California
moves to reduce gas prices [New York Times]
With
gasoline prices reaching record highs across California over the last week,
Gov. Jerry Brown moved on Sunday to alleviate some of the pain at the pump. Mr.
Brown directed the California Air Resources Board to take emergency steps to
increase the supply of fuel in the state and allow refineries to immediately
switch to a winter blend of gasoline that is typically not sold until
November….Mr. Brown said he hoped that the switch to the winter-blend gasoline,
which evaporates more quickly than gasoline sold during the summer smog season,
would stop the climb in prices because it could increase fuel supplies in the
state by up to 10 percent. Summer-blend gasoline is better for air quality.
Senator Dianne Feinstein also asked the Federal Trade Commission on Sunday to
investigate the cause of the price increases.
Delays
may threaten Valley high-speed rail funds [Fresno Bee]
Federal
money for California's high-speed rail program could be jeopardized if the
start of construction is significantly delayed in the San Joaquin Valley. And
there are signs that might happen….Details of the updated schedule are included
in the authority's arguments against a motion by Madera County, the Madera and
Merced county farm bureaus and other high-speed rail opponents for a
preliminary injunction. A hearing on the injunction is set for Nov. 16 in
Sacramento….Felker said the agency anticipates needing almost all six months to
buy the property for the right of way. But the authority cannot start making
offers to landowners until it gets a green light from the state Public Works
Board -- and that is not expected until sometime next month….The rail authority
hopes to be able to buy right of way from willing sellers. But some property
owners have vowed to fight -- which will require the authority to go to court,
parcel by parcel. Unlike some court cases that can linger for months or years,
however, "eminent domain is a well-understood process that has clear time
frames attached to it," Morales said.
Calif.
initiative will test appetite for GMO food [Associated Press]
…In
a closely watched test of consumers' appetite for genetically modified foods,
the special label is being pushed by organic farmers and advocates who are
concerned about what people eat even though the federal government and many
scientists contend such foods are safe. More than just food packaging is at
stake. The outcome could reverberate through American agriculture, which has
long tinkered with the genes of plants to reduce disease, ward off insects and
boost the food supply….Already, at least 19 states this year have introduced
GMO labeling bills, but none passed….The push comes as genetic engineering is
expanding beyond traditional crops. Last year, agricultural regulators approved
the planting of genetically modified alfalfa, angering organic farmers who
feared cross-contamination. An application is pending on an Atlantic salmon
that has been genetically manipulated to grow twice as fast as a regular
salmon.
http://www.sacbee.com/2012/10/06/4887266/calif-initiative-will-test-appetite.html#storylink=misearch
Genetically
modified food debate muted in generally accepting science community [San Jose
Mercury News]
…Backers
of Proposition 37 argue that consumers have a right to know how their food was
created. The premise is that lab-designed food is significantly different from
other food -- for instance, that fruits and vegetables tweaked to resist
droughts, pesticides or herbicides are different from traditionally bred crops.
But that's an assumption much of the scientific community questions, including
the U.S. National Research Council, an independent panel that informs
government decision-makers. Many scientists say there is no difference between
a food created through modern molecular techniques and food created through
conventional breeding. "There is nothing new about introducing traits into
crop plants, just the methods used to do it," said Martina
Newell-McGloughlin, director of strategic research initiatives and agricultural
biotechnology at UC Davis.
Supreme
Court to hear challenge to Monsanto seed patents [Wall Street Journal]
The
U.S. Supreme Court agreed Friday to hear an Indiana farmer's appeal that
challenges the scope of Monsanto Co.'s patent rights on its Roundup Ready
seeds. The company, whose genetically modified seeds produce crops that are
resistant to herbicide, has required farmers to use the patented seeds only for
a single crop and not save the "second-generation" seeds from the
harvest. Monsanto has imposed the terms because its technology reproduces
itself in each generation of seeds. If farmers could replant seeds taken from
each harvest, they could avoid paying for Monsanto's technology in future
plantings, the company says.
Flower
growers plan new tactics in battle against imports [Ventura County Star]
For
decades, California growers have been small players in a U.S. cut flower market
dominated by imports. But now the state's flower industry, with a substantial
presence in Ventura County, faces new challenges, and growers say it's time to
take more of the market. They point to a new Los Angeles warehouse that imports
South American flowers and to federal policies that give free access to
Colombian imports as the latest triggers convincing growers that aggressive
action is needed to survive….Californians' ambitious plan to take some of the
nearly 80 percent market share held by Colombian growers would consolidate
out-of-state shipping of California flowers to a single site to substantially
cut freight costs. Business from supermarkets and wholesale floral suppliers
would increase, in turn, growers hope.
Ag
Today is distributed to county Farm Bureaus, CFBF directors and CFBF staff, for
information purposes, by the CFBF Communications/News Division, 916-561-5550; news@cfbf.com.
Some story links may require site registration. To be removed
from this mailing list, reply to this message and please provide your
name and e-mail address.
No comments:
Post a Comment