madera county farm bureau - maderafb.com · madera county farm bureau ... california pistachio...

October 2017 Vol. 7, No. 10agriculture today

Madera CountyFarM Bureau

Madera County crop and livestock value is down 10 percent

Details still sketchy on pistachio grower requirements under FSMA

The goal for training is to provide relevant information to help keep pistachio growers compliant with the required management practices under the rule.

By Cecila Parson,Western Farm PressSeptember 6, 2017

Uncertainty exists with the deadline for pistachio growers to comply with the Produce Safety Rule (PSR) in the Food Safety Modernization Act draw-ing near.

Pistachio growers are required to fol-low the PSR for the 2018 harvest, says Linda Harris, chair of the Western Center for Food Safety (WCFS) locat-

ed at the University of California, Davis campus.

Questions remain about training and water quality testing, but Harris says WCFS will hold a training event for California pistachio growers at a San Joaquin Valley location this December.

The PSR curriculum is not specific for pistachios, she says. The goal for train-ing is to provide relevant information to help keep pistachio growers compliant with the required management prac-

tices under the rule. Growers need to begin the education process on produce safety and learn how the rules apply on their operations.

Currently, Harris says little data exists on food safety risks in pistachio produc-tion, especially on-farm practices. Still, growers need to understand the pieces so they can assess risks that could be on their farms.

On-farm contamination of pistachio

By John Rieping,The Madera TribuneSeptember 28, 2017

The gross value of Madera County crops and livestock dropped about 10 percent in 2016 compared to the prior year, according to authorities this week. Declining almond prices were partly to blame.

Agricultural Commissioner Stevie McNeill presented the 2016 Crop and Livestock Report to Madera County supervisors at their regular meeting Tuesday.

“For 2016, the gross value of all pro-duction was $1,819,489,000; this is a decrease of $197,957,000 — 9.81 per-cent — compared to 2015 production,” McNeill said in her report. “This is mainly due to decrease in some com-modity prices as market prices contin-ued to stabilize.”

The county now ranks 10th in agri-cultural production among the state’s 58 counties, and 14th in the entire nation. Sixty-seven nations around the world imported Madera County crops, pri-marily nuts and fruits.

Almonds remained the county’s lead-

ing crop for the seventh year in a row, with a value of $593,487,000 — down 25 percent compared to 2015.

“Although there was an increase in bearing almond acreage, the price per ton dropped considerably,” McNeil said.

Milks unseated grapes for second place, pushing the fruit to third. Pista-chios took fourth and cattle and calves held fifth.

Sixty-three organic farms and nine handlers registered in Madera County in 2016. The value of organic produc-tion in 2016 was $43,119,000. ■

CALENDAROCTOBERESJ Workshops at MCFB by appointment only, please call 209-303-146812 Board of Directors meeting at MCFB 1pm 15 Ag United Harvest Celebration, Tickets on sale Now, call MCFB

20 Ag Roundtable at The Deer Point Group, Call MCFB to RSVP 559-674-8871

30 ESJWQC Grower meeting, Modesto

NOVEMBERESJ Workshops at MCFB by appointment only, please call 209-303-14689 Board of Directors meeting at MCFB 1pm

10 Veteran’s Day, MCFB Office will be closed

17 Labor Laws Workshop23 & 24 Thanksgiving, office closed

See PISTACHIO GROWERS; Page 4

"IMAGINE THIS..." WRITING CONTEST NOW ACCEPTING ENTRIES

FOR 2017 CONTESTdeadliNe NoVeMber 1, 2017

See page 15

JOIN US FOR FOOD, FUN AND THE PETERSON FARM BROTHERS

october 15, 2017See page 2

2 | October 2017 Madera County Farm Bureau

Madera County Farm Bureau

news With the heat and sweat of har-vest making way for Fall, I am reminded of a quote by David Bly that paints the farmer in the correct light; “Striving for success without hard work is like trying to harvest where you haven't planted”.

Even though there are some crops still out in the fields waiting to be harvested, the growers in Madera county achieved success this year by having a bountiful and safe harvest, which is what matters most.

As growers wrap up the season throughout the county, I have noticed that many new tasks have begun in anticipation of the winter months. We are all hoping for another wet winter season.

We growers have received notices from our local water districts stat-ing that water rates have been cut to encourage us to use as much surface

water as possible for the final month of October. I urge you all to take ad-vantage of this opportunity as this is being done to help conserve ground-water and fill your soil profiles with clean, natural surface water. Please do your part. I know many of us re-member that just a few years ago this luxury was not available to us and we wished it was. Please call and order your water.

Now onto something more enjoy-able: the Madera County Farm Bu-reau Ag United Harvest Celebration and Annual meeting of the mem-bers. Please join us October 15, 2017 at Eastman Hall at the Chowchilla Fairgrounds for a wonderful evening. Joining us as guest speakers are The Peterson Brothers performing their famous farm parodies. We will have a prime rib dinner and lots of nice raffle prizes.

Please call 559-674-8871 or visit Maderafb.com to purchase your tick-ets. Come out and support your local farm bureau. Cheers to all for a great finale of the 2017 harvest! ■

President’s Message

Jay Mahil,President

2016 - 2017 Executive CommitteePresident: Jay Mahil

1st Vice President: Nick Davis2nd Vice President/Treasurer: Michael Naito

Secretary: Laura GutileAppointed by President: Steve MassaroAppointed by President: Dennis Meisner

Appointed by President: Tom RogersAppointed by President: Chris Wylie

Directors at LargeRobert Cadenazzi

Ryan CosynsClay Daulton

Stephen ElgorriagaJason Erickson

Clay Haynes

Michele LasgoityJennifer Markarian

Scott MaxwellNeil McDougaldJeff McKinneyPat Ricchiuti

California Farm Bureau - District 9 Director Tom Rogers

California Farm Bureau CommitteeEnergy, Air, and Climate- Clay Daulton

Agriculture Labor- Jay Mahil, Nick DavisFederal Economy & Farm Policy- Scott Maxwell

Marketing, Organics and Food Safety- Tom Rogers Pollinator & Crop Production- Ryan Cosyns

Office StaffExecutive Director: Christina Beckstead

Executive Assistant: Kristen Sargent

Madera County Farm Bureau1102 South Pine Street

Madera, CA 93637(559) 674-8871; www.maderafb.com

Advertising/PublishingMid-Valley Publishing

1130 G Street, Reedley, CA 93654

Advertising SalesDebra Leak (559) 638-2244

EditorKristen Sargent

Periodical PostagePaid at Fresno, California 93706

POSTMASTERSend address changes to:

Madera County Farm Bureau1102 South Pine Street, Madera, CA 93637

The Madera County Farm Bureau does not assume responsibility for statements by advertisers or for

products advertised in Madera County Farm Bureau.

TO BECOME A DONOR CALL

674-8871

Monica J. LasgoityPistoresi Agriculture Service

Domingos RibeiroThe Deerpoint Group, Inc.

Isla Vista FarmsMichael McRee

Almond Tree Hulling

MCFB would like to thank all our members who help support our work through their voluntary

contributions for the month of September:

new MCFB donors

Farm Bureau Membership BenefitsInsurance

Nationwide Travel Insurance Nationwide Agribusiness,

VPI Pet InsuranceNews and Entertainment

AgAlert, California Country Mag & T.V.

