What Wondrous Life
the World of George Husmann
An Interpretive Exhibit
Elizabeth Rozier Gallery
Union Hotel
Jefferson Landing
(1 Jefferson Street)
Jefferson City, Missouri
George Husmann, the "Father of the Missouri Grape Industry," immigrated
with his family to Hermann, Missouri in 1838 and with only the education
he received in his home village in Germany and in the Hermann Colony became
a renowned scientist, educator and writer.
The 16-panel exhibit features historic photographs from the Husmann
family collection, the private collection of Husmann biographer Linda Walker
Stevens, private collections in Missouri, the collections of the State
Historical Society of Missouri, Columbia, and the University of Missouri
Western Historical Manuscripts Collection in Columbia. Artifacts relating
to grape and wine culture in Missouri complement the photographic exhibit.
A.E. Schroeder, Professor Emeritus of German Studies at the University
of Missouri-Columbia, introduced an opening program at the Elizabeth Rozier
Gallery in Jefferson City on Sunday, June 9, 2002, at 2 pm. Speakers included
Linda Stevens, James Anderson of the Missouri Department of Agriculture
Grape and Wine Program, and photographer Oliver Schuchard, who produced
the photographs in the exhibit from the original prints. The exhibit travelled
to the Missouri State Fair and the Napa Valley Museum in California. The
State Historical Society of Missouri currently maintains it (through June
27, 2003), and it will move to the Gasconade Historical Society in October
The exhibit was sponsored by the Missouri Humanities Council in cooperation
with the National Endowment for the Humanities, and the State of Missouri
in cooperation with the Missouri Department of Natural Resources Division
of State Parks Interpretation Program, and the Missouri State Museum. It
will become part of the Missouri State Museum's Travelling Exhibits Program.
For further information, contact Molly O'Donnell, Director, Missouri
State Museum, Room B-2 Capitol Building, Jefferson City, MO 65101.
Click here to visit
the George Husmann Pavilion at Oak Glenn Winery, Hermann
Biographical note:
(from a brochure produced by the Misosuri Department of Natural
Resources, Division of State Parks interpretation Program and the Missouri
State Museum; project directors A.E. Schroeder and Linda Walker Stevens)
George Husmann was born on November 4, 1827 in Meyenburg, a village
near the North Sea in the Kingdom of Hanover. In 1837 he immigrated with
his family to the United States, first to Pennsylvania, where relatives
had settled, and then to Missouri. While still in Germany, Husmann's father,
Martin, a teacher, had bought shares in the German Settlement Society of
Philadelphia, which had been established in 1836 to found a colony in the
"Far West" where German immigrants could preserve their language, traditions
and values. Widely publicized throughout Germany and North America, the
colony, named Hermann, drew many educated immigrants as well as gifted
artisans, farmers and tradespeople.
Martin Husmann, with other early settlers, began to experiment
with grape culture in Hermann Colony, and in 1847 George Husmann planted
his first vinyard on his father's farm. With only the education he received
in Meyenburg and Hermann, Husmann was to become a renowned scientist, writer
and educator, known today as the "Father of the Missouri Grape Industry."
After a trip to California during the Gold Rush, Husmann returned to
Hermann to take care of his widowed sister's property and soon developed
a model fruit farm. He served with the Union during the Civil War and,
as a delegate to the State Constitutional Convention in January 1865, drafted
"An Ordinance Abolishing Slavery in Missouri," the first to be enacted
In 1866 he published his first book, The Cultivation of Native Grapes
and Manufacture of American Wine, and in 1869 he established The
American Grape Grower, the only journal on the subject in the United
States at that time.
In 1870 he was appointed to the University of Missouri Board of Curators
and continued to work with grape growers in the state. During the 1870s
Husmann and others shipped millions of grape cuttings to France, Germany
and other countries devastated by the deadly phylloxera infestation*.
Today two monuments still stand in Montpelier France, honoring Husmann
and other Missouri grape growers credited with "saving the French wine
industry."
In 1879 Hsmann was appointed first Professor of Pomology and Superintendent
of Forestry at the University of Missouri, where he established a nursery,
orchards, and vinyards where his son and two daughters studied agriculture
and horticulture. In 1881 he accepted a position in California and contributed
significantly to the development of the state's grape and wine industry.
Husmann died November 5, 1902, the day after his 75th birthday. This
exhibit celebrates his life and achievement.
*"Starting in the 1860s, French vineyards were devastated by vine
diseases that were probably accidentally imported from America. One of
these was phylloxera, a tiny insect which, in one stage of its development,
lives in the soil and destroys the vine roots. The Old World vines had
no resistance at all. Wine production dropped 75 percent, a catastrophe.
George Husmann, then Professor of Agriculture at the University of Missouri,
suggested that they graft their vines onto Missouri vines. The wild Missouri
vines were totally resistant to phylloxera. It worked. In the late 1880s
Missouri exported ten million root stocks and literally saved the French
vineyards. Husmann was given the Legion of Honor by the French government.
Then, a few amateur viticulturists in France and Germany decided that grafting
might not be necessary if they could cross their vines with ours and get
what they called 'direct producers'." "In the early 1930s some of the resulting
vines were imported. It was discovered that their American blood had given
them the winter hardiness needed for eastern and Midwestern winters. So
now, in Missouri, a region that has the summer climate and soils equal
to the best wine-growing regions in Europe, we now have the vines for good
wines. After nearly 100 years the French have unwittingly repaid us."
--Elbert Pirtle, Pirtle Wineries, Hermann
The directors gratefully acknowledge support from:
the Consulate General of the Federal Republic of Germany, Chicago;
the Department of German and Russian Studies, University of Missouri-Columbia;
German American Heritage Society of St. Louis;
Max Kade Foundation, Inc., New York,
and the MU Alumni Association
With special thanks to:
James Anderson. Grape and Wine Program, Missouri Department of Agriculture;
Jennifer Arnold, Department of German and Russian Studies;
Terry Loehnig, Hermann;
Chris Montgomery, Stae Historical Society of Missouri, Columbia;
Claudia Powell, Western Historical Manuscripts Collection, University
of Missouri-Columbia,
and Kathy Williams, Missouri State Museum.
Back to the Missouri Folklore Society | 农业 |
2017-04/0035/en_head.json.gz/19150 | EN FR Home The CNR Model Sustainable agriculture and biodiversity Preserving biodiversity CNR model
Great attention is given to the fauna and flora of the Rhone in the management of the 27,000 ha of land belonging to CNR’s concession. CNR participates in preserving its biodiversity. Dynamic partnerships for biodiversity and wetlandsAlong with the government, the Rhone-Mediterranean and Corsica Water Agency and the National Water and Wetlands Agency (ONEMA), CNR has signed a second framework agreement for the period 2014-2018. The aim is to make the Rhone a living river with vigorous natural functions, by restoring the ecology of the Rhone’s natural river bed and ensuring the return of migrating fish.In its capacity of funding body, CNR, which also either supervises the operations or provides expert technical advice, is an essential partner in this active approach taken by the partners. By virtue of its Missions in the General Interest, CNR is investing €47 M from now to 2018 to preserve the biodiversity of the Rhone and contribute to the balanced management of water resources.Contribution to the Green and Blue CorridorCNR and its partners act within the framework of the Government-Region Projects of the Rhone Plan and the Green and Blue Corridor of the Grenelle 2 law: this entails creating a coherent ecological corridor in the territory to ensure the living conditions of the animal and plant species present and to combat climate change.Restoration of fish migration routesCNR is restoring the migration route of diadromous migratory fishes (shad, lamprey, eel, etc.) which live in the sea and breed in fresh water (or vice-versa for the eel). It builds fish passes on some of its infrastructures to recreate the continuity of migration routes. Furthermore, it adapts the management of its locks of Beaucaire, Avignon and Caderousse by installing specific lock operations for fishes.Restoration of the natural environment of the RhoneAnother target of CNR’s actions are oxbows. These secondary branches of the Rhone accommodate great biological wealth and allow species to breed, grow and shelter. It therefore carries out earthworks to fill these former branches with water by removing sediment and sometimes dismantling old structures (groynes and spur dikes built at the end of the 19th century). These operations are completed by revegetation works.
Dragonfly, beaver, otter, and more: a wealth of biodiversity to be preservedActions in favour of preserving biodiversity associated with balanced land management, contribute to the presence of many species along the Rhone such as beavers, otters, dragonflies, and bats. It is precisely to preserve this rich natural heritage that CNR participates in implementing actions in partnership with the Rhone-Alps Nature Protection Federation (Frapna) and the Bird Protection league (LPO).A new fish pass at Sauveterre (Gard)The works performed on the plant and dam of Sauveterre consist of an itinerary composed of forty successive basins allowing the fish to climb the 10 m high dam. The species targeted in this case is the shad, a species that migrates over long distances and belongs to the herring family.Objectives of the 3rd MGI plan (2014-2018):€47 M invested by CNR for water resources and biodiversityRestauration of 20 oxbowsConstruction de 4 fish passes Jean-Michel OlivierCNRS research engineer The CNRS has worked with CNR for more than thirty years. We discuss the goals, the working methods, the presentation of results, how they are used, and we share our data, assets and competences. The quality and scale of our partnership makes our programme for the hydraulic and ecological restoration of the Rhone exceptional and there’s nothing else like it elsewhere in the world.On the same subjectMissions in the General Interest: water resources and biodiversity See more Join us | 农业 |
2017-04/0035/en_head.json.gz/19365 | Playing politics or helping the range?
Tony Davis
Range Improvement Task Force coordinator John
Michael P. Berman
New Mexico's most political animal
Note: this article in one of several feature stories in a special issue about the West's land grant universities and their extension programs.
Back in 1978, ranchers around the West felt the first tremors of grazing reform. Under legal pressure from environmentalists, the U.S. Bureau of Land Management found much of its rangeland in bad condition and recommended cutting cattle numbers on many allotments. New Mexico ranchers wanted a second opinion. They turned to the state legislature, which created the Range Improvement Task Force at New Mexico State University in Las Cruces. The only one of its kind in the West, the six-member task force calls itself a group of "unbiased, professional, fact-finding advisors and educators." Almost from the start, the task force has been accused of being a front for the livestock industry. Whether that charge is true or not, the task force's history serves as a good lens through which to view the sticky process of change in the West's cooperative extension network. It's clear that the task force loathes cutting cattle numbers, and in high-profile cases it has usually sided with ranchers. But it has also disagreed with ranchers regularly on individual allotments and has occasionally opposed grazing in wilderness. Lee Otteni, a former Forest Service and State Land Office employee in New Mexico who currently works for BLM in Washington, D.C., is one of several agency officials who consider the task force fair: "They're trying to keep the industry there and still protect the ground," he says. But some task force members openly admit pro-industry leanings and connections, even as they strive for objectivity. The task force's first coordinator, Jerry Schickedanz, had his hand in the management of New Mexico's most controversial allotment, the Diamond Bar, a decade ago. He reviewed Forest Service data on the 227-square-mile allotment and concluded it could support 1,679 head of cattle - more than twice as many as the Forest Service now considers sustainable. Earlier, in the late 1970s, Schickedanz had blasted a BLM proposal to cut cattle numbers to ease a severe erosion problem on the Rio Puerco near Albuquerque. BLM officials said the Puerco was responsible for half the sediment that flowed down the Rio Grande, even though it contributed only 8 percent of the river's water. The BLM pointed the finger at the 250,000 sheep that had grazed the area late in the last century. It planned to reduce current cattle numbers to give the land a rest. Schickedanz joined another task force member, economist James Gray, and two other NMSU professors to testify against the cuts. They argued the reduction would devastate the ranchers' livelihoods, that the ranchers knew more about the land than the BLM and that the erosion had natural geological causes. "I have a degree in zoology and wildlife, and I have a feel for wildlife needs, but I also have a feel for an individual who is trying to make a living on the land," said Schickedanz, who was raised on an Oklahoma ranch. "And I guess if I had a bias, it would be because of being raised on the land in looking after it and caring for it from a production standpoint ... as opposed to what some may term a preservation point of view." Current task force coordinator and agricultural economics professor John Fowler says he's an "advocate of ranching as a business' but also claims "we are always on the side of the resource. Most of the time we don't come out on either side." A perception of bias But a recent blow-up over the Diamond Bar had critics charging that the task force is far from resource-oriented. Just before the first of the year, a press release by task-force range scientist Chris Allison put an optimistic spin on conditions on part of the Diamond Bar allotment (HCN, 2/5/96). Arizona State University ecologist Bob Ohmart, a strong environmentalist, called the press release "one of the most horrible pieces of psuedoscience I've ever seen in my life" and wrote NMSU agriculture school dean John Owens that the task force should be privatized and stripped of state funding. Owens didn't return phone calls from High Country News seeking a response. "It really disturbs me to see employees with (the) university demeaning the credibility of that university," said Ohmart, a Ph.D. who holds bachelor's and master's degrees from New Mexico State. A pro-livestock industry economist at a land-grant college outside New Mexico echoed Ohmart's concerns: "The perception (of the task force's bias) is so widespread that it creates a problem, whether the perception is true or false," said the economist, who spoke on condition of anonymity. A hot subject Objectivity is hard to maintain in public-lands grazing anywhere in the West. In New Mexico, it's even harder. "I don't care how objective the task force is, it'd be tough for an organization to make much headway down there because so many ranchers down there are on the edge of survival," says Clint Peck, the editor of Western Beef Producer magazine in Billings, Mont., and a former livestock extension agent. Sid Goodloe, a rancher in Capitan, N.M., points out that historic grazing practices badly hurt the range well before the Range Improvement Task Force ever got there. Goodloe's particular bane is the encroachment of piûon-juniper forest onto rangeland, fostered by a century of fire suppression. "There's only a fraction of the herbage and forage for livestock and wildlife there was 100 years ago," he says. He has successfully used fire to beat back the impoverishing forest. And while he has considered the task force unflaggingly professional in the 18 years he's been involved, he'd like to see it be more aggressive when it comes to improving the range. "I've done everything I know how to do to get the task force and the university to promote prescribed burning," he says. "They finally did it last year. "The task force is an absolute necessity. But they've got to be more proactive. They've got to get out here and quit worrying so much about politics. I think they should help ranchers make money. They're part of the extension service, they're part of the land-grant university. Their job is to help people on their land." Longtime New Mexico resident Tony Davis now writes from Salem, Ore. Lisa Jones contributed to this story. | 农业 |
2017-04/0035/en_head.json.gz/20657 | Red Maxwell Meat: What's smart, what's right, what's next
Temple Grandin digs in on the practical side of what animals want
By Nathanael Johnson
on Jul 22, 2015 Share
Temple Grandin, an animal scientist who teaches at Colorado State University, works to improve animal welfare in farming. She is autistic, and, as she told Terry Gross, she thinks that may give her a special ability to do her work:
It was easy for me to figure out how animals think and how animals would react because I think visually. Animals don’t think in language. They think in pictures. It’s very easy for me to imagine what would it be like to go through a system if you really were a cow, not a person in a cow costume but really were a cow, and autistic senses and emotions are more like the senses of an animal.
My nervous system was hyper-vigilant. Any little thing out of place, like a water stain on the ceiling, would set off a panic reaction, and cattle are scared of the same thing. They’re scared of things like high-pitched noise, sudden clanging and banging, sudden movement, maybe even a little chain that hangs down in the chute and jiggles because it looks out of place, and things that are out of place can mean danger out in the wild.
I talked to Grandin for my recent piece on the morality of meat-eating, and the interview was so interesting I decided to publish the whole thing (edited and condensed for clarity). For those looking for something with citations, Grandin also writes about most of the things we discussed in this paper, and in her book, Improving Animal Welfare: A Practical Approach.
Q. Do you think that meat eating is OK, and ethical, within our existing system?
A. We’ve gotta give animals a life worth living. That’s what the Farm Animal Welfare Council in England said. Before I heard that, I said “a decent life,” but I like “a life worth living.”
Q. What about confined animal feeding operations (CAFOs); are they as [harmful to animals] …
A. That’s really a big blanket statement.
Q. Absolutely, let’s dig into it.
A. You can’t just say CAFO is this, everything else is this — that’s just painting with too broad a brush. Things aren’t that simple when you actually get out in the field and look at stuff. Compared to the bad old days, it’s drastically improved, and I mean drastically. And the handling at slaughter plants has drastically improved.
Q. So what are the qualities of a cattle finishing operation that give the animals a good life?
A. Keeping the pens dry and keeping cattle clean — that’s really important. When I first started out in cattle, we had lots of feedlots in Arizona, where it’s very dry. So the feedyards did not get muddy, and it provided a good environment.
Q. Why is it so important to keep them dry? From my uninformed perspective that seems like a relatively minor point.
A. It’s the single most important thing in feed yard design. You’ve got to do your dirt work. You’ve got to go in there with big equipment and spend the money to slope the land correctly for drainage. You just can’t do it right if you have puddles of water standing around. If cattle are standing in mud, they are more likely to go lame, and that’s a huge welfare issue.
This video explains America’s love affair with meat
With lab-grown meat, can we have our animals and eat them too?
Meat is never simple when it’s the family business
And then, of course, how you handle cattle, that’s the bright spot — that’s something that has really improved. People have seen the value in using low-stress methods of handling. Stunning and handling at the slaughter plant is greatly improved. I worked with McDonald’s in 1999 and 2000, and back then it was terrible — broken stunning equipment, yelling and screaming and hitting cattle, poking them repeatedly with electric prods. Now, things are not perfect; but they are much, much better than they were in the bad old days.
Q. Are there elements that I might see if I go to a good finishing operation that I might find repellent that are not repellent for a steer?
A. Well, of course, if there are a lot of cattle in one place, they are going to smell. That’s one of the things that really bothers a lot of people. And I’ve had a lot of people tell me that.
Q. Does that bother the animals?
A. I don’t think so. You’ve got to control dust. You’ve got to control mud.
Q. What about feed? I hear people saying that feeding cattle grain isn’t good for them.
A. Well, feeding cattle grain is sorta like a diet of cake and cookies. And cattle love to eat sweet yummy cake and cookies. Obviously a mama cow out on a ranch can’t eat that — because you aren’t going to be healthy eating cake and cookies all your life. But then, for a steer in a feedlot, the whole thing is that you slaughter them before it hurts them. They love to eat it. They come running when the feed truck comes. Of course, beef is the least confined compared to egg-layers or pigs.
Q. Right, so maybe we should talk about that. Take chickens first.
A. Remember there are two types of chickens that live in very different conditions. There’s the meat chicken, or broiler, and they live in sheds just walking around on the ground, and then you have egg-layers. And that’s where the real housing controversy is. There are things the egg-layers need to get changed — the standard battery cages where the ceiling is so low the bird can’t stand at normal walking height.
There’s a new kind of cage design — furnished cage, enriched housing, colony housing — they’re all the same thing. The birds can walk at full height. They have a very strong urge to lay their eggs in a secluded spot, so the cage has a little nest box, a perch, and a place for them to scratch. For a large-scale commercial operation that’s probably a good alternative. Now if you raise them in loose housing without cages, you do have problems with dust — it’s hard to keep the atmosphere good. There are tradeoffs on the different systems. I think the colony house is the way to go.
Q. So are big operations with enriched cages good?
A. Well, I have a new thing: Big is fragile. The recent avian flu killed 80 percent of the hens that lay for the liquid egg market. Half of all eggs go into baked and processed foods — it’s called liquid eggs. Big is very efficient; it’s not bad! It’s fragile. When you look at the consumer survey data, local is something people really want. And you know, I think deep down inside, that’s a primitive instinct about food security. What happens if the Walmart truck stops coming? You look at the port strikes on the West Coast: You had refrigerated containers rotting on the docks. Meat supply chains are very fragile.
Q. I think of cars as an analogy — we have cars now that are much faster and much more efficient than the Model T, but when they crash it’s a much bigger deal.
A. Big is definitely efficient. When it works it’s great! But it’s also bad, because it’s a much bigger mess when it crashes.
Q. Getting back to egg-layers — I look at this with my human values and say I’d like the hens to be exposed to sunlight, and grass …
A. Well, then it’s much more expensive. And we’ve got 25 percent of people in this country working minimum wage jobs and they gotta buy the cheapest eggs they can lay their hands on. I think eggs are a necessity — beef you could say is a luxury, but not eggs.
Q. From the hen’s point of view — of course we can’t totally know — but how important do you think it is to be outside?
A. Well I think there are certain behavioral needs we should satisfy, and you can actually, scientifically, look at what things a hen wants the most. There are objective ways to measure her motivation to get something she wants — like a private nest box. How long is she willing to not eat to get it, or how heavy a door will she push to get it? How many times will she push a switch to get it?
A private nest box is something she wants, because in the wild she has an instinct to hide in the bushes so that a fox doesn’t get [her eggs]. Give her some pieces of plastic to hang down that she can hide behind. Give her a little piece of astroturf to lay [her eggs] on. Give her a perch, and a piece of plastic to scratch on, and at least enough cage height so she can walk normally. I’m gonna call that apartment living for chickens. Do they need natural elements? Being outside? Science can’t answer that. I mean, there are people in New York that hardly go outside.
Q. But can’t you use those same objective measurement techniques to see how badly the hens want to go outside and scratch for bugs?
A. Well you can, and the motivation is pretty weak compared to something like the nest box, which is hard wired. Take dust bathing — for a hen dust bathing is nice to do, but it’s kind of like, ‘Yes, it’s nice to have a fancy hotel room, but the EconoLodge will do too.’ Motivation isn’t as great.
Q. If we move over to pigs, now the controversy is about gestation crates.
A. Well, on gestation crates, the science shows that they do just fine. That’s what the science shows. But that’s a degree of confinement that two-thirds of the public find unacceptable. People say things like, ‘I wouldn’t put my dog in that.’ That’s something that probably needs to get changed. Does that mean the pig needs to go outside? Probably not.
Another thing is that all the research that’s been done on gestation crates was done on young gilts [female pigs that haven’t had babies yet] on their first litter, and they actually can sit in the stalls [because they are small]. Now you’ve got a lot of farms out there where the stalls are so tight that the sow can’t even lay on her side, and no research supports that.
Q. Another thing people get upset about is the separating of dairy calves from their mothers.
A. That’s been going on for as long as I’ve been around on every little family dairy that ever was. That’s not new. They did that on our 12-cow dairy when I was a student in high school.
Q. Obviously it’s nothing new, but is it OK?
A. I’m not going to say she doesn’t get upset, but a Holstein gets less upset than a beef cow does. An Angus cow will get a lot more upset. There are a lot of individual differences, but on average that’s true. What I’m more concerned about is that we’ve bred that Holstein so much for milk production. I have a term that I call biological system overload. When you push that animal too hard — either genetically or whatever — you start to have problems with its biology.
When you breed an animal just to be productive, productive, productive, there’s always a price. Nothing is free in this world. They were breeding some of the hardiness out. It takes energy to fight off disease, and it takes energy to make meat. I think we need to be looking at what optimizes production. There are places they are putting HEPA filters — you know, the things that bubble-boy would have — on the windows of pig barns. Well, I don’t know if that’s the way. Maybe we need to breed a more hardy pig.
Q. And there are issues with genetics and structural problems, right?
A. Oh yeah. Broiler chickens 10 years ago had really bad structural issues with their legs. They’ve actually corrected some of those problems, and now they have tree-trunks for legs. Pigs still have bad structural issues that started back in the late ’80s. If you’re just breeding for production traits, you don’t bother to look at the leg structure to make sure it won’t get lame.
Q. There was something I wanted to get at with you, because I’d seen animal activists talking about you on the internet, playing on the stereotype that autistic people are cold and unfeeling. But it’s clear when you write about animals that you have tremendous empathy and deep feeling for them. I was really struck by the passage in which you described working on an animal holding mechanism for a slaughterhouse, then crying all the way back to the airport.
[That passage: “To design a good restrainer system, you have to really care about the animals it will hold. You have to imagine what it would be like if you were the animal entering the restrainer. It is a sobering experience to be a caring person, yet to design a device to kill large numbers of animals. When I complete a project I am left with a feeling of great satisfaction, but I usually cry all the way to the airport.”]
A. I did cry all the way back to the airport, yes I did. Then I think of another project. I was up on a catwalk over a whole sea of cattle — this was in the summer of 1990 — and getting kind of upset about it. And then I thought, you know, none of those cattle would have been born if we hadn’t bred them — they would never have existed at all. But we’ve got to give them a decent life.
Also, with my kind of metabolism, being a vegan is just not going to work. I think there are genetic differences in the ability to tolerate a vegan diet, and I [don’t have them]. My mother is the same way — she’s got to have her sausage in the morning.
Q. And so when you look at just sort of the average of what we have for animal agriculture in the U.S., do these animals have a decent life as far as you are concerned?
A. It varies a lot. Some people do a better job than others. I think cattle, done right, have a decent life. There are some muddy feed yards that need to be worked on. I think another issue we’ve got to look at is shade. We are growing cattle bigger, we’ve got more black cattle, we’ve got to start shading these feed yards. Keeping cattle clean is really important. But cattle I’ve seen in dry feed yards, I think they have a decent life, yes.
Q. What are the biggest issues that need to be addressed?
A. Well, pigs and laying hens are the most controversial. If you look online, the worst activist video — where people are hitting cows and stuff — is dairy. Pitchforks in the milking parlor, beating cows, just bad stuff.
Q. And that may have something to do with labor, and the conditions those workers are living in.
A. There are some very good dairymen. One of the problems that the dairy industry got into was breeding these gigantic big cows that would last just two years milking. Some of the really progressive dairies now are starting to go to smaller cows that last three or four years milking, a much better cow. I visited a couple this spring. There are about a third of the dairies here in Colorado that are really, really progressive and really, really good. And there’s another percentage that are not, that will milk cows until they are half dead and then market them. There’s a certain segment of the dairy industry that’s just horrible. About 25 percent of all dairy cattle are lame, and lame cattle are in pain — that’s just not acceptable.
Q. Is that a genetic issue?
A. Partially, but also standing on concrete, foot diseases — there are a lot of different causes. Having these humongous cows tends to make it worse.
Q. So are there specific things that you’d like to see changed? Forget about what the activists want, forget about public opinion for a second, just from the perspective of what science suggests would be good for the animals …
A. People get into, “big is bad, small is good.” It’s not that simple. The key is management. Whether you are big or small, you’ve got to have good management. Another thing you cannot do is understaff and overwork. If you overwork people they are going to get so tired there’s no way they can do things right.
We’ve got to figure out sensible things to do. The thing that worries me on a lot of these issues is that we’ve got more and more people getting involved who have never done anything practical, because schools have taken out all the cooking, sewing, woodworking, and art. And in the real world of practical things, nothing can be perfect. You can work to make it better, but it won’t be perfect.
You have to pick out some specific thing to work on. I worked on improving slaughter plants — that’s a specific thing. You gotta pick out something specific if you want to make constructive change on the ground, not destructive change. We have this abstractification, with activists attacking things they don’t even know anything about. And ag has responded poorly. Ag gag laws: dumbest thing they could have ever done. That just makes you look guilty. Why are they passing laws to make it a crime to videotape something?
Q. This has been really fascinating. Any last words?
A. We have got to find reasonable, practical things to do. I’m worried about pushing animal biology too hard — either with genetics or with drugs or whatever — and I like to look at welfare on outcome-based measures. First of all, you gotta make sure your air quality is good, they aren’t lame, they don’t have sores on them, they are clean, and they get to act out their behavioral needs.
More stories in this series:
Americans eat nearly twice as much as the average Norwegian and roughly nine times as much as the average Ghanaian.
Not many scientists are trying to grow meat in the lab, but those who are think it could change the world.
From carnivore to vegetarian to carnivore: Here's the tale of a rancher's daughter.
Everything you always wanted to know about fish farming but were afraid to ask
Can farmed fish be green? Can farmed fish be cool? Answers to these -- and more! -- inside.
More in Meat: What’s smart, what’s right, what’s next | 农业 |
2017-04/0035/en_head.json.gz/20988 | Peanut Butter Inventor
February 10, 2012 by staff Peanut Butter Inventor, George Washington Carver (January 1864 – January 5, 1943), was an American scientist, botanist, educator, and inventor. The exact day and year of his birth are unknown; he is believed to have been born into slavery in Missouri in January 1864.
Carver’s reputation is based on his research into and promotion of alternative crops to cotton, such as peanuts, soybeans and sweet potatoes, which also aided nutrition for farm families. He wanted poor farmers to grow alternative crops both as a source of their own food and as a source of other products to improve their quality of life. The most popular of his 44 practical bulletins for farmers contained 105 food recipes using peanuts. He also developed and promoted about 100 products made from peanuts that were useful for the house and farm, including cosmetics, dyes, paints, plastics, gasoline, and nitroglycerin. He received numerous honors for his work, including the Spingarn Medal of the NAACP.
During the Reconstruction-era South, monoculture of cotton depleted the soil in many areas. In the early 20th century, the boll weevil destroyed much of the cotton crop, and planters and farm workers suffered. Carver’s work on peanuts was intended to provide an alternative crop.
He was recognized for his many achievements and talents. In 1941, Time magazine dubbed Carver a “Black Leonardo”, a reference to the Renaissance Italian polymath, Leonardo da Vinci.
Filed Under: World NewsTagged: george washington carver, george washington carver inventions, george washington carver peanut butter inventor, How to Grow the Peanut and 105 Ways of Preparing it for Human Consumption, inventor of peanut butter and jelly, inventor of peanut butter wikipedia, inventor of reese's peanut butter cups, jif peanut butter inventor, Missouri, peanut, peanut butter inventor, peanut butter inventor black man, peanut butter inventor george washington carver, peanut butter inventor invention, peanut butter inventors, royal society of arts, the peanut butter inventor, tuskegee university, united-states Comments | 农业 |
2017-04/0035/en_head.json.gz/21044 | Global Farmer Network
By: Global Farmer Network
The Global Farmer Network are farmers committed to inserting their voice and perspective in the global dialogue regarding food and nutritional security.
No TPA Means No TPP
By Dean Kleckner: Des Moines, Iowa
President Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney disagree over budgets, health care, and what to do about unrest in the Middle East. When they meet for their first presidential debate on October 3 in Denver, they’ll have a brand-new opportunity to highlight their many differences.
Wouldn’t it be nice if they spent at least a few moments finding common ground? Voters are tired of gridlock in Washington and it would hearten them to see these ideological rivals describe areas of agreement.
I would suggest they start with international trade, which both men claim they want to expand. Specifically, the candidates should say that no matter who takes the oath of office in January, the next president must have Trade Promotion Authority (TPA).
The United States simply can’t forge new free-trade agreements without it.
The idea behind TPA is simple: It lets the president’s team negotiate with other countries, find progressive consensus and make a deal, and then submit the proposed pacts to Congress for up-or-down votes. TPA is a practical tool that allows our trade diplomats to pry open new markets for American-made goods and services, helping everyone from farmers and manufacturers to insurance agents and Hollywood moviemakers. The up-or-down vote is essential because it respects the authority of Congress to weigh in on pending agreements but also prevents individual legislators from trying to reopen trade talks after they’ve been completed. (They’ll say to "make improvements".)
In other words, it gives the president and his administration the genuine authority to negotiate.
Think of it this way: When you want to purchase a car, you visit an auto dealership and search for a sales representative. (Actually, the sales reps always seem to find you. That’s just how those guys are.)
Would you bother to negotiate with a sales rep that lacks the authority to sell vehicles? Or one who wants to continue bargaining even after you’ve come to terms and shaken hands? Of course not. It would waste your time.
That’s how other countries view TPA. If our president doesn’t have it, they won’t walk through the equivalent of America’s dealership door.
Last year, President Obama finally sent and Congress approved trade accords with Colombia, Panama, and South Korea. We’re just starting to see the economic benefits. Yet these agreements were negotiated when George W. Bush was president, back when TPA was still in force. It expired in 2007, which means that President Obama hasn’t had this important tool for his entire term in office. Right now, he is the only president not to have enjoyed TPA for at least a portion of his presidency since Lyndon Baines Johnson--and LBJ didn’t have it because TPA had not yet been invented.
So it’s no coincidence that the current administration has yet to negotiate a single tariff-reducing trade pact.
President Obama means well--and he likes to talk up the tremendous potential of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, an accord that would improve trade ties between the United States and several economic partners along the Pacific Rim. Without TPA, however, it won’t ever leave the drawing board. Here’s a motto to consider: No TPA, no TPP.
This alphabet-soup sloganeering may point to part of the problem. TPA just isn’t a great name for this device, though it’s arguably an improvement over "fast track negotiating authority," which was what everyone called it through the 1990s. Perhaps it needs rebranding once again. How about Free Trade Fair Vote?
Whatever the semantics, the next president should have TPA. Romney has called for it plainly. Obama hasn’t spoken as openly, though his administration has signaled that if the president is re-elected, he would like to have TPA in 2013.
So imagine the power of the moment, at the October 3 debate, if both candidates were to agree on the urgent need for TPA. Each man could promise that if defeated in November, he will try to sway the members of his party to support TPA for the victor.
The candidates will still disagree over many other details about how to create jobs and revive the economy--but in this gesture of magnanimity, they will have done the United States a great bipartisan service.
Dean Kleckner volunteers as Chairman Emeritus for Truth About Trade & Technology. www.truthabouttrade.org
Final Import Approval for Balance GT Soybeans
By Sonja Begemann | 农业 |
2017-04/0035/en_head.json.gz/21810 | PostsCommentsYou are here: Home / Agriculture / Meeting today to address Mississippi River navigation needsMeeting today to address Mississippi River navigation needs February 5, 2013 By Pat Curtis Mississippi River
Iowa’s governor and lieutenant governor will be among the participants in a panel discussion in Davenport today about Mississippi River trade infrastructure. The river is critical to agriculture interests as tons of corn and soybeans and other products are shipped around the world.
Gary Meden is Deputy Commander for Programs and Project Management with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Rock Island District. He says his agency receives roughly $50 million a year in federal funding and it’s not nearly enough to maintain the current state of locks and dams on the Upper Mississippi.
“About 65-percent of that is used to pay the people who operate the locks and dams, but in addition to that, we’ve got over $900 million of prioritized maintenance that we should be doing that we don’t have funding for,” Meden says. “In any one year, there’s probably about $100 million (in maintenance) that we could do on top of what we’re appropriated.”
Much of the infrastructure along the Upper Mississippi was built in the 1930s, according to Meden. “There are a lot of dam gates and lock gates that are in very bad condition and are leaking,” Meden says. “At some point, one or more these may fail and we could lose navigation pools and lose the ability to navigate commerce on the river.”
The Corps of Engineers is not allowed to lobby for increased funding, but state and local officials can do so. Meden says over $4 billion dollars in improvements along the Mississippi have been authorized by Congress, but Congress has failed to approve any appropriations toward improvements or major rehabilitation projects in the last two years.
“So, only one leg of what we call our navigation three-legged stool which is funded is operations and maintenance,” Meden says. “So, we’re just trying to maintain the status quo and we’re not even keeping up with that.” Today’s meeting is scheduled to begin at 10:30 a.m. at the Hotel Blackhawk in Davenport.
Share this:TwitterGoogleFacebookFiled Under: Agriculture, Business, News, Politics & Government Featured Stories | 农业 |
2017-04/0035/en_head.json.gz/23187 | World Food Day 2012: The Role of Agricultural Biotechnology
By Karen Batra, 10/17/2012
As we celebrate Food Day 2012, it seems the debate around agriculture and food production is more contentious than ever. Instead of celebrating our abilities to provide for seven billion people on our planet in ways that are more sustainable and productive than ever before, there are still some who want to ridicule our modern food production system.
Agricultural biotechnology – one of the most basic tools helping us to better feed, fuel and heal a growing world – always seems to draw controversy, despite its twenty years of commercialization and proven success.
A recent article in the Chicago Tribune points out:
For more than a decade, American farmers have planted corn seed containing modified genes that resist crop disease, combat insect pests and make weedkiller more effective. Generations of livestock have been raised on genetically modified corn. Millions of Americans have consumed it too, in cereal, cooking oil and related products. If genetically modified corn posed an urgent health threat, America would know it by now. In fact, the science behind these crops not only is safe, but transformative. Agricultural biotechnology has reduced the amount of chemical pesticides and herbicides in use. It has improved yields. It is making important contributions to the relief of global hunger, especially now that advanced tools are being used to improve cassava and other foodstuffs vital to subsistence agriculture.
The benefits of agricultural biotechnology have long been supported by millions of farmers around the world, and documented in hundreds of scientific studies.
And now the scientific community is pushing back on “junk science” and bad reporting that is misleading readers on current debates such as
food labeling, herbicide use and coexistence between organic and biotech farmers.
However you feel about any of these issues, one thing that is not in question, is the safety of biotech foods.
The SAFETY of biotech-derived food products has been THOROUGHLY ADDRESSED by the international scientific community
The TOP SCIENTIFIC authorities recognized in the United State of America – such as the National Research Council of the National Academies of Sciences, the American Dietetic Association and the regulatory authorities for each of the products have concluded that foods with biotech-derived ingredients pose NO MORE RISK to people than ANY OTHER FOOD.
Biotech crops have been cultivated for nearly 20 years – and foods derived from agricultural biotechnology have been eaten by BILLIONS of people without any significant health problems.
Despite the well-known benefits of biotechnology (environmental, socio-economical, productivity), we have plenty of work ahead to meet future challenges such as providing for a global population of 9 billion people in 2050 with less farm land and the uncertainties that come with climate change. Food science and technology will be the solution to these future challenges.
Take for example, the potential of drought resistant crops on which
the Wall Street Journal reported:
With the Farm Belt recovering from one of the worst summers of drought in decades, the companies that supply corn seeds are rolling out new strains that can survive with less water. It’s a wide-ranging, big-budget battle covering a lot of fronts, from crossbreeding crops to tinkering with the plants’ genes. There is no magic bullet, researchers warn. But even incremental gains could have big results, given the size and importance of the corn crop.
In the growing area of animal biotechnology, research has yielded:
Milk from a genetically engineered cow that lacks a key protein involved in triggering allergies
AquaBounty’s salmon that grows twice the rate of conventional salmon, increasing the sustainable production of high quality seafood
“Enviropigs” that engineered to digest plant phosphorus more efficiently, cutting feed costs and decreasing the levels of phosphorus in their manure
Unfortunately, as the Los Angeles Times reports, the process for getting government approval to sell food derived from genetically engineered animals appears to be a hopeless logjam. In frustration, more than 50 scientists and biotechnology leaders sent a letter to President Obama last month asking him to urge the FDA to move forward on the AquaBounty salmon decision.
As we celebrate Food Day, we all have a responsibility to be good communicators, good educators and help everyone learn about the importance of science and technology. We all need to push back on those who hold back progress and turn a blind eye to hunger and malnutrition.
To illustrate the importance of food science and technology, the Institute of Food Technologists has launched the “World Without Food Science” campaign. This video campaign includes a provocative public service announcement that shows what happens in a grocery store when there is no food science. Expert interview segments focus on how food science makes it possible to make food globally available and also how the profession makes it safe for consumers.
Most of all, World Food Day generates an opportunity to offer a science-based perspective on how we can meet the challenges of hunger head-on to help all those without access to safe, nutritious food-now and in the future.
Karen Batra
Karen Batra is Director of Food & Agriculture Communications, and has worked for BIO since 2008. Having lived in the Washington, D.C. area for more than 20 years, Karen has worked for four major national trade associations specializing in communications and media relations, most recently at the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association.What Karen likes best about BIO, aside from her uber-talented colleagues, is working to promote a technology that truly helps to heal, feed and fuel the world. In the food & ag sector, we aim to help farmers do what they do best – grow the most abundant, most affordable and safest food supply in the world.Karen’s favorite biotech food is papaya, and her favorite genetically engineered animal is the spidey-goat. Karen also has two Glofish, Redfish and Bluefish, who live with their non-biotech cousin, Peachy the Snail.
Suhanani says: 10/20/2012 at 5:09 pm food that we eat contains nutrients which is related to science. it is important to know the content of food before eating. biotechnology in agricultural sectors is significant to sustain the healthy crops produced. thus, each country should has agricultural biotechnology department.
Reply Leave a Reply Cancel reply Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *Comment Name * Email * Website Notify me of follow-up comments by email. Notify me of new posts by email. Related Posts GMO Answers on Forbes.com: 2016 Highlights
By Michael Stebbins, January 6, 2017
How “Non-GMO” Claims Can Mislead Consumers
By Karen Batra, January 5, 2017 | 农业 |
2017-04/0035/en_head.json.gz/23339 | Management [1] Ag groups leave sustainability standards effort
Sustainbility standards effort abandoned by 50-plus agriculture/commodity groups.
Among reasons cited for leaving: standards pushed through "unworkable."
Groups will focus on other efforts to produce standards. David Bennett [2] | Oct 19, 2010
On Monday, after several years of working with the Leonardo Academy to produce sustainability standards, over 50 commodity and farm organizations representing U.S. production agriculture interests withdrew from the effort en masse.
According to Leonardo Academy’s Web site (http://www.leonardoacademy.org/ [3]) the objective of the sustainability standard initiative “is to establish a comprehensive, continuous improvement framework and common set of economic, environmental and social metrics by which to determine whether an agricultural crop has been produced and handled in a sustainable manner.
"A national standard for sustainable agriculture has the potential to address a range of stakeholder needs, including supporting producer efforts to adopt sustainable production practices, establishing a framework for continuous improvement along the agricultural supply chain, providing a means of clear communication of sustainability achievements and harmonizing the myriad of sustainable agriculture standards that are currently in place or in development.”
Among the many groups that pulled out of the process were Farm Bureau, the American Soybean Association (ASA) and USA Rice Federation.
Ron Moore, an Illinois soybean producer and ASA board member who had been active in Leonardo committee leadership, said the pullback decision “was not made easily. It means walking away from nearly two years of investment … in an effort to produce an ‘on-farm’ standard. However, it is clear based on actions this past summer that any continued effort cannot and will not overcome the serious systemic limitations and chronic biases that are inherent in the structure the Leonardo Academy has set up for this initiative.”
Leonardo Academy, says Reese Langley, USA Rice Federation vice president of government affairs, “tried to bring in stakeholders including production ag groups along with various environmental groups and NGOs (non-governmental organizations) to develop an industry-wide sustainability standard for agriculture.”
The USA Rice Federation wasn’t a formal member of the group.
“We were more of an allied partner, if you will. We were involved in some of the work groups but had no actual vote. Some of the larger agriculture groups like Farm Bureau were voting members.
“So, we worked through the process for several years trying to come up with sustainability standards. There were particular focuses on social standards, economic standards and others.”
At the end of the day, the environmental and NGO groups strong-armed the process, say those Delta Farm Press has spoken with.
Mainstream ag groups
“They had more votes than agriculture did and were trying to push things that were unworkable in the view of the majority of the production ag groups,” says Langley. “Mainstream agriculture groups made a joint decision to pull out of the effort and pursue other options.”
