San Joaquin Valley lawmakers seek drought declaration [Modesto Bee]
San
Joaquin Valley — Eight state lawmakers from the San Joaquin Valley have sent a
letter asking Gov. Jerry Brown to proclaim a drought emergency. The bipartisan
group did not detail how the state might deal with a possible third straight
year of below-average rain and snow, but it did make clear that the stakes are
high. “The water forecast for next year is looking especially grim,” the letter
said, “and we believe that we are facing the realistic possibility of
experiencing true drought conditions that we have not seen since the mid 1970s,
when California experienced the driest two years in state history.”
Editorial: Time to call
California water shortage an emergency [Modesto Bee]
There’s
been a lot of news about water lately, just not enough talk about it falling
from the sky. Basically, we’re in the midst of record-breaking dry year, and
we’ve got to take steps now to make sure we don’t run out of water when we
really need it….The real solutions go far beyond telling people to stop
watering their lawns or to cut short their showers. The only realistic solution
is to create more water storage. The politicians who signed the letters to the
governor are among the most aware of this necessity. They get it. Unfortunately,
too many others don’t. Until there is enough political will to create more
storage above ground and below, we’re going to find ourselves dealing with
water crises every few years.
Immigration
advocates undeterred as House departs without action [New York Times]
As
the Republican-controlled House of Representatives wrapped up its work for the
year on Thursday with no progress on immigration, leaders from both parties
said they would return to the issue early in the new year. Representative
Robert W. Goodlatte, Republican of Virginia and chairman of the Judiciary
Committee, said at a hearing that immigration would be a “top priority” in
2014….An immigration overhaul has seemed close to death in the House more than
once in recent months. But even though Speaker John A. Boehner of Ohio has not
found a strategy to corral a majority of his caucus behind legislation, a
unified Democratic minority and an array of persistent supporters of a
comprehensive bill have made it difficult for Republican leaders to sweep the
issue aside.
Future
of rangeland in state on agenda [Stockton Record]
Rangeland
use for grazing can return as little as $1 per acre annually. While plantings
of grapes, walnuts or almonds, or even further conversion to subdivisions and
strip malls, may boost a farmer's returns, it also means the potential loss of
valuable, sometimes unique, wildlife habitat and open space. The pressures for
conversion of California's rangelands and ranches, as well as ways to keep them
viable and productive, will be the focus of the California Rangeland
Conservation Coalition Summit planned for Jan. 21-22 in Oakdale.
Commentary: The hidden costs of
some cheap food [Los Angeles Times]
…More
than two-thirds of the American dairies that at some point used rBST have
stopped, according to a study by a University of Alberta researcher.…The hormone
does what it says, which theoretically would raise profits. But getting that
productivity benefit requires such close monitoring of the cows’ feed that the
numbers weren’t penciling out for most dairies, according to the study. Dairies
often found themselves spending as much or more on feed as they were gaining by
having more milk to sell….The study raises anew questions about whether food
technologies intended to reduce costs actually do so….The answer isn’t known,
but we should at least be asking more questions about these and other methods
that boost productivity, a supposed economic benefit. Setting aside for the
moment controversies about health and humane treatment and focusing only on the
financial aspect: Is cheap food truly inexpensive?
Commentary: Genetic food
findings in dispute [Monterey County Herald]
Foes
of genetically modified food have this one huge issue that won't go away: the
science keeps going against them. The latest example took place late last
month, when a prominent journal withdrew the one study that seemed to show a
definite link between health problems and food whose genetic mix has been
altered….So where does this leave the debate about GM foods? Yes, Big Ag,
Monsanto first and foremost, won this battle. But it was far from satisfying. A
healthy measure of blame has to be laid on the journal that published the
study. Instead of citing fraud or intentional misrepresentations, it simply
said the findings were inconclusive. That leaves you wondering why the study even
made it into print in the first place.
Ag
Today is distributed by the CFBF Communications/News Division to county Farm
Bureaus, CFBF directors and CFBF staff, for information purposes; stories may
not be republished without permission. 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. For more
information about Ag Today, contact 916-561-5550 or news@cfbf.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment