Datasets:

BAAI

/

IndustryCorpus

like 44

Follow

Beijing Academy of Artificial Intelligence 593

2017-09/1436/en_head.json.gz/20349

Inside a Water-Pump Repair Shop in Kenya Kikuyu farmers would be in serious trouble when their water pumps broke down were it not for Simon Njugi Kikuyu farmers would be in serious trouble when their water pumps broke down were it not for Simon NjugiSoon after we arrived in Nairobi, Kenya, we headed into the country to get a feel for the hardware used by rural farming communities. All the villages on the outskirts of the city are dependent on wells for agriculture most of the year. Kikuyu is a moderate-sized town of just a few thousand people on the outskirts of Nairobi, but it's the hub of a densely populated agricultural area. The businesses here service around 600,000 people in the surrounding areas. The countryside is lush, with rolling hills, and tea bushes nestled under verdant green trees. Considering the size of the surrounding area, this village is quite small. Nestled in the middle of farm country, the services its businesses provide are essential. The most important shop of all is the water-pump repair shop. In a farm town as small as Kikuyu, you're in serious trouble if the motor on your water pump breaks down: crops wither and die quickly in the sweltering heat. New motors are expensive, and out of the price range of subsistence farmers.The man who keeps the pumps pumping and the water flowing is Simon Njugi, a small man who looks a tad younger than his 38 years. He is Kikuyu's water-pump repairman, and therefore a popular guy. His workshop is housed in a large concrete building in the center of the village. When we arrived at the workshop, Simon strolled out to greet us.Simon learned to repair motors from his father, Ndua, who worked repairing motors for someone else for over 30 years. Slogging it out for years on end, Ndua had always wanted to run his own business, but had never been able to take the risk at the same time he was providing for his family. Simon grew up watching his father repair motors, and had always wanted to strike a more independent path. After graduating high school, he saved up some money from working odd jobs and started his own shop. Demand for his services grew quickly, and soon he was able to hire his father. They finally had the family business they'd both always wanted.Both Simon and Ndua know exactly what they are doing--their hands are gnarled from years of winding copper. They learned their trade the hard way, from making mistakes, teaching each other as they went. Simon is better with newer pumps with more electronics, and his father specializes in older models and their whimsies. Usually, when pumps fail, power spikes or overloading fries the insulation coating the copper coils inside the motor. The fix is to replace all the copper with new windings. This is time-consuming, but relatively straightforward, as long as you precisely replicate the old winding pattern. Motors are almost never fixed this way in developed countries, because people toss the motors and replace them with a new model. We mentioned this to Simon, who thinks we're crazy for throwing away perfectly good hardware. He spent some time enthusiastically explaining to us why older motors are more rugged and more reliable than motors being manufactured today. Then he invited us inside.Inside the shop, motors were stacked everywhere. He told us that villagers regularly bring in broken motors, but often don't have the money to pay for the repair. So while he fixes the motors, the villagers scrounge for the money, usually borrowing from friends and family. If they can't afford the repair, he hangs on to the motors for a three-month grace period. On the back wall of his shop, dozens of repaired motors await their owners to claim them.But Simon isn't satisfied just fixing things himself: He's most happy when teaching people how to fix things. He always has a couple students working with him, and he takes pride in teaching and passing along his trade.He introduced us to Kioni, a young woman apprenticing in the workshop to learn motor repair. Simon says that it takes several months of hands-on training to learn to rewind motors well. Kenya's repair people are more heterogeneous than we found in Cairo, and she was the first woman we've seen fixing anything on our trip. She was clearly excited about her new trade, and proudly shows off the motor she's repairing. Her posture brims with self-confidence.Simon's workshop has seen tens of thousands of motors pass through its walls. Kim has brought his motor to Simon three times for repair, and each time returned it to heavy use. They come in as broken lumps of metal, with internals twisted into a blackened mass of metal. They leave good as new, with a fresh coat of paint, glistening rebuilt copper internals, and a smile on Simon's face as he hands it back to its owner. Just as an electric motors is the lifeblood of any farm, Simon's workshop is the cornerstone of this community. The Fixers is a documentary project about e-waste in Africa, and the repair technicians who turn our unwanted junk into coveted treasures. Produced by Kyle Wiens, screenplay by Brian X. Chen, and photography by Jon Snyder and Justin Fantl.

农业

2017-09/1436/en_head.json.gz/20529

Experimental orchard, garden to yield lessons Thursday, September 27, 2012 8:00 am Chris Michlewicz An experimental fruit orchard and vegetable garden will teach Douglas County farmers and novice growers how to care for an increasing variety of natural goods. The county, in partnership with the Tri-County Health Department and the Colorado State University Extension office, is conducting a research project at the Hidden Mesa Open Space on Colorado 83 south of Parker that will ultimately provide a better blueprint for growing fruits and vegetables in the local climate. Instead of farmers risking investment on crops that could potentially fail, Douglas County has spent grant money and enlisted the help of about a dozen master gardeners and horticulturists to see how various plants react to conditions like wind, pests, soil, sunlight and seasonal changes. The lessons, and potentially groundbreaking techniques for growing goods from throughout the world that have never been tried in Douglas County, will be passed on the public, said Andy Hough, environmental resources coordinator for the Douglas County Open Space and Natural Resources Department. “It’s a place where the public can come look at these methods so they don’t have to put the brainpower or capital investment into something that may or may not work for them when they’re counting on profit as a bottom line,” he said. The orchard is finishing its second fruiting season and will take a few years to get into full swing. Much of the research will focus on the best ways to produce and care for high-yield nut and fruit trees. The garden, on the other hand, is more intended to increase the availability and diversity of healthy locally grown food. This year, more than 1,500 pounds of produce picked from the garden was donated to the Parker Task Force (http://tinyurl.com/bq65unx). Castle Rock resident Dave Smukler, master gardener and the project’s garden coordinator, said the 30-by-60-foot plot thrived and exceeded expectations. He is invigorated by the lessons learned from the few vegetable experiments; changes will be made accordingly next season. A $120,000 block grant from Tri-County Health kick-started the orchard operation in January 2011 and expired last March. It paid for necessities like fencing, trellises, greenhouses, irrigation systems and plants. “The theory is that with grant money, local government could set up a prototype to demonstrate what we think works and test what we think might work,” Hough said, adding that hazelnuts, figs and heskap, an edible honeysuckle, are among the plants being studied for the first time. Likewise, “natural chemical means” are being applied to produce fruits that resist late-spring frosts, Hough said. Smukler, a semi-retired contractor and construction superintendent who volunteers his time like the other gardeners, said he is curious about the effects of Douglas County’s higher elevation and cooler nights on newly introduced vegetables. “Maybe they should grow here, but maybe they shouldn’t. That’s what we’re trying to find out,” he said. Smukler is most excited by the wide-open space and abundant sunlight, which is often constricted by roadways, homes or trees. The master gardeners planted seeds and nurtured the vegetables at home before relocating them to the garden. For several consecutive weeks, they harvested twice a week because the vegetables were growing so quickly. The orchard and garden, which are just southwest of the Hidden Mesa Open Space parking lot, are fenced in, and the public is not allowed access without an appointment. The county has already hosted a handful of informal tours; more organized learning sessions will be scheduled once research results become available. The groups involved have utilized extra space to grow additional tomatoes and melons, and there are preliminary plans to possibly expand the garden next season. Maintenance and labor will be funded by produce sales, and Douglas County will continue to contribute. The Hidden Mesa project, along with a smaller-scale sister project at Lowell Ranch south of Castle Rock, are part of Douglas County’s effort to revitalize agriculture in an area that was founded by ranchers and farmers. To volunteer, contact Hough at [email protected]. For more on the donations to the Parker Task Force, click here http://tinyurl.com/bq65unx. Some of the fruits/vegetables/nuts being grown: mulberries, raspberries, walnuts, apples, hazelnuts, strawberries, watermelons, kiwis, heskap, cantaloupe, figs, tomatoes, squash, zucchini, blackberries, mushrooms, seaberries. douglas county, hidden mesa, orchard, garden, experimental Print

农业

2017-09/1436/en_head.json.gz/21021

John Block Reports from Washington By: John Block, AgWeb.com John Block has dedicated his professional career to the fields of agriculture, food and health. It was a pleasure to see and talk to the delegation of the National Association of Farm Broadcasters that came to town this week. It is a good thing to come to the nation’s capital and get a first-hand look at what’s going on. Should we be surprised but the single word used repeatedly to describe this government was “dysfunctional.” Maybe that is an exaggeration, but it seems that we’re not getting much done. Last week, I testified before the Trade Subcommittee of the House Ways and Means Committee on Cuba. We need to open up trade and travel with Cuba. For 50 years, we have had a policy of isolation that has been a total failure. We need to turn to a policy of engagement. Do President Obama and Congress have the courage to change policy? I don’t know. I worked for a President that had courage. I remember vividly the first meeting of President Reagan’s Cabinet. I urged the President to take immediate action on his campaign promise to end the grain embargo against the Soviet Union. Secretary of State Alexander Haig adamantly disagreed. He told President Reagan the grain embargo should only be lifted in exchange for concessions from the Soviets. But President Reagan, who had no love for what he called Godless Communism” would not go back on his word to the American people or the American farmer. Within the first 100 days of his Presidency, he unilaterally lifted the grain embargo because he believed that selling grain to the Soviet Union was the right thing to do. Now, that took courage. Where is the courage now? The Peterson-Moran bill, House Resolution 4645, would open Cuba up for trade and travel. Most, but not all, of the Committee Members indicated support for the bill. However, they made it clear that they are unhappy that nothing has been done to pass the Colombia, Panama, or South Korean trade agreements. They are gathering dust on the shelf as we speak. All of these trade opportunities are just sitting there. Cuba, Colombia, panama, South Korea – where is the action? We are forfeiting jobs to other countries as they take our markets from us. Maybe “dysfunctional” isn’t an exaggeration. In closing, I would encourage you to access my website which archives my radio commentaries dating back 10 years and will go back 20 years when complete. Check on what I said back then. Go to www.johnblockreports.com. Until next week, I am John Block in Washington. It would be a lot easier like dairy farmers to cut acres grown rather than looking and hoping for increased exports. If farmers setaside 5-7% of their land it would mean a whole lot less bushels, less chemicals, fertilizr, less of everything. I think even a smaller farm of 1,000 acres could afford to setaside 50 acres. Pay your rent and gain it back in increased prices. Any more grain exports would cause prices to go up and the country doesnt want high raw food products such as grains. It means ethanol would be spendier and your corn flakes would be $6.00 a box instead of $5. Machinery Pete Watching Surge in Sprayer Sales 02/21/2017 10:31 AM

农业

2017-09/1436/en_head.json.gz/23183

Efforts to kill invasive plant worry beekeepers Published on December 21, 2010 3:01AM Last changed on December 21, 2010 5:40AM By DAVID RUNKAssociated PressDETROIT (AP) -- An effort to fight an invasive plant with insects that eat it has drawn opposition from beekeepers who worry it will leave them without an adequate source of nectar and pollen for their honeybees.Researchers in Michigan released bugs that feed on spotted knapweed earlier this year. Western states and big honey producers, such as Minnesota and Wisconsin, previously used so-called biological control to help restrain the flowering plant, which produces chemicals that deter the growth of other plants and crowds out native vegetation.It's not clear why Michigan beekeepers are so worried about knapweed control when those in other states haven't been as much. Some in the industry speculated Michigan beekeepers may rely on knapweed more for nectar and pollen than those in other states. Regardless, Michigan is among the nation's top 10 honey producers and the home of beekeepers who ship hives as far as Florida and California to pollinate orchards and fields. Beekeepers argue that if they're hurt, the farmers who rely on them will suffer too."If it wasn't for this plant, we wouldn't even be here," said Kirk Jones, the 57-year-old founder of Sleeping Bear Farms in the northwest Lower Peninsula community of Beulah. If knapweed control efforts prove successful, he said: "It could be detrimental to the future of the beekeeping industry."The dispute between the state and its beekeepers is happening amid a massive die-off of bees nationwide. Colony collapse disorder has killed about 30 percent of the nation's bees each year since it was recognized in 2006, according to a report the U.S. Department of Agriculture released Friday. The bees are crucial for the production of 130 crops worth more than $15 billion a year, it said.Michigan officials said they're keenly aware of the importance beekeepers place on knapweed, which blooms in late July and early August when many other plants aren't flowering. As part of the knapweed fight, they're looking at what kinds of native flowers could be planted to replace it -- both to sustain bees and improve the diversity of wildflowers statewide."It's not an attempt to take away a resource that beekeepers find valuable, but to replace it with one that might have more functionality," said Ken Rauscher, director of the pesticide and plant pest management division for the Michigan Department of Agriculture, which worked with federal officials to oversee the release of knapweed-eating bugs.Beekeepers, however, are skeptical about other flowers' ability to do the job.Spotted knapweed, also known as starthistle, was introduced in the U.S. from Europe in the late 1800s. It was brought over accidentally, either in contaminated seed or ships' ballast water, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The plant has been seen in Michigan for at least a century but has spread more vigorously in the past two decades. It thrives in sandy soils, such as dunes, and in former farm fields, along roads and in prairies.Many beekeepers have set up shop near large expanses of knapweed, said Roger Hoopingarner, president of the Michigan Beekeepers Association. Its loss, and a subsequent loss of bees, would hurt honey production, but the bigger effect would come from not having bees to pollinate fruit and vegetable crops, he said.Michigan is second only to California in the diversity of crops it produces and is among is among the nation's leaders in the production of red tart cherries, apples and blueberries -- all of which need pollination."If spotted knapweed goes away and there is nothing that will replace it, then some of these beekeepers . . . will just leave the state," Hoopingarner said. "They go now to California or other states for pollination, and they won't come back because there will be no incentive to come back."Two knapweed-eating flies were released in Michigan in the 1990s, but those don't appear to have curbed its spread, Rauscher said. So in August, researchers released two types of weevils on state land in five counties. Scientists in other states have found success in killing off knapweed with a combination of flies and weevils.Michigan officials don't expect to wipe out knapweed; the hope is to pare it back. Doug Landis, a Michigan State University professor who specializes in biological control, is working with the state on the project. He said replacing knapweed with other flowers is a must because of the way Michigan beekeepers use the plant."That will maintain the nectar flow," Landis said.Terry Klein, 70, of TM Klein and Sons Honey in St. Charles, has about 1,000 colonies of bees in central Michigan. He said he fears the economically-troubled state won't have the resources needed to fully replant areas where knapweed is killed off. The burden will be on beekeepers, who will have to raise the prices they charge Michigan farmers for pollination, he said."To me, it's a double-whammy," Klein said. "Costing Michigan jobs. Costing our status as a fruit-growing state."The pilot project will be evaluated over the next year or two, and Michigan officials don't expect to release more insects until that is done, Rauscher said. Even if the project is expanded, it could be 10 to 15 years before the bugs have a substantial impact on the presence of knapweed, leaving time for beekeepers to adjust, he said.And, the Michigan Beekeepers' Hoopingarner added, even if Michigan doesn't introduce more bugs, they could eventually spread there from surrounding states where they're used to control knapweed.Copyright 2010 The Associated Press.

农业

2017-09/1436/en_head.json.gz/23518

Food Zimbabwe's women farmers on the rise Guy Oliver/IRIN HARARE, 27 May 2014 The spike in women managing their own agricultural land following Zimbabwe’s 2000 land reform programme catapulted the country to high up in the African league of female farmers tilling their own farms, although accurate data for gendered land ownership on the continent remains a grey and contested area. Women provide the majority of sub-Saharan Africa’s agricultural muscle and produce up to 80 percent of the regions basic foodstuffs, according to the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). Prior to Zimbabwe’s land redistribution, which saw about 4,500 white-owned farms - accounting for more than a quarter of the country - handed to an estimated 245,000 black farmers, fewer than 5 percent of Zimbabwe’s women had land registered in their name. But in the wake of land reform, women now comprise about 20 percent of landowners and leaseholders. “Anybody, male or female, could claim pieces of land [with the advent of the land reform programme],” Thandiwe Chidavarume, director of Women and Land in Zimbabwe (WLZ), an NGO campaigning for greater land access for women, told IRIN. However, Zimbabwe’s formerly white-owned redistributed land is provided on a 99-year leasehold and remains the property of the state, so tenure is not guaranteed, and deciphering gender ownership of land in Africa also hinges on the question of what “ownership” means. The land ownership matrix since the 2000 redistribution completely altered the landscape, but communal land, where patriarchal norms persist and traditional leaders determine land access, has remained largely unchanged. About 50 percent of Zimbabwe consists of communal land, where 70 percent of the population reside and small-scale farmers work average plot sizes of about two hectares. Fuzzy ownership A December 2013 paper by the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) entitled Gender Inequalities in Ownership and Control of Land in Africa: Myths versus Reality highlights the “gross simplifications” regarding women and land in Africa, leading to bald statements that “less than 2 percent of the world’s land is owned by women” or “women own approximately 15 percent of agricultural landholdings in Africa.” FAO’s Gender and Land Rights Database uses the term “agricultural holdings headed by women”. Mali is at the bottom of a 19 country list, with 3.1 percent. Madagascar has 15.3 percent, while Cape Verde tops the list with 50.5 percent. The IFPRI paper acknowledges the paucity of information regarding land ownership by women. Whereas property deeds might identify an owner, other considerations were also at play. “For example, a woman may have the right to farm a parcel of land and bequeath it to her children, but not to sell it without permission from her kinship group. Second, the single statistics that are used seem to imply that individuals own land. Without further qualification, however, it is not clear how land that is owned jointly is classified. In particular, it would be important to note how land that is owned by couples is included in the measure. It is also unclear how land owned by clans, tribes, institutions, or government actors, rather than by individuals, is included,” the paper said. "The pattern that women own less land than men, regardless of how ownership is conceptualized, is remarkably consistent" “Analysis of LSMS-ISA [Living Standards Measurement Study - Integrated Surveys on Agriculture] from six countries shows that of the total land area owned or accessed by households, women solely own (documented and undocumented) a high of 31 percent in Malawi, followed by Uganda (16 percent), Tanzania (15 percent), Niger (8 percent), and Nigeria (less than 1 percent),” the paper said. The paper surmises that in the absence of comprehensive data “the pattern that women own less land than men, regardless of how ownership is conceptualized, is remarkably consistent. Further, in many cases, the gender gaps are quite large.” A 1993 Land Tenure Commission appointed by President Robert Mugabe’s ZANU-PF government investigating post-colonial land issues had no gender perspective in its brief, although it is estimated about 70 percent of Zimbabwean rural women are engaged in daily agricultural activities, from land preparation for planting through to post-harvest activities. In 1998 WLZ was established after the realization, Chidavarume said, “that in spite of Zimbabwe being independent [since 1980], women were still treated unfairly when it came to accessing agricultural land… “We continue to lobby government and are pushing for more than 20 percent now. With hindsight we should have asked for more from the beginning,” she added. Women’s rights watershed Meanwhile, the 2013 adoption of a new constitution is viewed as a watershed for women. Emed Gunduza, a spokesperson for the Women’s Coalition of Zimbabwe (WCZ), a network of women’s rights activists and women’s organizations, told IRIN the new constitution had eliminated contradictions between customary and statutory law. "All laws, customs, traditions and cultural practices that infringe the rights of women conferred by the constitution are void to the extent of infringement" The new constitution stipulates that “all laws, customs, traditions and cultural practices that infringe the rights of women conferred by the constitution are void to the extent of infringement.” The previous constitution protected customary law. Consequently the custom of a widow losing her deceased husband’s land entirely or partially if she refused to marry a male relative becomes redundant. The custom, Chidavarume said, had placed an unwarranted strain on a woman’s ability to provide for her children. Customary law also dictated that unmarried women could not have communal land allocated to them. However, Gunduza said, the stumbling block for women was socialization and continued beliefs of a man’s authority over women. As a consequence, most women with land or leaseholds are unmarried, or are widows or daughters returning to their parents’ areas after a divorce, said Edith Mazhawidza, president of the Women Farmers Association, although there were also instances of joint land ownership between men and women. But with the dust settling from the turbulence of land reform, there is less and less land available for resettlement and increasing competition for it. In a widely reported address earlier this year Vice-President Joice Mujuru acknowledged there was corruption in land allocations, which she said the government did not condone. The allocation of land is multi-tiered, with the National Land Identification Committee under the auspices of the office of the vice-president at the apex. Provincial committees are chaired by ministers of state for provincial affairs and district committees headed by district administrators, with both committees drawing on personnel from government departments, including the president’s office, ruling ZANU-PF party officials, war veterans and traditional leaders. im/go/cb The experiences of a woman farmer in Zimbabwe Photo: Ish Mafundikwa/IRIN Ella Mubayiwa, 60, returned from England to claim a farm during Zimbabwe’s 2000 land redistribution programme Ella Mubayiwa, a 60-year-old widowed mother of four, was part of the “Third Chimurenga” as the 2000 land reform programme was dubbed, and was encouraged by her mother to return to Zimbabwe and claim land. “I was in England after finishing a degree in business administration but could not get a job, when I heard that the president had authorized the reclamation of our land,” she told IRIN. “We were bussed to different parts of the country and had the pick of the land.” Mubayiwa acquired a 35-hectare farm in 2000 in Nyabira, about 30km west of the capital Harare, and was one of 38 other households resettled on the former white-owned farm. “It was difficult from the beginning as I had no draught power, or finance so I started from very humble beginnings, hiring other peoples’ tractors,” she said. She first began growing tobacco as a cash-crop and by 2012 was able to buy a tractor with her profits. “It has made it easier for me but I still face challenges in terms of capital to finance my activities on the farm.” Banks do not accept the 99-year government leases for farmers as collateral for loans, as the leasehold only gives the right to farm state land, not land ownership. Mubayiwa’s venture into livestock was less successful after her four cattle died, but she is diversifying her crop production, after being selected as part of a maize seed production pilot project by the government’s Scientific and Industrial Research and Development Centre (SIRDC). Edith Mazhawidza, president of the Women Farmers Association, approached SIRDC to enter into a partnership with 11 female farmers on a combined 200-hectares across Zimbabwe to produce a maize seed variety developed by SIRDC. “They [SIRDC] supply seed, fertilizer and technical know-how,” Mazhawidza told IRIN. The women are then contractually bound to sell the harvest to SIRDC and after the costs of inputs are deducted the women are paid the difference. Maize seed production provides higher rewards with a ton fetching up to US$660, against maize with consumption prices of about $390 a ton. “ I used to be wary of ceding the title deeds of my house to the bank as security because of the uncertainty of the rains.” Mubayiwa has a promising crop of maize seed on 15 hectares. “I am hopeful that because of the good rains, I’ll get a good harvest. I hope to double the hectarage next year,” she said, adding that she expected to harvest five tons per hectare. The success of producing maize seed has encouraged her to use her Harare house as collateral for a loan to build a dwelling on the farm, as she still commutes to the farm, and also install an irrigation system. “I used to be wary of ceding the title deeds of my house to the bank as security because of the uncertainty of the rains. I was afraid that if there was a drought I would lose my house but the rainy season was good this year so I am willing to take a chance. It’s better to be on the property, I want to be a full-time farmer,” she said. Mubayiwa employs 10 full time workers, who live on the farm with their families, and hires about 15 seasonal labourers. “I need more people on the farm but labour is expensive, I pay my workers $75 a month and provide them with mealie meal as well,” she said. Get latest reports in your inbox. Unconventional cash project challenges aid status quo in Lebanon 20 February 2017 Investigations EXCLUSIVE: UK “voluntary” returns – refugee coercion and NGO complicity Everything you need to know about the latest Syria peace talks 21 February 2017 Analysis Miserable conditions at camp for Zimbabwe flood victims advertisement Pests plague southern African farmers Next for you The rainy season, always welcome in often dry southern Africa, has brought with it favourable breeding conditions for army worms and red locusts. Twitter

农业

2017-09/1436/en_head.json.gz/23774

Government of Arunachal Pradesh Ruchi Soya Industries » Ruchi Soya inks MOU with Government of Arunachal Pradesh Posted by: Clara Fernandes at 10/06/2016 06:59:00 am (L-R) Mr. Muthuselvan_ Mr. Hage Kano_ Mr. Talem Tapok_ Mr Poola Mallesham_ Mr A K Purkayastha_ Mr TV Ramana ü To promote and encourage oil palm cultivation in 25,000 ha in zone IV comprising of 4 districtsü A positive step towards : Ø Reducing the country’s ever increasing dependency on imported Palm OilØ Enhancing the income of farmersChandigarh, October 6, 2016: Ruchi Soya Industries Ltd., India’s leading Agri and Food FMCG company recently signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the Government of Arunachal Pradesh to boost palm oil production through development of quality palm plantations and human capacity building. Under the MOU, Ruchi Soya will promote and encourage development of oil palm in 25,000 hectares in zone IV comprising of 4 districts of the state (West Siang, East Kamang, Lower Subansri and Papumpare). The MoU was signed between Mr Talem Tapok, IAS, Agriculture Secretary representing the Government of Arunachal Pradesh along with Director (Agri-Marketing) and Mr Poola Mallesham, Corporate Head (Oil Palm Division) of Ruchi Soya Industries With this agreement, Ruchi Soya Industries now has obtained permission for oil palm development in 45,000 hectares, covering 5 districts in the state of Arunachal Pradesh. (Through an MOU signed last year, the company obtained access of 20,000 hectares in Zone III - East Siang District)Mr. Talem Tapok – Agriculture Secretary, State Government of Arunachal Pradesh commented, “We are pleased by the efforts put by Ruchi Soya Industries Limited for Oil Palm Development in East Siang district through timely set up of state-of-the-art Nursery, Rising of Plantations in the fields of Farmers. Honourable Government of Arunachal Pradesh is delighted to take this association a step forward with additional allocation of Zone IV, having potential of 25,000 Hectares for Oil Palm Development by Ruchi Soya Industries Limited.”Commenting on the occasion, Mr. Dinesh Shahra, Founder & Managing Director, Ruchi Soya Industries Ltd. said, “We are glad to have trust and support of State Government of Arunachal Pradesh. Ruchi Soya has always been striving towards the betterment of Indian farmers and has continually strived to help them to achieve better yields and realization by providing the right technology and assistance. In line with the Hon’ble Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s vision of doubling farmers’ incomes by 2022 such collaboration is a stepping stone towards achieving this.”Sharing his views on the occasion Mr. Poola Mallesham, Corporate Head, Oil Palm Division of Ruchi Soya Industries Limited said, “Allotment of Zone IV will help in upbringing of more palm plantations in the near future which shall not only contribute to employment generation but go a long way in strengthening the rural economy by enriching the farmer income levels. We would like to place on record the sincere efforts of the Agriculture Department, Government of Arunachal Pradesh in promoting Oil Palm development in the state and for the successful implementation of the National Mission on Oilseeds and Oil Palm (NMOOP) scheme.”India is heavily dependent on import of cooking oils and is all set to import record 15 million tonnes in the current 2015-16 oil year ending October. Out of the 15 million tonnes, palm oil imports alone accounts for 9 million tonnes or 60 per cent. The reason for palm oil occupying a lion share of the total consumption is because palm is generally the cheapest commodity vegetable oil and also the cheapest oil to produce and refine globally. Therefore, focus on palm oil cultivation will undoubtedly play a key role in addressing the domestic shortfall in edible oil consumption and lowering India’s edible oil import bill and saving foreign exchange.Ruchi Soya is the leading player in oil palm processing with 0.52 million metric ton capacity per annum in India, with land access to over 2 lakh hectares of potential oil palm cultivation in India. The company has access to palm plantations in the states of Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, Karnataka, Mizoram, Gujarat, Odisha, Tamil Nadu, Chhattisgarh and Arunachal Pradesh.About Ruchi Soya Industries Limited Ruchi Soya is India’s leading Agri and Food FMCG company with a turnover of USD 4 billion. It enjoys Number 1 position in cooking oil and soy foods categories of the country. Its leading brands include Nutrela, Mahakosh, Sunrich, Ruchi Star and Ruchi Gold. An integrated player from farm to fork; Ruchi Soya is also among the pioneers of oil palm plantations in India. It is one of the highest exporters of value added soybean products like soy meal, textured soy protein and soy lecithin. Ruchi Soya has also diversified into renewable energy and is committed to environmental protection. Newer Post

农业

2017-09/1436/en_head.json.gz/24634

Proagro history Union Pro Agro Chijchipani, Caranavi 1000 – 1750 meters above sea level Arabica – Typica, Caturra Bright acidity, full body, chocolate, hazelnut, prune flavors Unión Pro-Agro (UPA) was established in 2000, in the Cantón of Chijchipani in the Caranavi Province, to support the sustainable production of coffee for their members. Many of the inhabitants are of Quechua and Aymara origin, and first or second generation migrants from the Altiplano, a region that had been severely affected by drought in the 1970s and led to massive migration to the Caranavi region to become coffee farmers. Today UPA has grown to a membership of 192 individuals and their families spread out across 11 different colonias. At the cantón Chijchipani, more than 85% of the population earns a living exclusively from coffee cultivation. UPA began direct exporting in 2007. At that time, the cooperative rented warehouse space and contracted milling services from a private company. But since 2006 UPA has been devoting a portion of its FT premium to the purchase of a property and the construction of a dry mill in El Alto, which is now fully operational. The cool and dry climate of El Alto, paired with the high altitude of about 4000 meters (and therefore thinner oxygen levels) make el Alto the ideal location in terms of quality control for dry milling and coffee storage. The UPA profile is characteristically Caranavi, with deep chocolate and hazelnut flavors, crisp acidity and a full, velvety body. Five collection centers in the cantón of Chijchipani, serving the eleven communities within the cooperative and spanning three “ecological floors” that correspond to low, middle and high altitudes, and renewed investments in centralized washing stations and fermentation tanks – has facilitated UPA’s capacity to maintain strict quality control standards with members. At Tupac Katari, the primary collection center and organizational offices, UPA maintains a demonstration plot for educational purposes, with varietals such as Cepac 1, Cepac 2, Catuai, Bourbons, Robusta, and “criollas” also known as Typica for performance tracking and comparison. They also experiment with numerous organic fertilizers and pest control methods to demonstrate best practices to members. The location is also home to “la Casa del Café” and a budding development tourism project. This is a relatively new relationship for us, with first imports from UPA only in 2012. However, this has quickly grown into a very healthy and stable relationship, with easy communication and great coffee channeling out to our roasters. All signs point to a promising future to come!

农业

2017-09/1437/en_head.json.gz/411

Rooftop Farms: Here to Stay or Passing Phase? Jennifer V. Hughes Jennifer V. Hughes, Contributing Writer When Centrum Partners took over the Bradley Business Center on Chicago’s North Side in 2011, the company wanted to transform the 21-acre commercial campus into a cutting-edge location with tenants poised for the new economy. That’s why it made perfect sense to partner with New York-based BrightFarms to turn one acre of the complex’s rooftop from vacant space into a hydroponic greenhouse—a deal that was unveiled this week. The farm will grow 500,000 pounds of lettuce, tomatoes and herbs annually, to be sold directly to supermarkets, community markets and other venues. “A green component is always on our minds,” says Michael McLean, senior vice president for Centrum Partners, which owns the property together with New York investment partner Angelo Gordon & Co. “BrightFarms brings a very creative business to the property, which is part of our vision. These are people who are very forward-thinking about the new economy and we’re excited about that.” Centrum is on the vanguard of the rooftop agriculture movement. Green roofs—using rooftop space with a thin covering of soil for growing vegetation—have gradually become more popular within the past decade. As of 2011, there was 36 million sq. ft. of green roofs in North America. Green roofs provide insulation, alleviate storm water problems, boost the life of a roof and have been linked to increased rent and worker productivity. But using rooftop space to grow food is far less common. Steven Peck, president and founder of the industry association Green Roofs for Healthy Cities, estimates there are less than 20 rooftop agriculture sites now nationwide. Some are farms with layers of soil and crops and others use hydroponic greenhouses. “The people who are doing it are pioneers,” Peck says. Rooftop farming has many upsides Last month, Green Roofs for Healthy Cities held its first Urban Agriculture Summit in Toronto, bringing together a sold-out crowd of 650 people to learn about rooftop agriculture. Next month, the group will hold its 10th green roof and green wall conference, Cities Alive, in Chicago. Not every roof is an ideal candidate for rooftop farm, Peck points out. The roof must be able to withstand the extra weight, be accessible for those who will work on the farm and provide enough space not already taken up by equipment. Because a rooftop farm often requires a new waterproof roof membrane, it sometimes doesn’t make sense to install one until the end of the life of the existing membrane, he says. But there are many advantages. The companies that install rooftop farms pay all costs of construction. Rooftop agriculture carries many of the same environmental benefits as traditional green roofs. Rooftop farms often capture waste heat from buildings to use in their greenhouses in winter times, says Kate Siskel, BrightFarms’ marketing associate. That means you have to pay less to cool, say, a facility with industrial ovens or a heat-emitting data center. Rooftop agriculture projects also usually set up a system to capture storm water run-off, Siskel says. They provide some of the same insulation as a traditional green roof, which saves on heating and cooling. Some roof farms can even contribute to a building’s LEED certification. Then, there is the fact that a rooftop farm is a tenant like any other in a commercial building. Several rooftop farming companies declined to say how much they pay in rent, but Peck says it varies from .50 to $2 per sq. ft. It’s not a lot, but Peck notes, “right now they’re getting zilch.” “Roof space is a valuable asset and we need to use those spaces,” he says. “We need the commercial building industry to wake up and learn that their roofs can do a lot more for them and for their neighbors.” “If I had a million square feet of roof space, I’d definitely be asking what those roofs can do for me,” he says. At the Standard Motor Products Building in Queens, N.Y., a soil-based rooftop farm has been in place since 2010, operated by the company Brooklyn Grange. The 43,000-sq.-ft. farm was a good move not only for the rental income and environmental benefits, but also as a way to set the property apart, says Ashish Dua, owner of Acumen Capital Partners, which owns the seven-story commercial loft. “I think it does have an impact on our occupancy rate and rents,” he says. “I think it’s one of those things that distinguishes our building and sets it apart, and that helps occupancy. The fact that we’re into being green and socially and environmentally responsible—tenants want to be a part of that.” Tenants are allowed to use the space for lunchtime recreation, the building has periodic dinner parties on the roof and a farmer’s market in the lobby sells produce grown right upstairs. But Robert S. Best, executive vice president at Jones Lang LaSalle, says he still thinks it’s a tough sell. There are no green roofs or rooftop farms within the JLL portfolio, even though the company is an environmental leader in many other ways. Best says building owners worry about whether a green roof or roof farm would cause problems with the roof that would void the warranty. So many urban roofs are cluttered with cooling towers, elevator equipment and window-washing rigs, making it hard to find space. “My main question would be, ‘Why?’” Best says. “To get all the equipment on the roof, to put in all the beds, it’s such a major undertaking—is it really worth all the trouble? “I think the reason you don’t see a lot of it is that it’s not worth all the trouble that a green roof brings with it, at least for the big commercial property owners to even think about,” Best says. "Tough row to hoe" Those who operate rooftop farms admit they have a tough row to hoe. “There are people who are extremely enthusiastic about it and people who are hesitant,” says Siskel, of BrightFarms. In addition to the planned project at the Bradley Business Center in Chicago, it has secured supermarket partners to buy produce in Oklahoma City and St. Louis, but in both cities the company is still looking for a suitable farming location. “There is an abundance of space in cities that is not being used and we have the opportunity to repurpose it,” she says. Before the end of the year, BrightFarms expects to break ground on a 100,000-sq.-ft. hydroponic greenhouse at a former Navy warehouse in Sunset Park, Brooklyn. The farm expects to sell 1 million pounds of produce a year to local supermarket chains and is projected to be the largest rooftop farm in the U.S. The building has been vacant since 2000 and is being developed by Salmar Properties, which bought the building from the city for $10 million. McLean, of Centrum, says his company was reassured to take the leap into rooftop farming because of BrightFarms’ 10-year track record and reputation as one of the largest rooftop farming companies in the nation. “What they’re doing is going on top of a building to make use of useless space,” he says. “They’re generating money and jobs and they’re getting produce to an urban center where people usually have to pay twice as much to import it from California or Mexico. It’s a wonderful story and it’s totally part of what we’re trying to do.” Source URL: http://nreionline.com/brokernews/greenbuildingnews/green-roofs-rooftop-farms-here-to-stay-or-passing-phase

农业

2017-09/1437/en_head.json.gz/483

CSAs and Aggregators: Threshing Things Out Posted on Tuesday, July 7th, 2015 at 10:17 am.Posted by Rodale Institute By Steven McFadden Community is not a warm and cuddly marketing concept attached to Community Supported Agriculture (CSA). It is, rather, a defining element. Yet in the past few years, some middleman food businesses have appropriated the term “CSA” to describe what they are doing, without involving community. This practice is leading to confusion and concern. Initiated in America in 1986, CSAs are constellations of local farms, food and people who are united in an agrarian relationship for the health of people and planet, and their growing popularity has caught the attention of entrepreneurs. Many food delivery businesses have been started that claim to be alternative, more efficient CSA models but which simply reintroduce the middleman into the local economy, standing between the farm and the people. In the context of this trend, the term CSA is in danger of following the word “natural” down a mushy pathway to the realm of meaninglessness. Food hubs and grocery delivery services focused on local food are providing an innovative and important service, obviously much in demand. With sophisticated web portals and tantalizing discounts, they will likely find increased market share in the years ahead. Historically, processors and distributors held the power and dictated the terms to farmers. Aggregation businesses create markets for small-scale farmers, but primarily benefit middlemen, while once again relegating the risk of production to farmers and asking little or no commitment from consumers. However, sharing the risk of farming and building community are keys to CSA. In a world with widely corrupted natural resources and increasingly extreme weather patterns, local farms and food appear destined to continue coming to the forefront. Across America, communities large and small are embracing local agriculture and establishing pathways and programs to boost regional food production. What interested people in CSA at the start nearly 30 years ago was a fundamental recognition that our relationship with nature and the ways that we use the land will determine the future of the earth. Thus, ultimately the problems of agriculture and the environment belong not just to farmers, but to all people. In the end, no one can escape responsibility for the well-being of the earth. CSA was intended to provide a direct pathway for every person and every household to participate actively through a web of relationships with each other, farmers and farms. Many CSAs continue to build upon the essentials of the original vision and to innovate from that base of relationship, but much of this is lost at businesses that advertise themselves as CSAs. Low price and convenience are powerful motivators. When I spoke with Marcia Ostrom, associate professor at Washington State University and a member of their Small Farms Team, she said, “A typical CSA provides produce from a single grower. This does not allow for the variety and selection many people desire, especially when produce options become limited during winter months.“ She observed that small, individual farms cannot produce the necessary volume required for these new markets, while commodity farms are not designed to produce the necessary quality. Farms of the middle, on the other hand, have both the capacity and flexibility to collaborate with each other and with other supply chain partners to respond to these expanding markets. As a result, food aggregators and food hubs have emerged. Sixty years ago, there was infrastructure to support family-scale farming; with the dominance of industrial food chains, that withered. Food hubs are part of rebuilding that infrastructure. The USDA is actively promoting the concept and says there are now more than 220 food hubs spread out across more than 40 states. Food hubs coordinate all parts of a community-based food system, with an emphasis on efficiency. They aggregate food from local farms and market to schools, restaurants, and retailers. They also coordinate supply-chain logistics and network with distributors, processors and buyers. As USDA secretary Tom Vilsack said in a May 2013 speech, “Skyrocketing consumer demand for local and regional food is an economic opportunity for America's farmers and ranchers. Food hubs facilitate access to these markets by offering critical aggregation, marketing, distribution and other services to farmers and ranchers.“ Many observers regard food hubs as the center of the new rural economy. One such hub, a Kansas City food business called The Hen House Markets Growers’ Alliance CSA, came to my attention this year when it emerged as the focus of intense online discussion among a number of CSA farmers in Nebraska. Hen House buys from many local farms and then distributes to people who have paid up front. They ask no commitment whatsoever of the “community” of consumers. The corporate involvement provides distribution, advertising and other overhead services that a lone CSA would find overwhelming. Hen House thus stretches the traditional understanding of a CSA and morphs it into an efficient business model. Enterprises such as Hen House – and there are many of them emerging across the USA and Canada -- raise questions: what is a real CSA? Can any food delivery service rightfully claim to be a CSA? Are enterprises that for the main part define “community” in terms of a market being accurate or confusing when they use the term CSA? Emily Akins of the Kansas City Food Circle, a nonprofit organization promoting a sustainable food system in the region, commented, “We love Hen House. It’s good because it provides a market for a lot of small-scale farmers, but we wish they would not use the term CSA to describe what they do. Consumers can end up thinking that CSA is just a way to get farm fresh food at the grocery store, while a traditional CSA is a relationship between a person and a farm.” Blowback The popularity of the CSA concept has also spawned “box scheme” businesses that may have no farm base at all, but use the local farm cachet to lure customers to their box delivery schemes. Farmer Allan Balliett calls these “fake CSAs.” According to Balliett, “a fake CSA exploits a consumer’s assumption about the value of a CSA.” He says they are misleading customers and diverting money away from local farms and from traditional CSAs. Feeling the impact of box schemes on his Fresh and Local CSA in Shepherdstown, WV, Balliettstarted a Facebook page to educate the masses about real CSAs. “If you don’t know your farmer you’re not really in a CSA,” he said.Box schemes, or subscriptions for weekly baskets of produce, ask little or no commitment whatsoever to the relationship. They are simply a new way of exchanging money for food. They establish no relationship between the consumer and the farm – no community. For over 20 years, the Fair Share CSA Coalition in Wisconsin has been a pioneer in developing CSA. According to Executive Director Chris Brockel, CSA is much more than just a weekly delivery of food. “As CSA becomes a household name,” he said, “we’re seeing more and more versions of ‘CSA style’ businesses. CSA is about more than just getting vegetables – it’s also about making a direct connection between consumers and farms, and making sure that connection is nurtured. Aggregation takes all of that out. The potential for connection is lost. Is that truly a CSA?” Defining Terms The USDA long ago published a general definition of CSA, but it is rarely noted. However, as of January 1, 2014, California’s Department of Food and Agriculture has established an official, legal definition of CSA (see below). The definition, which has a profoundly bureaucratic ring to it, bans use of the CSA term by anyone buying from wholesalers or not requiring advance payment. The Community Alliance with Family Farms (CAFF) has formed a California CSA Network to link the over 250 CSAs in that state. CAFF organizer Rachel Petit said the use of the term CSA by aggregators definitely has been a problem in her state. She said the new legislation makes a clear distinction, but that it’s too soon to know what kind of difference it will make. CSA got started not with a definition, but with a vision — a vision that was developed by a far-flung community of people. Many women and men contributed to building upon that idea. However, it was understood from the beginning that every farm and every community had its own particular needs and capacities, and that as a result, there would be wide variation in how the evolving concepts of CSA would be applied. As CSA author Elizabeth Henderson has observed, “Reducing CSA to a mere food subscription scheme castrates the CSA model, taking away its power to create lasting relationships between the people who grow and eat food.” The food industry has just scratched the surface of “locally grown” as a business concept, but seems intent on digging deeper. As the business aspect of local food grows in size and strength, will the community dimension of CSA continue to wither? That question will be answered not just by farmers, but also by the individual human beings who constitute the community. California CSA Network California Legislation defining CSA Findings of the 2013 Food Hub Survey Hen House Market Growers’ Alliance CSA Kansas City Food Circle “If you don’t know your farmer, you are not in a CSA” Facebook OFFICIAL DEFINITIONS The USDA defines CSA as “a community of individuals who pledge support to a farm operation so that the farmland becomes, either legally or spiritually, the community’s farm, with the growers and consumers providing mutual support and sharing the risks and benefits of food production.” California’s legal definition of CSA restricts use of the term. If there is a middleman, you cannot call it a CSA under Article 6. Community-Supported Agriculture 47060. For purposes of this article, the following definitions apply: (a) “Community-supported agriculture program” or “CSA program” means a program under which a registered California direct marketing producer, or a group of registered California direct marketing producers, grow food for a group of California consumer shareholders or subscribers who pledge or contract to buy a portion of the future crop, animal production, or both, of a registered California direct marketing producer or a group of registered California direct marketing producers.” Tags: agriculture supported communities, community supported agriculture, csa, farm business, Food Hubs, food security, new farm, organic One Response to “CSAs and Aggregators: Threshing Things Out” Zan July 29, 2015 I have been pondering these same questions about a massive “CSA” based in Lancaster County, PA (LFF CSA), in which an aggregator sources food from Amish farmers and distributes produce, meats, cheeses, flowers, medicinals and more, to pick-up sites from Northern Virginia to New York City to Philadelphia. While this food hub is not a true CSA, they are committed to organic farming and have supported the transition of some land from conventional to organic, so it is a valuable mechanism, despite the misnomer. Thank you for laying out the issues so clearly.

农业

2017-09/1437/en_head.json.gz/806

Print Email Font ResizeUS roaster is helping make Cameroon coffee beans magicBy Howard Weiss-Tisman, Brattleboro ReformerPosted: A woman sorts coffee beans in the new open-space, outdoor sorting facility. Previously workers worked in dark, factory-like settings. The women are paid triple what other sorting facilities pay, they work in a more comfortable environment and there is a more communal atmosphere. (Contributed photo/Brattleboro Reformer) BRATTLEBORO, Vt. — Mocha Joe's roasting company founder Pierre Capy was not impressed the first time he tried a cup of coffee made with beans grown in Cameroon.Capy has run his Main Street roasting facility in Brattleboro since 1994. He has traveled around the United States, and the world, educating others about what it takes to produce the highest grade of coffee. So when he tried that cup of Cameroon-grown coffee in 2008, he did not taste a coffee bean that could take its place with some of the best in the world.But what Capy did taste that day was potential, and he has been working ever since to strengthen the specialty coffee market in Cameroon — and trying to convince the rest of the gourmet coffee community that the country should be able to produce excellent coffee.Now Mocha Joe's has started an online fund-raising effort to raise money for an expanding organic certification program in Cameroon. The money will also be used to register farmers in local credit unions and start a revolving loan fund to give coffee farmers access to capital.“The challenge for me, from the start, was to try to create something from nothing,” he said. “Cameroon has the soil, it has the elevation, it has a rain and dry season and I thought we could produce incredible coffee there.”Advertisement Capy's improbable introduction to Cameroon, a West African country that is mostly known for growing bulk, low-grade coffee beans for the European market, came when he hired Hamidou Yaya, then a student from the School for International Training in Brattleboro.Yaya showed Capy some coffee that was grown in his homeland.Capy looked through the bag of Cameroon coffee and the beans were dirty and unsorted. But among the ungraded beans Capy found large, well-formed beans that he thought could hold up to some of the best coffee in the world.He had some coffee sent over and Capy pulled out the best beans and paid careful attention to the roasting process“The coffee had a syrupy, caramel flavor. It was very good. You could compare it to Kona or Jamaican varietals, ” said Capy. “Cameroon had a clean slate. No one was importing Cameroon coffee to America, and I knew that if we could differentiate the beans and create a market we could sell some over here.”In March 2009, Mocha Joe's Roasting Company partnered with the Farmer's Cooperative Initiative, a group of U.S. roasters and investors working with 31 farming families in the northwest of Cameroon. The collaborative imported the first container of specialty-grade Cameroon coffee to the U.S.Later that year, Capy and another Mocha Joe's employee traveled to Cameroon to oversee the harvest and sorting processes. Prior to the visit most of the coffee was dried and shipped for the commercial market. There was no awareness of growing and sorting specialty coffee, which Capy knew would bring a much higher price to the farmers. It took a while to convince area residents that sorting was an important part of the coffee growing process, and after a number of failed experiments Capy helped set up a communal sorting facility. It was the first step in improving the grade of coffee being shipped out of Cameroon.In 2011 he spent another four months in the region with his wife and two children during the growing and harvest season. They lived in the village of Fongo Tongo with coffee farmers and, while there that year, Capy hired Philip Younyi, a local agronomist, to be his director of operations.The quality of Cameroon coffee continued to improve, and Capy introduced it to other small roasters around New England. In 2012, Capy started working in the village of Oku, where farmers use traditional growing techniques that are close to international organic growing standards. Capy knew that if the farmers could get their USDA organic certification, their coffee would bring an even better price.The certification is very expensive and Capy helped some of the farmers with no- and low-interest loans to go through the certification process. The following year 54 family farmers in Cameroon obtained their organic certification, and Mocha Joe's imported the very first shipment of certified organic coffee from Cameroon.Capy said the Cameroon project is now at a pivotal point. Working with other roasters this year, Mocha Joe's and the other companies will import three tons of organic coffee and 16 tons of specialty coffee from Cameroon.“Originally we were primarily focused on improving the quality of the coffee harvested, but as our familiarity with the coffee and our connection with the community have deepened, our goals for the project have expanded,” Capy said. “For the past two-and-a-half years we have been working on getting organic certification, and with the success of this pilot project we are ready to expand the project into a larger program.”Mocha Joe's is now trying to raise $5,500 to support the Cameroon coffee project. The contributions will be used to enroll farmers in a local credit union which allows them to borrow money at a low interest rate of 1.5 percent, instead of the up to 200 percent that local non-regulated money lenders charge.Capy also said the funding would bring more farmers into the organic certification process, and would help ensure that organic coffee growing in Cameroon remains stable, even if Mocha Joe's pulls out of the growing, sorting and certification processes. Capy said about 75 more farms need to get their organic certification to keep the project moving forward.“We're just a small Vermont business and this has only worked because we've done things step by step,” Capy said. “No bank will lend us money for this. We are trying to get more people interested in coffee from Cameroon, and have enough farmers growing quality coffee so that it is sustainable on its own. We're really proud of how far we've come and we're excited to see where we can take it.”This article previously misspelled the name of Mocha Joe's employee and Cameroon native Hamidou Yaya.Print Email Font ResizeReturn to Top RELATED

农业

2017-09/1437/en_head.json.gz/854

Field trials of genetically modified corn From InpaperMagazine — Published Jun 20, 2011 02:09am Recently planted corn stalks stand a few inches above ground on a farm, Friday, June 10, 2011 near Batavia, Ohio. – AP Photo AFTER nearly succeeding in the case of Bt cotton, the US multinational Monsanto is now lobbying for introduction of genetically modified corn in Pakistan and has convinced the government to have field trials of its crop. Some media reports say that the bureaucracy is apparently inclined to allow its commercial planting although many experts, academics and farmers are opposed to it. Field trials, being closely monitored by the government agencies to assess its cross pollination impacts, are being conducted in Manga Mandi, about 25-30 km from Lahore. After obtaining initial nod from the regulatory authorities, demonstrative cultivation will take place in 2012. A spokesperson of Monsanto claims that the field trials have so far been successful and cross germination preventions have proved their effectiveness. The GM corn would bring more reliable and cost-effective solutions and that the insect-protected corn will increase productivity. He said that the countries that approved GM corn had allowed it for human consumption. But Prof Dr Muhammad Ashfaq, Dean, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad, says the issue whether GM foods are safe enough to consume remains unresolved. Although some experts warn of possible hazards to human health in the long run, the main issue is whether labelling GM foods would help consumers by giving them a choice to buy or not to buy these foods, he said. The controversy over how safe the consumption of genetically modified foods, seeds and products are to human health is now 15-years old. The opposition is most intense in Europe, Japan although GM is undesirable in most of the world for its long-term side-effects to soil and health. The European Union has so far approved only one genetically modified crop – maize or corn. But there is a deep divide over GM in the 27-member bloc. Despite the approval, six countries have still imposed a moratorium on the GM corn crop. They are France, Germany, Luxembourg, Greece, Austria and Hungary. And even in countries like Italy, where no formal ban applies, no one chooses to plant the crop. However, it is cultivated on a large-scale in Spain. India also remains sharply divided over the legacy of Bt cotton, the only transgenic crop now under commercial cultivation in the country. The genetically altered cotton seeds have increased productivity, but they are more expensive than traditional seeds and have left some farmers deeply in debt leading to mass suicides. Last year India halted the commercial release of the world's first genetically engineered eggplant, called Bt brinjal, for lack of consensus within the scientific community. In the US, GM crops and seeds were developed in the 1970s, with significant financial support from the Rockefeller Foundation, by three chemical companies, namely, Monsanto Chemicals, DuPont and Dow Chemicals. All the three were also involved in the scandal of the highly toxic Agent Orange used in Vietnam. Their marketing of GM seeds was seen as a clever way to trap the farmers by forcing them to purchase only their chemicals such as Roundup under a legal contract. In Pakistan, use of modern biotechnology started in 1985. Currently, there are 29 biotech centres or institutes in the country. However, few centres have appropriate facilities and trained manpower to develop GM crops. Most of the activities have been on rice and cotton. Despite acquiring capacity to produce transgenic plants, no GM crop has been introduced in the country. Their commercial release is hampered due to delays and weak capacity of regulatory bodies related to biosafety and Plant Breeders Rights. But it has resulted in illegal cultivation of Bt cotton smuggled from India on a large area as there exists a strong demand for it among the farmers community. So far, the development of GM crops has remained restricted to the public sector. Monsanto has been working with the industry and the government for introduction of Bt cotton. The American giant looks closer to its goal for which it has been struggling since 1998 when it entered Pakistan market. It has developed the much-needed nexus with the bureaucracy in Islamabad. In fact, the global financial crisis of 2007 and the shortages it caused in supply of commodities in the world proved to be a blessing for the multinationals selling GM seeds and products. Japan and South Korea, long known for consuming organically grown corn, began buying GM corn for use in soft drinks, snacks and other foods because organic corn prices tripled. In the wake of last year's floods that partially devastated cotton crop, Pakistan's agriculture ministry was reported to have entered into a deal with Monsanto for large-scale import of its Bt cotton seeds. But it remained unconfirmed. The Seed Association of Pakistan, however, warned the Punjab government to refrain from signing an agreement with Monsanto, saying this will “annihilate national seed companies, besides causing huge financial burden on the national treasury.” Last year, two scientists had cautioned the government against signing any deal with Monsanto for the introduction of so-called “insect-resistant” Bt cotton, saying it could harm the interests of growers. Dr Anwer Naseem, chairman, National Commission on Biotechnology, said on March 21: “There is a need to get sound, critical and scientific input from experts in the country before signing a deal.”Dr Abid Azhar, deputy director of AQ Khan Institute of Biotechnology and Genetic Engineering, University of Karachi, had said there were instances when growers have been forced to purchase seeds from the multinationals for every crop after the introduction of alien varieties. “In this way, the multinationals have attempted to monopolise the seed business,” he said. However, the ministry of agriculture signed an MoU with the US firm on April 10 and the then minister, Nazar Gondal, was so upbeat on the occasion that he hoped it would bring an agriculture revolution in Pakistan. It is amazing to note American diplomats' loyalty to GM products. The US ambassador in Paris, according to a WikiLeaks cable, advised Washington in 2007 that it should start a military-style trade war against any European country which opposes genetically modified crops. His advice was in response to moves by France to ban a Monsanto GM corn variety in 2007. The ambassador, Craig Stapleton, asked Washington to penalise the EU, particularly countries which did not support the use of GM crops. Ineffective trade policy The best and worst paid jobs

农业

2017-09/1437/en_head.json.gz/2931

Heat up your winter with new information on peppers Have you ever wondered what makes peppers hot? Yes, we know a lot of it has to do with the capsaicin. But it turns out, there may be more to pepper’s spiciness. Have you ever wondered what makes peppers hot? Yes, we know a lot of it has to do with the capsaicin. But it turns out, there may be more to pepper’s spiciness.Some University of California, Davis, scientists have mapped the pepper genome to shed light on the biology of the pepper’s hallmark pungency, or spiciness, as well as its fruit-ripening and disease-resistance mechanisms.The pepper genome is said to be one of the largest genomes assembled to date. Researchers found pepper DNA is much more complex than the genome of its cousin, the tomato.Hot peppers, one of the oldest domesticated crops in the Western Hemisphere, are members of the Solanaceae plant family and cousins to an extensive group of plants including potato, tomato, eggplant, petunia and tobacco. Hot-pepper plants are popular ornamentals and produce fruits that are major vegetables in most global cuisines, as well as rich sources of vitamins and nutrients, pharmaceuticals, natural coloring agents, cosmetics and defense repellents.The sequencing also uncovered evidence suggesting that the pungency, or "heat," of the hot pepper originated through the evolution of new genes by duplication of existing genes and changes in gene expression after the peppers evolved into species. In other words, as pepper developed as a distinct species, it "doubled down" on the genes that cause the heat.It was already known that pepper pungency was caused by the accumulation of naturally occurring chemicals called capsaicinoids, unique to the Capsicum genus. More than 22 of these "heat"-producing compounds have been isolated from peppers, and many have been shown to have human health benefits, including inhibition of tumor growth for certain cancers, pain relief for arthritis, appetite suppression and weight-loss promotion.Knowing what they know now and will likely discover with this new information at hand will allow scientists to experiment to uncover better or more efficient uses of pepper’s characteristic spiciness to make compounds or maybe even cures for some of the problems that ail us.That’s got to beat trying to eat enough habaneros or Thai peppers to get the beneficial effects.* * *On March 11, the Guilford County Agricultural Center will offer a Backyard Buffers program from 6:30-8 p.m. at 3309 Burlington Road, Greensboro. Learn about buffer benefits, common stream bank plants, and small-scale solutions to reduce erosion. Class is limited to 20 participants and free plant materials will be given to those who register and attend. You must call in advance to register. To reserve a spot call Pam Marshall at 375-5876.

农业

2017-09/1437/en_head.json.gz/3895

Some costs of animal disease outbreaks cannot be counted U.S. veterinarian recalls the horror of Britain's foot-and-mouth disease outbreak and the farmers' efforts to rebuild By R. Scott Nolen Great Britain's recent bout with foot-and-mouth disease was brought home to most Americans by grizzly images of burning pyres of animal carcasses stacked like cordwood, or mass graves cut into the English countryside, filled with depopulated livestock. Less evident than the economic upheaval from the culling of millions of sheep, cattle, and pigs, was the emotional toll suffered by farmers and their families. A team of U.S. veterinarians who helped stem the tide of foot-and-mouth disease in the United Kingdom saw firsthand the severe psychologic stress caused by an animal disease outbreak, the likes of which have not been witnessed in the United States. Dr. Lynda C. Kelley, a senior research scientist with the Agriculture Department's Agricultural Research Service, was one of several USDA employees honored recently for their efforts in the United Kingdom during this past year's FMD outbreak. From March to April 2001, Dr. Kelley was part of the USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service's Foot-and-Mouth Disease in the United Kingdom Team. During that time, she visited sheep and cattle farms in western England and Wales, testing for the virus. If the virus was detected, Dr. Kelley also helped value the livestock and feed for reimbursement. "We would go onto farms and determine if there was a problem with FMD," Dr. Kelley explained. "If a lab could handle samples, we would submit them. But many times, we had to make decisions without lab support because the labs were overwhelmed. If the farm was positive, we would slaughter the animals." Professional slaughter crews were summoned to the farms to cull the adult cattle and sheep. But the young animals, the calves and lambs, had to be euthanatized by inter-cardiac injections administered by the veterinarians themselves. "You might do thousands of baby lambs a day yourself," Dr. Kelley recalled. "It was tough. It's not why you go to vet school. You go to vet school to make animals better. "I was prepared for the economic devastation and logistical problems, but what I wasn't prepared for was the emotional aspect, not just of myself but of the farmers." A farm declared FMD positive was placed under quarantine, with no person or animal allowed on or off the farm, except for the veterinarians and slaughter crews. Isolated from the community, the families could only watch as their livestock were culled and disposed of. Before the British government declared a national emergency, which authorized the military to assist with logistics and carcass disposal, the veterinarians were responsible for disposal. Dr. Kelley worked in counties where the high water table prohibited burial, so the carcasses had to be burned instead, which was slow going. Children who had bottle-raised calves were stuck on their farms when their calves, which the veterinarians had euthanatized, were decomposing out in the yard awaiting disposal, according to Dr. Kelley. Neighbors were afraid to come around for fear of spreading the disease to their own flocks. "It was total isolation at a time when they really needed a lot of support," Dr. Kelley said, adding that veterinarians were the only link to the outside world for many families. They helped grieving families by performing such mundane tasks as bringing them groceries or shoeing a horse, now complicated by the quarantine. "We ended up being counselors, too, to the people, and that was an area (where) I didn't realize we'd play a key role," Dr. Kelley said. At the time of the outbreak, suicides and suicide attempts by emotionally distraught farmers were widely reported. Dr. Kelley recalled an 80-year-old farmer she met while depopulating his sheep farm in Worcester. His wife had died that year and he lost a farm in the 1960s to FMD. He thought he was going to lose the farm to the county once his sheep were killed. "I had cleaned up my boots and was getting ready to leave when I walked in on him as he was preparing to kill himself," she recalled. Dr. Kelley talked the farmer through the night. Today he's doing well, she said, and Dr. Kelley remains in touch with him. For three weeks this past July, Dr. Kelley, along with her family, returned to the United Kingdom to visit the British farmers and see how they are recovering as they restocked their farms. It was a wonderful experience, she said, adding that the farmers wanted the U.S. veterinarians to return and celebrate. The government's reimbursement program isn't able, however, to cover all the costs of restocking every farm. "Cattle," she said, "right now are so expensive in the UK that a lot of farmers have not been able to restock their farms." America could learn, Dr. Kelley believes, from how the British government responded to the FMD outbreak. Should the virus ever reach the United States, a national emergency should be declared immediately, she said. That way, every available resource will be used to contain the virus before it can spread. Dr. Kelley admires how Britain issues "passports" to its cows, documenting where they originated and which farms they've been shipped to. This allows for efficient tracking and helped British officials with tracing the path of FMD contagion. She believes the United States would benefit from a similar system. "We don't have any kind of tracking system like that in the United States, and I think that would be a good thing," she said. The British did not have a tracking system for sheep, however, which might explain why the foot-and-mouth virus spread so rapidly among the sheep farms. The Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, which has, since the outbreak, been rolled into the Department of Defense, has maps of each farm. The maps contain details about the species and number of animals owned, as well as contact information. Although it would certainly raise concerns about privacy, Dr. Kelley thinks such a system would help this country in time of an animal disease outbreak. "In the event of an outbreak," she said, "it would give us a leg up and a place to start." Given the increase of globalization and international travel, the paradigm that border patrol is the best way to prevent the introduction or foreign animal diseases must be rethought. The only way to protect the nation's livestock, she said, is by working to eradicate animal diseases throughout the world. "We need to be thinking about global animal health now," Dr. Kelley said. "It used to be that (line of thinking) meant that we might not be protecting our animal livestock, but now I think it is."