Langley is largely echoed by the ASA’s Moore who said his organization would look at other options. “U.S. farmers are very much dedicated to the long-term sustainability of their farms and their farming practices. For this reason, farmers will embrace an achievable roadmap for the environmental, social and economic aspects of sustainability, but only if they are part of its development. We are committed to working toward such goals in the hope that widespread adoption will contribute to real sustainability of American agriculture.”
The USA Rice Federation will now shift attention to Field to Market: The Keystone Alliance for Sustainable Agriculture.
“We’ve been a part of the Keystone process for about (18 months), now. Keystone includes environmental groups but is much more a consensus-building process,” says Langley. “It’s more results-based and not necessarily trying to dictate certain practices like organic.
The organization’s Web site (http://www.fieldtomarket.org/ [4]) contains initial benchmark studies for four crops: cotton, corn, soybeans and wheat.
“Those are an attempt to measure where those crops are on an environmental basis, what their footprint is, and how things have improved over the last 20 years,” says Langley. The benchmark study for rice was recently completed.
“That will be added to Keystone’s material in a month, or two,” says Langley. “They provide a ‘field print calculator’ that allows a farmer to go in, put in data from their farm and see how it compares it the industry average on an environmental basis. Things like soil loss, water use, energy use, land use, and climate impact are covered.”
Source URL: http://www.deltafarmpress.com/management/ag-groups-leave-sustainability-standards-effort?page=2 | 农业 |
2017-04/0035/en_head.json.gz/23689 | From an organic pioneer, a vegan cookbook May 27, 2014 One of my favorite events each year is Cooking for Solutions, a conference and food festival staged beautifully by the Monterey Bay Aquarium. It’s a gathering of smart people who are passionate about food–how it’s produced, its impact on the environment and on health and, of course, how it tastes. Monterey is a great place to spend a few days and the aquarium is world-class. This year, I met some great chefs who I hope to be able to write about in the weeks and months ahead.
I also re-connected with Myra Goodman, who with her husband Drew co-founded Earthbound Farm, an organic industry powerhouse. Myra and Drew host a breakfast outdoors each year at Earthbound’s Farm Stand in Carmel Valley, which is usually followed by a panel about the organic industry.
This year, Myra made news herself. She and Drew sold Earthbound to an even bigger organic firm, White Wave Foods, and she and her daughter Marea have written a cookbook called Straight From the Earth: Irresistible Vegan Recipes for Everyone. I haven’t had a chance to try any of the recipes yet, but I did write about Myra and her book last week for Guardian Sustainable Business.
Here’s how my story begins:
Myra and Drew Goodman never planned to become farmers. They were two kids from New York City who graduated from the same high school, went to college and then made their way to northern California to take a year off before grad school. Living in a 600-square-foot home in rural Carmel Valley, they grew organic raspberries and sold them at a roadside stand. “A romantic adventure”, Myra calls it.
That was 30 years ago. Grad school never happened, but their company, Earthbound Farm, became America’s largest grower of organic produce. In January, the Goodmans and their shareholders sold Earthbound to White Wave, a Colorado-based company whose brands include Silk and Horizon Organic, for about $600m.
That’s a lot of lettuce.
I sat down with Myra Goodman last week during Cooking for Solutions, a conference and foodfest presented by the Monterey Bay Aquarium. We talked about the growth of the organic food industry, the problems with meat and why the word “vegan” isn’t in the title of her new cookbook of plant-based recipes, Straight from the Earth.
Over the past three decades, Goodman, who is 50, has helped change the way crops are grown in America; now she’d like to help change the American diet. “We need to eat a lot less meat,” she says, “and a lot more plants”.
It looks like America may be moving in that direction. Last week, the organic food industry reported that it is growing again after a sluggish few years, post-recession. Sales of organic products in the US jumped to $35.1bn in 2013, up 11.5% from $31.5bn in 2012, the fastest growth rate in five years, according to the Organic Trade Association.
The story goes on to explain why eating less meat — particularly conventionally raised beef — is one of the simplest steps anyone can take to reduce carbon emissions. You can read the rest here.
Filed Under: Climate Change, Consumption, Environment, Food Tagged With: Cooking for Solutions, Earthbound Farm, Monterey Bay Aquarium, Myra Goodman, Straight from the EarthThe surprising roots of Earthbound Farm May 23, 2010 Drew and Myra Goodman never planned to become farmers. Two kids from New York City, they graduated from the same high school and made their way to northern California, where Drew went to UC-Santa Cruz, Myra to Berkeley. (She majored in “The Political Economy of Industrial Societies.” Ah, Berkeley. ) Grad school was next on her agenda—Myra anticipated a career in international relations—but she and Drew decided to take a year off to live in a 600-square-foot home in rural Carmel Valley. “A romantic adventure,” she called it.
But, as John Lennon once wrote, “life is what gets in the way when you are making other plans.” Drew and Myra grew raspberries on a two-and-half acre plot, selling them first at a roadside stand, then to restaurants in nearby Carmel. They didn’t know much about farming, but because they didn’t like the smell of the chemical fertilizers and pesticides, they tried organic farming, guided by Rodale’s Encyclopedia of Organic Gardening. They grew salad greens, too, and while they made only $9,800 in their first year, 1984, they decided that grad school could wait. And then wait some more.
A quarter century later, their Earthbound Farm is America’s largest grower of organic produce. Drew and Myra were the first to sell the pre-washed bagged salads that are now on supermarket shelves everywhere, and they dominate that market. Today, Earthbound processes and markets more than 100 varieties of salads, vegetables and fruit, gathered from about 150 farmers who tend 35,000 organically-farmed acres from British Columbia to Mexico. Earthbound Farm products are available in 75% of supermarkets across the country, and the firm makes store brands for chains like Costco, Safeway and Trader Joe’s. Annual revenues top $400 million.
Talk about organic growth!
“We’ve been sprinting nonstop,” says Drew, just to keep up. Things eased up a bit lately after he [click to continue…]
Filed Under: Books, Consumption, Food, Sustainability Tagged With: Cooking for Solutions, Drew Goodman, Earthbound Farm, Food to Live By, Monterey Bay Acquarium, Myra Goodman, organic farming | 农业 |
2017-04/0035/en_head.json.gz/24405 | Grain reaperagriculture
Obed Hussey
agricultural technology
origins of agriculture
invention by Hussey
in Obed Hussey
U.S. inventor of a full-sized grain reaper that was in wide use throughout Illinois, Maryland, New York, and Pennsylvania until Cyrus Hall McCormick’s reaper captured the market.
grain reaper
a usually four-wheeled vehicle designed primarily for passenger transportation and commonly propelled by an internal-combustion engine using a volatile fuel. Automotive design The modern automobile is...
television (TV)
TV the electronic delivery of moving images and sound from a source to a receiver. By extending the senses of vision and hearing beyond the limits of physical distance, television has had a considerable...
the study of computers, including their design (architecture) and their uses for computations, data processing, and systems control. The field of computer science includes engineering activities such...
carriage of goods
in law, the transportation of goods by land, sea, or air. The relevant law governs the rights, responsibilities, liabilities, and immunities of the carrier and of the persons employing the services of...
artificial intelligence (AI)
AI the ability of a digital computer or computer-controlled robot to perform tasks commonly associated with intelligent beings. The term is frequently applied to the project of developing systems endowed...
formation of a matted or felted sheet, usually of cellulose fibres, from water suspension on a wire screen. Paper is the basic material used for written communication and the dissemination of information....
a branch of mathematics that deals with continuous change and with certain general types of processes that have emerged from the study of continuous change, such as limits, differentiation, and integration....
device for processing, storing, and displaying information. Computer once meant a person who did computations, but now the term almost universally refers to automated electronic machinery. The first section...
alloy of iron and carbon in which the carbon content ranges up to 2 percent (with a higher carbon content, the material is defined as cast iron). By far the most widely used material for building the... | 农业 |
2017-04/0036/en_head.json.gz/512 | Innovative Grazing Apprenticeship Program Attracts Young Farmers January 26, 2016
Credit: Laura Paine
The aging of America’s farmer population has become of increasing concern in the last several decades as older farmers retire without a new generation ready to take their place. Given the challenges inherent in farm life– hard work, high risk, and unreliable earnings– younger generations have been leaving rural areas for more secure career opportunities, and fewer new farmers are entering the profession. The Dairy Grazing Apprenticeship (DGA) program, out of Medford, Wisconsin is trying to turn the tide and by ushering in a new wave of young dairy farmers.
The new program is an innovation on a tried and true method — master to apprentice teaching. In this way, DGA is hoping to revive traditional dairying and train a new crop of young would-be dairy farmers to use sustainable grazing and other conservation methods.
The DGA program is supported by the Beginning Farmer and Rancher Development Program (BFRDP), a USDA grant program, which helps raise the next generation of farmers by ensuring they get the skills and financial supports they need to thrive.
Five years after receiving their BFRDP grant in 2010, DGA has grown from local to national, and is now federally registered within the U.S. Department of Labor’s Apprenticeship program. Their program, which first expanded out of Wisconsin to interested farmers and graziers in Minnesota and Missouri, is now also working with farmers and farmer organizations across Pennsylvania, Maine, and New York.
Two DGA apprentices, Reed Fitton and Kyle Serwe, and master grazier Don Boland, recently spoke with NSAC to offer a glimpse into what the program offers to young farmers from different backgrounds.
The Modern Apprentice: Finding a Foothold
Reed Fitton, 29, is an Iowa native, but he didn’t grow up on a farm. After earning his Bachelor’s degree in archaeology in Iowa, Fitton changed courses to follow pursue a budding interest in agriculture.
“I took a lot of beginning farm classes since I didn’t grow up on a farm,” says Fitton. “I worked on a vegetable farm, and then started to get into dairy in Wisconsin.”
Fitton discovered DGA while attending a Grassworks grazing conference in Wisconsin. The formal training and accreditation offered by DGA appealed to Fitton because it allowed him to hone his new skills by working on a larger, more established dairy farm, and also because of its universal recognition across the country.
“With accreditation, at least I could take it and go to a larger farm or move somewhere else in the country. With a nationally recognized standard, anyone can look at it and say ‘oh he knows what he’s doing’,” said Fitton.
For apprentices, professional certification of their dairy farming skills is particularly appealing because it greatly decreases their barriers to entry into the dairy industry.
At the time he discovered DGA, Fitton was renting a 60-acre farm while also helping grazier Don Boland with his milking operation. Boland, a fifth generation farmer, agreed to take on the Master Grazier role so that Fitton could complete the apprenticeship on his farm.
“The biggest advantage to us is we can have someone here who wants to be here,” says Boland. “It’s hard to find motivated help.”
In order to complete the educational component of the program, apprentices must complete a workbook that addresses the entirety of a grazing operation. They must also take classes at a technical college, with subjects ranging from soil quality to feed rations. In contrast to what the program teaches, much of Fitton’s classwork comes from a conventional agriculture perspective.
“They were talking about all of these diseases that we’ve never even heard of because our cows stay outside,” Fitton recounts. “But we still need to know about them, just in case.”
In return for his work, Fitton receives dairy heifer calves as part of his wages, enabling him to begin his own operation soon after graduation. He is ten hours and one class away from finishing the apprenticeship; afterwards, he hopes to find a partner with whom to start an organic dairy of his own.
The Modern Apprentice: Reviving a Family Legacy
The apprenticeship is equally as beneficial to young farmers with extensive prior farm experience as it is to those just starting out. Kyle Serwe, 27, has been working on his grandfather and great uncle’s 250-acre farm, the Bob and Bill Guell Farm in Eden, Wisconsin, since he was in kindergarten.
Serwe sought out the DGA program because he wanted to expand his existing knowledge and skill set. Through the program, Serwe was able to help his family implement a more intensive grazing management strategy using twice a day rotational grazing practices, and beginning composting for fertilization. Both young and experienced farmers recognize how valuable the apprenticeship is for training the next generation of farmers.
“It actually gives a younger person the opportunity to try farming and get paid while they’re still in school,” said Serwe.
In return for his work, Serwe received a salary and one heifer calf each month. He graduated from the apprenticeship in January 2014 and now has a substantial herd of 24 heifer calves.
With both Bob and Bill in their mid-60’s, finding someone to take over their operation of 180 milking cows, is a top priority. With the DGA training under his belt, Serwe is now planning to lease his grandfather and great-uncle’s farm for two years as a test run. During this period he’ll try to build equity and see if ownership is the right path for him.
Building Continuity with Masters and Apprentices
The DGA program hinges on building relationships between masters and apprentices: it offers beginning farmers—the apprentices—the opportunity to learn from knowledgeable, successful graziers—the masters. The program screens potential masters, such as Boland, who must be eligible farmers with at least five years of experience in organic or grazing methods, and enrolls them in a training program to become effective communicators.
Upon completion, they are free to select an apprentice. Apprentices, such as Serwe and Fitton, also face rigorous training, completing a required 4,000 hours over two years. The apprentices complete 3,712 hours through paid, on-farm work, with the remaining 288 hours reserved for complementary classroom instruction, pasture walks, and workshops.
Ultimately, DGA’s goal is to create a chain of master and apprentice relationships that spans generations, with former apprentices taking on farming operations and new apprentices of their own when they are able. DGA currently boasts 60 masters and 22 apprentices, with an additional 29 apprentices on their wait list. So far, eight of DGA’s apprentices have successfully completed the two-year program. Soon, they too may become master graziers and inspire more young farmers to pursue a career in dairying.
Beginning and Minority Farmers, Local & Regional Food Systems, Sustainable Livestock Comments are closed. | 农业 |
2017-04/0036/en_head.json.gz/1519 | Livestock fundraiser brings in more than expected
Extra dollars could be used to build up ag presence, 4-H, at the fair
The fundraiser to bring draft horses and other heavy horse events back to the Ionia Free Fair "far exceeded" the expectations for the event's planners, said Dennis Arnold, chairman of the Ionia Free Fair board of directors, on Wednesday.The livestock benefit party held Jan. 12 at the Steele Street Hall raised "in the neighborhood of $17,000," Arnold said. He and the board had hoped to raise $3,000 to $4,000 from the party.An estimated 300 people attended the fundraiser, which included a hot dog dinner, live and silent auctions, a 50/50 raffle and a drawing. "We had to start serving sooner than we planned because it was getting backed up," Arnold said. "It was really great to see the interest in ag from the community."Arnold said he would like to see excess money used to enhance participation "at the back of the fair," where the 4-H and agriculture events are located. He plans to solicit recommendations from fair superintendents when they meet in early February. He also met with the 4-H director, Rebecca McCafferty, to get her input on where extra money would be most helpful in strengthen 4-H programming at the fair."People might live in Ionia and not realize the process of getting milk," McCafferty said. "We'd like to do demonstrations throughout the week of fair to draw attention to the rich agriculture of Ionia." McCafferty added that she hopes to use volunteers from across the county, including leaders and local farmers, to conduct educational or interactive demonstrations about the agriculture industry during the fair, "really showcasing the agriculture side of the fair and the realm of agricultural opportunities there are in Ionia County."4-H participation has been declining, she said, because many people don't know how valuable the 4-H program is, both in promoting agriculture but also in building youth leaders."We need to educate the community about 4-H, and the whole diversity that is open to every youth," she said. "We hope to draw attention to agriculture as a whole, but also as a viable youth develop organization kids can invest in, and experience things and grow."McCafferty said the relationship with Arnold is going to be good for both 4-H and the fair. "He has experience in livestock and agriculture, and I have a background in youth development and education," she said. "We'll work really well together to bring new ideas to the fair this year."Follow Karen Bota on Twitter @KarenB_ISS. | 农业 |
2017-04/0036/en_head.json.gz/2320 | About us / GSFC - Ventures
GSFC - Ventures
GSFC AGROTECH LIMITED (AGROTECH)
Gujarat State Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. is one of the largest fertilizers manufactures in India. In line with its objective to cater better services to farming community, GSFC feels the need to consolidate its position in Agro Business sector by focusing on Agro Business Sector. In its endeavour GSFC has incorporated 100 % Subsidiary Company, GSFC AGROTECH LIMITED. The objectives of GSFC Agrotech Limited shall be to carry on the Business in Agriculture Sector which includes Liquid Biofertilizers, Cereal Protein Hydrolysate based Biotech Products, Tissue Culture, Seeds etc. initially. Tunisian Indian Fertilizers S.A. (TIFERT)
The TIFERT plant in Tunisia is a strategic JV that aims to ensure a consistent supply of Phosphoric Acid to GSFC's Sikka Unit. The Sikka Unit manufactures DAP and NKP Phosphatic fertilizers from imported Phosphoric Acid and Liquid Ammonia. Currently, there is limited avaibility of Phosphoric Acid in the international market. The supply of Phosphoric Acid from the TIFERT plant will help optimize production of GSFC's DAP plant. At full load, TIFERT plant will produce 3,60,000 TPA of Phosphoric Acid (P2O5), enabling GSFC to increase its DAP production at Sikka by 3,90,000 TPA.
Gujarat Narmada Valley Fertilizers & Chemicals Limited (GNFC)
GNFC is a joint sector enterprise promoted by the Government of Gujarat and GSFC. It was set up in Bharuch, Gujarat in 1976. Located in an extremely prosperous industrial belt, GNFC draws on the natural resources and the industrially rich reserves of the area. GNFC started its manufacturing and marketing operations as one of the world's largest single-stream Ammonia-Urea fertilizer complexes in 1982. Over the next few years, GNFC successfully commissioned different projects in fields as diverse as chemicals, fertilizers and electronics. GNFC today has extended its profile much beyond fertilizers through a process of horizontal integration. chemicals/petrochemicals, energy sector, electronics/telecommunications and information technology form ambitious and challenging additions to its corporate portfolio. GNFC has an enterprising and strategic view towards expansion and diversification. Gujarat Green Revolution Company Limited (GGRC)
GGRC provides professional services on Micro Irrigation System, coupled with required equipments to the farmers of Gujarat, either outsourced or self produced. It aims to bring about the Second Green Revolution, with the aim of saving water and energy, besides providing multiple benefits to improve agricultural productivity and farmer's prosperity at large. The company is promoted by GSFC, GNFC and GAIC.
Gujarat Chemical Port Terminal Company Limited (GCPTCL)
GCPTCL is the most modern commercial port and storage terminal located at Dahej. The location enables the port to leverage the production facilities of oil, petroleum products and chemicals in the Dahej area, and to service the vast hinterland spanning entire Western, Northern and Central India. The company is promoted by seven corporate houses including GSFC. It is a modern port and storage terminal, fully computerized, with state-of-the-art technology and added leverage of 'Single-Window' Operations. The port is capable of handling vessels of 6,000 DWT to 60,000 DWT (Dead Weight Tonnage). The present storage terminal capacity is about 3,00,000 cubic meters of hazardous liquid and gaseous chemicals falling in 'A', 'B', and 'General' classes. Gujarat Industries Power Company Limited (GIPCL)
GIPCL was incorporated in 1985 as a public limited company under the auspices of Government of Gujarat. The promoters of the company are GSFC, Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Limited, Gujarat Alkalies & Chemicals Limited and Petrofils Co-operative Limited. The company is in the business of electrical power generation. The total present capacity of GIPCL's Vadodara and Mangrol plants is 815 MW. The company has a vision to transform itself into a national level power sector enterprise. It commissioned its first power project, a 145 MW gas based Combined Cycle Power Plant, in February 1992 at Vadodara. Power from this plant is distributed to its promoters in proportion to their original equity holding. The company expanded its capacity and commissioned a 165 MW Naphtha and Gas based Combined Cycle Power Plant at Vadodara in November 1997 as Independent Power Producer (IPP) with Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) with Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Limited. Effluent Channel Project Limited (ECPL)
ECPL was commissioned in 1983 to handle the effluent discharge of chemical and other units in the Vadodara area. It has a total capacity to convey about 1,30,000 MTD (130 MLD) of treated wastewater over a distance of 55 km in the Gulf of Khambhat. The channel has recently completed 28 years. The channel is a brick masonry conduit constructed in "U" shape laid with gradient of 1 in 3000. It has 139 cross drainage works ensures that there is no hindrance to traffic of 29 villages that are located along the channel. The entire channel is covered with RCC slab and it has fully asphalted inspection road from take off point at Dhanora up to the disposal points in the Gulf of Khambhat. During 1999-2000 the Effluent Channel Project was converted to a Company with a major stake of four Major units, including GSFC. This company is called Effluent Channel Project Limited (ECPL). Bhavnagar Energy Company Limited (BECL)
BECL is establishing a 500+ MW lignite based Pithead Power Project at Padva, about 25 km away from Bhavnagar city.
About GSFC l Vision & Mission l Six Precepts of GSFC l Board of Directors
Senior Executives l Code of Conduct l Human Resources l GSFC - Ventures
Tendering
Marketing Network Enquiry
GSFC @ Glance
| GSFC Units
| Financials
© 2007 GSFC Ltd, All right reserved. | 农业 |
2017-04/0036/en_head.json.gz/2996 | China’s stock reductions could provide new opportunities Jan 06, 2017 2017 Mid-South Farm and Gin Show: Register online Jan 09, 2017 Target spot: A disease of ‘high yield’ cotton Jan 05, 2017 Tinkering with exports: serious implications Jan 02, 2017 Management Continued prosperity for U.S. agriculture
• Net farm income has gone from about $55 billion in 2000 to what is predicted to be $100 billion this year, and most of this growth is due to high prices.
• Cash receipts for cattle and crops have shown an upward trend for the last four years, and that was due primarily to increased global demand, mostly from China and Southeast Asia. Paul Hollis | Sep 07, 2011
Several factors will impact the future of U.S. agriculture in the next decade, but most current indicators point towards continued prosperity, says Daniel Whitley of the USDA Foreign Agricultural Service.
“We all have to agree, no matter which metric we choose to examine it, there is very good prosperity being enjoyed today in American agriculture,” said Whitley at this year’s Southern Peanut Growers Conference held in Panama City, Fla.
“Net farm income has gone from about $55 billion in 2000 to what we’re predicting to be $100 billion this year, and most of this growth is due to high prices.”
If you look at the 10-year average, we’re currently running about $20 billion above the 10-year average, he adds.
“Again, a lot of this is due to commodity prices. This is a judgment made about the profitability of ranchers and farmers — it has nothing to do with processors. That certainly is a record, but we fully expect that to continue into the future.”
Cash receipts for cattle and crops have shown an upward trend for the last four years, and that was due primarily to increased global demand, mostly from China and Southeast Asia, says Whitley.
The profitability and the profits being generated in agriculture show up in the primary asset of farmland, he says.
“USDA is predicting this year that the value of the farm sector in the United States is going to equal $2 trillion. Obviously, that is a record, and it’s largely due to the value of farmland increasing.
“But farmers also are great bookkeepers and have been paying down their debt. They also have more ownership in their machinery and in their operations,” says Whitley.
All of this is good, but the story gets even better, he says.
“The best news is that all this prosperity is not coming at the expense of the American taxpayer. This year, USDA expects farm payments to be zero for price-related payments. There will be payments made for conservation, direct payments and others, but right now, we predict there will be no payments related to prices. That makes for good news in Washington, D.C., and it makes for good news for rural Americans.”
Looking at projected baseline prices over the next decade, Whitley says USDA has predicted that soybean prices will remain high. They probably won’t be at the record levels of 2007 and 2008, but certainly higher than historical trends, he says.
“I would expect that when the next baseline is released, those prices will be even higher than we’re projecting for this year.”
Long-term projections
As for the projection for net farm income out to 2020, Whitley says he doesn’t expect the supply response to be able to keep pace with the increased demand for U.S. agricultural products and for agricultural products around the world.
Of the many factors affecting U.S. agriculture, the most important is global demand and the growth of the middle class around the world, he says.
“There are many who argue that we should talk about how the dollar impacts agricultural exports. If anyone tells you the value of the dollar doesn’t play a role in how U.S. ag exports perform, they’re smoking something strange. There’s a very strong correlation between the two,” he says.
There will be a “seismic shift,” says Whitley, in where middle-class consumers around the world will be located.
“If you go back to 1990, more than half of middle-class consumers resided in these developed countries. What we’re predicting going out to 2020 is that nearly all the growth in middle-class consumers will occur in developing countries.
“There’s a new acronym now they’re using for Mexico, Indonesia, South Korea and Turkey — MIST. These countries are growing at a rapid pace. Over the next decade, we’re estimating economic growth in developing countries will average 6.6 percent annually. Developed countries will average 2.2 percent.”
As consumers move from low-income to middle-class status, one of the first things they do is go out and buy a car, which requires gasoline for fuel, and they improve their diets, moving to higher quality proteins, says Whitley.
“That puts upward pressure on demand for the livestock sector and all the materials that feed the livestock sector. That’s why the middle class is so important. We have the middle class increasing by 104 percent by 2020, and only 9 percent of that is in developed countries.”
It’s important to remember, he says, that not all developing countries are created equal. “There’s China, then India, then everyone else.
The middle class in China is expected to grow by 226 billion households by 2020. China has been the fastest growing cotton and soybean market over the past few years. If you took China out of the equation, there would be virtually no growth in cotton and soybeans.
“China is the 800-pound gorilla in the room and is certainly attracting the attention of those in the international agricultural trade community, not only in cotton and soybeans, but we’re also seeing movement in corn.
“Much of this can push food prices higher to unsustainable levels, making it more difficult for hungry people around the world to be able to afford food.”
Value of dollar
Turning to the value of the dollar, Whitley says the USDA is projecting that throughout the remainder of the decade, the dollar will fall by 14 percent, with most of the decline coming against currency in developing countries.
“When the dollar falls against the currency in those countries, it makes them able to afford more products from the United States. In just the last year, the dollar has fallen by 14 percent.”
Biofuels is one those factors that some people love and some hate, says Whitley. The industry is very close to achieving its mandate of 15 billion gallons for corn ethanol by the year 2015.
“We’re at about 13 billion gallons now, and we have the capacity to be at about 14.5 billion gallons. Once we reach the mandate, the increased demand for corn, feedstock and ethanol will probably plateau and remain level unless oil prices shoot through the roof and ethanol becomes profitable on its own.
“If tax credits expire at the end of the year, then attaining profitability in the industry will become much tougher.”
Commodity prices are undeniably highly related to energy prices, says Whitley. A study out of Purdue University showed that corn price increases in 2007 and 2008 were 80-percent related to the rise in crude oil prices.
The agricultural industry, he says, has done a great job of accepting the advancements of innovation and technology and to answer the call to help feed hungry people all over the world. But how the rest of the world responds will determine largely how we’ll meet the future demand for food.
“We’re projecting that U.S. ag exports will reach almost $140 billion, so we’ve basically doubled our exports over the past five years. But it’s not just the United States. All of the major agricultural producing countries around the world have increased their exports in the last five years.
“Even the Chinese have become a major exporter as well as importer. Over the long-term, Brazil is probably the country to keep an eye on, not only because of their advancements in technology, but also because of the additional land they have at their disposal for increasing production.”
By the year 2020, says Whitley, global trade will reach $1 trillion.
“One of the challenges the world will have to meet over the next 30 to 40 years will be how to feed what economists project will be 9.5 billion people on earth by the year 2050. One of the ways to do that is to increase yields. We have adopted the technology to improve our yields.
“Over the last 15 years, our trend upwards certainly is more than many of the world’s corn producers. The yields in the United States are five times the yields for the same crops in Central America.
“South America has started to adopt some of the biotechnology, and we expect some of their trend yields to move upward. But the Europeans and East Asians are still resistant to new technology.”
There are basically three large areas of land around the world that could be brought into agricultural production, he says: South America, which is mainly Brazil; Eastern Europe; and Africa.
“But one of the things we’ve seen since 1990 is that most of the gains have been in yields and not in increased areas of planting. Eventually, there’s a finite amount of land you can bring into production. Eventually, you have to increase yields. We do have land at our disposal in the world, but not in the United States.”
The increase in the purchasing power of the middle class is going to outpace the purchasing power of developing countries in the next decade, and the prosperity of U.S. agriculture should continue, says Whitley.
RelatedMr. Trump goes To Washington: Market price considerations for the week of Jan. 16.Jan 17, 2017EPA registers Dow’s Enlist Duo herbicide for related cotton technologyJan 13, 2017UAS technology meshing data with cotton crop modelsJan 13, 2017Delta Farm Press Calendar of EventsJan 13, 2017 Load More | 农业 |
2017-04/0036/en_head.json.gz/3032 | Cow Patty Power — Local dairy farm creates electricity from manure
Aug 09, 2012 Jason Emerson Uncategorized
Twin Birch Dairy Farm in Skaneateles has been a model New York state farm with state-of-the-art technology and a high priority on environmental stewardship for more than a decade. Recently, owner Dirk Young added a new benchmark for his business by adding a methane-powered generator, thereby making Twin Birch a totally self-sustaining farm from corn to cow to manure to electricity.
This latest achievement — one of only two in the Syracuse region — will be celebrated later this month by state officials and organizations who helped make it possible through agricultural grants.
“We do this because [environmental stewardship] is in our mission statement and because we want to be good neighbors,” said Young, a third-generation farmer on Benson Road in Skaneateles. “We are the ultimate recycler — we harvest the corn, produce the milk, produce biogas from the manure, sell the excess meat and put the manure back on the fields to grow next year’s crop.”
Twin Birch, which was started in 1960 by Dirk’s father Kenneth Young Sr., began with 120 cows and 500 acres of land. Today it owns 1,500 acres of land and 1,300 cows, and is a multi-million-dollar business that supports 25 local families employed there and puts $20 million back into the local economy.
Twin Birch also has been celebrated and awarded numerous times for its environmental stewardship, high quality milk and pioneering of new agricultural technology for over a decade. In 2002, Twin Birch was named the Onondaga County Soil and Water Conservation Farm of the Year. In 2004, Young built an anaerobic digester — a facility to collect, break down, sterilize and reuse cow manure — one of only 17 in the United States. Most recently, Twin Birch shared accolades with students at SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry whom they assisted in a national sustainability design competition sponsored by the Environmental Protection Agency. The project, about anaerobic digestion of cow manure, was named an award winner in June and netted the ESF program $90,000 in grants to take the design to real-world application.
When asked why he puts so much emphasis and money on environmental stewardship, Young says matter-of-factly, “I believe everybody lives downstream.”
The new Twin Birch methane-powered generator does not, in fact, save the farm any money, but Young believes it is good business, good policy, and, most importantly, helps him be a good neighbor.
Put simply, the new technology generates electricity from the methane emanating from the manure, it reduces waste, and it significantly reduces the manure odor coming from the farm.
More specifically, there are numerous steps to the energy process, but it all starts in one place — manure.
“We are just constantly recycling what Mother Nature gives us,” said Twin Birch Business Manager Steve McGlynn. About one-third of dairy farming focuses on what you do with the manure, he said. And for a farm with 1,300 cows, that is a lot of manure.
Twin Birch has state-of-the-art barns that keep the cows comfortable with fans, sprinklers, automated walls and shades — even automated back scratchers — and an automated manure collection system. The collector, a V-shaped metal bar, constantly moves up and down the barn moving manure to the collection pipes. From there it is pumped to the air-tight anaerobic digester, an immense underground vat that heats up the manure to 100 degrees for 21 days while it churns and separates the compounds in the waste.
The liquid compound is piped out and used as fertilizer on the farm fields. The solids — undigested pieces of mostly corn and hay — is purified and comes out looking like sawdust that is used as sterile bedding for the cows. This entire process, which is also chemically complex, kills pathogens in the waste and nearly eliminates the smell of the manure both in the barns and in the fertilizer it creates.
“Twin Birch was first farm in Skaneateles Lake Watershed (and one of first in the surrounding region if not the first) to take the plunge and invest in a manure digester,” said Mark E. Burger, executive director of the Onondaga County Soil and Water Conservation District and program manager for the Skaneateles Lake Watershed Agricultural Program. “The anaerobic digester helps agriculture because the farm addressed many issues that impact water quality/environment and can create difficult neighbor relations. And, the anaerobic digester on the farm has successfully demonstrated another Best Management Practice that can help to address compliance with environmental regulations and issues in the community.”
But for the new electric generator at Twin Birch, the most important byproduct of the anaerobic digestion is the methane. The methane rises to the top of the vat and is pumped over to the biogas generator, where it is then converted to electricity and any excess is cleanly burned.
The system, built by American Biogas Company of Syracuse, generates 125 kilowatts of electricity per hour, or enough to power 170 homes for a day. This produces enough energy to power all the barns, houses and satellite facilities at Twin Birch. Technically though, the power generated does not go to Twin Birch but goes into the local National Grid power grid, and Twin Birch then receives credits for what it generated.
The new biogas system typically costs more than $1 million to create, but Twin Birch spent between $500,000 and $750,000 because many of the components were already in place and thanks to the help of two grants from the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority.
“One of the most impressive components [of the Twin Birch digester] was that the farm committed a lot of their own resources, financial and otherwise, to get this digester up and running. This system was not without heartache, difficulty or complications, but Twin Birch had the foresight to see it through,” Burger said. “One of the best points is that the farm has always been very open to host tours and participate in research so that other agricultural producers in the industry, as well as community members, could see what and how they are doing anaerobic digestion and how other farms can use that technology to advance their position in the industry.”
On Tuesday, Aug. 21, NYSERDA will hold a ceremony at Twin Birch Farm to celebrate and recognize its achievement in utilizing biogas technology. Multiple state officials have been invited to attend, including Congresswoman Ann Marie Buerkle.
“We’re very pleased we took on this project and to have worked with a local company like American Biogas,” McGlynn said. “This has been a real success story. This works.”
Jason Emerson is editor of the Skaneateles Press. He can be reached at [email protected].
Comment on this Story tweet Local swimmer competes in Olympics this week
McArdell lays claim to SDGA District Amateur
Jason Emerson is editor of the Cazenovia Republican and Eagle Bulletin newspapers. | 农业 |
2017-04/0036/en_head.json.gz/3779 | NEGenWeb Project
On-Line Library Compendium of History Reminiscence
& Biography of Western Nebraska
ter of Kirkwood, this office being established about ten years
previous, his predecessors being J. N. Hovey, A. G. Felton and
John A. Brubaker, in the order names.
In 1882 Mr. Arter was married to
Miss Sarah Johnson, of American birth, and German descent, and
five children have been born to them as follows: Jason R., Laura
V., Cynthia Ann, Winfield S. and Alice A.
Mr. Arter is an easy-going,
genial gentleman, clear-headed and original in his ideas and
thoughts, and is much above the average man as a philosopher. In
political faith Mr. Arter is an Independent.
---->o<----
Peter Nissen, one of the
tried and true ranchers of Keith county, Nebraska, was born in the
southern part of Denmark, April 14, 1863. His father, Nis Matsen,
according to the peculiar custom of names in that country, was a
farmer and bricklayer by trade and lived and died in Denmark, his
native country. The mother, Susan Christena (Petersen), still
lives in that country on part of the old home farm.
Our subject was reared in
Denmark, remaining there until in 1887, when he came to America,
sailing from Copenhagen to New York. He then decided to locate in
New Jersey. He here acquired the English language, and after about
one year, came west to Colorado, locating on a pre-emption claim
in Washington county, where he was one of the early pioneers. Here
he, with others of his family, experienced the years of drouth
(sic) and ruin of crops for several years, having hard time to get
along. With him was his brother, Hans, and a sister, Mrs. Mary
Petersen, who was a widow then. She has three children, Hans A.
Petersen, Simon Petersen and John Nelson, the latter being the son
of a second husband. Our subject's brother, Hans Nissen, was born
in southern Denmark, November 10, 1866, and came to America on the
same vessel. They have been together most of the time since. The
brothers and sister came to Keith county, Nebraska, in 1893, and
located on homesteads in Lonergan precinct. Together they have a
splendid ranch of about five thousand five hundred acres along the
North Platte river, and running back into the hills, on which they
run about four hundred head of cattle and fifty horses. The
buildings and main improvements of the ranch are on Otter creek,
which furnishes a never failing supply of clear, cold water. They
have about four hundred acres of fine hay land and they engage
largely in raising cattle and horses, farming just enough to
provide such grain feed as is needed for their stock. Our subject
and his brother have been very successful in their business and
are well fixed financially.
Peter Nissen has been an
important factor in the growth of his vicinity and is recognized
as one of the leading old-timers. He has taken an active part in
political matters and has held several local offices, among them
that of assessor, which position he has occupied several times. He
is Republican in politics, and was reared in the Lutheran
FERMAN S.
The gentleman above named
is a well known and highly respected citizen of section 1,
township 21, range 15, Garfield county, and one of the pioneer
settlers of western Nebraska,. He landed in this section of the
country with but little capital and went to work determined to win
a home for himself, and how well he succeeded is evidenced by the
good farm and valuable property he now owns. He is industrious and
energetic and is one of the progressive agriculturists of his
county, his place being situated in what is called Bean Creek
Valley, all of it being under cultivation.
Mr. Key is a native of Adair
county, Iowa, born in 1867. He was reared on a farm, receiving a
common school education, attending the country schools for a few
months during the winter of each year, the balance of his time
being spent in doing hard farm work on his father's farm in Iowa.
He came to Nebraska from Iowa, in 1887, settling on a pre-emption
consisting of one hundred and sixty acres, located twenty miles
northeast of Burwell, and later took a homestead nine miles from
Burwell. The farm on which he now lives is situated in section 1,
township 21, range 15. Here he engages in the culture of grain,
raising corn, oats, wheat, etc., also runs some stock, raising
alfalfa for his stock, and this yields a good crop at each
cutting, the valley land being particularly adapted to its
productions. It averages two tons per acres, and Mr. Key considers
it the best feed possible for all stock. Mr. Key is of the opinion
that only one-half of the amount of money and labor is needed here
in order to accomplish good results that is required in the
eastern states, and says that five hundred dollars here is equal
to two or three times that sum there. He also says that any man
who is possessed of five hundred dollars who is willing to work,
will become almost independently rich here in a reasonable time.
He is himself a prac-
Compendium of History
Reminiscence & Biography of Western
tical farmer and employs modern methods in his operations.
Mr. Key was married in 1887 to
Miss Jennie M. Scofield, a native of Adair county, Iowa, whose
parents were well-to-do farmers there. Mr. and Mrs. Key reared
five children, namely: Eldon L., James Walter, Roy Everett, Lloyd
and Hazel. Mrs. Key died March 15th, 1906, and her loss was deeply
felt by her devoted family and a host of sympathetic friends.
Mr. Key is an Independent
politically and owes allegiance to no party, although he takes an
active interest in all affairs of moment in his locality and is
prominently connected with all movements for the public good and
the bettering of conditions in his region.
Eugene Beal, sheriff of Keith
county, Nebraska, is one of the strong political leaders of the
county and has a large and increasing constituency. He is a
capable official and makes friends wherever he goes.
Eugene Beal is a native son of
Nebraska, born in Crab Orchard, Johnson county, July 23, 1877, and
is of German-Irish stock. His father, John Beal, a native of Knox
county, Ohio, was a pioneer of the state, coming to Gage county in
the early sixties. Our subject's mother, Maria J. Lovitt, was also
born in Knox county, Ohio, from which state the family moved to
Nebraska; at that time their supplies had to be freighted from
Nebraska City, the nearest river town.
Our subject was reared on a farm
on the frontier of eastern Nebraska, becoming inured to hard work,
receiving a good common school education and graduating from the
Business College at Beatrice.
Eugene Beal enlisted in Company
C, First Nebraska Regiment, for service during the
Spanish-American war and the Philippine insurrection in the
Philippines. He mustered in at Lincoln, May 1, 1898, and his
record as a soldier is as follows:
Enrolled April 27, 1898, for the
Spanish-American war and the Philippine insurrection in 1899,
participating in the following engagements: Santa Mesa, February
4th and 5th; captured water works, February 6th; Marquina Road,
February 17th, Dam Farm Del Monte, March 25th; Meycouyan, March
26th; Marilou, March 27th-29th; Guiguinte, March 29th and 30th;
Cupin Malolos, March 31st; Quinga and Bag Bag River, April 24th;
Calumpit, March 25th; Santa Thomas, May 4th. Mustered out August
25, 1899, at San Francisco and returned to his home in Nebraska.
He was next employed by the Chicago, Burlington and Quincy
Railroad Company for six months and an equal time as deputy clerk
in the district court and for one year deputy sheriff of Gage
In June, 1902, he came to Keith
county, where he purchased six hundred acres of land and went into
the ranching business, cultivating two hundred and seventy-five
acres of the land.
Mr. Beal was married in June,
1902, to Miss Zelma L. Hodges and the union has been blessed with
three children: Barney L., Hellen and Theodore.
Our subject was elected sheriff
of Keith county in 1907, and is the present incumbent. He has held
other offices of trust and responsibility in the community and is
regarded as an efficient and conscientious public man.
E. Bauder, a prosperous and
energetic farmer of Sheridan county, Nebraska. resides on his well
improved estate in section 3, township 32, range 43. He is a
gentleman of much energy and determination, and is also one of the
early settlers of this region.
Mr. Bauder was born in Montgomery
county, New York, in 1850, and raised and educated there. His
father, Simion Bauder, is a native of New York, and came west,
locating in Kansas, where he died, and after his death his wife
took her little family and went back to their old home in New
York. Our subject was one of three children, and at the age of
eleven he began working out by the month on farms to support
himself, and for twenty-two years followed this occupation. In the
fall of 1884 he left New York and came to Nebraska, locating on
the place he now occupies, driving the distance from Valentine to
where he lives with teams and covered wagon containing his
household goods. When he arrived here the ground was covered with
snow and the first night after reaching Gordon, a blizzard struck
the place and ripped the cover off the stage in which they were
riding. This was a disagreeable and unpleasant experience, but no
serious damage resulted from the storm. He at once went to work on
his homestead, the following year building a sod house, and did
well at farming until the dry period came on and he lost all he
had made, and became so discouraged that had he been offered two
hundred dollars for his land, he would have sold it and quit.
However, he was obliged to stick to it and managed to live and
support his family during the hard times, which lasted from 1890
to 1900. Since then
he has gathered together eleven quarter sections of good land,
and his place is well improved and all fenced. He has a drove of
some two hundred head of stock, and is one of the most progressive
agriculturists of the community in which he lives. He now has the
blocks all made with which he intends to erect a fine cement house
in the spring. He enjoys a comfortable home and pleasant
surroundings, and has seen plenty of pioneer life and does not
care for any more.
In 1887 Mr. Bauder was married to
Miss Etta Addick, a native of New York state. Her father and
mother were both natives of New York state, the former having died
when she was a mere child. Mr. and Mrs. Bauder have one child,
George E., born and raised in this locality.
Mr. Bauder is one of the men who
have devoted both time and money to assist in the development of
the locality in which he chose his home. He takes an active part
in all local affairs. and has served his county as commissioner
for one term. He is an Independent voter.
Robert C. Snodgrass, a
capable and progressive farmer of township 30, range 46, Sheridan
county, is recognized as a citizen of worth and one of the leading
agriculturists of his community.
