Farmers urge Congress to legalize agriculture workers [Wall Street Journal]
President
Barack Obama took executive action Friday to temporarily legalize millions of
immigrants who are in the U.S. illegally, though the program doesn’t
specifically address agriculture. Under the plan, an estimated 250,000 farm
workers likely would be eligible for relief from deportation and for work
permits, the United Farmworkers Union said. That is a fraction of total number
of undocumented workers toiling in U.S. fields, say farmers, who hope that Mr.
Obama’s decision to take unilateral action will propel Congress to achieve a
legislative solution that addresses agriculture workforce needs….Frustration is
running so high that farmers like Mr. Leitz say they have started to withhold
contributions from Republicans in elections. “I’m not giving any more to guys
who haven’t helped us,” said the farmer, who describes his politics as “very conservative.”…Ideally,
farmers say, a congressional fix would legalize undocumented field workers and
encourage them to stay in agriculture, as well as include provisions to ensure
a steady flow of seasonal workers who could enter and leave the country with relative
ease.
Next
step for water bill up in air [Sacramento Bee]
Now,
with Feinstein’s surprise decision Thursday afternoon to call a halt and restart
talks in January with a more open process, officials and advocates must assess
what went wrong, what went right and what comes next….The immediate next step
will be taken by House Republicans, some of whom felt the rug had been yanked
out from underneath them just as they were 98 percent done. They worry that by
the time Congress acts next year, another drought-ridden growing season will
have passed….They could, for instance, try passing a stand-alone bill before
the Dec. 11 adjournment, perhaps reflecting all or part of what’s been
negotiated so far. That would make a statement and, at the least, set a
foundation for next year. It would also face certain Senate resistance.
Stanislaus
residents race to get well permits [Modesto Bee]
There’s
a funny line in the staff report that accompanies the proposed groundwater
ordinance on Tuesday’s Stanislaus County Board of Supervisors meeting agenda.
It says that when the new well-drilling rules eventually get approved, they’ll
be “retroactive to Nov. 25, 2014, to prevent a race to obtain permits before
the effective date of the ordinance.” Too late for that. The county’s already
been flooded with well-drilling permit applications, all of which were approved
under the current restriction-free standards….Yep, word spread quickly this
fall that Stanislaus was considering tightening its standards for where new
wells could be drilled. Landowners – almost all of them farmers – rushed to
pull permits for new wells throughout the county, especially around Oakdale.
Last Wednesday alone, Stanislaus issued permits for 14 new groundwater wells.
That’s about as many wells as the county used to issue during an entire month.
Stream
protections vs. private property rights in Sonoma County [Santa Rosa Press
Democrat]
Sonoma
County’s effort to implement one of its most controversial land use policies —
protective buffer zones along 3,200 miles of rivers and streams — has reignited
a pitched debate between environmental organizations, farmers and private
property rights activists about how to best protect and manage waterways
throughout the county….As proposed, the restrictions, which are up for a
decision today at the Board of Supervisors, would curb development, farming and
other activities on more than 82,000 acres of land outside city limits, most of
it on private property. Supporters, including environmental groups, say the
measures are needed to protect common resources such as drinking water, as well
as wildlife that depend on streams for habitat….But opponents, including the
Sonoma County Farm Bureau, say the measures trample on the rights of private
landowners. “This is a regulation for the sake of regulation,” said Tito
Sasaki, president of the Farm Bureau.
Farmers
spray pesticides near schools with no notification required [NBC Bay Area]
Most
California counties don't require farmers and growers to tell schools about
potentially dangerous chemicals used in their pesticide spray….Wineries and
vineyards dot the landscape of Livermore with brand new homes and schools
popping up right next to them. It’s this picturesque atmosphere that drew Paola
Reyes to the East Bay town….The beauty, however, soon became overshadowed by
her family’s illnesses, and nobody knew why it was happening. “Things were at a
breaking point with my family,” Reyes said.
“My son’s health, especially, to the point where he couldn’t go to school, and
I looked at the vineyard and I said, 'Oh my God, maybe it’s the vineyard. They
must be spraying something at that vineyard.'”…
Food
and politics both on the menu [Sacramento Bee]
The
food movement has long been a force unto itself in California….In recent years,
though, the progressive push toward more local and sustainable eating has
morphed from a cultural novelty to an organized public health interest. A
statewide Food Policy Council representing advocacy groups from Mendocino to
San Diego now tracks votes and reports annually on bills related to food and
farming. Urban Ag Alliances and Food Access Committees now pester county
officials to write farmers markets into their general plans and let restaurants
buy in bulk from local community gardens. The California Department of Food and
Agriculture now has an official Office of Farm to Fork.
No comments:
Post a Comment