农业

2017-09/1437/en_head.json.gz/4603

One of Frank Sinatra's signature songs was "It Was A Very Good Year." This has not been a very good year for agriculture. I received word recently that both the U.S. House of Representatives and the Senate have zeroed out funding for the Fund for Rural America competitive grants program. This news puts the cap on a year of disasters for agriculture. When the Federal Agriculture Improvement Act of 1990 was passed, it was with an implicit, if not an explicit, contract that Congress would appropriate $100 million per year for three years to fund research and technology transfer projects in areas that improved the competitiveness of U.S. agriculture, environmental stewardship, and rural communities. This was a trade-off for the withdrawal of government from commodity programs that stabilized prices and farm incomes. During its first year of operation, several million dollars were withdrawn from the Fund to meet disaster relief needs in the Midwest. This substantially diminished the resources available for the original purposes of the fund. But if 1997 brought portents of disaster, 1998 has brought torrents. Bear in mind that the federal budget, for the first year in at least two decades, is running a surplus of from $40 - $50 billion. Bear in mind also that the day on which the Fund was being zeroed out, the President was signing the Congress' Highway Bill for $203 billion. According to a news item filed by Glen Johnson for the Associated Press, critics "... label the new law an election-year plum for Congress, saying it contains pork for all 50 states." Utah, which is hosting the 2002 Winter Olympics, gets $640 million. And this was the year in which the National Commission on Small Farms advocated putting the small, family farm at the centerpiece of agricultural policy. It advocated research on new crops, improved farming and marketing systems, technology development and adoption for value-added products, entrepreneurship development, etc. The zeroing out of the Fund calls into question the government's commitment to meet the recommendations of the National Small Farm Commission. But besides the political heavy weather, agriculture has been savaged by El Ni–o and, if we believe Vice President Gore, El Niño may become more the norm than the exception. El Niño plus global warming may precipitate an oscillation of climate between floods and drought. If this is the case, risk will increase manyfold for agricultural producers at the very time when the government is determined to privatize risks. The result, if we are unlucky, could be disastrous, as many producers do not have crop insurance and may not be able to cover credit obligations. But at least with a $203 billion highway program, farmers may have less potholes to traverse as they take products to market Home Growing Red and White Currants Diverse Operations Fit Unique Farmers Outreach Projects Span State Think Safety First

农业

2017-09/1437/en_head.json.gz/4736

Industry $13.7 million goes to KSU sorghum and millet research By U.S. Agency for International Development The U.S. Agency for International Development, or USAID, announced that Kansas State University is the recipient of a $13.7 million grant from the agency to help end poverty and increase food supplies in semi-arid Africa. The award was made under Feed the Future, the U.S. government's global hunger and food security initiative. The five-year grant establishes the Feed the Future Innovation Lab for Collaborative Research on Sorghum and Millet at Kansas State University. With it, the university will serve as the nation's leading center for international sorghum and millet research, as well as a key component in Feed the Future's mission to advance solutions to hunger, poverty and under nutrition in developing countries. "With its selection, USAID has strongly validated Kansas State University's preeminence in sorghum and millet research and agricultural science," said Timothy Dalton, associate professor of agricultural economics, who will serve as director of the Feed the Future Collaborative Research on Sorghum and Millet Innovation Lab. As director, Dalton will oversee the development and management of a sorghum and millet research network led by Kansas State University. The network—for which the university will act as the research and information leader—will be comprised of USAID, various agriculture-centric U.S. universities, and universities, research centers, industries and non-governmental organizations in three African countries. Through the research network, leading U.S. scientists at partnering universities and institutions will focus on improving the productivity, disease resistance, agronomy and value of sorghum and millet crops in Ethiopia, Senegal and Niger. Additionally, the researchers will help train scientists in those countries and will develop improved crop varieties that will benefit other countries in sub-Saharan Africa. Sorghum and millet are important food crops in the arid African lands, Dalton said. The technologies and innovative approaches developed through this program will build resilience in farming communities subject to frequent drought and help smallholder farmers adapt to climate change. Ethiopia is the most important sorghum-producing nation in East Africa because it has the largest acreage of sorghum crops on which millions of impoverished farmers rely, Dalton said. It also is one of the centers of genetic origin for sorghum, which may lead to new germplasm for U.S. farmers. Senegal and Niger are both in West Africa. Senegal grows pearl millet, the most widely grown subspecies of the grain, as it has adapted to the harsh semiarid environment. Niger is one of the largest sorghum-producing countries in West Africa and neighbors several other important sorghum-producing countries in the region. "The overall goal with those three key producing nations is to improve farmers' productivity with sorghum and millet, which will reduce poverty and hunger," Dalton said. "Additionally, we want to help the famers with value-added product development to increase benefits to consumers, the private sector and farmers." Although the consortium's efforts are focused on helping Africa, Dalton said he anticipates benefits for American famers and universities as well. Research on food security, production and value-added products could also improve U.S. crops and products. Additionally, the assistance of graduate students and postdoctoral researchers will be integral in strengthening national research and development capacity in each of the target nations. sorghummilletfeed the futurefeeding africagrains researchkansas state university About the Author:

农业

2017-09/1437/en_head.json.gz/5543

Log In or Register Cotton Peanuts Soybeans Corn Livestock Vegetables Orchards Markets Tobacco Quotes Weather Continuing Education Courses LISTEN: Max Armstrong's Daily Updates WATCH: This Week in Agribusiness Managing Weed Resistance FFA Chapter Tribute Samuelson Sez Max's Tractor Shed Over a Cup About Us Contact Advertise Privacy Policy Terms of Service Ad Choices Search Log In Register Recent Syngenta expands support of STEM education initiatives Feb 20, 2017 This Week in Agribusiness, February 18, 2017 Feb 18, 2017 Senate confirms Scott Pruitt to lead EPA Feb 17, 2017 Ronnie Lee will lead National Cotton Council in 2017 Feb 14, 2017 Kent Fountain is National Cotton Ginner of the Year Feb 14, 2017 Featured Resistance management even more critical with new herbicides Feb 06, 2017 Plan for strong disease, nematode pressure early this year Feb 02, 2017 US cotton moves to rebrand its promise to the world Feb 02, 2017 David Blakemore to lead National Cotton Ginners Association Feb 14, 2017 Management Final draft crop insurance agreement released From the USDA | Jun 17, 2010 Aiming to reform the federal crop insurance program, reduce the federal deficit, and maximize taxpayer dollars, the USDA has released the final draft of a new crop insurance agreement and, as a result, $6 billion in savings. Two-thirds of the savings will go toward paying down the federal deficit, and the remaining third will support high priority risk management and conservation programs. By containing program costs, these changes will also ensure the sustainability of the crop insurance program for America's farmers and ranchers for years to come. USDA's Risk Management Agency (RMA), which administers the federal crop insurance program, released the final draft version of a new Standard Reinsurance Agreement (SRA), which details the new terms, roles, and responsibilities for both the USDA and insurance companies that participate in the federal crop insurance program. "The federal crop insurance program is a critical component of the farm safety net, and now that our negotiations are complete, we have the framework for a stronger program that will help producers in every region of the country better manage their risk," said Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack. "The President has laid out an aggressive plan for reducing the deficit and we're pleased to take a leadership role in that effort … while strengthening key risk management and conservation programs that benefit America's farmers and ranchers." (Possible crop insurance provisions in the next farm bill are already being discussed. For a look at some of those ideas visit http://southeastfarmpress.com/legislation/crop-insurance-0602/index.html.) The release of the final draft agreement follows two draft proposals and months of discussions with insurance companies and other stakeholders. USDA has worked aggressively through the negotiation process to preserve the crop insurance program as part of the farm safety net, support producer access to critical risk management tools, protect the interests of taxpayers, and ensure a reasonable return for the companies that deliver the program. The final draft agreement will generally maintain the current Administrative and Operating (A and O) subsidy structure, but remove the possibility of windfall government payments based on high commodity price spikes by limiting the level of A and O payments that the industry can receive. However, an inflation factor and consideration for new business is included so that the maximum payment may reasonably increase over the length of the agreement. Through this negotiation process, RMA has lowered the projected average long-term return for the companies to about 14.5 percent. To do this, RMA worked closely with the insurance companies to modify the terms under which RMA provides reinsurance. Meanwhile, RMA will increase the return in historically underserved states to provide additional financial incentives for companies to write business in these states. The agency also returned to individual state stop loss protection for the more risky business, thus providing greater reinsurance protection for companies. Through USDA's work during this negotiation process, the Obama administration is also ensuring that $2 billion in savings from the new Standard Reinsurance Agreement will be used to strengthen successful, targeted risk management and conservation programs and that $4 billion will be used to reduce the national deficit. The $2 billion that will be invested in farm bill programs include releasing approved risk management products, such as the expansion of the Pasture, Rangeland, and Forage program; providing a performance discount or refund, which will reduce the cost of crop insurance for certain producers; increasing Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) acreage to the maximum authorized level; investing in new and amended Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program initiatives; and investing in CRP monitoring. The $4 billion in budget savings USDA achieved is one of the first and most significant steps that a federal agency has achieved in reducing mandatory spending from the long-term federal deficit. The 2008 farm bill authorized RMA to renegotiate the agreement effective for the 2011 crop year. Due to significant increases in commodity prices in recent years, annual insurance industry payments more than doubled from $1.8 billion in 2006 to an estimated $3.8 billion in 2009 based on the terms of the previous SRA. Meanwhile, the number of total policies decreased from 2000 to 2009. In preparation for these negotiations, RMA contracted with an internationally known company, Milliman Inc., to review historical rates of return and determine a reasonable rate of return for the crop insurance industry. The Milliman analysis shows that over the past 21 years, the crop insurance companies averaged a 17 percent return when the average reasonable rate for that period was 12.7 percent. See the full report and additional information about the new SRA online at http://www.rma.usda.gov/news/2009/12/sra.html. Since the renegotiation process launched, USDA has focused on six primary objectives for this agreement, which have been maintained throughout the negotiation process: • Maintain producer access to critical risk management tools. • Align A and O subsidy paid to insurance companies closer to actual delivery costs. • Provide a reasonable rate of return to insurance companies. • Protect producers from higher costs while equalizing reinsurance performance across states to more effectively reach under-served producers, commodities, and areas. • Simplify provisions to make the SRA more understandable and transparent. • Enhance program integrity. These objectives align with RMA's primary mission to help producers manage the significant risks associated with agriculture. By achieving these six objectives, the new SRA ensures financial stability for the program and the producers it serves, while increasing the availability and effectiveness of the program for more producers and making the program more transparent. Following delivery of the final draft to the companies, RMA will work with the companies to correct any technical errors or unclear language. RelatedFarm Progress America - February 21, 2017Feb 21, 2017MIDDAY-Midwest Digest- February 20, 2017Feb 20, 2017Farm Progress America - February 20, 2017Feb 20, 2017MORNING-Midwest Digest- February 20, 2017Feb 20, 2017 Load More

农业

2017-09/1437/en_head.json.gz/5767

Bill McKibben speaks out.. Tag Archives: Marcel Bonin Sodden skies torment farmers Posted on July 10, 2013 by nataliehormilla A horse grazes on what’s left of its pasture, along Elm Street in Barton, just as Tuesday’s downpour subsides. Photo by Chris Braithwaite by Tena Starr “It’s kind of a nightmare.” That’s how Brandon Tanner of Glover described this summer’s weather and his own efforts to put in hay for his dairy cows. “It’s one of those things where you’re forced this year to get what you can get when you can get it,” Mr. Tanner said. “There’s no planning, no helping other people. It’s sort of you do yours when you can do it the best you can.” He said he managed to get his first cut, as usual, back in May. “Soon as I got done haying we had a snowstorm,” he said. Mr. Tanner isn’t alone in his frustration with this year’s odd weather and, lately, relentless rain. Farmers, strawberry growers, boaters, anyone who enjoys a day at the beach — they’re all likely to say “Enough already.” Although Mother Nature isn’t. There’s some hope that by the end of the week the stubborn weather pattern will break down, permitting a couple of consecutive rain-free days by the weekend, said meteorologist Lawrence Hayes at the Fairbanks Museum in St. Johnsbury. The problem, he said, is that Vermont has been stuck in between two upper level features involving a serpentine jet stream that moves northward. The sources of its air is the Gulf of Mexico and the southeast coast, hence the subtropical air in Vermont. Also, “the air has been so copiously humid (dew points around 70) that any shower that forms is risk of generating at least moderately heavy rain,” Mr. Hayes said by e-mail. The result of all this has been a lot more rain than usual, as well as more rainy days, in both May and June. According to the Chronicle’s weather records (which record weather in West Glover) precipitation in May was 7.88 inches — almost double the long-term average of 4.03 inches, and exceeded only in May of 2011. It also snowed in May. The Chronicle’s weather records go back to 1987. In June, there was some rain in West Glover on 21 out of 30 days. It added up to 6.23 inches, well above the long-term average for June of 4.14 inches. In St. Johnsbury the 14-day stretch of measurable rainfall from June 23 to July 7 was the longest consecutive day stretch there during the warm weather season, meaning May through October, Mr. Hayes said. For most, the soggy weather is simply an annoyance. But for some, it has economic consequences, as well. Peak View Berry Farm in Orleans doesn’t have any strawberries at all this year, although it’s not due to the wet weather that’s plagued so many strawberry growers in Vermont. “We lost our strawberries in January when the thaw came and then it got so cold in February,” said Michelle Bonin, who owns the farm with her husband, Marcel. “The thaw literally pushed all of our plants out of the ground. That was something we’d never seen.” The Bonins have since put in 13,000 new plants and are hoping to have a crop from the ever bearers in October. But even tending the new plants is tough with the wet weather. “A few days ago I wanted to cultivate my strawberries and couldn’t because of the mud,” Marcel Bonin said. “The ground is saturated. I’d have a mess.” In Westfield, Gerard Croizet at Berry Creek Farm said he’s lost 20 to 25 percent of his strawberries to the weather, mold in particular. The berries are big, although softer than usual, and the yield has been good, he said. It could be a lot worse, though, Mr. Croizet said. “I know some people lost most everything.” “I’m not depressed,” he added. Both the Croizets and the Bonins grow vegetables as well as berries, and say that weeding is a big problem with their fields so wet. And while some crops are doing well in the subtropical weather, others are struggling. Mr. Croizet said he’s worried about disease at this point, particularly late blight, which might make an early appearance due to the moisture. “I don’t remember nonstop rain like that,” he said. “I think it’s extraordinary, I think it’s quite dramatic for the whole area,” Mr. Bonin said about the unusually long stretch of rainy days. He said his Orleans farm stand is usually open by the last week in June. It’s not this year. “I don’t have anything to put in it,” Mr. Bonin said. For dairy farmers, the persistent rain not only makes it hard to make any hay, but also the quality suffers. Most farmers make round bales these days — those plastic wrapped bales that resemble giant marshmallows. It takes a comparatively short stretch of dry weather to make a round bale as opposed to a square one, but this summer has daunted even those attempts. It takes at least a couple of days to “put up something that’s not going to be an ice cube,” Mr. Tanner said. If the hay is too wet, it will be frozen solid come winter when the farmer wants to feed it to his animals, he said. That’s one problem. Another is that some fields are so wet farmers can’t even get on them to hay. And yet another is that grass, especially orchard grass, declines in quality — meaning it loses protein — once it begins to head out. “You can always supplement grains in order to make up what you lost on your grass, but especially the past three years, that’s been sort of unaffordable,” Mr. Tanner said. He said that last year, a classic summer, he squeezed in five cuts of hay. “This year, so far, I’ve done one. I’ll be lucky if I get three.” Evan Perron isn’t overly worried about the weather, even though he’s one of the few who still makes square bales. “The hay I cut will be just fine, for horses, ponies, sheep, it will still be 10-12 percent…it’s nothing you could turn into milk and survive,” he said. Mr. Perron said that when he was a kid it was common to wait until after July 4 to start haying. “There was a time we might not have thought much of it,” he said about the long rainy stretch. “We’d just be a week late.” But now that people try to get 20 or 30 percent protein from their hay, “it’s a pretty big deal,” he said. “I don’t think I ever recall such a soggy streak as this one.” contact Tena Starr at [email protected] For more free articles from the Chronicle like this one, see our Editor’s Picks pages. For all the Chronicle’s stories, pick up a print copy or subscribe, either for print or digital editions. Posted in Editor's Picks | Tagged agriculture, Berry Creek Farm, Brandon Tanner, Chris Braithwaite, Evan Perron, Fairbanks Museum, farmers, Gerard Croizet, Lawrence Hayes, Marcel Bonin, Michelle Bonin, Peak View Berry Farm, Tena Starr, weather Categories Editor's Picks

农业

2017-09/1437/en_head.json.gz/6779

Industry Syngenta confirms that going digital is gaining momentum in ag By Syngenta April 22, 2014 | 3:47 pm EDT A majority of growers and other agricultural professionals turn to online sources first for general information about their industry, and over half of them use mobile or handheld devices 10 or more times per workday. These are some of the key findings in a recent Syngenta survey, in which more than 300 readers of Thrive, the company’s production-focused magazine and website, responded to questions about their online habits and appetites. Anthony Transou, Internet marketing manager at Syngenta, is not surprised that, like other industries, U.S. agriculture is embracing digital communications—from social media campaigns and blogs to precision farming and recordkeeping. “Digital platforms give users a way to share and learn from others in the agricultural industry, whether they are around the corner in their communities or across the globe,” he said. “One of our key concentrations is to create optimized content that can spread across channels and be consumed anywhere, so there is a seamless experience from desktop to mobile users.” Syngenta's Digital Toolbox Transou’s team has made several recent adjustments and additions to the Syngenta digital platform. For example, new websites like Tools to Grow More Soybeans and the Quilt Xcel Fungicide Stress Management Training Module help growers locate information about specific issues or products more easily. Another recent online development is the Know More, Grow Moreagronomy blog, which features tips and local news updates from Syngenta agronomic service representatives. Twitter, Facebook and YouTube channels are also convenient ways for growers to interact with Syngenta via questions, comments, contests and general discussions. “Additionally, we are adding online companions to many of our print communications, including Thrive magazine,” Transou said. “This digital initiative allows us to reach a larger audience and provide deeper, more interactive content.” One of his team’s proudest accomplishments is updating the company’s flagship grower-focused website, FarmAssist.com. This online resource has evolved into a one-stop shop for news, market updates and information about the Syngenta product portfolio. But until 2012, FarmAssist users needed a desktop computer for the site’s features to work properly. That changed with the launch of m.farmassist.com, a mobile-optimized version of the website that allows cellphone and tablet users to access the same capabilities as if they were on a desktop computer. “Our current suite of digital assets is a result of our early preparation to become an active participant in the digital world,” Transou said. “We thought about a mobile strategy for Syngenta very early on so we could easily transition our content and existing assets to some of the emerging technologies and mediums.” Looking forward, Syngenta aims to include more interactive localized content, which is a process of natural progression with the increasing use of mobile technology in agriculture. Transou said he envisions being able to send growers and other users pest alerts, weather information, market prices and yield data specifically targeted to their local areas. The nature of digital communications allows Syngenta to gather and analyze customer feedback, which it uses to constantly improve existing digital assets and formulate ideas for new ones. The Thrive online survey is a good example of how the team uses feedback to influence content creation. Because respondents indicated that they are most interested in production best practices and new product information, the editorial team will start developing more articles and Web content around those topics. Transou sees Syngenta as a leader in making digital platforms an all-encompassing destination for growers—not an indirect dead end found through Web searches. “Farmers understand that information is now flowing in a digital world, especially the well-connected younger generation,” he said. “Our ultimate goal at Syngenta is to give growers the most positive digital experience in the industry.” internetAgricultureonline About the Author:

农业

2017-09/1437/en_head.json.gz/7573

What happens after Jan. 1 if there isn't a new farm bill? Every five to seven years the United States Congress passes what is arguably the single most important piece of legislation affecting the nation’s food environment. Terri MelheimStaff WriterTwitter: @TerriNews2Email: [email protected] Every five to seven years the United States Congress passes what is arguably the single most important piece of legislation affecting the nation’s food environment.The Federal Farm Bill, a massively complex piece of legislation, has almost 700 pages and is the primary agricultural and food policy tool of the federal government.The Farm Bill affects every American in one way, shape or form.Beginning in 1973, Farm Bills have included titles on commodity programs, trade, rural development, farm credit, conservation, agricultural research, and food and nutrition programs among others.Congress is coming perilously close to leaving Washington, D.C. without passing a Farm Bill this yearAccording to the Minnesota Farmers Union Director of Government Relations, Tom Petersen, it is important that a new five-year Farm Bill be signed into law before Jan. 1, 2013, for a number of important reasons.Brown County could see the effects of a delay in the Farm Bill passing in major dairy programs, including Milk Income Loss Contracts (MILC) and the Dairy Product Price Support Program (DPPSP), which expires with the end of the 2008 Farm Bill.If no action is taken on the Farm Bill by Jan. 1, federal dairy policy will revert to 1938 and 1949 law, Petersen explained.“We would go back to 1938 and 1939 law. Farmers would be paid in a parity-based government backed price of about $38 per hundredweight for milk,” he said. “It would double the price for the farmer, but in the long-run consumers would see a jump in prices which would decrease demand. There are concerns in this area.” While dairy programs pose potential temporary setbacks for dairy farmers, Petersen explained that 37 programs that were included in the 2008 Farm Bill did not include baseline funding beyond Sept. 30, 2012.Important programs that currently lay dormant that would affect Brown County include CRP re-enrollments, Wetland Reserve Program (WRP), grasslands reserve program, Rural Energy in America Programs (REAP), Beginning Farmer and Rancher Program, organic research and there is no current disaster protection program in place.“That’s going to be a problem if the drought persists,” Petersen said.He explained that many counties across the nation were declared agricultural disaster areas by the U.S. Department of Agriculture at some point in 2012, and 55 percent of the nation’s pasture and rangeland rated in poor to very poor condition.Peterson went on to say that hay and other commodities are going to get tight, especially for livestock producers who will need some disaster assistance if the region doesn’t get substantial moisture in 2013.Petersen sees only temporary setbacks for farmers if Congress does not pass the farm bill before the first of the year, but says an opportunity to make major reforms to farm policy will be lost if no action is taken by Jan. 1.“Any temporary extension would be a short-sighted, inadequate solution that would leave our rural America crippled by uncertainty,” Petersen added. “If a new Farm Bill is not passed by the end of the year, even deeper effects will be felt by all sectors of agriculture that will jeopardize the long-term viability of farm and conservation programs.” About Us

农业

2017-09/1437/en_head.json.gz/7592

Scrapping regulations calls for discretion Feb 10, 2017 Stronger safety net is goal for National Cotton Council Jan 27, 2017 Oklahoma Peanut Expo March 23 in Altus Feb 08, 2017 Cattle industry 'very concerned' about Trump's pledge to renegotiate NAFTA Feb 06, 2017 Brazil is big in terms of production growth and potential Daryll Ray | Apr 27, 2006 What you have heard about the mammoth increase in production in Brazil during the last decade is either correct or more staggering than you thought. Ditto for their potential growth in the future. Agricultural production in Mato Grosso, the major agricultural growth area of Brazil, is a part of a long-range economic development process that began with (1) a subsistence economy 30 to 40 years ago. The succeeding steps are (2) primary production, (3) establishment of value-added industries, (4) industrial diversification beyond agricultural products and (5) export activities. At the present time they see themselves in the third stage of developing value-added industries like ADM’s soybean crush operation and the Feltrin’s prototype biodiesel plant. Much of this information was provided in a presentation given by several members of Famato, the Mato Grosso Federation of Agriculture. This is a farmer-based organization that provides production and marketing information for those living in Mato Grosso. The growth in Mato Grosso’s agricultural production in the last decade and a half have been phenomenal with the planted area increasing from 4.7 million acres in 1990/91 to 21.1 million acres in the 2004/05 crop year, more than a four-fold increase. Production grew at an even faster six-fold rate due to increasing yields in addition to the area increase. This growth is a major reason why Brazil ranks first in the world in the export of soybean complex (the sum of soybeans, soybean meal and soybean oil). Over 60 percent of Mato Grosso’s soybean production heads to the export market. At present 99 percent of all of Mato Grosso’s world exports are from agricultural and cattle production with soybeans accounting for two-thirds. The largest importers of Mato Grosso’s agricultural products are China, the Netherlands, Italy, Iran, Spain, Thailand and Germany. In 1991 exports were valued at 224 million U.S. dollars. By 2005 this number had jumped to 4.2 billion US dollars.?The most dramatic number came when they pointed out that the state of Mato Grosso contains 222 million additional acres of land that are suitable for crop production after allowing for grasslands, native forests and environmental reserves. This number, nearly equal to total U.S. cropland, does not include the potential of other Brazilian states. The problems they face in bringing this area into production include factors that we had previously heard described: Asian soybean rust, transportation problems, and lack of storage capacity. In the same period that agricultural production increased 125 percent storage capacity only increased 5.7 percent. In terms of transportation, Brazil has slightly fewer miles of railway than they had 80 years ago with an increased demand. Unlike in the U.S., many rural areas have no rail access including most of Mato Grosso. In the 1990s, the total miles of paved roads increased at an average rate of 1.38 percent per year. Brazilian federal investment in road construction has declined from 2.3 percent of Gross National Product (GNP) in 1987 to 0.4 percent of GNP in 2003. In addition, the average truck on the road is 17.5 years old with most of that driven over poor quality roadbeds. In the afternoon we flew to Londrina where we visited a virgin timber park that allowed us to see the pre-development condition of the area. Appropriately, during this visit to the rain forest it rained. The weather quickly cleared up and clear skies and pleasant temperatures resumed as we returned to the hotel. 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: [email protected]

农业

2017-09/1437/en_head.json.gz/9032

Teachers FCU Keeps it Local With Farmers Market June 10, 2013 • Reprints Several representatives from various organizations attended a June 6 press event to mark the debut of a farmers market that will be hosted by Teachers Federal Credit Union this summer. Fifteen vendors will be able to offer fresh fruits and vegetables to the public this summer thanks to Teachers Federal Credit Union. The $4.7 billion cooperative has partnered with the Long Island Growers Market to host a farmers market every Thursday through Aug. 29 at its headquarters parking lot in Hauppauge, N.Y. In addition to offering fresh, locally grown produce, the farmers market will also feature baked goods, jams, jellies and other assorted products, according to TFCU. “Farmers and the agricultural industry are an important part of Long Island's history; past and present,” said Robert Allen, president/CEO of TFCU, during a June 6 press event introducing the vendors to the Hauppauge community. “TFCU is locally grown, and we believe in the importance of investing in Long Island.” The credit union said it was inspired to host the farmers market at its headquarters due to its proximity to Brentwood, an area identified by the federal government as one of Long Island’s “food deserts.” A food desert is an area where residents do not have access to fresh produce and other healthy fare, according to TFCU. This is a particular concern during the summer months for children who rely on schools to serve healthy breakfasts and lunches, the credit union said. “Without farmers markets, we would not be farming,” said Ethel Terry, founder and coordinator of Long Island Growers Market. “We only sell what we make, bake, grow and catch. It's important to us that our customers know where their food comes from.” Suffolk County Legislator John M. Kennedy, Jr. (R-Nesconset), who attended the press event, thanked TFCU for having the forethought to provide this opportunity, and being mindful of those who need these goods. “Suffolk County invests in the agricultural community to support our farmers so they yield bountiful crops and bring them to communities through markets such as this,” Kennedy said. Sarah Eichberg, director of community research for Vital Signs and the Institute for Social Research and Community Engagement at Adelphi University, recently completed a two-year 152-page report focusing on Long Islanders affected by food insecurity. “Farmers markets are integral to combating the prevalence of food deserts, which are one of Long Island's most immediate challenges,” Eichberg said. “High prices and the lack of access to fresh produce make it difficult for many to purchase healthy foods despite their desire to do so.” The Hauppauge Industrial Association is also supporting the farmers market, said Terri Alessi-Miceli, president of the organization. “The HIA is proud to support the efforts of farmers markets, and is working with TFCU to end the prevalence of food deserts in communities across Long Island,” Miceli said. « Prev

农业

2017-09/1437/en_head.json.gz/9317

Drought's impact on spring bull sales mixed As drought whittles away at the nation's cowherd, ranchers raising purebred livestock have felt the squeeze as the need for bulls shrinks. By Candace KrebsContributing Writer LA JUNTA, Colo. — As drought whittles away at the nation's cowherd, ranchers raising purebred livestock have felt the squeeze as the need for bulls shrinks."The best way to describe the bull sale we had was the demand was pretty good until we ran out of buyers," summarized John Reid of Ordway, Colo. "Then that was the end of it. Nobody wanted another one."After their sale in late February, Reid and his son Chip wound up bringing home a third of their Charolais bulls, which they still hope to sell by private treaty."People are sitting around and don't want to step out and buy until they see something running down the creek," Reid said. "If we get a little moisture, things could get pretty good pretty fast."At area production sales, prices have been strong for the high-end bulls, in some cases setting new records. But selling off the low end has been a challenge, confirmed Troy Marshall, owner of Marshall Cattle Company at Burlington."I've been to a lot of sales this spring, and it's really been the tale of two markets," he said. "There have been record averages set at a lot of sales. But for that second tier of bulls, it's been a little different. With the drought, there's plenty of bulls to go around, and nearly every sale has hit a wall at some point."Based on that, Marshall and his wife Lorna were pleased with their own sale, held in mid-March. They sold 20 percent fewer bulls than the previous year, offering 85 lots, but ended up averaging around $5,000 for each and grossing more money than they had the previous year. "Every one of them sold, and the prices weren't spread out as much," he said. "But I think our sale was kind of an anomaly."Future sales will likely benefit from weather patterns that seem to be improving, he added."Attitudes have changed a lot in the last three weeks," he said. "At least we're seeing some hope."Brad Ridinger, manager of the Jumping Cow Ranch and owner of his own purebred herd, had to postpone and reschedule his sale for Saturday, March 30, after a storm dumped up to 16 inches of snow on the ranch north of Ramah."We've had a lot of people calling to find out if we are still having our sale," he said. "Having some moisture on the ground might make people more excited about getting some bulls to put back on their cows. We'll cross our fingers and see what happens."At Pritchett, Colo., Mark Crane said winter moisture had been minimal there.Still, he was pleased with his Black Gold Cattle Company's late March production sale. "Our bulls brought $300 more on average than last year, so that was a good surprise," he said. "I had enough good customers who are finding a way to make it through. They are hanging on to some cows, so they have to have some bulls."But he added, "I've heard a lot of mixed sales reports. It's kind of a tough year."John Williams of Boise City, Okla., has been raising Charolais seedstock in the panhandle for 42 years and said the drought was definitely presenting challenges for him."We haven't had any precipitation here," he said. "It just barely turned the ground white on top and that's it. People are waiting to see if they get moisture to figure out whether they'll be selling cows or buying bulls."To expand his market beyond the drought zone, Williams started advertising his bulls on the Internet this year, so far with minimal success."Most people don't want to drive that far to look at a bull," he said.Asked if the drought had adversely affected the popularity of the big-framed continental breed that caught his favor while he was still in high school, he said he had seen no signs of that."Most people are still paid by weight," he said. "It seems like those who got into Angus real big are wanting Charolais again."Harold Sidwell, part of a ranching family that has been raising registered Herefords at Carr, Colo., since 1908, said sales had started off slow, with the earliest calls coming from the Western Slope, where ranchers were "snowed under" with spring precipitation.For his part, he thought the drought had been good for the popularity of the British breeds. In fact, he and his family are so optimistic about the future and pleased with how demand for Hereford cattle has rebounded that they are thinking about starting up a spring bull sale again next year. The Sidwells held regular production sales up until 1981, when they switched to selling by private treaty."An auctioneer can kind of work on people a little bit and get another hundred dollars for a bull," he said. "We're excited about doing it again."In an odd way, the same drought that is taking a bite out of current sales is also fueling buyers' willingness to invest in top quality bulls. From Burlington, Marshall, who is a contributor to Beef Magazine in addition to running the ranch, said the positive long-term outlook in the cattle industry was helping push more bulls into the $5,000 to $10,000 range — even among commercial buyers — as cattlemen invest in what they see as promising times ahead."I think most everybody agrees the supply and demand fundamentals have never looked better," he said. "Cow numbers are so tight that it will take four or five years at least before we can increase production significantly. From a price standpoint, that's very, very optimistic. Everyone is just waiting for the opportunity to take advantage of it." About Us

农业

2017-09/1437/en_head.json.gz/12871

John Block Reports from Washington By: John Block, AgWeb.com John Block has dedicated his professional career to the fields of agriculture, food and health. Rising Food Prices? Can't Blame Ethanol With food prices rising worldwide, some self-styled authorities on agriculture are claiming that producing ethanol in the Midwest causes food riots in the Middle East. Their story is simple: Biofuels are gobbling up the grains that would otherwise be used to feed the world's poor. Just limit the production and use of ethanol and — presto! — food will be abundant, affordable and available all across the globe. But this theory of food-versus-fuel flies in the face of four facts: First, U.S. ethanol production uses only about 3 percent of the world's grain supply. Moreover, that 3 percent consists of feed grains, largely corn for livestock. The food grains that people actually eat — mostly rice and wheat — aren't affected by biofuels production. Second, about a third of the corn used for ethanol becomes a co-product: livestock feed for cattle, poultry and hogs. Last year alone, the U.S. exported 9 million metric tons of these distillers grains, corn gluten feed and corn gluten meal to nations around the world, including Egypt. Third, volatile energy costs are the real drivers of all consumer prices including for food. Energy impacts every facet of food production from growing the crops to processing the food to transporting it to market. These factors explained why food prices soared in 2008 and are rising right now. Imagine where oil and gasoline prices might be were it not for ethanol comprising 10 percent of the gasoline market today. Fourth — and most important — American farmers are increasing their productivity. Ethanol's demand for corn has grown dramatically during the past decade. But so has the crop of corn produced by American farmers. Because of productivity improvements, American farmers are growing more corn that ever, with the highest average yield per acre anywhere in the world, at any time in human history. From 1977 through 2007, U.S. corn acreage increased slightly, to 93.6 million from 84.3 million. But corn production more than doubled, to 13.1 billion bushels from 6.5 billion. In fact, crop yields have increased so spectacularly that the majority of the corn used for ethanol comes from gains in efficiency and growth — not from cropland expansion. Even last year, in spite of adverse weather conditions, American farmers produced the third largest corn crop in history. Meanwhile, the U.S. ethanol industry produced a record 13 billion gallons of the biofuel, replacing some 445 million barrels of imported oil and supporting more than 400,000 jobs that can't be outsourced. In large measure, American agriculture's increased productivity results from ethanol production. In addition to promoting energy security, one reason for developing a domestic ethanol industry was to provide farmers with more income from the private marketplace and fewer subsidies from the federal government. Now that corn is no longer priced below the cost of production, farmers are developing more efficient ways to grow more grain at lower costs. In tandem with advances in agriculture, the ethanol industry keeps developing new ways to use less water and energy and produce more livestock feed as a byproduct of biofuels. Far from biofuels stealing food from hungry humanity, the world's food crisis would be much worse were it not for the innovations that the ethanol industry has encouraged in American agriculture. Continuing these innovations, U.S. biofuels companies are developing new ways to produce fuels from feedstocks ranging from grasses and corn stalks to wood waste, municipal solid waste and algae. That's why, when it comes to feeding and fueling the world, ethanol is part of the solution, not the source of the problem. I have read Mr. Block's comments about corn and soybeans for over a year now. I have respected his opinion up until now. His logic is very one sided. Being a dairyman I have felt the impact of ethonal since its mandate. Corn acres have displaced soybean, wheat, cotton, and alfalfa acres. I have basically broke even or lost money since it was mandated by the government. Corn byproducts do not replace corn in my ration as many are lead to believe. Mr. Block seems to have drank to much Washington DC kool-aid. Take the subsidy off ethanol and if stands on its own more power to it. If the dairy industry does not get a break on feed costs soon you will be buying made in China, melamine laced milk. I disagree with kgh3. I won't take the time to rebut each and every sentence; most people reading this will see all the holes for themselves. However, without a "break" in dairy feed prices, I believe we will simply see the poor operators get pruned out of the industry. It seems that Mr Block is a fiscal conservative for everybody else but wants the subsidies to continue to flow for ethanol for his own self interest. This is why nothing is being done about the US deficit. Everybody wants the cuts to be for somebody else!

农业

2017-09/1437/en_head.json.gz/13164

2007- The Year of Protein Awareness While Americans are not protein-deficient, the nutrient’s roles in food and health are becoming more appreciated, and its connection to satiety is skyrocketing. By Mark Anthony, Ph.D. Awareness of dietary protein has shaped our notion of healthy eating for over a century. Stemming from the Greek word, "prota," which means "of primary importance," protein is truly the substance of life. From muscle to bone to brain, protein serves as the dominant construction material. A protein is a large organic molecule made of amino acids, which are linked together in a linear fashion. Amino acids are nitrogen-containing organic molecules. All enzymes are proteins, and enzymes control virtually every physiological reaction in the body, from respiration to immune defense to passing along genetic characteristics. In fact, genes are simply blueprints for building proteins. In 1904, Russell Henry Chittendon, a physiologist at Yale University, carried out the first scientific experiments designed to quantify human protein needs. At the time, protein needs were estimated to be about 119g per day for adults consuming 3,000 calories, based on observations of what manual laborers naturally tended to eat. Chittendon, a pioneer in human nutrition research, believed this figure to be exaggerated, and conducted a series of nitrogen balance studies on students and faculty members at Yale in order to determine the minimum protein requirements for active and sedentary adults. (Protein, unlike carbohydrates and fats contains nitrogen. Hence, measuring nitrogen intake vs. output gives a pretty accurate picture of the protein required to make up for natural losses.) Chittendon's records closely match the present-day Dietary Reference Intake (DRI) recommendation of 0.36g per pound of body weight, which translates to about 56-63g for men and 46-50g for women based on a 2000-calorie diet. How do we as a nation measure up to these recommendations? Americans, according to a USDA survey, consume on average 75g of protein per day. Individual intakes vary, but in general, we are not a protein-deficient land. Yet forces other than government recommendations shape public awareness of protein needs. In the 1970s, this awareness got a jolt with the publication of the best-selling book, Diet for a Small Planet, by Francis Moore Lappe. Though criticized by some for overstating the need to mix and match proteins at every meal, the book raised public consciousness of amino acid balance by showing how vegetable proteins could complement each other to provide the full spectrum of essential amino acids. Despite the criticism, the message stuck: There were in fact many ways to fulfill our protein needs in addition to the traditional meats that graced the table at nearly every meal. This awareness paved the way for the acceptance of true variety in protein sources. Today if you ask a vegetarian "Where do you get your protein?" you'll probably get a pretty sophisticated answer. Expanding protein awareness "While 2.5 percent of America is classified as 'vegetarian,' 35 percent or more fit into the 'flexitarian' category, which is defined as eating three or more meatless meals per weak. Flexitarians are mainly health-driven in food choices and are looking to cut down intake of fat and cholesterol," says Seth Tibbot, founder of Turtle Island Foods Inc. (www.tofurky.com), Hood River, Ore. Turtle Island started out making Tempeh, a fermented soybean cake from Indonesia. The company now is better known for Tofurky, one of the most innovative protein products on the market. "Tofurky is a combination of organic tofu, vital wheat gluten (the protein part of the wheat) and natural flavors. Tofurky has an elongated, stranded meat-like texture and resembles turkey white meat in flavor," says Tibbot. While Tofurky may be new to many, if you're a vegetarian, this very well may be the gobbler you feasted on during the recent holidays. "Tofurky was first marketed by our company in 1995 during the Thanksgiving holiday," Tibbot continues. "It grew out of my personal dismal experiences of trying to find a tasty, high-protein, convenient vegetarian centerpiece for the Thanksgiving table. Every year on 'turkey day,' my meat-eating friends would be having a grand old time with the bird while the plant eaters were left only with salad, potatoes and such disasters as our "stuffed pumpkin" and, in another year, a gluten roast that you couldn't cut with a chain saw." The story of Tofurky is an example of protein awareness emerging from a small group and filling a niche that was greater than expected. "With the marketing of the first Tofurky, which weighed in at 3.5 lbs. and served eight people, we realized that we were not the only ones looking for a vegetarian alternative to turkey. It was an immediate hit in spite of its $32 price tag," says Tibbot. "It violated pretty much all the retail conventional wisdom, which said, 'Never price anything in the freezer above $3.99.' "Although it was difficult to convince retailers that the market existed, once Tofurky hit the shelves, it didn't stay there very long. Sales were brisk right from the start." Vegetarianism is more than avoidance of meat. Hence, finding high-quality sources of vegetarian protein is critical to the maintenance of a healthy active lifestyle. "We want to show how an active, sustainable and organic lifestyle can improve the overall health and well-being of everyone," said Maria Emmer-Aanes, director of marketing of Nature's Path Foods (www.naturespath.com), Richmond, British Columbia. Nature's Path sponsors the Whidbey Island Marathon & Half Marathon as a way of promoting its Optimum Rebound cereals, formulated for "optimal post-exercise muscle recovery and fuel replacement." Rebound, a high-protein cereal, provides 10g of protein per serving from a mix of whole grains, nuts, soy nuts and seeds. About the time that Diet for a Small Planet hit the shelves, Barbara's Bakery Inc. (www.barbarasbakery.com), Petaluma, Calif., began providing baked goods free of preservatives, hydrogenated oils and refined sugars. Today its offerings include wholegrain cereals, yogurt and fruit bars, plus higher-protein Puffins (named after the sea bird) cereals and cereal and milk bars. High in fiber and protein from whole grains and soy, milk, whey and yogurt, the bars are designed to provide a satisfying and sustaining alternative to the typical nutrient-poor snacks. Show More Content

农业

2017-09/1437/en_head.json.gz/14904

Corn Stink bugs could injure corn in addition to soybeans By Purdue University and Ohio State University October 18, 2013 | 3:49 pm EDT Field crop growers might already be aware that stink bugs could cause injury to soybeans, but it seems the smelly pests could also cause problems for both sweet and field corn, say entomologists with Ohio State University's College of Food, Agricultural, and Environmental Sciences. Although the damage stink bugs can cause to soybeans in Ohio has the potential to be a significant problem, fewer growers might be aware that the insects can also cause corn injury, said Andy Michel, an Ohio State University Extension pest expert. While there have been few reports in the Buckeye state of stink bug damage in some northern Ohio corn fields, growers who have found discolored, shrunken or missing kernels, might find that stink bugs are indeed the culprit, said Michel, who also has an appointment with the Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center. OSU Extension and OARDC are the statewide outreach and research arms, respectively, of the college. Stink bugs, known for their "sweaty feet" smell when squashed or irritated, have made their way into Ohio soybean fields and now some Ohio corn fields, in addition to invading homes statewide, he said. "The damage isn't really extensive but growers may see some damage on some kernels," Michel said. "Usually the damage in field corn is localized to scarring on kernels or causing a mottled appearance near the tip of the ear, but severe injury has also been observed. "Sweet corn is particularly susceptible to stink bugs and exhibits similar damage characteristics." Michel said damage reports have come in on some corn fields in Wood County and at Ohio State's Waterman Farm in Columbus. The damage to corn crops is mainly caused by green stink bugs, which are native to Ohio, he said. But some of the damage to corn was also caused by the brown marmorated stink bug, which is a fairly new pest to the region. A native of eastern Asia, the brown marmorated stink bug was first identified in the U.S. in Allentown, Pa., in 2001, said Ron Hammond, an OSU Extension entomologist. The brown, three-quarter-inch-long insects are known to feed on a wide range of crops, including apples, peaches, tomatoes and soybeans. Likewise, he said, sightings of larger-than-usual numbers of green stink bugs have also been reported in Ohio soybean fields, as well as reports of the red-shouldered stink bug, which is a newer pest in Ohio. "Up until recently, stink bugs weren't in populations large enough to cause a concern in Ohio," Hammond said. "But as these bugs begin to increase in numbers across the state, the concern for soybean growers is the potential for yield declines due to the pests, which use their piercing-sucking mouthparts to feed on the plant seeds." In corn, stink bugs appeared to be feeding through the husks, Michel said. "When stink bugs pierce through the husk and feed on the ear during early development, the cob will not develop on that side, but continue growing on the back side giving the ear a characteristic banana-shaped appearance," he said. "The shuck will also stop developing, exposing the grain to bird and insect damage, with signs of injury also including shrunken or missing kernels." Corn growers are encouraged to report any stink bug injury to OSU Extension so that entomologists can gauge how significant the problem may become for Ohio growers, Michel said. "While we have not seen any economic losses from stink bugs in field corn, growers should be aware of their presence and the damage they can cause," he said. "Heavy stink bug populations can reduce not only yields but also the quality of the grain, so we want to know if growers are seeing a lot of damage. "We typically see more stink bug damage to corn crops in southern states, but we are interested to get an idea of what Ohio corn growers are seeing and experiencing in their fields. From a grower's point of view, they might be confused as to what stink bug injury symptoms are, but the issue could be on the rise and it's a problem that we want to make sure that growers are aware of so we can recommend treatment options." cornsoybeansstink bugsstink bug injury About the Author: Purdue University and Ohio State University

农业

2017-09/1437/en_head.json.gz/15708

The Real Johnny Appleseed Brought Apples—and Booze—to the American Frontier The apples John Chapman brought to the frontier were very different than today’s apples—and they weren’t meant to be eaten John Chapman, known as Johnny Appleseed, planted orchards across the frontier. (Wikipedia) Natasha Geiling On a family farm in Nova, Ohio, grows a very special apple tree; by some claims, the 175 year old tree is the last physical evidence of John Chapman, a prolific nurseryman who, throughout the early 1800s, planted acres upon acres of apple orchards along America's western frontier, which at the time was anything on the other side of Pennsylvania. Today, Chapman is known by another name—Johnny Appleseed—and his story has been imbued with the saccharine tint of a fairytale. If we think of Johnny Appleseed as a barefoot wanderer whose apples were uniform, crimson orbs, it's thanks in large part to the popularity a segment of the 1948 Disney feature, Melody Time, which depicts Johnny Appleseed in Cinderella fashion, surrounded by blue songbirds and a jolly guardian angel. But this contemporary notion is flawed, tainted by our modern perception of the apple as a sweet, edible fruit. The apples that Chapman brought to the frontier were completely distinct from the apples available at any modern grocery store or farmers' market, and they weren't primarily used for eating—they were used to make America's beverage-of-choice at the time, hard apple cider. Johnny Appleseed and the American Orchard Johnny Appleseed: The Man, the Myth, the American Story The Botany of Desire: A Plant's-Eye View of the World "Up until Prohibition, an apple grown in America was far less likely to be eaten than to wind up in a barrel of cider," writes Michael Pollan in The Botany of Desire. "In rural areas cider took the place of not only wine and beer but of coffee and tea, juice, and even water." It was into this apple-laden world that John Chapman was born, on September 26, 1774, in Leominster, Massachusetts. Much of his early years have been lost to history, but in the early 1800s, Chapman reappears, this time on the western edge of Pennsylvania, near the country's rapidly expanding Western frontier. At the turn of the 19th century, speculators and private companies were buying up huge swathes of land in the Northwest Territory, waiting for settlers to arrive. Starting in 1792, the Ohio Company of Associates made a deal with potential settlers: anyone willing to form a permanent homestead on the wilderness beyond Ohio's first permanent settlement would be granted 100 acres of land. To prove their homesteads to be permanent, settlers were required to plant 50 apple trees and 20 peach trees in three years, since an average apple tree took roughly ten years to bear fruit. Ever the savvy businessman, Chapman realized that if he could do the difficult work of planting these orchards, he could turn them around for profit to incoming frontiersmen. Wandering from Pennsylvania to Illinois, Chapman would advance just ahead of settlers, cultivating orchards that he would sell them when they arrived, and then head to more undeveloped land. Like the caricature that has survived to modern day, Chapman really did tote a bag full of apple seeds. As a member of the Swedenborgian Church, whose belief system explicitly forbade grafting (which they believed caused plants to suffer), Chapman planted all of his orchards from seed, meaning his apples were, for the most part, unfit for eating. It wasn't that Chapman—or the frontier settlers—didn't have the knowledge necessary for grafting, but like New Englanders, they found that their effort was better spent planting apples for drinking, not for eating. Apple cider provided those on the frontier with a safe, stable source of drink, and in a time and place where water could be full of dangerous bacteria, cider could be imbibed without worry. Cider was a huge part of frontier life, which Howard Means, author of Johnny Appleseed: The Man, the Myth, the American Story, describes as being lived "through an alcoholic haze." Transplanted New Englanders on the frontier drank a reported 10.52 ounces of hard cider per day (for comparison, the average American today drinks 20 ounces of water a day). "Hard cider," Means writes, "was as much a part of the dining table as meat or bread." John Chapman died in 1845, and many of his orchards and apple varieties didn't survive much longer. During Prohibition, apple trees that produced sour, bitter apples used for cider were often chopped down by FBI agents, effectively erasing cider, along with Chapman's true history, from American life. "Apple growers were forced to celebrate the fruit not for its intoxicating values, but for its nutritional benefits," Means writes, "its ability, taken once a day, to keep the doctor away..." In a way, this aphorism—so benign by modern standards—was nothing less than an attack on a typically American libation. Today, America's cider market is seeing a modest—but marked—resurgence as the fastest growing alcoholic beverage in America. Chapman, however, remains frozen in the realm of Disney, destined to wander in America's collective memory with a sack full of perfectly edible, gleaming apples. But not all of the apples that came from Chapman's orchards were destined to be forgotten. Wandering the modern supermarket, we have Chapman to thank for varieties like the delicious, the golden delicious, and more. His penchant toward propagation by seed, Pollan argues, lent itself to creating the great—and perhaps more importantly—hardy American apple. Had Chapman and the settlers opted for grafting, the uniformity of the apple product would have lent to a staid and relatively boring harvest. "It was the seeds, and the cider, that give the apple the opportunity to discover by trial and error the precise combination of traits required to prosper in the New World," he writes. "From Chapman's vast planting of nameless cider apple seeds came some of the great American cultivars of the 19th century." While the apple find its geographic origin in the area of modern-day Kazakhstan, it owes most of its popularity to the Romans, who became masters of apple grafting, a technique wherein a section of a steam—with buds—from a particular type of apple tree is inserted into the stock of another tree. Grafting is an integral part of cultivating apples, as well as grapes and fruit trees, because the seed of an apple is basically a botanic roulette wheel—the seed of a red delicious apple will produce an apple tree, but those apples won't be red delicious; at most, they'll only barely resemble a red delicious, a characteristic that classifies them as "extreme heterozygotes" of the biological world. Because of its intense genetic variability, fruit grown from apple seed, more often than not, turned out to be inedible. Apples grown from the seed are often called "spitters," from what you'd likely do after you took a bite of the fruit. According to Thoreau, an apple grown from seed tastes "sour enough to set a squirrel's teeth on edge and make a jay scream." When apples made their way to colonial America, they came first in the form of graftings—budded stems from the settlers favorite European trees, which they hoped to bring with them to the New World. But the soil of America turned out to be less hospitable than the soil the colonialists had known in Europe, and their apple trees grew poorly. Moreover, as William Kerrigan writes in Johnny Appleseed and The American Orchard, early settlers lived in a world where land was abundant but labor was scarce; grafting was a delicate technique that required finesse and time, whereas growing apples from seeds produced a crop with relatively little effort. Eventually, settlers turned to growing apples from seed, producing "spitters" unfit for eating—but immensely well suited to fermenting into alcoholic quaffs. About Natasha Geiling Natasha Geiling is an online reporter for Smithsonian magazine. | Follow @ngeiling Architects and Designers Make Money for Norway Designing for Seniors and Soldiers, Toward a "Silver" Architecture Ask Smithsonian: How Long Can a Person Hold Their Breath? (1:31) Gasp! The answer will amaze you. One highly influential ancient Middle Eastern civilization established some of the essential systems we still use today. Think you know which it is? Who Decided to Put 60 Seconds in a Minute? In 1828, John Jacob Astor built a trading post on the Missouri River. Business was so profitable that it only took four decades for Astor to become America's first multimillionaire. America's First Multimillionaire

农业

2017-09/1437/en_head.json.gz/16262

stories filed under: "premiums" Economics Mike MasnickThu, Mar 22nd 2012 3:00pm cows, economics, farming, open source, premiums, scarcities fulper farms High Tech Cows & Open Source Farm Equipment: Yes, The Economics Of Farming Is Relevantfrom the innovation-impacts-lots-of-industries dept I frequently get asked why I spend so much time talking about the entertainment industry here on Techdirt, and one of the points I make is that I think what's happened to the entertainment industry over the last decade and a half is really a leading indicator of the type of disruptive change that has already started to impact, or will soon be impacting, nearly every industry imaginable. As such, by understanding what's happening and how not to respond, perhaps we can help lots of other industries move more smoothly into the future. So I'm always interested and intrigued by parallels in totally unexpected industries. Just recently, the good folks over at NPR's Planet Money put together a fascinating episode about modern farm economics (and host Adam Davidson also wrote a NY Times piece on the same subject). While it mainly focuses on Claudia, the high-tech cow, it also has some key economic points that will likely sound familiar to regular readers (unfortunately, these key economic points are only in the audio version of the podcast, and were left out of the transcript). Near the beginning, host Adam Davidson lays out his "four clear lessons about how to have a shot at thriving in the current global economy." Stay on top of technological change. Focus. Specialize on the things you can do best. Find some way to buffer yourself against unexpected changes that are definitely coming. Find something that you can sell that your customers are willing to pay a premium for because you've given them something they want which no one else can give them. All of those sound familiar to one degree or another, but clearly number one and number four are ones that we hit on frequently. They then use the example of Fulper Farms to show how it can work. They talk about the technological change and innovation not just in process, but in the breeding of better cows, which leads to the "bleeding edge high tech cow." They then talk about specialization, where the Fulper's don't do everything that a farmer used to do, but instead focus on raising and milking cows, and rely on other experts to handle the breeding of cows (to get those high tech cows) and even cow nutrition (letting this other person stay up on the latest in cow nutrition science). To some extent, it's like the differences we've talked about between gatekeepers and enablers. The gatekeepers wanted to be at the center of things and control all aspects of production, distribution, etc. But in a world of enablers there's much more specialization. So, for example, in the music world, musicians can pick and choose from best-of-breed solutions to help create, distribute, promote and monetize their work, rather than just relying on a single provider. Not much time is spent on the third point, but there's a brief discussion about financial tools to help buffer the swings in the market -- things like grain futures and such, which are really just forms of insurance to protect in a volatile market. I'm a little less interested in this particular point. I think it can be important in some industries but is less of a key point long term. But the fourth point was what I found the most interesting, and obviously fits most closely with some of the theories and business models I've espoused for years: sell something scarce which people want to buy. But, in a commoditized world such as farming, how is that even possible? Well, we hear the same thing in the music world all the time, where people insist that there's nothing to sell but the music, but then we see lots of folks get creative and do amazingly creative things. And the same thing is clearly happening on the Fulper Farm as well -- thanks in part to the youngest generation, who attended my own alma mater (Go Big Red!), and is applying some of what she learned about being more entrepreneurial back to the farm. She's trying out a few things to take some special facets of what the farm has available, for which they can charge a premium: Breanna realized they kept talking about this "problem" they had. They're really close to New York City. Land is really expensive in Northern New Jersey. There's not an agricultural world there, so they have to travel really far to buy ag equipment. There's all these problems being so close to New York City. And she realized, by using her farm as a case study in college, that being so close to the City might be the best way to make money. It might be their secret to being a successful farm. I looked and I couldn't find any farm closer to New York City. I think this is the closest one to Brooklyn... And people in Brooklyn are kind of obsessed with farming.... Breanna has figured out that there's money in that. She's working with a cheese maker who's going to help them make a premium Fulper-branded cheese. You and I, some time soon, can go to our local shop and buy really, really local... this is "the closest cheese to Brooklyn."... Breanna had this other idea. Did you know that you could send your two daughters for a week to summer camp at Fulper Farms?.... Families pay a few hundred bucks, their kids have an awesome week experiencing agriculture.... You know what's amazing? A few weeks of summer camp that Breanna did as a college project? Brings in almost as much money as a whole year of milking cows. Hello alternative revenue streams. I'm sure the purists will insist that just like a musician should only sell music, a dairy farmer should only sell dairy products. But a smart business person finds ways to capitalize on real scarcities, and that's exactly what Breanna appears to have done with the Fulper Farms. The report concludes with another key point that we've definitely seen in the music business as well. Davidson notes that there's a lot more opportunity, and the average farm is now making more money than in the past, but it's a lot more volatile, and lots of the old guard simply don't make the transition well. Once again, this sounds mighty familiar. It's kind of neat to see the parallels between such different industries when it comes down to the basic economics of progress and technological change. Along those lines, perhaps there are even more parallels moving into the future. As I was working on this post, Leigh passed along a TED talk from about a year ago by Marcin Jakubowski, who is taking the concepts of the maker culture and the open source ethos and applying it to farming. It seems like an appropriate thing to end this post with, so check it out: Mike MasnickThu, Mar 19th 2009 5:42am business models, music, platforms, premiums, reason to buy Topspin Shows That Premium Offerings Get Sales: People Will Pay For Value Beyond The Musicfrom the a-reason-to-buy dept It's really been great over the past year or so to see more and more bands adopting business models that involve tiered "premium" options that add real value for fans -- the key to creating a real reason to buy, as discussed in my MidemNet presentation a couple months ago. We've seen all different variations on the tiered theme from Trent Reznor to Kristin Hersh to Jill Sobule to John Wesley Harding and many others. Personally, I still think that the most creative of the bunch is Josh Freese's tiers that go from just fun to ridiculous (one option lets you keep his car -- after you drop him off at home). One of the companies that's doing a good job helping some musicians make this model work is TopSpin, who we've discussed before. In fact, TopSpin has helped Reznor and Freese with their offerings (as well as the Beastie Boys, who recently launched something similar, as well). With TopSpin's platform coming out of beta this week, the company has released some data on its success so far, and it's impressive -- especially for those of you who keep insisting that fans these days just want music for free and are unwilling to pay for anything. Its campaigns have certainly helped bands grow their audience and improved ways to connect with fans. One of its first major projects was the release of David Byrne's latest album, and it increased his email list by 3000%. (Update: Originally we said 37%, but that was wrong. It's actually 30x, or 3000% as per Topspin). The various projects have shown that people are quite willing to pay if they're provided with real value and given a real (rather than artificial) reason to buy. The average transaction price is $22 -- significantly more than what people are paying for "just the music" and even more than what an average CD costs. Perhaps the most appealing stat: on a recent project 84% of the orders were premium offers above the lowest tier. People will pay more for being given real value, rather than just being forced to pay for the music. This is great news. Unfortunately, TopSpin is still rather limited right now to bigger name artists (they pick and choose who they work with). I think the world is open for another player to come in and disrupt the market by making such systems available for anyone. Also, in the various projects that TopSpin has run so far, I still think the pricing is a little off (Reznor's was the exception, and he only used TopSpin's backend, rather than its whole program). Also, it seems pretty rare for artists using TopSpin to offer a free option, which limits opportunity greatly (and drives folks to file sharing, rather than opening up a better relationship with those fans, and maybe gaining an email contact and the ability to create sales later). This is (I hope?) an issue from the musicians' side, rather than TopSpin's. It's also worth noting that the company has also announced a program with Berklee College of Music to teach courses to musicians in how to leverage TopSpin for better business models. Hopefully at least some of that class will include an explanation of how using free as a part of your business model can extend it even further.