Mr. Snodgrass was born in West
Virginia in 1857, and is a son of Isaac Snodgrass, of
German-American stock, born and raised in West Virginia, a farmer
by occupation. He died there in 1859, when our subject was two
years of age, leaving a family of five children, his wife
remaining on the home farm until they were grown up. Our subject
was the third child in order of birth, and as soon as he was old
enough he began assisting in the farm work, hoeing corn when he
was a small lad, and helped his mother until he was twenty-one
years of age. He determined to start out for himself and borrowed
twenty dollars to start west on, as he thought that the best field
for a young man of small capital. He got as far as Indiana, and
was obliged to stop there while he earned more money, and in 1881,
landed in Iowa. Here he worked out for a time, and then took a
farm and ran it for four years, when he left there and came to
Nebraska in 1888, locating in Sheridan county. Here he took a
homestead and lived on it for two years, then purchased the
relinquishment on the farm which he now occupies. He set to work
improving this place and proved up on it. He first erected a sod
house and lived in this for several years. He put on all the
improvements himself, saving the cost of any hired help, and at
the same time was raising crops up to 1891, when the dry years
struck his locality and for several years was only able to raise
sufficient to keep the family in provisions and save enough for
the next year's seed. For the past eight years he has raised
excellent crops, getting better each year, and he has gradually
added to his place until he is now owner of six hundred and forty
acres of good land, and also leases some near his own farm. On his
farm there is a deep gulch which serves as a shed for his stock,
of which he has about one hundred head of cattle and thirty
horses. He finds stock raising to be most profitable and intends
to engage in it on a larger scale from now on. He farms about one
hundred and seventy-five acres, and uses a large portion of the
produce on his farm, marketing very little of it. He is delighted
with the farming possibilities in this section of the country, and
after having experience in Iowa and other states, would not trade
his farm here for any he ever saw.
Mr. Snodgrass was married in 1883
to Miss Lottie Worley, born in Delaware county, Iowa, in 1862.
They have a family of five children, namely: Vernon L., John
Earle, Richard Leroy, Dora Agnes and Dale Carleton, all born and
raised in Nebraska.
Mr. Snodgrass lived on his
present farm during the Indian scare of 1891, and remained there
through the dangerous times, although he never experienced any
serious trouble from the redskins. At this time his wife was
visiting relatives in Iowa, and on two occasions Mr. Snodgrass,
together with several neighbors, went to Hay Springs to spend the
night for fear of being surprised and injured by the savages, but
the balance of the time he stayed at home. The people were in a
high state of excitement, and every church in the section was a
meeting place and refuge for them.
Mr. Snodgrass is a Republican,
and although he takes a keen interest in local and county affairs
has never held office. An interesting picture of a ranch scene of
Mr. Snodgrass' property will be found elsewhere.
I. E.
I. E. Montgomery, of
Bloomington, Franklin county, Nebraska, is president of the Valley
Investment Company, organized in 1903, incorporated and started in
1881. It came into
the above gentleman's hands in 1892, and since that time he has
been manager of the concern, whose operations extend over this and
the adjoining counties in Nebraska and Kansas. It is the largest
company of its kind in this section of the country, and makes a
specialty of loans on good farm and business property, with ample
capital for all demands on A1 security. In the sale of lands it
has done a large and constantly increasing business, and the
promoters of the concern have advertised extensively this section
throughout Iowa, northern Missouri and Illinois, and brought a
large number of settlers here in the past twenty years, who have
proved to be of the industrious and progressive farming class, and
who have been successful here beyond all expectations, the land
increasing in value from five to forty, then to sixty, and
exceptionally located lands close to the town, at eighty to one
hundred dollars per acre, in that time, which is the measure of
success which has come to buyers who have held on to their
The Valley Investment Company has
a paid up capital of ten thousand dollars, surplus two thousand
dollars, with officers as follows: President, I. E. Montgomery;
cashier, J. W. Knikbride, and O. H. Montgomery, vice-president.
They also write insurance in the leading companies, and have a
large business in this line. In the fall of 1902 our subject
organized the Bloomington Telephone Company, incorporating it with
a capital of five thousand dollar, and since its start the
business has developed rapidly. In 1904 the capitalization was
found to be too small for the operations of the company, and in
the spring of the following year Mr. Montgomery secured control of
the Franklin Telephone Company and he then incorporated the
Republican Valley Telephone Company with an authorized capital of
one hundred thousand dollars, this company being a consolidation
of the Bloomington and the Franklin Telephone Companies. The new
company has a paid up capital of seventeen thousand dollars. The
company owns the exchanges in the towns of Bloomington, using two
hundred 'phones, and Franklin, with the same number, operating in
all over four hundred telephones of their lines of six hundred
'phones, and new telephones are being constantly installed. This
company owns the toll lines east from Republic City, Nebraska, to
midway between Franklin and Riverton, also the toll line from
Franklin to Macon, and operate, under arrangement, over the Bell
telephone toll lines in every direction to this and the adjoining
The Republican Valley Telephone
Company rebuilt the Franklin system in the summer of 1905,
installing a new two hundred capacity visual signal switchboard,
as well as about twenty-five hundred feet of cable, and in the
fall of 1906 they erected a fine brick central office building in
Bloomington, with every up-to-date fixture and improvement to be
had, installing an additional one hundred capacity switchboard and
three thousand feet of cable, and the whole system is now in the
best possible shape. Besides Mr. Montgomery's interest in the
telephone company he is proprietor of about one thousand acres of
farm lands, and buys, sells and rents from time to time. Much of
his time is taken up in public affairs, and for sixteen years he
was in the court house at Bloomington. From May 1884, to January,
1888, he served as deputy county treasurer, and from the latter
date to August, 1891, was deputy county clerk, resigning at that
time to look after the campaign as candidate for clerk of the
district court. At that time the fusion party had a majority of
two hundred to three hundred in the county, but our subject had
been so successful as deputy treasurer and clerk that he was
elected on the Republican ticket by a majority of one hundred and
twenty-five, he and L. A. Siegel, county clerk, being the only
Republicans to be elected. Mr. Montgomery served as clerk of the
district court for four years, from January 1, 1892, up to January
1, 1896, and was re-elected in the fall of 1895, serving for four
more years. He was the first clerk of the district court in this
county, where the office is separate from that of county clerk.
While acting as deputy county clerk he did the work of a district
court clerk, from January, 1888, up to July, 1891. During the
years 1901-'02 he took a course in law at the Nebraska State
University, graduating in June, and was admitted to the supreme
court bar and all state courts in the month, also to the United
States circuit court and the district courts in November, 1902. In
his practice he made a specialty of real estate and probate
Mr. I. E. Montgomery is a native
of Mankato, Minnesota, born in 1866. His father, R. W. Montgomery,
is a veteran of the Civil war, having enlisted in 1862 in the
Second Minnesota Cavalry, and served up to 1865. He is secretary
of the Masonic lodge at Bloomington, and prominent in Grand Army
of the Republic circles.
He married Miss Eliza Burns,
born, in Ire-
land, near Dublin, who came to this country about 1856,
locating in Pekin, Illinois. Our subject was educated in the
Nebraska schools, and after finishing his education taught for one
year in Smith county, Kansas. He has one brother, C. D.
Montgomery, associated with the Mergenthaler Linotype Machine
Company, of Chicago and New York. Our subject has lived in
Bloomington continuously since 1881, and prior to that resided in
Furnas county, near Precept, and also in Beaver City. In 1890 Mr.
Montgomery was married to Miss Oma Hildreth, daughter of Wilson
Hildreth, deceased, formerly of Franklin county, and of this
marriage one child was born, named Elizabeth.
The family are members of the
Methodist Episcopal church at Bloomington, Mr. Montgomery acting
as trustee. He is also a member of the school board, serving on
that body since 1901, first as chairman and secretary, and is now
ALTNA S.
GERDES
Altna S. Gerdes, who resides in
township 27, range 47, Box Butte county, was born in Hanover
province, Germany, in 1858. His father was a farmer and day
laborer, and our subject was reared in his native town, where he
followed farm work until he was twenty-six years of age. After
reaching manhood he serve for three years in the German army, and
in 1884 left the old country and came to America, landing at New
York. After landing here he remained for some time in New York
city, then came to Illinois, where he was employed for three years
on a stock farm. In 1887 he came west, locating in Box Butte
county, Nebraska, landing in Hay Springs on June 1, 1887. Here he
filed on a pre-emption in section 2, township 27, range 47,
putting up sod buildings and digging a well, as there was trouble
from lack of water in this vicinity. He remained on that place but
one year, then settled on a homestead in section 13, on which he
lived for ten years. His first poor year was in 1890. The
following two years he was able to raise good crops, but again in
1894, 1895, and 1896 the drouths (sic) caused failures of crops
and he had a hard time to get along and improve his place. During
those times his nearest trading point was Alliance, and he was
obliged to make many trips to Pine Ridge for wood, camping out
along the road on the journey. About this time Mr. Gerdes started
in the stock business. His beginning was one cow and a calf, which
he bought in 1887, and he kept increasing his herd and has dealt
in stock principally since that time, and all the cattle he ever
bought was six head, from this number developing a fine herd, at
times running as high as three hundred and twenty-five head of
cattle. He has marketed many carloads, all of them being from the
increase of his original six head. Mr. Gerdes now owns a ranch of
two thousand acres, all in Box Butte and Sheridan counties. He has
good buildings, fences, etc., with three wells and windmills. He
only cultivates forty acres, keeping all the rest for pasture,
grass and hay land for his stock.
In 1898 Mr. Gerdes was married to
Line Taylor, a widow, daughter of C. C. Ruggles, who was one of
the first settlers in this county. Mr. and Mrs. Gerdes are the
parents of two sons, George, aged nine years, and John, aged seven
Our subject is one of the leading
men and old-timers of this part of the state, who has always taken
an active part in its history from the beginning. He is a
Republican.
The subject of this review,
residing at North Platte, Nebraska, is one of the oldest railroad
men in this section of the state. He has been in this line of work
since 1870, and is familiar with every branch of the business and
an authority on all matters pertaining to railway affairs.
Mr. Elliott is a native of
England, born in Kent in 1848, and a son of Frederick Elliott, Sr.
His grandfather, Stephen Elliott, served for forty-four years in
the British navy. There were ten sons in the family, and of this
number nine left the mother country and came to the United States
to build up homes and make a fortune for themselves. The Elliott
family first came from Scotland to Ireland, and later settled in
Kent, England, and it was there that our subject was raised until
the age of twenty, beginning to work in the machine shop of the
ship yards there, where he learned the trade which he has followed
ever since. At twenty years of age he started out for the new
world and landed in America in 1869. He came west and settled in
Nebraska, beginning work in the railway shops at Omaha in 1870,
and from that time up to 1881 he had been employed on most of the
leading roads in this section of the country. During the latter
year he first started to work for the Union Pacific, and has been
with that com-
pany ever since that time, with headquarters at North Platte.
He is now employed as foreman of the blacksmith shop in that city,
and has held this position for the past five years.
While Mr. Elliott still lived in
England he married Miss Bessie Peets, at Ramsgate, and together
the young couple came to the United States, where they have worked
hard to establish a home, and have a fine family of three
children, all filling honorable positions in the world. The
eldest, Professor Ed. C. Elliott, graduated from the North Platte
high school in 1891 and entered the Nebraska State University,
where he received the degree of Bachelor of Science and Master of
Arts, afterwards entering the Columbia College, New York, where he
earned the title of Doctor of Philosophy. He also studied in
Germany for some time, and is now filling the chair of pedagogy at
the University of Wisconsin. The second son, Fred Elliott, Jr., is
also a graduate of the North Platte high school, and has a good
position with the Union Pacific Railway Company shops in Omaha as
a coach carpenter. Benjamin G. Elliott, the youngest son, was
graduated from his home high school, and is now attending the
School of Technology at Terre Haute, Indiana.
The family are prominent members
of the Episcopal church at North Platte, and enjoy the esteem and
friendship of a large circle of people in their community.
William D. Connell,
residing on section 6, township 32, range 50, Dawes county, is
well known as a successful and prosperous agriculturist of his
locality. He is among the earliest settlers in western Nebraska,
and has aided materially in the development of the region by his
active interest in promoting the commercial and agricultural
resources of the county, and is highly respected and esteemed by
all who know him.
Mr. Connell was born in Polk
county, Iowa, near Des Moines, in 1855. His father, John Connell,
was a butcher by trade, born in Ohio, of Irish stock, and he
married Charity Scribner, who was of German parentage. As a boy
our subject lived in Iowa, Missouri and Kansas, learning the
butcher's business early in life, which he followed for fifteen
years. When he was twelve years of age he started out for himself
and traveled over the western states quite extensively. In 1885 he
came to Dawes county, and at that time the railroad only came as
far as Valentine. He made his first settlement two and a half
miles east of Whitney, then a small town, and his first dwelling
was a log shanty sixteen by thirty-two. The following year his
family joined him, and they remained on this place up to 1897,
then located in section 6, township 32, range 50, where he now
lives. Here he has put up good buildings and all necessary
improvements and machinery for operating his farm. He has his
place all fenced, and plenty of good water, the White river
running through the farm. He owns one hundred and sixty acres, and
has plenty of hay land and alfalfa, and engages in stock raising,
doing but little farming. He buys and sells considerable stock,
running principally horses and cattle, When he first came here he
drove from Valentine, and in making another trip to the Missouri
river was compelled to drive all the way from Hay Springs, as
there was no railway through then.
In 1874 Mr. Connell was married
to Miss Eva A. Ballard, daughter of Martin Ballard, an attorney at
Blair, Nebraska, where for a time after his marriage Mr. Connell
was engaged in the butcher business. Mr. and Mrs. Connell have
three children, who are named as follows: Lillie M., C. F. Connell
and Gertie S.
SAMUEL W.
Samuel W. Carey, who
occupies a foremost position among the prominent old settlers of
western Nebraska, resides at Crawford, in Dawes county, and is the
owner of a fine farm and comfortable home in section 7, township
32, range 53. He has spent many years in accumulating this
property, and his entire career has been marked by industrious
effort and honest dealings. On another page we present a picture
of Mr. Carey with his family and grandson.
Mr. Carey is a native of
Hillsborough county, New Hampshire, born in 1832. He is a worthy
descendant of an old American family and a son of Samuel, also a
farmer all his life. His mother's maiden name was Harriet Prouty.
Our subject was raised in his
native state and remained there during his young manhood,
following farm work for many years. In 1862 Mr. Carey came west,
first locating in Chicago, where he remained for a short time. He
came to Nebraska, locating in Sioux county in 1887, and at the
time he struck this region the country was practically in its
primitive state, there being no roads or bridges,
and only a few scattering settlers in the county. He picked out
a location thirteen miles northwest of Crawford, the tract being
situated on School and Cottonwood creeks, and lived there for
about five years, proving up on the place as a homestead. He had a
hard time getting started, meeting with many discouragements on
account of crop failures, etc., and finally purchased and moved to
the farm on section 7 in 1892, and at once began to put up
improvements in the way of buildings, fences and cultivating the
land for crops. The ranch contains four hundred and eighty acres,
and is well supplied with timber, water, etc., and he engages in
mixed farming and stock raising. He has put in all his time on the
place since coming here, and his labors have been well rewarded,
as is evidenced by the well tilled fields and well kept appearance
of every corner of his property. Mr. Carey still owns his ranch in
Sioux county, but of late has bought out the Charles Bowers
foundry plant at Crawford, Dawes county, Nebraska, and is putting
it in fine shape for general business, and he lives on the site,
occupying several acres. Mr. Carey is a born mechanic and served
his apprenticeship in New York when a young man.
Mr. Carey was married in 1863 to
Martha Procunier, a daughter of Isaac Procunier, of German
descent. Her mother's maiden name was Annie McClish, of Scotch
descent. Our subject and his estimable wife have had a family of
five children, who are named as follows: Leona, Elmina, Adelaide,
Hattie, and Martha. Leona died in May, 1903.
Mr. Carey is one of the
well-to-do men of his locality and enjoys a happy and peaceful
home and many friends. He is held in high esteem as a worthy
citizen and a good neighbor. He is a stanch Bryan Democrat. Mr.
Carey was one of the first men to build a fence in his township,
and also one of the first to have any surveying done. He also
bought the first sawmill into the district, and owned it.
Albert G. Holt, widely
known as one of the leading business men of Johnstown, Brown
county, is a gentleman of integrity and sterling character, who
has gained the confidence and esteem of the people among whom he
has resided for the past twenty-two years. He is the banker of the
above town, and a worthy citizen of his community.
Mr. Holt is a native of Missouri
City, Clay county, Missouri, born January 15, 1861. His father,
John D. Holt, was a merchant and produce shipper, of old American
stock, and the mother in maidenhood was Martha M. Peery. The
family consisted of six children, of whom our subject is the
fourth member. He was reared in Missouri City, some twenty-one
miles east of Kansas City. For two years the family lived at Holt,
Missouri, and subsequently spent two years in Gainsville, Texas,
returning to Missouri City. Mr. Holt had learned the telegrapher's
art and worked at Liberty, on the Hannibal & St. Joseph
Railway, for some time. At the age of twenty-two he came to Long
Pine, filing on a homestead. He then went to Blair, Nebraska, and
worked as a telegraph operator for several years, and while there
was married. In 1887 he came to Johnstown as station agent for the
Fremont, Elkhorn & Missouri Valley Railroad, first known as
the Sioux City & Pacific, which position he held for six
years. He was afterwards postmaster during Cleveland's second
administration, serving one term. He has always taken an active
part in politics, attending many national conventions,
particularly since 1896, and is known as one of the
public-spirited men of this section.
During the dry years throughout
this region Mr. Holt was extensively engaged in the poultry and
game business in Johnstown, his trade amounting to forty thousand
or fifty thousand dollars each year, and through this venture he
accumulated a large part of his property. He now owns a fine ranch
of twelve hundred acres, on which he runs as high as two hundred
head of cattle.
Mr. Holt was married near
Ellendale, South Dakota, to Miss Mary Towne, daughter of DeWitt C.
Towne, who married Julia B. Goodman. To Mr. and Mrs. Holt seven
children have been born: Nellie C., who is cashier in the bank;
Hazel M., John Albert, Louis C., Cleora Ruth, Grace and Clifford
Towne.
In 1901 Mr. Holt established the
Citizens' Bank in Johnstown, which he is now operating, it being
considered one of the most reliable banking houses in western
Nebraska. He is a stanch Democrat in politics, a member of the
Modern Woodman of America and the Ancient Order United Workmen at
Johnstown. He is a member of the Christian church, while the
family are communicants of the Episcopalian church.
James A. Farmer, one of the
extensive agriculturists of Marvin precinct, is also one of
the very early settlers in Perkins county. He is a man of
active public spirit and broad mind, and has an enviable
reputation as a worthy citizen.
Mr. Farmer was born in Jefferson
county, Ohio, in 1845, and was reared on a farm there. Both of his
parents were natives of that state and spent many years as
farmers.
When James was about twelve years
of age he started to support himself, and since that time has
drifted from one place to another and has seen much of the country
in his wanderings. In 1863 he enlisted in Company H. Eleventh Ohio
Cavalry, and was sent west with his regiment, going into the
Dakotas, Montana, Colorado and Wyoming. All of his service in the
west was in fighting the Indians. He also saw service after the
raider Morgan and after the guerrilla Quantrell. After his
discharge from the army, in 1866, he returned to Ohio and remained
there up to the spring of 1884, following farming all of the time.
He was married there in 1869 to Miss Elizabeth Chamber, born in
Virginia, and to them were born three children, Denver, Edgar and
Flora, all bright and intelligent young people. The family came to
Kearney county, Nebraska, and lived in that vicinity for one year,
then came to Perkins county, where they were among the
pioneers--but few were here at that time. The country was entirely
unimproved, and they went through many hardships and privations in
getting a home started, all their supplies being hauled from North
Platte, a distance of sixty miles from their claim. Mr. Farmer
made many trips to that point, the journey taking several days
through rough and unbroken roads, and the nights were spent in
camping out under his wagon. He improved his farm as he was able,
putting up substantial buildings, planting groves, etc., and now
has a very valuable property. His home is on section 6, township
9, range 35, and he has one hundred and twenty acres of which is
cultivated and the rest used for pasture and hay land for stock,
of which he has quite a bunch, including cattle, horses, hogs and
sheep.
When Mr. Farmer landed in this
section of the country he had but little capital to start with. He
went to work with a will to carve out a fortune and establish a
good home for himself and family, and the result must be highly
satisfactory to him, as every dollar of his property has been
gained through his own efforts, and he can enjoy his declining
years with the knowledge of "duty well spent." Mr. Farmer is a
Republican and takes an active part in Republican politics.
LEANDER KARR
BIVENS
Leander Karr Bivens, one of
the early settlers and prosperous ranchmen of Thomas county,
Nebraska, resides on his pleasant estate and enjoys the comforts
of rural life and the respect and esteem of a large circle of
Mr. Bivens was born in
Pennsylvania in 1834. His father, Leonard Bivens, was of Yankee
stock, a blacksmith by trade, and he married Nancy Sarver, who
came of Pennsylvania Dutch stock. Leander was raised in his native
state until he was nine years of age, when his parents came to
Illinois, where he spent his boyhood, remaining there up to 1854.
He then drifted to Utah and during the time he was in Utah he was
for a time engaged in carrying the United States mail, and was
through all sorts of exciting times, making his trips at times
through the severest storms, and at one time barely escaped with
his life when caught in a blizzard, and had fourteen mules freeze
to death on one trip.