VehiclesAvis, Budget, Ford,

Hertz Vehicle RentalsDo-It-Yourself

Grainger, Kelly-Moore Paints, Dunn Edwards Paints, Case IH,

CAT, Grainger and Western Square Ind., O'Reilly Auto Parts

TravelChoice Hotels, Wyndham Hotels

Business ServicesAnderson Marketing, Farm Bureau Bank,

Farm Employers Laborers Service, A4 Promotions

Health ServicesClear Value Hearing, Farm Bureau

Prescription discount program, LensCrafters, Preferred Alliance

Contact the MCFB Office at (559) 674-8871 or

www.maderafb.com for details.

Madera County Farm Bureau MembersDISCOuNTS FOR BuSINESS MEMBERS• Earnthelowestadvertisingrate• Freespotcolorinyouradvertising• Nochargeforaddesign• Firstadatdiscountedprice• Businesscardlistinginour“AtYourServiceDirectory”whileadappearsinnewspaper

• Runyournoncommercialclassifiedadatnochargefor3months

CallDebraLeakformoreinformation.LetMidValleyPublishingassistyouinprofilingyourbusinessandservicestoitsgreatestpotential.

559-638-2244

TO BECOME A MEMBER CALL

674-8871

NAME CITY P/C/B

new MCFB Members

Robert LaSalle Firebaugh P

MCFB welcomes the following new Agricultural (producer), Associate (consumer)

Collegiate, and Business Support members who joined in September.

Eastman hallChowchilla Fairgrounds

1000 S. 3rd Street, Chowchilla

For more information visit maderafb.com ~ (559)674-8871 ~ 1102 S. Pine St, Madera, CA 93637

Laura’s Nuts

Sunday, October 15, 2017Chowchilla Fairgrounds

GOLD SponsorsConsolidated Insurance Services ~ Helena Chemical

TEP ~ Sierra Valley Almonds

Platinum Sponsors

General seating tickets$60 in advance, $75 at the door

With Awards, Prime Rib Dinner and Celebrity

Dessert Auction

Welcomes

With hit songs like “I’m Farming, and I Grow it”, and “What Does a Farmer Say”

Program Begins at 5:30pm

Madera County Farm Bureau

Madera County Farm Bureau October 2017 | 3

See HIGH SPEED RAIL; Page 10

By Tim Sheehan,The Fresno BeeSeptembe246, 2017

In 2010, when the Obama admin-istration started to pony up more than $2.5 billion in economic stim-ulus money for construction of Cali-fornia’s high-speed rail project, the funds came with three important conditions:

• That the money be used for con-struction in the San Joaquin Valley.

• That the money be completely spent by Sept. 30, 2017.

• That construction of the Valley segments from Merced to Bakers-field be completed by Sept. 30, 2017.

That once-immovable comple-tion deadline is now just days away. And while all of the stimulus money from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act has indeed been spent and construction is happen-ing in earnest in Fresno and Madera counties, much of the Valley route in Kings, Tulare and Kern counties – considered the “backbone” of a system to eventually link San Fran-cisco and Los Angeles – remains on the drawing board.

PEOPLE DON’T REALIZE … HOW MANY HANDCUFFS AND CONSTRAINTS WERE PUT ON THIS PROJECT THAT HAVE BEEN A CHAL-LENGE TO DEAL WITH.

Dan Richard, California High-Speed Rail Authority board chairman

The California High-Speed Rail Authority has three construction contracts covering about 115 miles of the rail project from Madera to Bakersfield with a total value of nearly $3.3 billion. The earliest that any of those contractors are required to be finished is mid-2019. A fourth contract is anticipated to be bid lat-er for laying tracks over the Valley route.

And a starting date for passenger service that was once forecast for 2022 with trains running between Merced and Los Angeles has now been bumped to 2025, with a plan for trains to speed between Bakers-

field and San Jose.What the heck happened?Beset with complications and a

schedule in jeopardy, the rail au-thority prevailed upon the Fed-eral Railroad Administration to let California first spend the stimulus money – and to relax that pesky construction deadline.

A combination of delays – from lengthy environmental reviews to protracted lawsuits to the excru-ciatingly slow pace of buying land for the railroad right of way – have plagued the rail project in the seven years since Joseph Szabo, then-head of the Federal Railroad Adminis-tration, visited Fresno in October 2010 to present a ceremonial check for $715 million to the California High-Speed Rail Authority.

“People don’t realize … how many handcuffs and constraints were put on this project that have been a chal-lenge to deal with,” said Dan Rich-ard, chairman of the rail authority’s nine-member board. “Every day when we wake up, there are pres-sures on cost, schedule and scope. Our job is to try to manage those.”

Tom Richards, a Fresno developer, was appointed to the rail board by

then-Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger in late 2010 and is the second-lon-gest tenured member of the board. He said he understands concerns about the project’s ever-extending schedule, but points to the tangible construction that residents in Fres-no and Madera can see happening along the route. “We’ve not seen construction on this scale in our community that I can point to, ever, in terms of complexity and certainly in sheer size and cost,” Richards told The Bee last week.

“Admittedly, it’s not on the sched-ule we originally believed we could accomplish,” Richards added. “But we’ve tried to be forthright in our business plans to indicate what we thought was achievable and where we are going.”

Property acquisitionOne of the most glaring issues has

been right-of-way acquisition by the rail agency. The authority reported this month that it needs more than 1,740 pieces of property for its route, as well as associated structures like street over- and underpasses, from north of Madera to Shafter in Kern County. As of July 31, it had man-aged to purchase and deliver 1,160

parcels – about two-thirds of what it needs – to its construction contrac-tors. But it’s taken five years to reach that point.

A slow start early on cost the agency tens of millions of dollars to its prime contractor for its Fres-no-Madera section because it was more than a year after the $1 bil-lion contract was awarded in mid-2013 before the rail authority had enough parcels for construction to begin. The $63.5 million payment for the delay in right of way is the single largest change order taking a bite out of the available contingency fund for the 32-mile contract.

To help contain those penalty costs, the rail authority has focused its real estate efforts on “critical path” parcels – the land most need-ed to move things along on struc-tures like viaducts, trenches and road overpasses that take the longest time to build.

Chief engineer Scott Jarvis told the rail board last week that while the agency continues to face con-struction delays and the risk of ris-ing costs because of right of way challenges, progress is happening. Construction is going on at 13 dif-ferent sites in Fresno and Madera counties, “and we do have enough right of way to allow construction to start” for two contracts south of Fresno.

Environmental analyses The statewide high-speed rail proj-

ect falls under the stringent auspices of the California Environmental Quality Act. The law requires both an exhaustive analysis of potential environmental effects and measures to offset those impacts. In the case of the rail program, not only did the statewide plan have to go through this type of review, but each of the 10 individual sections from San Francisco to Los Angeles also need to have an environmental analysis – in most cases, thousands of pages of documentation, statistics, com-ments and responses – before that segment can be formally approved and bids sought for construction.

High-speed rail in the Valley was once supposed to be done by Saturday. Not even close

Tim Sheehan/The Fresno Bee

California High-Speed Rail Authority board chairman Dan Richard, left, and vice chairman Tom Richards discuss challenges of scheduling, financing and litigation that have confronted the state’s bullet-train program for years.


8798

1504

7

For The Madera TribuneSeptember 23, 2017

The Madera County Board of Su-pervisors honored AgriLand Farm-ing Company Inc. this week with a proclamation for its ongoing com-munity service and business leader-ship.

In making the proclamation, AgriLand was called “one of the great institutions of Madera Coun-ty.” Board members also noted that AgriLand stands out for its efforts to provide a successful, healthy workplace for employees and for its

dedication to the community.Supervisor David Rogers noted

that AgriLand and the work of founder and CEO Jim Maxwell lifts up all those around them and is a great example of a business that puts its money where its mouth – and heart – is.

In accepting the proclamation, Maxwell pointed to the dedication of his employees to serving oth-ers and noted AgriLand’s willing-ness to do more to support Madera County community service efforts and charities in the future.

Agriland says it is the third largest nut grower in the U.S. and is also a full-service farm management firm that provides turnkey services in the nut growing industry.

The firm provides a wellness plan for employees and their families; a 401K program; and holiday and paid time off for field employees. The company actively promotes the education of the children of their farm work force by incentivizing ac-ademic excellence in middle school and high school, followed by college scholarships for those who qualify

for and attend college.In 2014, AgriLand became the

first farm management company in the Central San Joaquin Valley to enter into a compliance and self-monitoring agreement with the U.S. Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour division. It advances compli-ance with the Fair Labor Standards Act (FSLA) and Migrant Seasonal Worker Protection Act (MSPA) by assuring the company self-monitors its activities and those of the farm labor contractors with whom it part-ners. ■

County supervisors laud nut grower, farm manager

nuts with salmonella or E.coli can come from humans, soil, water, and animals. Awareness of how these sources can possibly introduce pathogens to a crop can comes from evaluating manage-ment practices and the observation of daily operations. Just because pistachio nuts don’t hit the ground during harvest does not eliminate contamination risks, says Harris.

Sources of water, the orchard’s loca-tion from the nearest animal agriculture operation, and soil amendments used during production should all be evalu-ated and any risks noted. Some will be more challenging to overcome, she says.

For example, dust from a nearby dairy can be a source especially around pis-tachio harvest. Animal manure must be properly composted to eliminate

pathogens. Contracting out harvest and employee training are two touch points that should be addressed to prevent hu-man-introduced contamination.

PSR-required water quality sampling and documentation is an area which

may not fit pistachio production. Harris says the rule applies to water that comes into contact with the product. This is unlikely with drip irrigation systems commonly used in pistachio orchards.

The one area that will require water sampling is the water used for foliar sprays. The use of public sourced-water or groundwater for tank mixes require only minimal sampling, yet surface wa-ter use triggers an extensive sampling requirement.

Harris says it’s recognized that some unique situations exist during the pista-chio harvest regarding crop transport to handlers. The PSR’s traceability portion adds to the number of variables to gain compliance.

Harris says the two most common pathogens found on pistachio nuts are the salmonella strains Montevideo and Senftenberg. A survey examining pista-

chio nuts at processing facilities found that ‘floaters’ have a higher rate of con-tamination than ‘sinkers.’

One reason for this is floaters tend to have more hull material attached and pathogens are concentrated on hulls, she says. A delay in unloading har-vested nuts at the processor can also increase pathogen contamination due to high moisture content in nuts.

The Produce Safety Alliance, a col-laboration with Cornell University, the Food and Drug Administration, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture, helps growers meet regulatory demands. The Alliance has scheduled grower training sessions at several California locations in September and October.

Meeting dates, times, and locations are available online at https://tinyurl.com/yb275xsq. ■

PISTACHIO GROWERSContinued from Page 1


1592

7_H

PLANT AND PRODUCTION MANAGER FOR AGRICULTURAL PACKING SHED AND COLD STORAGE FACILITY IN THE SAN JOAQUIN DELTADutiesPhysical plant management and maintenance including equipment, buildings, and electrical, water and air pressure systems.Manage production of fresh market and seed potatoes. This will entail coordination with field, harvest, sales and shipping personnel. . Scope of responsibilities also include maintaining an active shop for farm equipment and packing shed repairs.The above duty descriptions include but not

necessarily limited to:

• Fabrication of new and maintenance of existing equipment

• Sourcing new equipment to accomplish production goals and cost savings

• HiringandCoordinationwithtechnicalrepair providers

• Manage information including daily production, maintenance logs, and inventory control

• Budgetingandforecasting

Requirements

• Industrial electrician; familiarity and working knowledge of electricity and electrical equipment

• Goodmetalworkingskills;skilledwelder

• Goodcommunicationandorganizationskills

• Basic knowledge and familiarity with computer worksheets

• Workwellaspartofadiversified teamwith minimal supervision

• BilingualinSpanish

OPENING FOR AGRONOMY ASSISTANT/QUALITY CONTROL MANAGERJob Description: The candidate will join a diversified program with a large, progressive farm in California’sCentral Valley. This includes support andimplementation of agronomic decisions for potato, turf, corn, and other crops and support for quality control with the farm’s packing operations. Thelargest share of responsibility will involve potato and seed potato operations. Job responsibilities inclued:

• General farming including distributing, monitoring, and recording fertilizer and pesticide recommendations and applications

• Coordinating and recording planting operations for all crops under supervision and guidance of senior managers

• Identifying variables that affect the production, harvest, and marketing of crops

• Calculating and analyzing crop yields and returns

• Assistingwithaquality controlprogram for shed operations to meet sales and customer product specifications and requirements

• Assistingwithandcoordinationofagrowing seed potato export program

• Coordinating operations for turf operations in conjunction with managers.

The qualified candidate should possess the following:

• Excellentcommunicationskills• BS or MS in an agriculture-related field,

agricultural experience preferred• Strong analytical ability with good

organizationalskills• Workwellaspartofadiversifiedteamwith

minimal supervision• Determinationandassertiveness

• Adaptabilitywithapassionforagriculture• BilingualinSpanishstronglyrecommended• Abilityandwillingnesstotravel

This position offers a very competitive compensation package including benefits

Please resond care of: Ken Jochimsen Zuckerman Family Farms, Inc. P.O. Box 427 Stockton, CA 95201 (209) 469-7979 [email protected]

HELP WANTED

By Dale Kasler and Ryan SabalowSacramento BeeSeptember 21, 2017

Shellshocked by an influential farm irrigation district’s refusal to help pay for the Delta tunnels, ad-vocates of the $17.1 billion project were scrambling Wednesday to sal-vage it or conjure up a Plan B. Three possible options were floated by California water policymakers for reviving the proposal. All of them face substantial hurdles of their own.

Can the tunnels go forward? Here’s a look at the current state – and the immediate future – of the project dubbed California WaterFix by Gov. Jerry Brown’s administra-tion.

What’s the reason for the tun-nels?

Everyone acknowledges that the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, the hub of California’s water deliv-ery network, is increasingly fragile. Fish populations have plummeted, and most experts say a major reason is decades of pumping at two huge

Delta pump stations run by the state and federal governments. Some-times the pumps have to be throt-tled back to protect fish, which al-lows water that would otherwise be pumped south to flow to the ocean. That frustrates south-of-Delta water users.

Brown’s administration says the tunnels, by altering water flows through the estuary, would protect fish from the pumps and allow water to be more regularly pumped south.

Why is the project suddenly in doubt?

The board at Westlands Water District, a major farm irrigator in the San Joaquin Valley, stunned Cali-fornia’s water community Wednes-day by voting 7-1 against helping to pay for the tunnels. It was the first vote by any major agency on Wa-terFix, and Westlands’ share would have been more than $3 billion. The district’s anxiety about project costs was well known, but project backers figured the district would postpone a decision. Westlands’ vote blows a big hole in the financing plan.

Would Westlands ever change

its mind?Doubtful, at least as the project

exists now. Westlands’ chief gripe is that the U.S. Bureau of Recla-mation, which operates the federal pumps, developed a cost-allocation method that exempts some water ir-rigation districts – the massive Fri-ant Water Authority in particular – from having to participate. That puts more of the burden on West-lands, the largest federal contractor.

So it’s unlikely Westlands would jump back in without a change of heart from the Bureau of Recla-mation. The bureau, in a statement issued right after the Westlands vote, indicated it wasn’t planning to change its financing approach to WaterFix.

“Everybody told (Reclamation) ahead of time it didn’t work. They clung to it,” said Jeff Kightlinger of the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. Metropolitan gets one-third of its water from the State Water Project and is a fierce advocate for the tunnels.

Wait – why are the feds involved? The tunnels are Jerry Brown’s

project, right?Yes, but the federal government

has played a significant role in plan-ning WaterFix. The state and fed-eral governments run side-by-side delivery systems centered around the Delta, the State Water Project and the federal Central Valley Proj-ect. Both projects pump massive amounts of Northern California riv-er water to south-of-Delta contrac-tors such as Westlands, but they’re taking different approaches to fund-ing their respective shares of the tunnels. The state is insisting that all of its south-of-Delta contrac-tors contribute to the cost, or find another agency to take their share. The feds, because of the complicated system for delivering Central Valley Project water, has said certain dis-tricts don’t have to pay.

Would taxpayers be asked to pick up the slack?

That’s uncertain. All along, tun-nels advocates have said WaterFix would follow the time-honored wa-ter project tradition of “beneficiary

What’s next for Brown’s Delta tunnels now that a big chunk of funding has disappeared?

See DELTA TuNNELS; Page 12


6131

6 questions to ask before purchasing farmland nowAs farmland values potentially diminish from their sustained peaks of previous years, it

may be tempting to take advantage of the lower prices.By David Albin,South East Farm PressAuguest 29, 2017

As farmland values potentially di-minish from their sustained peaks of previous years, it may be tempting to take advantage of the lower prices. With the right timing and opportunity, add-ing property can be a wise investment.

But purchasing farmland involves more considerations than most capital expenditures. The questions below can help guide your property search and in-form the best decision for your opera-tion.

How productive is the land?A little homework can pay dividends

later by helping you understand the property’s income potential. The seller should be able to provide information on criteria such as the number of till-able acres, soil type, soil fertility and drainage, all of which have an impact on profitability. For example, if you find

the land has poor drainage and needs to be tiled, you’ll need to include that cost in your calculations.

Does the land have an accurate legal description?

The keyword to focus on here is ac-curacy. A good legal description will help you understand the exact acreage you intend to purchase. Look for a de-tailed survey with a metes and bounds description, then do some calculating on your own to ensure the advertised acreage matches up. Property Valuation Administration records are another op-tion to see how many acres are reported within the tract in legal records. And your local Farm Services Agency office may be able to provide aerial photos that give you an unbiased view of the land.

When should I start working with my lender?

Strong relationships can play a sig-nificant part in determining the success of your operation. Consulting with your lender a year or two in advance of a ma-jor purchase will help you both evalu-ate the financial strength of your op-

eration, which you can use to start your search. And the sooner you get started, the sooner you can prepare to meet the down payment and other cash flow de-mands. Your lender also can help deter-mine the financing package that works best for your needs, such as establishing a fixed interest rate to make long-term budgeting easier.

What effect will this have on my op-eration next season and beyond?

A significant purchase should come only after a thorough examination of your operation. One consideration is your role after the purchase. Additional land means additional responsibili-ties. This means either more hands-on time by you managing the farm or find-ing additional help, giving you a more managerial role. Either way, a shift in day-to-day decision-making is required.

A significant purchase should also have you thinking about succession planning. If you don’t already have a plan in place, start thinking about how more land and a potential long-term loan will affect your operation’s stability in the future. If you do you have a suc-cession plan in place, evaluate how this purchase will affect whoever will take over the business.

Is my operation financially strong enough to take this on right now?

The million-dollar question is: what can you immediately afford? To answer this, look at your working capital situa-tion. Do you have enough cash on hand to make a down payment and meet your other financial demands? Generally, you will need to contribute 25 to 30 percent cash as a down payment; other-wise, you’ll need to meet that minimum range with additional collateral in lieu of cash.

See 6 QuESTIONS; Page 16

contactDEBRA LEAk

to aDVERtISE In tHE

MADERA COUNTY FARM BUREAU

(559) 638-2244


†Manufacturer’s estimate of power (ISO) per 97/68/EC.

Fresno • 4288 S. Bagley • 559-486-8020 | Five Points • 21350 S. Lassen Ave • 559-884-2425Visit us at www.fresnoequipment.com

5ML Low-Profile Utility Tractor• 115 hp† PowerTech™ engine

• 16F/16R PowrReverser™ transmission

• Newly designed low-profile hood for improvedvisibility and access

6M Series Utility Tractors • Low-profile design perfect for orchards, nurseries, vineyards and other hard-to-reach areas

• 110 to 130 hp†

5G Series Narrow Specialty TractorThe new 5GV and 5GN Series Tractors are the perfect fit for the narrower rows producers are adopting to conserve water. Plus, they stand their ground when it comes to the toughest jobs out there.

High-performance. Low-profile design. Better for your operation.

1510

0

By Dale Kasler,The Sacramento Bee

The embattled Delta tunnels proj-ect has secured a financing commit-ment from a Bay Area water agency, albeit a small one.

The board of Zone 7 Water Agen-cy, which serves about 220,000 cus-tomers in Alameda County, voted Wednesday to join the project, known officially as California Wa-terFix. The 5-2 vote came one day after Westlands Water District, a sprawling agricultural district in Fresno and Kings counties, dealt WaterFix a huge setback by reject-ing the project.

Zone 7’s share of the project would be only about 1 percent of the fund-ing, according to agency general manager Jill Duerig. Westlands, by contrast, was expected to bear one-fifth to one-fourth of the estimated

$17.1 billion cost of the tunnels; its no vote leaves a gaping hole in the financing plan.

Nevertheless, state officials were delighted to have Zone 7’s support as they struggle to keep the project going in the aftermath of West-lands’ no vote. Natural Resources Secretary John Laird, in a prepared statement, said Zone 7’s directors “demonstrated their commitment to securing a clean and sustainable water supply for their community.”

For good measure, Zone 7 direc-tors agreed to spend up to $250,000 to help with planning for the tun-nels.

Zone 7 became the first water dis-trict to endorse the project. “It was a courageous thing for our board to do,” Duerig said Friday. “Being first isn’t always easy.”

She added that in spite of the un-certainty surrounding the project,

her agency believes the tunnels will move forward in some fashion.

One possibility circulating in Cal-ifornia water circles is a scaled-back version of the tunnels that would serve only those water agencies, such as Zone 7, that belong to the State Water Project. The major state contractors are the Metropolitan Water District of Southern Califor-nia and a group of agricultural dis-tricts in Kern County, all of which are expected to vote on participating in the project in the next two weeks.