农业

2017-09/1437/en_head.json.gz/16707

Floriculture: Flowers, Love and Money at the Garden Museum Did you know that 90% of cut flowers in the UK now come from Kenya? If a Victorian gentleman gave you white tulips, what would he be trying to tell you? Floriculture: Flowers, Love and Money is the latest sweet-smelling exhibition at London's Garden Museum, and promises to tell the story behind your bouquet.Claire Daly25th February 2013 © courtesy of the Garden Museum Hyacinth Field, Wisbech, c.1908 Daffodil Picking, Scilly Isles, c.1900 Robert Murdoch Percoval, Flower Boxes © National Museums Liverpool, Walker Art Gallery Next Valentine's Day the Garden Museum will open the first exhibition to tell the story of the cut flower trade from the 17th century until today. The exhibition will also explore the inspiration of cut flowers to painters, and to the art of floristry, and their symbolism in rites of passage such as marriage, funerals, and memory.The exhibition begins in 17th century Covent Garden: the square built by The Earl of Bedford contained a market for fruit and vegetables. Covent Garden continues to be the heart of the flower trade, whether represented by the Floral Hall, illustrations by Edward Bawden, or iconic films such as Lindsey Anderson's Everyday Excerpt Christmas, from the 1950's. The stall-holders, in their current location in Nine Elms, will be the subject of an artist's commission as we seek to record their stories of life at the Flower Market.Until the 19th century, the wholesale trade in flowers was local, small in scale, and existed alongside allotments and Head Gardeners' cutting gardens and displays in the great house. This slowly evolved, with, in the 1880s growers of snowdrops and daffodils in Spalding, Lincolnshire, racing to supply London markets by train; by 1929 this had increased to 20 tonnes a day. In 1940, 4 million bulbs were shipped to America as payment for arms. The world's flower trade has increased from £1.8 billion in the 1950s to in excess of £64 billion today. After trains came planes: in 1969 the first air freighted flowers flew to the United States from Colombia. However, the globalised trade has attracted increasing controversy over its environmental impact, and allegations of exploitation of vulnerable workforces. The exhibition will explain each side of the debate – including the new movement for "Fair Trade in flowers" – but will also be a celebration of the domestic growers, an industry which has all but vanished but may be revived by a new generation of eco -aware, creative growers. The exhibition will follow the growth of the retail industry, from florists' shops to supermarkets; in 1979 Marks and Spencer– which had sold plants since the 1920s – first experimented with the sale of cut flowers and quickly grew to be a significantforce in the modern marketplace. Earlier in the century, Gertrude Jekyll and Constance Spry established floristry as an art form and a profession. The exhibition will pick out iconic weddings which have transformed taste, such as the 1961 marriage of The Duke and Duchess of Kent in York Minster or that of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge in 2012 – masterminded by Shane Connolly, whose ideas in floral design the show will explore. The exhibition will look at the relationship between artists and cut flowers, through works by artists such as Stanley Spencer's view of his cutting garden at Cookham, Duncan Grant's still-lives and glimpses of the garden path at Charleston, and CedricMorris's masterful studies of irises. The paintings selected will capture the fragile beauty of flowers from their gardens.Finally, we shall explore the place the beauty and quick mortality of cut flowers play in rites of life and death: marriage, funerals, and memorial shrines. Floriculture is the new exhibition at London's sweetest-smelling museum, the Garden Museum. Opening the door, the smell of flowers greets you. "By the time you have enjoyed this exhibition, in the UK we will have spent more than £140,000 on cut flowers", the museum claims. I find this a most astonishing figure, because none of my boyfriends have ever bought me flowers, not even on Valentine's Day. But all these cut flowers are now being flown in from Kenya, at great environmental expense. It was almost too depressing to read. The reason they look great after their long-haul flight is that they've been sprayed with silver thiosulphate, which is incredibly damaging for the environment, and also kills their smell. Flowers on crack, in other words. And most of the roses sold this Valentines Day were of this kind. "I'll be environmentally friendly by refusing to buy you any flowers," joked one husband to his wife at the exhibition.The UK has one of the most perfect growing environments in the world, but 90% of cut flowers now come from abroad. There is a new movement to promote fair trade flowers, following in the footsteps of chocolate. Some homegrown flowers have had a revival in recent years, such as lavender, but it's no longer economically viable to mass produce flowers in the UK. The exhibition was awash with young people, men, and the expected smattering of old ladies admiring the pictures. The space is so small that there was a cacophony of grannies on mobile phones and creaking floorboards as people went past. Surely all gardeners are quiet types? There should have been a silencer on guard.I went round the exhibition in the wrong order, as I do when there are annoying people to be avoided, and so now we go back to the beginning of the flower revolution. Long before the Chelsea Flower Show, there were florist societies around the country called "Florist's Feasts". Nosegays and "tussie-mussies" were the bouquets of yore, and they were freshly picked. Flowers began to take trains in the 1880s when the demand for daffodils from London meant that they had to be brought in from Lincolnshire. The great Victorian love affair with flowers began a little before Queen Victoria's reign in 1831, when the Horticultural Society of London launched competitions for amateur and professional fruit growers and florists.The exhibition follows the current trend of writing in unusual places – on the skirting boards, near the ceiling. The meanings of flowers were dashed out along the ground to express the Victorian fashion for floriography – the hidden messages of flowers, from Jean Marsh's The Language of Flowers – bluebells for constancy, white tulips for forgiveness. And I was fascinated to find out how long our love affair with flowers has been going. The ancient Egyptians used flowers for interior decoration and wall paintings of flowers in vases adorned the tombs of the Pharaohs. Their favourites were lotus flowers and water lilies. There's also a smattering of art. My favourite was a beautiful painting by the flower collector and artist Sir Cedric Morris of iris seedlings. Each year he grew 1000 iris seedlings and in 1943 rushed to paint his bumper crop before they died. He cultivated a garden inspired by Claude Monet's at Giverny. Monet himself once wrote, "I perhaps owe becoming a painter to flowers".Recent research at the University of New Jersey proves that flowers make us feel good, and the exhibition indeed left me feeling great (if in need of a boyfriend who understands the importance of flowers). Rebecca West's installation of hanging roses dangling from the ceiling just outside the exhibition is extraordinary, especially in the setting of St Mary's Church which houses the museum. Let's just hope they're home grown. Bring on the fair trade Rose Revolution.Flowers, Love and Money, at Garden MuseumClaire Daly reviews Floriculture: Flowers, Love and Money at The Garden Museum.3 Date reviewed: Saturday 23rd February 2013 Image credits:Valentines © courtesy of the Garden MuseumHyacinth Field, Wisbech, c.1908 © courtesy of the Garden MuseumDaffodil Picking, Scilly Isles, c.1900 © courtesy of the Garden MuseumRobert Murdoch Percoval, Flower Boxes © National Museums Liverpool, Walker Art Gallery More by Claire Daly Interview: Michael LloydWorld Press Photo 2012Animal CrackersAll articles by Claire Daly

农业

2017-09/1437/en_head.json.gz/17026

Indian farmers visit BAYER 500 Indian farmers traveled to Cologne for the G8 economic summit. They were part of an international protest against an unjust economic system. On June 18, 1999 the Indians demonstrated in front of the BAYER headquarters in Leverkusen together with 300 German supporters. They demanded protection of local markets, withdrawal from genetic engineering research and a ban on pesticides. The COALITION AGAINST BAYER-DANGERS (CBG) planned the demonstration. Poison for Latin America 200,000 people have been poisoned in Germany through the use of thewood preservative XYLADECOR. BAYER sold its shares of DESOWAG, the manufacturer of XYLADECOR, 10 years ago to cover its participation in the questionable business. We have recently discovered that BAYER and DESOWAG are still marketing XYLADECOR together in Latin America - with risky ingredients that aren't contained in the same product that is sold in Germany. The German companies presented XYLADECOR at the agricultural trade fair AgroExpo in Bogota, Columbia as a wood preservative that can be used against mould and termites. The active ingredient in Xyladecor is the controversial Pyrethroid Cyfluthrin. The American Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) considers Cyfluthrin "extremely toxic" and have entered it into their list of the 50 most dangerous pesticides. The dangerous ingredient is not used in the same product in Europe - a typical case of double security standards. The manufacturers obviously assume that the authorities and the general public in South America will not be as careful as those in Europe. BAYER the winner of the Asian crisis Global players such as BAYER are using the Asian crisis to strengthen their market position in the affected countries by purchasing shattered native companies or increasing their number of shares. This is how BAYER Indonesia recently bought all the shares in its previous sales partners. BAYER also profited from the financial difficulties of the Japanese pharmaceutical company SANKYO and purchased its shares in the previous joint venture BAYER-SANKYO CO. LTD. By buying out SANKYO in the joint venture, BAYER is now the second largest manufacturer of diagnostics on the Japanese market. Lawyers for boycott of shares "Don't buy BAYER!": American lawyers who are representing former forced labor in concentration camps in compensation claims against BAYER, BASF and 22 other companies, have asked stockbrokers to let their "conscience be their guide" and no longer trade the shares of said companies. BAYER & Co. secure themselves a gene monopoly BAYER is entering human genome research in a big way. The chemistry multinational from Leverkusen has established a genome research consortium together with GLAXO WELLCOME, NOVARTIS, PHIZER, HOECHST MARION ROUSSEL and six other large pharmaceutical companies. The companies want to secure a knowledge monopoly of genetic codes in cooperation with the genetic engineering foundation WELLCOME TRUST, which was founded by the pharmaceutical giant WELLCOME. This will save them the great expense of purchasing of the research of smaller biotech companies. The gene cartel has a budget of 44 million dollars at their disposal. BAYER's chairman of the board, Dr. Manfred Schneider, announced that the company intends to be among the Top 5 global biotechnology companies within the next four or five years. According to Schneider, this goal cannot be achieved through internal growth. The company therefore intends to continue making million dollar deals such as BAYER's involvement in the American genome research company MILLENIUM. Chrome in South Africa One of the largest chrome factories in the world began production as a joint company of BAYER and DOW CHEMICALS in Newcastle, South Africa. As a result, the multinational, which is the second largest chrome manufacturer in the world, is closing its chrome processing plant in Leverkusen, Germany. Due to the country's large chrome deposits, the company has processed this raw material in South Africa since 1973, and it even has its own mine. The idea of an apartheid government apparently did not present any problems for the company. On the contrary, the government provided many blacks workers who were cheap and had no rights. The workers are exposed to many health risks during chromate production. The COALITION AGAINST BAYER-DANGERS received the first reports of illness such as respiratory illnesses, skin tumors and even cases of lung cancer from the BAYER workers who work at the plant in 1990. The sanitation of Dhuennaue Dhuennaue, BAYER's dump for the last decade in Leverkusen, Germany, is the largest toxic waste dump in Europe. A hundred thousand cubic meters of chemical waste is stored only a few meters from the Rhine river and surrounding residential areas. This has led in the past to considerable harm to humans and the environment; there have even been a few deaths. Workers have been sanitizing the entire area for the past three years. Entire blocks of residential housing have been moved. The sanitation costs are presently over 200 million German marks; the taxpayers are paying one fourth of the costs.No approval for METRIFONAT right now BAYER suffered a setback last year in the clinical testing of the Alzheimer preparation METRIFONAT in the USA. 20 of the test persons complained of sudden muscular weakness, and the American health authorities, the FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION (FDA), stopped the testing of the drug. As part of the admissions process for the medication, the FDA has now sent the chemical giant an "action letter" in which the authorities state that they will only approve METRIFONAT once the production methods and pharmacological effects have been changed. The value of BAYER stock dropped the next day, since this "blue letter" will considerably delay approval of the medication. The company withdrew the drug's approval application in Europe on its own accord. Pesticides in fruits and vegetables According to a study by the EUROPEAN UNION, 40 % of all probes from fruit and vegetables in 13 EU member states contain pesticide residues, and the normal limits have been exceeded in 3 % of the cases. Scientists detected several ingredients that are contained in BAYER agricultural toxins such as Chlorpyriphos (RIDDER), Methamidophos (TAMARON) and Procymidone (SUMISCLEX WG). Billion Mark investments in Asia The chemistry multinational, which has its headquarters in Leverkusen, announced that it intends to invest eight billion German Marks in Asia by the year 2010. Two billion Marks are allotted to be invested in Japan, where the company suffered from 4 % sales losses in 1998. Asian shares in the companies turnover should increase in the future from 14 % to 25 %. BAYER intends to use 4.8 billion Marks of the investment sum to build new production centers, especially in China and Thailand, and one billion Marks will be available for company takeovers. Three dead in an explosion There was recently an explosion in the harbor of the BAYER subsidiary EC ERDOELCHEMIE in Dormagen, Germany. Three people died in the explosion and 10 other people were critically injured. The accident occurred while filling a tanker with gasoline. The explosion could be heard many kilometers away, and a giant cloud of black soot was visible. The air in the entire region was so full gasoline that the citizens could even feel it on their tongue. The authorities told the citizens to keep their doors and windows closed and alerted the Rhine river traffic. Cooperation with Hong Kong University In order to establish themselves even more in important markets, BAYER continually seeks to associate itself with renowned academic institutions in the relevant countries. The company has now entered an research and cooperation agreement with the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, which holds a leading position within Chinese scientific circles. As its first investment, the multinational has given the university money to build-up of its laboratories and purchase technical equipment. __________________________________KEYCODE BAYER is published by the German group Coalition against BAYER-dangers which has been monitoring the BAYER Corporation for more than 20 years. CBG/Coalition against BAYER-dangers collects information about BAYER and coordinates activities against violations of human and environmental rights caused by this company. Anyone who has information on possibly illicit activities of BAYER or who wants to receive our newsletter regularly - please let us know. Anyone who needs photos or information concerning BAYER is invited to contact us: CBG/Coalition against BAYER-dangers, Postfach 15 04 18, 40081 Duesseldorf, Germany E-mail: [email protected]: www.CBGnetwork.org Fax: (+49) 211 333 940 Tel: (+49) 211 333 911

农业

2017-09/1437/en_head.json.gz/17085

Drought tolerant corn moving east Feb 13, 2017 Match sprayer to new herbicides Feb 10, 2017 Dicamba-resistant soybean challenges Feb 09, 2017 Weed control outlook: Soybeans & corn Feb 07, 2017 Early Frost Damages Crops Kent Thiesse 1 | Sep 20, 2011 The 2011 growing season is likely to be one that is talked about for decades to come, whether it be the late planting in many areas last spring, greatly above normal rainfall and flooded fields from late May to early June, severe storms during the early part of the summer, or the extremely dry weather in August and early September. All of that was topped off by a very early killing frost in many areas of Minnesota and surrounding states on the morning of Sept. 15, which is two to three weeks earlier than normal at most locations. Most of the primary corn and soybean production areas of southern and western Minnesota recorded low temperatures of 27-33° F that morning. Anything below 28° is considered a killing freeze; however, temperatures of 29-32° F for a few hours can have a similar effect on crops. Maturity levels of the crops varied considerably throughout the region. A majority of corn in the southern portions of Minnesota that was planted in late April and early May was very close to reaching physiological maturity, or black layer, however, north of that area, most corn was planted in mid- to late May, and was probably two to three weeks from reaching maturity. Most soybeans are likely to be impacted by the early frost, but again there will be a lot of variation in the amount of damage. Soybeans that were beginning to turn color and were within a couple weeks of maturity may only have light to moderate damage; however, the later-planted soybeans could have significant yield loss. In addition, some areas did not have a killing freeze, only a moderate frost. Producers who have crop losses from the early frost, along with earlier losses from heavy rains, hail, wind or the very dry weather, should contact their crop insurance agent before harvest to alert them of a potential loss. Producers need to follow proper procedures and documentation during harvest to verify crop losses, and assure them of any potential insurance indemnity payments. Many farm operators forward priced a considerable amount of their anticipated 2011 corn and soybean production in order to capture very favorable crop prices in recent months. Crop conditions in many areas of southern Minnesota looked good to excellent in late July and early August, resulting in some producers being fairly aggressive in yield projections for forward pricing. The very dry weather pattern late in the growing season, coupled with the early frost, could result in a few of these producers being short of bushels to fill their grain contracts. Farm operators who suspect this situation should talk to the grain purchaser to find out what options they have. The early frost, along with the dry weather pattern and warmer-than-normal temperatures, is likely to bring on the initiation of corn and soybean harvest quite rapidly, especially in parts of southern Minnesota where corn has reached maturity. Corn is usually at 30-32% moisture when it reaches back layer, and ideally growers like to see corn dried down in the field to 20-22 percent moisture, or lower, before they harvest the corn. This greatly saves on corn drying costs, and improves the quality of the corn being harvested and going into storage. Corn is usually dried down to a final moisture content of 15-16 percent moisture for safe storage until the following Summer. Corn will dry down about 0.50 % per day naturally at an average daily temperature of 60 degrees F, which increases as average temperatures rise, and will decrease as temperatures drop below that level. At Waseca, the normal daily average air temperature in September is above 60 degrees, but that drops to about 48 degrees during October. Harvest Safe this Season The week of Sept. 18-24 has been designated National Farm Safety Week, which is very good timing as we enter full-scale fall harvest for the 2011 growing season. Farm Safety Week is a good time for farm families to review farm safety procedures. More farm accidents occur during the fall than at any other time of the year, and usually involve one or more farm family members. Special care should be taken with children and senior citizens around farm and grain-handling equipment, as these groups are the most vulnerable to farm accidents. Federal and state statistics list farming as one of the most dangerous professions in the U.S. According to Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry data, 23 of the 69 work-related deaths in the state in 2010 involved the agriculture industry. There were 121 traffic accidents involving tractors and farm machinery in 2010, resulting in 19 injuries and two deaths. The non-farm public also needs to pay extra attention when driving on rural roads during harvest season, especially before and after work or school. Farm vehicles are larger and move much slower than cars, and the Autumn sun is usually in a bad position during the times of heaviest traffic in the mornings and late afternoon on rural roads throughout the fall season. The best advice is to slow down, pay attention and stay off cell phones while driving. For more details on fall farm and rural safety tips, go to the Minnesota Department of Agriculture website. Editor’s note: Kent Thiesse is a former University of Minnesota Extension educator and now is Vice President of MinnStar Bank, Lake Crystal, MN. You can contact him at 507-726-2137 or via e-mail at [email protected] TAGS: Soybeans Corn 0 comments Hide comments

农业

2017-09/1437/en_head.json.gz/17262

New method of restoring wetlands successful along Gulf Coast Nov 27, 2013 | 951 views | 0 | 6 | | New method of restoring wetlands successful along Gulf Coast November 27, 2013 Writer: Kathleen Phillips, 979-845-2872, [email protected] Contact: Marissa Sipocz, 281-218-6253, [email protected] HOUSTON — More than 135 acres of prairie wetland habitat have been restored near Houston with a new method that may help additional acreages be recovered, according to experts with the Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service. The prairie wetlands at Sheldon Lake State Park have been restored over a 10-year period using a novel approach of re-excavating soil covered up by other land-use situations, particularly agriculture, said Marissa Sipocz, AgriLife Extension wetland program manager in Houston. The prairie wetlands at Sheldon Lake State Park have been restored. (Photo courtesy of Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service) “The method we have used has changed how freshwater prairie wetland restoration and creation will take place along the Gulf Coast,” Sipocz said. “The genius of this method relies on its simplicity: re-excavation of the original soils.” The method, called “Sheldon-Sipocz,” uses high-tech, precision equipment to dig added soil out of an area until the original soils are exposed. These hydric soils are more conducive to the growth of plants that thrive in shallow water. The method was pioneered by Andy Sipocz, biologist for the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department. Prior to this method, wetland areas were commonly created by digging a depression or pond randomly on the landscape, often not in the type of environment and soils that encouraged wetland plant growth, Marissa Sipocz explained. She said beginning in 2003, AgriLife Extension partnered with Texas Sea Grant, the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to begin restoration of the Sheldon Lake State Park. Originally built in 1942, the eastern side of Sheldon Lake Reservoir was later drained and leveled for farming until the 1970s when it was designated a wildlife management area. It became a state park in 1984, and the land management goals shifted from providing hunting and fishing opportunities to being a landscape conservation and restoration area. “The goal was to transform the park into a recreational haven within the city limits of Houston,” Sipocz said, “and to provide the public with a glimpse of the region’s natural landscape.” The area originally was coastal prairie with pine and oak tree savannas dotted by marsh basins, a landscape that once covered millions of acres along the Texas-Louisiana Gulf Coast, according to the wetland team, which includes people with the Texas Master Naturalist program, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department and AgriLife Extension. “Wetlands also store rainfall runoff and remove pollutants from surface waters thus reducing downstream flooding and improving the water quality of Carpenters Bayou and Galveston Bay,” she said. Restoration of Sheldon’s wetlands thus far has occurred in three phases with the Wetlands Restoration Team, Texas Master Naturalists and local high school students planting the water-inundated basins. “Our group collects plants in large clumps with a substantial root ball and dirt,” she explained. “We break them into smaller, fist-sized pieces, or sprigs, with soil knives.” The sprigs are plunged into the soil under the water as one volunteer uses a wedge-shaped tool called a “dibble” to make a hole while a second person puts the sprig in. Marissa Sipocz, in foreground, planting a wetland with volunteer Jim Branch, right, and Mary Edwards. Sipocz and Edwards are both with Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service and Texas Sea Grant. (Photo courtesy of Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service). “It’s important to keep the dibble in place until the planter finds it because you can’t see through muddy water to plant. Once the planter has the sprig in the hole, the digger slowly removes the dibble and can move to another site. Repeat that 55,000 times and voila, the wetland is restored,” Sipocz quipped. “We also collect specific wetland seed like hibiscus or juncus, clean them and then mix with clay, compost and water to make a ‘ball’ having the consistency of a child’s molding clay. The seed balls then are tossed out in the margins of the wetlands.” In all, more than 7,500 hours were volunteered along with some 3,000 hours given by students to plant about 123,000 native wetland plants. The project team has conducted numerous field days on the site to demonstrate the process to others. Though it took 10 years to develop and perfect the process, Sipocz said, a wetland could probably be restored in half that time depending on weather and funding. Sipocz says the fourth and final phase is set to begin restoration in 2014 and plans to have wetland plants growing on an additional 50 plus acres by 2016. The upcoming Phase 4 restoration is funded through EPA, Texas State Soil and Water Conservation board and the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality/Galveston Bay Estuary Program. -30- Article by Kathleen Phillips [email protected] View all articles by Kathleen Phillips → Copyright 2017 The Gilmer Mirror. All rights reserved.

农业

2017-09/1437/en_head.json.gz/17544

Advanced Search Close See more news releases in Food & Beverages Agriculture Leading the way for sustainable dairy farming The proAction Initiative will demonstrate sustainable dairy farming, a commitment to continuous improvement and delivers the Growing Forward 2 objective of creating assurance programs. CARDINAL, ON, March 21, 2014 /CNW/ - Dairy Farmers of Canada (DFC) is pleased with the announcement of the federal government funding for dairy traceability and proAction Initiative today. This investment will help develop the dairy programs that confirm farmers' commitment to continuous improvement. In the last year, DFC and its members have developed a strategic road map to show their commitment a strong and sustainable future for Canadian dairy farmers. This strategy, known as proAction, will be carried out by farmers for farmers, with discussions with stakeholders and the food value chain. "Dairy farmers are already responsible food producers, but this commitment is not always recognized," said David Wiens, DFC Vice-President. "Canadians want safe, nutritious food that are produced responsibly and farmers are investing significant sums of money on products and services that improve the care and health of animals, and ultimately improve the quality of food." In recent years, $28 million was spent on time-temperature recorders, which help ensure milk is kept cold and water used to wash milking equipment is hot, with huge benefit to safeguarding food safety and quality. Additionally, farmers have spent over $50 million a year on products like mattresses and brushes that improve the comfort of cows in barns; and services, such as herd improvement and classification programs. There are many ways farmers invest to also improve their environmental footprint. An estimated 70 per cent of dairy farmers in Canada already have an environmental farm plan and have made improvements that benefit both the farm and the environment. The Life Cycle Analysis (LCA), which is a method to measure the environmental footprint of a product, shows Canadian milk to be quite competitive when it comes to carbon and water footprints compared to other countries' dairy industries. Moreover, DFC was the first dairy farm group in the world to include a "social" measurement to its LCA. The dairy LCA is a snapshot in time that helps identify opportunities to enhance sustainable practices. In February, dairy farmer leaders agreed to proceed with a significant investment in the next 10 years to bring the proAction Initiative to fruition. Conservatively estimated to be around $160 million when counting resources and time, the investment by farmers demonstrates the commitment to continuous improvement of sustainability and quality on Canadian dairy farms. You can read more about proAction at dairyfarmers.ca. SOURCE: Dairy Farmers of Canada (Corporate) For further information: Thérèse Beaulieu, Assistant Director, Strategic Communications, 613-236-9997 x 2751,C : 613-371-5023 www.dairyfarmers.ca Dairy Farmers of Canada (Corporate) /R E P E A T -- Media Alert - Dairy Farmers of Canada to unveil its new organizational logo/ Media Alert - Dairy Farmers of Canada to unveil its new organizational logo

农业

2017-09/1437/en_head.json.gz/18376

Minnesota Cancels Poultry Exhibitions Through End Of 2015 # 10,056 Although we’ve seen other bird-flu stricken states take short-term action to prevent the sale, trade, and exhibition of live poultry (see North Dakota BAH Limits Poultry Movements), a longer term concern has been what to do about the myriad of state and county fairs that run throughout the summer and fall. Minnesota, which holds one of the largest state fairs in the nation, becomes the first state to extend their moratoriums on the exhibition of poultry through the summer fair season. Minnesota’s county fair schedule kicks off in mid-July and runs through mid-September. The State Fair, held in St. Paul, starts on August 27th and runs through September 7th. Agricultural exhibits are always a huge draw, and 4-H members, and many others spend countless hours each year preparing for and anticipating these events. Today’s Minnesota Fair Website has the following announcement posted, which precludes the showing of poultry at any public venue through the end of 2015. Minnesota State Fair Cancels 2015 Open Class and 4-H Poultry Shows The Minnesota State Fair has canceled its poultry shows for the 2015 Great Minnesota Get-Together. The cancellations are in response to the directive issued by the Minnesota Board of Animal Health. For the 2015 State Fair, the Poultry Barn will feature interactive displays and presentations about Minnesota’s poultry industry and its huge contribution to the state’s economy. Throughout its 160-year history, State Fair livestock shows have been modified, restricted, and even canceled for animal health reasons. The most recent occurrence was in April of 2014 when no regional horses were displayed during the Minnesota Horse Expo due to an equine virus. The State Fair works closely on animal health issues with a variety of agencies and veterinary experts. For decades, these groups have included the Board of Animal Health, the Minnesota Department of Health, the Centers for Disease Control, The University of Minnesota College of Veterinary Medicine, Minnesota 4-H and FFA and a variety of animal producers associations. Further information on the H5N2 highly-pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) is available at the Minnesota Board of Animal Health’s website: www.bah.state.mn.us. The full directive, released about an hour ago on the Minnesota Department of Public Safety’s website reads: NEWS RELEASE FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE May 15, 2015 Exhibitions of Birds Cancelled for 2015 Season Fairs, swap meets, exotic sales and petting zoos will not include birds ​ ST. PAUL — The Minnesota Board of Animal Health today announced its directive to cancel all bird exhibitions at county fairs, the State Fair, and other gatherings of birds. The Board’s directive is effective through the end of 2015 and also prohibits birds from being included in swap meets, exotic sales, and petting zoos. Since March 5, 2015, nearly 90 Minnesota farms have been impacted by H5N2 highly-pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI). The purpose of the Board’s directive is to minimize the risk of potential further spread of the virus. The risk to the public related to H5N2 HPAI is very low and there is no food safety concern. “Taking this step makes sense,” said Dr. Beth Thompson, assistant director of the Minnesota Board of Animal Health. “We need to do everything possible to get rid of this virus and preventing the commingling of birds from different farms is one way to do that.” Animal health officials met with leadership of the Minnesota State Fair and University of Minnesota Extension earlier this week to discuss the situation. “This is a critical time for Minnesota’s poultry industry, and we’ll do whatever it takes to help,” said State Fair General Manager Jerry Hammer. “The Board of Animal Health has absolutely made the right decision. We’ll use this as an opportunity to further educate people about the challenges of food production.” “University of Minnesota Extension 4-H's priority is youth and their learning experiences," said Brad Rugg, Extension 4-H and State Fair and Animal Science program director. "Some 4-H'ers will be disappointed that they won't be able to show their poultry projects at fairs this summer, but we're exploring alternate learning opportunities to offer them at fairs and will share more details as plans develop. Part of our job developing the next generation of agriculture leaders includes teaching youth best practices to ensure the health and safety of the animals they raise, and this is that learning being put into action in the real world." Minnesota’s poultry industry has experienced the largest impact as a result of HPAI. Steve Olson, executive director of the Minnesota Turkey Growers Association and Chicken and Egg Association of Minnesota said, "We know the decision to halt poultry exhibitions at our county fairs and the Minnesota State Fair was not an easy one to make. This certainly affects the 4-H kids who plan for their projects all year long, and also means fewer opportunities for fairgoers across the state to learn about raising poultry. However, this is the right decision because what's most important at this point is protecting the health and well-being of the birds that are being raised by 4-H’ers, FFA members, and Minnesota’s poultry farmers." Representatives from the Minnesota Board of Animal Health, Minnesota State Fair, Minnesota 4-H and Minnesota Turkey Growers Association will provide statements and answer questions pertaining to the 2015 bird exhibition decision. It seems likely that we’ll see other bird-flu affected states follow suit in the coming days, since even if the virus subsides over the summer, it is expected to flourish once again in the fall. Posted by

农业

2017-09/1437/en_head.json.gz/19030

HomeNewsEU Commission Backs Plan to Approve GM Corn EU Commission Backs Plan to Approve GM Corn The European Union moved closer to approving the cultivation of DuPont-Pioneer Maize 1507, despite consumer apprehension about genetically modified food. By RAF CASERT, Associated Press BRUSSELS (AP) — The European Union moved closer to approving the cultivation of a second genetically modified corn on the continent despite years of objections by environmental groups and widespread apprehension about GMO food among European consumers. Wednesday's approval by the EU Commission, the bloc's executive arm, now sends the plan to approve DuPont-Pioneer Maize 1507 to the EU's 28 member nations for consideration — and could lead to a decision on the issue within months. EU member states have sharply diverging views on the cultivation of Genetically Modified Organisms — commonly known as GMOs —and decisions have been often been deadlocked for years. A continued stalemate over the next few months would throw the issue back to the Commission, which could then make the decision itself. Since DuPont Pioneer had first applied for approval to commercialize the cultivation in Europe 12 years ago, it welcomed the latest step. "1507 maize meets all EU regulatory requirements and should be approved for cultivation without further delay," the company said in a statement. Environmental groups sharply criticized the EU Commission for opening the door to further GMO cultivation in Europe. "Instead of banning this toxic maize (corn) and protecting both consumers and the environment, the European Commission has buckled once again to industry pressure," said Mute Schimpf of Friends of the Earth Europe. It said the GMO corn was highly toxic and would harm the delicate habitat of butterflies and moths. DuPont Pioneer, however, insists that its 1507 corn is grown throughout the world and had received no less that 7 positive safety reports from the EU. The EU has strict guidelines on authorizing and informing consumers about foods containing GMOs — a policy that has caused problems for producers of genetically modified seeds such as the U.S.-based Monsanto Co., which are used to less stringent rules around the world. At the moment, Monsanto's MON 810 corn is the only GMO farm product cultivated in the EU, and even then, it only represents 1.35 percent of the EU's corn cultivation. That contrasts sharply with the widespread use of GMOs in North and South America. The European Commission also proposed to change the way that GMOs could be introduced in Europe, allowing individual member states to reject their cultivation based on a series of social or political grounds even if it has been approved throughout the EU on a scientific basis. Fallout From GMO Wheat Finding 5/30/2013 6:18:00 AM EU Says Monsanto Plans to Withdraw Applications for GM Crops 7/18/2013 8:47:00 AM Comments

农业

2017-09/1437/en_head.json.gz/19097

Retailing & Restaurants Farmers seek new paths to profitability Little profit left in crowded field of farmers markets Aug 29, 2010, 9:00pm PDT Updated Aug 26, 2010, 10:24am PDT Retailing & Restaurants Mark Anderson The crowds came out Saturday for the farmers’ market at Country Club Plaza in… more While the general economy has been stagnant for a couple of years, the number of farmers’ markets rose at a steady pace right through the boom times and the recession. That growth is causing some pains for farmers, who don’t sell as much as they used to when the farmers’ markets were fewer and farther between. As earlier farmers made strong profits from farmers’ markets, more growers caught on to the idea, which is now squeezing profitability. That, in turn, is pushing farmers to even more creative avenues such as direct delivery, roadside stands and direct restaurant supply. The crowds came out Saturday for the farmers’ market at Country Club Plaza in… more The U.S. Department of Agriculture this month said it has 6,132 farmers’ markets in its directory, up 16 percent from last year. In fact, the number of markets has doubled in the past decade. California leads the nation with the most farmers’ markets, at 580 in 2010. Sacramento-area farms sell directly to consumers at nearly double the rate of farms nationally, according to a report by Shermain Hardesty, a Cooperative Extension economist in the University of California Davis Department of Agricultural and Resources Economics. Her research found that 14 percent of local farmers sell directly with roadside stands, farmers’ markets or custom-delivered produce boxes, called community supported agriculture, or CSA. That compares to about 9 percent of farms nationwide. The increase in farmers’ markets is creating an environment where farmers individually are making less money by selling their produce at the markets, “and that is an issue,” Hardesty said. There are fixed costs associated with showing up at a farmers’ market and a lot of time and effort involved. There’s the commute, setting up the stand, staffing it, breaking it down and driving costs. <img src="https://media.bizj.us/view/img/8822142/matsui-doris*100xx2832-3776-0-0.jpg"alt="Doris Matsui"> Doris Matsui California's 6th Congressional District <img src="https://media.bizj.us/view/img/10310781/yuri-rodrigez-6043824*100xx2899-3865-0-0.jpg"alt="Yuri Rodriguez"> Yuri Rodriguez Otto Construction <img src="https://media.bizj.us/view/img/10346019/elliott-stevens-6056603*100xx2239-2985-0-0.jpg"alt="Elliott Stevens"> Elliott Stevens Mark III Construction See More People on the Move That said, the farmers’ market is where the farmer makes contact with the customer. If a farmer wants to start growing a CSA direct-selling clientele, farmers markets are the place to do that. While the number of markets has been growing, the growth might be at its limit locally, said Dan Best, coordinator of the Certified California Grown Farmers Market, which handles 12 markets in Sacramento County. “For one thing, what it comes down to is that the farmer has to be able to make some money,” Best said. There also aren’t too many more places where there are the facilities and enough traffic to warrant setting up more farmers markets, Best said. “We are going to need a lot of parking, not just for customers, but for the farmers and their trucks, and also a large area for the market itself that allows for people to stroll around.” Many new shopping centers are so landscaped they don’t work as a venue for a new market. “Farmers markets are springing up everywhere, and that is good. And not to be negative about it, but there are so many of them now that some of them don’t pay to go to,” said Tim Mueller, farmer and owner of Riverdog Farm in Guinda, which has been in business for 20 years. It delivers CSA boxes and goes to farmers markets in the Sacramento Valley and the Bay Area. The benefit of a farmers’ market or direct selling is that the farmer gets paid the retail value of his or her produce. If the farmer sells wholesale, the price is just a tiny fraction of that. The benefit of selling wholesale is volume — it doesn’t require the time, distribution and delivery of retail. Riverdog has an 800-member CSA operation, in addition to selling its produce wholesale. “Having all three is a great way to balance all of it out. It is nice to have three legs to support the farm. If the wholesale market is swamped and you can’t get a price, you can put that in the boxes,” Mueller said. The CSA boxes represent the highest profit for the farm operation because they are pre-ordered, but they also come with a tremendous investment in time to maintain customer service. With a lot of farmers jumping on the farmers’ market bandwagon, it also brings out growers who haven’t learned how to make it work for the long term, Mueller said. “There are some people who are good farmers, but they aren’t very good at the business side,” he said. A farmer might feel great about leaving a market with $500 in cash, but in the long run that doesn’t pay for the work that went into growing the crop and attending the market. “By the time you account for picking for the market, then working the market, and driving to Berkeley and back in a refrigerated box truck from Yolo County, it is a 12-hour day,” Mueller said. “I guess that is just farmers. Farmers are famous for self-exploitation. Every year you bet the farm in the spring in the hope that you will be able to bring in crops.” To get into a space in a farmers’ market these days you have to be part of it from when it is first organized, said Thaddeus Barsotti, farmer for Capay Inc., which goes to 15 farmers markets and also does a huge business in CSA box delivery, with more than 13,000 delivery customers. “Farmers’ markets are without a doubt the most political things I have ever been associated with in my entire life,” he said. It is nearly impossible to get a spot for a stand in a market that has been around for any length of time, and in many cases, what the farmer can sell is constrained by the market. “At some of them, if you’re the greens and tomato guys, they won’t let you add eggs if there is another person there who is selling eggs,” Barsotti said. “It seems to me like it is better if there is more variety and choice, but that’s not the way a lot of these operate.” [email protected] | 916-558-7874 Elliott Stevens Mark III Construction See More People on the Move Suggested Reading March 21, 2017, 8:30am Connectionopolis: Press Play for Business You've got to see this!...

农业

2017-09/1437/en_head.json.gz/19481

Encyclopedia > Plants and Animals > Plants > Plants milkweed milkweed, common name for members of the Asclepiadaceae, a family of mostly perennial herbs and shrubs characterized by milky sap, a tuft of silky hairs attached to the seed (for wind distribution), and (usually) a climbing habit. Forms of this primarily tropical family are especially abundant in South America and in Africa, where many are succulents. Only a few genera are temperate; those species native to the United States are mostly of the genus Asclepias, the milkweeds, or silkweeds. The common milkweed, a plentiful roadside and field plant of the eastern and central states, is A. syriaca. A number of western species are poisonous to livestock, especially sheep. The milkweeds have been utilized as food (particularly the young shoots and buds), masticatory, medicament, and fiber. Some species yield an excellent bast fiber, like flax, but are difficult to cultivate and refine. The readily obtainable seed hairs from wild plants were sometimes used as a rather inferior substitute for kapok. Several species have been examined as potential sources of natural rubber; Palay rubber comes from a species of Crypostegia native to Madagascar. Among the milkweeds grown as ornamentals, the showy-blossomed butterfly weed or pleurisy root ( A. tuberosa ), native to the United States, was eaten by the Native Americans for lung and throat ailments. Hoya is an Old World genus that includes the wax plant ( H. carnosa ), a tropical climbing shrub cultivated as a pot plant for its fleshy leaves and fragrant waxy flowers. The milkweed family is classified in the division Magnoliophyta, class Magnoliopsida, order Gentianales. The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, 6th ed. Copyright © 2012, Columbia University Press. All rights reserved.See more Encyclopedia articles on: Plants

农业

2017-09/1437/en_head.json.gz/20576

June 21/11 12:57 pm - Meet Your Farmer Bike Tours in Atlantic Provinces!Posted by Editoress on 06/21/11 The Atlantic Canadian Organic Regional Network (ACORN ) is pleased to receive a $10,000 prize from Stonyfield’s Profit for the Planet Community Challenge fund.Each year, Stonyfield donates 10% of its profits to community green initiatives that aim to help restore and protect the planet. Out of the more than eighty applications from across the country, ACORN’s Meet Your Farmer Bike Tours topped the list as 2011’s winner of the largest financial gift offered by Profit for the Planet, proving the initiative to be worthy of much excitement.ACORN , a non-profit organization that aims to promote organic agriculture and education in the Maritime Provinces, will use the $10,000 award to develop the first ever pedal-powered tours of organic farms in the Maritimes.“We’re very excited about this project, especially as it benefits both the farming community and general public. The tours will be a fun way to get the whole family outside and to learn more about where food comes from and what organic really means,” says ACORN Executive Director, Beth McMahon.Each of the three tours–one for each Maritime Province–will showcase a diversity of organic farms, including those with livestock, gardening and processing facilities. Participants will follow beautiful scenic routes in regions where clusters of organic farms are within a short distance of each other. The rural routes will remain accessible and safe for families with children, and the one-day duration will make it feasible for everyone to participate.The Meet Your Farmer tours will also include delicious food samplings, guided tours, and lots of fresh air. Each of the tours will be video-documented for a short film to be presented at the upcoming 12th annual ACORN conference in Halifax this November.“Overall, our goal is to build understanding and lasting relationships between consumers and their farmers, and to further support environmental stewardship and protection–why drive to a farm, when you can bike there?” said McMahon.These agriculture-inspired bike tours will be the first of its kind in Atlantic Canada, and ACORN believes the idea could inspire similar type events across Canada in years to come.Sunday, August 7 in Summerville, NSSunday, August 14 in Bouctouche, NBTBA–PEI Return to Canadian Cyclist homepage | Back to Top

农业

2017-09/1437/en_head.json.gz/20950

Bats Pollinating Bats http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/06/20/fact-sheet-economic-challenge-posed-declining-pollinator-populations Fact Sheet: The Economic Challenge Posed by Declining Pollinator Populations Pollinators contribute substantially to the economy of the United States and are vital to keeping fruits, nuts, and vegetables in our diets. Over the past few decades, there has been a significant loss of pollinators—including honey bees, native bees, birds, bats, and butterflies—from the environment. The problem is serious and poses a significant challenge that needs to be addressed to ensure the sustainability of our food production systems, avoid additional economic impacts on the agricultural sector, and protect the health of the environment. Economic Importance of Pollinators: Insect pollination is integral to food security in the United States. Honey bees enable the production of at least 90 commercially grown crops in North America. Globally, 87 of the leading 115 food crops evaluated are dependent on animal pollinators, contributing 35% of global food production. Pollinators contribute more than 24 billion dollars to the United States economy, of which honey bees account for more than 15 billion dollars through their vital role in keeping fruits, nuts, and vegetables in our diets. Native wild pollinators, such as bumble bees and alfalfa leafcutter bees, also contribute substantially to the domestic economy. In 2009, the crop benefits from native insect pollination in the United States were valued at more than 9 billion dollars. The Challenge of Pollinator Declines: The number of managed honey bee colonies in the United States has declined steadily over the past 60 years, from 6 million colonies (beehives) in 1947 to 4 million in 1970, 3 million in 1990, and just 2.5 million today. Given the heavy dependence of certain crops on commercial pollination, reduced honey bee populations pose a real threat to domestic agriculture. Some crops, such as almonds, are almost exclusively pollinated by honey bees, and many crops rely on honey bees for more than 90% of their pollination. California’s almond industry alone requires the pollination services of approximately 1.4 million beehives annually—60% of all U.S. beehives—yielding 80% of the worldwide almond production worth 4.8 billion dollars each year. Since 2006, commercial beekeepers in the United States have seen honey bee colony loss rates increase to an average of 30% each winter, compared to historical loss rates of 10 to 15%. In 2013–14, the overwintering loss rate was 23.2%, down from 30.5% the previous year but still greater than historical averages and the self-reported acceptable winter mortality rate. The recent increased loss of honey bee colonies is thought to be caused by a combination of stressors, including loss of natural forage and inadequate diets, mite infestations and diseases, loss of genetic diversity, and exposure to certain pesticides. Contributing to these high loss rates is a phenomenon called colony collapse disorder (CCD), in which there is a rapid, unexpected, and catastrophic loss of bees in a hive. Beekeepers in the United States have collectively lost an estimated 10 million beehives at an approximate current value of $200 each. These high colony loss rates require beekeepers to rapidly, and at substantial expense, rebuild their colonies, placing commercial beekeeping in jeopardy as a viable industry and threatening the crops dependent on honey bee pollination. The loss rates have driven up the cost of commercial pollination: for instance, the cost of renting honey bee hives for almond pollination rose from about $50 in 2003 to $150-$175 per hive in 2009. Some of the viral agents that are impacting honey bee colonies are also now reported to be adversely affecting native pollinators, such as bumble bees, and the pollination services they provide. Population declines have also been observed for other contributing pollinator species, such as Monarch butterflies, which migrate from Mexico across the United States to Canada each year, returning to overwinter in the same few forests in Mexico. The Monarch butterfly migration, an iconic natural phenomenon that has an estimated economic value in the billions of dollars, sank to the lowest recorded levels this winter, with an imminent risk of failure. Migratory Pollinators Program For over a decade, biologists have been concerned about apparent declines in pollinators, especially those that migrateacross landscapes and between regions. While protection of plant-pollinator interactions is an emerging national priority, ecological conditions of migratory corridors have received far less attention. These migratory corridors, or “nectar corridors,” consist of a series of stepping stones, or patches of flowering plants, that provide nectar for refueling during migration along 2000-6000 km flyways. These flyway habitats are threatened by destruction, degradation, and fragmentation due to land conversion, herbicides, pesticides, and exotic plant invasion. The nectar corridor that extends from southern Mexico north to the Intermountain West of the U.S. and Canada is of particular concern. Lesser long-nosed bats (Leptonycteris curasoae), rufous hummingbirds (Selasphorus rufus), western white-winged doves (Zenaida asiatica mearnsii), and monarch butterflies (Danaus plexippus), and other migratory pollinators move seasonally along this corridor traveling between the tropics and their northern breeding/birthing grounds. These types of migrations have been termed“endangered natural phenomena.” We examined the migratory routes of these four species, and we studied their biology and the floral resources upon which they depend during migration. Our field research covered approximately 1660 km (straight-line measurement) from Jalisco (south-central Mexico) to central Arizona. We also provided community outreach and education in Arizona and Mexico to develop local public acceptance of conservation needs and to involve local communities in conservation efforts and in the collection of scientific data. The North American subspecies of lesser long-nosed bat (Leptonycteris curasoae yerbabuenae) includes a population of migrators that follow two corridors in their northward spring migration (Coastal Lowland Route and Inland Montane Route; see Map 7). At least one corridor is utilized in the southward fall migration (Inland Agave Corridor), however it has not been confirmed that all bats using the Spring Coastal Lowland Route follow this Inland Agave Corridor for the return south in the fall. Pollinator mutualismbetween these bats and their food plants appears to vary latitudinally. From roost sites, these bats travel great distances at night to find large enough patches of nectar producing plants to sustain themselves and their young, and to prepare for the next leg of their journey. Thus, protection of foraging areas near roosts is critical. Read more: http://www.desertmuseum.org/pollination/ Leave a Reply Cancel reply Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *Comment Name * Email * Website Pages Activism

农业

2017-09/1437/en_head.json.gz/21236

Drought task force to maximize water deliveries State officials say a drought task force set up by California Gov. Jerry Brown will try to maximize water deliveries to farmers, particularly those in the western San Joaquin Valley. Farmers expect little or no state or federal water allocations because of the worsening drought. Tim HeardenCapital Press Published on December 23, 2013 2:36PM Tim Hearden/Capital Press California Gov. Jerry Brown (right) talks with an attendee of a breakfast in Colusa, Calif., earlier this year. Brown has asked top state officials to set up a task force to deal with the state's worsening drought. Buy this photo Capital PressSACRAMENTO — State officials say a drought task force set up by Gov. Jerry Brown will focus on maximizing the efficiency of water deliveries to farmers, particularly those in the western San Joaquin Valley.The governor on Dec. 17 asked California Department of Food and Agriculture Secretary Karen Ross and others to form the task force to determine the state’s preparedness for a worsening drought that already has farmers anticipating few if any state or federal water allocations next spring.“We must do everything we can to address the impacts of water shortages and move water from where it is available to where it is needed,” Brown said in a letter to top officials.The state’s actions could include establishing a clearinghouse of water storage-related information, assessing the regions most affected by dry conditions and the impacts of drought on the regions’ economy, the governor stated.The task force could help determine potential water transfers, infrastructure improvements, water trucking and other actions to alleviate the water shortages, Brown explained.The administration “recognizes the potential seriousness of the current water situation for agriculture and is committed to doing what it can,” CDFA spokesman Steve Lyle told the Capital Press in an email.Along with Ross, the task force will include State Water Resources Control Board Chairwoman Felicia Marcus, Department of Water Resources chairman Mark Cowin and Office of Emergency Services director Mark Ghilarducci. The group will meet weekly, and its work could lead to a formal statewide drought declaration.The task force’s formation comes as the Department of Water Resources has set up its own drought management team to help farmers and others make it through what is expected to be a dry 2014. Among the DWR’s principal concerns is the plight of farmers – especially those in the western San Joaquin Valley – who must operate with markedly less water than needed for crops, the agency said in a news release.Jeanine Jones, the DWR’s interstate resources manager, said the department can’t make it rain or change biological opinions that have led to limitations on pumping from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta.However, the state and federal water projects “are working very hard with fishery agencies to improve operations and fine-tun as much as possible … to move water when it’s available,” Jones said.When it does rain, water agencies might be able to use runoff water in streams below dams to meet needs south of the Delta, she said. The state has been working with sellers and buyers on water transfers as part of an executive order issued by Brown this spring, Jones said.Officials from the DWR will make a presentation on the drought to the California Board of Food and Agriculture on Jan. 7. The 10 a.m. meeting will be held in the main auditorium at 1220 N St., Sacramento.OnlineCalifornia Board of Food and Agriculture: http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/state_board/California Department of Water Resources: http://www.water.ca.gov

农业

2017-09/1437/en_head.json.gz/21368

Farm bill would save less than previously thought Cows pause from grazing in a farm pasture in Towamencin Township. Friday, February 22, 2013. photo by Geoff Patton By MARY CLARE JALONICK, Associated Press WASHINGTON (AP) — Farm bills passed by the Senate and a House committee last year would save far less money than previously thought, according to a new estimate released Friday. A report from the Congressional Budget Office says a Senate-passed farm bill would save $1.3 billion annually, as opposed to the $2.3 billion per year in savings estimated last year. A bill passed by the House Agriculture Committee would save $2.7 billion a year instead of $3.5 billion. While the amounts may seem small in comparison to the bills’ $100 billion-a-year cost, the estimates are another roadblock for the embattled legislation and the farm-state lawmakers who have fruitlessly tried to convince House leadership to move forward on it. One of the main arguments that House Agriculture Committee Chairman Frank Lucas, R-Okla., and Senate Agriculture Committee Chair Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich., made in favor of passage is that the bill would save taxpayers money over time. The farm bill sets policy for farm subsidies, programs to protect environmentally-sensitive land, rural development and food stamps. Food stamps, now called the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, make up roughly 80 percent of the legislation’s cost. The normally reliable farm-state coalition in Congress fell apart in 2012 as agricultural issues fell by the wayside in an election year. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack blamed the lack of a farm bill on rural America’s declining population and lost clout. A booming agricultural economy also played a part as farmers weren’t clamoring for a new bill or changing farm policy. The farm bills passed by the Senate in June and by the House Agriculture Committee in July died at the end of last year’s congressional session after Republican House leadership said they did not have the votes to pass it. The most recent farm law, passed in 2008, expired in September and was extended until September 2013 as part of the New Year’s agreement on the so-called fiscal cliff. Farm-state leaders will have to write a new bill this year but have not yet started that process or said how they plan to go about it. President Barack Obama has expressed general support for a new farm bill but it wasn’t among his priorities in the State of the Union address. The budget office said it lowered the estimates because savings in cuts to the food stamp program were lower than previously thought. The estimates also changed because of fluctuating crop prices. The report did not alter estimates for savings generated from eliminating a controversial crop subsidy called direct payments. The subsidies, which are paid to landholders whether they farm or not, cost $5 billion a year. Those subsidies would have been eliminated in both bills, with some of the savings directed toward new subsidy programs. Senate Democrats have also proposed using that savings to avert across-the-board government cuts that kicked in Friday. A spokesman for the Senate Agriculture Committee said it is not unusual for the Congressional Budget Office to adjust its calculations and that the revised estimates wouldn’t derail efforts to pass a farm bill. “The committee will be able to achieve the savings needed once it passes the new version of the farm bill,” said Ben Becker, a spokesman for Stabenow.

农业

2017-09/1437/en_head.json.gz/23208

February 2012 Archive for Heritage Iron By: Heritage Iron Heritage Iron Magazine was founded in 2008 in order to fill a need for those interested in muscle tractors. Heritage Iron features all brands, all makes, and all models of muscle tractors from the 1960’s to mid 1980’s including the equipment used by the tractors. Each issue highlights a featured tractor and presents a detailed account of the tractor, its attributes, its history, and its owner. Other regular features in the magazine are machinery milestones, letters to the editor, equipment and company history, classified ads, auction results, an editor’s page, farm toys, literature and memorabilia. The Kinze 5020 Re-Power During the 1960’s and 70’s, the race was on for “more power”. Innovative farmers and even some of the barnyard mechanics tinkered with various engines to be retrofitted into farm tractors. Whether it was more power, more efficiency, or just cheaper horsepower, everyone had an idea. In Ladora, Iowa, a 25-year old innovator by the name of Jon Kinzenbaw had his one ideas to incorporate more power into a model that was lacking. Jon had developed a good reputation for his ability to fix or build anything. He had already built his first unloading auger grain wagon, his first payloader and first high-flotation chemical applicator. His fabrication skills knew no limits and Jon would tackle any project that came through the door. When Deere finally went from two cylinders to six, they took a giant leap. The 5010 was a monster of a tractor when compared to the rest of the lineup and the horsepower to pull the 12,000 pound hunk of iron proved to be inadequate. For this reason, many of the 5010/5020 models were re-powered and this model is one of the more popular of the Kinze Conversions. The JD 5010 came out in 1963 and was followed by the 5020 in 1965. The two shared the same basic engine but the 5020 had been cranked up through the pump to give it an additional fifteen horses. Even at 141 PTO horsepower, the 531 CID Deere engine needed more. For many power hungry farmers, they turned to M&W Gear to add a turbo. However, the 531 engine wasn’t designed to be a turbocharged engine and they didn’t last. The most obvious choice was to re-power it. In 1969, a farmer from Reinbeck, Iowa by the name of David Bystriki, approached Jon to inquire about re-powering his 5020. Still operating out of his first welding shop, Jon took on the challenge. And so the 5020 Kinze Re-Power was born. Jon chose the 8V-71 Detroit to be used in his conversions for various reasons. In the 1960’s the 71 series Detroits were very popular and reliable. They were widely used in the trucking industry making them plentiful in large quantities. The exhaust temperature on the 531 was 1200-1300 degrees while the Detroit was less than 700 degrees, which resulted in a greater life expectancy. And probably the most logical reason it was used was because it fit inside the engine cavity of the tractor and overall dimensions after installation were identical to the original engine. It provided compact horsepower with minimal modification. The stock 5020 was rated at 141 hp. Dynos weren’t readily available at every shop during this time period but Kinze estimates the 8V-71 was probably pushing out 300 PTO horsepower, double that of the stock tractor. Thanks to a beefy rear end, the back side of the 5010/20 had no problem delivering the power to the ground. A minor modification was done to one snap ring in the transmission but that was all that was needed. Kinze quit offering the conversions in 1976 because the 6030 had solved most of the problems that occurred with the 5020. Four-wheel drive tractors were coming on the scene by then and the 7520 was satisfying the needs of the big farmers. Plus, by that time, Kinze was focusing on the planter and grain cart business. After Kinze Manufacturing moved to their current location in Williamsburg, they again began re-powering tractors but only 4-wheel drives, such as the 8630s and 8640s. So how much of a difference did the Kinze conversion make in the field? The stock 5020 pulled a 7-bottom plow in third gear. The re-powered 5020 still pulled a 7-bottom plow, but now you could pull it in fifth gear. Yes, it probably used more fuel but you got a lot more work done in a lot less time and time is money. Kinze conversions are always a popular attraction at shows and especially going through the field. You don’t even have to look to know what is headed your direction, just get out of the way. About the Author: Sherry Schaefer is a Greenville, Illinois (Bond County) native who grew up around tractors and farm equipment. Her grandfather, Ervin Schaefer, was an Oliver tractor dealer in both Granite City and Hamel, Illinois from 1936 -1965. Her father, Oliver “Ollie” Schaefer, is a used Oliver tractor and equipment dealer in Greenville, Illinois. The Schaefer family also owned and operated a national tractor pulling sled service for more than twenty-five years beginning in the late 1960s. Schaefer has authored three books, Farm Tractor Collectibles, (MBI Publishing, in 1998), Oliver Tractors, (MBI Publishing, in 2001) and Classic Oliver Tractors: History, Models, Variations & Specifications 1855-1976, (Voyageur Press, 2009).Heritage Iron Magazine was founded in 2008 in order to fill a need for those interested in muscle tractors. Heritage Iron features all brands, all makes, and all models of muscle tractors from the 1960’s to mid 1980’s including the equipment used by the tractors. Learn more at www.HeritageIron.com

农业

2017-09/1437/en_head.json.gz/23402

Cluster bean or commonly known as Guar (Cyamopsis tetragonoloba L.) is a drought-tolerant legume. It was traditionally cultivated for using as a vegetable and fodder. Commercial interest for Guar is fairly recent and its large-scale industrial production started from the 1950s. The origin of guar is very well known but historical evidence suggests that it must have been domesticated from African species of Cymopsis. Traditionally, guar seed has been cultivated in India and Pakistan. Commercial cultivation of guar seed is primarily triggered by the demand for guar gum production. Major world suppliers of guar gum are India, Pakistan and the United States, with smaller contribution from Australia and Africa. Economically Important Product: Guar is commercially cultivated for its seed which contains uniquely large endosperm. Guar gum is the main product of endosperm and contains galactomannan, which forms a viscous gel in cold water. Gum recovery is about 29% of seed weight. It is used in a number of industrial applications such as oil well drilling, paper, explosives, mining etc., Highly refined guar gum is used as a stiffener in foods like ice cream, a stabilizer for cheeses, instant puddings and whipped cream substitutes. Churi and Korma are bi-products contain 35% of protein and can be used as feed. Climate and Cultivation Guar is suitable for arid and semi-arid climates. Although guar is widely cultivated for vegetable purpose all over the country, its cultivation for seed purpose is restricted to a few northern states in kharif season. It is grown as a rainfed crop and is generally sown after the monsoon rainfall in the second half of July as it requires water before sowing. Guar tolerates high temperatures and dry conditions It responds to irrigation but can be grown without irrigation in areas with 20cm to 50cm of annual rainfall. Crop duration varies from 90 days to 120 days depending on the varieties. Seasons and crop calendar: Sowings are normally completed in July and plants reach flowering stage in August. However, long duration varieties take slightly longer period. Harvesting commences in the month of October in case of short duration varieties while it extends to November in case of indeterminate varieties. World production of guar seed has traditionally been confined to specific areas in India and Pakistan. Together they account for about 95% of total world production of guar seed as well as exports of guar gum. Apart from India and Pakistan, guar is also produced in smaller quantities in the U.S., Australia and African countries. Domestic Scenario India is the single largest producer of Guar Seed accounting for 80% of the total guar produced in the world followed by Pakistan and the U.S. Although production levels of guar have been increasing steadily, output remained highly volatile owing to the crop’s dependence on climate and rainfall conditions. Area under cultivation of guar seed has crossed 30 lakh hectares in the early 2000s and has remained in the range of 30-35 lakh hectares over a decade. State-Wise Production Rajasthan is the single largest state producer and has been the traditional home for guar production and trade. But the production has been highly erratic despite the relatively stable and substantial acreage under the crop due to highly fluctuating yields. Majority of the crop is grown under rainfed conditions and hence, the yields are heavily dependent on rainfall. Nevertheless, Rajasthan alone contribute for more than 70% of India’s total output and Gujarat, Haryana, Punjab and Uttar Pradesh contribute for the rest. However, production pattern among other states has been changing in the recent years with a steadily raising contribution from Haryana and Punjab. Further, guar in these two states is cultivated under irrigated conditions as a result the yields are stable and very high at about 1100-1300 kg per hectare against 300-500 kg per hectare in Rajasthan. Spot markets: Rajasthan: Jodhpur, Bikaner, Sriganga nagar Haryana: Hissar, Adampur, Bhattu, Sarsa Gujarat: Deesa, Radhanpur Futures markets Futures trading in guar seed and guar gum are offered on national multi commodity exchanges including MCX, NCDEX, NMCE and ACE. India is the single largest exporter of guar gum in the world. India exports nearly 80-90% of the domestically produced guar gum. On average guar gum exports from India stood at about 1 to 2 lakh tonnes in 2000s. However, there was a significant rise in exports during the past four years as they doubled from about 2.2 lakh tonnes in 2009-10 to 4.4 lakh tonnes in 2010-11 and subsequently to 7.1 lakh tonnes in 2011-12 though moderated to 4.1 lakh tonnes in 2012-13. Export destinations: US, China, Germany, Italy, Malaysia, Russia, Turkey, Indonesia and Egypt. Import sources: NA · Monsoons and rainfall: Guar seed is grown in a rainfed condition and hence fluctuations in rainfall affect supply and thereby prices · Demand from both domestic and external sources impact prices. · Policies: Any change in government policiesrelated to production and trade

农业

2017-09/1437/en_head.json.gz/23414

Whippoorwill Hollow promotes local food Posted: December 24, 2010 3:00 p.m. Whippoorwill Hollow promotes local food Sabastian [email protected] Sabastian Wee/The Covington News Andy Byrd, owner of Whippoorwill Hollow Farm, purchased the farm in 2000. Andy Byrd’s enthusiasm for organic fruits and vegetables are undeniable. His family and friends praise his love of providing and promoting healthy food. His Whippoorwill Hollow Farm, 3905 Ga. Highway 138, is a testament to his passion. Byrd had grown up in a community grocery store owned by his parents. He became interested in agriculture through various trips with his father to the farmers market. Byrd sustained a broken neck in a diving accident in 1980, which left him permanently in a wheelchair. He opened a video store and a pizza store and joined the Walnut Grove City Council, where he remained for 15 years. Yet his interest in farming never went away. "I really wanted to start farming," said Byrd. "I had always enjoyed fresh food and I knew others would, too." Byrd and his wife, Hilda, bought Whippoorwill Hollow Farm in 2000. It is certified organic and employs two full-time (his brother-in-law and best friend), a few part-time employees and several volunteers. When Hilda passed a year ago, Byrd continued with the farm. "She loved everything that was grown out here," said Byrd. "She loved her flowers and meeting people. She always had a smile on her face." In winter, the farm produces vegetables including bok choy, lettuces, arugula, kale, carrots and beets. There’s livestock at Whipporwill, too, including horses, goats and chickens. While the farm sells fresh eggs cultivated from its free-range chickens, the livestock is there primarily to serve as a petting zoo for children who visit the farm. "I want to be able to educate young children on where their food comes from," explained Byrd. "That’s how we can pass down the education of how fruits and vegetables can be affordable and available to the community." The farm operates throughout the year, facing different challenges along the way. The main obstacle the farm has to deal with in winter is extreme cold. The farm has already experienced some crop damage from cold this year. "When it gets to be below 20 degrees, things just don’t grow as fast," said Byrd. "We try to cross-cover to keep them warm, but that only can do so much." "It’s something new everyday," added Jerry Pilgrim, fellow employee and old friend of Byrd’s. "One day we would have to cover the crop and the next we would have to uncover it." The staff built a 30-by-100-foot hoop house, essentially a greenhouse, that keeps the cold out at night and stores warmth from the sun during the day. Whippoorwill Hollow Farm works with Community Supported Agriculture, an organization that helps members receive fresh and organic produce. The farm sells a percentage of their produce that is picked up once a week by customers. "When you go to a grocery store, the vegetables and fruits are already over a week old," said Byrd. "This gives people a chance to get produce that’s fresh out of the ground." The farm also sells its produce in various farmers markets in Metro Atlanta, like Decatur Square and Morningside Farmer’s Market. Its Whippoorwill peas are shipped across the country. Whippoorwill has played host to several festivities in past years, including the annual Eastern Native American "We are All Related" Charity Pow Wow. Proceeds from the event were donated to assist Native Americans with diabetes. Five years ago, Andy and Hilda began hosting the annual Field of Greens festival in an effort to promote community awareness regarding fresh, organic fruits and vegetables. The festival featured 31 Atlanta chefs serving small plates of gourmet organic meals. The event acted as a farm relief fundraiser as well, with proceeds going to aid farmers during a poor economic climate. Field of Greens proved to be success for the farm, and Byrd looks forward to more events like it. Byrd continues to grow the Whippoorwill farm and plans to erect more hoop houses in the upcoming year, He hopes to carry on attracting and teaching people about organic products. "(Andy) just wants to farm fresh food and help people eat better," said Pilgrim. "It’s hard to get good produce like this these days. But it’s harder to get people to eat better."