Thirty-five years of Mr. Bivens'
career were spent in roving the western states, and he has passed
through some of the most thrilling adventures during his life on
the frontier, experiencing every form of pioneer hardship and
privation. During the "gold fever, " which struck the whole
country at different times, he was one of the foremost in the
different expeditions formed in the west, and in pursuit of the
shining metal which tempted so many from home to the gold regions,
he figures that he has spent not less than fifty thousand dollars
prospecting in the western gold fields of California, Greenwood
Valley and British Columbia.
In 1886 Mr. Bivens first came to
Thomas county, Nebraska, two years before it was organized, took a
pre-emption and homestead and proved up on both claims. He had a
hard time to make a living during the first few years on the
place, but stuck to it, determined to succeed, going through the
usual pioneer times and finally became able to add improvements to
his farm, erect good buildings, etc., gradually adding to his
original homestead, until he is now owner of one whole section,
which he uses for stock raising, the greater portion used for
grass and hay land. He has built five miles of fence, and every
improvement necessary in the way of buildings, machinery, etc. He
has a beautiful lake on the ranch, well stocked with fish, and has
any number of fine shade and fruit trees, which he planted many
years ago. Altogether his place is one of the best equipped and
most pleasantly situated in this part of the coun-
© 2000, 2001 for NEGenWeb Project Resource
Center by T&C Miller | 农业 |
2017-04/0036/en_head.json.gz/3784 | More B.C. organic farmers have All the Dirt on small-scale agricultureRANDY SHORE, Vancouver Sun 03.08.2012Heather Stretch works in all weather on Northbrook Farm, her small-scale organic farm on Vancouver Island. Stretch is one of the authors of All The Dirt, a book about farming.ExternalShareAdjustCommentPrintA new book by three Vancouver Island organic farmers is both an inspirational account of modern agricultural life and a cautionary tale of long hours and low pay.All The Dirt: Reflections on Organic Farming is a memoir and an instruction manual written by a trio of young women who each started her own small-scale farm about 10 years ago. They soon joined forces to create a sales, distribution and marketing firm for their produce.The three principals of Saanich Organics — Heather Stretch, Rachel Fisher and Robin Tunnicliffe — will be in Vancouver Friday at 7 p.m. to give a talk about organic farming at the People’s Co-op Bookstore at 1391 Commercial Drive.“One of the ways we can begin to fix our food system and create more sustainably grown food is to encourage people to start farming in a small-scale sustainable way,” said Stretch. “We can’t keep preaching to people to buy locally grown, organic produce if that food isn’t available.”The answer is more farmers, and each of the authors answered the call in her early twenties, just about the time their friends were starting urban careers and families. But each was energized by the good they felt they were doing for themselves, their customers and the Earth.Even though each had her own farm, they often held work parties for the sense of community it gave them. Eventually they added children, spouses and apprentices to keep them company as more acreage came under crops.The book is their way of helping prospective farmers understand what they are getting into, to provide a “replicatable model” of sustainable farming and answer important questions. How do I choose land? What should I plant? What sells? How do I sell it? How much money will I make?All The Dirt provides answers rooted in real-world experience, both successes and failures. Stretch knows firsthand how easy it is to get starry-eyed about potential yields and tragically ambitious about how much land you can productively manage on your own.Two important points common to the stories of all three authors: The yield of your farm is more closely related to the amount of labour applied than it is to the amount of land under crops, and, it will take at least three to four years before you pay yourself a living wage.You might also want to revise downward your idea of a living wage.“If you are fired up and you want to start growing food or be more committed to eating sustainably and promoting food security, then our stories will be inspiring,” said Stretch.The authors’ exuberance for their lifestyle choice — don’t kid yourself, it’s not a job — comes through clearly, as does the growth in material rewards they gleaned from gaining skill, knowledge and experience.For those in love with the idea of sustainable farming, but who harbour doubts about the life it entails, All The Dirt just might tip you in the right direction.“The people who will read it as a cautionary tale are as important an audience to me as those who will read it as an inspirational tale,” said Stretch. “If [small-scale farming] is not the right thing for you, the $30 price tag of the book is a bargain; it might save you tens of thousands of dollars and years of crushing disappointment.”Worst case scenario, All The Dirt will alert you to dozens of things about growing on a commercial scale that you have never considered and it offers a window into a kind of farming that is gaining traction as a viable career.“People — even people who don’t want to be farmers but who are just interested in how we do things and why we do it — ask us a lot of questions,” said Stretch. “We thought it would take a book to answer all those questions. We each have more than a decade of experience at this and are pretty confident of our opinions and so we wrote it down.”“We are still close enough to that start-up experience to be of benefit to people who are thinking about starting a farm,” she said. “We also have the experience to say what works and what doesn’t.”[email protected]
xShareB.C. organic farmers have All the Dirt on small-scale agriculture | 农业 |
2017-04/0036/en_head.json.gz/4149 | Shedding New Light on Wheat Adaptation and Domestication News Apr 03, 2013
Chinese Scientists Report the Latest Genomic Studies of Wheat, Shedding New Light on Crop Adaptation and Domestication -Two Separate Studies Published Online in the Same Issue of NaturePublish Date:2013-03-25March 25, 2013, Shenzhen, China – The advanced online publication version of Nature today presents two manuscripts that provide an unprecedented glimpse into the adaptation and domestication of wheat. These achievements are the results of joint efforts led by the Institute of Genetics and Developmental Biology (IGDB), Chinese Academy of Sciences, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences (CAAS), and BGI. The two projects sequenced and analyzed two ancestral wheat genomes of Triticum urartu and Aegilops tauschii, respectively, throwing light on the biology of the world’s primary staple crop and providing valuable new resource for the genetic improvement of wheat.Wheat is a globally important crop due to its enhanced adaptability to a wide range of climates and improved grain quality for the production of baker’s flour. Major efforts are underway worldwide to increase its yield and quality by increasing genetic diversity and analyzing key traits related to its resistance to cold, drought and disease. However, the extremely large size and polyploid complexity of the wheat genome has to date been a substantial barrier for researchers to gain insight into its biology and evolution.The first manuscript, led by teams at IGDB and BGI, presents the genome of Bread wheat (T. aestivum, AABBDD), the progenitor of the Wheat A genome. Using a whole-genome shotgun strategy and Next-generation sequencing (NGS), researchers identified a large set of gene models (34,879) and abundant genetic markers with the potential to provide a valuable resource for accelerating deeper and more systematic genomic and breeding studies. For example, they found the T. urartu homolog of OsGASR7 might be a useful candidate for improving wheat yield. The discovery of 2,989,540 SNPs (single nucleotide polymorphisms) is useful for the future development and characterization of genetic markers. The researchers also reported genomic evidence of the role of repeat expansion in the enlargement of genome size during the evolution of the Triticeae tribe of grasses.Ae. tauschii (DD), also known as Tausch's goatgrass, is a diploid goat grass species which has contributed the D genome of common wheat. Around 8,000 years ago in the Fertile Crescent, it crossed with the tetraploid wheat T. turgidum (AABB) in rare hybridization events that resulted in the hexaploid wheat T. aestivum. However, the modern strategy of breeding for hybrid vigor has been accompanied by marked changes in patterns of gene expression.The second manuscript, led by teams at CAAS and BGI, focuses on the genome sequencing and analysis of the wild diploid grass Ae. tauschii. They found that more than 65.9% of the Ae. tauschii genome was comprised of 410 different transposable element (TE) families, and the expansion of the Ae. tauschii genome was relatively recent and coincided with the abrupt climate change that occurred during the Pliocene Epoch. They also found the expansion of the micro-RNA miR2275 family may contribute to Ae. Tauschii’ s enhanced disease resistance. Remarkably, a higher number of genes for the cytochrome P450 family were identified in Ae. tauschii (485) than sorghum (365), rice (333), Brachypodium (262) and maize (261). This family of genes has been found to be important for abiotic stress response, especially in biosynthetic and detoxification pathways.Shancen Zhao, Project Manager of BGI, said, “Genetic improvement of crops is the key output of breeding research. The genomic data provides a valuable resource for botanists and breeders to comprehensively understand wheat’s genetic diversity and evolutionary history. The two studies also represent a major step forward for improving this vital crop in the face of global climate change, growing human population, and bio-energy. ”Providing the global agricultural community with these resources new resources for crop improvement and in keeping with the scientific community’s goals of making all data fully and freely available, the huge amounts of data (1.5 terabytes) are available in the GigaScience database, GigaDB, in a citable format (see: http://dx.doi.org/10.5524/100050 and http://dx.doi.org/10.5524/100054), and are available as raw reads in the NCBI SRA database (Accession # SRP005973 and SRP005974).
Read more RNAi Spray a Game Changer for Crop Protection News Jan 16, 2017
Read more Monsanto, NRGene Announce Collaboration News Jan 12, 2017
A New Weapon in the War Against Antibiotic Resistance Blog
Read more Seven days in science - 6 Jan 2017 Quiz | 农业 |
2017-04/0036/en_head.json.gz/5695 | PGI To Remain Organized
Potato growers from throughout Idaho met in Pocatello today and in a unanimous vote agreed to remain a viable organization for the Idaho potato industry.However, PGI will no longer be involved in contract bargaining. A new yet-to-be-named organization is being formed to include all frozen fry contract growers. This organization will conduct its own bargaining with the three largest processors operating in the state-Simplot, Lamb-Weston, and McCain Foods.In addition, the 80-plus growers agreed to approach the Idaho legislature next spring to get legislation for a mandatory check-off of all growers to finance PGI. This has been one of the biggest obstacles in PGI, some growers contributing and others not.Dan Moss, PGI president, also said that a suit against the organization by Idaho Pacific over a process contract has been settled out of court. No details of the agreement were made public. PGI had initiated an agreement with the dehy processor for potato delivery it did not make for the 1999 crop. Reason for failure to deliver was in dispute by PGI because the timetable for delivery was not clearly spelled out.Growers agreed to keep PGI the voice of the Idaho potato industry, representing the state in all national, state, and industry concerns, including PoPac.Growers also agreed to lower dues from six tenths of a percent to three tenths and to adjust dues as needed in the future. Keith Esplin, executive director, and all other officers will function in their positions until the annual December meeting.Esplin's main focus is to get a first-handlers list made up and growers re-signed. Growers in the bargaining association have already said they would re-join PGI because of the many positive benefits it can provide. District meetings will be held to inform growers and to get re-enlistment commitments. You Might Also Be Interested In... | 农业 |
2017-04/0036/en_head.json.gz/7013 | Centre store
Dairy/Deli/Bakery
Pharmacy & Beauty
Events/Awards
Generation Next Awards
Star Women Awards
Thought Starters
Green Consumers
Products & Packaging
P.E.I. dairy farmer discovers a seaweed diet dramatically cuts cows’ methane output
Dorgan said the seaweed-fed cows were healthier and produced more milk
By Canadian Press | December 11, 2016 A P.E.I. dairy farmer’s attempt to save money on feed—he fed his cows seaweed from a nearby beach—has led to a discovery that could bring a substantial reduction in greenhouse gases worldwide.
A researcher found the seaweed reduced the methane in the cows’ burps and farts, a key contributor to climate change.
“Considering that agriculture is one of the big contributors to the global greenhouse gas inventory, it’s pretty huge,” said agricultural scientist Rob Kinley.
More than 10 years ago, Joe Dorgan was a dairy farmer in Seacow Pond, near the northwestern tip of the province, with many of his cows grazing near the shore.
He decided to convert to an organic dairy farm and, as a way to save money, he started feeding seaweed to the cows as their source of minerals and vitamins.
“You live right on the beach here and our ancestors used seaweed for everything, for their animals, for their fertilizer, the whole thing,” he said.
The seaweed is plentiful and washes up on the local beaches where it is gathered using rakes hauled by horses.
“This is 100 per cent natural. As the storms toss it ashore on the beach, we gather it, dry it, process it and feed it,” he said.
Dorgan said the seaweed-fed cows were healthier and produced more milk. That’s when the light went on and he saw a business opportunity.
He sold his herd, and sought to get his seaweed product approved by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency for sale to other farmers.
Kinley, then at Dalhousie University’s faculty of Agriculture in Truro, N.S., was asked to test the animal feed that Dorgan was producing.
Kinley discovered that the product reduced the methane in the cows’ gaseous output by about 20 per cent.
He wondered if there might be other seaweeds around the world that might be even more effective at reducing the methane.
“That’s when I started the global search that brought me to Australia looking for that super seaweed, and it didn’t take long before I found it,” he said in an interview from Townsville, Australia, where he works for the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation.
“In the laboratory it was a bit of a shocker when I first found it because I thought the instruments weren’t working properly because I couldn’t find methane at all. It was reducing methanebelow the detection limits of the instruments we were using. I had never seen that before,” he said.
Agriculture is one of the big contributors to the global greenhouse gas inventory _ anywhere from 15 to 25 per cent.
The cows, sheep and other animals being served the feed still burp and fart _ but it’s almost methane free. (Kinley said 90 per cent of the methane actually comes from the burps, not the flatulence.)
Right now, there’s not enough of the particular seaweed readily available to make it commercially viable, but Kinley said he’s trying to convince some companies to get involved.
“What we need to do is find companies that already grow seaweed that are willing to change their ways. Once we can show them that it is economically viable and environmentally responsible to do so, that shouldn’t be a problem,” he said.
Most farmed seaweed is now used for cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, and fertilizers. However, Kinley said growing seaweed for animal feed would become more attractive if a carbon value is attached to it.
Meanwhile Dorgan’s company, North Atlantic Organics, is trying to keep up with demand for its products _ shipping across Canada and the United States, and some overseas.
It’s even being supplied to dog sledders in the Yukon, who feed it to their dogs, he said.
Saputo reports death of employee at Trenton, Ont. plant
Dairy processor is cooperating with authorities who are investigating the death New York milk producers facing more obstacles from Canada
Nova Scotia’s Scotsburn Ice Cream to be sold to Agropur
What departments will be front and centre for your retail marketing strategies this year?
© 2008-2017 Rogers Media Inc.
Sales Advertising | 农业 |
2017-04/0036/en_head.json.gz/7021 | Little cherry disease on the rise
A disease that causes small, bitter cherries is increasing in Washington and growers need to take it seriously before it "takes out the industry," a scientist warns.
Published on January 22, 2014 10:30AM
Courtesy/Tim Smith, WSU
Little cherry disease cherries, left, are half the size of normal cherries, right. This sample is from the Wenatchee, Wash., area, summer 2011.
Buy this photo WENATCHEE, Wash. — Little cherry disease is threatening the Washington cherry industry and growers need to take it seriously, a Washington State University research scientist says.The virus, which results in small, bitter-tasting cherries that are unmarketable, took a big jump in 2013, Tim Smith, WSU Extension tree fruit specialist, told growers at North Central Washington Stone Fruit Day, Jan. 21.The meeting was sponsored by WSU Extension and the Washington State Fruit Commission and was held at the Wenatchee Convention Center.“I’m not sure everyone recognizes how serious it is,” Smith said of the disease. “We need to jump on it now and get ahead of it before it takes out the industry.”There is no cure and the only treatment is tree removal, he said. Fieldmen at Stemilt Growers Inc. were “getting very good at spotting it” last fall and 200 acres of cherry trees were yanked out on Stemilt Hill and Wenatchee Heights, Smith said.“I would guess another 200 to 400 acres need to come out in the Wenatchee area,” he said. “Malaga has taken out a patch or two. Had they not, they would be in serious trouble by now.”The virus is difficult to detect because it’s only visible at harvest when growers are “busy doing 100 other things,” Smith said. The tree looks fine, but cherries on an edge or part of a tree aren’t ripe, he said. They finally turn red, but never taste good and are always small and sometimes heart-shaped, he said.Growers are busy so they don’t notice or if they do they think it’s just an oddity that will be gone the next year, Smith said. But they need to stop and mark those trees and check them out when they have more time, he said.It’s difficult to detect in Bing and Sweetheart, Washington’s most common varieties, and the disease spreads rapidly, seeming to “cross an orchard in lickety-split time,” he said. Fumigating the ground after tree removal doesn’t help so its best to let ground lie fallow for a year and watch trees that are left, he said.The disease is spread by mealy bugs and by roots of trees grafting into each other, Smith said.The Washington Tree Fruit Research Commission and Oregon Sweet Cherry Commission agreed in December to spend $63,479 in the first of three years of study to find out why it is increasing and develop management strategies.In 1933, the virus all but wiped out the British Columbia cherry industry and 60,000 trees, 90 percent of the total, were removed, Smith has previously said. British Columbia experienced another serious episode in the 1970s.It’s been detected in Washington since the 1930s but has never been a serious problem, he told the growers. Wet, cool springs, he believes, contributed to an uptick in 2010 and 2011.In 2010, Smith confirmed the disease in 10 out of 10 orchards he suspected. In 2011, it was eight out of eight and in 2012, it was three out of six. “In 2013, we had many suspected orchards. Too many for me to count,” he said. “Almost all were tested and confirmed.”It’s known to be throughout Central Washington and in Hood River, Ore., he said.Contacted later, Kyle Mathison, vice president of Stemilt Growers Inc. and president of Kyle Mathison Orchards, said he removed more than 100 acres on Stemilt Hill and Wenatchee Heights in 2013 and that several other growers made up the rest of the 200-acre removal. He owns hundreds more acres in the vicinity and said he’s worried.“You have to bite the bullet and take them out and start over,” he said. “Hopefully we won’t have reinfection. That’s our biggest concern. The economic loss is way bigger than a rainstorm or hailstorm because you have to wait five to six years to get back into production. It’s just devastating.”Ken Eastwell, a WSU plant pathologist in Prosser, said the disease is a significant concern but manageable with effective control of mealy bugs and tree removal. It appears to be most prominent in Wenatchee perhaps because mealy bugs prefer apples and pears and there are a lot of cherries in close proximity to apples and pears, he said.Mealy bugs are increasing for several reasons including softer, more targeted pesticides, he said. Older, harsher chemistries used for cherry fruit fly were perfectly timed to hit apple mealy bugs, he said. | 农业 |
2017-04/0036/en_head.json.gz/7022 | Freeze worries grape growers Published on January 25, 2013 3:01AM
Sean Ellis/Capital Press
A vineyard near Caldwell, Idaho, is cover in snow in early January. Unusually cold temperatures in the region have wine grape growers concerned about the impact on their vines.
Buy this photo Low temperatures persist for weeks in Idaho's wine countryBy SEAN ELLISCapital PressCALDWELL, Idaho -- A deep freeze that has persisted in the Treasure Valley for most of January has grape growers and wineries concerned about the impact to plants."I expect some damage. We're crossing our fingers here," said Ron Bitner, owner of Bitner Vineyards in Caldwell in southwestern Idaho.Temperatures have been as much as 25 degrees below normal for the past three weeks and dipped to minus 4 degrees the past three days in Caldwell, which is in the heart of Idaho's wine country.The cold "has been very persistent the last 10 days, with lows between zero and minus 5 the whole time," said Les Colin, a meteorologist with the National Weather Service's Boise office.Colin said temperatures fell to as low as minus 9 in lower elevations in places like Weiser and Ontario, Ore., for a few nights."That's starting to push the envelope here in Idaho," Bitner said. "It's too early to panic, but definitely there is some concern."Temperatures at University of Idaho's Parma research station have been well below zero for several days, but it's been much colder in some pockets in the area, said professor Essie Fallahi, UI's project leader on fruit crops."Any time the temperature gets down to that range, it might get to the tolerance limits of some plants," he said. "I'm kind of worried about some of those places in lower areas where it can get (several) degrees colder."Colin said the weather is expected to start getting quite a bit warmer later in the week, but winegrape growers are concerned about the damage that has already been done.Bitner said there have been three really cold winters in the area during the 32 years he has been growing winegrapes here and this year is the second coldest behind 1991, when temperatures stayed well below zero for an extended period of time and killed some grapevines all the way to the ground.Bitner had to retrain his plants following that cold snap, a process he said can cost about as much as planting new ones, and his vines produced about one ton per acre instead of the normal three tons per acre the next season.As the mercury flirted with zero for several days in early January, wine industry leaders said they were keeping an eye on temperatures but weren't overly worried. But it's gotten even colder since then and now they're starting to express real concern.Vines in the area are in deep dormancy and are more cold hardy this time of year because they have had time to adjust to the cold, Fallahi said.Even then, he added, he's starting to get concerned about the unusually low temperatures.According to the NWS, the average temperature for the month is on track to make this January the fifth coldest on record dating back to 1865.The average temperature is a full 15 degrees below normal.Bitner said the length of the current cold snap is also a concern."The longer it goes on, the worse it can be," he said. | 农业 |
2017-04/0036/en_head.json.gz/7261 | Alberta growers want a provincial wheat commission
By Alexis Kienlen Published: December 21, 2011 Crops
A group of Alberta farmers is pushing for the establishment of a provincial wheat commission, saying it could help unite wheat producers and drive more money into cereal research.
“We see this as an opportunity to enhance grower profitability through research and market development,” said Greg Porozni, a grain producer from Willingdon who is a member of the steering committee composed of representatives from cereal groups.
The committee has been making presentations at Alberta Canola Producers Commission regional meetings to drum up support for the proposed commission.
At present, only a small amount of grower funds is given to the Western Grains Research Foundation for research and market development. Canada is only putting about $20 million into grains research, and that’s not nearly enough, said Porozni. Australia, which produces the same amount of wheat as Canada, is currently putting about $80 million into plant breeding and research, said Porozni, adding his group would like to see an Alberta wheat commission set up Aug. 1, 2012. “Ultimately we are hoping that Saskatchewan and Manitoba will also come on side,” Porozni said.
Cereal Council of Canada
One of the long-range goals is to form a Cereal Council of Canada, similar in structure to the Canola Council of Canada, he said. “I was on the board of directors of the Canola Council of Canada and it worked extremely well,” said Porozni. “We growers worked side by side with all of the industry players and it is an absolute success. We need to get there with cereals and this is how we get there.”
The steering committee includes representatives from the Alberta Winter Wheat Producers Commission, the Alberta Barley Commission, the Alberta Canola Producers Commission, the Alberta Soft Wheat Producers Commission, and the Western Grains Research Foundation. “The reason we have that kind of a group is that we are showing that we want to work together with all sectors of industry to make this work,” said Porozni.
The move for the all-inclusive wheat commission has been building for about three years. In 2008, the Alberta Winter Wheat Producers Commission proposed an all-inclusive wheat commission be formed in Alberta in order to acquire more funds for wheat research. “Winter wheat and soft wheat only represent about five per cent of the wheat grown in Alberta,” said Porozni.
Checkoff money from that group was largely spent on administrative costs, with very little money was left for research and development.
Once an Alberta wheat commission is up and running, it should be able to invest about $3 million into research and market development each year, said Porozni.
It’s expected a provincial wheat commission would also work closely with the Western Canadian Research Foundation and the Canadian International Grains Institute.
Porozni urged the producers present at the three canola growers’ meetings he’s addressed to voice their support for the idea to the minister of agriculture. ADVERTISEMENT | 农业 |
2017-04/0036/en_head.json.gz/9212 | > Crop Yields Sign Up for Free NewsLetter Email Address
Crop Yields
The End of the Green RevolutionDecember 18, 2012 02:10 PM
Hope of Greater Global Food Output, Less Environmental Impact of AgricultureAugust 30, 2012 08:54 AM
Population has bigger effect than climate change on crop yields, study suggestsOctober 5, 2011 08:42 AM
Tropical agriculture "double-whammy": high emissions, low yieldsNovember 3, 2010 08:39 AM
According to the Malthusian theory of population, population increases in a geometrical ratio, whereas food supply increases in an arithmetic ratio. He was wrong because technology pushed improvements in yield at a far faster pace than population could grow. Still the idea is simple: There is only so much food that can be produced and if population grows then some one will starve Crop yields worldwide are not increasing quickly enough to support estimated global needs in 2050, according to a study published June 19 in the open access journal PLOS ONE by Deepak Ray and colleagues from the Institute on the Environment (IonE) at the University of Minnesota. ADVERTISEMENT Previous studies estimated that global agricultural production may need to increase by 60-110% to meet increasing demands and provide food security. In the current study, researchers assessed agricultural statistics from across the world and found that yields of four key crops- maize, rice, wheat and soybean- are increasing at rates between 0.9 -1.6 percent every year. At these rates, production of these crops would likely increase 38-67 percent by 2050, rather than the estimated requirement of 60-110 percent. The top three countries that produce rice and wheat were found to have very low rates of increase in crop yields.Historically speaking, a major increase in crop yield took place in the early eighteenth century with a change of how crops were rotated. This was followed by the Green Revolution which refers to a series of research, development, and technology transfer initiatives, occurring between the 1940s and the late 1970s, that increased agriculture production worldwide, particularly in the developing world, beginning most markedly in the late 1960s. Human overpopulation occurs if the number of people in a group exceeds the carrying capacity of the region occupied by the group. The term often refers to the relationship between the entire human population and its environment, the Earth, or to smaller geographical areas such as countries. Overpopulation can result from an increase in births, a decline in mortality rates, an increase in immigration, or an unsustainable biome and depletion of resources. "Particularly troubling are places where population and food production trajectories are at substantial odds," Ray says, "for example, in Guatemala, where the corn-dependent population is growing at the same time corn production is declining."The analysis maps global regions where yield improvements are on track to double production by 2050 and areas where investments must be targeted to increase yields. The authors explain that boosting crop yields is considered a preferred solution to meet demands, rather than clearing more land for agriculture. They add that additional strategies like reducing food waste and changing to plant-based diets can also help reduce the large estimates for increased global demand for food."Clearly, the world faces a looming agricultural crisis, with yield increases insufficient to keep up with projected demands," says IonE director Jon Foley, a co-author on the study. "The good news is, opportunities exist to increase production through more efficient use of current arable lands and increased yield growth rates by spreading best management practices. If we are to boost production in these key crops to meet projected needs, we have no time to waste."For further information see Rising Population.Crop image via Wikipedia. Tweet | 农业 |
2017-04/0036/en_head.json.gz/9572 | Farmers want answers at FDA meeting this week | New Hampshire Contact us
August 19. 2013 12:38AM
Earl Cate flips freshly cut grass so that it will dry faster, a procedure known as tedding, at his farm on Ridge Road in Loudon. Farmers will have the chance to learn about proposed federal food safety rules on Tuesday in Hanover. (UNION LEADER FILE)
Farmers want answers at FDA meeting this week
HANOVER — A meeting at Dartmouth College on Tuesday will give farmers an opportunity to meet with Food and Drug Administration officials and ask questions or express concerns regarding proposed federal regulations for farms, which some say are more suited to large-scale farms than the homespun New England variety..The event will be hosted by the New Hampshire and Vermont departments of agriculture from 9:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. at the Hopkins Center on the campus of Dartmouth College in Hanover.The session will specifically focus on FDA's proposed regulations for implementing the Food Safety Modernization Act, a 2011 law revamping food safety laws in an effort to increase the safety of the food supply...Small New England farmers could be substantially impacted by at least two of the five regulatory overhauls, which specifically target fruit and vegetable growers as well as any foods processed and packaged on farms, Lorraine S. Merrill, commissioner of the New Hampshire Department of Agriculture, Markets & Food, said on Friday...More than 100 New Hampshire farmers recently attended three University of New Hampshire Cooperative Extension workshops held to explain the proposed regulations, she said, but there is still confusion about the new rules and what their impact would be...Being able to ask FDA officials directly about the regulations on Tuesday will help tremendously, she said.However, as it stands now it appears the regulations are more appropriate for large specialized farms and not the typical New England farm that very often grows various types of produce, while at the same time keeps chickens, cattle, pigs and sheep, among other farm animals, Merrill said..."Farmers very much care about the cleanliness and safety of the food they produce. But this new law is pretty sweeping, and it doesn't fit very well with our typical New England small- and medium-size diversified farms," Merrill said...For example, there are restrictions on the use or application of manure and compost as fertilizers in terms of how long they would have to sit before food could be harvested from it, Merrill said, "and it's longer than any other previous guideline or rule."..There is also a requirement of keeping animal livestock and animals a certain distance from growing areas that could be a real challenge for small diversified farms, she said. "And then there's our wonderful New Hampshire wildlife life that romp around our fields and growing areas, and that's a concern."..There are some exemptions for small farms, but those exemptions have exceptions, she said. "They are very complicated rules and laws."And even if a small farm is exempt from a certain regulation, it could prohibit a farm from growing or expanding in the future..."At this point there are more questions than answers, which we are hoping to get from this meeting, a little better understanding. I'm hoping it's not going to be detrimental to our farmers," Merrill said..."Our farmers have many questions of just what the implications of these rules are."U.S. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-NH, and Rep. Annie Kuster, D-NH, who set up the meeting, plan to participate in the public input session. In a prepared statement they said they have been "hearing concerns about these new rules potentially burdening small farmers throughout the region.".."Our farmers represent a vital part of our economy, and they deserve protections from excessive, burdensome regulations," Shaheen and Kuster said in a joint statement. "This public forum will give our farmers an opportunity to express concerns about these new rules and regulations, and we're pleased the FDA has extended this opportunity at our request. We hope the FDA will fully consider all the concerns raised by New England's farmers and consumers before finalizing these rules."..Merrill said the first hour and half of the meeting is set aside to explain the proposed regulations, with the last hour and a half open for questions.The law passed in 2011, but these proposed regulations were released in January...The public comment period ends Sept. 16, Merrill [email protected].. | 农业 |
2017-04/0036/en_head.json.gz/9824 | Market Watch: Exotic melons a sweet success in high desert
Hollywood and Highland farmers market David Karp Ruben and Sonya Mkrtchyan sell Uzbek melons grown in Onyx. Ruben and Sonya Mkrtchyan sell Uzbek melons grown in Onyx. (David Karp) David KarpSpecial to the Los Angeles Times
Thirteen years ago, when Ruben Mkrtchyan told his wife and four children that they were going to move from Glendale to a high desert valley in the middle of nowhere to grow the world's tastiest melons, they thought he had lost his mind."My mom and I looked at each other and said, 'What is he talking about?' " recalls his daughter Tatevik. "When we went up there, the land was completely empty, just Joshua trees and scrub."
But Mkrtchyan had a vision of fields and orchards blooming in the wilderness, one that he has realized to a remarkable extent. He now grows 15 acres of legendary melon varieties from Uzbekistan and Iran, and he has just started showing up at farmers markets in Los Angeles.Mkrtchyan, born on a collective farm in the Ararat Valley, the fruit bowl of Armenia, earned the equivalent of a master's in mathematics just before the Soviet Union fell apart. In 1989, he immigrated to California, and since he didn't speak any English, he took a job in construction to support his young family. Eighteen months later, he went into business for himself as a general contractor, and in time he prospered.Mkrtchyan started taking his family camping and particularly loved Lake Isabella, at the southern end of the Sierra Nevada. He looked to buy a ranch in the area, and when a real estate agent showed him a property in a remote valley seven miles east of the tiny community of Onyx, halfway between Lake Isabella and Ridgecrest, he was smitten by the stark beauty of the arid land, rimmed by mountains."I thought, this is unbelievable, because more than the mountains I love only God," he said last Sunday, in the house that he built on the property, which is now covered with melon fields and fruit trees.The site is at the bottom of the valley, so it has a good well and is so isolated from other farms that there is little pressure from pests and diseases. That's a crucial consideration for growing Central Asian melons, which are intensely sweet and flavorful but much more susceptible than standard American varieties to fungal diseases such as powdery mildew.Uzbekistan is to melons as France is to wine, a center of excellence and diversity. The most extraordinary of Mkrtchyan's melons is the variety that he calls Mirza, a Farsi and Russian name meaning "prince" or "high nobleman." The fruits are huge and elongated — 18 inches to 2 feet long, weighing 10 to 25 pounds — with beige netting and golden stripes over a cream background. The flesh is creamy white, slightly granular, much softer than that of conventional melons, and intensely sweet and flavorful."It's like drinking from the river of the garden of paradise," said Amanda Broder-Hahn, pastry chef at Food restaurant, after tasting a sample.Obinovot (the name means "father of sugar," says Mkrtchyan) tastes similar, if slightly less rich, but may be the world's most spectacularly beautiful melon, its rind an abstract artwork of canary yellow, orange, green and brown, accented by cracks and scratches that give it the allure of antique Chinese ceramics. Mkrtchyan also grows Sharlyn (one of the few Central Asian types that has been available here), which has tender, orange flesh, and Mashhad, a large, elongated Persian variety.Mkrtchyan's melons ripen from the end of July to the first frost, typically in late October or early November. He and his wife, Sonya, started to sell two weeks ago at the new Hollywood & Highland farmers market, which runs 8 a.m. to 2 p.m. Saturdays, off Orange Drive. This weekend they will start at the Calabasas and Brentwood farmers markets, and they have also been selling some of their melons to the Jons Marketplace chain.Mkrtchyan has used his property as his own experiment station to try cultivating many crops, not all of which have succeeded. Walking through the orchards, he pointed to a pile of chainsawed, blackened cherry trees and to a grove of pears, susceptible to fire blight, that would be taken out next. Like many high desert growers (he's at an elevation of 3,200 feet), he lost most of his stone fruit this year to a late freeze. But his apricot trees — some of them grown from seeds from Armenia, the supposed homeland of the species, Prunus armeniaca — are flourishing, along with his mulberries. And he's excited about his Armenian quince, which he says bears fruit that is sweet and edible fresh like an apple. He also produces pristine, delicious honey from his beehives.Two years ago, Tatevik, who initially looked askance at her father's proposed move to Onyx, gave up the stress of working as a real estate agent to form a partnership with a beekeeper in Camarillo. She named the venture Isabell's Honey Farm after her daughter and sells orange blossom, buckwheat and sage honeys at seven farmers markets.A year ago, Mkrtchyan established the Isabell Green Foundation to provide food and aid to orphans and impoverished families, both in the Sub Caucasus and in the United States. His farm donates blemished but healthful produce. Last Sunday, half a dozen scientists on the organization's board gathered at the farm to discuss their plans for projects like soil decontamination and a new technology for drying fruits.He's eager to make use of this technology to dry his melons, some of which are unsalable because they crack. Judging by a rich-flavored, musky slice of his dried Uzbek melon, this product, which is a staple in Central Asia, could be a runaway hit at local ethnic and farmers markets.Mkrtchyan is already making plans to expand melon cultivation to 50 or even 100 acres, both near his farm and in cooperation with a grower in the Coachella Valley. One can only hope that such expansion will not dilute the delight that his farm, improbably located in the middle of nowhere, has given both him and his [email protected]
Market Watch: Melons, apples and more
Map: Explore your local farmers markets
Market Watch: The latest farmers market news by David Karp | 农业 |
2017-04/0036/en_head.json.gz/10946 | Weather report: Heat returns to the Plains
By Brad Rippey, Agricultural Meteorologist
In the West, showers associated with the monsoon circulation are heaviest in Arizona. Meanwhile in the Northwest, hot, dry weather continues to promote summer crop development and winter wheat harvesting. Idaho’s winter wheat harvest was 38% complete on August 4, compared to the 5-year average of 15%. On the Plains, hot, dry weather is bringing renewed stress to rangeland, pastures, and rain-fed summer crops in Texas and Oklahoma. Today’s high temperatures will reach or exceed 105°F across portions of the southern Plains. Meanwhile, showers dot eastern portions of the northern and central Plains. In the Corn Belt, showers and thunderstorms are generally confined to western and southwestern sections of the region, including central and southern Missouri and eastern parts of Nebraska and the Dakotas. However, more rain is needed in the heart of the western Corn Belt. On August 4, Missouri and Iowa led the nation with 15 and 14% of the soybeans, respectively, rated in very poor to poor condition. In the South, heavy showers are causing flash flooding in parts of the Mid-South, including south-central Missouri. Widely scattered showers are affecting the Southeast, although most areas are getting a reprieve from July’s incessant rainfall. On August 4, Florida led the Southeast with topsoil moisture rated 36% surplus. Outlook: During the next several days, locally heavy showers and thunderstorms will occur in the vicinity of a frontal boundary separating cool air across the northern Plains and Midwest and hot weather in the Deep South. The axis of heaviest rain will stretch from the central Plains to the northern Mid-Atlantic States, including the Ohio Valley, with 2 to 4 inches possible. Only spotty showers will affect the northern Plains and upper Midwest, while little or no rain will occur in much of Texas and the Far West. Heat will gradually shift from the southern Plains into the Southeast, but generally cool conditions will prevail across the northern and central Plains and the Midwest. Hot weather will persist across the interior Northwest, but other areas west of the Rockies will experience cool conditions. The NWS 6- to 10-day outlook for August 11-15 calls for below-normal temperatures along the Pacific Coast and from the Midwest into the Northeast, while warmer-than-normal weather will prevail across the south-central U.S. and the interior Northwest. Meanwhile, near- to above-normal rainfall across the majority of the nation will contrast with drier-than-normal conditions in the Great Lakes region and parts of the Southwest.
weatherweather reportoutlookforecastplainscorn beltraindrought About the Author:
Brad Rippey, Agricultural Meteorologist | 农业 |
2017-04/0036/en_head.json.gz/11216 | Farm interests use spending bill to fight agency regs Robin Bravender, Ben Geman and Taryn Luntz, E&E reporters
E&E Daily: Friday, June 19, 2009
House appropriators approved a $10.6 billion spending bill for U.S. EPA last night, tucking in several amendments aimed at insulating agricultural interests from the reach of federal climate regulations.
The House Appropriations Committee cleared the fiscal 2010 Interior and Environment spending bill after adding provisions to block EPA regulations requiring factory farms to report their greenhouse gas emissions and exempt livestock operations from possible carbon regulations.
The committee voted 31-27 to adopt an amendment that would prevent funding from this or any other bill to go toward a rule that requires mandatory reporting of greenhouse gases from manure management systems at large factory farms.
Agriculture "is scared to death," of the regulation, said the amendment's sponsor, Rep. Tom Latham (R-Iowa). "They don't know what it's going to cost or the impact it's going to have on their livelihood."
EPA proposed a rule in March that would establish a national reporting system for industries to document their greenhouse gas emissions. The reporting rule would affect about 13,000 facilities nationwide, including large factory farms. The public comment on the rule ended earlier this month and EPA is expected to take final action in October.
Rep. Norm Dicks (D-Wash.), chairman of the Interior and Environment Appropriations Subcommittee, dismissed Latham's concerns, saying that the EPA rule would require about 85 to 95 of the largest confined feeding operations in the nation to report their methane emissions.
"A facility of that magnitude and size can well afford to at least report in what the level of methane is," Dicks said. "I think this is something we need to know. Methane is one of the most important gases that we have to deal with if we're going to deal with this issue."
The committee also approved an amendment that would prevent the government from requiring livestock producers to obtain permits under the Clean Air Act.
Some agriculture groups and farm-state lawmakers are concerned that if EPA moves to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act, EPA could impose fees on livestock operations for the methane emissions that result from the flatulence and burps from their cows or pigs (E&E Daily, March 31). EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson has repeatedly said the agency has no intention to pursue such regulations.
But the amendment would prohibit EPA from requiring Clean Air Act permits for carbon dioxide, methane and other greenhouse gases emitted by livestock. The provision, introduced by Rep. Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.), was approved by voice vote.
Dicks offered his support for the amendment but noted that he would work with Tiahrt to ensure that the measure would remain narrowly focused and would not affect other Clean Air Act provisions.
The committee also adopted by voice vote an amendment from Rep. Mike Simpson (R-Idaho) that would require President Obama to submit a report to the House and Senate Appropriations committees detailing all the federal agencies' obligations and expenditures that pertain to climate change in fiscal 2008, fiscal 2009 and fiscal 2010.
The legislation could move to the House floor as early as next week, according to a committee aide.
Biofuels emissions amendment narrowly fails
The committee rejected, 29-30, Rep. Jo Ann Emerson's (R-Mo.) amendment that would have blocked EPA from measuring "indirect" emissions from land-use changes when calculating the carbon footprint of biofuels.
Emerson and many other farm state lawmakers -- most notably Agriculture Chairman Collin Peterson (D-Minn.) -- oppose the way EPA is determining biofuels' emissions in draft rules to implement the national renewable fuels standard that was expanded in a 2007 law (E&ENews PM, June 17).
The revised RFS requires that biofuels, to varying degrees, have fewer lifecycle greenhouse emissions than gasoline and diesel fuels. The agency in May issued draft rules that include calculation of emissions from land-use changes that are ripple effects of biofuels production.
An example of these emissions would be the release of carbon when rainforests are cleared in other countries to grow crops for food to compensate for increased use of U.S. farmland to grow fuels feedstocks.
Emerson's amendment would have prevented funds in the fiscal 2010 bill from being used to promulgate rules that measure indirect emissions from land-use changes as part of the overall calculation of biofuels emissions.
The committee also rejected an amendment from Rep. Ken Calvert (R-Calif.) that would have increased funding for an EPA program to slash emissions from old diesel engines.
The amendment, defeated by a 23-36 vote, would have increased fiscal 2010 funding from $60 million to $75 million for the Diesel Emissions Reduction Act, which was enacted as part of the 2005 Energy Policy Act with the purpose of spending $1 billion over five years to retrofit heavy-duty diesel vehicles and engines.
Water project amendment
The committee left intact the president's request for a massive spending boost for water infrastructure projects but added an amendment to ensure project workers are paid prevailing wages.
The amendment from Reps. Steven LaTourette (R-Ohio) and Jim Moran (D-Va.), would impose Davis-Bacon wage requirements on all construction projects that use money from the Clean Water State Revolving Fund and the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund. The provision passed by a voice vote.
The language could prove a stumbling block when the bill reaches the House floor, as similar amendments have repeatedly caused controversy in both chambers.
While water infrastructure funding draws bipartisan support, House lawmakers squabbled over the Davis-Bacon wage requirements contained in a water projects bill that passed in March, with Democrats generally in favor of the wage measure and Republicans generally opposed.
$84M boost for EPA
The House panel retained the overall funding levels approved for EPA last week by the Interior and Environment Appropriations Subcommittee. The bill would fund the agency at $10.6 billion -- $84 million beyond Obama's recommendation and nearly $3 billion more than its current funding level of $7.6 billion (Greenwire, June 10).
The bill includes $420 million for climate change adaptation and scientific efforts. That amount is $24 million above Obama's budget and $189 million above the fiscal 2009 level.
Water projects would get $3.9 billion under the committee's bill, more than double the fiscal 2009 funding levels. The bill would divide the money among the Clean Water State Revolving Fund, the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund and State and Tribal Assistance Grants.
Great water bodies would receive $667 million under the measure, $89 million above the president's request and a $544 million increase from last year. Much of that money would go to the Great Lakes, which is tapped to receive $475 million for a major restoration initiative.
EPA's Superfund program would see $1.3 billion under the bill, $2 million less than Obama's request but a $22 million boost from last year's level.