A state-only project “is certainly possible,” Duerig said. “A project can morph.”

A state-only approach would leave out Westlands and other members of the federal government’s Central Valley Project. Both the state and federal projects ship water through the Delta but have adopted differ-ent cost-allocation plans that make

participation more affordable for the state contractors.

The tunnels are designed to re-en-gineer the fragile Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, the hub of Califor-nia’s water network, and improve water shipments to urban and agri-cultural customers in the southern half of the state and parts of the Bay Area.

Zone 7 relies on deliveries from the Delta for about 80 percent of its supplies. The agency expects its cus-tomers’ water rates to increase about 20 percent to pay for its share of the tunnels. ■

Not every water agency is rejecting Brown’s Delta tunnels – here’s one yes vote

contactDEBRA LEAk

to aDVERtISE In tHE

MADERA COUNTY FARM BUREAU

(559) 638-2244


88589314

According to U.S. census data, the av-erage age of a farmer is 57. While few are planning to retire at that time, farmers and ranchers should begin thinking about how they would like to live in retirement and how that can be achieved.

Financial planning can be intimidat-ing, so here are some things to consider as you begin to think about the re-tirement in your future and what that means to your farm.

• Knowing how much money is enough. Considering the rising cost of living, increased health care costs and possible decreases in Social Security benefits, farmers and ranchers can see a lower standard of living in retirement. Realistic and effective financial plan-ning can help solve for these issues and

lead to a more secure lifestyle in retirement and peace of mind. Keep these principles in mind: spend less than you make, bud-get to save at least 10% of your net income, manage credit wisely, pay yourself first and avoid procrastination.

• Plans and portfo-lio. One of the best and most efficient ways of acquiring wealth is to take ad-vantage of retirement plans established under IRS regulations for the self-employed. They include IRAs, Keogh Plans and Simplified Employee Pen-sions (SEPs). Beyond a single plan, con-sider creating a diverse portfolio of in-vestment assets. The key is to start early and invest continuously at a level of risk that is appropriate to your situation.

• Land and equipment. Determine your plan for your land and equipment.

Farmers and ranchers may want to sell these assets in order to generate income or they may go to the next generation of owner/operator. Each option has many considerations including taxes and more planning in the form of business succes-sion planning.

• Renting or selling out. If you con-sider renting your land and operation you should create a plan to transition from an operating farm or ranch to an income-producing investment. This also comes with additional considerations like determining how much rental in-come will be needed to fund retirement and estate planning for the extended fu-ture of your business and assets. When selling, the best way to determine the farm or ranch’s value may be to get an appraisal based on the amount of acre-age, the value of machinery or equip-ment in the operation and the crop or livestock the farm is able to send to mar-ket. The appraiser might help pinpoint problems that could negatively affect

the property’s value and may suggest changes to improve the operation and its overall value. Be sure to keep your files in good order, such as tax returns, licenses, permits and employee records.

Lastly, it’s important to enlist the help of qualified professionals who don’t have a stake in final decisions. Qualified professionals may include your banker, your accountant, your personal attorney or a financial or estate planner. If you would like to help in finding a qualified professional to speak with, contact the Nationwide® Land As Your Legacy® team at LAYL@nationwide,com or toll-free at 1-855-529-2729.

Neither Nationwide, nor its employ-ees, its agents, brokers or registered rep-resentatives gives legal or tax advice.

Nationwide, the Nationwide N and Eagle, Nationwide is on your side and Land As Your Legacy are service marks of Nationwide Mutual Insurance Com-pany. © 2017 Nationwide

NFM-16515AO (05/17) ■

Financial planning for farmers and ranchers

IntEREStED In aDVERtISIng? contact:DEBRA LEAk MID-VALLEy PUBLISHING

(559) 638-2244


15049

2018

Jared Northington 559-904-6360Keith Eubanks 559-250-9313Dennis Butcher 435-201-2867Jon Borda 661-979-6654Jason Nearn 559-448-8800Or contact a dealer near you.

15645

By Todd Fitchette Western Farm PressSeptember 13, 2017

Two California growers with ties to the state’s main agricultural agency say farming practices in America’s highest grossing farm state will change – how much so and to what extent depends largely, but not solely, on regulatory challenges foisted on farmers.

Don Cameron and A.G. Kawamura farm in completely different areas of the state with different microclimate con-cerns, but similar marketing issues and under regulatory challenges shared by all farmers across the Golden State.

They also share the California De-partment of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) on their resumes as Cameron is on the current board and Kawamura served as secretary for the agency under Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Terra Nova RanchCameron is a first-generation grow-

er with roots in Redding, Calif. who fished as a kid in the Sacramento Riv-er. Today, he manages about 25 crops grown across 7,000 acres of farmland in western Fresno County.

Restrictive regulations and dozens of different agencies affecting his cropping decisions continue to make him less of a farmer and more of a water manager, human resources expert, and record keeper - a few of his daily tasks.

“We know we’re going to have more regulations as we go forward; that’s a

given,” Cameron says. “We know that the California Legislature will pretty much tell us what to farm and how to farm it.”

Water has long been an issue for Cameron who learned decades ago that water from wells on his farm were in-sufficient at times to grow all his crops. Long before the recent drought caused California lawmakers to pass the Sus-tainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA), which regulates how much water farmers can pump from underground, Cameron tried to provide a sustainable balance to his aquifers by flooding farmland from the Kings Riv-er.

First it was grapes in the early 1980s and more recently he began flooding al-

monds, pistachios and olives – not only to irrigate them, but to recharge the groundwater in his region.

“We started groundwater recharge

a long time ago because we knew our water table was dropping and at some point we’d run out of water,” he said.

He is now embarked on a progressive project to use Kings River flood flows to recharge his region. Though the project has been green-lighted by the appropri-ate agencies the permitting process con-tinues to slow project completion.

Cameron figures that once SGMA is fully implemented with its pumping re-strictions and wells metered he will be forced to idle some of his land as the law requires regions to sustainably manage their groundwater resources.

He won’t be the only one as farmers across the state will face pumping re-strictions.

“I’ve talked to some growers in Kern County and they talk about idling 25-30 percent of their ground because of

Kawamura, Cameron: Regulations threaten California agriculture's sustainability

Farmers say regulatory challenges becoming too difficult to overcome

See REGuLATIONS; Page 14

California farmer Don Cameron has been flooding his wine grapes since 1982 as a long-term project to replenish the aquifer under his farm.


To date, only two construction segments have received full envi-ronmental approval from the state rail authority and the Federal Rail-road Administration: Merced-Fres-no, certified in 2012, and Fresno-Bakersfield, finalized in 2014. And even in the Merced-Fresno portion, an area around Chowchilla was carved out for additional study and has yet to be officially approved.

In 2016, the agency set a goal of having the environmental review and certifications completed for all of its remaining segments by the end of this year. Now, however, it seems likely that none of those additional reviews will be completed by that time, and some may not be done un-til fall 2018.

“I think a lot of us on the board were skeptical of the 2017 date for all 10 environmental segments being done,” Richard told The Bee. “What you had there was management try-ing to keep pressure on people to move forward.”

“But after you’ve driven people as hard as you can, how do you step back and say we’re just not going to be able to do that – and main-tain public confidence?” he asked. “While we were pushing on our contractors to move this forward, it

was probably unrealistic to expect that all of these were going to be done by 2017.”

Richard said that while it has taken longer than desired for envi-ronmental consultants to do their work, the Federal Railroad Admin-istration that oversees the project under the National Environmental Policy Act has not been able to keep up, either. “The FRA was not, until recently, allowed to accept funding from us to augment their staff to help process these,” Richard said.

After President Donald Trump signed an executive order for federal agencies to find ways to streamline environmental reviews, however, the state has been negotiating with the FRA to transfer or delegate re-sponsibility for the federal environ-mental analysis to the state.

Lengthy lawsuitsEven before 2012, when the rail

authority certified the environ-mental impact report for its Mer-ced-Fresno segment, opponents peppered the agency with lawsuits challenging various aspects of the project.

Several suits were filed challeng-ing the adequacy of the environ-mental analysis; simultaneously, other lawsuits sought to target whether the rail authority’s ultimate plans complied with the require-ments of Proposition 1A, the $9.9

billion high-speed rail bond mea-sure approved by California voters in 2008. In the latter, the litigation stalled the rail authority and forced the state to hold off on using the bond funds to meet its cost-sharing obligations under the federal grant agreements.

That meant the state had to pivot to a Plan B – using cap-and-trade dollars raised at auction from com-panies buying air-pollution credits under the state’s greenhouse gas re-duction program until the Proposi-tion 1A money became available.

WE’VE NOT SEEN CON-STRUCTION ON THIS SCALE IN OUR COMMUNITY THAT I CAN POINT TO, EVER ... ADMITTEDLY IT’S NOT ON THE SCHEDULE WE ORIGINALLY BELIEVED WE COULD ACCOMPLISH.

Tom Richards, Fresno developer and California High-Speed Rail Authority board vice chairman

At the same time, uncertainty over the bond funds led the state and the federal rail agencies to negotiate changes to the grant agreements al-lowing California to spend the fed-eral money first – and beat the clock on this month’s spending deadline for the stimulus funds – and chip in the state’s share later.

“The original idea was that our money from the bonds and the fed-eral money would go into the proj-ect dollar for dollar, basically at the same time,” Richard said. “But we ran into litigation that held up our ability to get to the bond funds. And nothing would have started, noth-ing would have happened without the federal government allowing us to spend their money first. … We never would have had a chance of making the spending deadline with-out them.”

The federal accommodation “helped us get through a very dif-ficult period where we basically lost a year and a half to litigation,” Rich-ard added. “We had a number of people who opposed high-speed rail who openly said they were bring-ing litigation in hopes of stretching us out past the timeline where we could spend this money, and hobble or stop the project.”

A moving targetJust as the environmental, con-

struction and operational schedules have been very much a moving tar-get in the public’s eyes, so too has been the cost for California’s ambi-tious bullet-train program.

In 2008, the agency predicted that it could build Phase 1 of the state-wide system – a 520-mile line be-tween San Francisco and Los Ange-les – for about $33 billion. By 2009, in a report to the state Legislature, the estimate was revised to $34.9 billion, or $42.6 billion adjusted for inflation.

A draft business plan released in late 2011 caused whiplash for many observers when it predicted con-struction costs of $64.5 billion in 2010 dollars – or an eye-popping $98.1 billion adjusted for inflation through 2033. At that time, the cost included fully dedicated tracks with long stretches of elevated tracks through urban areas – structures that some engineering consultants for the rail authority said can cost twice as much as at-grade tracks.

By April 2012, the authority is-sued a business plan that scaled back both the plan and its cost. It introduced the idea of a “blended” system in which high-speed trains would share existing and upgraded commuter-train tracks on the San Francisco Peninsula between San Jose and San Francisco, as well as

HIGH SPEED RAILContinued from Page 3

Tim Sheehan/The Fresno Bee

Construction crews work on building a new high-speed rail bridge over the San Joaquin River at the north end of Fresno on Aug. 17, 2017.

See HIGH SPEED RAIL; Page 11


We’re dedicated to ensuring our customers get the right solutions and equipment at the right price. Stop by today, and see why our customers always enjoy their experience.

• 24.1-66 hp† engines• Tons of features and

attachments available

Compact Utility Tractors• 4 unique tractor families to meet your needs• Cab or open-station models available

MADERA - 1901 West Cleveland Ave • 1-800-948-7228 (across from the Madera County Fairgrounds)MidlandTractor.com

1Subject to approved installment credit with John Deere Financial. Some restrictions apply; other special rates and terms may be available, so see your dealer for details and other financing options. Valid only at participating U.S dealers. *Beginning 1/1/2016 all Compact Utility Tractors purchased new from an authorized John Deere Dealer come standard with a 6-year/2000 hour (whichever comes first) Powertrain Warranty. See the Limited Warranty for New John Deere Turf & Utility Equipment at dealer for details.†Manufacturer’s estimate of power (ISO) per 97/68/EC.

LOW MONTHLY PAYMENTS AVAILABLE1

AND

MTC6X50407MCFB-4C

*

Our customers know us for:Equipment Solutions....

Guaranteed

15099

in Los Angeles. The price shrank to $68.4 billion in inflation-adjusted costs.

As of 2016, based on lower-than-expected bids on the first three con-struction contracts in the Valley, the authority revised its estimates downward once again, to about $64 billion. Some of the savings were the result of a decision by the agency to shift its focus from the technically – and financially – challenging task of navigating and burrowing through mountain ranges between Bakers-field, Palmdale and Los Angeles in favor of taking the route north and west to San Jose and continuing on to San Francisco.

The authority will be required to prepare and submit a new busi-ness plan to legislators by next May, and it’s likely to include an updated schedule and revised cost estimates for not only the Valley construction segments, but also for the proposed first operational portion between Kern County and San Jose and for the entire San Francisco-Los Ange-les stage.

“If I could change one thing about this project, it would be the level of public confidence that we can do this,” Richard said. “I keep running into this sense that, ‘Well, we can’t do this. It’s too hard.’ ”

“It’s going to be expensive, prob-ably more expensive. It’s going to

take longer. But 50 years from now, people are going to forget that, just like they forgot the 2,300 lawsuits over the Golden Gate Bridge or that it took 30 years to finish Interstate 5,” he added. “It’s here now; we’re going to get this done. And it’s go-ing to be hard.”

Richards, the board vice chair-man, agreed. “The reality is that in any project like this, and frankly in anything you do in life, it’s a matter of managing alternatives and man-aging problems,” he said. “That’s what we’ve done, and it’s what we do every day.” ■

Gov. Jerry Brown, center, ceremoniously signs a section of rail, flanked by his wife, Anne Gust Brown, center right, and Gina McCarthy, administrator for the Environmental Protection Agency, center left, and other dignitaries sign during a groundbreaking in Fresno in January 2015. Others from left, then Supervisor Henry Perea (partially seen), Joseph Szabo, then-administrator of the Federal Railroad Administration, McCarthy, Gov. Brown, Anne Gust Brown, Robbie Hunter, secretary-treasurer of the State Building and Construction Trades Council of California and then-Mayor Ashley Swearengin.

John Walker/ The Fresno Bee

HIGH SPEED RAILContinued from Page 10


4 locations to serve our customers FASTER & BETTER

ETTLER TIRE

608 N. Gateway 8 SERVICE BAYS TIRES MOUNTED IN 30 MIN HUNDREDS OF TIRES IN STOCK HIGH TECH EQUIPMENT ALIGNMENT & BRAKES FINANCING AVAILABLE OAC

Since 1934SERVING THE LOCAL FARMERS FOR OVER 75 YEARS

22800 Ave. 181/2ACCROSS FROM PILOT TRUCK STOP

6 SERVICE TRUCKS 3 ACRES OF ROOM 24 HOUR ROAD SERVICE NEW ACCOUNTS WANTED

1539 Robertson Blvd - Chowchilla711 E. Childs Ave. - Merced

674-4678 674-6236

559-665-3704209-723-1823

SCH

8940

1398

5

Source: 2013 Munich Re: Report. Based on premium and loss data. Nationwide, the Nationwide N and Eagle and Nationwide is on your side are service marks of Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company. We Stand For You is a service mark of Nationwide Agribusiness Insurance Company. ©2015 Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company. Products underwritten by Nationwide Agribusiness Insurance Company, Farmland Mutual Insurance Company, Allied Property and Casualty Insurance Company and AMCO Insurance Company. Home Office: 110 Locust Street Des Moines, IA GPO-0171AO.2 (02/15)

WE STAND FOR you.®

And for making smart choices to ensure safety.

Ask us about Nationwide® farm and ranch insurance today.Foster & Parker Insurance Agency

Steve Barsotti 1643 n. Schnoor Street, Ste 103, Madera, CA 93637

(559) 674-8536 •

WS4U.com

DELTA TUNNELSContinued from Page 5

pays,” meaning all the costs would be borne by ratepayers of the south-of-Delta agencies whose supplies would be enhanced by the tunnels. The project got a black eye when federal auditors recently determined that the Bureau of Reclamation had improperly subsidized $50 million of the planning expenses.

Even San Joaquin Valley ag boost-ers in Congress, such as Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Tulare, don’t appear to favor taxpayer help for the tunnels. Nunes recently called WaterFix “a textbook boondoggle,” suggesting there isn’t much appetite in Con-gress for putting money into it. Nunes and other congressional Re-publicans have repeatedly tried to pass a bill that would rescind pro-tections for fish and allow for more pumping at the Delta pumps, great-ly reducing the need for the tunnels.

President Donald Trump may be a wild card, though. He has pledged to help San Joaquin Valley farm-ers with their water shortages. A former Westlands lobbyist named David Bernhardt is the new deputy secretary at the Department of the Interior, which oversees the Bureau of Reclamation, although Interior officials say Bernhardt has recused

himself from issues involving West-lands..

The Trump administration had in-dicated “there was going to be some federal help coming,” said Los Ba-nos farmer Cannon Michael, who receives water from the Central Val-ley Project and leads the San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority. “That could be an avenue.”

Is there a third option for saving the project?

Possibly. Kightlinger, the manager at Metropolitan, suggested that “we develop a scaled-back project.” With little or no funding from the federal contractors, the State Water Project districts – led by Metropolitan and the farmers at the Kern County Wa-ter Agency – could build a smaller version of the tunnels. Both Met-ropolitan and Kern County have indicated they support WaterFix, although they haven’t formally com-mitted yet.

Kightlinger said he isn’t sure if there’s political support from the water agencies for a state-only tun-nels project, but it might have to be explored. “Engineering-wise, we know it’s possible,” he said. “Fi-nance-wise, it’s possible.”

Kern County’s general manager, Curtis Creel, declined to comment on the idea of a project financed ex-clusively by state contractors.

A smaller project sounds like an easy solution.

Not necessarily. Experts say a WaterFix Lite could represent a dramatic departure from what’s currently being planned. A scaled-down project might not help the fish as much. After laboring for years to win environmental approvals for the tunnels, project backers might have to start all over again with the plan-ning and red tape.

“You’re talking about a different configuration of the facilities, dif-ferent operations and arguably dif-ferent impacts,” said Kevin O’Brien, a Sacramento lawyer who is suing to block the tunnels on behalf of some Northern California government agencies.

Why would a smaller project be so different?

It largely has to do with with water flows and fish. The existing pumps are so powerful, they cause a portion of the Delta’s tributaries to flow in reverse, drawing fish into harm’s way at critical times. The tunnels plan, as currently envisioned, is supposed to fix that “reverse flow” problem and ensure fish safety while allowing the pumps to keep water deliveries on schedule. A smaller tunnel project, however, might mean the reverse flow phenomenon remains a serious threat to fish.

“It would diminish substantially the environmental benefits of reduc-ing the reverse flows,” said Jay Lund of UC Davis’ Center for Watershed Sciences.

What are tunnels advocates do-ing right now?

They’re trying to stay the course. Metropolitan’s board of directors still plans to vote Oct. 10 on wheth-er to participate in the current tun-nels plan, said spokesman Armando Acuña. The Santa Clara Valley Wa-ter District is voting Oct. 17, “as far as I know,” said spokesman Marty Grimes. “I haven’t heard of any change yet.” The Kern County Wa-ter Agency is polling its 13 member agencies and plans to report the re-sults to Brown’s administration by Oct. 12, according to Creel.

State officials, meanwhile, said the fight for WaterFix isn’t over. “The state is not going to walk away from its obligation to advance this criti-cal upgrade” to water infrastructure, Natural Resources Secretary John Laird said Wednesday. ■

IntEREStED In aDVERtISIng? contact:

DEBRA LEAk MID-VALLEy PUBLISHING

(559) 638-2244


1300 S. Gateway DriveP.O. Box 1263Madera, CA 93639

• Fuels• Lubricants• Propane

(559) 673-3597(800) 421-3370(559) 673-6608 fax

IRRIGATING THE VALLEY SINCE1967

DESIGN THROUGH INSTALLATION559-673-4261559-674-4078

19170 HWY 99MADERA, CA 93637

Valley Feed

Tree & Vine Supplies

121 N. Gateway DriveMadera, CA 93637

Ph: (559) 674-6735 • Fax: (559) 661-7200

1100 South Madera Ave (Hwy 145), Madera

(559) 674-5661

For all your Service, Parts & Sales Needs

BUSINESS DIRECTORY at your Service

This Wide Open

SPOTCould Be Yours

Your SpaceThis Could Be

Introduce your business to new clients –

Reserve your space in the Agriculture Today Business Directory

ShreddingBurseyAlmonds • Walnuts • Pistachios • Citrus

Madera, CA(559) 352-0926

By

1504

8

14703

IntEREStED In aDVERtISIng? contact:

DEBRA LEAk MID-VALLEy PUBLISHING (559) 638-2244


OCTOBER 20, 201711:00AM-1:00PM

MADERA COUNTY AGRICULTURE ROUND TABLE This month’s Ag Roundtable will be hosted by The Deerpoint Group.

The intent of this Ag Round Table is for Ag leaders to meet on a regular basis to openly share and discuss issues and challenges we are facing, pursue opportunities, and develop strategic partnerships with regard to our natural resources management, impending legislation, regulations and the many other topics that we face. This meeting’s discussion will include water concerns.

UNITE FOR THE BETTERMENT

HELP FIGHT CURRENT

CHALLENGES AG FACES

DEVELOP STRATEGIC

PARTNERSHIPS

CREATE A FORUM FOR UNIQUE

MADERA COUNTY ISSUES

BUILD AG LEADERS

LOCATION:

The Deerpoint Group

1963 Independence Drive

Madera, CA 93637

Please RSVP [email protected]

559-674-8871 11:00am-1:00pm

SGMA,” he continued. “I think you’re going to see a shift in what’s grown.”

Cameron believes popular high-value crops like almonds will likely continue, though he doesn’t believe the rapid ac-celeration of acreage seen in recent years can be sustained under the state’s water

restrictions and supply.Orange County ProduceKawamura is a family partner in Or-

ange County Produce, an Irvine, Calif.-based company that direct ships produce

grown on current and former military installations, and on land as small as three acres close to upscale apartment complexes and major freeways.

Kawamura is a former CDFA secre-tary and grandson of a farmer forced off his southern California land and into a Japanese internment camp in Arizona during World War II.

The only reason the family did not lose its farm at the time was because Kawamura’s grandfather was able to give his farm to his local banker, a trusted businessman who once the war was over returned the farm to the fam-ily.

Like Cameron, Kawamura believes water availability will be the largest driver in the success of farming in the state. Aside from the available unpaved space to farm in Orange County, wa-ter is the single-most important factor in his choice of land. By itself, picking land can be as easy as spotting open parcels with ample weeds.

“I know if the weeds are doing well there then the soil is good enough to grow crops,” he says.

Kawamura primarily farms organic and conventional strawberries and fresh market green beans on about 1,000 acres in the southland. In some cases, his decision to farm certified organic crops has more to do with local ordi-nances and neighborhood perceptions than it does pure business decisions.

SGMAWhile perhaps necessary to protect

groundwater resources, SGMA is a hurdle that Kawamura says can put a farmer out of business.

“SGMA without a rudder of where we’re heading as a nation or a state is more than troubling - it’s disturbing,” Kawamura says.

“We need to have a dialog over the idea that California rules and regula-tions are designed to impede agricul-ture, shut it down, or even eliminate certain kinds of agriculture based on land use or value,” he continued.

For Cameron, the necessity of pre-serving aquifers should be considered in concert with the state's abilities to produce food and fiber. For instance, he once looked at food produced on his farm and discovered that it could sustain the caloric needs of 200,000 people.

“It’s kind of fun to put it in those terms because people will think you’re eliminating 25 percent of your land to save water. It really means you’re cutting out food to feed a lot of people,” Cam-eron said.

No agricultural policy?

REGULATIONSContinued from Page 9

See REGuLATIONS; Page 15


Sacramento, California, Septem-ber 11, 2017: The California Foun-dation for Agriculture in the Class-room is now accepting submissions for the 2017 “Imagine this… Story Writing Contest.” Third to eighth grade educators are invited to sub-mit their students’ work to be en-tered to win awards including being published into a story book, a med-al, an e-reader, and an all-expens-es-paid trip to Sacramento for the awards ceremony during California Ag Day.

The “Imagine this… Story Writ-ing Contest” is one of the longest running programs administered by the California Foundation for Agriculture in the Classroom. For more than 20 years, students have explored numerous agricultural themes to craft their narrative sto-ries. Students are encouraged to write about whatever agricultural theme excites them. Over the years, stories have ranged from superhero apples to futuristic farms to talking animals.

“Agriculture is everywhere! From the food we eat to the clothes we

wear, agriculture is a part of our life every day. Not only is it important to teach about agriculture–it’s es-sential!” explained Judy Culbertson executive director of California Ag-riculture in the Classroom.

Stories are judged and awarded re-gionally and then the six “Imagine this… Story Writing Contest” state winners are chosen. High school art students in Northern California il-lustrate the state winning stories. Working in teams, the artists ex-press their personality through their own style. Drawings, paintings, digital art, and Claymation can be seen throughout past editions.

The annual deadline is November 1. Teachers are to submit the top 5 stories from each class. More in-formation about the contest can be found at LearnAboutAg.org/imagi-nethis.

About California Foundation for Agriculture in the Classroom:

The California Foundation for Agriculture in the Classroom (CFAITC) is dedicated to increas-ing the awareness and understand-ing of agriculture among Califor-

nia’s educators and students. Our vision is an appreciation of agricul-ture by all.

For more information, visit Learn-AboutAg.org , call 916-561-5625, or email [email protected]. ■

“Imagine this...” Story Writing Contest now accepting entries

for 2017 contest!

Julia Daniels, the 2016 “Imagine this… Story Writing Contest” 3rd grade winner, signing autographs at a California Foundation for Agriculture in the Classroom special event.

Top right: The 2016 “Imagine this… Stories Inspired by Agriculture” book cover illustrated by Inderkum High School art students.

REGULATIONSContinued from Page 14

While California has a “California Agricultural Vision” document to set a purpose, vision and goals for the state's multi-billion farming industry it might be a moot point, according to Kawamu-ra.

“It’s as if agriculture is unwanted in this state by the current administration and even more by this legislature,” the former Ag Secretary says.

Over the years, Kawamura has con-sidered different things that could put him out of business. Water constraints,

quarantines, export and trade sanctions, fuel prices and labor shutdowns can have the same net effect on his business, yet at least some can be mitigated with careful policy that promotes business and farming in a state that celebrates the foodie movement and locally-grown produce.

For instance, he once farmed certified organic strawberries in a field wrought with disease that conventional treat-ments could help. Due in large part to the regulated loss of methyl bromide plus concerns from neighbors about conventional farming practices he lost the field to disease within months.

Another example he calls a “micro-cosm of California business practices. Kawamura was caught in a political battle between a particular city which he says has anti-business and anti-ag-riculture views and the property owner who leased it to him to grow produce.

“It was pretty ugly,” he said. “They were basically trying to extort money out of a developer and we just happened to be the tenant on the property.”

The future of California agricul-ture?

Both farmers agree that changes in the state's political climate do not bode well for California agriculture's sustain-

ability, though neither is completely bearish about California agriculture.

Both talk about the impact of labor access and costs on farming. The hourly rate Kawamura must pay workers in his fields is close to the daily rate for work-ers 90 miles south of him in Mexico.

For Cameron, staying in business now is a matter of choosing profitable crops with a contract before planting. In some cases he leases land to companies test-ing seed varieties in his climate.

Kawamura remains “nimble” - always looking for opportunities to grow crops on parcels that will probably be devel-oped in a few years. ■


0147

06

Consider how using cash or assets as a down payment will affect other areas of your operation. Extra expenses beyond the purchase of the land and daily op-eration, such as facility improvements, fencing and equipment upgrades, might be necessary with more acreage. You’ll need some cash to handle those addi-tional obligations.

What are my operation’s expenses

and income potential?Think about the land’s long-term po-

tential to generate income beyond the first year or two of the purchase. Fi-nancing with a long-term loan requires close analysis of your operation’s fixed costs, variable costs and income poten-tial. Above all, you’ll need sufficient fi-nancial capacity to withstand inevitable market downturns. Yield and grain prices will fluctuate, but knowing your five-year yield average will help evaluate your operation’s longer-term financial

strength.Investing in additional acreage for

your operation isn’t a decision to be made overnight and should not be taken lightly. But, as you spend time going over plans for your operation, these questions will help you identify the right decision when an opportunity arises in addition to emphasizing long-term prosperity.

Article courtesy of Farm Credit Mid-America. ■

6 QUESTIONSContinued from Page 6 contact

DEBRA LEAk to aDVERtISE

In tHE MADERA COUNTY

FARM BUREAU

(559) 638-2244

madera county farm bureau - maderafb.com · madera county farm bureau ... california pistachio...

Documents