农业

2017-09/1437/en_head.json.gz/23560

PlantsAbout PlantsPlant Basics The Structure of Lima Bean Plants The Structure of Lima Bean Plants Lima beans have a plant structure similar to other bean plants. Yet, while they share common features, they still manage to produce a fruit that is different from all other beans. Understanding the components of the plant and how they relate to one another leads to a deeper appreciation for the plant and how it develops its beans, especially if you want to grow some. Roots serve two important purposes for the lima bean plant. First, they anchor the plant in place. The second function is to absorb water and nutrients from the soil and distribute it to the plant. Bean plants in general have shallow root systems, so they tend to spread out horizontally more than vertically. Tiny root hairs branch off the main root, reaching out and seeking what the plant needs to survive. Lima beans come in both pole bean and bush bean varieties. In both cases the stems are crucial. Stems also have two primary functions. The first function is to act as the skeleton of the plant and provide support. The second is to house the vascular bundle. Inside the stem are tubes which comprise the vascular bundle. The xylems are the tubes that carry water from the roots to the rest of the plant. The phloems are the tubes that carry the sugary food the leaves make to the rest of the plant. Leaves are critical to a plant's survival because they make the plant's food through photosynthesis. Leaves are attached to the stem by the petiole. The petiole extends up through the leaf and is called the midrib. The underside of the leaf is where the stomata are--the tiny openings that open in sunlight to take in carbon dioxide. Lima bean plants have tiny white flowers. These develop when the plant is mature enough to begin its reproductive cycle. Flowers of determinate varieties last about two weeks while indeterminate varieties will bloom throughout the growing season. Flowers must be pollinated by an outside pollinator such as a bee or butterfly. Once the flowers have dropped off, the bean pods begin to develop. From start to finish, the lima bean takes anywhere from 60 to 110 days to reach maturity, depending on the variety. Some are picked early before the pods begin to swell. These are used as baby lima beans. Mature beans are picked when the pod swells but is still a bright green. If the pods are left to dry out naturally, the beans will become seeds and begin the growing process over again. lima beans, plant structure, bean plants About this Author Theresa Leschmann has been writing since 2005. Her work has appeared in the "Southern Illinois Plus" and on numerous websites. She is a property manager who writes about gardening, home repair, business management, travel and arts and entertainment topics. She is pursuing an associate's degree in English from Oakton Community College. New in Plant Basics Regulation of Glucosinolate Metabolism in Plants How Does Infrared Heat Signature Work on Plants? Floriculture Plant Identification Orgone & Plant Growth How to Grow a Saltwater Plant How to Prune Flowers for a Summer Garden Does Xylella Fastidiosa Cause Apple Trees Not to Fruit? How to Take Care of Bigger House Plants How to Start Plants From Seed

农业

2017-09/1437/en_head.json.gz/24081

TED Speaker TED Attendee Eleni Gabre-Madhin Website: International Food Policy Research Institute Blog: World Hunger Website: Ethiopian Commodities Exchange Eleni Gabre-Madhin is working to build Ethiopia's first commodities market. Re-establishing the profit motive for farmers, she believes, could help turn the world's largest recipient of food aid into a regional food basket. Why you should listen Economist Eleni Gabre-Madhin has ambitious vision -- to found the first commodities market in Ethiopia, bringing rates and standards (not to mention trading systems, warehousing and data centers) to the trade of crops. Gabre-Madhin left her earlier job, as a World Bank senior economist in Washington, DC, in part because she was disturbed by the 2002 famine in Ethiopia -- after a bumper crop of maize the year before. With prices depressed, many farmers simply left their grain in the field in 2001. But when the rains failed in 2002, a famine of 1984 proportions threatened the country. Her dream: to build a market that protects the African farmer, who is too often living at the mercy of forces beyond his or her control. The director of the International Food Policy Research Institute, Madhin studies market reforms, market institutions, and structural transformation in Africa, and works to create "a world free of hunger and malnutrition." Eleni Gabre-Madhin’s TED talk A commodities exchange for Ethiopia More news and ideas from Eleni Gabre-Madhin The Market Maker: Eleni Gabre-Madhin Following up on economist Eleni Gabre-Madhin’s 2007 TEDTalk on Ethiopian markets comes an episode from PBS’ award-winning documentary series Wide Angle titled “The Market Maker.” Anchor Aaron Brown traveled to Ethiopia and toured the country with Gabre-Madhin, where he witnessed the trials faced by her Ethiopia Commodity Exchange, and the effects of the system on […] 4 great talks for International Women's Day To celebrate March 8, International Women’s Day, we suggest these four TEDTalks gems from some amazing speakers — artists, scientists and economists who think deeply about the role of women. Author and activist Isabel Allende discusses women, creativity, feminism — and the power of passionate thinkers and doers: The former Finance Minister of Nigeria, Ngozi […] Archive: Eleni Gabre-Madhin on TED.com For the next week, we’re presenting some of our favorite TEDTalks from among the 270+ talks and performances we’ve posted since June 2006. Look for brand-new TEDTalks starting August 18. Until then, enjoy these gems — and suggest your own by writing to [email protected] or joining the conversation on TED.com. At the 2007 TEDGlobal conference […]

农业

2017-09/1437/en_head.json.gz/25248

Industry Commentary: We love our smartphones, but what about smart food? By Bob Stallman, president, American Farm Bureau Federation November 26, 2013 | 10:23 am EST Smartphones, video games, tablets, apps … the list could go on and on. Our society and economy run, function and communicate via technology. Technology has become so advanced that we now use the “phone” portion of the smartphone far less than we use the device to browse the Web, tap into social media, listen to music and play games. Technology is changing the way we do just about everything, and by all accounts we can’t get enough of it. Until we start talking about food technology, often referred to as biotechnology, and then our mindsets revert to the Dark Ages. Farmville vs. Farm Technology For years, farmers and ranchers have used technology to produce more food, feed, fiber and fuel, while using less acreage, chemicals and water. Now, facing quite possibly the biggest challenge of our generation – to produce 100 percent more food by 2050 – we need technology to feed far more than our brains and our Facebook accounts. In fact, in doubling the amount of food grown in the next 37 years, 70 percent of that additional food will have to come from efficiency-enhancing technologies that will compensate for one of the few things technology can’t produce: farm and ranch land. Through advancements in science and technology, agriculture production has made tremendous strides. Consider the improvements to corn yields since the mid-to-late 1800s. In 1870, the national corn yield was 29 bushels per acre. This year, corn yields are projected to be 155.3 bushels per acre. The advancements in science and technology have resulted in a roughly 436 percent increase in the nation’s corn yields since 1870. Today, approximately 90 percent of corn, soybeans and cotton grown in the U.S. are adopted from a biotech variety. Yet, there has not been a single documented, statistically significant incident of harm to human health or to the environment. Due to the stellar performance of biotechnology products, the U.S. government, the World Health Organization, the American Medical Association and the National Academy of Sciences have all embraced the safety and benefits of these critical advancements. Still, some people are reluctant to accept this technology, let alone embrace it, as a means of feeding an increasing population. The Great Contradiction To those who continue to be skeptical of biotechnology, please consider this: every choice you and I make involves risk. Waking up, eating breakfast, taking a shower, driving to work or even walking on the sidewalk has its hazards. And what about your new smartphone? There are risks associated with that, too. The reality is that we accept that technology can help mitigate these risks to the benefit of all society. Why are we still in the Dark Ages in our approach to food technology, but we’re giddy over the release of the iPhone 5s? With a partner in technology, farmers and ranchers are prepared to meet the food, fuel and fiber demands of the 21st century, but there, too, is a risk: the minority who contradict their own acceptance of technology could ultimately eliminate food options for those who would take a meal over the latest iPhone any day. technologysmartphonesbiotechnology About the Author: Bob Stallman, president, American Farm Bureau Federation

农业

2017-09/1437/en_head.json.gz/25328

Agricultural Animal Welfare Laws A U.S. House bill introduced early this year to improve conditions for egg-laying hens has received renewed attention recently, as Sen. Diane Feinstein introduced an identical proposal in the Senate on May 24. If implemented, the law would require commercial egg producers to meet minimum standards for caging devices and set caging-related labeling requirements to distinguish free-range, cage-free, and caged egg operations. Somewhat less controversial provisions of the bill would also require better air quality standards, more humane methods of euthanasia (i.e., no more throwing live animals into grinders) and prohibit forced molting by starvation. One particularly interesting aspect of the legislation is that it has split both agricultural lobbies and animal welfare groups, creating some unlikely allies on each side of the debate. Agricultural Producer Organizations One would generally expect agri-business groups to be opposed to stricter animal welfare laws. What’s unusual about this bill is the fact that those groups that are directly targeted by the legislation, commercial egg producers, largely support the bill, while the bulk of the opposition comes from groups representing producers of other animal products and broad-based agricultural lobbies. The United Egg Producers (UEP), which claims to represent 88 percent of the commercial egg market, is the main agricultural group supporting the bill, flanked by several state and regional egg producer organizations. The UEP has even created a website to campaign for the bill, www.EggBill.com. While they list the benefits to hens and to consumers (via labeling requirements) among the reasons to support the law, their primary argument is based on the desire for nation-wide uniformity among egg-producer regulations. Currently, states set their own regulations on egg producers, some much more strict than others. And a few states, such as California, require that all eggs sold in the state conform to their standards, regardless of where they were produced. By replacing a patchwork of inconsistent state regulations with a national standard, the UEP argues, the law would streamline compliance, correct market distortions to competition, and reduce barriers to interstate commerce. It is worth noting that the UEP has previously campaigned against stricter state-level caging laws, but it seems their losses have made a uniform compromise more desireable than continuing to fight smaller battles. The most vocal agricultural opponent of the egg bill is the National Pork Producer’s Council (NPCC), joined by the American Farm Bureau Federation,the National Cattleman’s Beef Association, and other meat and dairy producers. Although the bill would not change regulations for anyone but egg producers, these groups believe the bill would be an unprecidented act of federal intrusion into farming standards that would start a domino effect (the NPCC spells out the metaphor quite clearly in this ad) of regulations throughout the animal industry. As evidence they often cite Wayne Pacelle—president of the Humane Society of the U.S., which partnered with the UEP as the main backers of the egg bill—including in the aforementioned ad his quote, “we have no problem with the extinction of domestic animals.” This is a fairly straw-man-like argument, not to mention the fact that the quote is almost 20 years old and a bit out of context. However, there is some truth to the claim that this is an unprecedented level of federal regulation. There are currently no federal laws requiring a set amount of space per animal for any class of agricultural animals, and it is possible that passage of the law could induce some legislators to introduce similar requirements for pigs or cattle. But since the current egg bill is an amendment to the Egg Products Inspection Act of 1970, federal regulation of eggs is not all that unprecedented. The other big argument advanced against the egg bill is that the regulations will increase the price of eggs for consumers. Although one study commissioned by the UEP has suggested the price of a carton of eggs will only increase by about two cents, egg bill opponents point to the egg shortages of Europe as evidence of what will happen in the U.S. There, a similar ban on conventional battery cages is blamed for the ten to twenty percent reduction in egg production, as many southern and eastern European egg producers failed to update their cages in time, and a resulting increase in consumer prices ranging from forty to seventy-five percent in different countries. There are a few notable differences, however, between the EU law and the American egg bill that make it difficult to predict how similar the results would be. The scope of the EU law is far broader in that it applies to egg operations of more than three hundred fifty hens, whereas the U.S. bill only covers producers with more than three thousand hens. The U.S. bill would also give producers more time for compliance (eightteen years as opposed to twelve). But given the current economic situation, even an uncertain threat of increased food prices will likely be a significant factor in the argument. The primary animal welfare proponent of the egg bill is the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS). As a big supporter of state caging regulations, the HSUS was instrumental in negotiating the compromise with the UEP. They are joined by the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, Mercy for Animals, and the Animal Legal Defense Fund, as well as the generally more moderate professional veterinary associations. For them, the winning aspect of the bill is the elimination of the battery cage arrangements that dominate factory farms, containing over ninety percent of all commercial egg-producing hens in the U.S. Confined in this style of cage, with an average of 67 square inches of floorspace per hen, the hens are prevented from engaging in natural behaviors such as perching, wing-stretching, and often even turning around. This can lead to health issues like osteoporosis and external parasites and to the behavioral abnomalities that cause hens to peck at and cannibalize each other. Within fifteen years, all caged operations would have to approximately double the floorspace per hen and include “adequate environmental enrichments” such as perch space and scratching areas. The American Veterinary Medical Association reports that the move to enriched cages would significantly improve the health of hens, and even endorses enriched cages over cage-free arrangements for the prevention of certain diseases and parasites. It is also interesting to note that in the AVMA endorsement, they make a point to comment that voluntary transition to more humane caging is preferable, but cite the market inefficiencies of conflicting state regulations to justify federal intervention. While it seems like the elimination of battery cages should please all animal advocates, groups like the Humane Farming Association (HFA), Friends of Animals, and United Poultry Concerns don’t like the trade-off involved, and have dubbed their campaign “Stop the Rotten Egg Bill.” To them, the defining piece of the legislation is a clause pre-empting state or local regulations that go beyond the requirements of the federal bill (which is what the UEP gets out of the compromise). The HFA argues that the bill represents an attempt to keep hens in cages forever, and derides the notion of “enriched” cages, saying “a cage is a cage” in this somewhat creepy ad featuring anthropomorphic chickens. There is some merit to this claim. Even though the bill would double the existing average amount of space per hen, the space requirements proposed are all still one square foot or less. The majority of hens would still be confined in factory-style operations on wire floors and would never set foot outside. And we can see from photos put out by enriched-cage proponents—so presumably among the most flattering photos available—that the hens are not exactly living luxurious or natural lifestyles. Interestingly, by opposing the federal egg bill, these groups are rejecting a small or moderate improvement in conditions for the vast majority of hens, in favor of trying to win more significant improvements on smaller scales. Currently, no state other than California—which is given a special section in the federal egg bill with their own requirements—has passed or is considering passing caging requirements that require more space than the federal proposal. Future of Animal Caging Laws The future of the egg bill is likely doomed; as the Senate declined to incorporate it as an amendment in their version of the Farm Bill on June 19, supporters have called for redoubled efforts in the House, where it languishes in a committee headed by an opponent of the bill. Yet we may see animal confinement as a nation-wide uniformity issue again as states consider other stricter animal welfare regulations. For example, pork producers could find themselves in the same situation as the UEP. Nine states, including California, Colorado, and most recently Rhode Island, have already enacted bans on the use of gestational crates for pregnant sows. These crates measure six feet long by two feet wide, which keeps the pigs practically immobilized for periods of up to four months, causing the pigs to endure bone and muscle deterioration, sores from lying in their own waste, and extreme psychological stress. The push against gestational crating has gained traction lately, with several large restaurant and grocery chains—including McDonald’s, Burger King, Kroger, and Safeway—encouraging or requiring suppliers to phase out the crates, and New Jersey is considering (and likely to pass) a law to specifically ban gestational crating of sows. Some states, like Massachusetts and New York, are making the confinement issue even broader with laws prohibiting confining or tethering an animal in a manner that prevents the animal from turning around, lying down, standing, or stretching its limbs. Both of the laws would make violation a criminal misdemeanor, and would apply to egg producers and pork producers alike, along with every other agricultural animal (although both laws would allow gestational crating of sows for the last week of expected pregnancy, and make exceptions for short-term confinement for routine purposes and for transportation of animals). Most of the existing and proposed animal confinement laws also specifically target veal, consumption of which has been declining for decades following a 1980s public information campaign by animal rights groups depicting the incredibly restricted movement of veal calves. And foie gras has received renewed attention recently, as a California law, passed in 2004 but scheduled to come into effect on July 1, 2012, bans the practice of gavage (force-feeding through a tube) and the sale of foie gras produced in this method. Considering these trends at the state level, it may not be long before other commercial producers of animal products go the way of the United Egg Producers in wanting a uniform national standard. View all posts by Derek Smith → ← The Dilemma of the Death Penalty Abstinence Education In Schools → Facebook Comments 3 WordPress Comments to Agricultural Animal Welfare Laws Pingback: NYC toy poodle Chichi dies | Cancer-healthylifestylereview.info SarahBarnett says: June 27, 2012 at 10:38 am Thanks for this informative piece Derek. I work at the HSUS, and this bill would not only help millions of hens, but it would also provide a stable future for egg farmers, and as you mentioned as the support of a variety of groups. I encourage people to take action, and contact their legislators to urge support of this important bill. We have an action alert that has made it easy to do so:� https://secure.humanesociety.org/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=5583&JServSessionIdr004=7g78lf7361.app305b As for the misinformation about the legislation, such as that put forth by groups like the humane farming association (who has never taken part in any campaign that has succeeded in banning any farm animal confinement practice anywhere). The false claims they put out are too long to address here, so I recommend checking out this page: http://www.humanesociety.org/hfa Reply Pingback: Google Alert – keeping chickens | Chicken Ark

农业

2017-09/1437/en_head.json.gz/26215

Log In or Register Tree nuts Grapes Orchard crops Water Alfalfa Vegetables Cotton Rice Quotes Weather Continuing Education Courses LISTEN: Max Armstrong's Daily Updates WATCH: This Week in Agribusiness FFA Chapter Tribute Samuelson Sez Max's Tractor Shed Over a Cup About Us Contact Advertise Privacy Policy Terms of Service Ad Choices Search Log In Register Recent Dairy farmers eager for Trump to ease milk glut Feb 21, 2017 Conservation couple: From Bay Area business owners to first-generation ranchers Feb 19, 2017 This Week in Agribusiness, February 18, 2017 Feb 18, 2017 Senate confirms Scott Pruitt to lead EPA Feb 17, 2017 New Massey Ferguson technology in 8700 series high-horsepower tractors Feb 16, 2017 Featured ABC invests $4.7 million for next gen almond farming, sustainability Feb 16, 2017 California wine grape industry seeks no-touch vineyard Feb 10, 2017 Jimi Valov: a proud ambassador of farming, community and pistachios Feb 13, 2017 Former Ariz. ginner Charlie Owen posthumously awarded Lifetime Achievement Award Feb 14, 2017 Management More aid for livestock producers Farm Press Staff | Apr 08, 2003 The secretary also said she is forming a Drought Coordinating Council to monitor ongoing drought conditions and coordinate USDA’s efforts to bring help to affected producers and communities. “This Administration has remained committed to providing relief to producers who have faced difficult times because of drought.” Veneman said. “Many regions continue to face persistent and severe drought conditions. The new council will monitor the situation and coordinate the resources we have available to address needs where they exist.” Veneman made the announcements during a briefing from USDA’s radio broadcast studios, where she was joined by Nebraska Gov. Mike Johanns, co-leader of the Western Governors Associations’ drought response efforts; Vernon Hill, Chairman of the Eastern Shoshone Business Council of the Wind River Indian Reservation; and USDA Chief Economist Keith Collins. The Drought Coordinating Council will bring together resources from USDA’s Farm Service Agency; the Risk Management Agency; the Natural Resources Conservation Service; the U.S. Forest Service; the Agricultural Research Service; the Cooperative State Research, Extension and Education Service; the National Agricultural Statistics Service; the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service; the Agricultural Marketing Service and agencies under Rural Development. Also, representatives from the Office of the Chief Economist and the Office of Budget and Program Analysis participate in the Council, which will proactively plan and respond to the threat of drought. The Council is also working with the Department of Interior and other federal, state and local entities to coordinate wildfire prevention and suppression efforts and aid families, businesses and communities impacted by drought. Veneman said the 2003 Livestock Feed Program will provide timely relief for livestock producers in areas hit hardest by drought by making available surplus stocks of non-fat dry milk (NDM), which are not intended for nor destined for human consumption. The stocks will be provided at a minimal cost to several states and tribal governments in areas designated as severely impacted by drought. “One of our most pressing concerns right now is the ability of pasture and grazing lands to support livestock herds,” said Veneman. “Non-fat dry milk can serve as a high quality source of protein to maintain foundation livestock herds in this critical time.” USDA will partner with state and tribal governments to move the non-fat dry milk to eligible producers. Approximately 100 counties in nine states currently meet the initial eligibility criteria. The states with eligible counties are: Arizona, Colorado, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, South Dakota, Utah and Wyoming. Eligible counties are listed on www.usda.gov. The U.S. Drought Monitor will be used to determine which counties are eligible, and eligibility will be re-evaluated every 30 days to ensure the program is targeted to producers in greatest need. To be eligible, counties must meet one of the following two criteria: Be a county or part of a county located in a D4-Exceptional category on the Drought Monitor at any time on or between Sept. 3, 2002, and March 11, 2003, and on the March 11, 2003, Monitor be located in at least D3-Extreme or D4-Exceptional area. Be a county or part of a county located in a D4-Exceptional area on the Drought Monitor on March 11, 2003. Eligible livestock are foundation herds (breeding and replacement stock) of beef cattle, buffalo, sheep, and goats. The allocation of NDM for a county will be based on a renewable, if applicable, 30-day supply, based upon two pounds of NDM per day for beef cattle and buffalo, and one-half pound of NDM per day for sheep and goats. In addition to the 2003 Livestock Feed Program, assistance for livestock producers is provided through the Livestock Compensation Program (LCP), for which sign-up began April 1, and through the Livestock Assistance Program (LAP), for which sign-up will begin in July after LCP payments have been completed. Both programs were authorized by the Agriculture Assistance Act of 2003. USDA’s Farm Service Agency also operates “HayNet” (http://www.fsa.usda.gov/haynet/) that serves as an electronic bulletin board where ranchers in need of hay can find critical information about the nearest supply. Veneman noted that in the past year, the Bush administration has worked to make every tool available to help farmers and ranchers impacted by drought, including declaring disaster emergencies as quickly as possible, making low-interest loans available to producers, ensuring that more than $4.4 billion in crop insurance was available to help cover losses, extending haying and grazing Conservation Reserve Program acres to provide feed for livestock and developing a livestock compensation program that provided over $1 billion in immediate assistance to producers most impacted by drought. Information on all USDA programs available to assist producers including those provided by the Agricultural Assistance Act of 2003 is available at www.usda.gov. e-mail: [email protected] RelatedFarms facing shortfalls with 2016 commodity pricesFeb 16, 2017Ag Chairman Conaway commits to trade supportFeb 16, 2017Arrington calls for less regulation, orderly transition for health careFeb 15, 2017Cotton Service Award honors Mark LangeFeb 14, 2017 Load More About Sitemap Advertise Contact Us Privacy Policy Terms of Service Subscribe Follow us:

农业

2017-09/1438/en_head.json.gz/184

Living With Loquats Harvesting loquats from The South Tree, April 2012. Anyone who's ever had a loquat tree knows that loquats can be both a blessing and a burden. The trees are beautiful and bear an abundance of fruit with very little attention. This is both the good news and the bad news. When loquat trees bear fruit, they bear a lot of it. And it will fall to the ground, courtesy of gravity. Unless you have a staff of gardeners to rake your yard daily, you may find that the glorious abundance a large loquat tree produces soon becomes annoying. And if you're anything like me, you feel guilty that you're not putting the fruit to good use each time you feel the soft flesh of a loquat squish into the soles of your shoes. This year, I intended to harness that guilt – while harnessing the incredible energy of our two loquat trees. In the past, my husband and I tried loquat jam and loquat cobbler, but it was hard work to peel a large quantity of loquats so I no longer consider any loquat recipe that requires peeling the loquats. During this loquat season, I've made both loquat butter and loquat leather with mixed results. If you don't live in loquat territory, you may never have heard of loquats. I certainly hadn't until I moved to Southern California – where you can find them everywhere. So in the midst of picking, seeding and pureeing my favorite fruit of the moment, I thought I needed to do some research on the mysterious origins of the loquat. According to Purdue University's Center for New Crops & Plant Products, the loquat is indigenous to China and possibly to southern Japan, where it has been cultivated for over 1,000 years. Loquat trees grow in temperate climates around the globe -- and in some intemperate climates as well. In the 1700s, the colonial powers apparently discovered the deliciousness of loquats, because the fruit suddenly appeared in the greenhouses of the Royal Botanical Gardens in England and National Gardens of Paris – and then soon appeared in other outposts of the European empires. Exactly how they got to Southern California, it’s never made clear, but obviously the loquats like it here, since they grow in such abundance. The university says that loquats are part of the rose family, Rosacae, surprisingly enough, and claims that trees can grow up to 30 feet tall. I can attest that this is true – and perhaps is an understatement. Our two loquat trees are each at least 30 feet tall, with no sign of stopping. The loquat fruit grows in clusters and each loquat is supposed to contain one to ten large seeds in the center of the fruit. (I've counted up to six seeds in the fruit from my loquat trees.) The University web page does NOT point out one of the problems of the loquat’s large seeds. The fruit-to-seed ratio makes them a real challenge to clean. It takes a lot of work to remove the large seeds for a relatively small volume of usable loquat flesh. Purdue’s website (based on Julia F. Mortons’ Fruits of Warm Climates) says there are over 800 varieties of loquats. I have two in my backyard, each a different variety, which I refer to as The North Tree and The South Tree. After a bit of researching, I believe that The North Tree is a Japanese variety, known for pear-shaped fruit with pale-yellow skin and whitish flesh. The web page says the fruit is juicy and "non-distinct" in flavor. We refer to the flavor, more scientifically, as ranging from “blah” to “meh.” The South Tree has fruit with darker skin, yellowish flesh, and its flavor is distinctly preferred by both wild parrots and 3-year-old girls. I haven’t specifically been able to identify the variety, but it is quite possibly a “Placentia,” a Japanese variety introduced to Placentia, California in the late 1800s. Placentia is a tiny town in Orange County, only 35 miles away, so it wouldn’t surprise me that the this variety would have been popular when our L.A. bungalow was being landscaped in the 1930s. Loquats from The North Tree (top of frame) and The South Tree (bottom of frame), April 2012. The trees bear fruit from April until May or June – or at least they do in California where I live. Purdue University claims that freshly-picked loquats will keep for 10 days at room temperature, but at my house they decay quickly and I've found that it's best to harvest them on the same day I want to use them. Loquats also have the distinction of being a delicious fruit with a poisonous seed. The chemical inside the seed – hydrogen cyanide -- can break down into cyanide in the human digestive system, so caution should be used when selecting and seeding the fruit. In addition, the fruit in large quantities is said to have a sedative effect. Purdue University's Center for New Crops & Plant Products reports that a 5 year-old girl in Florida fell asleep and was difficult to awake after she ate 4 unripe loquats. She was dazed immediately after waking, but within two hours had recovered and did not suffer any permanent injury. After reading this bit of information, I'm no longer quite so excited about making loquat jelly, which needs to be made with slightly unripe fruit. I’m just not that interested in a breakfast jelly that knocks out my children. However, I am looking forward to making pickled (fully-ripe) loquats in the coming weeks. As a food history geek, I can find myself lost for hours pursuing the minutiae of the loquat’s illustrious back-story (“Look, it’s also an expectorant!”) But eventually I realize that I have to get around to that 8 liter bucket full of yellow fruit that could go bad. And as fascinating as it is to explore the history of Eriobotrya japonica, it’s nothing compared to spreading home-made loquat butter on a piece of crunchy toast on a spring morning in Southern California. loquat butter, loquat fruit leather, loquat jelly, loquat tree, loquats

农业

2017-09/1438/en_head.json.gz/205

MEMO/09/571 Brussels, 31 December 2009 Reform of Common Fisheries Policy control framework – questions and answers Why do we need a new control regulation? The fisheries control regulation in force until now dates back to 1993. It has since been amended a dozen times, in particular in 1998 to include the control of fishing effort, and in 2002 during the last reform of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP). The resulting system has serious shortcomings that prevent it from being as effective as it should be. As both the European Commission 1 and the European Court of Auditors 2 have highlighted, the current system is inefficient, expensive, complex, and it does not produce the desired results. This in turn impacts negatively on the implementation of other elements of the CFP and undermines the success of conservation and effort management initiatives. Control failures thus contribute to the negative performance of the CFP, which appears unable to deliver on its fundamental objective. Despite several years of implementation of the 2002 CFP reform, which has introduced a number of potentially powerful conservation measures, the state of resources in EU waters remains worrying. Some 88% of stocks are overfished, and this threatens both fish stocks and the livelihoods of fishermen. If we allow this situation to continue, the negative impact on fisheries resources, the fishing industry and regions dependent on fishing is likely to be very serious. That is why the Commission has proposed this substantial reform of the CFP control system, addressing all its shortcomings and modernising its approach. What are the main shortcomings of the existing system? There are three main kinds of problems with the current system: A control and inspection framework which has not kept pace with changes in fisheries management, and remains disproportionately focused on activities at sea. A low infringement detection rate and lack of effective deterrent sanctions have not encouraged a culture of compliance in a world where too many vessels are chasing too few fish. The Commission lacks the powers it needs to exercise full control over the Member States' implementation of CFP rules, and to intervene when necessary to ensure a level playing field. The cumulative and ad hoc nature of previous revisions and amendments means that the current framework is also greatly in need of simplification. Will the new system really be more effective? The new regulation takes a focused approach to addressing each of the problems listed above, and introducing concrete measures to correct current failings. Control and inspection will be focused where it is most effective, through an approach based on systematic risk analysis. Inspection procedures will be standardised and harmonised for all stages along the chain, including transport and marketing. Use of modern data-processing and communications technologies will be extended. Where possible, data processing will be automated, and subject to systematic and comprehensive cross-checking. The result will be a system which is more effectively targeted, more effective, and also less costly and burdensome to operate. A point system for serious infringements will be introduced, which can lead to a fishing licence being suspended, or even withdrawn, after a certain number of points have been accumulated. New, more effective systems for sharing control data will be introduced, and the mandate of the Community Fisheries Control Agency will be extended, to enable it to play its role more effectively. Commission officials will be given extended inspection powers, allowing them to carry out inspections on their own initiative without prior notification to the Member State concerned. Where failings are detected, the Member State will be given the opportunity to remedy the situation through an action plan drawn up in collaboration with the Commission. The Commission's powers to close fisheries when quotas are exhausted will be strengthened, and it will be able to impose financial sanctions on Member States for poor fulfilment of their obligations under the Common Fisheries Policy, including withholding funding granted under the European Fisheries Fund or to support their control systems. Will the new system not cost more? On the contrary, it will reduce administrative burdens and make the system less bureaucratic. The Commission's impact assessment found that with the reform adopted, the total administrative costs for operators would be reduced by 49% (from € 79 to 40 million), largely thanks to the extended use of modern technologies – i.e. the Electronic Reporting System (ERS), and Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) to all vessels over 12 metres long. Existing paper-based tools (logbooks, landing declarations and sales notes) will be replaced at all stages of the fisheries chain. For example, the electronic logbook will lower the administrative burden for the fishermen, as certain basic information will be automatically recorded; when using a paper logbook, the fishermen has to fill in all information every time and on every sheet. The time spent filling in the logbook should be reduced by almost 70%, as the fishermen will only need to fill in the catch data. The system will be quicker, more accurate, less expensive and will allow for the automated processing of data. It will also facilitate cross-checking of data and information, and the identification of risks. The result will be a more rational and risk-based approach in practice to control actions at sea and on land, which is inherently more cost-effective. The new system will also remove the current obligation on Member States to transmit lists of fishing licences or fishing permits to the Commission. These will instead be made accessible electronically to the control services of their own country and of other Member States, and to the Commission. How will the point system for serious infringements work? The point system for serious infringements will basically work in the same way as the systems for traffic offences familiar to motorists in most Member States. The number of points to be attributed for specific infringements will be fixed in detailed rules. Every time a serious infringement is committed, the appropriate number of points will be attributed to the offender in the national registry of fishery offences of the flag Member State. Infringements committed in other Member States will be communicated to the flag Member State. Any vessel which accumulates more than a certain number of points in a three-year period will have its fishing licence suspended for at least two months. For repeat offences the penalty increases to suspensions of four, eight and twelve months respectively. If, after the end of the fourth suspension period, the offender again incurs the necessary number of points, the fishing licence will be withdrawn for good. However, if the offender does not commit any serious infringements within three years of the previous such infringement, all points on the fishing licence will be deleted and he will start again with a clean slate. Points stay with the vessel and are therefore transferred to the new owner if the vessel is sold on. Detailed rules for the point system will be drawn up at Community level in close cooperation with Member States. The relevant article of the new control regulation will only enter into force six months after the adoption of these detailed rules. Member States will also be required to establish a similar point system for masters of fishing vessel. The point system neither introduces new sanctions nor defines serious infringements. It is based on serious infringements as defined in the regulation on fighting illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing 3 which will enter into force on 1 January 2010. These serious infringements reflect conduct particularly harmful to the conservation of fishing resources and can generally also be found in relevant control schemes of Regional Fisheries Management Organisations. It should be noted, though, that Member States have broad discretion in including particular conduct under one of these serious infringements, as the relevant article on sanctions for serious infringements in the new control regulation provides that the defined activities are to be considered as serious infringements depending on the gravity of the infringement in question, by taking into account criteria such as the nature of the damage, its value, the economic situation of the offender and the extent of the infringement or its repetition. How far will the regulation go in harmonising sanctions? Why is it necessary to do this? The control regulation adopts the same approach as the IUU regulation, under which a maximum penalty must be imposed which is equivalent to at least five times the value of the fishery products obtained by committing a serious infringement or to at least eight times this value in the case of a repeated serious infringement. This leaves sufficient leeway to take account of the particular details of each individual case. The aim of the new regulation is to ensure that the level of sanctions for serious infringements does not fall below a certain limit, so as to ensure a level playing field across the EU. Insofar as these limits are respected, the new regulation will not prescribe the actual sanction to be applied in any individual case. How will the traceability system work in practice? The new regulation introduces a comprehensive traceability system to track all fish and fisheries products throughout the market chain. Fisheries products will have to be packed in lots, on which certain minimum information (name of the species, live weight, catching or harvesting data, production unit, etc.) must be provided. This information must be made available to the competent authorities. This information will also have to be entered into the validation system, where it will be cross-checked systematically with other information available for the products. The information for every lot must be available all along the production chain. Where and to whom do the new rules apply? The regulation applies to all fishing activities in EU waters. Hence it will apply also to the fishing activities of third countries in EU waters. In the case of bilateral agreements with third countries which contain specific provisions on control, these provisions will take priority over the regulation. Furthermore, the regulation will apply to all EU vessels, irrespective of where they operate – including outside EU waters. However, it will not take priority over the special provisions contained in fisheries agreements between the EU and third countries in the waters of which EU vessels operate, or over the measures applied by Regional Fisheries Management Organisations. The regulation will also apply to nationals of EU Member States involved in fishing under non-EU flags, subject to the primary responsibility of the flag State. When will the rules come into force? The control regulation will enter into force on 1 January 2010. This date is significant, as it also marks the entry into force of the IUU regulation. These two regulations, together with the fisheries authorisations regulation already in force, will constitute the three arms of a comprehensive and workable control system for fisheries. At the same time, the Commission has acknowledged that, Member States need a little more time to ready themselves fully to implement some measures in the regulation. For instance, a transition period is foreseen for provisions on the point system for serious infringements. All types of databases related to the new regulation (electronic databases for serious infringements and for inspection) will also benefit from the transition period. The same applies to a number of new control mechanisms, such as the certification of engine power scheme. How will the new regulation affect recreational fisheries? At the Council meeting in October 2009, the fisheries ministers agreed that, under the new regulation, catches by recreational fishermen will not be counted against the national quota of Member states. So recreational fishermen have nothing to fear. From 2010, Member States will be required to evaluate the impact of some recreational fisheries – namely in respect of fish stocks subject to an EU recovery plan (one such example being cod). Reported catches must be sent to the Commission, which will then ask the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF) for independent scientific advice on whether or not the impact is significant. If – and only if – this impact is shown to be significant for the sustainability of the fishery concerned might specific management measures be taken in future by the Council. For bluefin tuna rules already exist: International rules agreed under ICCAT, and transposed into EU law, indicate that there is an obligation on Member States to set up a quota for recreational fisheries and to register catches which will count against the national quota (Reg. 302). Also, recreational fishermen must seek authorisation to fish and may only bring back one bluefin tuna per fishing trip. For more information: Besides press release released today see also that published in November 2008 when control overhaul was proposed: IP/08/1710 Further information and documents can be found at: http://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/cfp/control_enforcement/reform_control_en.htm 1 : COM/2007/0167 final 2 : Commission reaction to the Court's report: see IP/07/1862 and MEMO/07/552 3 : Council Regulation (EC) No 1005/2008 of 29 September 2008 establishing a Community system to prevent, deter and eliminate illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing Side Bar

农业

2017-09/1438/en_head.json.gz/258

Ed Lawrence Recently retired after 30 years of outstanding achievement in the field of Canadian horticulture, Ed Lawrence's tenure as Chief Horticultural Specialist to six consecutive Governors General spanned a period of vice-regal history dating from Jules Leger in the 1970s to Adrienne Clarkson in 2005. In his capacity as head gardener, Ed's responsibilities included not only the oversight of the 85 acre historic grounds and greenhouses of Rideau Hall, but of all six official residences under the authority of the National Capital Commission, including those of the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition. During that same period, Ed's gardening expertise gained popular recognition through CBC Radio's "Ontario Today" noon-time gardening phone-in show heard every Monday. After more than two decades, enthusiasm for Ed's down-to-earth practical advice shows no sign of waning, making the Monday gardening hour one of the longest-running and most successful features in the annals of Canadian broadcast history. His on-air popularity has led to other appearances on numerous radio and television gardening programs, including The Hobby Garden, From a Country Garden, The Canadian Gardener, and Vie de chalet on Radio-Canada. In the summer of 2001, Ed hosted a 13-part television gardening series, "The Gardener" produced in partnership with the National Capital Commission in Ottawa and WPBS TV in Watertown, New York. Ed has written gardening columns for newspapers throughout the Ottawa Valley and a weekly column for the Toronto edition of the national newspaper, The Globe and Mail. In 1988 he won Landscape Ontario's Garden Communicators' Award for his broadcasting work and in 2000, Ed was the recipient of the prestigious Award of Merit from the Ontario Horticultural Association. Toronto-born and Humber College educated, Ed now resides on a farm in the Almonte, Ontario region and continues to share his gardening know-how through a broad range of national and community-based horticultural endeavours. Home View the Book About Ed Whether your dahlia's are drooping, your maples are moping or your grass has grubs, Ed Lawrence has all the answers!

农业

2017-09/1438/en_head.json.gz/882

Drought tolerant corn moving east Feb 13, 2017 Match sprayer to new herbicides Feb 10, 2017 Dicamba-resistant soybean challenges Feb 09, 2017 Weed control outlook: Soybeans & corn Feb 07, 2017 Some Farm Bill Programs Are Destined to Expire in 2012 Five conservation programs were initially funded at $2.105 billion, but would require $3.2 billion to continue in the next farm bill There are 37 programs in the 2008 Farm Bill that will expire in a couple years because there is no guaranteed funding after September 2012 Source: University of Illinois farmgate | Nov 18, 2010 There are 37 programs in the 2008 Farm Bill that will be expiring in a couple years because there is no guaranteed funding after September 2012. Should they expire like worthless options at the Board of Trade or should there be an effort to fund them at any cost? That’s totally up to you – and the US taxpayer. As the political winds threaten to keep a tighter grip on the U.S. Treasury purse strings, there will be many programs in the federal government that will disappear for lack of funding. And at least three dozen of those may quickly be identified in the USDA budget. The Congressional Research Service (CRS) has identified the programs, which cost the taxpayer between $9 and $10 billion to operate. The CRS report says the 37 programs had received mandatory funding for the life of the 2008 Farm Bill, but there is no budget baseline that carries them beyond 2012, such as public feeding programs, direct payments or crop insurance. Their cost is about 4% of the $283 billion five-year farm bill, or 11% of the cost if the $100 billion nutrition title is removed. CRS Farm Specialist Jim Monke says the largest one is the permanent disaster assistance program, which was budgeted for $4.8 billion in the farm bill, but would be continued at $3.7 billion based on estimates made last March. There are also five conservation programs that were initially funded at $2.105 billion, but would require $3.2 billion in the next farm bill if they were continued. When members of the House and Senate ag committees begin to look at the programs and whether they should be funded, Monke says the decision-making process will be something like this: “If selected for continuation, would the program continue at its current higher cost, or be redesigned in the next farm bill to cost less? Thus, which of the two approaches is better depends on whether one believes Congress would change program parameters, for example, to reduce a program that has become more expensive than initially expected, or whether Congress would continue current program provisions and pay a higher cost than in 2008 when extending a program.” On the chopping block? Monke says some of the programs are pilot programs or are new programs without a large constituency. He says six are bio-energy programs; five are related to specialty crops or beginning and minority farmers. However, the wetlands reserve and the grasslands reserve programs have been well established for many years. If any of the programs are to be continued, the agriculture committees have to pay for them from the funding allocated for farm programs, and cannot fund them from any “new” money. Other programs have to be reduced or sacrificed to pay for the 37 that are nearing expiration. For example, the conservation programs that are within the 37 expiring are: Wetlands Reserve, Grasslands Reserve, Voluntary Public Access and Habitat Incentive Program, Small Watershed Rehabilitation Program and Desert Terminal Lakes. In the Rural Development sector of the farm bill, programs destined for termination include: Rural Micro-entrepreneur Assistance Program, Funding of Pending Rural Development Loan and Grant Applications, and Value-Added Agricultural Market Development Program Grants. Monke reports that one program that ends a year before the expiration of the farm bill is the supplemental agricultural disaster assistance program that was created in the 2008 Farm Bill. He says it was authorized in an effort to end the ad hoc crop disaster assistance. Another is the ethanol blenders’ tax credit, which expires at the end of December. The current farm bill has $283 billion worth of programs over its five year life, most of which will continue into the next farm bill. But there are 37 programs worth $9 to $10 billion that are destined for expiration because there are no provisions for continued funding. Included are the permanent disaster program and the wetlands reserve program. Some are pilot programs, but there are more than $2 billion worth of conservation programs, the $4 billion disaster program, and a variety of small organic programs. RelatedThink Spring, Think Nitrogen Management for CornMar 19, 2012Is Planting Corn in Mid-March a Good Idea for the Midwest?Mar 20, 2012Early Start to Spring, FieldworkMar 27, 2012Corn Planting Date Considerations Mar 27, 2012 Load More

农业

2017-09/1438/en_head.json.gz/969

The Top Five Sweet Potato Producing States The Top Five Sweet Potato Producing States By Jackie Stark eHow Contributor Jackie Stark Follow Comstock Images/Comstock/Getty Images Sweet potatoes are one of the most versatile and nutritious vegetables on the market today. They are a very common vegetable in many Asian cultures, though they have yet to catch on as much in the Western diet, as they are mostly thought of as a holiday food. A warm weather vegetable, sweet potatoes are grown all across the United States, but nowhere more so than these five states. With the sweet potato as its state vegetable, it's no surprise that North Carolina is the No. 1 sweet potato producing state in the country. According to statistics compiled by the United States Department of Agriculture, North Carolina produced, on average, 5,260,277 cwt a year from 1990 to 2007. (A cwt is a unit of measurement used in agriculture, meaning one hundred weight). Louisiana Louisiana is known for many things: the birthplace of Elvis, Mardi Gras in New Orleans and Cajun food. It is not necessarily well-know for sweet potatoes, but it's the second-highest sweet potato producing state in the country, with an average of 2,795,055 cwt between 1990 to 2007. Since the sweet potato is a warm weather vegetable, Louisiana is able to grow sweet potatoes year-round. Louisiana agriculture is also composed of sugarcane, cotton and soybeans. California With its warm climate, California is an ideal state for growing many different fruits and vegetables, the sweet potato being one of them. California weighs in as the third highest sweet potato producing state in the country, with an average of 2,487,500 cwt between 1990 to 2007. California is also known for its raisins, dairy products, figs and olives. The state produces more than half the countries fruits, nuts and vegetables. Mississippi Coming in fourth in sweet potato production is Mississippi, with an average of 1,607,444 cwt from 1990 to 2007. Though most people don't associate Mississippi with sweet potatoes, the state is known for its agriculture, as its warm climate makes it ideal for growing cotton, soybeans, rice and other plants. Texas Last, but not least, Texas rounds out the top five list of sweet potato producing states, with an average of 492,888 cwt per year between 1990 to 2007. As the second largest industry in the state, Texas is known for its agriculture, especially its cattle ranches, wool and cotton production. The state also grows much of the country's corn, wheat and hay. Related Searches North Carolina Sweet Potato Production: Sweet Potatoes - The Vegetable With Super Food Powers! Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture: U.S. Sweet Potato Statistics Mississippi Agriclutre A Look at California Agriculture A Look at Texas Agriculture Photo Credit Comstock Images/Comstock/Getty Images Promoted By Zergnet Does a Sweet Potato Vine Produce Potatoes? Sweet potato plants (Ipomoea batatas) are vines of tropical origin that thrive in hot weather. All varieties of the sweet potato produce... How to Grow Sweet Potatoes Sweet potatoes (Ipomoea batatas) are native to Central and South America, but they’re also grown commercially in southern states such as North... How to Substitute Rice for Potatoes Making Starch From a Sweet Potato How to Remove Potato Stains What Is the Best Climate for Planting Potatoes? How to Plant Russet Potatoes

农业

2017-09/1438/en_head.json.gz/1273

The Genius of Jean Pain Through the 1970s, French gardener Jean Pain was a pioneer in developing methods of using compost to generate fuel and heat water. Overview of Jean Pain's compost water heater. PHOTO: MOTHER EARTH NEWS STAFF The warm, dry, and rocky Provence region of France is better known for its resorts than for its suitability to gardening. Yet—among that area's craggy hills—a self-taught organic gardener, forester, and biotechnologist named Jean Pain is working wonders with a new technique of composting. By removing underbrush from his woodlands and pulverizing it in a shredder of his own design, M. Pain fertilizes his incredibly prolific gardens, heats his house with the warmth created during the decomposition of the wood waste, and even runs his car on the biogas produced in a methane digester which also accepts the shredded brush.A few months ago one of MOTHER EARTH NEWS' staffers visited Jean and Ida Pain at their home in France, and discussed the techniques which the inventive agronomist has developed to overcome the hardships of the impoverished native soil and become self-sufficient . . . while restoring the ravaged forests of their area to a lushness that the region hasn't known for centuries. Since Jean's research is so extensive and varied, we've decided to relate just one portion of it in this article.The manual labor involved in composting—if one is working exclusively to produce fertilizer for crops—tends to become prohibitive on any large scale. Therefore, the techniques for the construction of heat-producing piles with weights of up to 200 tons—like those the Pains are experimenting with—are somewhat different and more mechanized than the methods used for a simple garden compost heap. (However, Jean stresses that—despite all the necessary mechanization—the effects of applying the following information hold great potential for individual reforestation and localized energy production anywhere in the world.)As M. Pain explained it, there are three basic steps in the preparation of the material needed for energy-producing compost piles.[1] Thicket-trimming: While removing brush from forested areas (the Pains gather their "raw material" in such a manner), it's important always to consider the balance of ecological systems. Proper brush trimming encourages the growth of healthy trees, and at the same time maintains ample wildlife habitat and protects the woodland from the threat of fire. Depending upon the climate and soil in any given area, it's often possible—Jean has found—to remove about 15 tons of undergrowth from each acre of land every year . . . and the process will provide the remaining saplings with sufficient sunlight to grow straight and tall.[2] Shredding: Since the underbrush that's collected may reach diameters of up to four inches, relatively heavy-duty machinery is necessary to shred the wood. Jean prefers a cutter that produces slivers rather than chips . . . since water penetrates the surface of a long thin fragment more easily than it does blocky chunks. Though the shavings may be as much as an inch long, the ideal thickness is about 1/16 of an inch.[3] Saturation: M. Pain claims that a cubic yard of brush can, under ideal conditions, absorb and retain about 140 gallons of water if the pile is progressively stacked and soaked over the course of three days. Water must be added to the layers at least once every 4 inches, but watering at 2 1/2-inch intervals will give the best results. In addition, since a certain amount of liquid will filter through the stack, a trough must be built to collect all the excess moisture so that it can be sprayed back onto the heap. Composting OperationAny thermal compost pile—Jean explained—can be sized according to the demand for heat that is anticipated. We'll discuss, then, a heap built from about 16 tons of clippings. This happens to be equivalent to the amount of brush that can be removed from an average acre of timber during a year of normal stewardship . . . and such a pile also produces the right amount of humus to add to an acre of land that's to be used for growing cereal grains.After the twigs from such an area have been shredded, they'll form a mound about 10 feet wide, 10 feet high, and 15 feet long . . . with an average density of about 20 pounds per cubic foot. However, the process of saturation may bring the poundage up to nearly 60, and the final density will still be in the range of 40 pounds per cubic foot. (Jean has found that the piles usually finish decomposing by the eighteenth month . . . but he tests the material by crushing a chip between his fingers to be sure the compost is ready for field and garden use at that time.)While composting goes on, the bacterial activity within a pile produces a considerable amount of heat . . . averaging about 140°F in most instances. Thus it is possible to tap a significant source of thermal energy by intertwining heat-exchanging pipes throughout the interior of the stack.Jean's early research consisted of laying 1" black semirigid polyethylene pipe in a serpentine pattern within the rectangular heaps . . . in either a vertical or horizontal array. While the horizontal arrangement proved to be easier to assemble, the vertical approach was considerably easier to take apart once decomposition was complete. Of course, in either case the connections in the plastic pipe must be secure . . . since a leak will be hard to notice within the heap, and even more difficult to repair . . . without completely disassembling the pile. A Compost Water HeaterOnce the Pains' theories about the heat production capacity of compost piles had been borne out by actual experience—and they were getting enough hot water to keep a 1,000 square-foot home warm—they then concentrated on improving the overall efficiency of their heat capture system. One obvious way to minimize heat loss to the atmosphere was to build the piles in a circular fashion . . . which offered less surface area for a given volume. Furthermore, such an approach promised to simplify both the assembly and the tearing down of the heaps.The basis of Jean's cylindrical compost pile is some sort of tower—built from chicken wire, for example—which will hold the inner brush in place. One example incorporates a retainer five feet in diameter and ten feet tall. Once the tower has been filled with brush clippings, 1" black polyethylene semirigid pipe is wrapped around the structure . . . starting two feet from the bottom, with spirals spaced every six inches, and ending about two feet from the top. The pipe is tied to the tower at its points of entry and exit, and wound tightly enough in between to stay firmly in position.A two-foot-thick layer of composting material is then packed around and atop the tower and pipe . . . with the ends of the tubing protruding, of course. The intake and exhaust ends of the pipes should be connected to form a closed loop running to and from the building being heated. A Quick and Easy Hot Air SystemJean also pointed out that one way to get around the complexity and expense of using water pipes and radiators is to heat air in a thermal pile. The technique works quite well if the heap can be located close enough to the point of use to eliminate any need for extensive lengths of ductwork and the associated expense and heat loss.Jean constructed an experimental air heater to serve a 70-square-foot drying shed-from a pile of about 425 cubic feet. Three levels of six-inch heat duct were set into the compost, with the entry and exit pipes going directly into the building. Circulation is handled by convection, and Jean's records show that the temperature inside the dryer has remained at 125°F for over eight months. Brush GasIt has been known for some time, and documented by experts such as Ram Bux Singh , that methane gas can be produced from cellulose in the absence of air. Methanogenic bacteria thrive on the carbon and nitrogen in pulverized wood, and leave carbon dioxide and methane (CH4) as waste products. However, the microbes work best at about 98°F . . . and therefore require heat augmentation (in most climates).The compost-pile heating method is ideally suited to meet this need, since a biogas digester can easily be enclosed in a heat-producing heap. Jean Pain has experimented with a digester employing a tightly sealed four-cubic-meter vat wrapped with 1" polyethylene pipe. Water is circulated through the pipe to cool the vat when the warmth developed by the compost becomes excessive. Thus, heated water is also a by-product of the process.In addition, a thermometer is placed in the top of the vat for monitoring the interior temperature, and a length of copper tubing runs from the vat to a series of rubber inner tubes which serve as gas storage space. [EDITOR'S NOTE: In working with methane, it's imperative that proper precautions against leakage be taken since the confined fuel can be very explosive when mixed with a small amount of air.] After 71 days of digestion, Jean's biogas plant produced nearly 3,750 cubic feet of gas with a heating value of almost 450 BTU per cubic foot. The 50 cubic feet of fuel available each day was used to feed appliances in the house, and to power the Pains' little Citroen 2CV truck. Future Possibilities for Brush Compost HeatJean and Ida Pain hope that future work with brush composting will result in localized technologies that will return more land to small farming . . . and enable more people to make a living from the soil. In an era in which the survival of the small farmer is threatened by the continual escalation of petroleum-based fuel costs, alternative energy schemes like M. Pain's do, indeed, offer a potential salvation for independent agriculturists . . . who have been the basis of our species' existence here on earth since our beginnings. Mother's Experiments With Compost HeatWhen MOTHER EARTH NEWS' research staffers heard about the Jean Pain compost water heating technique, they immediately decided to build an experimental bioheater out on the Eco-Village property. However, since our shredder isn't set up to produce the thin wood slivers described by Jean, we had to change the heap design slightly to suit our own situation. MOTHER EARTH NEWS' resource manager, Larry Hollar, built the pile by erecting a six-foot-high, five-foot-diameter tower from chicken wire and bamboo, and alternating four-inch layers of wood chips with one-inch layers of manure (to "trigger" the decomposition). Each stage of stacking was followed by thorough saturation with water . . . to achieve a humidification of 40-50%.After filling the interior of the cylinder with composting material, Larry wrapped 1" semirigid hot water pipe around the column ... starting at ground level and spacing 10 coils seven inches apart. Then the entire assembly was packed with two and a half feet of the four-parts-cellulose, one-part-manure mixture—on top and around the sides of the column—and wrapped in black plastic to capture solar heat.While our test mound really hasn't had time to demonstrate its full potential, the interior temperature has already worked its way up to 116°F. Water retained inside the pile reaches 112°F, while a two-gallon-per-minute flow yields 85°F liquid . . . and we're using ground water that enters the heap at a chilly 48°F.Once the oversized wood chips that we were forced to use get into full swing decomposition, we're confident that the temperature of the water heater will rise significantly . . . perhaps to the 140°F Jean gets from his heaps.But in the meantime, our tiny five-ton pile is showing tremendous potential, and we've got some more ideas to get to work on. A shredder that will produce slivers to M. Pain's specifications is in the planning stages . . . and our research team wants to try incorporating an actual hot water tank in the middle of a heap. We'll keep you posted on progress with this revolutionary waste heat management technique ... because, as Jean says, "Now is our last chance." Unconventional Gardening Methods: Pros and Cons Farming the Neighborhood Grow a Community Garden Project Free Course on Organic Seed Production Urban Backyard Farming for Profit

农业

2017-09/1438/en_head.json.gz/2407

Did you know that about half of the water used at the average home goes towards landscape irrigation, and that about half of the landscape water is wasted? Most sprinkler systems are inefficient and tend to waste a lot of water. The most water-efficient irrigation system is you! That’s right, people who water by hand tend to use the least amount of water on their landscapes. The drawback with this method is that people are not always available when the plants need watering, so the latter become unhealthy and the former unhappy. Fortunately, you can design your landscape to incorporate the most drought-tolerant plants, requiring no more than once per week watering, even during the summer (certain short-rooted plants in hot sunny parts of the landscape). But when the convenience of an in-ground irrigation system is needed, it’s important to know that different types of systems are more water-efficient than others. Below are the major types of water-efficient irrigation systems. Drip irrigation is a precise, slow, direct system of applying water to the soil, which makes 100% of the water available to the plant. Where drip systems release so many gallons of water per hour, traditional sprayheads release up to four or more gallons per minute. The environmental and water-saving benefits of drip include decreased run-off, evaporation, and overspray. Drip irrigation is often preferred where you have relatively few plants spread over a large area (for example, a few large bushes with a lot of open space between them) or where you have hard-to-water areas such as narrow planters. When installing drip, you must include a devise to lower the water pressure and a special filter to keep the system from clogging up. Click here for more information on drip irrigation. Bubblers are a form of precise watering that delivers water deep into the soil – hence, it is especially useful around plants that have deep roots, such as trees. Bubblers are also useful in certain planter boxes where traditional sprinklers will not work. Bubblers are durable, require little maintenance, require minimal filtration, minimize overspray and evaporation,and have an easily adjustable flow rate. Stream Rotor Pop-ups Stream rotors replace traditional pop-up sprayheads – that is, you simply screw the old top (the nozzle) off the pop-up and screw the stream rotor back in its place. Compared to traditional sprayheads, stream rotors are fairly water conserving and only release about 25 percent of the water per minute: reducing evaporation and reducing runoff. Stream rotors work well where you need to water a lot of plants that have fairly short root systems, like many groundcovers and bunchgrasses. The alternative irrigation system is to run an extensive drip system. The information on this page can be found in greater detail in the Metropolitan Water District Irrigation Handbook. There is also an online Irrigation class at BeWaterWise.com. For more information on any of these irrigation methods, go to the websites of the big irrigation manufacturers, such as Rainbird and Toro, and go to:

农业

2017-09/1438/en_head.json.gz/2841

Print this page Indian agriculture minister calls for quality seeds 21 Aug 2012, BioSpectrum Bureau , BioSpectrum New Delhi: The Indian seeds industry needs the right push as poor monsoons this year have once again highlighted the need for hybrids that will increase farm productivity and profitability. Farmers' suicides in the past few years have also brought this need to the fore. Commenting on this need, while applauding the Indian seed industry for achieving self-sufficiency in quality seed production, Minister of State for Agriculture, Government of India, Mr Harish Rawat recently said there is a need for production and distribution of hybrids as these have the potential to increase farm productivity and profitability. He added that focus is needed on fodder crops, green manure and minor millets. According to the minister, these areas have not drawn adequate attention so far. Mr Rawat made this comment at a function to inaugurate the golden jubilee year of the National Seeds Corporation (NSC) on August16, 2012. Highlighting the role played by the corporation in bringing the green revolution, the minister said, "In the last fifty years, NSC has emerged as the link between plant research and farmers. In the year 1966-67, NSC played a pivotal role in bringing Green Revolution in the country by undertaking large-scale production of paddy seeds Taichung native-1 and handling the import of 18,000 tonnes of dwarf Mexican wheat seed and monitoring the performance of these seeds with states for success and bringing food security in the nation." The minister said with the liberalization of seed policy, big companies have also established their facilities in India. Mr Rawat was also of the view that they are mostly concentrating on specialized crops and varieties that are their own research product and selling them as proprietary item. "As such, volume of seeds remain either with the public sector or in the hand of small companies with limited resources," he said. On the role of PSUs, minister said, "The public sector units need to realign themselves to become more farmer-friendly and their products must be as per the market demand. Recognizing the contribution of seed companies in the public sector in the past, the goodwill they have established in the market and the level of infrastructure and reach they possess, I feel these companies, including the NSC, should work with clear vision about what the country needs in the light of a growing population, limited arable land, constraints in expanding irrigation facilities and adverse impact of climate, chemicals and fertilizers and growing demand of type and kind of seeds." Dr R S Paroda, chairman, Farmers' Commission of Haryana, also highlighted the achievements of the seed industry in India and areas needing particular attention. He called for a national mission on seeds and said the new seed bill, under consideration of Parliament, will lead to reforms in the seed sector.

农业

2017-09/1438/en_head.json.gz/3675

Oranges With clementines, big sales come in small packages By Cynthia David The clementine craze continues to sweep the U.S., with no end in sight to the appeal of the small easy-peel orange. Clementines and w. murcotts now represent the number one growth in the citrus category, cannibalizing all other citrus, said David Mixon, senior vice president and chief marketing officer of Seald Sweet in Vero Beach, Fla. “Right now, consumers are calling the shots,” said Mixon. “They want it sweet and easy to peel, with no seeds and bright color so it looks ripe. And it has to be convenient.” It’s a far cry from the way we traditionally enjoyed oranges, he said, recalling the juice of a sweet temple orange running down your arm and off your elbow, with plenty of seeds to spit out. Seald Sweet is even putting research money into finding easy-peel varieties that would grow well in Florida, he said. The company is also the third-largest importer of clementines from Spain and Morocco, he said, and produces, sells and markets its own citrus in California. Despite the popularity of clementines, Mixon said only 40% of U.S. consumers know and regularly buy them, partly because they’re not merchandised well. “A lot of retailers find it difficult to make room for a square box that’s only available for a period of time,” he said. “If they don’t build a massive display they have a few boxes lying around the store getting old and nobody sees them. When they do see them they’re not worth eating.” California, where the navel is still king, has seen an explosion of seedless mandarins, said Joel Nelsen, president of California Citrus Mutual in Exeter, Calif. “Seven years ago we had 12,000 producing acres,” Nelsen said. “Now we’re over 30,000 and there’s more in the ground.” Fred Berry, marketing director for Mulholland Citrus, Orange Cove, one of the largest California growers of the easy-peel varieties, said w. murcott mandarins will be the dominant small variety from now until April as the clementine harvest ends, but they’re often retailed as clementines, and they’re so similar consumers can’t tell the difference. While California clementines have an advantage over imports because the fruit may be fresher and doesn’t have to be cold-treated, growers have a freight disadvantage since the majority of the population lives east of Mississippi, Berry said. This year, the dollar is stronger against the euro for the first time in several years, prompting some East Coast customers to buy more fruit from Spain and Morocco, he said. “So far, we are all right,” Berry said. “As long as we can maximize our grower returns, and not have to go into a saturated market, we’re just that much better off.” Despite the concern that California is planting too many clementine varieties, Mulholland still sees potential for growth. “If people are still planting, it means there’s still room for growth in terms of demand,” he said. “That growth may come at the expense of other varietals, such as navels. Then again, when you look at the overall consumption in Europe of easy-peelers versus current U.S. consumption, we have a lot of room for growth.” Producing a seedless clementine is much easier for growers in Spain and Morocco, because their groves are separate from the seeded varieties, Mixon said. “We fight the seeds in California,” he said. “In certain areas we net them and do the best we can.” With groves closer together, however, he said “it’s almost impossible to eliminate seeds.” Topics: w. murcottclementine appealclementine trendclementine consumption About the Author: Cynthia David

农业

2017-09/1438/en_head.json.gz/3774

ABC invests $4.7 million for next gen almond farming, sustainability Feb 16, 2017 California wine grape industry seeks no-touch vineyard Feb 10, 2017 Jimi Valov: a proud ambassador of farming, community and pistachios Feb 13, 2017 Former Ariz. ginner Charlie Owen posthumously awarded Lifetime Achievement Award Feb 14, 2017 California water crisis over? Harry Cline | Aug 03, 2010 A little over a year ago, farmers, farm workers and local politicians were marching arm-in-arm across the San Joaquin Valley begging for water for agriculture and jobs. About the same time, politicians in Sacramento were behind closed doors making pork-and-bean deals to get an $11-billion bond issue on the November 2010 ballot. Today the hardest hit farmers on the West Side of the San Joaquin Valley want to sell surplus water to Los Angeles and the water bond will very likely be postponed until 2012. What happened? It rained and snowed in California. Welcome to the wacky world of California water. From drought to surplus in less than 18 months. It has been the scenario no one wanted, but feared the most. California’s water infrastructure is 18 months older than it was last spring and still broken. However, Californians no longer notice. The hills were green far into summer from all the rain and snow. Everyone is still overwatering their lawns and no swimming pools are dry. When this year’s water season started, farmers were told they’d get maybe 5 percent of their total water allocation. By the end of the allocation season, it was up to 50 percent. However, it was too late by then to plant additional crops to use the water. The farmers cannot hold it over in the San Luis Reservoir for 2011 because the lake is full after a wet year. It must be lowered this fall to make room for next winter’s snowmelt — if there is one. Farmers cannot use all of it this winter, so it is either sell 50,000 to 100,000 acre feet of water to L.A. or lose it. L.A.’s urban reservoirs are low and L.A. and Westlands Water District are trying to cut a deal to take the irrigation water for urban use this summer and fall in exchange for L.A. water for farming next year. If there was additional storage available, Westlands could hold the water over for 2011. That is the problem with the state’s outdated water system. It was built for a population of 20 million Californians where more than 37 million now live. Storage is woefully inadequate. Water management is a guessing game with little room to wiggle in this outdated system. The state’s water supply is managed based on “normal” rain and snow. If there is too much runoff, then excess water is released to go to the ocean. If the lakes are drained and runoff is below normal, agricultural and urban water users suffer. And you also have the environmental/fish preservation issues muddling that. The lame duck California governator has proposed postponing the water ballot until 2012 in the wake of California’s continuing budget deficit. The Legislature must agree, but most indicate it is a done deal. The idea is getting support from those who say the water package must be reworked to make it more politically and economically palatable and still fix the state’s water system. So now we wait for the next drought and hope it lasts long enough to convince voters there is a true water crisis. We just hope we don’t have to persevere too long until there is only a little of agriculture left to save. email: [email protected] TAGS: Legislative 0 comments Hide comments

农业

2017-09/1438/en_head.json.gz/6009

Review and Improvements of Existing Delimitations of Rural Areas ... Review and Improvements of Existing Delimitations of Rural Areas in Europe Over the last twenty years, the European Commission has taken policy initiatives with ever greater emphasis on the territorial perspective. The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) reform, in particular the rural development policy, foresees measures on territorial characteristics which implies the use of urban/rural definitions for the broad targeting of resources. The focus of the CAP has shifted from the previous dominance of sectoral market measures to a concern for a more integrated and sustainable agricultural and rural development policy. In the ‘Future of Rural Society’ Report (CEC 1988), the Commission had already identified different types of rural areas: rural areas under pressure of modern life, rural areas in decline and very marginal rural areas. However such a differentiation was not quantified. Accessibility was implicit in this urban-rural gradient. In 1994, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) developed a simple territorial scheme that identifies types of regions based on population density applied at two hierarchical levels. As there is no commonly agreed definition of rural areas at European level, the OECD typology is considered as an easy and acceptable approach for identifying rural areas. However, this typology used is exclusively based on population densities and is highly sensitive to the size of the geographic units and the classification thresholds. Over the years, attempts have been made to review and improve the OECD approach and also alternative methodologies have been proposed. However, the current methods based merely on population distributions, do not allow for detailed and quantified geographical analysis and do not reflect two main characters differentiating rural from urban areas: the “natural” (non-artificial) surface and the accessibility/remoteness. The objective of this study was to improve the characterization of rural areas at commune level (Local Administrative Unit – LAU 2) by introducing the criteria of accessibility (peripherality) and ‘natural (nonartificial) space in the OECD methodology. The assessment was carried out at LAU2 (and NUTS3) level for 3 Member States (Belgium, France and Poland), testing different thresholds. Firstly, as indicator of peripherality, the travel time by road network to urban centres has been selected by using the speed limit of each category of roads (based on the EuroRegionalMap dataset) and two impedance factors, a congestion index (Urban Morphological Zones)and a slope index (DEM,100m). In order to discriminate the communes on the basis of the peripherality index, two time breaks have been tested: 30 and 60 minutes. A criterion based on the total population per commune (Eurostat SIRE database, census per commune 2001) has been used to select the urban centres and the thresholds of 50,000 and 100,000 of inhabitants have been tested. The origin/destination cost matrix solver was applied, using centroids of LAU2 as destinations/facilities. For the final selection of the optimal thresholds, it was opted that extreme situations should be excluded: the threshold of 50,000 inhabitants for an urban centre and the travel time period of 30 minutes appeared to be the most appropriate criteria to evaluate the accessibility to cities. A sensibility analysis was followed out to evaluate the impact of the integration of a 100 m DEM and a congestion effect which showed that the congestion effect impact on the classification is significantly more important than the one related to the slope effect. The peripherality analysis was done for three countries (BE, FR and PL) considering them as being “isolated” countries. A border-effect analysis was carried out (for Belgium), to assess the impact of the urban centres of the neighbouring countries and it appeared that the accessibility of communes close to borders is indeed influenced by the neighbouring cities. Secondly, the land cover criterion to assess the ‘natural’ (non-artificial) surface of a LAU2, was used based on the methodology of Vard et al.(2005) that states that a commune will be classified as “rural” if at least 90 % of its area is covered by forest, agricultural or natural areas (Corine Land Cover 2000). Finally, the peripherality index and the land cover indicator were integrated in the OECD methodology. The rural typology contains 4 classes as only one threshold of population density (150 inhab./km²) is used and only two characteristics are combined (population density with remoteness/accessibility or population density with land cover) because there are correlations between some categories of the 3 characteristics (population density, land use and remoteness/accessibility). No comments were found for Review and Improvements of Existing Delimitations of Rural Areas in Europe. Be the first to comment!

农业

2017-09/1438/en_head.json.gz/6749

How Fancy Cheese May Save Some Small-Scale Dairies By Amy Mayer Kevin and Ranae Dietzel, owners of a small dairy herd near Jewell, Iowa, named their signature cheese after this cow, Ingrid. Amy Mayer Wheels of cheese age in a climate-controlled room of the Dietzels' custom-made cheesery. C.J. Bienert, owner of The Cheese Shop in Des Moines, says he expects to see more growth in domestic cheeses in the coming years. Originally published on February 17, 2017 8:56 am On a clear, cold winter evening, the sun begins to set at Lost Lake Farm near Jewell, Iowa, and Kevin Dietzel calls his 15 dairy cows to come home. "Come on!" he hollers in a singsong voice. "Come on!" Brown Swiss cows and black Normandy cows trot across the frozen field and, in groups of four, are ushered into the small milking parlor. Unstable milk prices that rarely get very high have forced most dairies to grow their herds to make money on volume. In general, farmers rarely keep only one or two cows in a red barn as is so often depicted in children's books. Dietzel, who has 15 milking cows, is among the small-dairy farmers in the U.S. trying to turn a profit without having to churn out substantially more milk. "My business plan was to add value to that milk by making cheese," Dietzel says. Increasing demand for upscale, local foods has created a market for on-farm cheese-makers like Dietzel. Profit is not guaranteed and the upfront investment is significant, but it's the model Dietzel has chosen. Dietzel had always been interested in dairy farming, but when he finally decided to give it a go, he found himself in central Iowa, where land is expensive and dairy herds are few. He and his wife built a cheesery with a milking parlor on one end, and through a separate entrance, a near-sterile looking room filled with stainless steel and food-grade plastic. At the entrance, Dietzel trades his warm hat and coat for a hairnet and apron and gets to work massaging curds into wheels of cheese. His signature product is Ingrid's Pride, named for one of the cows. It's a cheese related to provolone, but made using Dietzel's own technique and featuring a unique flavor related to the grasses his cows eat. Dietzel's hand-made, small-batch processing means he can sell cheese for more than what a big company like Kraft or Cabot could. "We have to do something that's a little bit more original and is also going to be worth that money," he says. "Hopefully, we're doing that." Dietzel is not the only one. Iowa State University dairy scientist Stephanie Clark says that over the past seven years, she's seen one to two new startups invest in cheese each year. "It's amazing the history that we have in Iowa on its own," Clark says, "and then we have quite a lot of success throughout the Midwest." The math can make sense. With a back-of-the-envelope calculation, Clark says one cow's milk might yield a farmer $13 a day. Turning that milk to cheese could gross the same farmer $105. Obviously, there are expenses beyond what a milk-only dairy has. But small, all-in-one businesses make money with cheeses that fetch a premium. In the past 15 years, membership in the American Cheese Society — a national group of home and on-farm cheesemakers — has more than doubled to 1,700 members today. "We are talking about specialty cheese," Clark says. "We're talking about smaller farms — [they] can be artisan, can be farmstead." The small storefront of The Cheese Shop in Des Moines is crowded with a cheese case, wine displays and a handful of tables for the cheese-centric lunch menu. A cheesemonger greets everyone who enters and all customers are encouraged to taste samples before buying. Owner C.J. Bienert was enamored of the taste and variety of American cheeses when he opened the shop five years ago. He combs the Midwest for the best ones, even stocking a small amount of an apple cider-washed goat cheese from Michigan's Upper Peninsula that costs $50 a pound. "But it sells," Bienert says with a laugh. "You buy a tenth of a pound, $5 worth, a very small little taste, and it's a treat." Still, that's 10 times what you might pay for a simple block at the supermarket. Many of Bienert's other offerings are still special, but less expensive. Right now, he says about 70 percent of the cheeses in the shop are domestic. "I really do believe in the next five years we'll be able to be 80 to 90 percent American artisan and we'll have at least half a dozen, if not a dozen, more producers here in Iowa," Bienert says. The Cheese Shop also features cheeses from Missouri, Nebraska, Colorado and other regions of the country. On a gray day with a wintry mix falling outside, comfort foods like cheese-heavy macaroni and grilled cheese sandwiches attract a lunch crowd. "I'm a big blue cheese fan, but anything soft and stinky is what I like," says Cassie Valek of nearby Newton, Iowa. "I like the Prairie Breeze cheddar; I think those are probably my two favorites. I'm fairly new to Iowa, so I like to get out and explore and try all of the options here." Another customer, Parady Boatwright, says she stops in almost once a week. "There's a lot of misconception that great cheese can only happen in one country," says Boatwright, who grew up in France but has been in Iowa for more than 20 years. "But when you come here, The Cheese Shop, it reminds you that great products can come from anywhere and are made by people who love what they do." This story comes to us from Harvest Public Media, a reporting collaboration focused on food and agriculture. Copyright 2017 Iowa Public Radio. To see more, visit Iowa Public Radio. TweetShareGoogle+EmailView the discussion thread. © 2017 WJSU

农业

2017-09/1438/en_head.json.gz/6782

Agweb HomeFarm Journal HomeNewsStrength in Numbers What Made It Work There was unquestionable trust among the group members, and an agreement that while they were a group, each business was separate. This meant some individuals might be successful at the auction and others wouldn't, as was the case with two members. The area of Macoupin and Montgomery counties in central Illinois, known as Racehorse Flats, has produced a feel-good story the likes of which isn't heard much these days. The region's nickname comes from the aggressive attitude of area farmers: They're always in a race to be first in the field each spring. That attitude has produced a competitive landscape that's as rocky as the countryside is flat and fertile. Farms of 10,000 acres are common, and the area has three operations that total more than 30,000 acres each. So when nearly 4,000 acres of the locally famous Kilton land came up for sale around Litchfield, Ill., three area farmers knew they had to get it. Steve Gartner, Kevin Niemann and Chris Zimmerman each farmed ground that was near some of the parcels, which surround Litchfield to the north and west. And it is good land. Individually, it would be difficult to compete for the 43 tracts in the multiparcel auction, particularly in this region of the state. Guys like these, with a couple thousand acres each, have to be resourceful to secure highly productive, conveniently located ground like this. Well, they got downright creative when they decided to join forces with other area farmers. A pool of money that was more than $15 million deep put them in the running. "An advantage to this is we were able to work with people who would normally be our competitors in the auction," Zimmerman says. "We were looking at as many as eight bidders. Now we were all together." A group of 10 businesses, ranging in size from 600 acres to 3,000 acres, was formed. The group walked away from the January 21, 2009, auction 2,462 acres stronger. Each partner took his pre-agreed share of land and the mortgage that goes along with it. Play nice. The original three, Zimmerman, Gartner and Niemann, met to discuss how they would approach the potential purchase and who they wanted to join forces with. This ruffled a few feathers along the way, Gartner says. "The three of us know each other and we trust each other. I kept saying we had to find guys who play well with others. There might be some guys in the area who aren't happy they weren't asked, but we wanted to work with people we knew and trusted. "It was important for everyone to be open and honest because we had to show what tracts we were bidding on and how much each of us could afford to bid." Each person targeted by the three men as a potential member was notified, and they all met in Niemann's shop to discuss the partnership. Of the members at that initial meeting, only two didn't come back. There is no formal partnership, Gartner says. No contracts were ever signed between the group members, and all agreements were made with a handshake. After the auction, each member of the group was responsible for his own purchase and has no obligation to the group as a whole or to any individual in it. Hash it out. Once the group was formed, egos were checked and financing was secured, and it was time to commence negotiations over who was in for which tracts. "We got together about four times after that initial meeting to pick and choose who would bid on what ground," Zimmerman says. "There wasn't too much of an issue, but there were some cases where people wanted to bid on the same tract. We just got together in the shop and hashed it out." The basis of the negotiation process was simple, Niemann says. "There's enough ground to go around. And if we didn't get what we wanted, it wouldn't be the end of the world." All the current tenants of the Kilton ground were invited to be part of the group, and they were given first opportunity to choose the tracts they would bid on. In some cases, hashing it out meant that some members had to give up to another member land that they had farmed for years. But oddly enough, everyone came out of the process happy. For example, Brad Carriker and his father, Jim, bought ground that Jay Greenwalt farmed, as did Brad Pastrovich and his dad, Dave. But Greenwalt is satisfied because he picked up a new piece of land. "The ground Brad and Jim got was right next to a piece of ground they were farming, so they should have been farming it anyway," Greenwalt says. "I checked with the guy farming the piece I got, and he wasn't interested in buying it. He was okay with me bidding on it." How it works. Each tract was auctioned separately, says Kent Aumann of Aumann Auctions. After all 43 auctions had established the base for each tract, the call went out to the nearly 300 bidders to form combinations of tracts. "To make combinations work, the sum of the tracts you put together has to be worth more than the sum of what they are when they're apart. Whichever way they're worth more is how they're going to stay," he says. A high first-round bid can work well if you're interested in only one or two tracts. "With a strong first round, you have a better chance of getting the ground. If you have ground that is worth $6,000/acre, and the base is $4,000/acre, everything is going to have raises. If you get one tract up around $6,000/acre, you're probably going to get it," Aumann says. That method makes a group like this work, Zimmerman says. "Once you put together a big group, it makes a pretty good chunk of money. As individuals, you just can't compete." The group had one bidder number, and everything was handled through it. Each member was responsible for his own financing and had his own closing date and signed contract for his piece of ground. Sale day. As the auction progressed, the group used an Excel spreadsheet designed by group member Jeff Helgen to track the group's progress and determine how much money each individual was responsible for throughout the day. They compared the total bid to the amount each person could pay, and that resulted in two group members dropping out, Zimmerman says. Although this was unfortunate for those members, it was a seamless process because the group had decided up front how much each person could afford and knew who was bidding on which piece of ground. The group simply gave up on the problem tract and moved on to the remaining 28 tracts on their wish list. In the event one of the buyers is not able to close on the ground, the responsibility for the ground falls back on the individual doing the bidding, Aumann says. For this group, Zimmerman doesn't see that becoming a problem, and he says he hopes the group will hold together given their current satisfaction. "Today, everyone is happy. We'll see in 10 years if everyone still feels that way." Illinois Prices Forge Ahead; Iowa Backs Off The annual survey of Illinois farmland prices released in March by the Illinois Society of Professional Farm Managers and Rural Appraisers shows most regions and land qualities posted gains last year. The competitive Central Region, including the counties where the auction described in this feature took place, was up the most—15% for excellent ground, 13% for good land and 0% to 12% for average land. Price changes in the Northern Region were the most variable, ranging from -10% to +20%. "Parts of this area were seeing a lot of development, and that simply dried up," says Bob Swires, chairman of the survey project. The latest Iowa survey, on the other hand, averaged a 7.6% decrease. However, this survey was for the six months from September 2008 to March 2009. On a yearly basis, declines were more modest, with a maximum drop of 5.8% in the West-Central region and changes positive in the Southern tier. "The districts posting year-on-year declines are the ones that gained the most in recent years," notes Troy Louwagie, head of the survey for the Iowa Farm and Land Chapter #2 Realtors Land Institute. Is Iowa's softening a precursor to weaker prices elsewhere? The Illinois survey respondents expect a slight decrease in farmland prices this year and are almost evenly divided among up, unchanged and down for 2010. —Linda H. Smith To contact Greg Vincent, e-mail [email protected]. Top Producer, Spring 2009​

农业

2017-09/1438/en_head.json.gz/6816

Home>Habitats>Grasslands, UK We're a charity. Please help us. Greater knapweed, field scabious, wild carrot and hawkbit flowering in meadow In the UK there are a number of different types of grassland which vary depending on the soil type and geography of the area. Almost all the grassland in the UK is semi-natural, having been altered throughout history by farming practices such as grazing, mowing, burning and the removal of larger plants. Meadows are perhaps the best known of all grasslands, famous for their rich variety of wildflowers. They are cut for hay and grazed during the winter. Machair is a very rare grassland habitat, only found along parts of the Scottish and Irish coasts. Grasslands, UK fact fileTypes of grasslandRangeBiodiversityThreatsConservationGet involvedVisit a UK grasslandFind out moreGlossary Types of grassland There is very little entirely natural grassland left in the UK and most of the grassland we are familiar with can be described as semi-natural, having been altered throughout history by farming practices such as grazing, mowing, burning and the removal of larger plants. Throughout the UK there are a number of different types of grassland which vary depending on the soil type and geography of the area. Meadows are perhaps the best known of all grasslands, famous for their rich variety of wildflowers. There are various types of meadow found in the UK, from lowland meadows and flood pastures to the scarce upland hay meadows of the north of England. Meadows must be actively managed using traditional farming methods and after the flowers have seeded these grasslands are cut for hay and reverted to grazing during the winter. Calcareous grasslands Chalk or limestone grasslands, also known as calcareous grasslands, occur in both upland and lowland areas. They are managed by regular grazing, usually by sheep, which encourages plant diversity and prevents any one species from dominating this habitat. Calcareous grasslands are best known for the huge number of butterfly and moth species they support, as well as being home to a number of rare orchids. Acid grasslands Acid grasslands often occur on areas of infertile soil unsuitable for growing crops, and were traditionally used as common grazing land. These grasslands are characterised by clumps of vegetation interspersed with areas of open ground. Species found here include heathers, mosses, lichens, solitary bees and wasps and the rare field cricket (Gryllus campestris). Marshy grasslands Marshy grasslands, also known as purple moor grass and rush pasture, are most commonly found in the west of the UK thanks to the high rainfall and peaty soils of this region. Characterised by tussocks of purple moor-grass and rushes, these grasslands provide important habitat for a number of species, including ground-nesting birds and invertebrates such as the marsh fritillary (Euphydryas aurinia). Machair Machair is a rare grassland habitat, only found along parts of the Scottish and Irish coasts. Carefully managed by local communities, machair is found on sandy coastal soils and boasts an impressive variety of flowers. It is also home to plenty of invertebrate species, particularly bees, as well as a number of breeding birds. Calaminarian grasslands Calaminarian grasslands are found on soils with high levels of heavy metals which are toxic to many plant species. As a result, the plant life found in these grasslands is less varied, however they are home to some rare plants such as Young's helleborine (Epipactis youngiana) and a large number of lichens. Grasslands occur throughout the UK but as agriculture has intensified, vast areas of traditional, wildlife-rich grasslands have been lost and the remaining fragments are small and isolated. For instance, estimates suggest that within the last 75 years 80% of our chalk grassland and 97% of our lowland meadows have been destroyed. In England, The Grassland Trust estimated that only around 100,000 hectares of wildlife-rich grassland remain. Top Biodiversity Grasslands are among the richest wildlife habitats in the UK. Famous for their plant and invertebrate life, grasslands also support a diverse range of mammals, birds and reptiles. Bats such as the greater horseshoe bat (Rhinolophus ferrumequinum) are attracted to feed on the large number of invertebrates found in grasslands. Rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus) are a familiar sight and play an important role in grazing, and small mammals such as the field vole (Microtus agrestis) and harvest mouse (Micromys minutus) attract predators including the weasel (Mustela nivalis), stoat (Mustela erminea) and red fox (Vulpes vulpes). A huge number of birds can be found in grassland habitats, including species in decline such as the skylark (Alauda arvensis) and nationally scarce birds such as the chough (Pyrrhocorax pyrrhocorax) and corncrake (Crex crex). Grasslands are important breeding habitats for many ground-nesting species such as lapwings (Vanellus vanellus) and curlews, and the presence of small mammals attracts birds of prey including barn owls (Tyto alba), northern harrier (Circus cyaneus) and kestrel (Falco tinnunculus). In grasslands with open patches of bare ground reptiles such as grass snakes (Natrix natrix) and adders (Vipera berus) can be seen basking. In marshy grasslands common frogs (Rana temporaria) may lay their eggs in pools of temporary water. A vast number of invertebrate species are found in grasslands as the plants found here provide plentiful nectar and shelter. Butterflies are well known grassland residents and species include the common blue (Polyommatus icarus), Orange tip (Anthocharis cardamines) and meadow brown (Maniola jurtina). A variety of bee species inhabit grasslands, as well as lesser known and scarce species such as the wart-biter cricket (Decticus verrucivorus) and hornet robberfly (Asilus crabroniformis). Plants and fungi Grasslands contain a huge variety of plant species such including grasses, rushes, wildflowers, herbs, heathers and mosses. Common species include bird’s-foot-trefoil (Lotus corniculatus), cowslip (Primula veris), yellow rattle (Rhianthus minor) and harebell (Campanula rotundifolia). Grasslands are also home to a number of notable orchid species, including the monkey orchid (Orchis simia) and late spider orchid (Ophrys fuciflora). A number of lichens and fungi also inhabit UK grasslands, including species such as the pink waxcap (Hygrocybe calyptriformis) and olive earthtongue (Microglossum olivaceum). Explore the biodiversity of UK grasslands: Lapwing (Vanellus vanellus)Common blue (Polyommatus icarus)Harebell (Campanula rotundifolia) Top Threats Wildlife-rich grasslands require careful management, and over time farmers and landowners have been moving away from traditional methods of land management towards more intensive farming practices such as ploughing and draining, using fertilisers and herbicides, and converting grassland to use for arable crops. Although intensive farming and overgrazing is damaging for grassland, neglected or abandoned grassland is just as vulnerable, as without any management at all it can quickly become overtaken by scrub. In parklands and other grasslands which receive high levels of recreational use, the soil fertility may be altered by dog fouling or pollution from cars and other vehicles. The planting of trees, shrubs and other introduced plants can also seriously damage grassland habitats. Grasslands are also being lost through urban expansion, development and road building, leaving remaining areas fragmented and isolated, which can prevent wildlife from dispersing. Top In terms of conserving grassland habitat, it is vital to keep on top of scrub clearance and encourage farmers and landowners to use traditional grazing and cutting methods to manage their land. A wide range of literature is available offering landowners advice on managing grasslands for the benefit of wildlife. For example, Buglife offer guides to managing a variety of grassland habitats for invertebrates and Natural England have produced a number of publications advising on managing, restoring and creating grassland. Grasslands can also be afforded some protection as designated nature reserves which can be carefully managed. For example, traditional grazing animals can be re-introduced, and in areas where the soil fertility has been artificially improved the nutrient-rich topsoil can be removed to allow grassland species to naturally re-colonise. Areas with introduced plants can be cleared and re-planted with seeds from unimproved grasslands. Top There are lots of practical, hands on ways you can get involved in grassland conservation, and contacting a conservation organisation such as your local Wildlife Trust is a great way to discover volunteering opportunities in your area. Activities could include scrub clearance, surveying and monitoring animal and plant species, building fences or even putting up bat boxes. There are also simple steps you can take in your day to day life which can make a big difference, for instance showing your support by buying produce directly from local farmers who use traditional land management techniques. You might even decide to create a wildflower meadow in your own garden, and Natural England has produced a helpful guide on how to do this. Visit a UK Grassland There are some fantastic grasslands to visit in the UK. If you want to explore these unique habitats, you can find some suggestions of where to start your journey here: Download the Wildlife Trust’s guide to 40 great places to see wildflower meadows Explore the National Trust’s Top 5 grasslands The Grasslands Trust’s top grassland sites to visit Some of our favourite UK grasslands include: Devil's Dyke, West Sussex, England Only a few miles from Brighton, Devil’s Dyke is an historical site in the South Downs National Park with undulating chalk grassland to explore. Keep an eye out for butterflies and orchids here. Uist islands, Outer Hebrides, Scotland The Outer Hebrides are one of the best places to see machair, the rare coastal grassland filled with wildflowers. Here the largest expanses of machair can be found on the west coast of the Uists. Great Orme, Llandudno, Wales Great Orme's Head in Llanduno has been described as one of the most outstanding areas of wildlife-rich grassland in Wales, with spectacular views and plenty of rare plants and invertebrates. Silverdale, Lancashire, England Silverdale on the edge of Morecambe Bay boasts an expanse of grassland which leads to the shore. A great place for walking, you may spot a number of butterflies and birds such as the linnet (Carduelis cannabina). Denmark Farm, Ceredigion, Wales Denmark Farm in Wales is an example of how careful management can result in the return of wildlife-rich meadows in an area which has previously been intensively farmed. Their most diverse meadow now contains over 100 species. Richmond Park, London, England The parklands and commons of Greater London contain a number of important acid grassland sites which are easy to visit. Richmond Park is known for its deer but is also home to a wealth of other species including many birds, fungi and over 1,350 species of beetle. Find out more about UK grasslands and their conservation: The Wildlife Trusts: Habitat Explorer - Grassland The Wildlife Trusts: Habitat Explorer - Calaminarian Grassland The Wildlife Trusts: Habitat Explorer - Lowland Calcareous Grassland The Wildlife Trusts: Habitat Explorer - Lowland Dry Acid Grassland The Wildlife Trusts: Habitat Explorer - Lowland Meadows The Wildlife Trusts: Habitat Explorer - Machair The Wildlife Trusts: Habitat Explorer - Purple Moor Grass and Rush Pasture The Wildlife Trusts: Habitat Explorer - Upland Calcareous Grassland The Grasslands Trust Joint Nature Conservation Committee - UK Lowland Grassland Habitats London Biodiversity Partnership - Acid Grassland The Natural History Museum - British Habitats: Meadow The Natural History Museum - British Habitats: Chalk grassland BBC Nature - Habitats: Chalk Grassland BBC Nature - Habitats: Wildflower Meadow InvertebratesAnimals with no backbone, such as insects, crustaceans, worms, molluscs, spiders, cnidarians (jellyfish, corals, sea anemones) and echinoderms.LichenA composite organism made up of a fungus in a co-operative partnership with an alga. Owing to this partnership, lichens can thrive in harsh environments such as mountaintops and polar regions. Characteristically forms a crustlike or branching growth on rocks or tree trunks. Top XClose © David Kjaer / naturepl.com XClose Terms and Conditions of Use of Materials Copyright in this website and materials contained on this website (Material) belongs to Wildscreen or its licensors. Visitors to this website (End Users) are entitled to: view the contents of, and Material on, the website; download and retain copies of the Material on their personal systems in digital form in low resolution for their own personal use; teachers, lecturers and students may incorporate the Material in their educational material (including, but not limited to, their lesson plans, presentations, worksheets and projects) in hard copy and digital format for use within a registered educational establishment, provided that the integrity of the Material is maintained and that copyright ownership and authorship is appropriately acknowledged by the End User. End Users shall not copy or otherwise extract, alter or manipulate Material other than as permitted in these Terms and Conditions of Use of Materials. Additional use of flagged Material Green-flagged material Certain Materials on this website (contributed under Wildscreen Licence 4) display green flags next to the Material and are therefore available for not-for-profit conservation or not-for-profit educational use. These green-flagged Materials may be used by End Users, who are individuals or not-for-profit organisations, for their not-for-profit conservation or not-for-profit educational purposes. Low resolution, watermarked versions of the Material may be copied from this website by such End Users for such purposes. If you require high resolution or non-watermarked versions of the Material, please contact Wildscreen with details of your proposed use. Search ARKive for green-flagged Material. Creative commons Material Materials licensed to Wildscreen under a Creative Commons licence are clearly marked with Creative Commons buttons and may be used by End Users only in the way allowed by the specific Creative Commons licence under which they have been submitted. Please see http://creativecommons.org for details. Any other use Please contact the copyright owners directly (copyright and contact details are shown for each media item) to negotiate terms and conditions for any use of Material other than those expressly permitted above. Please note that many of the contributors to ARKive are commercial operators and may request a fee for such use. Save as permitted above, no person or organisation is permitted to incorporate any copyright Material from this website into any other work or publication in any format (this includes but is not limited to: websites, Apps, CDs, DVDs, intranets, extranets, signage and interpretation, digital communications or on printed materials for external or other distribution). Use of the Material for promotional, administrative or for-profit purposes is not permitted. More »Grasslands, UK species Get the latest wild news direct to your inbox. Get involved ARKive relies on its media donors to donate photos and videos. Can you help? There are plenty of other ways you can get involved too! Blog Tuesday 14 February

农业

2017-09/1438/en_head.json.gz/7846

What is a Flowering Fern? O. Parker Edited By: Angela B. A flowering fern is a large, shrub-like fern that grows in damp areas where water supply is continuous. The term "flowering fern" is derived from spore-bearing fronds that appear in mid- to late summer and are said to resemble a spent flower. This species has members native to North and South America, Europe, Asia, Africa, and the British Isles. Another widely used common name is royal fern. The scientific name is Osmunda regalis. A mature flowering fern grows 6 feet (1.8 m) tall and 3 feet (about 1 m) wide. The fronds are from 2 feet to 5 feet (.6 m to 1.5 m) long with delicate green opposite leaves. The fronds are from 12 inches to 18 inches (30 cm to 45 cm) wide. The roots of the flowering fern are black with a portion of the mass raised up to 6 inches (15 cm) above the surface of the soil. The roots also penetrate the soil to reach the underground water table. Unlike most ferns that thrive in cool, shaded areas, the flowering fern grows well in full sun or partial shade. In the wild it grows alongside rivers and streams, at the edge of ponds, and in open, damp meadows, wet woodlands, marshlands, swamps and bogs. In warm areas, the leaves stay green all year; cooler areas will see the ferns die back in the winter and return in the spring. The flowering fern is hardy to temperatures as low as -4 degrees Fahrenheit (-20 C). Ad In cultivation, the flowering fern prefers sandy, damp soil with an acidic pH. It can be planted in full sun as long as there is constant access to water, or in light shade with frequent irrigation. Though large, this fern transplants well any time of year; in very hot weather, the fern should be moved in the evening when the air is cool. Flowering ferns are planted near garden ponds, where the deep roots can access the water. In a shrub bed or alone in the landscape, the bright green foliage creates a lush, green backdrop with continuous water. To propagate the flowering fern, sections of the root can be divided and replanted. The spores, produced in midsummer, can be collected and replanted in damp peat moss or compost in a greenhouse. Once collected, the spores must be sown within three days. Plants grown from spores should be raised in a greenhouse for the first two years before being moved outside. Ad What Is a Button Fern? How Do I Choose the Best Flowering Houseplants? What is Cistus Incanus? What is Physocarpus? What is a Water Fern? What is Araceae? What is Pithecellobium?

农业

2017-09/1438/en_head.json.gz/8054

Search View Archive The one licensed dairy farm in Dukes County, Mermaid Farm, won’t benefit greatly from the new dairy farm law aimed at bigger producers, said its owner Allen Healy, but the provisions could help farmers more broadly. Nature & ScienceFarm & Field Help is on the Way for Vineyard Farmers Julia Rappaport Monday, August 18, 2008 - 8:00pm It’s called the Dairy Farm Preservation Act, but legislation signed into law last week by Gov. Deval Patrick will be a boost for all kinds of small farmers. The law will make available more grant money and funds, will create a special board to promote dairy farming in the commonwealth and will increase to 10 miles the distance farmers can drive their unregistered tractors and farm equipment.“In a nutshell it really represents a really monumental piece of legislation,” said Department of Agricultural Resources assistant commissioner Scott J. Soares yesterday. “It provides a variety of things for dairy farmers and for agriculture broadly.”Signed by the governor on Thursday, the law has eight parts, which include:• A low-interest loan program for farmers.• Income tax credits to dairy farmers during months when milk prices fall below production costs.• More funding for farmers with land held in agricultural preservation restriction,• The establishment of a dairy promotion board.• Exempting farm animals and farm equipment used for agricultural purposes from personal property taxes.• A provision allowing farmers to drive their unregistered farm vehicles ten miles (previously the limit was two miles).• An allowance for coupons for fluid milk in the state.• The establishment of a commission to study legal barriers to adopting new farm technology.“This is very gratifying. I didn’t know they knew we were out here,” said Jim Athearn, who owns Morning Glory Farm in Edgartown. Mr. Athearn also sits on the Martha’s Vineyard Commission and is a vice president of the Agricultural Society. “This could have an effect on me and it could have an effect on a rising farmer on the Vineyard who may now have more tools to use to get started.”The law grew out of a report written after high costs and low milk prices drove Governor Patrick to declare a state of emergency for Massachusetts dairy farmers in 2007. It seeks to protect a state industry which has declined more than 77 per cent in the past 25 years. There are currently 183 licensed dairy farms in Massachusetts; in 1950, there were 6,760 dairy farms. There is one licensed dairy farm in Dukes County: Allen Healy’s Mermaid Farm in Chilmark.Vineyard farmers can take advantage of the new law. Mr. Athearn regularly applies for grants to help offset the costs of running his farm. And with some of the land he farms protected under agricultural preservation restrictions, until last week he was prohibited from applying for state farm viability funding. “I have looked under the farm viability funds for grants before, but was never able to because my land is in permanent preservation,” Mr. Athearn said. “[Now] I may apply for the funding.”Mr. Soares said: “This gives us a chance not just to preserve the land base, but also to preserve the agricultural business which needs to occur to keep these working land bases working.”Island farmers could also get a boost from the creation of new four-year low-interest loans of up to $500,000. “The two most helpful things to me when I was getting started were the Farmers Home Administration’s low interest loans and the New England Vegetable Growers seminars,” Mr. Athearn said. “Things like that can be very helpful to someone trying to pull themselves up.”William J. Gillmeister, chief economist for the state Department of Agricultural Resources, agreed. “That is a significant benefit to all farms. Oftentimes, farmers need to update their equipment. They may need to adopt new technologies and they may need some funds to do that. There are some granting programs already established, some incentives for the adoption of technologies, but this will provide even further resources for farms to take advantage,” he said.The bulk of the bill, which is aimed at dairy farmers, will have little impact for Mr. Healy who milks four cows and sells 25 half-gallon bottles of raw milk a day in the summertime. “The only thing that affects me is the farm vehicle thing,” he said. “The rest is geared towards farmers who sell fluid milk to Hood or Garelick.”But he said the vehicle provision will allow him to drive his truck to land he owns four miles away from his North Road farm.As in the rest of Massachusetts, the number of dairy farms on the Vineyard has declined dramatically over the years. The Martha’s Vineyard Cooperative Dairy, an organization begun in 1946 by W.W. Pinney, then owner of Sweetened Water Farm, originally boasted 30 members, but rising costs led to dwindling numbers and the cooperative went out of business in 1968. In 1980, Stephen Potter began Seaside Dairy at Katama Farm in Edgartown. Mr. Potter’s milk provided 70 per cent of the Vineyard’s milk stock in the 1980s and he made cheddar cheese. In 1986, unable to overcome mounting financial debt, the dairy closed. Today, many Island farmers keep cows and goats. Some make cheese, milk and yogurt for use at home, but only Mr. Healy is certified as a dairy farmer, which allows him to sell raw milk from his farm.Elsewhere in Massachusetts, dairy farmers produce almost two million pounds of milk — about 232,000 gallons — each year. Milk production costs are high while prices are low. “The cost of production has continued to increase, which is not unique in the dairy industry,” Mr. Soares said. “The costs of fuel, feed and labor have continued to increase. These programs will allow the industry to react to these kinds of costs.” The average farm price for a gallon of milk in 2006 was $1.16, down from $1.33 the year before. That small drop amounted to at least $44,270 in reduced income for Massachusetts dairy farmers, according to the Massachusetts Association of Dairy Farmers. The average price of milk is back up to $1.98 this year, but production costs add up to approximately $1.85 per gallon.Mr. Gillmeister also advised patience. “It is going to take a little bit of time to get these programs up and running,” he said. The first piece to take effect will be the milk couponing program, which the department has 180 days to enact.“Will it be easier to be a farmer in Massachusetts? I think so,” Mr. Gillmeister said. “The name is the Dairy Farm Preservation Act, but as you can hear, it does not just protect dairy farms, but all farms.”•The department of agriculture is now accepting proposals for its 2009 innovation center grants. Proposals are due by August 29. Guidelines are available online at mass.gov/agr/ag_innovation_center_rfr_09.pdf. This column is meant to reflect all aspects of agricultural activity and farm life on the Vineyard. To reach Julia Rappaport, please call 508-627-4311, extension 120, or e-mail her at [email protected]. Comments Home page Vineyard NotebookTo keep up with the news sign up for our free twice-a-week email, the Vineyard Gazette Notebook. View archive » © 2017 Vineyard Gazette Advertise with the Gazette

农业

2017-09/1438/en_head.json.gz/9886

ABC invests $4.7 million for next gen almond farming, sustainability Feb 16, 2017 California wine grape industry seeks no-touch vineyard Feb 10, 2017 Jimi Valov: a proud ambassador of farming, community and pistachios Feb 13, 2017 Former Ariz. ginner Charlie Owen posthumously awarded Lifetime Achievement Award Feb 14, 2017 Management Senate stimulus bill may miss the mark as wrangling continues over spending provisions Forest Laws | Feb 21, 2009 For weeks, every economist worth his salt has been saying Congress needed to be bold in crafting the stimulus package needed to revitalize the economy. So what did a supposedly bipartisan group of senators do when the stimulus bill came to the floor? They began whacking away at it to bring the legislation down to less than bold proportions. As this issue went to press, the senators were trying to agree on spending provisions “that truly help stimulate the economy,” as Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, said. Collins, Democrat Ben Nelson of Nebraska and others reportedly were planning $90 billion in cuts. As they met, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics announced the country lost another 598,000 jobs in January — 207,000 of them in the manufacturing sector. Those losses bring the total for the period since January 2008 to 3.5 million and unemployment to 7.5 percent. The debate seemed to break down along philosophical lines with Republicans arguing for more tax breaks and Democrats pushing for funding for education, health care and much-needed repairs of the nation's infrastructure. Former Republican presidential candidate John McCain of Arizona tried to offer a substitute stimulus plan that would have lowered the total investment to $421 billion, an amount most economists consider laughable. The Democratic majority refused to allow a vote on it. The Senate also rejected an amendment that would have subsidized 30-year fixed home mortgages to lower interest rates to 4 percent to 4.5 percent with Democrats reminding their opponents that loose lending practices helped get us in this mess. One economist said proponents of a smaller stimulus package seemed to have forgotten the economy's desperate straits, reverting instead to “spouting old clichés about wasteful government spending and the wonders of tax cuts. “It's as if the dismal failure of the last eight years never happened,” said Paul Krugman. “Somehow, Washington has lost any sense of what's at stake — of the reality that we may well be falling into an economic abyss, and that if we do, it will be hard to escape.” Senators also have been debating “Buy American” provisions, which would require the use of iron, steel and goods made in America in the stimulus bill's public works projects and U.S. textile products in uniforms procured by the Transportation Security Administration. Advocates say the provisions would help create jobs in this country rather than “continuing to ship them overseas” as American business has been doing with depressing frequency in the last several years. Critics claimed the requirements would be protectionist and would raise the cost of already expensive infrastructure projects. The latter reminded me of the oft-parodied rejoinder “Will the last person leaving New York, please turn out the lights” when that city was on the verge of bankruptcy in the 1970s. One of those “bipartisan” senators may have to turn out the lights if something isn't done to reverse the direction of the economy soon.

农业

2017-09/1438/en_head.json.gz/10710

Veggie Races to go organic Posted on Monday, April 7th, 2014 at 10:49 am.Posted by Rodale Institute (Reading, Pennsylvania) Rodale Institute, a non-profit dedicated to pioneering organic farming through research and outreach, today announced their new partnership with the Reading Fightin Phils, Double-A Minor League Baseball affiliate of the Philadelphia Phillies, to take their award-winning “Veggie Race” organic. Each night Rodale Institute’s new “Organic Veggie Race” will be front and center during the inning breaks as part of the Reading Fightin Phils’ in-between inning entertainment. A huge fan-favorite, the “Organic Veggie Race” consists of three employees in vegetable costumes racing around the field, often with an unexpected twist. Celebrities have gotten involved, like when wrestling legend Jerry Lawler once clothes-lined Carrot. The veggies themselves have even gotten romantic; Broccoli proposed to his girlfriend in front of the entire stadium after winning the veggie race a few years ago. The moment was captured on video and was played on CNN, ESPN and had over 28,000 views on YouTube. Rodale Institute’s founder, J.I. Rodale, coined the term, “organic agriculture,” in 1940 and founded the Institute in 1947 with the mission of improving the health and well-being of people and the planet. The Institute has assisted many farmers in their transition from using synthetic chemicals to organic practices. The Institute’s team has now begun to expand their focus beyond agriculture. “We laid out a path to success for farmers who want to give up synthetic chemicals a long time ago. It has worked tremendously, and we’ll always be a resource for farmers” said Coach Mark Smallwood, Executive Director at Rodale Institute. “Now we will also create new models for other institutions looking to go organic. It’s usually their food at first, but then we look at the cleaning materials or the landscaping – anywhere toxic chemicals might be used on their campuses, we help transition those practices using organic principles,” said Coach. First Energy Stadium, home of the Reading Fightin Phils, is one of the Top 100 Stadium Experiences in sports, and is the top-ranked Minor League Baseball destination in all of Pennsylvania. “I’ve always dreamed of being organic,” said Broccoli. “As an organic veggie, I can run faster and I’m safer for the kids to be around. My wife cried when I told her the news because she was so happy.” The season begins with the first game on April 3rd at 7:05 PM in the First Energy Stadium at 1900 Centre Avenue/RT 61 South, Reading, PA 19605. The Fightin Phils will play against Portland. Season tickets, mini-plans, and group tickets for the 2014 season at FirstEnergy Stadium are available by visiting Fightins.com, calling the Fightin Phils Ticket Office at 610-370-BALL, or by visiting the Fightin Phils Ticket Office in person at FirstEnergy Stadium. Follow the Fightin Phils on Twitter at @ReadingFightins and like them on Facebook via www.facebook.com/fightins. ABOUT RODALE INSTITUTE Rodale Institute is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit dedicated to pioneering organic farming through research and outreach. For more than sixty years we’ve been researching the best practices of organic agriculture and sharing our findings with farmers and scientists throughout the world, advocating for policies that support farmers, and educating consumers about how going organic is the healthiest options for people and the planet. CONTACT: Aaron Kinsman Media Relations Specialist [email protected] Tags: rodale institute

农业

2017-09/1438/en_head.json.gz/11446

Corn shortage idles 20 ethanol plants nationwide This October file photo shows unharvested corn in a field near Council Bluffs, Iowa. Corn growers had high hopes going into the 2012 planting season but the drought that began last spring hit the corn crop hard. As a result, corn prices skyrocketed and corn has become scarce in some regions, forcing 20 ethanol plants around the country to halt production. Most are not expected to resume production until after 2013 corn is harvested in late August or September. Associated Press ST. LOUIS — The persistent drought is taking a toll on producers of ethanol, with corn becoming so scarce that nearly two dozen ethanol plants have been forced to halt production. The Renewable Fuels Association, an ethanol industry trade group, provided data to The Associated Press showing that 20 of the nation’s 211 ethanol plants have ceased production over the past year, including five in January. Most remain open, with workers spending time performing maintenance-type tasks. But ethanol production won’t likely resume until after 2013 corn is harvested in late August or September. Industry experts don’t expect a shortage — millions of barrels are stockpiled and the remaining 191 plants are still producing. Still, there is growing concern about what happens if the drought lingers through another corn-growing season. “There’s a lot of anxiety in the industry right now about the drought and a lot of folks watching the weather and hoping and praying this drought is going to break,” said Geoff Cooper, vice president for research and analysis for the Renewable Fuels Association. “If we get back to a normal pattern and normal corn crop, then I think the industry is in good shape,” Cooper said. “But if this drought persists and it has the same effect on this coming corn crop, then we’ve got a problem.” America’s ethanol industry has taken off in the past decade. Plants in 28 states produce more than 13 billion gallons of ethanol each year, Cooper said. By comparison, in 2002, the industry produced 2.1 billion gallons. Today, roughly 10 percent of the U.S. gasoline supply is made up of the biofuel. Roughly 95 percent of U.S. ethanol is made from corn. The National Corn Growers Association estimates that 39 percent of the U.S. corn crop is used in ethanol production. Corn producers had high hopes going into 2012. Record harvests were predicted. Then the weather dried up. The drought began before planting and never stopped. Even though more acres were planted in 2012 compared to 2011, 13 percent less corn was harvested. Availability of locally produced corn is vital for ethanol plants since having it shipped in is too expensive. To make matters worse, the drought hit hardest in many of the top corn-growing states. Six of the 20 ethanol plants that stopped production are in Nebraska, two in Indiana, and two in Minnesota. Ten states have seen one plant affected. Cooper said the 20 plants employ roughly 1,000 workers combined, but it wasn’t known how many have been laid off. Valero Energy Corp., idled three plants last year — in North Linden, Ind., and Albion, Neb., in June; and in Bloomingburg, Ohio, in December. Five plants ceased production in January alone — Abengoa plants in the Nebraska towns of York and Ravenna; a White Energy plant in Plainview, Texas; an Aemetis facility in Keyes, Calif.; and POET Biorefining’s mid-Missouri plant in Macon. The production stoppages are cutting into ethanol production. The 770,000 gallons per day produced in the last full week of January were the fewest since the U.S. Energy Information Administration began tracking weekly data in June 2010. That’s not much of an issue for consumers, at least for now, because there are plenty of stockpiles of ethanol. Purdue University agriculture economist Chris Hurt said the nation has more than 20 million barrels of ethanol in stock, slightly more than a year ago, largely because Americans are driving less and driving more fuel-efficient cars. Cooper said, though, that stockpiles are expected to dwindle in the spring and summer as demand picks up and plants remain idled. Hurt said the ethanol industry needs an end to the drought, a strong corn crop and a drop in corn prices. Corn futures were $5.51 a bushel in May, before the drought’s impact took hold. Prices rose to a peak of $8.34 per bushel in August and were $7.46 per bushel last week. “I cannot see any profitability in this industry until we get lower corn prices, and it’s going to take a reasonable-sized U.S. crop,” Hurt said. Officials at the nation’s leading ethanol makers — Archer Daniels Midland and POET — declined to speculate about whether additional plants will close. POET spokesman Matt Merritt said producing ethanol at Macon became cost-prohibitive because of the lack of available Missouri corn, and shipping it in was simply too expensive. Cooper said most of the idled plants expect to restart production — just not anytime soon. Corn is expected to remain scarce and expensive at least until the 2013 crop is harvested, starting in late August and into September. Cooper believes ethanol production won’t resume at most plants until then. For now, many of the plants remain open with workers doing maintenance or helping to modernize the facilities while they wait for production to resume, Cooper said. Only one of the closed production facilities, an ADM plant in Wallhalla, N.D., may be closed for good, Cooper said. “Generally the industry is optimistic,” Cooper said. “We’re just going through a rough patch here.” Not everyone associated with the industry is that optimistic. Brian Baalman farms near Menlo, Kan., typically growing 8,000 acres of corn each year. Last year’s crop was about one-third of that. This year, he may plant only the one-third of his acreage where irrigation is available this summer. Like many growers, Baalman has a direct interest in ethanol. He is on the board of Western Plans Energy in Oakley, Kan., and has stock in seven ethanol plants. He said near-record prices for corn, driven up by the drought-fueled shortage, are making ethanol production costs too high. “We are burning up all our excess cash just to stay running at a reduced rate to keep people working and keep the people there, keep the lights on, so to speak,” Baalman said. “It’s very tough right now.” “A lot of these ethanol plants aren’t going to make it,” Baalman said.

农业

2017-09/1438/en_head.json.gz/11689

Follow @thecattlesite News & Analysis Features Markets & Reports Sustainability Knowledge Centre Directory Events Our Shop News Global Roundtable for Sustainable Beef Invites Public Comment on Draft Principles & Criteria18 March 2014 GLOBAL – The Global Roundtable for Sustainable Beef (GRSB) has released its draft Principles and Criteria for Global Sustainable Beef document for public comment. The document identifies the key areas in the beef value chain that must be addressed to ensure beef production around the globe is environmentally sound, socially responsible and economically viable. The draft was developed by GRSB members, including producers and producer associations, the processing sector, retail companies, civil society organizations, and regional roundtables. "These principles and criteria establish a global framework for ensuring sustainable performance in beef production," according to Ruaraidh Peter, GRSB Executive Director. "The definition covers all elements of the global beef value chain, including production, processing, distribution, sale and consumption. GRSB members believe sustainability is a journey of continuous improvement that requires the shared participation and responsibility among all actors - from producers to consumers. The GRSB definition provides a broad road map for this journey, allowing different regions to establish specific indicators, metrics or practices." The draft document, accessible at www.GRSBeef.org, is the product of more than a year’s work by members of the GRSB, as well as consultations with outside reviewers and beef sustainability subject matter experts around the globe. The public is invited to provide input and comments to the draft definition through May 16, 2014, after which the document will be updated to reflect the input received during the public comment period. Comments, along with any improvements to the draft definition, will be published for public review. “GRSB defines sustainable beef as a socially responsible, environmentally sound and economically viable product that prioritizes our planet, people, the animals, and continuous progress," Cameron Bruett, President of the GRSB and Head of Corporate Affairs at JBS USA. "Our membership has worked in a collaborative fashion to boldly confront the challenges in every segment of the beef value chain. The core principles for global sustainable beef production seek to balance a broad range of issues including natural resources, community and individual development, animal well-being, food, efficiency and innovation." GRSB officially formed in 2012 and includes international members from across the beef value chain. The group is organized into five constituency groups, including cattlemen, ranchers, and producer groups, commerce and processing, retail, civil societies (NGOs), and regional roundtables. It is through the efforts of the regional roundtables that the definition will be applied to accomplish on-the-ground improvements in specific areas of the world. "Our diverse membership recognizes that the global beef industry plays an important role in the lives of the people and communities who produce and consume beef; the well-being of the animals under our care; the management of natural resources; and in meeting the growing global population's demand for animal protein efficiently," Bruett said. "We are confident that through leadership, collaboration and the promotion of a science-based approach, we can achieve our vision of a world where all aspects of the global beef value chain are environmentally sound, socially responsible and economically viable." The GRSB general assembly will vote on the final adoption of the Global Beef Sustainability Principles and Criteria document later this year during the Global Conference for Sustainable Beef. Read the GRSB Draft Principles & Criteria You can view the full report by clicking here. TheCattleSite News Desk Economics, Welfare, Environment and Waste, Sustainability, General Share This

农业

2017-09/1438/en_head.json.gz/11736

Dragon Fruit are native to Central and South America where they are known as pitaya or pitahaya. They are one of the most widely distributed members of the cactaceae family, and are now found on six continents. There are three species of dragon fruit in the genus Hylocereus and one species in the genus Selenicereus. Varieties of Hylocereus guatemalensis, Hylocereus polyrhizus, and Hylocereus undatus as well as hybrids of these three species are grown commercially worldwide. Selenicereus megalanthus is grown commercially on smaller scales in South America and is especially popular in Columbia. The dragon fruit flesh can be white, red, or magenta all to varying degrees dependant upon variety. The red fleshed varieties contain lycopene which is a natural antioxidant known to fight cancer, heart disease, and lower blood pressure. Despite the health benefits and its spectacular appearance, the fruit has gone virtually unnoticed for centuries. Today it is the leading fruit export of Vietnam. It has even caught the attention of Snapple, Tropicana, and Sobe which are just a few of the major labels that have incorporated dragon fruit into their bottled fruit drinks. The sensation surrounding this fabulous fruit can be attributed to a legend created by ingenious Asian marketers.According to the legend the fruit was created thousands of years ago by fire breathing dragons. During a battle when the dragon would breathe fire the last thing to come out would be the fruit. After the dragon is slain the fruit is collected and presented to the Emperor as a coveted treasure and indication of victory. The soldiers would then butcher the dragon and eat the flesh. It was believed that those who feasted on the flesh would be endowed with the strength and ferocity of the dragon and that they too would be coveted by the Emperor. It is written that the dragon’s flame originates deep within its body near the base of its tail. The meat from this part of the dragon was the most desirable and most sought after portion. Only the officers of each division would be privy to this cut of meat. The ancient Chinese called this cut the “jaina,” which translates literally to “the sweetest and best tasting.” The jaina was treasured by all who were privileged enough to taste it, and it is believed that man’s thirst for the jaina is what led to the destruction and eventual extinction of all of the dragons. Top of Page | Print in PDF format Shoji Watanabe FRUSIC Click here for the full story Bees are seen here working the flowers in the early morning. The night blooming flowers can remain open until noon on a cloudy day, but are typically collapsed by nine. We employ a Vietnamese style of trellising. The posts are two feet in the ground, six feet above, and have field fence laced to rebar for a superstructure. The posts are wrapped with burlap to hold liquid soluble fertilizers for the epiphytic roots. This six month old American Beauty has latched onto a column on the balcony of Sy Baskin’s twenty-sixth floor Brickel Avenue condominium over looking Biscayne Bay. Sy is an accomplished grower of container fruit trees, and he is also the owner of an accomplished thoroughbred named Ocean Drive. Dragon fruit are getting attention from a broad spectrum of major bottlers. Ingredients: • Four cups of top shelf Vodka • Two tablespoons of sugar • One half Zamorano or Red Jaina dragon fruit • Garnish with V. Jaina for contrast. Office Hours: 8:00am - 4:30pm EST, Monday - Friday 9:00am - 3:00pm EST, Saturday Email: [email protected] Image Copyright 1998-2005 Ian Maguire All textual information is copyright protected by Pine Island Nursery and may only be used with consent Top of Page | About Us | Plant Characteristics | Retail Price List | Mail Order | Variety Viewers | Wholesale Direct | Contact Us | Home

农业

2017-09/1438/en_head.json.gz/12319

No products in the cart. High in the Sierra Foothills, world-class wines await your taste. Just like the area’s pioneers took a chance 100 years ago, Charles B. Mitchell came to Fair Play searching for opportunity. Seeking to live out the dream of owning his first vineyard, it wasn’t long before he discovered the true potential of the region. Situated as the highest-elevation viticultural area in California, the possibilities for producing top-notch Zinfandels quickly became evident. Charles B. Mitchell Vineyards wasted no time, blazing a trail and purchasing the largest of the Fair Play’s original wineries to reawaken the area. Fair Play is located high in the lovely Sierra Foothills, abundant with oak and pine forests. The area was settled during the Gold Rush by miners and farmers, who put their lives on the line in hopes that success would strike. The first commercial vineyard and winery didn’t come to the area until Wisconsin native, Horace Bigelow, decided to plant 4,000 grape vines in 1887. Most of the 20th century was quiet and declining for the population around Fair Play due to the difficulty of transporting goods to viable markets. The wine region didn’t take off again until Benn Simms offered his Diamond Bar Ranch to University of California, Davis for an experimental vineyard. Through studying the experimental vineyard, it was determined that excellent dry table wines, especially Zinfandel, could be grown in the Fair Play region. In the early 2000s, we purchased the original UC Davis test plot and started to carefully tend our grapes to create some of the area’s premier Zinfandels. After discovering the true potential of the region, Charles was instrumental in creating the thirty-three square miles known as Fair Play into an established American Viticultural Area. Come experience an adventure in wine and celebrate the beauty of the Sierra Foothills. We produce a select list of wines, including Sauvignon Blanc, Grenache, Syrah, Barbera, Cabernet Sauvignon, Port and more. Explore an array of tasting opportunities that highlight our regions unique terroir from barrel tasting future wines to our Zin Zone with over 12 unique single vineyard small lot Zinfandels that highlight specific micro-climates within our region. Join us for one of our many seasonal events including our Bottle Your Own Weekends. Join us in the Sierra Foothills to take off on a new wine experience. Charles B. Mitchell Charles has been producing award-winning wines in the Sierra Foothills for over 20 years. Sign up for our email newsletter and receive

农业

2017-09/1438/en_head.json.gz/12820

Farmers Need To Get 'Climate Smart' To Prep For What's Ahead By Daniel Charles Farmers participate in a CGIAR climate training workshop on how to interpret seasonal rainfall forecasts in Kaffrine, Senegal. Courtesy of J. Hansen/CGIAR Climate In the 2030s, climate change will affect food and farming more strongly, particularly small-scale in poor countries. CGIAR Originally published on April 3, 2014 7:39 pm The planet's top experts on global warming released their latest predictions this week for how rising temperatures will change our lives, and in particular, what they mean for the production of food. The report, sadly, is massive and excruciatingly hard to digest. Our hats go off to the good folks at the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR), who summarized it with easy-to-read infographics on what to expect over the next several decades. The bottom line: Climate change probably will hurt food production, raise food prices and increase hunger, especially in the tropics. At the same time, those calamities may not be inevitable. According to CGIAR, "Adaptation will be key." If you want to see more infographics like this one, check out what CGIAR put together on the 2010s and the 2050s. Adaptation is climate-change jargon for everything that people can do to avoid the effects of rising temperatures, from building higher seawalls to installing air conditioning. Even if you're just talking about farming, the list of possible adaptations is long. It includes irrigation, switching to crop varieties that can better withstand high temperatures, planting earlier to take advantage of longer growing seasons, fighting new insect pests, and building new transportation infrastructure that will allow countries to move food to where it is needed most. International donors, including the World Bank, are now pouring money into research on "climate smart agriculture." They're trying out specific innovations among farmers in 15 "climate smart villages" that have been identified in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. In one area of Senegal, for instance, farmers are now getting more accurate weather forecasts, delivered via cellphones. Andy Jarvis, of the International Center for Tropical Agriculture, says these forecasts are vitally important, because farmers want to plant their crops just as the rains start, and the true start of the rainy season can't be easily predicted. It may vary, from one year to the next, by a month or more, and farmers can easily be fooled into planting too early by a small rain that's not sustained. Jarvis says this program is now expanding to reach more farmers. There's a video about the program here. According to this week's report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, adaptive measures like these offer significant benefits — like boosting the yields of major grain crops by an estimated 15 to 18 percent, compared with current yields. At the same time, the report warned that if average temperatures keep increasing, farmers and consumers would have to adapt in more fundamental ways. Farmers would be forced to grow different crops entirely or leave their traditional farming areas, and consumers would have to get used to an entirely new mix of foods. Come 2030, we might just have to develop a taste for sorghum biscuits.Copyright 2014 NPR. To see more, visit http://www.npr.org/. TweetShareGoogle+EmailView the discussion thread. © 2017 WVAS

农业

2017-09/1438/en_head.json.gz/12941

Argentines link health problems to agrochemicals Argentine farmworkers, others impacted by misuse of agricultural chemicals. By MICHAEL WARREN and NATACHA PISARENKOAssociated Press Published on October 21, 2013 9:17AM BASAVILBASO, Argentina (AP) — Argentine farmworker Fabian Tomasi was never trained to handle pesticides. His job was to keep the crop-dusters flying by filling their tanks as quickly as possible, although it often meant getting drenched in poison.Now, at 47, he’s a living skeleton, so weak he can hardly leave his house in Entre Rios province.Schoolteacher Andrea Druetta lives in Santa Fe Province, the heart of Argentina’s soy country, where agrochemical spraying is banned within 500 meters (550 yards) of populated areas. But soy is planted just 30 meters (33 yards) from her back door. Her boys were showered in chemicals recently while swimming in the backyard pool.After Sofia Gatica lost her newborn to kidney failure, she filed a complaint that led to Argentina’s first criminal convictions for illegal spraying. But last year’s verdict came too late for many of her 5,300 neighbors in Ituzaingo Annex. A government study there found alarming levels of agrochemical contamination in the soil and drinking water, and 80 percent of the children surveyed carried traces of pesticide in their blood.American biotechnology has turned Argentina into the world’s third-largest soybean producer, but the chemicals powering the boom aren’t confined to soy and cotton and corn fields.The Associated Press documented dozens of cases around the country where poisons are applied in ways unanticipated by regulatory science or specifically banned by existing law. The spray drifts into schools and homes and settles over water sources; farmworkers mix poisons with no protective gear; villagers store water in pesticide containers that should have been destroyed.Now doctors are warning that uncontrolled pesticide applications could be the cause of growing health problems among the 12 million people who live in the South American nation’s vast farm belt.In Santa Fe, cancer rates are two times to four times higher than the national average. In Chaco, birth defects quadrupled in the decade after farming expanded in Argentina.“The change in how agriculture is produced has brought, frankly, a change in the profile of diseases,” says Dr. Medardo Avila Vazquez, a pediatrician and neonatologist who co-founded Doctors of Fumigated Towns, part of a growing movement demanding enforcement of agricultural safety rules. “We’ve gone from a pretty healthy population to one with a high rate of cancer, birth defects, and illnesses seldom seen before.”A nation once known for its grass-fed beef has undergone a remarkable transformation since 1996, when the St. Louis-based Monsanto Co. promised that adopting its patented seeds and chemicals would increase crop yields and lower pesticide use. Today, Argentina’s entire soy crop and nearly all its corn and cotton are genetically modified, with soy cultivation alone tripling to 47 million acres (19 million hectares).Agrochemical use did decline at first, then it bounced back, increasing eightfold from 9 million gallons (34 million liters) in 1990 to more than 84 million gallons (317 million liters) today as farmers squeezed in more harvests and pests became resistant to the poisons. Overall, Argentine farmers apply an estimated 4.3 pounds of agrochemical concentrate per acre, more than twice what U.S. farmers use, according to an AP analysis of government and pesticide industry data.Glyphosate, the key ingredient in Monsanto’s popular Roundup brand of pesticides, is one of the world’s most widely used weed killers. It has been determined to be safe, if applied properly, by many regulatory agencies, including those of the United States and European Union.On May 1, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency even raised the allowable levels of glyphosate residues in food, concluding that based on studies presented by Monsanto, “there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to the general population or to infants and children from aggregate exposure.”Argentina’s 23 provinces take the lead in regulating farming, and rules vary.Spraying is banned within 3 kilometers (1.9 miles) of populated areas in some provinces and as little as 50 meters (55 yards) in others. About one-third of the provinces set no limits at all, and most lack detailed enforcement policies.A federal environmental law requires applicators of toxic chemicals to suspend or cancel activities that threaten public health, “even when the link has not been scientifically proven,” and “no matter the costs or consequences,” but it has never been applied to farming, the auditor general found last year.In response to soaring complaints, President Cristina Fernandez ordered a commission in 2009 to study the impact of agrochemical spraying on human health. Its initial report called for “systematic controls over concentrations of herbicides and their compounds ... such as exhaustive laboratory and field studies involving formulations containing glyphosate as well as its interactions with other agrochemicals as they are actually used in our country.”But the commission hasn’t met since 2010, the auditor general found.Government officials insist the problem is not a lack of research, but misinformation that plays on people’s emotions.“I’ve seen countless documents, surveys, videos, articles in the news and in universities, and really our citizens who read all this end up dizzy and confused,” Agriculture Secretary Lorenzo Basso said. “I think we have to publicize the commitment that Argentina has to being a food producer. Our model as an exporting nation has been called into question. We need to defend our model.”In a written statement, Monsanto spokesman Thomas Helscher said the company “does not condone the misuse of pesticides or the violation of any pesticide law, regulation, or court ruling.”“Monsanto takes the stewardship of products seriously and we communicate regularly with our customers regarding proper use of our products,” Helscher said.———Argentina was among the earliest adopters of the new biotech farming model promoted by Monsanto and other U.S. agribusinesses.Instead of turning the topsoil, spraying pesticides and then waiting until the poison dissipates before planting, farmers sow the seeds and spray afterward without harming crops genetically modified to tolerate specific chemicals.This “no-till” method takes so much less time and money that farmers can reap more harvests and expand into land not worth the trouble before.But pests develop resistance, even more so when the same chemicals are applied to genetically identical crops on a vast scale.So while glyphosate is one of the world’s safest herbicides, farmers now use it in higher concentrates and mix in much more toxic poisons, such as 2,4,D, which the U.S. military used in “Agent Orange” to defoliate jungles during the Vietnam War.In 2006, a division of Argentina’s agriculture ministry recommended adding caution labels urging that mixtures of glyphosate and more toxic chemicals be limited to “farm areas far from homes and population centers.” The recommendation was ignored, according to the federal audit.The government relies on industry research approved by the EPA, which said May 1 that “there is no indication that glyphosate is a neurotoxic chemical and there is no need for a developmental neurotoxicity study.”Molecular biologist Dr. Andres Carrasco at the University of Buenos Aires says the burden from the chemical cocktails is worrisome, but even glyphosate alone could spell trouble for human health. He found that injecting a very low dose of glyphosate into embryos can change levels of retinoic acid, causing the same sort of spinal defects in frogs and chickens that doctors increasingly are registering in communities where farm chemicals are ubiquitous.This acid, a form of vitamin A, is fundamental for keeping cancers in check and triggering genetic expression, the process by which embryonic cells develop into organs and limbs.“If it’s possible to reproduce this in a laboratory, surely what is happening in the field is much worse,” Carrasco said. “And if it’s much worse, and we suspect that it is, what we have to do is put this under a magnifying glass.”His findings, published in the journal Chemical Research in Toxicology in 2010, were rebutted by Monsanto, which said the results “are not surprising given their methodology and unrealistic exposure scenarios.”Monsanto said in response to AP’s questions that chemical safety tests should only be done on live animals, and that injecting embryos is “less reliable and less relevant for human risk assessments.”“Glyphosate is even less toxic than the repellent you put on your children’s skin,” said Pablo Vaquero, Monsanto’s corporate affairs director in Buenos Aires. “That said, there has to be a responsible and good use of these products because in no way would you put repellent in the mouths of children and no environmental applicator should spray fields with a tractor or a crop-duster without taking into account the environmental conditions and threats that stem from the use of the product.”Out in the fields, warnings are widely ignored.For three years, Tomasi was routinely exposed to chemicals as he pumped pesticides into the tanks of crop-dusters. Now he’s near death from polyneuropathy, a debilitating neurological disorder, which has left him wasted and shriveled.“I prepared millions of liters of poison without any kind of protection, no gloves, masks or special clothing,” he said. “I didn’t know anything. I only learned later what it did to me, after contacting scientists.”“The poison comes in liquid concentrates, in containers with lots of precautions to take when applying it,” Tomasi explained. “But nobody takes precautions.”With soybeans selling for about $500 a ton, growers plant wherever they can, often disregarding Monsanto’s guidelines and provincial law by spraying with no advance warning, and even in windy conditions.In Entre Rios, teachers reported that sprayers failed to respect 50-meter (55-yard) limits at 18 schools, dousing 11 during class. Five teachers filed police complaints this year.Druetta also filed complaints in Santa Fe, alleging that students fainted when pesticides drifted into their classrooms and that their tap water is contaminated. She is struggling to get clean drinking water into her school, she said, while a neighbor keeps a freezer of rabbit and bird carcasses, hoping someone will test them to see why they dropped dead after spraying.Buenos Aires forbids loading or hosing off spraying equipment in populated areas, but in the town of Rawson, it’s done directly across the street from homes and a school, with the runoff flowing into an open ditch.Felix San Roman says that when he complained about clouds of chemicals drifting into his yard, the sprayers beat him up, fracturing his spine and knocking out his teeth. He said he filed a complaint in 2011, but it was ignored.“This is a small town where nobody confronts anyone, and the authorities look the other way,” San Roman said. “All I want is for them to follow the existing law, which says you can’t do this within 1,500 meters (of homes). Nobody follows this. How can you control it?”Sometimes even court orders are ignored.In January, activist Oscar Di Vincensi stood in a field near a friend’s house waving a ruling against spraying within 1,000 meters (1,100 yards) of homes in his town of Alberti. A tractor driver simply ignored him, dousing him in pesticide.Di Vincensi’s video of that incident went viral on YouTube earlier this year.———Dr. Damian Verzenassi, who directs the Environment and Health program at the National University of Rosario’s medical school, decided to try to figure out what was behind an increase in cancer, birth defects and miscarriages in Argentina’s hospitals.“We didn’t set out to find problems with agrochemicals. We went to see what was happening with the people,” he said.Since 2010, this house-to-house epidemiological study has reached 65,000 people in Santa Fe province, finding cancer rates two times to four times higher than the national average, including breast, prostate and lung cancers. Researchers also found high rates of thyroid disorders and chronic respiratory illness.“It could be linked to agrochemicals,” he said. “They do all sorts of analysis for toxicity of the first ingredient, but they have never studied the interactions between all the chemicals they’re applying.”Dr. Maria del Carmen Seveso, who has spent 33 years running intensive care wards and ethics committees in Chaco province, became alarmed at regional birth reports showing a quadrupling of congenital defects, from 19.1 per 10,000 to 85.3 per 10,000 in the decade after genetically modified crops and their agrochemicals were approved in Argentina.Determined to find out why, she and her colleagues surveyed 2,051 people in six towns in Chaco, and found significantly more diseases and defects in villages surrounded by industrial agriculture than in those surrounded by cattle ranches. In Avia Terai, 31 percent said a family member had cancer in the past 10 years, compared with 3 percent in the ranching village of Charadai.Visiting these farm villages, the AP found chemicals in places where they were never intended to be.Claudia Sariski, whose home has no running water, says she doesn’t let her twin toddlers drink from the discarded poison containers she keeps in her dusty backyard. But her chickens do, and she uses it to wash the family’s clothes.“They prepare the seeds and the poison in their houses. And it’s very common, not only in Avia Terai but in nearby towns, for people to keep water for their houses in empty agrochemical containers,” explained surveyor Katherina Pardo. “Since there’s no treated drinking water here, the people use these containers anyway. They are a very practical people.”The survey found diseases Seveso said were uncommon before — birth defects including malformed brains, exposed spinal cords, blindness and deafness, neurological damage, infertility, and strange skin problems.Aixa Cano, a shy 5-year-old, has hairy moles all over her body. Her neighbor, 2-year-old Camila Veron, was born with multiple organ problems and is severely disabled. Doctors told their mothers that agrochemicals may be to blame.“They told me that the water made this happen because they spray a lot of poison here,” said Camila’s mother, Silvia Achaval. “People who say spraying poison has no effect, I don’t know what sense that has because here you have the proof,” she added, pointing at her daughter.It’s nearly impossible to prove that exposure to a specific chemical caused an individual’s cancer or birth defect. But like the other doctors, Seveso said their findings should prompt a rigorous government investigation. Instead, their 68-page report was shelved for a year by Chaco’s health ministry. A year later, a leaked copy was posted on the Internet.“There are things that are not open to discussion, things that aren’t listened to,” Seveso concluded.Scientists argue that only broader, longer-term studies can rule out agrochemicals as a cause of these illnesses.“That’s why we do epidemiological studies for heart disease and smoking and all kinds of things,” said Doug Gurian-Sherman, a former EPA regulator now with the Union of Concerned Scientists. “If you have the weight of evidence pointing to serious health problems, you don’t wait until there’s absolute proof in order to do something.”

农业

2017-09/1438/en_head.json.gz/13071

Print: HTML "Food security will deteriorate further unless leading countries can collectively mobilize to stabilize population, restrict the use of grain to produce automotive fuel, stabilize climate, stabilize water tables and aquifers, protect cropland, and conserve soils." — Lester Brown, World Facing Huge New Challenge on Food Front How Water Scarcity Will Shape the New Century Keynote Speech presented at Stockholm Water ConferenceLester R. BrownIt is exciting for me to be part of this 10th Water Symposium. I am especially impressed with what a few dedicated people in a rather small country like Sweden can do to draw global attention to an issue that desperately needs it. First, I would like to pay particular tribute to Malin Falkenmark, who has been leading this effort for so many years. I think it was Margaret Mead who said all great social movements begin with one committed individual, and I think Malin has demonstrated very well what a committed individual can do, and all the colleagues that have gathered around her to make Sweden a leader in this field. Malin has been a mentor for me and many others, helping us to understand the water issue and its importance.Over the next 35 minutes, I will be talking about how water will shape the new century, affecting every facet of our lives, from the use of recreational time to the structure of our diets.World water use has tripled over the last half-century. Seventy percent of all the water that is withdrawn from rivers or from underground sources is used for irrigation. Twenty percent is used by industry, ten percent for residential purposes. Forty percent of our food supply now comes from irrigated land, which now plays a disproportionately large role in the world food economy. The demand for water has tripled since 1950 and is continuing to rise as we add 80 million more people each year.While the demand continues to rise, the basic amount of fresh water supply provided by the hydrological cycle does not. I would like to talk about two of the principal signs of stress as the demand for water outruns the supply. One is rivers running dry, the other is falling water tables.Many of the world’s major rivers now fail to make it to the sea, or there is very little water left in them when they do reach the sea. The Colorado River, the major river in the southwestern United States, rarely reaches the Gulf of California. It is drained dry to satisfy the agricultural needs in Colorado, Arizona and, importantly, California. The Nile River, the lifeline of Egypt, has little water left in it when it reaches the Mediterranean. The Ganges, shared by India and Bangladesh, is almost dry when it reaches the Bay of Bengal. This has become a negotiation between India and Bangladesh — how to divide the limited supply of water in a river basin where a few hundred million people live.Consider too, China’s Yellow River, the cradle of Chinese civilization. It first ran dry in 1972 for some 15 days, and then it ran dry intermittently for several years. But beginning in 1985, it has run dry for part of each year. And, as someone mentioned earlier, in 1997, it ran dry for more than half the year. For some months, it did not even reach Shandong, the last province that it flows though en route to the sea.The Yellow River provides a fascinating study of the competition that develops in a river valley when there is not enough water to go around. The Chinese government has decided that the interior provinces, the poor provinces of the country, will get priority in the use of the water in the Yellow River basin. There are literally hundreds of projects now underway and planned that will reduce further the amount of water in the lower reaches of the basin. The Yellow River flows though eight provinces en route to the sea, originating in Qinghai-Tibet plateau and ending in Shandong Province. Shandong used to get half of its irrigation water from the Yellow River, with the other half coming from the province’s underground aquifer. But now, farmers are not getting enough water. The World Bank estimates that in China as a whole, farmers with irrigated land only have 80 percent of the water they need to maximize their yields.There was a major riot in Shandong a few weeks back when the government tried to repair a large reservoir that had been leaking for years. The local people, who depended on the leakage from the reservoir, rioted to protect their water supply. One hundred and twenty villagers were injured, 50 policemen were injured, and one policeman was killed. This riot is just a small indication of what people will do when they are deprived of the water they need. And this scenario is going to be repeated many times around the world in various forms wherever there is competition for water. Shandong province is important agriculturally in China because it accounts for a fifth of China’s corn harvest and a seventh of its wheat harvest. The government’s actions in giving upstream provinces priority suggests that Beijing is prepared to sacrifice irrigated agriculture in the lower regions of the basin in order to develop the interior because there is such a huge income gap between the coastal provinces and the interior.In the competition for water, agriculture almost always loses. The reason is basic economics. In China, for example, if you have a thousand tons of water, you can use it to produce one ton of wheat which is worth about 200 USD at most, or you can use that thousand tons of water to expand industrial output by 14,000 USD.A country that needs growth and is desperately trying to create jobs does not use scarce water for food production if it can afford to import food. So we are seeing some major policy shifts in China now. One, which they have publicly announced, is that in the increasingly intense competition for water, cities and industry will come first, with agriculture becoming the residual claimant. China has also announced that it is giving up the goal of self-sufficiency in the production of grain. It now recognizes that because of water shortages, it is going to have to begin importing more grain in the future.Today we find water tables falling on every continent. Aquifer depletion is a new problem. We have had problems in irrigation from the very beginning, some 5000 years ago. But the depletion of aquifers is a new problem, one that has emerged only in the last half century or so, because it is only during this period that we have had the pumping capacity to quite literally deplete aquifers. We see this in the Punjab, the breadbasket of India. Beginning in the mid-1960s with new high yield varieties, that are also earlier maturing varieties, India was able to institute a very productive double cropping system of high yield winter wheat and high yielding rice as the summer crop. But it takes water — a lot of water — to produce two high yielding crops. What has happened is that the water table under the Punjab is falling by half a meter per year. At some point India is going to have to make some adjustments.A similar situation exists in China. The government has reported that the aquifer under the North China plain, which produces 40 percent of China’s grain harvest, is falling by 1.5 meters (roughly five feet) per year. At some point, there will have to be some major cutbacks in the use of irrigation water on the North China Plain.My colleague Sandra Postel has attempted to calculate the size of the world water deficit — the amount of overpumping in the world. She has concluded, using data for India, China, the Middle East, North Africa, and the United States, that worldwide we are now each year overpumping by a 160 billion tons of water, which equals 160 billion cubic meters.Since it takes a thousand tons of water to produce one ton of grain, a 160 billion-ton water deficit is equal to a 160-million-ton grain deficit. Stated otherwise, roughly 160 million tons of the world’s grain supply is now being produced by overpumping. Assuming a person consumes one third of a ton of grain each year, the current global average, 160 million tons of grain will feed 480 million people. This means that of the world’s current population of six billion, we are feeding 480 million with grain produced with the unsustainable use of water. Stated otherwise, we are now beginning to feed ourselves with water that belongs to our children. We are borrowing water from the next generation.Ironically, world grain prices right now are at the lowest level during the last two or three decades. To an economist, this looks like a situation where we have excessive productive capacity. To an environmentalist, it looks like a situation where we are overproducing by using resources — importantly water — unsustainably.Let me illustrate the difference between these two views. If we were to decide next year that worldwide we would no longer overpump aquifers, recognizing that there is some point where we have to stop overpumping and stabilize water tables, grain harvests would drop an estimated 160 million tons, and world grain prices would go off the top of the chart. In our long-term projections of agriculture supply and demand, we have come not close to doing an adequate job of incorporating the water situation.One of the new things we are beginning to see in the world water economy is that water scarcity is crossing national boundaries via the international grain trade. In an increasingly integrated global economy, water scarcity — traditionally a local issue — is quickly becoming an international issue. The fastest growing grain market in the world today is North Africa and the Middle East — Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, and Egypt and the Middle East eastward through Iran. Every country in that region is facing water shortages. As water becomes scarce, the growth and the demand for water in cities and by industry is satisfied by taking water from agriculture. This is then offset by importing grain.A number of countries in that region now import half or more of their grain. The water required to produce the grain and other foodstuffs imported into that region last year was equal to the annual flow of the Nile River. Stated otherwise, if you want to visualize the size of the current water deficit in North Africa and the Middle East, it’s equal to another Nile River flowing into the region in the form of imported grain. And the deficit is growing rapidly year by year.It is now commonly said that future wars in the Middle East are more likely to be fought over water than over oil. This could be. But it is difficult to win water wars. My guess is that the competition for water in the Middle East, and indeed throughout the world, is going to take place in the world’s grain markets. And it’s the countries that are financially strongest, not those which are militarily the strongest, that are going to win in this competition.We have seen, for instance, growing import needs in many Middle Eastern countries. Iran last year displaced Japan as the world’s leading wheat importer. That was driven in part by drought. It is an indication of how rapidly the growth and import demand is growing in water short countries. Egypt this year will also pull ahead of Japan, becoming the number two wheat importer. Water is beginning to shape international grain trade patterns in much the same way that land scarcity has historically.One of the wild cards in the water situation and one of the things that makes assessing the future water situation difficult is climate change. At the Worldwatch Institute, we have been tracking various climate indicators, initially sort of the first level ones, like carbon emissions, atmospheric CO2 levels, and rising temperatures (the fifteen warmest years of the last century have all come since 1980). There has been a very distinct upturn in global temperature. But now we are beginning to look at some of the secondary effects, like ice melting. And some of the things we see are scary.In the Arctic Ocean, the ice sheet has shrunk by nearly 40 percent over the last 35 years. A recent Norwegian study indicates that in another half century there might be no ice left in the Arctic Ocean in the summertime — an enormous change. But it is when ice on land begins to melt that we will see rising sea levels, and we are beginning to see that. One of the things that is going to affect water supply, particularly for agriculture, is the temperature rise in mountainous regions.A rise in average temperature in mountainous regions of 1 or 2 degrees Celsius can substantially alter the precipitation mix between rainfall and snowfall, with substantial increases in the amount of precipitation coming down as rain and a reduction in the amount coming down as snow. This change translates into more runoff and more flooding during the rainy season but less water being stored as snow and ice in the mountains for use in the dry season.We have been taking these “reservoirs in the sky” for granted. They have been there ever since agriculture began, certainly since irrigation began some 5,000 years ago. But they are beginning to melt. Ice is melting in all the major mountainous regions of the world. In the United States, Glacier National Park located in the State of Montana, had 150 glaciers in it a century or so ago. Now there are only 50. And the US Geological Service is projecting that in another 30 years, there may not be any left at all. Consider, too, the Andes, where melting is accelerating, or the Alps, where there has been an enormous shrinkage in the snow/ice mass.That’s why we discovered the iceman at the Austrian " Italian border several years ago, emerging from the ice. It was not the only one. Our ancestors are emerging from the ice with a message for us. And that message is, “The Earth is getting warmer.” As it does, the ice and snow are melting.The snow/ice mass in the Himalayas, which is the third largest in the world after the two polar ice caps, is now beginning to shrink, and at an accelerating rate. This is of importance to us at this conference, because every major river in Asia originates in that snow/ice mass. Whether it is the Indus shared by India and Pakistan, the Ganges shared by India and Bangladesh, the Mekong, and the Yangtze or Yellow River, they all come out of that central Asian snow/ice mass. And it is shrinking. This could alter the hydrology of Asia in ways that we cannot now even in some ways begin to understand, with more runoff during the summer rainy season, and less snow melt to feed rivers during the dry season.We have seen the projections of water supply and demand for a few countries, but in very few countries have we done what the World Bank has done for South Korea, which is to project the amount of water that will be available for agriculture as the water needs for industry and cities increase. The projection for South Korea is that 13 billion cubic meters used each year for irrigation today will shrink over the next 30 years to 7 billion cubic meters. We need those kinds of projections for major countries everywhere so we can better understand what the future water balance is going to look like.What do we do about this unfolding situation? I would like to quickly touch on several things that I think are important. First of all we need to take a fresh look at population. We are currently projected to increase from six billion at present to nearly nine billion by mid century. But almost all of the three billion projected growth increase will come in countries that are already suffering water shortages.I did a recent article on hydrological poverty. With populations growing fast in water-short regions of the world, scores of countries are facing acute hydrological shortage — simply not enough water to satisfy basic human needs. This is a new situation, and we need to look at it closely. First, we need to look at the UN population projections and think about moving from the midlevel projection of nine billion to their low projection of seven billion. Unfortunately, adding even another billion people in countries that are already overpumping aquifers poses a serious issue. I think the time has come where we have to begin thinking about trying to hold the line everywhere, at two surviving children. Otherwise, hydrological poverty is going to be inevitable and, unlike other forms of poverty, inescapable. While we cannot tremendously alter the amount of water available in any particular country, we can use it more efficiently. But even with more efficient use — much more efficient use — there is still not nearly enough to go around given the population projections. So, shifting to smaller families is necessary sooner not later, when it could well be too late.I could talk about more recent irrigation technologies, but it would not add very much to what you already know and have been discussing in various symposia. For instance, the success of drip irrigation is obvious; however, the economics are currently limited for the most part to high-value crops. This is an area where Israel has done some important pioneering work — low-pressure sprinklers for overhead irrigation, a definite advantage over the high-pressure ones or surface irrigation.We need to begin thinking about changing irrigation practices. There is some evidence that rice, for example, can be grown with intermittent irrigation, rather than continuous flooding of the fields without sacrificing yields. That could provide water savings.More efficient irrigation technologies and practices are important, because 70 percent of all the water extracted from underground and diverted from rivers is used for irrigation. More water-efficient crops would help stretch water supplies further. Wheat, for example, requires less water per ton than does rice. Growing more water efficient crops is an important component of an effort to reestablish a balance between the supply and the demand for water.Another important step is to restructure the world animal protein economy. Much of the growth in the demand for grain over the next few decades will come in the form of feedgrain in developing countries as people throughout the world try to move up the food chain and consume more animal products. Once we get to the point where we will have to feed to get a decent amount of animal protein, because we have hit the limits both with oceanic fisheries and with grainlands, then feed conversion rates become important.Cattle require some seven kilograms of grain to add one kilogram of live weight. For pork it is about four kilograms of grain for one kilogram of live weight. For poultry, it is closer to two to one. And for fish in aquaculture (not the predatory species like salmon and trout, but like carp in China, which produces more than half the world's fed fish, or catfish in the United States), the conversion rate is one kilogram of live weight for less than two kilograms of grain, an extraordinarily efficient conversion.So as we look ahead, we need to be looking at satisfying future demand for animal protein much more from poultry or from fish farming than from beef production or pork production. We can still get the animal protein, but we can do it with a much more efficient use of grain, and if it is more grain efficient, then it is more water efficient. So we have to think about the water efficiency of future animal protein sources.Another area to consider is water pricing. One of the great problems that we as environmentalists see in the world is that we are underpricing some resources, and that is creating serious problems. We are underpricing gasoline, for example, and various fossil fuels. The result is that we are getting climate disruption. We are underpricing water almost everywhere, whether in the southwest of the United States or in India or in China. India is even subsidizing water use by providing low cost electricity to farmers to run irrigation pumps.We should not be subsidizing the use of scarce resources. Rather, we need prices of water to reflect the value of water. This is difficult. It is particularly difficult with countries like India or China. Trying to raise the price of water in China is like trying to raise the price of gasoline in the United States. There is a lot of resistance, and it is politically difficult, but it is the only way we can go. When water prices more clearly reflect the value of water, then we will begin to see efficiency permeate the entire economy in the use of water.We have to think about raising water productivity across the board. About 50 years ago, we were facing a similar situation with land productivity. Up until the middle of the last century, most of the increase in food production came from expanding the land area, but suddenly we reached the point where it became very difficult to expand the area of agricultural land. At this point, we systematically began to shift to raising land productivity.Governmental policies were designed to raise land productivity, including investment in agriculture research, price support policies in agriculture, credit for farmers, and a whole range of investment in irrigation and in fertilizer. All of these changes raised land productivity. But with water productivity we do not even have a common vocabulary, a common set of indicators with which to measure water productivity. With grain, everyone in the world uses either tons per hectare or, in the English system, bushels per acre. We have a common framework, but we do not have this for water and it is very much needed.What we need as we begin this new century is a revolution in water productivity, a “blue revolution” as it has been called that is comparable to the concerted effort undertaken a half century ago to raise land productivity.These are some of the thoughts that I have on this Monday morning as we open this tenth symposium on water. I would like to again commend the organizers for all the work over the last decade for helping escalate the water issue in the public mind. Because water has traditionally been an abundant resource and, essentially, a free resource, we have been taking it for granted. We can do so no longer. We now have to think about water in a very systematic, comprehensive way. We have to recognize water for what it is- a scarce resource.This morning Minister Kjell Larsson said that when we are exploring space, we get very excited when we see some indication that there might be water on some other planet or some place, because we know that water is the basis for life. But here on earth, we take it for granted.I think one of the ways of judging the success of these symposia is the extent to which water has been escalated in public importance. I believe it is going to escalate a lot more in the years ahead as we begin to understand what it is like to live in a water-scarce world.Thank you.Copyright © 2001 Earth Policy InstituteAll rights reserved.

农业

2017-09/1438/en_head.json.gz/13230

Trump’s Corporate EPA Pick Undocumented farmworkers' fate Bird Flu is Big Business Tour on CETA, TTIP and Trump Home Posted April 29, 2011 by MarketsFood IATP has just released a first-of-its-kind collection of writings about excessive speculation in commodity markets and the toll it has taken on agricultural prices. Excessive Speculation in Agricultural Commodity Markets: Selected Writings from 2008–2011 includes a total of 19 different pieces covering everything from the basics of what speculation in commodity markets looks like to why such speculation is responsible for the agricultural price crisis, as well as information on regulating excessive speculation. In the foreward, IATP's Steve Suppan writes: As former National Director of Intelligence Dennis Blair told a stunned U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence on February 12, 2009, the global economic crisis, triggered by financial and commodity market deregulation, has replaced Al-Qaeda as the number one U.S. national security threat. Blair’s intelligence agencies forecast widespread regime destabilization if the economic crisis continued to fester without major policy and political reform within two years. His agencies did not specify what reforms were needed nor advocate for their enforcement. That is up to us. Among others, the extensive list of authors includes Olivier De Schutter, the U.N. Special Rapporteur on the right to food, Michael W. Masters and Adam K. White, Daryll E. Ray, Harwood D. Schaffer, David Frenk and IATP's own Steve Suppan. Download the full text, or each section individually: Full Text: Excessive Speculation in Commodity Markets: Selected Writings from 2008–2011 Table of Contents and Foreword Section I. Overview Section II. Excessive Speculation and the Agricultural Price Crisis Section III. Regulating Excessive Speculation Posted April 25, 2011 by Agriculture When IATP started Peace Coffee in 1996, its position as the country's first certified 100-percent organic and fair-trade coffee company was more than just a first—it was the central idea behind the company. Peace Coffee's use of fair-trade, organic green coffee beans helps connect farmer cooperatives around the world to consumers. Over the years, IATP has continued its work advocating for fair trade and Peace Coffee has flourished, with a new coffee shop in Minneapolis and an ever-growing, passionate staff. The piece below first appeared in Peace Coffee's April Peace Spokes newsletter, written by Anna Canning, Peace Coffee's project manager. It addresses the issues affecting the rising price of coffee and what it all means for farmers, co-ops and coffee drinkers. Harvest Update, by Anna Canning Perhaps you've already noticed it in the grocery aisle; perhaps you're an avid follower of the commodity markets; or perhaps you've read, seen, or heard the news lately: coffee prices are up. "What's going on in the commodity market?" seems to be the question of the season. It's a complex system and experts disagree on the precise causes of the rapid rise in coffee prices that have now reached 34-year highs -- and no one can say for sure whether they'll continue to rise or fall. General consensus is that we're experiencing the interaction of a few factors. As we reported last year, recent harvests in many areas have been lower, which producers are attributing to changing weather patterns, putting pressure on the available supply of quality coffee. Add to that increasing coffee consumption around the world in producing countries such as Brazil and as well as in emerging markets such as China, where more people are reaching for a coffee mug every day. So far, that's classic supply and demand, forces whose interactions are sketched quite neatly in a straight diagonal line across the pages of high school econ text books across the country. Real life, however, is not so neat. In recent years, as the rosy glow paled on the notion of investing in real estate and vague mortgage products, investors flocked to diversify into commodities. Increased speculation has increased volatility across the markets for various products and means that an increase in coffee prices can no longer be so cleanly linked to bad weather in Brazil, for example (if curious, our parent organization IATP has thought extensively on this topic. All these factors impact commodity market prices for basic, Folgers' grade coffee. Similarly, as more coffee drinkers come to appreciate coffee as more than a generic caffeine delivery system, demand is increasing for specialty grade coffee. We've long told the story of the coffee we roast as being unique from region to region, community to community, not just "decaf" or "regular" or the "washed mild" of the trade. That's not just marketing hype and just as the flavor of each bean is unique, so too is the impact of recent developments on each farmer group. Fifteen years ago, the story of Fair Trade could be distilled into a few talking points: in those days of low market prices, the goal was to pay coffee farmers a fair, stable minimum price, provide access to markets and financing while cutting out the middlemen who profit at the expense of small-scale farmers. When prices are up, the simple story "Fair Trade pays higher prices to farmers" is no longer quite so true. Indeed, high commodity market prices can cause logistical challenges for co-ops as they scramble to communicate with their sometimes far-flung members and compete with deep-pocketed local middlemen for coffee. Queen Bean Lee recently returned from a trip to Guatemala to visit some of our producer partners there: Apecaform (from whom we've been buying the beans that make up the Guatemalan Dark roast and the backbone to this year's Pollinator Blend) and Chajul, another long-time trading partner. Her stories of this trip sum up some of the evolution of Fair Trade, and what remains relevant in these days of high coffee prices. Last year when we were beginning to look ahead to this year's harvest and the escalating coffee market, we sat down with the other members of our importing cooperative and the farmers that we buy from. It was quickly clear that this was to be a year in which cash would be crucial. At the request of several savvy farmer co-ops, we increased the amount of pre-financing that we'd help secure and increased the minimum price on the contracts to allow access to that financing (read more on how this works). This means that while some organizations have struggled to come up with the cash to purchase their member's coffee, well-managed co-ops such as Apecaform and Chajul are currently able to collect coffee in a competitive marketplace. For isolated communities such as Chajul, these well-run co-ops play an especially vital role—not only are they paying competitive prices for coffee, they continue to provide much needed community projects (for more on this, see Kyle's account of the trip in this issue). The next chapter in this new Fair Trade market remains to be written. One thing seems clear: amidst all these changes, it's no longer really meaningful to speak of a Fair Trade market or a specialty coffee market in general; the local market is key. Similarly, the answer to whether these higher prices are good for coffee farmers ends up being a qualified "it depends" on which ones and where. At Apecaform, yields are down which means that while the price per pound may be high, less coffee means that individual farmers aren't getting a raise. Meanwhile, at Chajul, times are good. Weather patterns that have set back other farmers haven't reached their fields. A few months ago when in Ethiopia, Lee observed that country's response to higher prices for the crop that makes up such a large part of the economy: Plant more coffee! Such large-scale projects to increase cultivation of coffee could of course create a glut of Ethiopian coffee in a few years when this spring's seedlings start to set cherries. Yet which of these trends will prevail remains to be seen. What is clear is that a well-managed co-op continues to serve its members well, in good markets and in bad, providing good economic stability and development. Just as each year's harvest arrives with slightly different nuances in the cup, so too each season's harvest has its themes, its challenges and its successes. While the challenges are clear, it's truly inspiring to see how our long-term producer partners are responding to them. This is the eleventh season that we've been buying coffee from Apecaform and that relationship continues to evolve and to demonstrate the potential for the next decade, whatever it may bring. Posted April 22, 2011 by Ben Lilliston AgricultureMarketsClimate Change Later this month, carbon market investors will gather in Nairobi at a meeting hosted by the World Bank's International Finance Corporation. The meeting will connect heavy hitters in the carbon market world like Barclays Bank, JP Morgan, and the German bank KfW with African project managers. Part of the reason for the meeting is the March 24 launch of the Africa Carbon Exchange (ACX). The ACX is positioning itself as the hub of climate change business on the African continent. But as IATP's Shefali Sharma writes in a new commentary, "existing and attempted carbon emissions exchanges in Europe and the United States have suffered one blow after another—fraud, carbon credit theft, poor legislative design, even profits for some major polluters—all at the expense of ordinary citizens and the environment." Due to these failures, Bloomberg recently characterized carbon trading as "a backwater of the global commodities market." Shefali writes, "There is a real danger that carbon offsets will become a major policy distraction and capital diversion from the real climate change challenges that Africa faces: the urgent task of climate change adaptation and ensuring resilience of communities." You can read the full commentary here. Posted April 21, 2011 by Food Justice The Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy (IATP) is pleased to announce the selection of 14 new Food and Community Fellows. The 2011–2013 class of fellows is a mix of grassroots advocates, thought leaders, writers and entrepreneurs. You can see the full class below and at foodandcommunityfellows.org. The two-year fellowship provides an annual stipend of $35,000 in addition to communications support, trainings and travel. The program supports leaders working to create a food system that strengthens the health of communities, particularly children. For this class of fellows, a selection committee focused on work that creates a just, equitable and healthy food system from its roots up. Over 560 individuals applied for fellowships. “We had more than three times the number of applicants of previous classes. Such a talented and diverse pool of people working for food systems change was exciting and challenging for our selection committee and application readers. We look forward to this class building on the great work of previous classes,” said IATP’s Mark Muller. “The six-person selection committee provided a diversity of expertise and perspective that was essential for the decision-making process.” “This new group of fellows parallels their predecessors in skill, capacity and experience,” says Keecha Harris, a food systems and public health expert, member of the very first fellowship class and member of the selection committee. “The selection process demonstrates that this country has a cadre of profoundly dedicated individuals committed to better food in their communities and improved food policies in all levels of government.” The new class of fellows represents work from Bainbridge Island, Washington to west Georgia, and from southern New Mexico to Queens, New York. Another selection committee member, August Schumacher, former USDA Undersecretary of Farm and Agriculture Services agrees. “The caliber of the final awardees reflects extraordinary capabilities, outstanding and innovative proposals, and plain hard work,” Schumacher says. “The Food and Community Fellows have always been change agents,” says Jim Harkness, President of IATP.” We invest in individuals that have a vision and plan for bettering the food system. These fellowships aren’t about incremental change; we want big visions that have the potential to provide our children with new opportunities for growing, processing, eating and thinking about food.” The Food and Community Fellows program is generously funded by the W.K. Kellogg Foundation in Battle Creek, Mich. and the Woodcock Foundation, based in New York, New York. To follow the work of the new class of IATP Food and Community Fellows, visit our website and follow us on Facebook and Twitter. Class VIII IATP Food and Community Fellows Brahm Ahmadi, founder of People’s Grocery and CEO of People’s Community Market in Oakland, is a social entrepreneur redesigning food retail to better engage, serve and support food desert communities. Jane Black is a Brooklyn-based food writer who covers food politics, trends and sustainability issues. Don Bustos is a traditional farmer in New Mexico working on issues of land and water rights using community-based approaches and providing farmer-to-farmer training. Cheryl Danley, an Academic Specialist with the C.S. Mott Group for Sustainable Food Systems at Michigan State University in East Lansing, engages with communities to strengthen their access to fresh, locally grown, healthy and affordable food. Nina Kahori Fallenbaum, the Washington, DC-based food and agriculture editor of Hyphen magazine, uses independent media to engage Asian American and Pacific Islander communities in local and national food policy. Kelvin Graddick, a west Georgia-based, fair food system advocate, manages a cooperative that maintains a local sustainable food system, promotes healthy living, builds cultural and economic knowledge, and creates economic opportunities. Haile Johnston, a Philadelphia-based social entrepreneur, works to improve the vitality of rural and urban communities through food system connectivity and policy change. Jenga Mwendo, a community organizer based in New Orleans' Lower Ninth Ward, focuses on strengthening community through urban agriculture. Raj Patel, a writer, academic and activist in San Francisco, works in support of Food Sovereignty in the US and the Global South through advocacy, analysis and protest. Kimberly Seals Allers, an award-winning, Queens-based journalist and author, is the leading voice of the African American motherhood experience and a champion for children through her work advocating for improved maternal and infant health and increased breastfeeding in the black community. Valerie Segrest, a member of the Muckleshoot Tribe outside of Seattle, works as a Community Nutritionist and Native Foods Educator to create a culturally appropriate system of health through traditional foods and medicines. Kandace Vallejo, a staff member at Austin, Texas-based Proyecto Defensa Laboral/Workers Defense Project, coordinates the organization's Youth Empowerment Program, where she works with low-income, first-generation Latino youth and their families to educate, organize, and take action to create a more just and equitable food system for workers and consumers alike. Rebecca Wiggins-Reinhard works with La Semilla Food Center to improve access to healthy, affordable, and culturally appropriate foods in the Paso del Norte region of southern New Mexico and El Paso, Texas. Malik Kenyatta Yakini, an activist and educator, is Interim Executive Director of the Detroit Black Community Food Security Network, chairs the Detroit Food Policy Council and serves on the facilitation team of Undoing Racism in the Detroit Food System. Posted April 19, 2011 by Shefali Sharma FoodFood security IATP's Shefali Sharma is part of a delegation visiting rural areas in India to assess the human rights impacts of the country's trade and investment policies.You can view her previous post here. New Delhi – Last I wrote, I was embarking on a journey into some of the most rural villages of Southern India. Over a four-day period, our team met with groups of farmers—men and women—in the State of Andhra Pradesh. We travelled from west to east across Chittoor District and then took an overnight train to the Northern district of Medak, covering hundreds of kilometers. Our difficult task was to understand what small farmers in India grow, how much they keep for eating and how much they sell to the market. We wanted to understand if they can continue to sustain themselves and their consumption needs through growing food alone and whether they have access not just to food, but adequate nutrition all year long. We also wanted to understand whether a European Union–India Free Trade Agreement (FTA), currently under negotiation, would have an impact on their livelihoods. In particular, what role does dairy and poultry play for their income and food security and what would liberalizing investment with the European Union do to land access and natural resources for local farmers. Historically, the European Union has a habit of dumping both dairy products and poultry parts in developing countries, decimating small-scale dairy and poultry producers in the process. For example, Ghana’s poultry sector was wiped out when frozen poultry parts flooded Ghanian markets and the EU-India FTA is likely to include an “asset”-based definition of investment, including both “movable and immovable property.” In the village of Yalakallu, we met both with small producers and landless agricultural wage workers (all photos here by Harneet Singh). Often the small farmers were also wage laborers because they did not have income all year from growing food and were forced to work for daily wages as income. A small farmer in the Indian context means ownership of as little as .5 to 5 acres of land. The farmers with whom we met owned on average only one to three acres of land. The bulk of their growing sustains food consumption for their families and any surpluses are sold to the local market. Water, however, is an acute problem in the village and most of the agriculture is rainfed. Increasingly erratic weather means heavy rains at unwanted times and drought in other parts of the growing season. These farmers have two growing seasons. They grow crops like rice, finger millet and vegetables in the rainy season (July to October), and grow lentils like red gram and green gram in the dry season (November to May or June). Some are also growing tomatoes and cabbage to sell to wholesale retailers, but because the prices of tomatoes had recently crashed, many of the tomato growers said they would be watching their tomatoes wither in the fields this year. For these farmers, dairy plays an important role because they receive payments every two weeks from cows and buffalo they raise on the farm while feeding them with crop residues from their own fields. Most of the farmers we talked with owned one or two cows that deliver 2–4 litres of milk a day. But a system of small traders delivers this milk to the local dairy. For decades, India has invested in developing a cooperative dairy sector that has been increasingly privatized over the past decade. Cheap imports of skim milk powder from Europe to make cheap reconstituted milk would certainly impact these small farmers. It was immediately evident that their ability to withstand even a little risk was very small. Some farmers we talked with have tried ventures like small poultry operations (from 1000 to 5000 chicks) to supply to domestic chains, but when the chicks die or get diseases, the company they sell to can abruptly terminate the contract. These risky business arrangements can involve loans and indebtedness—a common feature amongst all of these farmers. Rising food prices haven't necessarily helped these farmers yet because the wholesalers and retailers have retained most of those gains. In other parts of the same district, farmers with up to five acres of land are contracting with domestic broiler chicken firms. They are raising up to 5000 chicks, taking out loans to do the initial investment in setting up these farms. At the end of the year, they earn about 100,000 Indian rupees—spending 50,000 INR on loan repayment, keeping the rest for themselves. The profit margins are low to minimal and debts pass over from year to year. Water for the chickens competes with water for their farms. Our visit to the next neighborhood in Yalakallu was with landless Dalits (the lowest caste in India’s extremely hierarchical caste system). The women and men depend on wage labor and forest produce for feeding their families. Thanks to India’s public food distribution system, they are able to procure rice and sometimes lentils from government-subsidized ration shops at prices as low as 2 rupees per kilon but rising food prices mean their income brings less and less food. During these times, they compromise on food security—eating rice or finger millet with a watery juice of tamarind. In better times, their diet is supplemented with leafy vegetables and lentils, a key source of protein in these villages. Owning livestock is difficult. Without land, farmers cannot supplement their income and nutrition through dairy or goats, though many of them keep raise poultry, feeding them with kitchen waste, and local chicken varieties are much hardier than chickens produced for the broiler industry. It quickly became evident that these small farmers and landless laborers are facing obstacles when it comes to accessing land. Urbanization, real estate developers and industrial operations are increasingly fencing these people out of grazing land. Access to land is critical. Those who own land, even a small plot, can feed their families through most of the year, and have a much better chance at nutrition and healthier lives than their counterparts who live on wage labor alone. The EU and India’s investment provisions will mean more demand for land and natural resources as EU investors look to extract minerals in India and set up mechanized processing plants. This has already been the case with Indian companies taking over land in the countryside. It also means greater competition for scarce water and electricity. We heard numerous stories over the last few days about the tradeoffs and choices these small food growers and agricultural laborers are making, even now. More difficult choices may not be far off. Posted April 15, 2011 by The new Obama trade policy, as embodied in its free-trade agreement with Colombia, sadly resembles the old Bush trade policy: promoting growth in exports and investment at the expense of local economies and resilient food systems. This is unfortunate, not only because it fails to deliver Obama’s promised “21st-century” trade agenda, but also because it ignores some of the key lessons from NAFTA and the 2008 food-price crisis. Globalization has tied our economies together so that price changes in one country transmit around the world, increasing hunger and undermining efforts to rebuild rural communities and resilient food systems. For decades, the primary problem for agriculture had been low prices, stimulated by U.S. and European agricultural policies that compelled farmers to continue to produce more and more to make up in volume what was lost in falling prices, and to seek ever expanding markets, whether at home or abroad. Cheap imports flooded the markets of developing countries, devastating small-scale farmers in poor countries while failing to stabilize farm incomes in the U.S. and Europe. Trade policy is not neutral; it is a specific set of rules, embodied in agreements that tend to favor specific actors. Rather than learning the lessons of the 2008 food-price crisis, that governments need the ability to shield key markets from extremes so they can rebuild food systems, the rules in the Obama administration’s first two trade agreements proudly replicate the 20th-century model. White House fact sheets on the U.S.-Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement proclaim that the trade deal: Immediately eliminates duties on almost 70 percent of U.S. farm exports including wheat, barley, soybeans, soybean meal and flour, high-quality beef, bacon, almost all fruit and vegetable products, peanuts, whey, cotton, and the vast majority of processed products.[i] Like NAFTA, the Colombia agreement would subject local farmers to immediate competition from U.S. exports on a broad range of products. While prices are high for now, many Colombian farmers will find it difficult to compete with goods whose prices can vary so dramatically. As in Mexico under NAFTA, tariffs on corn and a few other sensitive products will be phased out over a longer period (although the agreement does allow countries to speed up that transition). The Mexican experience—in which more than 2 million farmers have been displaced from agriculture—shows that even a long transition may be inadequate when no real alternatives for rural employment exist. Many of those farmers were compelled to migrate to urban areas or the United States to find work. The White House fact sheet also boasts that the agreement: Immediately eliminates Colombia’s use of Andean Price Bands (variable tariffs), thereby ensuring that Colombia stops applying high duties under this mechanism.[ii] Colombia and other Andean countries have utilized price bands to stabilize prices. When prices are high, tariffs remain low, and when prices drop, tariffs are raised temporarily to stabilize prices. This is similar to the Special Safeguard Mechanism, one of the central proposals made by developing countries in the WTO talks to protect food security and rural livelihoods, a proposal resisted by the U.S. government since the Bush administration. Its removal could undermine Colombian farmers, as well as contribute to rising food-price volatility in other Andean countries. While Article 2.18 of the Colombia FTA allows for temporary safeguards, they can only be triggered by sudden increases in the quantity of goods, not volatility in prices. Those safeguards could only be applied to goods not already subject to duty-free treatment. That provision also specifies that any safeguard mechanisms agreed to at the WTO would not apply to goods from parties in this agreement. In describing “Trade and the U.S.-Colombia Partnership,” the administration cites the Colombian government’s proposals to restore land to those displaced by civil conflicts.[iii] Whatever the merits may be of that program, there is no assurance that farmers facing competition from exports, or new investments facilitated by expanded trade, would be able to stay on their land. ActionAid Guatemala has documented numerous cases of Guatemalan farmers pressured by palm oil and sugar producers to sell their land to make way for industrial-scale monocrop production. Many of these farmers had been granted titles in the wake of that country’s civil war, only to lose them again when inadequate access to credit and other inputs made it impossible for them to earn a living.[iv] Deregulation of financial services provided for in the new trade deal could reduce available farm credit. The U.S.-Colombia accord replicates most of the investment and financial services provisions in NAFTA and CAFTA. The lessons of this export-led model are not encouraging for U.S. farmers either. Despite rising agricultural exports, the number of small but commercially viable farms has dropped by 40 percent in the last 25 years. Very small farms serving local markets (and relying on off-farm income), and very large farms, have increased substantially. In a new report,[v] Tim Wise documents shrinking farm incomes among small- to medium-scale farms, as “Expenses have risen to gobble up higher sales revenues, and government payments have declined because some are triggered by lower prices. With the recession, off-farm income has declined dramatically, leaving family farm households worse off than they were earlier when crop prices were low.” U.S. farmers, like their Colombian counterparts, need reliable public support and consistent market signals so that they can invest in local, regional and national food production to feed their communities and their nations. Trade should supplement local food systems, not seek to replace them. The U.S.-Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement will leave farmers and consumers at the mercy of volatile prices and markets rather than learning from the very real experiences of very recent history to build a new approach that ensures fair, healthy and resilient food systems for all. We’re still waiting for a 21st-century trade policy. – Karen Hansen Kuhn is the director of IATP's International program. i U.S.-Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement: Expanding Markets For America’s Farmers And Ranchers, Fact Sheet, http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/IncreasingAgriculturalExportstoColombia.pdf, accessed April 12, 2011. [ii] Ibid. [iii] Trade & The U.S.-Colombia Partnership, Fact Sheet, http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/TradeandUSColombiaPartnership.pdf. [iv] Danilo Valladares, “Evictions of Native Families Add Fuel to Fire over Land Access,” Inter-Press Service, March 29, 2011. [v] Tim Wise, “Still Waiting for the Farm Boom,” GDAE Policy Brief 11-01, March 2011, available at http://www.ase.tufts.edu/gdae/Pubs/rp/PB11-01FarmIncomeMarch2011.pdf. Posted April 14, 2011 by Food and HealthAgriculture Today, the Senate introduced the Safe Chemicals Act, which seeks to reform the outdated and badly broken Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). We think this is good news for people and families across the United States. Why? Because TSCA has failed so completely to protect our health! Of the more than 80,000 chemicals on the market today, only about 200 have ever been tested for safety. Of those, only five have been banned. Despite 10 years of rulemaking, the EPA could not even ban asbestos, a substance widely known to be harmful to health. Now, more than 35 years after TSCA was passed, there is no shortage of stories about toxic chemicals, like BPA, phthalates, formaldehyde and lead ending up in the products we use everyday. These chemicals don't just end up in our products, they end up in food. For example, one of the most prevelant exposure routes for people to BPA is canned foods (can linings almost always contain BPA, which leaches into the contents of the can). A recent study from Environmental Health Perspectives found that by eliminating canned foods, levels of BPA were reduced by an average of 60 percent in study participants, after only three days! The Safe Chemicals Act will change all of that by changing the way we review and regulate chemicals. Here's what we like about the bill: Takes fast action to address highest risk chemicals. Further evaluates chemicals that could pose unacceptable risk. Ensures safety threshold is met for all chemicals on the market. Provide broad public, market and worker access to reliable chemical information. Promotes innovation, green chemistry and safer alternatives to chemicals of concern. Toxic chemicals, and their health effects, know no party lines. Let's hope Congress moves this bill forward quickly. Posted April 14, 2011 by Food IATP's Shefali Sharma is part of a delegation visiting rural areas in India to assess the human rights impacts of the country's trade and investment policies. I am in Bangalore tonight—a key metropolis for India’s economic growth story. In Bangalore reside many of India’s premier IT companies and back-end offices for multinational companies, be it for telecommunications or travel. But I won’t be staying in the silicon valley of India for long. Tomorrow, a team of us—from an Indian NGO called Anthra, a German development organization called Misereor, the Heinrich Boell Foundation, a photographer and I—will be waking up at the crack of dawn and driving three hours from the South Indian state of Karnataka to another southern state called Andhra Pradesh. Over the next four days, we'll visit the districts of Chittoor and Medak and talk to people in the villages of Yallakulu, Raipedu and Chennapur. Our purpose? To understand how changes in India’s international trade and investment policies are likely to affect dairy farmers and food growers in some of the most rural areas of India. India is negotiating a free trade agreement with the European Union and talking about possibilities of a future trade deal with the United States. While such deals often take place behind closed doors between governments and their industrial lobbies, such agreements can have drastic impacts on environmental and other public interest laws and regulations. Trade and investment policies also have a lot to say about who will continue to eke out a living while facing increased competition. Under these agreements, the most powerful and the least powerful must be treated “alike” under the free trade concept of nondiscrimination. Human rights law, on the other hand, stresses the need to discriminate in favor of the marginalized and vulnerable populations and claims supremacy over all other international law. This principle sets the stage for our next few days where we will be learning about the lives of people dependant on dairy production (something the European Union wants to import into India with much greater ease) and growing other agriculture commodities. In particular, based on the stories they will tell us, we will analyze to what extent the right to food—the “physical and economic access at all times to adequate food or the means to its procurement”—is being respected under the liberalization policies the Indian government has steadily been adopting. And how a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with the EU may strengthen or undermine this critical right. We begin this journey after an intensive, two-day consultation in New Delhi on building a Human Rights Impact Assessment of key areas of the FTA that are likely to impact small food producers in India. These consultations provided us with data and information we needed to understand the changes that are taking place in the dairy, poultry, food retail, India’s public food distribution system and in land-based investments. Now, we go to the field to see how these changes are playing out in the lives of vulnerable people themselves. Stay tuned. Posted April 13, 2011 by Farm Bill Higher prices for crops mean higher profits for farmers, right? Not so fast, says a new Policy Brief by Timothy Wise at the Global Development and Environment Institute at Tufts University. Looking at the latest data available (through 2009), Wise finds that while agriculture commodity prices are rising, so are costs to farmers. In fact, small- and mid-sized farmers (between $100,000 and $250,000 in sales, not profit), with an average of 1,100 acres, have seen a decline in net farm income. In 2009, small- and mid-sized farms had an average net farm income of just $19,274—continuing to rely heavily on non-farm income to stay on the land. Where is all the money going? "As any farmer knows, those small gains were obliterated by higher costs, as prices for fertilizers, chemicals, seeds, feed, fuel and other inputs followed the same upward curve as crop prices," Wise writes, accompanied by graphs like the one to the right. In the current climate of rabid budget cutting, and higher commodity prices, agriculture programs have been a popular target. The media are trumpeting the farm boom but Wise's paper reminds us that if we want small- and mid-sized farmers to survive and thrive, we need to look deeper than the headlines—and pay closer attention to who is really reaping the rewards of higher prices. Posted April 12, 2011 by Karen Hansen-Kuhn Climate Change Used under creative commons license from illustir. Carbon markets are viewed as the primary source of climate financing. The experience to date demands a reevaluation of their ability to exact real, sustainable change, particularly in relation to agriculture. Here are five reasons why poorly designed and regulated carbon markets should not be part of a global climate treaty. 1. The high cost to people, health and the climate Market-based mechanisms aim “to enhance the cost-effectiveness of, and to promote, mitigation actions.” But thus far, carbon emissions trading has been cost-effective only for those firms that have received billions of dollars in carbon credits for free from governments that can afford to subsidize their industries. It is certainly not cost-effective for the millions of people whose health is impaired because they live near industrial facilities that choose to buy offset credits rather than invest in pollution prevention. (U.S. courts are beginning to investigate the public health effects of carbon markets.) Nor is it cost-effective for the indigenous peoples dispossessed of their land to make way for carbon-offset investors’ projects. Market-based mechanisms should be evaluated according to broader criteria, such as vulnerability, harm to food production and sustainable development, and on the basis of equity and common but differentiated responsibilities. 2. Fostering excessive speculation One new market proposal is “green sectoral bonds” from the International Emissions Trading Association (IETA). Under this proposal, “green sectoral bond” investors would receive developing-country carbon credits to repackage and trade as derivatives. Developing countries would incur debt in contracts for which they, and not private contractors of mitigation technologies, would bear liability for failure to meet stipulated GHG reductions. Because countries, not private firms, are liable for bond performance failure, an ensuing chain of climate debt could prevent developing countries from accessing capital markets. This proposal would also shift historic responsibility for mitigation significantly to developing countries. The derivatives component of market proposals are vulnerable to excessive speculation that has plagued commodity markets since at least 2007 and exacerbated price volatility. There is considerable evidence of excessive speculation in commodity markets, aided by deregulation, especially in energy. Carbon and energy prices tend to move together. When hedge funds and commodity index funds add carbon to their portfolios, this speculation—and volatility—will increase. Market mechanisms are also vulnerable to the common crimes, deceptive market practices and tax fraud that have plagued trading under the European Union’s Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS). 3. Exacerbating food price volatility When wheat and other cereal prices surged in September 2010, the FAO’s Committee on Commodity Problems held an emergency meeting. The committee found that speculation was one of the key factors in the prevailing volatile and escalating prices in the cereal market and agreed that further work must be done to enhance transparency and manage the risks associated with new sources of market volatility.” Carbon is considered a commodity like oil, rice, maize and wheat. Excessive speculation in carbon is likely to exacerbate food and commodity price volatility. Bundling carbon derivatives into index funds with other commodities would also tend to destabilize prices. Highly volatile oil and food commodity prices impact economic stability and the agriculture sector as a whole, given the high dependence on fossil fuels for synthetic fertilizers, transport, distribution and storage. 4. Measurement difficulties and transaction costs Offset projects in the agricultural sector would create significant challenges of measurement and environmental integrity. Like the forestry sector, leakage (carbon sequestered in one project leaked through land-use changes elsewhere), permanence (carbon is highly variable in soil and may not be stored permanently) and additionality (the degree to which the carbon stored is additional to what would have been stored in a business-as-usual scenario) are significant barriers to the environmental integrity of soil-carbon offsets. There is a lack of data and measurements of in situ soil types, climate variability, past and future land use, and management practices. Soil carbon content can be highly variable depending on crops and their cropping cycles, human activity, land tenure and the climate itself. A costly combination of quantitative and qualitative field data with sophisticated models would be required to achieve greater accuracy with no guarantee of lasting emissions reductions. The World Bank BioCarbon Fund’s pilot soil-carbon sequestration project in Western Kenya acknowledges that it cannot accurately measure carbon in the soil. Instead, the World Bank will use a series of proxies to measure for soil-carbon sequestration. The transaction costs associated with this project are more than 1 million USD. The FAO acknowledges the high transaction costs involved in these projects and the potential impacts on small-scale farmers and food security. It estimates that close to 17 billion euros could be required between 2010 and 2030 to establish appropriate mitigation measures, monitoring, reporting and verifying methodologies and convert them into carbon credit equivalents. Carbon market “readiness” projects that include agriculture will divert institutional, human and monetary resources away from direct support of climate adaptation for small-scale farmers. 5. Undermining the transition to sustainable agriculture that respects human rights Offset projects could create additional challenges for land rights and food security. To be profitable, agriculture soil carbon projects will require that a large number of farmers’ activities are aggregated into a “carbon pool.” Such schemes require a large number of hectares to be profitable for project developers, investors and traders. Aggregating small farmers for the sake of carbon credits will create the potential for increased social conflict and human rights violations around land tenure, land grabbing and the displacement of food production in favor of more easily calculated carbon sinks. Such aggregated projects could foster a range of untested, costly and controversial technologies that farmers are asked to adopt as “quick fixes” for ease of measurability. Technologies such as biochar and genetically modified mono-cropping could be promoted at the expense of locally appropriate, affordable and ecological approaches that help small producers adapt to climate change while sequestering carbon. There is a real risk that the market-based approaches under consideration at the UNFCCC will continue to fail—both financially and environmentally. Market-based offsets that do not result in emissions reductions further jeopardize the agriculture sector’s ability to adapt to a dangerously warming planet. The focus on market mechanisms is a critical distraction from curbing the real sources of pollution and supporting agricultural practices that reduce emissions while ensuring food security, environmental integrity and rural livelihoods. The reduction of nitrous oxides associated with synthetic fertilizers and emissions from the industrial livestock industry should be starting points for mitigation actions related to agriculture. Direct public support for local seed banks, agroforestry and organic practices are only a few of many that are much less costly and can provide adaptive and mitigation benefits. Alternative proposals for climate finance exist and need the political courage of governments be to put into action. Download the PDF of this factsheet or see the fully cited February 21, 2011 comment to the UNFCCC it is based upon. —Karen Hansen-Kuhn About Think Forward

农业

2017-09/1438/en_head.json.gz/13256

more than 246,000 articles currently online -- Science is knowledge -- innovations-report - The latest trendsForum for Science, Industry and BusinessSponsored by: Search our Site: HomeAbout usDeutsch Science ReportsSpecial TopicsB2B AreaJobs & OpportunitiesHomeScience ReportsReports and NewsAgricultural and Forestry Science Rice-Producing Nations Stress Importance of Developing New Crop Varieties The world’s major rice-producing countries – including the two most populous nations, China and India – have emphasized the importance of continuing to develop new rice varieties to guarantee Asia’s food security and support the region’s economic development. Rice helps feed almost half Earth’s population on a daily basis, and just as important provides vital employment and income for billions of poor people, most of them in Asia. But, at a recent meeting in Indonesia of the region’s main rice-producing nations, the challenges facing rice production were highlighted and discussed with a focus on finding solutions through science and technology. The ninth annual meeting of the Council for Partnerships on Rice Research in Asia (CORRA) was told that, after a brief slowdown in regional collaboration to develop new rice varieties, the situation was improving once again. CORRA brings together senior research representatives of 15 major rice-producing and -consuming nations each year to highlight the issues, threats and challenges facing the rice industry in its efforts to feed the estimated three billion people who consume the staple food each day. “The introduction of plant variety protection rights and the continued implementation of the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture have clearly had an impact on the development of new rice varieties, especially the exchange of material between countries,” said CORRA chairman Seong-Hee Lee. Dr. Lee is also the director general of the Rural Development Administration’s National Institute of Crop Science in South Korea. He said most countries were only just starting to understand the impact of plant variety rights legislation and the international treaty on the way they develop new rice varieties. “It’s very important that rice-producing and -consuming nations continue to develop new varieties to combat problems such as pests and diseases and to have this collaboration is crucial,” he added. The CORRA meeting was told that, as the concept of national sovereignty over rice varieties was developed by each country, sharing and collaboration became more challenging. “But there’s no doubt that we must collaborate to develop the best new rice varieties,” Dr. Lee said. Under the treaty, all countries that ratify it must agree to facilitate access to their plant genetic resources (including rice) for food and agriculture. In turn, those involved will share – in a fair and equitable way – the benefits arising from the use of these plant resources. However, most of the members of CORRA are still not parties to the treaty and there have been no new ratifications by any of the members since Bangladesh in November 2003. “The main reason for this is the treaty’s very complex requirements when it comes to national governments,” Dr. Lee said. For the past 30 years, the well-known network called the International Network for Genetic Evaluation of Rice (INGER) has played a vital role in the development of new rice varieties in Asia, providing each country with access to material it otherwise might not be able to find. “It’s very important for food security and rice production in Asia that INGER be able to continue its work,” Dr. Lee said. In its three decades of work, INGER has provided material for the development and release of 667 new rice varieties in 62 countries around the world. The average annual value of each of these varieties has been estimated by experts at US$2.5 million, providing clear evidence of the major boost new varieties can provide to each country’s rural economy. CORRA members are Bangladesh, Cambodia, China, India, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Laos, Myanmar, Pakistan, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Thailand, and Vietnam. The International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) is the world’s leading rice research and training center. Based in the Philippines and with offices in 10 other Asian countries, it is an autonomous, nonprofit institution focused on improving the well-being of present and future generations of rice farmers and consumers, particularly those with low incomes, while preserving natural resources. IRRI is one of 15 centers funded through the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR), an association of public and private donor agencies. Please visit the Web sites of the CGIAR (www.cgiar.org ) or Future Harvest Foundation (www.futureharvest.org ), a nonprofit organization that builds awareness and supports food and environmental research. Duncan Macintosh | EurekAlert! http://www.irri.org http://www.cgiar.org http://www.futureharvest.org More articles from Agricultural and Forestry Science: Researchers discover a new link to fight billion-dollar threat to soybean production 14.02.2017 | University of Missouri-Columbia Important to maintain a diversity of habitats in the sea 14.02.2017 | University of Gothenburg All articles from Agricultural and Forestry Science >>>

农业

2017-09/1438/en_head.json.gz/13761

Europe During Drought China Turns to Ukraine as Food Source July 27, 2012 6:30 PM During Drought China Turns to Ukraine as Food Source //www.voanews.com/a/ukraine-drought-china-food/1448465.html LOKHVITSA, Ukraine — The worst drought in half a century is hitting corn and wheat harvests in the United States, the world’s largest food exporter. So China, a major food importer, is turning to a new source of supply - Ukraine, a nation once known as the breadbasket of Europe. The drought in the United States reinforces expert forecasts that world food supplies will steadily tighten this decade, and that prices will rise. When grain prices go up, so do the prices of bread, milk, eggs and meat. When that happened two years ago, riots broke out in Egypt and Mozambique. By 2050, the world will have to produce 60 percent more food to meet demands from a world population that is expected to be bigger and richer. In advance, China is reaching out to producers around the globe to guarantee future food supplies. A century ago, rich corn and wheat harvests made Ukraine the breadbasket of Europe. Now China wants to lock down a portion of the bounty flowing from the black soils of this farming nation the size of France. Galyna Kovtok is CEO of UkrLand Farming, or ULF, Ukraine’s largest agri-business. With more than half-a-million hectares of farmland under cultivation, she negotiated a $4 billion Chinese credit this year for her company. “This year, UkrLand Farming may become the first company in Ukraine to send agricultural products to China because at this moment, we are actively working to get certified to export to China,” she said. “The first step will be corn, and then we will work on sending other goods.” When ULF exports corn to China, it will make Ukraine the first country outside the Americas to do so. And with China's population becoming larger, and richer, China is on track to overtake Japan as the world's largest corn importer. In Lokhvitsa, a three-hour drive east of Kyiv, Chinese money is financing construction of six grain elevators. Building for the Chinese market, ULF will soon have almost two million tons of elevator storage capacity. At the elevators, and in the fields, the equipment is largely American. In a wheat field, a fleet of four half-million-dollar John Deere combines is harvesting and threshing. With investments like these, ULF grain yields per acre are now halfway between Ukrainian averages and the high yields of the American Midwest. But, just as in the United States, farming depends on the weather. Across the Black Sea region - in Ukraine, Russia and Kazakhstan - drought this year is pushing harvests down by 15 to 20 percent. Yuri Scherbak, the ULF manager in Ukraine, predicts that his own corn and wheat crops will be down by about 15 percent. “This year, unfortunately, we are expecting a bit of a drop in production,” he said. “And the main reason, while we are in a period of drought, is the decrease in quantity of precipitation." Traditionally, the Black Sea region is the main source of wheat for North Africa and the Middle East. But this year, on the supply side, Russia may have to suspend exports. And on the demand side, Africa and the Middle East are now competing with China. Austin Malloy contributed to this story US Drought Linked to Climate Change Chinese Government Criticized for Downplaying Floods Drought Taking Toll on Midwest Corn Producers More Europe News Planes, Tanks, Ships: Russian Military Gets Massive Upgrade

农业

2017-09/1438/en_head.json.gz/14134

Organic Can Feed the World Barry Estabrook Given that current production systems leave nearly one billion people undernourished, the onus should be on the agribusiness industry to prove its model, not the other way around"We all have things that drive us crazy," wrote Steve Kopperud in a blog post this fall for Brownfield, an organization that disseminates agricultural news online and through radio broadcasts. Kopperud, who is a lobbyist for agribusiness interests in Washington, D.C., then got downright personal: "Firmly ensconced at the top of my list are people who consider themselves experts on an issue when judging by what they say and do, they're sitting high in an ivory tower somewhere contemplating only the 'wouldn't-it-be-nice' aspects."At the top of that heap, Kopperud put Michael Pollan and Marion Nestle, a contributor to Atlantic Life and the author of Food Politics, the title of both her most well-known book and her daily blog."There's a huge chunk of reality missing from Dr. Nestle's academic approach to life," Kopperud wrote. "The missing bit is, quite simply, the answer to the following question: How do you feed seven billion people today and nine billion by 2040 through organic, natural, and local food production?" He then answers his own question. "You can't."What is notably lacking in the "conventional" versus organic debate are studies backing up the claim that organic can't feed the world's growing population.As a journalist who takes issues surrounding food production seriously, I too have things that drive me crazy.At the top of my list are agribusiness advocates such as Kopperud (and, more recently, Steve Sexton of Freakonomics) who dismiss well-thought-out concerns about today's dysfunctional food production system with the old saw that organic farming can't save the world. They persist in repeating this as an irrefutable fact, even as one scientific study after another concludes the exact opposite: not only that organic can indeed feed nine billion human beings but that it is the only hope we have of doing so."There isn't enough land to feed the nine billion people" is one tired argument that gets trotted out by the anti-organic crowd, including Kopperud. That assertion ignores a 2007 study led by Ivette Perfecto, of the University of Michigan, showing that in developing countries, where the chances of famine are greatest, organic methods could double or triple crop yields."My hope is that we can finally put a nail in the coffin of the idea that you can't produce enough food through organic agriculture," Perfecto told Science Daily at the time.Too bad solid, scientific research hasn't been enough to drive that nail home. A 2010 United Nations study (PDF) concluded that organic and other sustainable farming methods that come under the umbrella of what the study's authors called "agroecology" would be necessary to feed the future world. Two years earlier, a U.N. examination (PDF) of farming in 24 African countries found that organic or near-organic farming resulted in yield increases of more than 100 percent. Another U.N.-supported report entitled "Agriculture at a Crossroads" (PDF), compiled by 400 international experts, said that the way the world grows food will have to change radically to meet future demand. It called for governments to pay more attention to small-scale farmers and sustainable practices -- shooting down the bigger-is-inevitably-better notion that huge factory farms and their efficiencies of scale are necessary to feed the world.Suspicious of the political motives of the U.N.? Well, there's a study that came out in 2010 from the all-American National Research Council. Written by professors from seven universities, including the University of California, Iowa State University, and the University of Maryland, the report finds that organic farming, grass-fed livestock husbandry, and the production of meat and crops on the same farm will be needed to sustain food production in this country.The Pennsylvania-based Rodale Institute is an unequivocal supporter of all things organic. But that's no reason to dismiss its 2008 report "The Organic Green Revolution" (PDF), which provides a concise argument for why a return to organic principles is necessary to stave off world hunger, and which backs the assertion with citations of more than 50 scientific studies.Rodale concludes that farming must move away from using unsustainable, increasingly unaffordable, petroleum-based fertilizers and pesticides and turn to "organic, regenerative farming systems that sustain and improve the health of the world population, our soil, and our environment." The science the report so amply cites shows that such a system wouldgive competitive yields to "conventional" methods improve soil and boost its capacity to hold water, particularly important during droughts save farmers money on pesticides and fertilizers save energy because organic production requires 20 to 50 percent less input mitigate global warming because cover crops and compost can sequester close to 40 percent of global CO2 emissions increase food nutrient density What is notably lacking in the "conventional" versus organic debate are studies backing up the claim that organic can't feed the world's growing population. In an exhaustive review using Google and several academic search engines of all the scientific literature published between 1999 and 2007 addressing the question of whether or not organic agriculture could feed the world, the British Soil Association, which supports and certifies organic farms, found (PDF) that there had been 98 papers published in the previous eight years addressing the question of whether organic could feed the world. Every one of the papers showed that organic farming had that potential. Not one argued otherwise.The most troubling part of Kopperud's post is where he says that he finds the food movement of which Pollan and Nestle are respected leaders "almost dangerous." He's wrong. The real danger is when an untruth is repeated so often that people accept it as fact.Given that the current food production system, which is really a 75-year-old experiment, leaves nearly one billion of the world's seven billion humans seriously undernourished today, the onus should be on the advocates of agribusiness to prove their model can feed a future population of nine billion -- not the other way around.Image: Marykit/Shutterstock. Barry Estabrook is a former contributing editor at Gourmet magazine. He is the author of the recently released Tomatoland, a book about industrial tomato agriculture. He blogs at politicsoftheplate.com.