Reporter Allison Winter contributed. | 农业 |
2017-04/0036/en_head.json.gz/11438 | Creekstone Farms broadens its market
ARKANSAS CITY — It's taken more than a few rocky years, but Creekstone Farms Premium Beef's message that top-quality beef should get top prices is finally gaining traction in the marketplace.
BY DAN VOORHIS
Creekstone, based in Arkansas City, sells some of the best steaks in the world. Its beef has captured some of the fanciest steakhouses and restaurants in New York and Wichita. It's been featured in the New York Times and on CNBC.
That demand for quality has translated into growing sales. Sales were about $280 million to $300 million in 2007 and nearly $500 million in 2010.
CEO Dennis Buhlke describes Creekstone Farms today as a niche player in a world dominated by large-scale, low-cost beef packers, such as Tyson, Cargill and JBS. Creekstone survives by offering top-quality products and great service — at a higher margin. The extra dollar or two per pound doesn't tend to appeal to customers of the large grocery store chains, but some chefs find the tenderness and consistency worth it.
"It's just a very high-quality product," said Peter Moretti, executive chef at the Wichita Marriott. "There's a lot of marbling, and that's the main reason it's very tender."
In Wichita, Creekstone beef can be found only in restaurants, including Chester's Chophouse, Flint Hills National Golf Club, the Hyatt Regency Wichita, Stooges Sports Bar and Grill, the Wichita Marriott and the Wichita Airport Hilton.
"We're not for everybody," Buhlke said. "When the first things out of their mouth is how low can we be?" he said, "we'll tell them right up front: 'With all due respect, if that's your first question, I can save both of us a lot of time.' "
The method
The company achieves quality with tremendous time, effort and expense.
It starts when the company finds out which producers are buying the best Black Angus bulls.
"We'll approach that guy a year before the cattle even come into existence to try to build a relationship," Buhlke said. "Two years out," added Ryan Meyer, the company's director of cattle procurement.
It coordinates the movement of the feeder cattle from the producers to selected feedlots and then to the plant. The company uses the term "hand selected."
That gives the cattle a remarkable consistency of size, shape and color. In a recent lot of about 40 cattle in the factory's pens, the animals appeared remarkably similar with only one having even a patch of white.
The cattle are led quietly into dimly lit, heated indoor cattle pens, where they are examined by a USDA inspector. The concrete floor resembles cobblestones and is cleaned using in-floor sprayers. The cattle walk along a winding chute to the killing area so they can't see what's coming. There are no cattle prods.
The pens and slaughter area were designed by Temple Grandin, the industry consultant famous for bringing more humane practices to the industry. Being more humane translates into better beef, the company believes.
Innovative methods and equipment are used to clean and cut up the carcasses. All parts of the cattle, from the tenderloin to the tendons, are sold, some as steaks and some for dog food. Some of the organs are sold as delicacies overseas, while other parts are sold to medical supply houses.
A rocky road
There was a real question whether the company would ever see this day. Its forerunner, the ambitious startup Future Beef Operations, invested $94 million to build a plant filled with innovations, such as the humane cattle pens, with the expectation that such efficiency and quality control would give it an edge. But it opened Aug. 9, 2001. The company started with expensive cattle, struggled with equipment problems and then hit the recession. It went bankrupt in six months.
Creekstone Farms, a large Black Angus cattle producer based in Kentucky, bought the plant out of bankruptcy for $28.7 million in 2003 to pack its own products. But Creekstone ran into trouble in 2004 when its export business — about 35 percent of sales — was badly hurt by the mad-cow-disease scare. Several Asian countries banned beef from the United States. Creekstone fought and lost a long battle with the USDA to be allowed to inspect each animal for mad-cow disease. In 2005, the owners of Creekstone Farms sold most of the company to Sun Capital Partners, a private-equity firm that owns scores of companies.
But even after Sun's takeover, the company still was running below capacity. Buhlke was hired in January 2007 to fix that.
Around the middleman
Buhlke said he told Sun that he was going to focus on building the domestic market.
He had competed against Creekstone and respected the product immensely.
"My personal belief is that it was a great business model from the beginning; it was just poorly executed," Buhlke said.
"What I saw was all this focus on international, and being in the middle of a very distracting lawsuit and, even at the risk of not getting that position, I informed Sun Capital that my focus would be on growing the domestic business."
In looking at the sales and profit numbers, he said he figured out pretty quickly that the product was popular, but the distributors were keeping most of the profit.
Distributors have sales forces far larger than a beef packer. But they also have multiple brands to push and not always a strong incentive to push a particular brand, Buhlke said.
Soon after arriving, he went to the company's largest customer, a major distributor, to ask it to raise its prices to its customers. Creekstone was losing money on each steak it sold to the distributor. He was told no. When the contract came up, Buhlke imposed a price increase, and the distributor began phasing out Creekstone. It was an anxious time.
The way out was to go around such powerful middlemen and build customer demand for their product.
The company has rebuilt its business by building a larger sales force and by using smaller distributors who work harder for Creekstone. That's how it has gotten such an influential, albeit small, place in New York's top steakhouses.
"They're a little mom-and-pop, third-generation food distributor in New York, and when they saw the product, it became the foundation of their business," he said.
The company continues to experience some rocky moments. Japan reinstated its import ban on the company in 2009 when it discovered a cattle backbone in two boxes of beef. That's a part of cattle that can carry mad-cow disease. The ban has since been lifted, and there no bans in place by Asian counties.
The company also is working on the hard-to-crack European market. It exports meat from 2,000 head of non-hormone-treated cattle there every month.
But Buhlke said the company will continue to focus domestically. The U.S. market is so huge that his company doesn't have to worry about hitting the limit for higher-end beef customers anytime soon.
On the cost side, revamping the plant's operations management has paid off in greater efficiency, he said. Now, the plant is about at capacity using one shift.
Further growth would necessitate another shift and some improvements at the plant. There's a lot of room for growth, Buhlke said. "The good news is that we believe we are just getting started," he said.
facebook twitter email 7 months ago Wheat harvest begins in Kansas 1:14 7 months ago Wheat harvest begins in Kansas 2:13 8 months ago What it's like to fly a crop duster 1:19 8 months ago Kansas wheat tour finds strong 2016 crop View more video
Kansas regains seat on House ag committee
No farm crisis yet, but situation worsening, expert says
Kansas State to help farmers weather ag economy downturn
ICM explores reopening Colwich ethanol plant | 农业 |
2017-04/0021/en_head.json.gz/3612 | Yellow plastic identified as cotton contaminant Jan 09, 2017 Beltwide 2017: Industry reps explain new cotton herbicide chemistry Jan 09, 2017 Danny Davis’ last crop: It was a good one Jan 04, 2017 New tools for managing resistant weeds Jan 04, 2017 Management Farmers have consistently produced themselves out of prosperity—what about this time?
Historically, the production of agricultural crops, sooner or later, outruns demand, resulting in multi-year periods of low prices.
This tendency towards over-production is not a new phenomenon in U.S. agriculture.
Growing world markets may not always be there. Daryll Ray and Harwood D. Schaffer, University of Tennessee | Nov 09, 2011
In reading Jerry Hagstrom’s report on a 3-day conference, Agriculture Investment Summit for the Americas, we were struck by the witty insight of Jason Henderson when he said, “I have never met a farmer who is unwilling to produce himself [or herself] out of prosperity.”
In that one sentence, Henderson, executive vice president of the Omaha branch of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, summed up what agricultural economists have long known. Historically, the production of agricultural crops, sooner or later, outruns demand, resulting in multi-year periods of low prices. The same is true in the shorter-run for livestock, although producers there adjust production much more quickly than crop producers resulting in what have historically been hog and cattle cycles.
This tendency towards over-production is not a new phenomenon in U.S. agriculture. Shortly after the settlement of the first colonists in North America, farmers began to ship a new-fangled product called tobacco to London. Smoking caught on like wildfire—so to speak—and the production of tobacco became very lucrative.
The price was so lucrative that others quickly began to produce so much tobacco that within 40 years they had flooded the market. Prices fell so dramatically that several colonies were looking at acreage restrictions on the planting of tobacco in order to boost prices to a profitable level.
For a time, production of indigo in the U.S. South was profitable, but with increased production in the U.S., Central America, and South America, along with the advent of the Revolutionary War and the loss of the British per pound bonus, U.S. producers could no longer compete and the domestic market collapsed, never to recover.
The pattern of profitable prices, followed by increased production and the addition of new production areas, resulting in long troughs of low prices has plagued producers of corn, cotton, and wheat through much of U.S. history, particularly following the Civil War and opening up of the Great Plains to crop agriculture. In the last century, this pattern was repeated following WWI, WWII, and the export boom of the 1970s.
We are now experiencing a similar boom and at the investing summit, Gerald Bange, Chair of USDA’s World Agricultural Outlook Board, told his audience: “We’re not going to see $2 and $3 corn again in the” U.S. Much of his optimism is based on ethanol production and a growing export demand.
Exports growing
To date, agricultural exports to China, India, and Russia have been growing, resulting in an ethanol/export led prosperity for U.S. farmers. As Hagstrom reports (The Hagstrom Report, Oct. 24, 2011, Vol. 1 No. 194), Henderson cautioned his audience that “growing world markets may not always be there.”
Henderson based his caution on a look at the stages countries go through in the development process. In Stage One, a country begins to increase importation of food just as Brazil did in the 1970s and Russia did with meat products in the 1990s.
Russia, along with China, is in Stage Two, where they are seeking to “expand protein production with an eye toward feeding themselves and shrinking meat imports.” To do this they have increased their imports of soybean meal.
Brazil is now in Stage Three, a stage in which they increase production of crops so they no longer have to purchase imports to feed their own animals.
In Stage Four a country begins to compete with their former suppliers, exporting both crops and protein. Brazil is there with regard to soybeans and is likely soon to be there when it comes to corn, wheat, beef, pork, and poultry.
If the pattern holds, Russia and China may not be too far behind.
Daryll E. Ray holds the Blasingame Chair of Excellence in Agricultural Policy, Institute of Agriculture, University of Tennessee, and is the Director of UT’s Agricultural Policy Analysis Center (APAC). Harwood D. Schaffer is a Research Assistant Professor at APAC. (865) 974-7407; Fax: (865) 974-7298; [email protected] and [email protected]; http://www.agpolicy.org. | 农业 |
2017-04/0021/en_head.json.gz/4631 | Riverhead Profiles
After 142 years, Ty Llwyd Farm is becoming a national treasure
David Wines remembers playing at his grandmother’s place on Sound Avenue in Northville — racing around the old farmhouse on a go-kart, growing squash in the garden and pretending he was pulling a tractor like the adults in his family.
“We used to play farmer,” he said.
Decades later, Mr. Wines, 66, lives with his wife, Liz, and son, Chris, in that same house, from which they run the Harrison Downs farmstead — now called Ty Llwyd (pronounced “tee-clewed”) Farm — feeding chickens and cows and growing vegetables on the property that’s been in the family for six generations.
Now, the Harrison Downs farmstead — including the historic house, barn and several other original structures — is set to join more than a dozen other historic local sites on the National Register of Historic Places. The property will earn the same designation as nearby landmarks like the Big Duck in Flanders and Vail-Leavitt Music Hall in downtown Riverhead. It will be the 11th individual property in Riverhead on the list. Downtown Riverhead itself is also listed as a historic district.
Last week, the farm was added to New York State’s historic register, with a national designation all but approved. The designation doesn’t place any restrictions on the property, but would allow the Wines family to apply for certain grants if they need to restore a structure there, said David’s brother Richard Wines. Both are great-great-great nephews of the farm’s founder.
The site was chosen for its unique history as the North Fork’s most complete farmstead, with many buildings that are more than 100 years old.
“The heart of the farm hasn’t changed much in the last century,” said Richard Wines, a local historian and member of Riverhead Town’s Landmarks Preservation Committee. “Basically, the whole farmstead is intact.”
The property was among 19 additions to the state historic register announced last Wednesday by Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s office.
“These landmarks are a part of our rich and storied history and helped define what it means to be a New Yorker,” Mr. Cuomo said in a statement. “By placing these landmarks on the State and National Registers of Historic Places, we are preserving their legacies and ensuring that they will be enjoyed for generations to come.”
Harrison Downs, a New York City lawyer who grew up on the North Fork, built the farmhouse in 1874. Unlike other contemporary members of his family, he was educated at some of the Northeast’s most prestigious institutions, earning diplomas from Yale University and Columbia Law School.
Mr. Downs was a “gentleman farmer,” Richard Wines said. He didn’t actually farm the property himself, unlike other local families who worked their own land.
Instead, he said, the farmhouse was built to be trendy. The two-story home is in the Italianate style — similar to Jedediah Hawkins Inn in nearby Jamesport — that was popular among the elite of the day, he said.
It features a flat roof with large eaves, high (and highly impractical) 10-foot ceilings and is clad in unpainted cedar shingles. The house also featured a ballroom on the second floor, though records of whether Mr. Downs hosted parties there aren’t available. The ballroom was later converted into separate bedrooms.
The house definitely stood out from others nearby, which were much more practical and modest, Mr. Wines said.
“It was fashionable — the kind of thing someone from New York City would build, not a local farmer,” he said.
Mr. Downs never married or had children. He died in 1912 and the farm was inherited by his nephew, Lewis E. Downs. Four years later, Lewis Downs passed the farm to his son, L. Leland Downs, who moved in after his honeymoon in 1916. Wooden cupboards that were installed in the kitchen that year remain in the house to this day.
Leland Downs and his wife, Mary Wells, made many additions to the farm. The original barn on the property had burned down, so the couple built a new barn 100 years ago, which also remains in use.
The English-style barn — once popular on the North Fork — measures 30 feet by 42 feet. A shed adds an extra 22 feet on the west and was once used as a horse pen. Today, it holds chickens and farming equipment. Richard Wines can recall playing in the barn’s loft as a child.
The property saw other additions during this time, including a “Man’s House” used by hired help, an old chicken house and a side-gable structure plucked from Camp Upton during an auction in 1917. A washhouse was installed near the home in the early 1920s. David Wines now uses it to sort and store eggs.
Leland Downs ran the farm for years, though the business was difficult. David Wines said prices for potatoes fluctuated wildly, leading to big profits some years and harsh losses the other.
“It was gambling in every sense of the word,” Richard Wines said.
The stress became too much for Mr. Downs, who had a breakdown after several years of bad harvests in the 1930s and was sent to Kings Park Psychiatric Center, Mr. Wines said. Family members took over the farm, later handing it over to David Wines in 1974.
David and Elizabeth Wines have been farming on the land ever since. In his first year, Mr. Wines said, he made just $300 for the season and wondered whether he should stay in the potato business.
But the family did. The Harrison Downs farmstead was renamed Ty Llwyd in celebration of Ms. Wines heritage as the daughter of Welsh dairy farmers. The name itself translates to “brown house,” a nod to the farmhouse’s original wooden shingles.
Today, David Wines said, they are almost completely out of the potato business, which dried up on the North Fork in the mid-1980s. Ty Llwyd Farm now focuses mostly on livestock, with about 1,400 chickens that produce some 900 eggs per day in the summer, and a growing dairy operation founded a few years ago by Chris Wines.
David Wines said about 60 to 100 people visit the farm each day. The family has laid a hose across the driveway that rings a bell when new customers arrive, like some gas stations.
During a recent interview, Richard Wines, who was sitting inside the farmhouse at the same dining room set owned by his ancestors, joked that the bell has gone off during birthday celebrations and Thanksgiving dinners. Life on a farm is never dull, David Wines agreed. At that moment, a piece of the chair Richard was sitting on snapped and a large crack ran up its side.
“You gotta be careful about what chair you sit in!” David Wines exclaimed with a laugh, pulling away the piece of furniture away. He would fix it with wood glue later — a farmer always repairs what he can before throwing things away, he said.
That ethos extends throughout the house, where the Wineses live much the same way as the generations before them. The house has no central heating — just a couple of wood-burning stoves.
Like his grandfather, David Wines wakes up early, long before the sun rises, and sets to work cleaning the dairy barn and feeding the chickens. He’s got buildings that “always need fixing.”
It’s the same challenging farmer’s life he’s lived since he was a boy, but it’s a fulfilling life that he and his family couldn’t imagine giving up.
“It’s all I’ve ever done,” he said. “It’s a love of it. It gets better every year, more fun every year … Why hire somebody to have all that fun when you can do it?”
Photo credits: Paul Squire, Suffolk County Historical Society, Richard Wines
david wines, farming, national register of historic places, North Fork, Northville, Ty Llwyd Farm
Flying Point Surf
Greenport 405 Main Street construction
Greenport 449 Main Street physicians
Quality Hearing Aid Center
Riverhead 209 W Main St lighting fixtures
All Wright Electric
North Fork, Shelter Island & South Fork PO Box 1657 Next Post >RECAP: Town discusses EPCAL ambulance substation; metered parking downtown < Previous PostRiverhead News-Review Service Directory: March 31, 2016 Similiar Articles
Heidi’s Helping Angels to honor local volunteers by Nicole Smith
Last April, heading back to a campsite he’d rented with family and friends at Indian Island County Park following a… Read More
Finding inspiration from his mother’s fight against breast cancer by Bob Liepa
Robbie Block was the picture of focus, squatting on the Riverhead sideline in meditation, helmet in hand with his long… Read More
Flanders family mourns tragic loss after crash by Joe Werkmeister
Julio Aceituno-Perez sat with his wife, Gladys, on the morning of Sept. 13 in their Flanders home. They had celebrated… Read More | 农业 |
2017-04/0021/en_head.json.gz/5095 | Glanbia Ingredients Ireland opens new milk protein plant in Virginia, Co Cavan
Heather Humphreys, Minister for Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht, and Arlene Foster, NI Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Investment, has officially opened Glanbia Ingredients Ireland’s (GII) newly-built milk protein facility on the existing GII site in Virginia, Co. Cavan. This expansion of the Virginia facility, which processes milk from surrounding counties, and employs 100 people, is specifically designed to meet the exacting technical standards of the clinical and lifestyle nutrition market, a business which is growing worldwide and is predicted to expand by double digits over the next ten years. GII, Ireland’s leading dairy ingredients company, has ambitious plans for growth. GII is currently investing €200 million in value adding facilities with support from the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation through Enterprise Ireland. This investment programme, one of the largest ever undertaken by an indigenous company, will facilitate farmers and customers in expanding their businesses, particularly as the elimination of quotas in 2015 provides dairy farmers with an opportunity to expand production for the first time in 30 years. Over €7.8 million has been invested in the Virginia plant to build the new milk protein unit, which will more than double current milk protein capacity from 4,000 to 10,000 tonnes. It is a significant boost for the Virginia facility which will also continue its extensive production of enriched milk powders for export markets as well as exclusive cream supply to the global Baileys brand.
Speaking at the launch, Heather Humphreys, Minister for Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht, said: “Glanbia is a very important employer locally, and this significant investment illustrates the company’s commitment to the area. Glanbia’s innovative approach to targeting key growth markets overseas has allowed it to grow exports and establish itself as one of the major players in the Irish agri-food sector. The agri-food sector is not only a very important source of employment in Cavan and Monaghan, it is also helping to drive our jobs recovery across the country. I am delighted that Glanbia is reaffirming its commitment to the area with this latest multi-million euro investment.”
Arlene Foster, Northern Irish Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Investment, said: “Our food and drink industries both rely on export markets and we should build on our cooperation with Government bodies such as Invest Northern Ireland and Bord Bia continuing to collaborate to promote the free flow of trade across our border. By working together we can achieve much more and ultimately create a platform from which we can collectively sell more into target global markets.“Glanbia employs a large number of people on both sides of the border, through direct employment and through the supply of milk from dairy farmers, and is an excellent example of the opportunities that cross-border trade and investment brings to both countries. This investment will create a number of new jobs in the border area and I look forward to deepening the strong existing relationships with our friends and colleagues in Cavan.”Richard Bruton, TD, Minister for Enterprise, Jobs and Innovation, said: “At the heart of our Action Plan for Jobs is our creating a powerful engine of Irish enterprise. Today’s announcement by Glanbia shows what is possible for Irish businesses right across the country. I wish Jim and his team every success with this project, and look forward to working with Glanbia as they continue to expand their operations across Ireland.”Jim Bergin, CEO of Glanbia Ingredients Ireland, said: “GII has a strong investment programme of over €200m which is designed to position the business for future growth. While we are conscious of current fluctuations in commodity pricing, the long range outlook for the business and for suppliers is positive - with a growing demand from customers for the high quality milk proteins we will be producing here in Virginia. “The opening of our new plant ensures that both GII and our farmer suppliers will be able to capitalise on the generational opportunity that is provided by the ending of milk quotas next year. We are proud to have been operating in Virginia since 1974 and look forward to continuing to invest in the business with this latest investment confirming our commitment to the plant and the local area.”Julie Sinnamon, CEO Enterprise Ireland said: “This is a hugely significant and very welcome development for GII and the region. Enterprise Ireland has worked closely with the company in this current major expansionary phase and looks forward to continuing to support GII and the industry, which forms a vital part of the Irish economy.” GII first launched its range of advanced milk protein powders under the Solmiko brand in 2008 and has since had much success with their application in the clinical nutrition and sports nutrition industries, making it one of the leading suppliers of milk proteins globally. These industries are worth €16 billion and are currently growing at greater than 6% per annum. The new SolmikoHD and SolagoHD variants have higher bulk density and good dispersibility making them easily incorporated into customer formulations using existing processing equipment.The new facility in Virginia reinforces GII’s credentials on sustainability and conservation, and uses additional membrane technology that polishes and removes all remaining solids from the water extracted from the process, making it re-usable so no additional water is required for the new plant. | 农业 |