农业

2017-09/1438/en_head.json.gz/14380

MEMO/09/550 Brussels, 11 December 2009 Preparation Agriculture/Fisheries Council of December 2009 The Agriculture & Fisheries Council will meet in Brussels on Monday 14 (starting at 10.00), Tuesday 15 and Wednesday 16 December, under the Presidency of Mr Eskil Erlandsson, Swedish minister for Agriculture. Commissioners Mariann Fischer Boel, Androulla Vassiliou and Joe Borg will represent the Commission at the meeting. On Monday and Tuesday afternoon Council will deal with fisheries items, on Tuesday morning Health issues are on the agenda and on Wednesday the Agriculture points will be discussed. Over lunch on Tuesday, Ministers will be discussing the future of Common Policy for Animal Health and Welfare. The points on the agenda are: Fisheries Fishing possibilities for 2010 The one highly important fisheries-related item on the Council agenda will be a political agreement on the Commission proposal for a Council Regulation fixing fishing opportunities for 2010 ( IP/09/1538 ). This proposal concerns the main commercial stocks in the Atlantic, including the North Sea. Fishing opportunities for the Black Sea and the Baltic Sea were decided earlier this autumn. In preparing the proposal the Commission has used the same objective working method, based on scientific advice, as in previous years. It has taken the views of Member States and the industry on board and sought to alleviate short-term difficulties for the catching sectors wherever possible. As a result, it has limited TAC reductions to 15% in respect of 49 stocks, while for a further 10 stocks reductions beyond 15% have proven unavoidable. On the plus side, the Commission has proposed TAC increases for eight stocks where scientific advice is positive. As always in fisheries management, a trade-off has to be made in foregoing fishing opportunities in the short term in order to secure a more stable and profitable future for the fishing industry. The 2010 fishing opportunities proposal still contains more reductions than increases. However, a consistent and rigorous application of conservation criteria which takes account of scientific expertise and enjoys the support and direct involvement of the industry will, in time, result in replenished stocks and equilibrium between fishing and fish production. The goals of rebuilding depleted stocks and delivering sustainable fisheries in the long term are in line with the criteria laid down in the Commission's consultation document of May 2009 on fishing opportunities for 2010 ( IP/09/747 ). As part of the ongoing efforts to reduce discards, the practice of high-grading (i.e. discarding fish in view of a higher size/price catch) for any species subject to a quota has been banned. The Commission remains committed to reducing discards. In addition, fishers can do their bit to fish responsibly by returning to port once their quotas are used up, using selective fishing gear and avoiding concentrations of young fish. This year's proposal does not yet include final figures for stocks managed jointly with Norway or the Faroe Islands, because the parties have not yet reached agreement on those resources. The Commission is therefore proposing provisional figures for these shared stocks to allow fishing to continue while the negotiations carry on early next year. Food safety and animal health Animal welfare labelling The Commission will present a report, adopted on 28 October, presenting a range of issues concerning animal welfare labelling and the possible establishment of a European Network of Reference Centres for the protection and welfare of animals. The purpose of this report is to enable the European Parliament and the Council to undertake the in-depth discussion on animal welfare labelling. This inter-institutional discussion will provide the basis for the Commission's reflections in shaping possible future policy options. AOB Negotiations with Russia in the veterinary and phytosanitary field: Information from the Commission. International Conference on GMO's in European Agriculture and Food Production (The Hague, 25-26 November 2009): Information from the Netherlands delegation. Provision of food information to consumers – Information from the presidency. Agriculture Simplification of the Common Agricultural Policy On 20 November, the Commission issued a report with the reactions to the 39 simplification suggestions which Member States jointly submitted to the Commission in April. The working document provides information on the outcome of the assessment process and a state-of-play on the progress made since March 2009. The document first concentrates on the assessment of the list of 39 suggestions. It provides an overview of the evaluation process; outlines the highlights of the outcome and, where appropriate, presents a timeline for the follow-up the Commission's services intend to give. It goes without saying that the results of this process and their implementation through binding acts or proposals are subject to the approval by the Commission on a case by case basis. Apart from reviewing the proposals, considerable simplification related progress has also been made in other areas. The report and further information on simplification of the CAP are available at: http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/simplification/index_en.htm Based on a questionnaire from the Presidency, the Council will have an exchange of views on this subject. Future CAP: Rural Development The Council will continue the debate on the future of the Common Agricultural Policy and will focus on the Rural Development policy. A questionnaire from the Presidency will be the basis for the discussion. State aid for the purchase of agricultural land in Lithuania, Latvia, Italy and Hungary The Council received from these four Member States a formal request to approve the granting of State aid to farmers for the purchase of agricultural land. The Council has to decide by unanimity on such exceptional state aid. Dairy market report The Commission will present an updated quarterly report on the situation of the dairy market. Recent figures show a further improvement in dairy prices. A better functioning food supply chain in Europe On 28 October, the Commission has agreed a Communication (see press release IP/09/1593 ) on measures which aim to improve the functioning of the food supply chain in Europe. The recent sharp decline in agricultural commodity prices alongside persistently high consumer food prices has raised concerns on the efficiency of this crucial sector of the European economy. Improving commercial relationships between actors of the chain will be a significant step towards a more efficient food supply chain ultimately benefiting all actors of the chain and consumers alike. The full text of the Communication and Commission working documents are available on the internet at : http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/thematic_articles/article16028_en.htm The Commission will present the Communication to the Council. AOB Abolition of production levy for sugar producers by repealing Article 51 of Single CMO Regulation (EU N° 1234/2007) – Polish demand 26 th Conference of EU paying agencies – General Conclusions: Information from the Presidency. Environment Obligations of operators who place timber and timber products on the market The Agriculture Council is expected to reach political agreement on a proposal for a Regulation which aims to minimise the risk of illegal timber being placed on the EU market. The proposed regulation will make it an obligation for traders to know where their timber is from and ensure that timber they sell has been harvested according to the relevant laws of that country . This first reading political agreement will pave the way for negotiations with the European Parliament with a view to a second reading agreement in 2010. Protection of animals used for scientific purposes On 5 November 2008, the Commission presented a proposal (see IP/08/1632 ) that aims to strengthen the protection of animals still used in scientific procedures in line with the European Union's Protocol on Animal Welfare, ensure a level playing field throughout the EU for industry and enhance the quality of research conducted in the EU. The new provisions will also contribute to minimising as far as possible the number of animals used in experiments. The Council will be informed on the state of play of the negotiations with the European Parliament, under the co-decision procedure.

农业

2017-09/1438/en_head.json.gz/15780

Crops & Markets Wish Farms releases children’s book By Doug Ohlemeier Wish Farms is releasing a children’s book to help promote healthy eating. Therese Wishnatzki, the wife of Gary Wishnatzki, president and chief executive officer of the Plant City, Fla.-based grower-shipper of strawberries, wrote “Misty the Garden Pixie.” The book was designed to encourage children to eat more healthily and help educate them on nutrition by encouraging them to eat more fruits and vegetables, according to a news release. The book’s goal is to increase children’s awareness about farms that supply their food, according to the release. “We’ve always been a family-focused business, and healthy eating is important to us,” Therese Wishnatzki said in the release. “We hope this book will not only provide our younger consumers with a fun way to interact with the Wish Farms brand, but will also inspire kids to snack on fresh fruits, berries, and vegetables instead of some of the unhealthy alternatives.” The birth of the Wishnatzki’s first grandchild — the fifth generation connected with the family operation — inspired the book. The company also brokers, markets and distributes blueberries and vegetables. The book can be purchased and downloaded on Wish Farms’ website, at its Florida Strawberry Festival booth in Plant City through March 9 and is available in some Plant City stores. In addition to the book release, Wish Farms launched its third annual grocery money giveaway sweepstakes. The promotion, which includes $250, $100 and $50 grocery store gift cards, is another way Wish Farms involves consumers, to eat more fruits and vegetables, according to the release. To enter the contest, which started Feb. 28 and runs through March 10th, consumers must “like” Wish Farms on its Facebook page. wish farms children’s bookmisty the garden pixietherese wishnatzki bookflorida strawberries child nutrition About the Author: Doug Ohlemeier Doug Ohlemeier, who has written for The Packer since 2001, serves as eastern editor, a position he has held since August 2006. He started at The Packer as a staff writer after working for nearly a decade in commodity promotion at the Kansas Wheat Commission, where he was a marketing specialist. Doug worked in radio and television news writing, producing and reporting for seven years in Texas, Missouri and Nebraska. He graduated from Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, in 1984, with a bachelor of science degree in broadcast journalism and a minor in history. He earned a master’s in corporate communications from the University of Kansas, Lawrence, in 1991. In college, he served as a news editor of the daily O’Collegian newspaper and interned in radio and television news departments. View All Posts

农业

2017-09/1438/en_head.json.gz/16244

Why China's Farms Are Failing The country's environmental problems threaten the food production system for over a billion people. A farmer walks through a field near a replica of the Eiffel Tower at the Tianducheng development in Hangzhou, Zhejiang Province. Aly Song / Reuters Ever since May, when a state-controlled Chinese company agreed to buy U.S. pork giant Smithfield, reportedly with an eye toward ramping up U.S. pork imports to China, I've been looking into the simultaneously impressive and vexed state of China's food production system.In short, I've found that in the process of emerging as the globe's manufacturing center -- the place that provides us with everything from the simplest of brooms to the smartest of phones -- China has severely damaged its land and water resources, compromising its ability to increase food production even as its economy thunders along, its population grows (albeit slowly), and its people gain wealth, move up the food chain, and demand ever-more meat.Now, none of that should detract from the food miracle that China has enacted since it began its transformation into an industrial powerhouse in the late 1970s. This 2013 report from the United Nation's Food and Agriculture Organization and the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) brims with data on this feat. The nation slashed its hunger rate -- from 20 percent of its population in 1990 to 12 percent today -- by quietly turbocharging its farms. China's total farm output, a broad measure of food churned out, has tripled since 1978. The ramp-up in livestock production in particular is even more dizzying -- it rose by a factor of five. Overall, China's food system represents a magnificent achievement: It feeds nearly a quarter of the globe's people on just 7 percent of its arable land. But now, 35 years since it began reforming its state-dominated economy along market lines, China's spectacular run as provider of its own food is looking severely strained. Its citizens' appetite for meat is rising along with incomes, and mass-producing steaks and chops for 1.2 billion people requires tremendous amounts of land and water. Meanwhile, its manufacturing miracle -- the very thing that financed its food miracle -- has largely fouled up or just plain swallowed those very resources. In this post from a few weeks ago, I told the story of the dire state of China's water resources, which are being increasingly diverted to, and fouled by, the country's insatiable demand for coal to power the manufacturing sector. Then there's land. Here are just a few of the findings of recent investigations into the state of Chinese farms: China's farmland is shrinking. Despite the country's immense geographical footprint, there just isn't that much to go around. Between 1997 and 2008, China saw 6.2 percent of its farmland engulfed by factories and sprawl. The United States has six times the arable land per capita as China. Today, the FAO/OECD report states, China has just 0.22 acres of arable land per capita -- less than half of the global average and a quarter of the average for OECD member countries. A fifth of China's land is polluted. The FAO/OECD report gingerly calls this problem the "declining trend in soil quality." Fully 40 percent of China's arable land has been degraded by some combination of erosion, salinization, or acidification -- and nearly 20 percent is polluted, whether by industrial effluent, sewage, excessive farm chemicals, or mining runoff, the FAO/OECD report found. China considers its soil problems "state secrets." The Chinese government conducted a national survey of soil pollution in 2006, but it has refused to release the results. But evidence is building that soil toxicity is a major problem that's creeping into the food supply. In May 2013, food safety officials in the southern city of Guangzhou found heightened levels of cadmium, a carcinogenic heavy metal, in 8 of 18 rice samples picked up at local restaurants, sparking a national furor. The rice came from Hunan province -- where "expanding factories, smelters and mines jostle with paddy fields," the New York Times reported. In 2011, Nanjing Agricultural University researchers came out with a report claiming they had found cadmium in 10 percent of rice samples nationwide and 60 percent of samples from southern China. China's food system is powered by coal. It's not just industry that's degrading the water and land China relies on for food. It's also agriculture itself. China's food production miracle has been driven by an ever-increasing annual cascade of synthetic nitrogen fertilizer (it now uses more than a third of global nitrogen output) -- and its nitrogen industry relies on coal for 70 percent of its energy needs. To grow its food, in other words, China relies on an energy source that competes aggressively with farming for water. Five of China's largest lakes have substantial dead zones caused by fertilizer runoff. That's what a paper by Chinese and University of California researchers found after they examined Chinese lakes in 2008. And heavy use of nitrogen fertilizer takes its toll on soil quality, too. It causes pH levels to drop, turning soil acidic and less productive -- a problem rampant in China. Here's a 2010 Nature article on a national survey of the nation's farmland: The team's results show that extensive [fertilizer] overuse has caused the pH of soil across China to drop by roughly 0.5, with some soils reaching a pH of 5.07 (nearly neutral soils of pH 6-7 are optimal for cereals, such as rice and grain, and other cash crops). By contrast, soil left to its own devices would take at least 100 years to acidify by this amount. The acidification has already lessened crop production by 30-50 percent in some areas, Zhang [a Chinese researcher] says. If the trend continues, some regions could eventually see the soil pH drop to as low as 3. "No crop can grow at this level of acidification," he warns. "If the trend continues ..." That, I guess, is the broad question here. A global economic system that relies on China as a manufacturing center, in a way that undermines China's ability to feed itself, seems like a global economic system headed for disaster. This story appears at The Atlantic as part of the Climate Desk collaboration. Tom Philpott is the food and ag correspondent for Mother Jones.

农业

2017-09/1438/en_head.json.gz/17818

Diocesan Locator | | FOLLOW US TEXT SIZE Items of Interest Agriculture, Nutrition and Rural Issues Communiquè of Andean and U.S. Bishops The Farm Bill: Principles and Priorities For I Was Hungry & You Gave Me Food: Pastoral Reflection Part 3 For I Was Hungry & You Gave Me Food: Data Boxes Agriculture and Nutrition Archives 2006 Budget Reconciliation: A Challenge and an Opportunity Declaración del día del trabajo 2004 Bishops Thank Congress for Working on Extension and Improvement of Trade Preferences for Haiti Action Alert on Permanent Normal Trade Relations (PNTR) with China Letter to House of Representatives on Permanent Normal Trade Relations with China Letter to House of Representatives on NTR/MFN Status for China Letter to House of Representatives on MFN Status for China Statement on Renewing MFN Status for China Letter to Congress on Most Favored Nation Status for China Testimony on Human Rights and MFN for China Letter to Foreign Affairs Committee on MFN Letter to Congress on MFN Letter to President on MFN Status for China see all 20 pages USCCB > Issues and Action > Human Life and Dignity > Global Issues > Trade Letter on Agricultural Subsidies April 1, 2005The Honorable Charles E. GrassleyChairmanSenate Finance CommitteeSenate Dirksen BuildingRoom 219Washington, DC 20510Dear Mr. Chairman:On behalf of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), we are writing to welcome and support the introduction of S. 385, the Rural America Preservation Act. It is our understanding that the bill proposes to place a real limit on the amount of direct federal funding any single entity can receive and to close loopholes that currently allow the largest farms to receive massive government payments.As Pastors, we are motivated by a moral vision that focuses concern on the poor and the vulnerable, and thus requires the just allocation of limited resources for the common good. The USCCB is in favor of targeting direct federal assistance to those who need it most and placing reasonable limits on agricultural commodity payments. In our 2003 pastoral statement, For I Was Hungry & You Gave Me Food: Catholic Reflections on Food, Farmers, and Farmworkers, the bishops specifically addressed this issue: Limited government resources for subsidies and other forms of support should be targeted to small and moderate-sized farms, especially minority-owned farms, to help them through difficult times caused by changes in global agricultural markets or weather patterns that destroy crops. Agricultural subsidies often go to a few large producers, while smaller family farms struggle to survive. Rather than simply rewarding production, which can lead to surpluses and falling prices, government resources should reward environmentally sound and sustainable farming practices. Although agricultural subsidies were originally created to help poor farmers during the depression era, the unfortunate reality today is that most of the subsidies do not go to struggling farmers. Instead, millions in annual subsidies encourage the largest farms to overproduce, depressing crop prices and threatening the livelihood of small and medium-sized family farms in the U.S. and around the world.While the legislation you have introduced is directed towards the rural community in the United States, we are also mindful that in an era of globalization, decisions made by the United States can affect the ability of poor farmers and farm workers in Central America, Africa and Asia to earn a living and to feed their families. For this reason, our Pastoral Statement also refers to the international consequences of U.S. farm supports, and their impact on the ability of poor farmers around the world to receive a decent price for their products and to support their families. It states: Current U.S. and European subsidies, supports, tariffs, quotas, and other barriers that undermine market access for poorer countries should be substantially reduced and should be focused on policies that minimize the direct effects on the price of agricultural goods. As the United States continues its role in the Doha Development Round of trade negotiations under the auspices of the World Trade Organization, we encourage you to be mindful of the words of Cardinal Theodore McCarrick who in his Labor Day Statement of 2004 urged leaders to “look at trade policies from the bottom-up—how they touch the lives of the poorest families and most vulnerable workers in our own country and around the world.”Again Mr. Chairman, thank you for your efforts on this important issue. We look forward to working with you to reform farm programs and help sustain family farmers and rural communities both here and abroad.Sincerely,Most Reverend Nicholas DiMarzio, Ph.D, D.D.Bishop of BrooklynChairman, Domestic Policy CommitteeMost Revered John H. Ricard, SSJBishop of Pensacola-TallahasseeChairman, International Policy Committee ©2017 United States Conference of Catholic Bishops

农业

2017-09/2272/en_head.json.gz/14447

A horizonsoil type Soil profiles on hillslopesThe thickness and composition of soil horizons vary with position on a hillslope and with water drainage. For example, on the upper slopes of poorly drained profiles, underlying rock may be exposed by surface erosion, and nutrient-rich soils (A horizon) may accumulate at the toeslope. On the other hand, in well-drained profiles under forest cover, the leached layers (E horizon) may be relatively thick and surface erosion minimal.Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc. in soil: Soil horizons . Soil horizons are defined by features that reflect soil-forming processes. For instance, the uppermost soil layer (not including surface litter) is termed the A horizon. This is a weathered layer that contains an accumulation of humus (decomposed, dark-coloured, carbon-rich matter) and microbial biomass that is mixed with small-grained minerals to form... in soil: Time ...of the passage of time. (A series of soil profiles whose features differ only as a result of age constitutes a chronosequence.) One example of a time-related feature is the humus content of the A horizon, which, for soils less than 10,000 years old, increases continually at a rate dependent on parent material, vegetation, and climate. Typically, this rate of increase slows after about...

农业

2017-09/2272/en_head.json.gz/15555

Rotary parlors are here to stay By Thomas Quaife No one is suggesting that rotaries are going to take over or that they are somehow better than conventional herringbone or parallel milking parlors. However,today's rotaries will remain a viable option for some producers and not fade away like they did in the 1970s.If you were to look through a dairy magazine published 30 or 40 years ago, you'd be amazed at how much has changed in this industry. The technology, for one thing, has improved tremendously. Yet, some of the same concepts that we hear about today were floating around then - they just weren't as fully developed. For example, several articles appeared in 1973 about rotary milking parlors. Interest in rotaries was growing - so much, in fact, that the February 1975 issue of Dairy Herd Management referred to their "rapid acceptance."By 1977, rotaries had dropped out of sight - nary an article or an ad-vertisement to be found. Today, rotaries are making a comeback. And, this time, they're here to stay. What goes around comes aroundMany of the same issues that swirled around rotaries in the 1970s are issues today. Rotaries appeal to people because of high implied throughput - which, in the case of a 60-stall rotary, can be as high as 450 cows per hour. With a rotary, you can keep a constant flow of cows moving through the system.But, assembly-line approaches to milking can be both a curse and a blessing. Rotaries usually run at a fast enough pace that one cow after another will walk onto the milking platform a scant 8 to 12 seconds apart. With so little time to handle each cow, a worker will only be able to attach milking units and not much more - unless another milker is brought in, and then you lose some of the potential labor advantages. With many rotaries, the pre-milking udder routine is minimal at best. Certainly, if you are interested in buying a rotary, you need to ask yourself these questions: What kind of pre-milking udder prep procedure do I want to follow? How clean are the cows when they come into the parlor? How many milkers do I want working at one time?Your management system will have a major bearing on whether a rotary is right for you. And, so will your expansion plans. With conventional parlors, it's possible to expand the size simply by adding onto one end - provided, of course, the building will accommodate it. With a rotary, you can't do that. You're locked in, and the only option at that point is to add a second rotary. That's a definite disadvantage, unless you have planned well enough ahead of time to anticipate future growth. More reliableRotaries didn't last long in the 1970s because the companies that distributed them in the U.S. didn't put much development effort into them. Glitches oc-curred, as might be expected with any parlor system first being introduced. Companies pulled out before the glitches could be corrected, and rotaries lost ground to herringbones and parallels. But, a few diehards have kept their rotaries going since the 1970s. Brent Palmer, herdsman at a 325-cow dairy near Salt Lake City, Utah, has been milking in a 17-stall rotary parlor for nearly eight years, and the rotary itself is close to 22 years old. Preventative maintenance has been the key to keeping it going all of these years, he says. The worst thing that has happened yet was when the track beneath the milking platform broke and sprung open and the platform wouldn't move, Palmer says. Luckily, he was able to weld the track in place temporarily, and it only put the milking schedule one hour behind. The next morning, he was able to correct the problem more permanently. "We have yet to miss a milking because of problems with the milking platform, or table," Palmer adds.Dan Sheldon, owner of Woody Hill Farm in Salem, N.Y., is another long-term user of rotaries. He's milked in a 14-stall rotary since 1974 and a 28-stall rotary since 1995. In all that time, he recalls only two milkings where the parlor was not rotating - and that was from having to wait for specialized parts. He agrees that most mechanical problems can be avoided with preventative maintenance. If a handful of parlors from the 1970s are still going strong, then the newer models - which are much sturdier and more reliable - should have an even longer-lasting legacy. There's really no comparison between today's rotary parlors and those from the 1970s, notes Mike Pawlak, vice president of Westfalia Dairy Systems, a leading manufacturer of rotary parlors. The carriage system on today's rotaries, consisting of I-beams riding on high-impact nylon or steel rollers, makes it much easier for the platform to turn. And, the easier it is for the platform to move, the less wear and tear on the entire system, Pawlak adds. "With today's technology and the built-in safeguards, down days are virtually eliminated," Pawlak says, except for unexpected problems like power failures. Fixed routine Those employees of Sheldon's who have worked in other types of parlors say they don't want to go anywhere else after having worked in a rotary. They like the constant flow of activity. That's one of the advantages of a rotary: You gain a fixed routine. It forces you to address a cow every 10 seconds or so, depending on how fast the milking platform is turning. We've been hearing a lot lately about Total Quality Management (TQM) and its application to the dairy business. TQM seeks to promote consistent quality by identifying key steps in the manufacturing process and then formulating those steps in a routine that's highly repeatable. A rotary conforms to this concept, because it requires a worker to stand in a particular area - much like an assembly-line worker - and perform the same task every time a cow passes by. Two other observations: No coaxing is needed to get cows onto the milking platform. In fact, there's a lot of jostling in the holding pen as cows eagerly await their turn on the "merry-go-round." Rotary milking systems are amazing quietAdded efficiency?The jury's still out on whether the throughput and labor efficiencies gained by rotaries are superior to conventional in-line parlors. Dennis Armstrong, a parlor efficiency expert who recently retired from the University of Arizona, is currently gathering the numbers - and he says further study is needed. Efficiencies from a rotary will depend, in large part, upon the pre-milking hygiene practiced by the dairy. If the dairy has a minimal routine, there may be a labor savings, Armstrong says. If the dairy has an extensive routine, those savings won't be as great.At one of the dairies that Armstrong has studied - Joe Pires Dairy in Tipton, Calif. - the 48-stall rotary is handling approximately 280 cows per hour. Because six of the stalls are used by cows that are entering or exiting the platform (or cows that are about to be post-dipped or have milking units attached), that leaves 42 stalls for cows that are actively milking. Another cow enters the platform every 10 seconds. Theoretically, Pires' rotary parlor should be able to milk 360 cows per hour, but the actual number drops to 280 because one of the milkers has to stop occasionally and bring in another group of cows from the outdoor corrals. With two milkers handling all of the duties, Pires' rotary is achieving a throughput of 140 cows per worker per hour. That's an admirable number, but also within the realm of possibility for conventional parallel or herringbone parlor systems. An article in the September 1998 issue of Dairy Herd Management told about a double-24 herringbone in Michigan where one worker had milked up to 175 cows per hour. Simple mathLarry Jones, farm management consultant with the FARME Institute in Homer, N.Y., says all parlors - rotaries, herringbones, parallels - must conform to the "3,600-second rule." In other words, there are only 3,600 seconds in an hour to accommodate the work routine. If you have a 30-second work routine (including pre-milking prep and unit attachment), then one person can only handle 120 cows an hour, regardless of how many cows the parlor is capable of handling. The solution is to either cut the length of the routine or add more milkers. Streamlining the udder prep procedure can cause problems, however, be-cause you may be eliminating a vital component of udder health and cleanliness. Jones does acknowledge one clear advantage held by the rotaries, and that is entry time. If one cow is allowed to come onto the platform every 10 seconds, it creates a steady flow of cows onto the platform. Entry time is practically zero. But, if the entry time is lengthened to 15 seconds, the cows have to stop for a few seconds and wait, which slows things down. So, entry time becomes a crucial part of the efficiency formula. And, because cows usually require several minutes for milkout, entry time has to be coordinated with the size of the parlor and the pre-milking cow prep procedure. John Hayne, rotary systems product manager for Alfa Laval Agri, says one of the things he inquires about when installing a parlor is the herd's milkout time so he can adjust the speed of the milking platform accordingly. After doing the math, it becomes obvious that the rotaries are particularly well suited to large dairies - those with enough cows to keep a rotary with 48 stalls or more moving continuously - one cow at least every 10 to 12 seconds. In the 1970s, it was typical to see small rotaries, with perhaps 14 to 17 stalls. Those rotaries didn't have the potential to move very many cows. But, the average herd was smaller than it is today. Today's herds are large enough for a ro-tary to finally make sense.A striking example is provided at the 3,100-cow A.J. Bos dairy near Bakersfield, Calif. With twin 54-stall rotaries standing side-by-side, the dairy is running a total of 700 to 750 cows per hour through the milking center. The equivalent in-line setup, consisting of two double-54 herringbone or parallel parlors, couldn't generate those type of numbers unless it was getting six and one-half to seven turns an hour, and everyone knows that seven turns is unrealistic. Here to stayJones says he agrees that rotary parlors are here to stay for two reasons: The technology is much better than it was in the 1970s. They make sense on many of today's large dairies. Hayne, of Alfa Laval Agri, says there is definite interest among the 2,000-cow dairies in California. Often, the dairies are undergoing expansion or relocating from one area to another.Ray Middel, North American sales manager for Westfalia Dairy Systems, says the primary interest in rotaries has been among commercial dairy farms with 500 or more cows. These farms are interested in rotaries with 48 or more stalls. And just last month, another equipment manufacturer - Bou-Matic - introduced its line of rotary parlors. The fact that these companies are spending millions of dollars to develop and introduce new product lines is perhaps the most compelling evidence yet of the rotaries' increasing popularity. And, most observers don't see it as a fad or fleeting fancy, either. This time, rotaries are here to stay. About the Author: Thomas Quaife

农业

2017-09/2272/en_head.json.gz/16967

MEMO/10/619Brussels, 26 November 2010Preparation Agriculture/Fisheries Council of November 2010The Agriculture & Fisheries Council will meet in Brussels on Monday 29 November (starting at 10 a.m.) and (if necessary) Tuesday 30 November. It will be chaired for the Agriculture issues by Mrs Sabine Laruelle, Belgian minister for SMEs, the Self-Employment, Agriculture and Science Policy, and , for the points on Fisheries, by Mr Kris Peeters, Minister-President for the Flemish Region and responsible for Fisheries. Commissioners Maria Damanaki, John Dalli and Dacian Cioloş will represent the Commission at the meeting. The Council will debate the fisheries items (deep-sea fishing opportunities, Norway agreement and long-term management plans) in the morning. Over lunch, ministers will discuss the outcome of the symposium on improved fisheries and science partnerships as policy drivers, organised by the Belgian Presidency in Ostend on 26 November. After lunch, ministers will deal with agriculture items in the afternoon session, before returning to the deep-sea fishing opportunities proposal. The points on the agenda are:FisheriesDeep-sea fishing opportunities – political agreementThe Council will aim to reach political agreement on fishing opportunities for deep-sea species, based on the Commission's proposal of 6 October (IP/10/1294). In light of scientific evidence, the Commission proposed not to grant increases in fishing opportunities for deep-sea fish in EU waters and in international waters of the North-East Atlantic for 2011-2012 until positive trends in the abundance of deep-sea stocks have been properly identified. However, some important Total Allowable Catches (TACs) will be kept stable. The Commission also remains committed to phasing out fishing for deep-sea sharks and orange roughy until there is clear evidence regarding the level of unavoidable by-catch of these valuable species. EU-Norway consultations for 2011 – information from the Commission and exchange of viewsFollowing the exchange of views at the October Council, the Commission will report to Council on the progress in the first round of negotiations with Norway in Brussels from 16 to 18 November. Ministers will then exchange views on both the first round and the second, which will be kicking off that very day in Bergen, Norway.Commissioner Maria Damanaki will outline the state of play on the various issues and stocks under discussion with Norway, which include cod, whiting and herring.The bilateral Fisheries Agreement between the EU and Norway covering the fisheries on joint stocks in the North Sea has been in place since 1980. Some, but not all, of these stocks are jointly managed. Annual total allowable catches (TACs) are set by the EU and Norway for the jointly managed stocks, taking care to ensure an overall balance in the reciprocal exchange of quotas across the Agreement. Any Other Business (AOB)Long-term management plansThe Commission has asked for a discussion in Council on the arrangements needed to guarantee the continued success of long-term management plans under the Lisbon Treaty. The Commission is keen to resolve all outstanding issues on the future set-up of these plans with Parliament and the Member States.Long-term management plans have been one of the Common Fisheries Policy's major achievements in the past ten years. They have become an essential tool for managing fish stocks and for providing the fishing industry with better forward planning, and mark a major step forward from detailed technical regulations towards results-based management. The Commission is eager to build on the plans' success and to continue establishing such management plans for as many stocks as possible.Health and Food SafetyReport on the advisability and feasibility of presenting a legislative proposal enabling EFSA to receive fees - Presentation from the Commission and exchange of viewsThe Report will be presented by the Commission and discussed for the first time at the Council level. Proposal concerning the non-inclusion of 1,3-dichloropropene in Annex I to Council Directive 91/414/EEC - AdoptionCommission proposed to the July 2010 SCoFCAH a second non-inclusion of 1,3-dichloropropene, after a first non-inclusion in the positive list of Dir. 91/414/EEC in 2007 because of several concerns identified by EFSA. SCoFCAH was unable to deliver an opinion on the draft Commission decision.As a result, the Commission submitted to the Council in September 2010 the non-inclusion proposal under the comitology procedure, the Council having to act by a qualified majority. If no qualified majority is reached, the Commission will adopt the proposal.Conference on the review of the European plant health regime -Information from the PresidencyThe Belgian Presidency has included in the agenda an information point concerning the conference "Towards a new EU plant health law", which took place in Brussels on 28 September 2010 and was co-organised by the Commission and the Belgian Presidency. Conference on the review of the European plant health regime –Information from the PresidencyThe Presidency would like to inform Member States on the International Conference on Animal Welfare Education that was held in Brussels on 1-2 October 2010. The Conference brought together experts such as academics, officials, teachers, veterinarians and NGO representatives from all over the world. Its broad aim was to increase citizens' awareness and respect for animals as well as educate children about how animals should be treated.AgricultureCommunication "The CAP towards 2020"On 18 November, the European Commission published a Communication on "the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) towards 2020 – Meeting the food, natural resources and territorial challenges of the future". The reform aims at making the European agriculture sector more dynamic, competitive, and effective in responding to the Europe 2020 vision of stimulating sustainable growth, smart growth and inclusive growth. The paper outlines three options for further reform. Following discussion of these ideas, the Commission will present formal legislative proposals in mid-2011.The Communication will be presented by Commissioner Dacian Cioloş and will be followed by an exchange of views where Ministers will be invited to give brief, overall, initial reactions on the Communication. The Communication, press release and other documents can be found on the internet at:http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/cap-post-2013/communication/index_en.htmThis point will be public and can be followed in the press room of the Council.Report on the Farm Advisory SystemUnder the 2003 CAP reform Member States had the obligation to establish (by 2007) a system for advising farmers on land and farm management, the so-called Farm Advisory System (FAS) in order to help farmers to become more aware of on-farm processes relating to the environment, food safety and animal health and welfare. The Commission has now produced a report on the system - not to offer an exhaustive overview, but to provide input for a debate in the Council and the European Parliament in the course of 2010-2011. The report proposes to improve the management of the FAS: ensuring that knowledge is shared between actors and that synergies between various instruments such as advice, training, information, extension services and research are enhanced. A FAS advisor should act as a ‘general practitioner’, interlinking all different aspects of farming. He should explain to farmers not only EU requirements but also their objectives, and the underlying policies. The report is available at: http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/farm-advisory-system/index_en.htmAny Other Business (AOB)2011 budget: Information from the CommissionConference on Agriculture, Food Security and Climate Change (The Hague, 30 October – 5 November): Information from the Dutch delegationFrench Presidency of the G20 and volatility of agricultural markets: Information from the French delegation.

农业

2017-09/2272/en_head.json.gz/17405

Agweb HomeMILK HomeNewsSmall Dairies in Weld County, Colorado Struggle to Survive Facebook Small Dairies in Weld County, Colorado Struggle to Survive December 5, 2013 04:39 AM The cattle at Gege Ellzey's family dairy are said to be part of a bloodline that can be traced back to the livestock that hauled her ancestors West in covered wagons. Those are things she tries not to think about as she sees the animals leave the property to go to other milking operations, which she's had to do in recent weeks after the family decided to stop fighting the many challenges of running a small dairy and closed it. The general claim that there's limited opportunity for small producers in agriculture has been proved wrong in many ways in Weld County, but it certainly holds water — or milk — when it comes to one of the largest contributors to the local ag economy. Because of the unique challenges of the dairy business, the landscape of the industry as a whole has changed dramatically over the years, with fewer and fewer operations handling more and more of the milk production. And many of the smaller players — like Ellzey and others — have lost their place along the way. When the most recent comprehensive U.S. Census of Agriculture was released in 2007, it showed that from 1987 to 2007 the number of farms and beef-cattle operations in Weld County had actually increased, and the average size of the operations had shrunk. But dairies in Weld County — a top-20 milk producer nationally, and the state's leader — had fallen in numbers from 278 to 97, while the average size of the dairy during that time increased more than four-fold, going from 136.9 cows per operation to 719.4. Up-to-date numbers are limited. The 2013 Colorado Agricultural Statistics publication doesn't include a breakdown by county of the number of dairies or average herd size, and the next U.S. Census of Agriculture — based on 2012 figures — won't be released until next year. But local milk producers aren't expecting new numbers to reflect any reversal of dairy consolidation. Locally, an exacerbation of the trend is more likely, many say, with population growth in northern Colorado straining resources — increasing the demand and price for land and water. Also, new 2,000-plus-head dairies are moving into the area from out of state and larger existing dairies are expanding to meet the needs of a growing Leprino Foods cheese-processing plant in Greeley. That ongoing dairy growth is a major factor in Leprino's anticipated economic impact, which over 20 years is expected to be about $15 billion. But that increased competition for water, land, feed and workers has made it more expensive for all dairies to operate, and the narrow profit margins are especially tough on small producers. "In the dairy business, you have so many inputs ... labor, a lot of water, a lot of feed, a lot of electricity, which is all getting more expensive ... while you have so little control over the price you get for the milk you produce," said Ellzey, whose 200-milking cow dairy had been operating near Galeton for decades. "Those dynamics have pushed a lot of smaller producers out of business. And it's not getting any better. "With such narrow profit margins per cow, if you don't have thousands of cows, it's so tough to make it anymore." Typically, livestock feed accounts for about 40 to 50 percent of a dairy's operating expenses and, from 2007 to about 2012, the price of corn — a major component of livestock feed rations — doubled because of increased demand and drought. The price of hay also doubled in recent years, thanks to the widespread dry spells of 2011 and 2012. During that time, though, the price dairymen received for their milk didn't see such increases. The average price dairymen received for their milk in Colorado in 2007 was $19.30 per hundredweight, according to the National Agricultural Statistics Service's Colorado office. In 2012, the average price Colorado dairymen received for milk was actually lower, at $18.60 per hundredweight. Charles Tucker, who operates a dairy near Pierce with about 400 milking cows, said that with such challenges in place, if the right buyer offers him the right price, he's selling the dairy. "We keep being told, 'You need to be more efficient.' But we're already doing everything we can," said Tucker, whose family started the dairy in 1966. "And efficiency can only go so far when your feed costs double and the price of water doubles, and the price you get for your milk doesn't change." Larger dairies, Tucker and Ellzey explained, have the resources to advance purchase large supplies of feed, helping them lock in lower prices, which makes a big difference. Larger dairies often have the land, machinery and other resources to grow a sizeable portion of their own feed. Larger dairies also get more production out of their facilities and can take better advantage of other fixed costs in place, such as getting more cows through the milking parlor each day, they added. "That's how it has to be done now," Ellzey said. Many smaller dairies are faced with the choice of either expanding to become more efficient — which, with the increasing costs for everything needed to grow, requires a huge capital investment, possibly hundreds of thousands of dollars — or closing up shop. Kaye Harris Berthoud, CO9/26/2016 03:44 PM Want to purchase a few weaned calves. Can anyone help?

农业

2017-09/2272/en_head.json.gz/17836

Encyclopedia > Plants and Animals > Plants > Plants yam yam, common name for some members of the Dioscoreaceae, a family of tropical and subtropical climbing herbs or shrubs with starchy rhizomes often cultivated for food. The largest genus, Dioscorea, is commercially important in East Asia and in tropical America. The thick rhizomes, often weighing 30 lb (13.6 kg) or more, are used for human consumption and for feeding livestock. A number of species of Dioscorea are cultivated for extraction of diosgenin, a female hormone precursor used in the manufacture of the contraceptive pill. In the United States, cultivation of yams for food is restricted to the South, but the wild yam (sometimes used medicinally) is indigenous farther north, and another species, the cinnamon vine, is cultivated as a decorative plant. The sweet potato, which belongs to the morning glory family, is sometimes erroneously called yam. The S African elephant's-foot ( Testudinaria elephantipes ), also called Hottentot bread and tortoise plant, is sometimes grown in greenhouses; its large rootstock was formerly eaten by the natives. Yams are classified in the division Magnoliophyta, class Liliopsida, order Liliales, family Dioscoreaceae. The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, 6th ed. Copyright © 2012, Columbia University Press. All rights reserved.See more Encyclopedia articles on: Plants

农业

2017-09/2272/en_head.json.gz/18209

Stronger safety net is goal for National Cotton Council Jan 27, 2017 Oklahoma Peanut Expo March 23 in Altus Feb 08, 2017 Texas AgriLife Extension schedules cotton meetings Feb 22, 2017 RiceTec partners with Adama on new herbicide tolerance system Feb 21, 2017 Don't risk using pesticides off-label Stephen L. Johnson | Jun 11, 2002 This and the preceding article were written to remind producers of the consequences of misusing pesticides. American consumers have one of the safest food supplies in the world, and American farmers have world-renowned technologies available to ensure productivity. Pesticides are one of those critical technologies. America’s farmers are the first-line of defense for ensuring food safety. Unfortunately, during the 2001 growing season, cases of illegal off-label use of agricultural pesticides came to light. State and federal officials discovered off-label or misuse cases in 10 states that involved five pesticides, implicated nearly 300 people, affected more than 50,000 acres of crops, and resulted in an unprecedented multimillion-dollar buy-back program for wheat. Fortunately, the response system worked, thanks to the efforts of EPA, other federal and state agencies and one pesticide registrant that agreed to buy back the illegally treated wheat crop. Together we were able to prevent the tainted crops from entering the food supply and no serious human health incidents resulted. Nobody Wins Off-label pesticide use is a lose-lose situation for everyone involved. It can be especially risky to public health and the environment. Pesticides are registered for specific crops, with detailed label directions. It’s illegal and dangerous to use a pesticide inconsistent with these label directions. Pesticide label directions are based on substantial scientific testing and rigorous evaluation by EPA, the states, and scientific researchers, to ensure that products can be used without harm to workers, consumers and the environment. When a pesticide is used on a crop for which it is not approved or in a manner that is inconsistent with the label, it may pose real health risks to consumers. Last year’s incidents caused serious economic and financial disruption for hundreds of growers, whose crops became suspect, embargoed, and quarantined. In addition, states have issued notices of warnings, suspended applicators’ certifications, and assessed fines and penalties totaling hundreds of thousands of dollars. If the contamination had continued unchecked, these incidents could have jeopardized our farmers’ ability to guarantee safe food to domestic and foreign purchasers. It could also have raised public concern and distrust about any use of agriculture chemicals and undermined the credibility of all pesticide and food safety regulatory programs in this country. EPA’s Commitment to Growers Misuse is not only risky; it’s preventable and unnecessary. In several off-label cases, the growers acknowledged the illegal use of chemicals on their crops due to severe pest outbreaks never before seen in their region. In such cases, growers should know that there are alternative resources available to assist them. For example, EPA works closely with the user community to promote the development and use of reduced-risk pesticides. In fact, now more than half of the new approvals are for reduced-risk pesticides. Another tool for growers is the emergency exemption. Section 18 of FIFRA authorizes EPA to allow the use of a pesticide for a limited time if EPA determines that emergency conditions exist. In the case of severe pest outbreak, growers can contact their state lead agency (usually the state department of agriculture) and evaluate the need for a Section 18 emergency exemption. EPA acts on these requests very quickly. The Grower’s Role Given the high stakes involved, growers must follow the pesticide product label to the letter, and only rely on guidance from crop consultants or suppliers that is consistent with label instructions. The overall intent of the label is to provide clear directions for effective product performance while minimizing risks to human health and the environment. It is important to remember that the label is the law. The Nation’s Front Line in Food Security Ultimately, growers must be wise and informed users of pesticide products and should commit themselves to the longstanding role as environmental stewards. Environmental stewardship is an integral part of pest control. Simply put, it’s safeguarding human health and the environment in order to sustain or improve the quality of life for ourselves and future generations. Whether or not last year’s incidents were a coincidence, this is a problem that we can fix together. Through better coordination among federal and state agencies – as well as getting a strong message out to the user community – label compliance is serious business. As we pull together as a nation on so many of our security fronts, farmers are now more than ever important to ensure these valuable tools are used properly. Please read pesticide labels carefully and follow all directions. Stephen L. Johnson is assistant administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. To comment on this article, you may contact him at EPA or Forrest Laws, executive editor, Farm Press at [email protected]

农业

2017-09/2272/en_head.json.gz/18552

Action And Worth Reading new internationalist 139 September 1984 AFRICA Action and worth reading... IDEAS FOR ACTION Farallones International 15290 Coleman Valley Road Occidental CA 95465, USA. To stimulate local self-reliance through the use of appropriate technology techniques in agriculture, energy, health and nutrition. To enhance people’s problem-solving capabilities by building upon democratic group processes, local skills, resources and innovation. We work in four major areas: educational programs, consulting, project development, and networking/information dissemination. Our educational programs stress the integration of appropriate technology skills and nonformal experiential education and are performed both at our Rural Centre site and at the request of host institutions and governments in the Third World. Consulting and project development aim to strengthen the capabilities of institutions. We participate in a variety of informal networks and a newly started microcomputer network, ECONET. We have succeeded in developing a comprehensive educational methodology which has been tried in over 30 countries. Successful projects have ranged from short-term training programs to long-term collaborations such as our current activities in NEPAL where we are assisting in the implementation of an Appropriate Technology information clearing house and local AT centers. We have yet to develop a diverse and sustainable economic base. We have not been able to link as closely as we desire with other movements towards social and political change. We plan to begin a number of small enterprises to provide a stabler economic base for our activities. We are also particularly excited at present about the possibility of increasing communication between grass roots organizations. We are a membership organization and all are welcome to become members. Volunteers are also needed for a wide variety of tasks both at our Rural Centre site and at the Integral Urban House in Berkeley. Peace Tax Campaign (Australia) 1 Boa Vista Road, New Town, Hobart, Tel: (002) 346356 To bring about an awareness that all who pay taxes have an individual responsibility for supporting the war machine, and all that this implies in terms of peace and justice for all people. To make it possible for those with a conscientious objection to war to ensure that their taxes are used solely for peaceful purposes and are not used for military purposes. The campaign is in its early stages in Australia. Information sharing is seen as being important and so a newsletter is being published quarterly ($5.00 per annum) and local groups are being established to work together at the State level. Information about the situation in this country as well as the active campaigns in such countries as the USA, UK, Canada and New Zealand will be circulated. The work will be directed towards bringing about changes in the law and giving support to those who withold or divert their taxes. Consciousness raising, an Australia wide petition, lobbying Federal politicians, developing actions to take in regard to tax returns, investigating Government spending to ensure a firm foundation for our stand in facts that are verifiable, setting up a Trust Fund for tax withholders. SUCCESSES AND FAILURES Too early to say yet, hopefully can be updated at a later stage. Very definitely, particularly from people who can give time and effort, but also from anyone who is interested in the aims an indication of support would be helpful. This is a non-violent action campaign aimed at bringing about amendments to the law but for those who choose to go as far as tax refusal this then becomes civil disobedience, albeit of a form that has a long and historic past. Teaching Aids at Low Cost (TALC) P0 Box 49 Hertfordshire, UK. ALl 4AX Tel: (0727) 53869 To improve the standard of health, worldwide by supplying health teaching aids at low cost, particularly to the developing countries. To supply materials to help doctors and nurses and health workers at all levels to combat disease and to teach even illiterate people to improve their own health. To supply materials to help in recording growth progress and to recognise disease. To assist with family planning and to help control world population. TALC distributes over 50 sets of colour slides accompanied by scripts and cassettes. There are also over 50 books and various accessories. There is a two-tier price system, developing countries paying less than the rest of the world. TALC is non-profit making, seeking only to make enough money to finance new materials and update old ones. TALC distributed its three millionth slide in the autumn 1982 and sends materials out to at least seventy different countries. Information about TALC is slow to reach health workers worldwide in village situations. The people most needing our materials have difficulties in foreign exchange and finding the money to pay even our modest prices. To produce new slide sets - ‘Leprosy in Asia’, ‘Periodontal disease’, and other dental topics, ‘Child in a hospital environment’. To support new books particularly on primary health care. Help is needed with publicity. If anyone is holding a meeting or workshop, contact TALC Publicity Officer for simple publicity materials, including cards for obtaining TALC lists and prices. This page of New Internationalist is written by the groups featured on it. The space is available free and a guide for writing entries can be obtained from New Internationalist, 42 Hythe Bridge Street, Oxford, OX1 2EP. Worth reading on... AFRICA One of the best recent books on Africa is Rene Dumont’s Stranglehold on Africa, Andre Deutsch 1983. This volume, written in a pithy and combative style, is the last of a series of investigations Dumont has made into development in Africa. As an agronomist Dumont is very well placed to ask embarrassing questions about the ‘benign neglect’ of Africa’s peasants. Dumont could barely believe his ears when he was told bluntly by a Zambian government that "If we… go for a more modest model of development how’ will we ever be able to build the Champs Elysees in Lusaka". Any of the books by Basil Davidson on Africa are worth a good read. For an academic his style is elegant and approachable. His 1975 Can Africa Survive? (Pen go in) is a good summary of some of the hard choices facing Africans and with his other books on African history and politics provides an excellent introduction. Another good way into Africa is through its fiction. Three African novelists whose work is well worth exploring are Sembene Ousname (God’s Bits of Wood), Ngugi wa Thiang’o (Petals of Blood) and Chinua Achebe (Things Fall Apart). All are published in the Heinemann African Writers Series. Also important is the work of Amilcar Cabral - perhaps Africa’s most creative revolutionary theorist. Good summaries of African history are How Europe Underdeveloped Africa by the late Walter Rodney (Monthly Review Press) and in a more academic vein Bill Freund’s The Making of Contemporary Africa (MacMillan 1984). For more serious students of Africa a good source is the Review of African Political Economy (341 Glossop Road, Sheffield, SIO IHP, UK). Excellent analysis if somewhat arcane prose. For a good sense of how the ‘Foreign Exchange Machine’ operates continent-wide read Africa Undermined by G Lanning with 14 Mueller (Pelican 1979) and Agribusiness in Africa by Barbara Dinham and Colin Hines (Earth Resources Publication, 1983). The last provides a clear understanding of the crisis in rural development. This feature was published in the September 1984 issue of New Internationalist. To read more, or subscribe. Comments on Action And Worth Reading Until Death Us Do Part September 5, 1984 Africa will stay poor until its women are free argues Debbie Taylor. September 5, 1984 Briefly... September 5, 1984 If you would like to know something about what's actually going on, rather than what people would like you to think was going on, then read the New Internationalist.

农业

2017-09/2272/en_head.json.gz/18775

Navigation PathStartTopics & backgroundAgriculture and BiodiversityBiodiversitySeedsFood productionSeedsIntroductionNo Patents on Seeds"Free Pepper"Owning seeds, accessing foodPlant variety rights protectionWhat we doIt's up to you to actOwning seeds, accessing food Owning seeds, accessing food erklaerungvbern Many industrialised countries demand that the countries of the South introduce stricter regulations for the protection of plant varieties. In order to illustrate what effects this has on the right to food, Public Eye carried out a human rights analysis together with partner organisations. For years Public Eye has criticised Switzerland and other industrialised countries for the pressure they put on developing countries to join the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV). In joining this intergovernmental organisation, states undertake to incorporate in their national legislation a high degree of protection for commercial seed and plant material. Public Eye has repeatedly highlighted the fact that in the development of the UPOV system the countries of the South were not at the negotiating table, so the system does not correspond to the needs of these countries. With the publication of a comprehensive pioneering study in October 2014 Public Eye showed how the existence of small-scale farming families dependent on traditional seed propagation is jeopardised through adherence of the respective countries to the UPOV.The study ‘‘Owning Seeds, Accessing Food – A human rights impact assessment of UPOV 1991 based on case studies in Kenya, Peru and the Philippines“ describes and documents for the first time the concrete constraints caused by stringent plant variety protection laws for small-scale farmers in the use of protected seeds from the previous year’s harvest. For UPOV basically prohibits the exchange and sale of seeds produced in this way and significantly restricts freedom of use, even on one’s own field. Bilateral free trade agreements (FTAs) are a popular instrument to pressure developing countries into adhering to the UPOV. In earlier FTA negotiations Switzerland repeatedly expressed similar demands. However at the same time it has also refused to carry out the Human Rights Impact Assessments (HRIA) demanded by Public Eye for years. Through these analyses, potentially negative effects on human rights in the partner country can be identified in advance and thus prevented.Due to the inaction of the Swiss government and increasing pressure on the countries of the South to modify their legislation on plant variety protection, Public Eye took the initiative itself and conducted out a human rights impact assessment, together with other NGOs, in a large-scale project. In cooperation with local researchers it investigated in Kenya, Peru and the Philippines how adherence to the UPOV and the consequent plant variety protection laws would affect the right to food of marginalised population groups. The results of this empirical study are disturbing: Most producers in the South are dependent on the informal seed supply system for access to seed and plant material, which means that access to commercial seeds also takes place through own reproduction, exchange between farming families or purchase from other farmers on local markets.If this informal seed supply system is restricted by the introduction of stringent plant variety protection laws, this will hinder access to seeds and can thus jeopardise small-scale farmers’ right to food.Through these plant protection rights, traditional practices for the maintenance, sustainable use and further development of seeds are made illegal. The loss of this traditional knowledge can also, in the medium term, threaten the right to food. On the basis of these findings Public Eye and its partner organisations address concrete demands to governments, especially that of Switzerland: Carry out imperatively their own human rights impact assessments before the introduction or modification of plant variety protection laws.Use the existing flexibility provided by the TRIPS Agreement and other international agreements to protect their small farmer populations. There are alternatives to the UPOV system.In free trade negotiations Switzerland should refrain from making any demands with respect to plant variety protection.The Swiss government must at last carry out human rights impact assessments before concluding new free trade agreements. Only in this way can it ensure that it fulfils its international human rights obligations.Together with its partners Public Eye has filed these demands with the appropriate bodies. Through events at UN human rights bodies, at the FAO and on a national level we are informing key actors of the results of the study. Downloads The report «Owning seeds, accessing food» in english (PDF, 2.2 MB) and spanish (PDF, 5.2 MB)The Factsheet in english (PDF, 1.6 MB), spanish (PDF, 1.1 MB), french (PDF, 1.9 MB) and german (PDF, 715 KB) SummaryIntroductionNo Patents on Seeds"Free Pepper"Owning seeds, accessing foodPlant variety rights protectionWhat we doIt's up to you to act PrintTo top"Free Pepper"Plant variety rights p...

农业

2017-09/2272/en_head.json.gz/19258

opinion / Columnists No Free Lunch Farms, food and futures By: Cielito F. Habito - @inquirerdotnet Philippine Daily Inquirer / 12:16 AM December 09, 2016 Should we turn away from agriculture and focus our economic growth efforts elsewhere? If one is to examine the statistics, trends could give the impression that agriculture is a sunset sector, given 1) its declining share in total output and employment, and 2) the way young people are shunning farming in favor of jobs in the cities. Much of the dynamic growth seen by the Southeast Asian economies in the past 25 years was in fact dominated by growth in industry and services. Much of the poverty reduction that has occurred in our part of the world has also been driven more by growing incomes derived from services and manufacturing. Even farm level studies show that the growth in income of farm families has been attributable more to growth in their nonfarm incomes. A simple-minded inference from all this could lead one to believe that there’s no future in farming, whether from the perspective of a family or of a nation planning for its people’s future. But instincts would lead us to continue focusing on agriculture in the pursuit of poverty reduction and sustainable and inclusive development. The sector, after all, continues to be prominent in the region’s economies. Two attributes inherent to agriculture make this so. One, agriculture remains labor-intensive, employing more workers per unit output, even as greater mechanization in more labor-short economies is making this less so. Jobs are the foremost and durable antidote to poverty, and lack of them is what leads to persistent poverty and social exclusion. Two, agriculture inherently has strong backward and forward linkages in the domestic economy. That is, it buys a variety of manufactured inputs, while in turn providing inputs for a widening array of agri-based industries and other value-adding activities. It thus generates much second-round income and employment elsewhere in the economy. It is, in other words, a sector that is a strong driver of inclusive growth, one whose growth will pull up with it many other domestic industries while creating more jobs in the economy, both directly and indirectly. Such is the theme of a new book launched by the Los Baños-based South East Asian Regional Center for Graduate Study and Research in Agriculture (Searca), aptly titled “Farms, Food and Futures: Toward Inclusive and Sustainable Agricultural and Rural Development in Southeast Asia.” The volume compiles state-of-the-art knowledge on the agricultural and rural sector in our region, now seen to be the most economically dynamic in the world. It draws from the wealth of studies and papers presented at the international conference on Agricultural and Rural Development 2014 that Searca hosted in Manila two years ago, which attracted hundreds of participants from all over the region. The book also draws on the rich knowledge, experience and insights of the distinguished authors of its four thematic chapters on regional integration, institutions and governance, social inclusion, and sustainability. As Searca director Gil Saguiguit Jr. put it during the book’s launch forum, “agricultural and rural development remains a vital cog in the efforts of individual countries and the region as a whole to work for food security and poverty alleviation. And the fact that it is against a backdrop of increasing population, dwindling natural resources, and climate change makes it most challenging.” As to whether we should continue to hang our futures on the seemingly declining agricultural and rural sector, the book points out that once agriculture is more completely defined to encompass the entire agricultural value chain “from field to fork,” one finds that rather than declining, the sector has in fact been growing in importance. Far from being a sunset sector, it is one marked by rising productivity driven on the supply side by technological advance, and on the demand side by shifting food demands away from traditional cereals and toward horticultural products, i.e., fruits, vegetables and beverages—higher value crops that promise higher incomes to farmers. Agriculture, broadly defined, is in fact our future—and our young better take note. [email protected] TAGS: agriculture, economy, Growth, Poverty

农业

2017-09/2272/en_head.json.gz/19354

Monsanto V. Bowman - The Kojo Nnamdi Show Monsanto V. Bowman Monsanto, the world’s largest seed company, is headed to the Supreme Court in a case over its weedkiller-resistant soybean seeds. For years, an Indiana farmer got around the company’s requirement that farmers not plant second generation patented seeds without paying a fee. Monsanto sued and won, but the farmer is taking his appeal all the way to the top. We get an overview of the case and its potential implications for our food supply. Greg Stohr Supreme Court reporter, Bloomberg News Bowman v. Monsanto Supreme Court Case The U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments in Bowman v. Monsanto Co., to consider how patent rules apply to self-replicating technologies. 13:33:14MR. KOJO NNAMDIPatents and copyrights protect the makeup of lots of items we use every day, cell phones, prescriptions and in some cases the very seeds sown to grow the food you eat. Agricultural conglomerate Monsanto is headed to the Supreme Court in a case that centers on an Indiana farmer's use of second generation Roundup-ready soy bean seeds. Here to give us a primer on the case and the potential implications of the ruling on food and more is Greg Stohr. Greg Stohr covers the Supreme Court for Bloomberg News. He's also the author of "A Black and White Case: How Affirmative Action Survived Its Greatest Legal Challenge." He joins us by phone. Greg Stohr, thank you for joining us. 13:33:55MR. GREG STOHRGood to be here, Kojo. 13:33:56NNAMDIPlease remind us first of what Monsanto does and how the technology it has developed changed farming, especially the Roundup-ready seeds that we're going to be talking about here. 13:34:07STOHRWell, Monsanto makes the Roundup pesticide. And what it has done in addition to that is it has created a line of seeds -- different seeds, soy beans, corn, alfalfa, all sorts of things, that are designed to be resistant to the Roundup herbicide -- pesticide, excuse me. And what those seeds have, they've been genetically engineered to have an ingredient called glyphosate that kills everything -- actually glyphosate is the Roundup ingredient but it -- the seeds have been genetically engineered to inhibit the -- to have an ability to resist the Roundup pesticide so that they keep growing even though Roundup kills the weeds around them. 13:34:56NNAMDIWell, an Indiana farmer, Vernon Hugh Bowman, was sued by Monsanto and lost. But the case has been appealed all the way to the Supreme Court. Why did Monsanto file charges in the first place? 13:35:09STOHRMonsanto filed the suit against Mr. Bowman because it restricts farmers in terms of their use of these seeds. Monsanto wants the farmers to buy the seeds every year from a licensed seed distributor. They don't want farmers to plant the seeds, take the harvest and replant that the following year because then Monsanto doesn't make as much money. So it has this agreement with -- makes the farmers sign this license agreement. 13:35:37STOHRAnd Mr. Bowman found a way to try to get around the licensing agreement. And what he did was he planted two crops on his Indiana farm, as a lot of farmers do. He had a crop that he planted early in the year using the seeds that he bought from a licensed distributor and he harvested those seeds and he sold them. No problem there. But for the second planting of the season what he did was he acquired -- he bought some seeds from a grain elevator. That grain elevator had bought seeds from the harvest from other farmers. And it turns out a lot of those seeds in the grain elevator were Roundup resistant. 13:36:17STOHRSo he planted those seeds. And then after he harvested them he saved some more for the next year. And Monsanto said that violates our patent rights in those seeds even though they weren't the same ones that you signed the agreement having to do with when you bought them from the distributor. 13:36:35NNAMDIFor the sake of clarity here, Mr. Bowman did not go back to Monsanto to buy new seeds like he should have. Instead he bought them from the grain elevator. So why did Monsanto sue Bowman and not the grain elevator where he bought those soy beans? 13:36:52STOHRWell, for starters, Monsanto doesn't have an agreement with the grain elevators. It doesn't place any restrictions on the grain elevator. And in fact, it doesn't deal directly with them for the most part. It deals with the farmers and it tells the farmers that when you buy these seeds there are restrictions on what you can do with them when you harvest them. In addition, there's not, at least in terms of what I read in the court papers, no indication that the grain elevator had any particular knowledge about what Mr. Bowman was doing. So the entity that Monsanto seemed to think was the bad guy was the farmer. 13:37:27NNAMDI800-433-8850. Let me see what our listeners think about this. Do you think that seed should be protected by copyrights? Why or why not? 800-433-8850. What do you think is the key issue here? Patent protection, market monopoly or something else entirely? You can send us a Tweet at kojoshow, email to [email protected] or call us at 800-433-8850 to share your opinion. We're talking with Greg Stohr. He covers the Supreme Court for Bloomberg News. he's also the author of "A Black and White Case: How Affirmative Action Survived Its Greatest Legal Challenge." 13:38:03NNAMDIGreg, it seems kind of impractical to have to throw out usable seeds. Is there any way for farmers to make use of these second generation seeds legally? 13:38:14STOHRThere are. They can sell them to a grain elevator which typically will then sell them to somebody else for feed for livestock. And of course seeds can also be used to make food for human consumption. So there are other purposes other than just replanting them that they can be used for. 13:38:34NNAMDIWell, questions about patent protection and market monopoly issues both seem to be at play here, which is why I asked our -- members of our listening audience to respond. What's at the heart of this case? 13:38:47STOHRAt the heart of this case is really the patent issue and whether patent protection extends all the way to those seeds that Mr. Bowman bought from the grain elevator. Whether he can buy those seeds from the grain elevator and replant them and whether at that point it's still protected by Monsanto's patent. 13:39:08STOHRNow in previous cases the Supreme Court has said there's something called patent exhaustion. And what that means is if I make a product, say I make a can opener and you buy it from me, you're entitled to use that can opener. You're entitled to -- even though I have patent protection on it you're entitled to sell it to somebody else if you'd like to. The difference here in what makes this case interesting is that seeds aren't like a can opener. Seeds are self replicating. 13:39:34STOHRAnd so what happens is according to Monsanto is that when Mr. Bowman plants those seeds he's actually making new products. He's making new products that are covered, Monsanto says, by our patent. 13:39:48NNAMDIOn to the telephones. We will start with Jim in Arlington, Va. Jim, you're on the air. Go ahead, please. 13:39:55JIMThank you, Kojo. I think your guest has explained the questions very well. What I wanted to add just by way of clarification is that this transaction that goes on between Monsanto and the grain elevator and then the farmer, in general you have the same commodity changing hands and reaching the farmer, and that is -- those are the transactions where the patent owner's rights are cut off with respect to the same product that is transferred from party to party. 13:40:39STOHRSo the patent owner doesn't have a right to control the use as was explained, of that seed. The problem comes up when that seed is planted, and the resulting crops produce new seed. Now, the patent owner doesn't have a right to object to the production of that new seed because it's a natural consequence of the planting which is permitted. But in this case, it is the farmer's use of that newly produced seed, and Monsanto objects when the farmers plant that kind of newly produced seed that continue to bear the invented features and he is -- and farmers are able to essentially produce that new seed through the planting without going back to Monsanto for the purchase. 13:41:42NNAMDIAnd when the planter produces that new seed, Monsanto is claiming that is what is in violation of the copyright or patent? 13:41:52JIMYes. Well, that's right. What they're saying is that the use of -- that use of the new seed violates the patent rights in the same way, for example, that if the farmer found that patented seed on the ground and planted it, that would similarly violate the patent-owner's rights. It's all about a use of this invention beyond what the patent owner permits. 13:42:25JIMAnd I just want to add that this issue of self replication has implications far beyond soy beans because the question of self replication is an issue that applies at the microscopic level and at the genetic engineering context, and so the case has extraordinary consequences for the biotech industry. 13:42:51NNAMDIJim, you sound like a patent attorney. Are you involved in this case? 13:42:54JIMI am -- I am peripherally involved. I am with the American Intellectual Property Law Association. 13:43:00NNAMDIOkay. 13:43:01JIMSo we do track these things. 13:43:02NNAMDIThank you very much for your clarifications, Jim. You too can call us, 800-433-8850. We're going to take a short break. When we come back we'll continue the conversation, so if you have called, stay on the line. If you're a farmer, we'd love to hear your take on this case. 800-433-8850. I'm Kojo Nnamdi. 13:45:00NNAMDIWelcome back. We're talking about the Supreme Court case Monsanto v. Bowman, and we're talking with Greg Stohr. He covers the Supreme Court for Bloomberg News. Greg Stohr is also the author of "A Black and White Case: How Affirmative Action Survived its Greatest Legal Challenge," and his last name is spelled by the way S-T-O-H-R if you go looking for a book by Greg Stohr. 13:45:22NNAMDIGreg, the plaintiff and defendant both have a lot riding on the outcome, but its effects will reach well beyond them. What are the broader implications of the eventual ruling in this case? 13:45:34STOHRWell, this is the first time the Court has considered self-replicating technologies and how patent law affects those, and it is, as we think about in the future things like nano technology and organic computers and other products that may involve self replicating technologies, the Court's decision in this case could well affect how those industries develop. And it's one of those things -- because those industries are so new, it's one of these areas where actually the Obama administration urged the Court not to take the case just because it's going to be so hard to figure out what the implications are going to be for those emerging technologies. 13:46:16NNAMDIThere are several people who would like to join this conversation. I will start with Regina in Lovettsville, Va. Regina, your turn. 13:46:26REGINAGood morning, Kojo. Thank you for taking on this subject. I have a small farm in northern Virginia in Lovettsville. I've also kept bees, plant my own garden, have several farmers around me who for a living plant corn and soybeans, which are two heavily genetically-modified foods. And what's important about this case are the ethical ramifications because basically if I were to plant corn on my property and it cross-pollinated with my neighbor's genetically-modified seed, whether that be -- or in this case if I did it with soybeans, if I were to do that and then if I were to save the seed and keep replanting every year, and if I ever went to large-scale production to where I would begin selling that, I would be as risk of a huge company like Monsanto and all of its financial resources suing me in court and ruining me. 13:47:30REGINAAnd for a classic example of this exactly what happened, there was a case in Canada involving a farmer from Percy, and he went to the Supreme Court. He lost initially. He had to actually turn around and sue Monsanto, and for anyone who thinks that this is not huge and has big ramifications, I urge you to look that up online. Bottom line is you're patenting life, and you cannot control the way life will replicate itself genetically. 13:48:05REGINAThis is morally and ethically wrong that any company could be allowed to do this, and again, I encourage all Americans to look up this case online, the farmer from Percy who actually beat Monsanto. 13:48:19NNAMDIThank you very much for your call, Regina. I am not sure about this situation, Greg, but I do know that Monsanto was involved in a case in 2010 involving alfalfa. Could that be what Regina is referring to? 13:48:35STOHRI don't know the specific case she is referring to either, but there are all sorts of legal issues surrounding Monsanto and these seeds, and what you're talking about, the 2010 case, has to do with complaints by organic farmers that these seeds would -- if they were grown nearby would be contaminating the organic farms and for a while a federal judge blocked Monsanto from selling its genetically-modified alfalfa seeds, and I believe there may have been a similar block on, or at least efforts to block genetically-modified sugar beet seeds for the same reason. So you have both the -- in this case the patent issues, and in that case the environmental issues. 13:49:22NNAMDIRegina, thank you very much for your call. We move on to Toby in Louden County, Va. Toby, you're on the air. Go ahead, please. 13:49:30TOBYHi, Kojo. Thanks for having me on the show. I've listened to you for a while and I really appreciate your program. 13:49:35NNAMDIThank you. 13:49:36TOBYI'm calling -- I work in the arts. I specifically book heavy metal bands, and I've recorded a few, and put a couple albums into production. From my understanding, intellectual property rights and copyright extend to the underlying composition and not so much the product. For instance, if you buy a CD, you as the end user are allowed to replicate that CD as many times as you would like for your own personal use. The problem becomes when you turn around and you try to sell that protected property for your own profit, or you try to perform it for your own profit. 13:50:17TOBYThen you have to pay royalty to the person that came up with the art in that instance, or in this case, it would be the underlying process that creates the genetic modification. 13:50:31TOBYRegina, my neighbor, from the down the street brought up the point of cross pollination. If somebody plants Monsanto seeds on one acre, and somebody else plants genetically unmodified plants in another field and they cross pollinate, that genetic marker can translate to those plants, and then there's no way for a grain elevator to be able to know, you know, which plants are carrying that trait without doing further testing at the genetic level to see if that trait had been passed on, which then puts an undue burden on the end user. 13:51:08NNAMDIThank you very much for your call, and for you clarification, Toby. We're getting a lot of those here today, Greg Stohr. Greg, here's this tweet we got from Kathleen. "A thought: If I crossbreed two dogs should I then be given a patent for that offspring and those after that? That's what Monsanto is doing. Plants are living objects just like an animal." And Sam tweets, "Monsanto goes after individual farmers because they're the most valuable." 13:51:36NNAMDII suspect, Greg, that people who are opposed to Monsanto in this lawsuit would make that argument that they go after individual farmers because they are the most vulnerable. And Monsanto is no stranger to controversy, primarily surrounding questions about genetically modified foods. Is that an underlying current here Greg, and do you think it will have any influence on the ruling? 13:52:00STOHRThere certainly is a very strong movement that opposes genetically modified food and sees Monsanto as the biggest villain in the business. This case is not directly about those issues. This is really a patent case. It doesn't have to do with issues of -- directly of issues about the food we eat or even Monsanto's monopoly rights. One thing I do want to just clarify from what the caller said, that while he describes issues in copyright law which is another branch of intellectual property protect, those legal principles are a little bit different in this is a patent case. 13:52:44STOHRAnd he was describing what sort of sounded like a fair use of a copyrighted material. Patent law just works a little bit differently. So while sometimes it's useful to analogize the copyright law, the Supreme Court's not going to be bound by what it thinks is the best rule for CD's and other copyrighted material. 13:53:02NNAMDIThank you. Here now is Segaia (sp?) in Woodbridge, Va. Segaia, you're on the air. Go ahead, please. 13:53:08SEGAIAThank you, Kojo, for giving me a chance. I was wondering, you know, today it's on seed, and tomorrow an animal, the day after tomorrow about human beings. Where does we have to stop the line, you know? These things -- all these things what they are doing now is not (unintelligible) years. We don't know the affect what it will cause on human beings, you know? 13:53:32NNAMDIThank you. Thank you very much for your comment. Obviously there are people, including some who have been tweeting to us, are wondering where this is going. Are there earlier cases that we can look to for a hint at how this one is likely to be decided, Greg Stohr? 13:53:46STOHRWell, in general, this is a Supreme Court that it somewhat skeptical of patent rights and broad patent protection, and the fact that they took Mr. Bowman's petition in this case, which they did not have to do, suggests they might have some skepticism about the lower court ruling that said the Monsanto could enforce its patent against him. That's a pretty, you know, pretty broad generalization I just about the court and patent law, but I think we should certainly not assume that Monsanto is going to win this case, and in fact, I think it's certainly fair to assume that there will be several justices that are pretty skeptical of Monsanto's claim. 13:54:27NNAMDIOn now to Jennifer in Baltimore, Md. Jennifer, you're on the air. Go ahead, please. 13:54:31JENNIFERHi. Thank you very much. Well, I loved hearing the earlier farmer. I thought she was very clear on many of the issues. I'm -- I love to garden and I love to farm and I love to support people who provide food on a local level, and I know that farmers for centuries have saved seed to plant them again. So the idea that a company would like to keep control of that to the degree that Monsanto is trying to do, I find really troubling and offensive. 13:54:59JENNIFERAnd I hope that the Supreme Court rules against that because I think -- I know that's it's much more complex than that. I realize that. But it's a very, very significant and fundamental issue that's being brought up and I'm going to be watching it now that you've brought my attention to it. So thank you for that. 13:55:18NNAMDIAnd thank you very much for your call. We move on to Susan in Alexandria, Va. Susan, go ahead, please. 13:55:26SUSANOkay. I have really enjoyed the discussion so far. This is not new to me, but it's a new hot button for me. The -- at the beginning of the program, it sounded as if the farmer was malicious the way it was presented. The farmer knew what he was doing, knew that he was planting GMO seed, and that -- I'm thinking there's no way he could have known that. 13:55:54STOHRHe did know that he was buying it from the grain elevator, and he knew that the grain elevator accepted at least some genetically-modified seed. He did the over the course of a number of years, and what the court documents show is that he -- the first year basically tried it out to see what would happen if he applied Round Up to the crop and it turned out that the crops did pretty well, and there's some evidence in the case that something over -- I've forgotten the exact number, 90-some-odd percent of the seed accepted by this grain elevator is genetically modified. 13:56:30STOHRSo at least in the later years it was pretty clear to everybody that this was essentially the same as the seed that he could have bought from a Monsanto distributor. 13:56:40SUSANSo it almost sounds like Monsanto's mad they didn't think of that first. And the other thing, I was just -- everybody's brought up all the points I wanted to make. The only other thing, I watched "Genetic Roulette" on the Internet the other day, it's a "Genetic Roulette" movie by Responsible Technology. 13:57:00NNAMDIYes. 13:57:00SUSANIt was very informative on GMOs and how scary it is. 13:57:05NNAMDIOkay. And that seems to be what's driving a lot of the conversation we have been having so far. Greg Stohr, we're almost out of time, but since we are on the edge of a political season here, our brains are keyed up to look for the political angle of everything right now. Is the vote on this case likely to come down along a politically partisan divide? 13:57:25STOHRI wouldn't expect so, just because past patent cases haven't. There are some justices who are more skeptical of patents than others, but they don't fall along the same continuum that we're so used to seeing in social issues and on things like the president's health care law. 13:57:41NNAMDIGreg Stohr covers the Supreme Court for Bloomberg News. He's also the author of "A Black and White Case: How Affirmative Action Survived its Greatest Legal Challenge." Greg Stohr, thank you so much for joining us. 13:57:54STOHRMy pleasure. 13:57:55NNAMDIAnd thank you all for listening. I'm Kojo Nnamdi. Greg Stohr for Businessweek

农业

2017-09/2272/en_head.json.gz/19463

Animal Nutrition & HealthAnimal Nutrition & Health On-farm Support Future of FarmingFuture of Farming Algae - The Growth Platform Alternative Feeds Antibiotic-Free Program Feeding the WorldFeeding the World Land & Water Resources Protein for a Growing World Grain Shortages Contaminants in Feed DivisionsDivisions Alltech Crop Science Alltech-Owned Companies Animal Nutrition & Health PhilanthropyPhilanthropy Alltech ACE Foundation Sustainable Haiti Project Involvement Projects About AlltechAbout Alltech NewsMedia Center Press Releases  Alltech Increases its European Presence [Lexington, KY] - Alltech's philosophy of "thinking globally, acting locally" has been further implemented with the opening of new offices throughout Europe. Alltech believes these new ventures will further increase their market share in the European animal feed industry, where annual sales represent 28% of global sales. The opening of the Alltech Belgium office marks a strategic development for the region, as it has been marketed by the Netherlands under the Benelux umbrella since 1989. The new sales office is strategically located in East Flanders in a town called Deinze in the heart of Belgium's feed and animal production industry. The new Country Manager, Søren Healy, has extensive knowledge and experience of the Belgium market, since he has been responsible for sales in Benelux sales for the past three years - including The Netherlands until January 2005. The office will be officially opened in June and further recruitment is expected within the next few months. According to Healy, "Belgium is expected to play a strong role in the future development of European sales." As part of this new strategic development in the Benelux, Alltech Netherlands has moved to a new office in the Netherlands. With increased focus in each of The Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg markets, Alltech's office in The Netherlands will continue to provide administrative, marketing, warehousing and logistic services for the whole Benelux region. Alltech has also expanded its presence in southern Europe, with the opening of new offices in Turkey and Greece. The new facility in Izmir, Turkey, will be home to the administrative, marketing and production departments and will allow the company to be closer to its Turkish customers. The facility is 3,000 square metres with office, production and warehousing units. Alltech commenced trading in Turkey in 1998 through its distributor, and in 2000 the company established its own office in the country. Alltech Turkey employs 25 people and the company's expansion in Turkey reflects its commitment to being a global company that manages on a local basis. The facility will also serve as an export center for the former Soviet Union countries in the near future, namely Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan, due to its strategic location. The new Alltech office and warehouse in Greece is situated in Thermi, a suburb of Thessaloniki, under the management of Timm Neelsen. Alltech has had a presence in Greece through a distributor for over 10 years. The company has also expanded its market presence in Eastern Europe, with the opening of two new offices in Belarus and Bosnia-Herzegovina as part of its future growth strategy. Speaking at the opening of the new Belarus office, Mr. Jurek Kruk, regional manager for Alltech Belarus said, "Belarus is a market full of opportunities, where the livestock sector accounts for 60% of agricultural output." Maria Izotova will head the new office in Minsk, Belarus. The new sales office in Bosnia-Herzegovina, also headed by Timm Neelsen, opened in April. There is one sales representative, Lazar Vujakovic, who is responsible for sales in the region. The office is located in Banja Luka. © 2017 Alltech. Privacy Policy · Sitemap Press ResourcesContact InformationHomeAnimal Nutrition & HealthAlltech Crop ScienceFuture of FarmingFeeding the WorldPhilanthropyAlltech CampusAbout AlltechNewsSpanishPortugueseChinese Website Survey

农业

2017-09/2272/en_head.json.gz/19585

Business Keeping track of everything from blueberries to a $20 million green building Mary Ellen Podmolik, Tribune reporter Peter Testa worries about food safety when he goes to bed, and he's still thinking about it when he wakes up four hours later to start another day as president of Testa Produce Inc. But he doesn't bother to wash his favorite fruits, blueberries and raspberries, before eating them. "When I grew up, we would eat that stuff right then and there," he said. "I think we're so worried about being sterile, you're missing the point. You need to have a little bit of germs in you to build up an immune system so you don't get sick." Testa is a fast-talking, opinionated, whirlwind of an executive who talks as enthusiastically about rare produce as he does about his company's growth strategy, his pristine new "green" building in the old Stockyards neighborhood and the critical importance of keeping track of the sources of his many products. It's a full plate, and Testa delights in it all. His current preoccupation: Building his $70 million-plus wholesale food distribution company into a one-stop shop of produce, dairy, meat and dry goods for restaurants, hotels and institutions in Illinois and Wisconsin, which he plans to do on his own. It's a formidable challenge. Testa is the largest, family-operated produce wholesaler in the city, but it's clearly the underdog in a battle with titans like Sysco Corp. and U.S. Foodservice, which measure their sales in billions, not millions, of dollars. "There are restaurants out there that will tell you, 'We want one guy to bring us everything.' Those are huge accounts,'' he said. "We could buy other companies. but we'll go it ourselves. It's easier for me to do.'' Key to Testa's business is his personality, and the relationships he maintains with his 1,500 customers. It's a bond that is epitomized by a can of yams sitting atop a pallet in the warehouse. Larger distributors deliver products by the case. Testa will bring one can of yams or a box of brown sugar to a restaurant that decides to do a turkey for Thanksgiving. They know it, and they know Testa, who will stop by with samples of new products or offer to have, say, onions diced in the warehouse the way a chef wants in order to lessen kitchen prep time. "It's all about relationship," said David DiGregorio, chef-partner at Lettuce Entertain You Enterprises' Osteria Via Stato. "He always has time for me. I can just pick up the phone and call him, and he answers. That's something special." Chefs are particular, and what they particularly like about Testa is he's direct and knows individual customers' expectations. Last summer, Testa took a busload of customers to farms in southeastern Michigan to show them the source of the regional produce delivered on his 45 trucks that run six days a week. If a customer asks for a particular product, and Testa knows what he has won't be up to their standards, he tells them so. "He certainly takes the business quite personally," said Mark Lagges, banquet chef at the Drake Hotel, a customer of the family 70 years. "I love produce. I love finding different things for my customers," Testa said. "I find crazy things for them and I give it to them, and they have a riot with it. And that's what I like to do." One of those finds was finger limes, from a grower in California. Shaped like a person's little finger and pricey, the red or green fruit can be cut in half, and inside is a sort of citrus caviar that can be squeezed out and used on, among other things, fish. "The flavor is so intense," Testa said. The grower "knows I have the clientele to bring it to. They know they're not going to give it to a Jewel." He doesn't drop names of some of his clientele, but a cocktail on Grant Achatz's Aviary features finger limes. Testa's growth plans had been constrained by the approximate 45,000-square-foot facility at 1501 S. Blue Island Ave. that housed the company since 2001. Hemmed in himself by rush-hour traffic one afternoon 4 1/2 years ago, Testa started thinking about moving the business and going green at the same time. Once he decided to do it, he began learning everything he could about green building techniques. With a desire to keep the business in Chicago, he approached the city about a site near 45th Street and Racine Avenue in Stockyards Industrial Park. After 18 months of negotiation between property owners and more than $750,000 in land costs, Testa secured the land he needed, including much of it from the city for $1. Then came the process of figuring out the particulars to make a 91,000-square-foot building environmentally efficient and financially sustainable. "I know produce like the back of my hand," Testa said. "But I know this now too." The $20 million building that Testa relocated to in the spring is the antithesis of everything associated with Chicago's historic stockyards and a dramatic leap for the company, whose origins date to 1912 and Testa's grandfather selling produce from a horse-drawn cart. It also speaks volumes about the 58-year-old Testa, his painstaking attention to detail and need to stand out by working not just faster, but better. "From the very early stages he made it very clear that he was not an amateur," said Tim Stoeckel, a project manager at Summit Design + Build LLC, who worked on the project for three years. At times, Stoeckel felt like he was working for an older brother. "He was definitely the idea-maker on many things," he said of Testa. "He leaves it up to you to make it work. There was an obvious level of respect. There was professionalism, but it was a thin line. He was quick to give you a little punch in the shoulder when you said something stupid." Instead of installing plants on a flat green roof, Testa designed a 45,000-square-foot barrel roof that slopes toward the building's front so visitors can see the plants. It also means whoever weeds the roof has to wear a harness. The roof also collects rainwater that is filtered into an internal cistern and used in nonpotable applications, such as the toilets. One item on his wish list that building experts and bankers talked him out of was a geothermal heating and cooling system, because the payback was 18 years. The same people tried and failed to talk Testa out of the 750 kilowatt, $1.6 million wind turbine that, at 238 feet tall, towers over the building and the Back of the Yards neighborhood. It is expected to generate up to 40 percent of the distribution center's energy needs. Inside, the hot-water system is solar-powered, and light-emitting diode fixtures are installed in the offices and freezer. Methanol fuel cells power pallet-moving trucks. Testa's attention to detail included having the concrete floor near the loading bays poured more like parallelograms than rectangles, which will lessen the wear and tear of forklifts moving over them because both front wheels won't cross a seam simultaneously. "It's almost like a microcosm of Peter himself," Stoeckel said of the concrete. "He wants to be a little bit different." Testa plans to seek LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) Platinum certification for the building. The facility also is outfitted with a sophisticated trace-back system to manage any food-safety issues, problems that Testa said the company has largely dodged. Seconds after a bacteria outbreak alert would be issued in, say, California, Testa would be notified on his cellphone. Within 15 minutes, the company would know if the grower was a supplier, if any of the product had come to Testa Produce, and, if so,, where it was in the distribution system. Customers would then get a recall notice, and if any of the product was on a Testa truck, drivers would be notified not to deliver it and to retrieve anything they may have dropped off. Food safety issues, though, haven't steered Testa more toward organic produce for his own consumption. Rather, he makes the decision based on flavor and taste. These days, his organic choices are peaches, nectarines and plums. Testa's day typically start at 3 a.m., and by 4:30 or 5 a.m. he's helping pick orders in the warehouse for customers, rotating stock and taking inventory. He tries to leave by 6 p.m. On Thursdays he stays late to complete the week's pricing and sleeps overnight at a nearby condo so he can be back at work at 2:30 a.m. Friday without a long drive from his Prospect Heights home. "I hate being inefficient," Testa said. "It just bothers me to no avail." Those who play with the avid golfer say Testa's drive for efficiency is on display there too. Stoeckel, who has played golf with Testa on occasion, was invited to bring two friends for a foursome, but he warned them that Testa likes to finish 18 holes within three hours. , "You can come, but don't you dare go looking for your ball for 15 minutes," Stoeckel told his friends. That focus on efficiency extends to his sleep patterns as well. Testa says he needs only four hours a night, but he'll occasionally drift off at meetings, and he's known for his daytime power naps. "They'll see me do it, put my head down on the desk and take a little nap for 10 to 15 minutes and then, boom, (I'm) off and away," he said. His other secret weapon to get through a long day? Smiling broadly, he reaches into a drawer of his cluttered desk and pulls out a warehouse club-size box of Snickers candy bars. When those fail, there's also a box of Hershey's bars with almonds. It was not a given that Testa, the middle of five children, would one day run the family business. But on a Friday in 1971, Testa graduated from New Trier West High School, and the following Monday went to work for his father, Steve, as a $75-a-week van driver for Dominick Testa & Sons, the company founded by his grandfather. Other drivers made $225 a week. His father told Testa he didn't need college to learn the produce business, and, besides, they couldn't afford to send him. Looking back, he says he would have liked to have gone only for the parties and the girls. At 21, he got a second job as a bartender in Morton Grove, working 8 p.m. to 3 a.m., and then working for his father from 4 a.m. to 1 p.m. Police officers frequented the bar, and one thing led to another, and in 1976 Testa become a police officer who made $550 a week and worked for his father on his days off. "One of the things my grandfather always taught me was you can't do anything without money, you can't do anything without working," Testa said. "My grandfather, my father, my uncle — all of us learned that way." He also learned 35 years ago to get to know a restaurant's dishwasher the same as the executive chef because that dishwasher may one day become a chef. Today, there are more Testas involved in the business than ever. His daughter, Stephanie, the eldest of his four children, is distribution manager and arrives at 2 a.m. to manage the flow of trucks and deliveries. Her husband, Todd Morgan, is a buyer. Stephanie's younger brother, Steve, works in the warehouse, and Testa's youngest son, 11-year-old Tyler, gets $5 an hour when he comes to help his brother. Testa's older brother, Dominick, and his 83-year-old father, both vice presidents, have offices down the hall. But it is Peter Testa who has the final say. In 1991 a "huge" family fight prompted Peter to quit Dominick Testa & Sons, run by his father and uncle, and open Testa Produce at another stall in South Water Market. His brother and his father, along with many of the customers, followed him. At the time, Dominick Testa's sales were $12.5 million. "I told my father and my brother we have only one rule," Testa recalled. "I'm going to run the show. You two guys are my family, but I have the final word. When you don't have a single person in charge, it's like a board of directors without a president. You're off floundering." Eventually, he bought out Dominick Testa & Sons. Stephanie Testa, the first in the family to go to college, became so intrigued with the company that she transferred from Columbia College to DePaul University and graduated in 2008 with a business degree and a concentration in management. She shares her father's love of the operation side of the business and, according to her mother, her father's stubborn streak. She is expected to take over as president one day. Peter Testa likes to tell people he built the new facility and his daughter will have to pay for it. But Stephanie Testa is unsure her father can ever be less than actively involved. "I don't know if he'll actually ever leave," she said. "Testa Produce is Peter Testa. He's a very driven person." "People say, 'Aren't you getting up there? What's your exit strategy?'" Peter Testa said. "I said, 'Why do I have to have an exit strategy?'" [email protected] Twitter @mepodmolik Title: President of Testa Produce, Inc., a $70 million-plus wholesale produce distributor in Chicago. Twenty years ago, sales were $12.5 million. Career path: Except for a three-year stint as a Morton Grove police officer, has worked full time in the produce business since graduating from New Trier West High School in 1971. Family life: Married to wife, Kathy, for 28 years; one daughter, three sons and one grandchild. Lives in Prospect Heights. Hits and misses: Raspberries and blueberries. Don't serve him Brussels sprouts and cucumbers. What didn't make the move from the old building: His office door, papered with $1 bills he won in friendly wagers. Playing hooky: A 6 a.m. tee time every week at Old Orchard Country Club. When he's got time to practice, he can break 80. Competition: "It's anybody with a truck." Cubs or Sox: Sox, but he sells to both ballparks, so he'd like both teams to be in Game 7 of the playoffs. Strategic plan: "For the next 10 years, I'm going to work to make this place financially stable." Restaurant and Catering Industry Chicago Hotels Restaurants Dining and Drinking Chicago White Sox Food Industry The Aviary

农业

2017-09/2272/en_head.json.gz/19673

Farms facing shortfalls with 2016 commodity prices Feb 16, 2017 What’s in store for the next farm bill? Feb 16, 2017 John Killebrew: Honoring a life of service Feb 20, 2017 What’s behind positive moves in cotton price? Feb 17, 2017 Crops>Corn High corn yields in hot, dry fields • Forecasters are pretty much in agreement that the La Niña weather phenomenon will continue through early spring for the lower Southeast. • Generally, during a La Niña, warmer and drier conditions exist until the May/June period when it essentially falls apart. Paul Hollis | Mar 30, 2012 With the certainty of a dry spring looming, there are several things corn growers can do to better manage their crops for the weather ahead, says David Wright, University of Florida Extension agronomist. Forecasters are pretty much in agreement that the La Niña weather phenomenon will continue through early spring for the lower Southeast, says Wright, meaning warm, dry conditions that’ll be reminiscent of those seen in 2011. Ironically, the data shows that corn producers with irrigation make higher yields during a La Niña phase, he adds. “In an El Niño, corn yields are usually below normal if you’ve got irrigation. You normally don’t see the record corn yields like we saw in 2011. However, if you are not an irrigated grower, that is not the case. “Throughout north Florida, Georgia and Alabama, with irrigation, we usually have higher corn yields during a La Niña weather pattern. “But we still have large amounts of non-irrigated corn in the U.S., especially when you get into the northern parts of the states, and I’m not sure this always would be the case,” says Wright. Compared to last year at this time, drought severity in the lower Southeast is much worse, he says. “A lot of our winter crops look okay, as far as wheat and winter grazing, but many people have been working in swamps and cleaning out ponds because there is no water. “A lot of irrigation wells dried up this past year. In south Georgia and north Florida, we’re in an extreme drought situation now. “We’re in a long-term drought situation, along with parts of Texas and Oklahoma. That means more than six months of drought. We actually came out of 2010 about 20 inches below normal in rainfall. “We came out of 2011, at least in the Florida Panhandle, at about 30 inches below normal. So we’re a total of about 50 inches below normal in rainfall.” Most corn in the lower Southeast is planted in February or March, says Wright, which places the main pollination period in May. “During this period last year, we were in a severe drought across north Florida, southern Georgia, southern Alabama and on out into Texas. So we had to do a lot of irrigation during this time period if we wanted to make adequate corn yields.” Some growers made more than adequate yields in 2011, says Wright. “In Georgia, we saw about 350 bushels per acre, and the second highest corn yield in the U.S. was made by a Georgia grower. “We had irrigated growers around the Live Oak, Fla., area in deep sand, with 500 to 700 acres, who averaged 275 bushels per acre. That’s unheard of for that part of the country, but it happened.” Some of the factors behind these high yields were high photosynthesis and low plant disease, he says. “We didn’t have to worry about fertilizer leaching because we didn’t have enough rain. But we did have more potential for aflatoxin, with the hot, dry weather.” Steps for success In anticipation of warmer and drier conditions, there are several things corn growers can do to manage for good yields, says Wright. Killing cover crops early will help, he says. “In many cases, I’ve seen non-irrigated farmers let cover crops grow late, and by the time they start planting, there’s no moisture to get the crop up. “Some growers utilize heavy cover crops, and that’s one way to conserve moisture and prevent weeds, except for volunteer peanuts, which seem to come up through anything. “A heavy mulch can delay the need for an irrigation by a day, sometimes two days, which can make a significant impact on water use throughout the year.” Heavy mulches also help to increase organic matter, says Wright. When following pasturelands, organic matter is quite a bit higher, and it will hold moisture and nutrients. He also advises that growers split their pivots among crops. “Corn generally has higher water requirements earlier in the season than other crops, such as cotton and peanuts. If you know your wells are limited in the amount of water they’ll produce, put half of it in a crop that requires water at a different time. You can cut off the water for a time.” Also, says Wright, plant fields based on electrical conductivity. “Research in cotton has shown that as the electrical conductivity is increased, this usually means the soils are heavier or at least have higher water-holding capacity, and this can make a difference. Some of our soils may hold as much a 2 inches of water.” Another suggestion, he says, is banding fertilizers at planting whether it’s dry or liquid. “Be very careful about putting anything in-furrow. Banding works especially well in sandy soils.” Growers also should consider following winter grazing wherever possible, says Wright. “We have data that has shown cattle do compact the top 6 inches of the soil, but as you go down into the soil profile — 3 feet deep — there was a tremendous increase in the root mass where cattle had grazed.” If you have nematodes in your fields, use nematicides, he says. In fields where grass crops can be grown, you can have higher levels of nematodes that definitely will impact yield. “Controlling other pests is also important. Plant something after corn harvest to keep down weeds,” he advises. Drought-tolerant hybrids also will help, as will adjusting plant populations, says Wright. “We have made 200-bushel corn with 12,000 plants per acre. If you know you’re going to be in stress situations, it’s better to be at 26,000 than 36,000. “If you are shooting for those high yields and you have the irrigation capability, look at some of the higher populations. Usually, plant population is not the main yield-limiting factor. It’s usually drought, fertility and other things.” Ripping under the row also has proven to be very beneficial, especially in stress situations, he says. “As you go through the season, you’ll usually get behind on irrigation at some point, and this can make a tremendous difference, but rip early.” Growers with irrigation also might consider a second crop, says Wright. “If you have irrigation, it allows you to plant a second crop, and we’ve had growers who made 280-bushel corn followed by 34 or 40-bushel soybeans. If you’re timely, it can work.” If you’re in a non-irrigated situation, he says, plant later.

农业

2017-09/2272/en_head.json.gz/21282

Innovation and Experimentation: Annex Organics/ Field to Table, Toronto, Ontario A relatively new, rapidly evolving, and highly diversified project in Toronto illustrates many of the trends and truths in urban agriculture - the need to collaborate with non-profits, the dedication of one or two key people, the micro-scale of results, and the ability to improvise and quickly adapt to meet challenges and changes. Started in 1996 with the idea of creating a for-profit agricultural business on marginalized urban land, Annex Organics was a natural match for Field to Table, a non-profit with a variety of programs designed to increase community access to affordable, nutritious food. (Field to Table, which has a kitchen incubator for food product entrepreneurs and a catering business, is a project of FoodShare, a Toronto-based community food security non-profit.) From the beginning of the relationship, the two-woman operation of Annex Organics has paid no rent to use a small percentage of Field to Table’s warehouse, as well as space on the warehouse roof, where a rooftop garden and greenhouse are located. It also uses, at no charge, Field to Table’s vehicles for deliveries. As of January 1, 2000, the nature of the collaboration between the for-profit and the non-profit changed. Field to Table bought Annex Organics, which will continue to function as a business within the non-profit. “It’s hard enough to make money growing food if you’re an ordinary farmer, without all the challenges we face in an urban evironment,” says Lauren Baker who, together with Tracey Loverock, nurtured Annex Organics to become the business it is today. “The only way to succeed is to make partnerships so you can keep overhead low.” Annex Organics sells some of its heirloom vegetables, herbs, and sprouts at market value to Field to Table’s Good Food Box program, which every month packs 4,500 boxes of varying sizes in the warehouse and delivers them to paying customers in daycare centers, apartment buildings, and churches. The box’s low price pays for the nutritious food (most of which comes directly from growers), but distribution costs are subsidized by Foodshare. Annex Organics also sells to restaurants, health food stores, co-ops, and at a farmer’s market. All of its products are certified organic. In addition, Annex Organics started another project, growing and selling vegetable and herb seedlings and supplies, including compost, to urban gardeners. This seedling and supply venture has been spun off as an independent business, Urban Harvest, and is now managed by Baker, Loverock, and two partners. Baker will also continue to work with Annex Organics /Field to Table in a newly developed urban agriculture program. The most lucrative activity has been growing sprouts, which account for 90% of food growing revenues. Baker and Loverock had originally hoped to fund their business strictly through food production. But early on, another income-making opportunity presented itself: Field to Table paid the two entrepreneurs to put on workshops and train volunteers and at-risk youth participating in a federally-funded job skills program. Every six months, they teach 16 young people about gardening, food production, and marketing. “Most of them will not go on to get jobs in this area,” explains Baker. “They are learning life skills in this training program. But some have gone back to school and studied horticulture.” A few alumni of the urban agriculture training program have been hired to take over or start up Annex Organics/Field to Table projects. One young woman manages the greenhouse and sprouting operation. Her salary is covered by food-growing revenues. Field to Table also hired a young man who completed the training program and bought him the necessary supplies to build a mushroom hut - the next experiment for Annex Organics. It is hoped that mushroom sales will generate enough revenues to make the hut enterprise self-sustaining - and that the young man can eventually start his own similar business. Both the non-profit Field to Table and for-profit Annex Organics are eager to experiment and tinker to find answers. “Other entrepreneurs might focus on only one business,” says Baker. “Tracey and I knew we wanted to innovate and experiment with a variety of things. When the sprouts operation reached a certain size, we decided that rather than expand it, we’d move on to develop the next project - the greenhouse - to the point where it can stand on its own and be run by someone else. We’re interested in the model of microenterprise within the context of a larger project.” All these experiments complement each other and model a closed urban cycle, Baker points out. Compost is made from scraps from Field to Table’s food box program and incubator and catering kitchen, and the compost is used in soil mixes. Rinse water from the sprouts contains valuable nutrients and acts as a fertilizer for herbs, vegetables, and seedlings. Before the purchase by Field to Table, Annex Organics was able to pay for two full-time salaries and casual labor, but only because of consulting revenues, that contribute half of the company’s income. Although Baker admits that community economic development will always be dependent on grants and that Annex Organics is “a labor of love,” she is adamant about the need to keep things on a business footing. “Even though we are under the umbrella of a non-profit, we continue to sell food essentially to ourselves. Where people go wrong is when they lose track of expenses, revenues, and market values. You need to know that it makes economic sense to grow food.” -- Home • Past Issues • Resources • Sitemap • Contact Us

农业

2017-09/2272/en_head.json.gz/21360

Participatory risk assessment for harvesting of impala (Aepyceros melampus) and the distribution of by-products Ramrajh, Shashikala The demand for the control of safe food, from consumers the world over, has revolutionized the manner in which wild game meat harvesting occurs. In developed countries, food quality, food and human safety with quality controlling systems embracing environmental carbon footprint issues are constantly improving, for international harmonization at each level of production “from stable to table”, “farm to fork”, “field to yield” as well as from “cradle to grave”. Food industries globally have adopted the in Hazard Analysis Critical control Point (HACCP) system. This is a risk assessment process using Hygiene Assessment Systems (HAS) as a mitigating strategy for risk communication through training. It is also a holistic system that is compatible with international trends designed not only for food safety and quality, but it also embraces other aspects of farming such as animal welfare, environmental management and Occupational Safety and Health. Global marketing for international trade demands quality assurance from trading partners thereby promoting economic growth for developing countries. The watch dog bodies such as the World Trade Organisation (WTO) prohibit trading for non-compliance, therefore trade barriers are in place for uncertified food of animal origin, EU regulations are stringent requirements that need compliance and so too the OIE regulations for disease control, while the Codex Alimentarius Commission maintains trade harmonization. In South Africa Hygiene Assessment Systems (HAS) is a National Hygiene management strategy implemented at abattoirs, that promotes and facilitates quality and hygiene and is reflective of South African quality abroad. It is prescribed under the section, “Essential National Standards” in the Meat Safety Act, 2000, (Act 40 of 2000). This Act covers red meat and includes both domestic animals and game. The Veterinary Procedural Notices (VPN’s) are used for export of game and give far more detailed guidelines than the legislation for game meat sold and consumed locally in South Africa. The objective of the Hygiene Assessment System (HAS) is to create a national awareness of quality to better improve the quality of life of all South Africans, whilst at the same time it is used as an auditing tool for Veterinary Public Health to effectively compare essential standards within the nine provinces. Currently this programme is referred to as the National Abattoir Rating Scheme (NARS), which is only applicable to the high and low throughput Red Meat and Poultry abattoirs in South Africa and not to the Game or Rural abattoirs, thereby further compounding the duality of food standards with food safety being compromised. This study has been undertaken because there are inadequate risk control measures such as introduction of Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP) guidelines on primary and secondary meat inspection, specifically on game for local consumption, not only within South Africa, but in the international arena as well. A revision of the HAS document and audit will also be needed to meet with the local (not just export) criteria for wild game harvesting, to enable food safety, thus enabling food security in the remote non - agricultural areas in KwaZulu -Natal. Venison is the meat of today because of health priorities that have arisen over the last ten years. It is low in trans - fatty acids and is regarded internationally as a healthy product produced organically in a free range situation. South Africa has a large potential export market for venison to the European Union because the demand, for venison, exceeds supply in Europe. However, the European Union’s “safe food regulation” that was introduced between 2005 and 2007 with an implementation date of 2008 (Regulation1021/2008) has made it imperative that the HACCP principle is applied to any food or food product of animal origin imported into the European Union or its member states. Also, HACCP specifies that a multidisciplinary team of experts is selected. This then lends itself to a participatory approach to risk assessment as wide consultation is required. This participatory approach was used, including expert opinion surveys and focus group discussions with stakeholders and role-players in the game industry such as commercial hunters, state veterinary services and game ranch owners. Such participants may have better insight into existing conditions than external experts with recognised educational qualifications, usually used in the HACCP team. From this and the relevant Veterinary Procedural Notices for game harvesting, a HACCP process flow and critical control points were derived for the primary phase of meat inspection, including slaughter, primary meat inspection and loading for transport to the abattoir. This was modified during a phase or trial harvesting and then implemented during the harvest of 1758 impala carcasses which were subsequently exported. In addition, environmental risks were considered and a risk mitigation strategy designed, to reduce any possible environmental impacts. In northern Kwazulu Natal, game ranches and conservation areas are in close proximity to the rural poor where food is scarce and comes at a premium price. These game farms harvest seasonally for either the local or export market, hence there is abundance of game offal and by-products available, yet it is at present left in the field or taken to the vulture restaurants (in line with the VPN). Participatory risk analysis was thus also used to investigate the feasibility of using edible offal from impala (Aepyceros melampus) as a source of renewable protein, to address food security issues in impoverished communities in the study area, the districts of uPongola and Jozini, in northern KwaZulu Natal. Structured interviews on the cultural acceptability of impala offal were held with 162 randomly sampled adult respondents in veterinary districts associated with dip tanks. A two stage cluster design was used where the state veterinary areas were stage one and the dip tanks (with proportional random sampling of community members) were the second stage. Offal is a popular food in South Africa in different cultures, called “ithumbu” in IsiZulu, “ boti” by the Indian group, “afval” in Afrikaans and “tripe” in English. Generally demand outstrips supply of offal at red meat abattoirs in South Africa. It was found that there was no significant difference between those who would eat impala offal and those who would eat the offal of sheep. It was concluded that it is feasible to use inspected game offal from impala as a protein source in much the same way as red meat offal is used and that the current practice of leaving the offal for predators was likely, if it continues, to cause imbalances in the predator/ prey ratio on game farms. It is recommended that the VPN for game be amended to encompass inspected offal being allowed into the formal food chain, in line with the standard operating procedure developed during this study. Also that current fragmentation of legislation and the implementation thereof is revisited for effective control for harmonisation of food safety standards for game meat within South Africa. Dissertation (MMedVet)--University of Pretoria, 2013. dissertation.pdf Theses and Dissertations (Paraclinical Sciences)

农业

2017-09/2272/en_head.json.gz/21863

EPA offers help to growers HomeMarch 1st 2006 IssueEPA offers help to growers Excursions to the origin of apple enhance gene pool Scientists hope to improve cropping of Regina EPA offers help to growers EPA’s Strategic Agriculture Initiative funds diverse projects to help growers adapt to changing pesticide regulations. Mar 1, 2006 Sandra Halstead, Agriculture Initiative specialist, oversees a grants program that not only helps growers meet EPA regulations, but gives them a voice in the agency’s decisions regarding pest management.Photo by Anne Sampson Scattered across the country, tucked away in university extension offices and government labs, a coterie of regulatory scientists are looking for ways to reduce pesticide use. They work for the government—specifically, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency—and they’re here to help you. Just ask Sandra Halstead. She’s the Agriculture Initiative specialist with the EPA’s Region 10 Office of Ecosystems and Communities in Prosser, Washington. From her office at Washington State University’s research station, she oversees a grants program that not only helps growers meet changing EPA regulations for pesticide use, but gives them a voice in the agency’s decisions regarding pest management. Grants her agency has funded include projects aimed at controlling pests like leafrollers, codling moths, and cutworms with environmentally friendly alternatives after the EPA eliminated or restricted tried-and-true pesticides—all while lowering a grower’s operating costs. Halstead’s program is part of the Strategic Agriculture Initiative. It was created after Congress approved in 1996 the federal Food Quality Protection Act, a measure that set the EPA off on a mission to reduce the risks posed to humans by pesticides used in agriculture. That sounds good, but often new regulations mean valuable tools are restricted and replaced with alternatives that are either less effective or multiply a grower’s costs, or both. The Strategic Ag Initiative, however, takes a different approach. Director Regina Langton said it looks for projects that can contribute information on sustainable practices to EPA’s regulatory process. Projects funded by the program must be designed to show real, measurable results in controlling pests, protecting the environment, and improving the farmer’s bottom line. About 250 grants have been awarded since the project’s inception in 1998, she said. Nationally, the program receives about $1.5 million in funding annually. That money is distributed to the EPA’s ten regional offices, which then fund grants to researchers, grower groups, and other nonprofit organizations. Halstead’s area, Region 10, includes Alaska, Oregon, Idaho, and Washington, and receives about $250,000 annually. The grant process is administered for EPA by American Farmland Trust. Minor crops The money is aimed at minor crops, including tree fruits and grapes, and is distributed across the ten regions according to the number of acres planted to those crops. The Pacific Northwest is one of the largest regions, and Halstead has an impressive list of success stories. There’s the Hispanic Orchardists IPM Education Program headed by Nana´ Simone in the Tonasket and Wenatchee areas of Washington. With a grant partially funded by the EPA, Simone, a consultant with expertise in pest management and fluency in Spanish, developed a curriculum for Hispanic orchardists that gives them the knowledge they need to assess both the presence of pests in their trees and the most cost-effective methods of dealing with them. The program is aimed specifically at Hispanics for several reasons—first, because there are few other Spanish-language resources available, and because Hispanics represent the fastest growing contingent of fruit growers in the state. That’s an important piece of the initiative, according to Halstead. The Food Quality Protection Act recognizes that “we’re not protecting very sensitive populations like children,” she explained, so “we pay extra attention to crops that are important in the diets of children.” Apples certainly fit that description, and growers in north central Washington are particularly important because data collected by the University of Washington show that children in agricultural areas are exposed to much higher levels of pesticides than children in urban settings like Seattle. The orchards, Halsted said, “are where these kids live. They work there, and they play there.” The measurable results Langton refers to are often reported in dollars and cents. Orchardists who have enrolled in Simone’s program report significant cost savings because they have a good working knowledge of integrated pest management. But success can also be tallied in the amount of pesticides no longer being sprayed on Washington’s farms. WSU’s Dr. Doug Walsh, together with WSU Extension IPM coordinator specialist Dr. Holly Ferguson, in 2002 spearheaded a study titled “Cutworms Climb No More.” Growers had been laying down a strip of Lorsban, a broad-spectrum insecticide, between rows of grapevines where cutworms thrived. With grants from the EPA and other sources, they demonstrated that limiting sprays to just the trunks of the plants, and using a pyrethroid-based insecticide, which is less harmful to humans, is just as effective as the older method. Treating the trunks was enough to discourage cutworms from climbing the grape plants, and damage to the vines was eliminated. That’s good news from an ecological point of view. But factor in the costs—$15 per acre for the pyrethroid barrier spray versus $40 per acre for Lorsban—and growers sit up and take notice. “This is universally accepted by the growers,” Walsh says. “They were so hungry for an alternative [to Lorsban] that this spread like wildfire. Within two years, we had complete adoption. We’ve eliminated 15,000 pounds of Lorsban, while creating a much safer place for beneficial insects.” Because Halstead focuses on IPM, alternative methods of controlling pests like the use of beneficial insects get a lot of notice. The EPA helped fund a project conducted by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and WSU that put parasitic wasps in the orchard spotlight. Led by entomologists Drs. Tom Unruh and Bob Pfannenstiel of USDA and WSU’s Dr. Jay Brunner, the team planted wild rose gardens mixed with wild strawberries near apple, pear, and cherry orchards, then seeded them with strawberry leafrollers, a cousin to the variety that can decimate fruit trees. Parasitic wasps found a happy home there, and by spring, their larvae, which had fed on the strawberry leafrollers over the winter, grew to hungry adults, just as a new crop of leafrollers that infest apples took up residence in the adjacent apple orchards. When the wasps moved in, the leafrollers were contained. Ag WeatherNet One of the most widely used programs to have received EPA funding is the Agriculture WeatherNet system operated by WSU. Dr. Fran Pierce oversees the project, which comprises some 120 weather stations spread across the state. The data collected at the stations let growers plan their pest management strategies, and other decisions like controlled irrigation, with pinpoint accuracy. “If you live in Cowiche, up in the hills where it’s a lot cooler, you wouldn’t want to use the weather information from Grandview” when deciding when to spray for codling moths, Halstead explains. “It gives growers an understanding in real time of how weather data can impact pest management.” The American Farmland Trust issues a request for grant proposals each year, and typically receives between 10 and 15 applications. Successful grants are those that use innovative and collaborative methods to change the behavior of growers and provide good measurements of their effectiveness, according to Ann Sorensen of American Farmland Trust. “Any project that helps farmers adjust to the loss of Food Quality Protection Act-targeted pesticides by considering less toxic alternatives is considered urgent,” she said. “We also strongly encourage grantees to look at the economics of the practices they are trying to implement. With narrow or no profit margins, farmers are unlikely to implement techniques that are more costly than their current practices.” Information about the EPA grants and how to apply for them can be found at the American Farmland Trust Web site, www.aftresearch.org, and on the Strategic Agriculture Initiative toolbox Web site at www.aftresearch.org/sai/public/ index.php. By admin|2014-07-01T16:15:46+00:00March 1st, 2006|March 1st 2006 Issue| About the Author: admin

农业

2017-09/2272/en_head.json.gz/22318

Peanut market better, but take care in how you sell and plant for it Feb 15, 2017 (Correction) Bayer may divest assets in Monsanto merger Jan 24, 2017 Resistance management even more critical with new herbicides Feb 06, 2017 EPA approves Syngenta’s Minecto Pro insecticide for specialty, vegetable crops Feb 22, 2017 Young North Carolina growers from old school Roy Roberson 1 | May 21, 2008 Brothers Bryan and Wesley Foster represent the next generation of farmers — technologically inclined and marketing savvy — but they definitely come from the old school. The Foster brothers grew up on a family farm in Mocksville, N.C., in the shadows of the Appalachian Mountains. Today, they farm on the eastern tip of North Carolina, less than 50 miles from the Atlantic Ocean. They grow 1,500 acres of corn and another 1,500 acres of double-crop wheat and soybeans near Columbia, N.C. As if farming isn't risky enough, they recently purchased two grain buying stations in eastern North Carolina and one near their home farm in Mocksville. Neither growing grain, nor buying and selling it are anything new to the Foster brothers. They grew up on a diversified family farm that featured grain crops. Today, their father, Spurgeon Foster, still grows about 2,700 acres of grain crops on the family farm. The Fosters grow the same crops in eastern North Carolina as they did growing up, but farming, they say, is as different as night and day in the two places. “For one thing, they fight dry weather most every year and we fight wet growing conditions most years,” says Bryan Foster. How they got from one side of the state to another is story in serendipity, timing and forward thinking. Spurgeon Foster served on the National Corn Board in the mid 1970s. He became acquainted with farmers in eastern Carolina and was fascinated by how farmers were clearing swamp land, building levees and pumping water off the land to make room for crops. At that time grain prices were good, farming was highly lucrative and land prices were too steep for Spurgeon Foster to invest in land. Over time those conditions changed and when the time was right Spurgeon bought a farm near Columbia, N.C. The timing of that purchase coincided nicely with first Bryan, then Wesley finishing North Carolina State University's Ag Institute Program. Though they had farmed some of the land prior to purchasing it, the final decision to buy the land came in 1994. Since that time, first Bryan, then Wesley moved from west to east to manage the Columbia Farm. When they were first approached a few years back about buying a grain storage and buying facility in Swan Quarters, N.C., they put their experience and marketing savvy to the test and determined it would not be productive to have one buying point. They made an offer on the Swan Quarters facility and for a similar facility near the town of Creswell, N.C. By buying the two east Carolina facilities they put their farm almost directly in the middle of the two locations. Subsequently, they bought a third facility near their family's farm in Mocksville. “We buy our own crops, but it's two distinctly separate companies. We don't treat our crops any differently than those we buy from other farmers,” Wesley Foster says. The grain company is operated as Lake Phelps Grain Company. The Foster brothers run their grain business with the same old school philosophy they learned growing up on the farm in western North Carolina. Doing things right includes plenty of time planning and getting the most from the resources they have on hand. “In the grain business doing things right includes treating people fairly. We want to pay farmers a fair price for their grain and we want to get them their money as fast as we can. We are in the farming business, we know how important it is to get paid in a timely manner,” Wesley Foster says. The key to running both a large farming operation and large grain buying business is to have good employees, says Wesley Foster. “When we find good employees, we treat them well, and so far we've been fortunate,” he adds. Bryan, who focuses more on the farming operation, says growing grain crops in eastern North Carolina is dramatically different that he faced growing up. However, the same principles of knowing your soil and knowing how a crop will perform on that soil apply. And, not cutting corners works in both places. Growing wheat and double-crop beans is significantly different in the two locations, notes Bryan Foster. In most parts of the state, double-crop bean yields are consistently lower than full season beans. Here, there doesn't seem to be much difference in yields. One year full season is better and the next year double-crop beans are better, he says. On the Mocksville farm they do no tillage, not even strip-tillage. No-till has not worked well for the Foster brothers on the eastern tip of North Carolina. No-till helps hold moisture in the soil, but in our case we want it to run through the soil, Bryan explains. He researched different tillage options, trying to find the best system for their land in eastern North Carolina. In 2008, they adapted a strip-tillage system which allow them to avoid the deep tillage they use on some of their land, but avoid moisture problems associated with no-till systems in their part of eastern North Carolina. “We just completed planting some corn using the strip-tillage system and it looks like the most uniform crop we've had. Of course, using an auto-steer system, with accuracy of less than an inch helps, he laughs. The long rows are a picture of perfection. With such a well-established rotation, Bryan says a key is to manage one crop for the other. For example, for good weed control in wheat they add an extra application of glyphosate to clean up corn in the summer prior to planting wheat in the rotation the following fall. “We try to keep our corn weed free all year to avoid weed and grass problems with wheat in the fall. We spray a full application of glyphosate prior to planting corn, once over-the-top and we come back with a drop nozzle and clean it up before we chop the corn,” they explain. In addition to glyphosate, they use one application of atrazine or similar herbicide in their corn to break up the cycle of glyphosate. So far, they have had no problems with glyphosate resistance. Keeping one crop clean for another is different than changing practices just to make a high yield, Wesley Foster says. “It's been our experience that trying to produce high yields is sure to drive your costs up, but doesn't always result in higher yields or higher profits,” the North Carolina grower adds. In these unprecedented times when grain prices are high across the board, the Foster brothers contend taking care of business the normal way is better than trying to force a crop into high yields. Over the past 10 years, they note, their average yields for corn, soybeans and wheat closely parallel the national average for these crops. “Regardless of whether the price is high or low, as long as we can produce yields comparable to other parts of the country, we feel like we will be okay,” Wesley says. Being farmers and buyers, the North Carolina growers agree the best plan in the long run is to grow what is best for the land. Breaking up a successful rotation to chase high prices is a good way to get in trouble, they agree. A good case in point, says Wesley Foster, is a lesson learned by their father this year. He planted oats for the first time in many years. A disease or soil-related problems took a big toll on his oat crop. Had he grown oats for a number of years, he would probably have known what caused the problem and fixed it before it caused economically-damaging losses, Foster adds. In the case with his father, oats were planted on a small acreage as more of a test to determine their feasibility in the overall farm rotation. However, for many growers in the Southeast, planting large acreages of wheat, corn and soybeans on land not well suited to these crops, and by growers not familiar with the many obstacles that can hurt grain crop production. “In today's market a farmer has the ability to make a lot of money, but he also has the ability to lose a lot of money. The inputs are so high and the crop so valuable, the risks to farming grain crops is higher than it's ever been,” Wesley Foster concludes. Growing crops the right way and treating people the right way is the best formula for success, regardless of the price of grain or the cost of growing it, they agree.

农业

2017-09/2272/en_head.json.gz/23169

Fishy smell herb Either the plant, or the photographer was swaying at the time. It’s a very windy site. This handsome devil is Houttuynia cordata. There is a rather showier cousin, ‘Chameleon’, the same green, cordate (heart-shaped) leaves with an overlay of a creamy yellow and scarlet pink variegation, but I rather like this, slightly more sensible but just as beautiful for all that. Look at that gorgeous deep, burgundy red on the underside of the leaves and the stems, starting to marble its way through the surface of the lamina. If that’s not precisely like the wing of a dragon, then I don’t know what is. Just have a look at what this is growing through Both the species and the variety have similar infloresences; a pale yellow central cone of tiny flowers, rising 2-3cm above the four white, petal-like bracts. And both are utter stinkers. I’m not saying you can’t make Houttuynia work in your garden, it’s a fine ground cover plant, but vigorous doesn’t even begin to describe it, and it takes quite a bit of work, to the extent that you might wish you hadn’t begun. It definitely comes into the category of beautiful-plants-to-give-to-people-you-don’t-really-like, in which group it can rub shoulders with such rampant lovelies as alstromeria, golden rod, Lysimachia puncata, and that nice variegated ground elder of which I’m actually quite fond, especially in the gardens of other people. It’s the rhizomes that do it. They can creep for yards under the surface of the soil, migrating their way from the original planting site and pushing up through lawns and even concrete drives. (I was quite impressed when I saw the latter, thinking the plant must have self-seeded into the gravel. But upon examination, no - it was growing up through the concrete below. It’s nowhere near as beefy a plant as, for example, Japanese knotweed, which eats tarmac and roadstone for breakfast, so I imagine it had exploited a weakness in the material that it found. But hats of to it, all the same.) Houttuynia will revel in a damp soil, but also romp away quite happily in the dry. Should you fall out of love with it, mechanical extraction is nigh on impossible due to the brittle rhizomes, the tiniest piece of which will inevitably give rise to a new plant. Translocated herbicides seem to have limited efficacy too – you might think you’ve got the upper hand, but it’s been known to make a reappearance after several years of absence. Here’s Johny! While hoiking it out by the handful – a necessary task, even if you’re a fan, or have resigned yourself to coexisting with the thing – you’ll notice another of houttuynia’s key attributes – its scent. Native to southeast Asia, its Chinese name translates literally as “fishy smell herb”, and a common name within these islands is fishwort. The scent reminds me far less of fish than very potent coriander. Which leads me to introduce a thought that runs on a fairly constant loop inside my head – if a plant’s vigour is held against it to the extent that it’s often considered a nuisance, then, by all the cosmic laws of fairness and karma, surely one should be able to harvest it in handfuls and eat the stuff? It’s a working hypothesis, and I’m understandably slightly wary that I might not survive long enough to publish the full thesis, but I’m counting on careful research before dinner to see me through. It turns out, you can eat houttuynia, indeed it’s quite popular in the cuisines of China, India, and Vietnam. Both leaves and roots are used, either cooked or raw. I’ve not done it yet, but I’m sorely tempted to start to use it in place of fresh coriander stems, for example in a kind of salsa verde marinade I use for a fish curry (with ginger, garlic, tomatoes and chilli). Ask me in a few weeks how I got on. If you don’t get a reply, please send help. Emma Cooper22 May 2015 at 15:27It's been on my list to try it for a while. Hopefully once my new garden is finished, I can find it a spot :)ReplyDeleteAdd commentLoad more... RHS Chelsea 2015. Inside the Great Pavilion RHS Chelsea Flower Show 2015, part 2 The RHS Chelsea Flower Show 2015, part 1 The Blackberry Garden snowdrops I am currently enjoying visiting some amazing snowdrop gardens. This has become a favourite pastime this time of year as it helps keep the winter blues at...

农业

2017-09/2272/en_head.json.gz/23975

IITD develops chemical to keep fruits fresh Updated: Nov 26, 2006 22:47 IST M Rajendran None With big corporates like Reliance and Bharti entering the fresh fruit and vegetable business, can innovation be far away? Think of apples and oranges that can stay without refrigeration for more than week in any weather, without losing any of their looks, freshness or nutritive value - and how much it would help these new players in retail! This is precisely what will soon happen with the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Delhi Chemistry Department having developed a liquid solution, which keeps fruit and vegetables from rotting. It has been estimated by the National Horticulture Board of India that more than Rs 40,000 crore is lost annually because fruits and vegetables go bad as they are being transported from one part of the country to another. Speaking to Hindustan Times Prof HP Chawla, who headed the project, claimed, "The solution has been tested in nine different laboratories in the country. It has immense commercial value. We have already obtained the product and have applied for the process patent." Apart from apples and oranges, grapes, capsicum and tomatoes have been successfully tested by coating them with the solution - they remained perfect. IIT Delhi has developed the solution in collaboration with the Synthetic and Natural Molecular Technologies (SANMOTECH), a Technology Business Incubator Unit, which is part of a research organisation set up by IIT Delhi itself to develop innovative, marketable specialty products and processes. Prof Chawla has been working on coatings, which delay the biodegradation of fruit and vegetables and years. "The solution can be coated, sprayed or the fruit can be dipped in it to increase its shelf-life. It has been developed from natural products of Indian origin, as an alternative to traditional waxes. The coatings have been designed to slow the complex process that takes place within the fruit leading to its spoilage." He said the solution was natural, safe and non-toxic and tasteless. The project had found support from the Food Processing, Environment & Forests, Science and Technology and Rural Development ministries with the initial funding amounting to Rs 1.70 crore. Chawla noted that large-scale use of the solution would not only increase the average fruit farmer's earning, it would also reduce solid waste pollution and the associated effort and expense of handling and disposing off rotten fruit and vegetables. Its use will also open up new employment opportunities for rural youth in the agro-industry area. The National Research Development Corporation (NRDC) has been scouting for companies willing to market this solution. Somenath Ghosh, chairman and managing director, confirmed to Hindustan Times that NRDCC was at an advanced stage of negotiations with a few companies to market the solution. Sources in NRDC said executives from Reliance Industries and from Middle East countries have both shown interest. "We are negotiating with them to get a better price, which would be royalty for the developers," said Ghosh. Upendra Vats, Assistant General Manager, Fresh Fruits and Vegetables, Processed fruits & Vegetables, Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development Authority said, "Any solution that can enhance the life of fruits and vegetables is good for the export."

农业