Farmers call for more flexibility in water quality rules

Issue Date: July 14, 2010

By Kate Campbell
Assistant Editor

A one-size-fits-all approach to regulating water discharges from agricultural operations on the Central Coast isn’t likely to achieve desired water quality improvements. That message was repeatedly emphasized by farmers last week during a workshop before the region’s water quality control board.

The event in Watsonville focused on proposed changes to water discharge regulations that are up for renewal. Nearly 200 people attended, reflecting concerns about the board’s regulatory proposal.

Santa Barbara farmer Kevin Merrill confers with Kari Fisher, an associate counsel with CFBF's Natural Resources and Environmental Division, during the water quality hearing last week in Watsonville.

Farmers spoke in support of an alternative water quality improvement plan that has been put forward by a coalition of more than 50 farm groups. The plan was developed by the California Farm Bureau Federation with support from the seven coastal county Farm Bureaus and farm groups from the entire region.

Before last week’s workshop began, the regional board voted to extend the current farm water discharge regulations until March 2011, departing from the recommended 18-month extension proposed by the board’s staff. Although farmers said after the vote they would have preferred the full 18 months to work with staff on a new water discharge waiver, they welcomed the regulatory continuity, at least through next spring.

“Water quality and farming issues are extremely complex,” Santa Barbara farmer Kevin Merrill told the board. “And, the Central Coast agriculture community is committed to increasing an understanding of those complexities and helping improve water quality in the region’s watersheds.”

Farmers said the board’s proposal will do little to enhance water quality while imposing “extensive and massive” record keeping requirements on the estimated 3,000 farms in the region, which combined generate about a quarter of the state’s total $36 billion in agricultural production.

Merrill, who is president of Santa Barbara County Farm Bureau, said the alternative plan proposed by Farm Bureau and the coalition of farm groups will support achieving the board’s water quality goals while also providing farmers the flexibility they need to remain sustainable. He called for additional meetings with the board.

To illustrate the diversity of farms and crops on the Central Coast a number of farmers addressed the board during the workshop last week. Salinas vegetable grower Dirk Giannini explained that on the ranch he manages vegetative ditches have been used extensively since 2004 to prevent sediment in irrigation water from leaving the ranch.

“But with the onset of food safety concerns, we’re reluctant to expand this practice further,” he said, “because of potential conflicts between regulations for different state agencies.”

“On ranches we farm, crops require sprinkler irrigation on highly erodible soils. We’ve been working with UC researchers in the use of pam, a polymer that drops sediments from the water and leaves it in the field. Another material we’ve used is called Vanguard. This is an enzyme that breaks down pesticides in tailwater. This practice has significantly reduced exceedences before the water leaves the ranch.”

The problem, he said, is that these practices have not been readily accepted by the regional water board’s staff as best management practices that lead to improved water quality.

Carpenteria farm manager Rick Shade told the board that growing practices on the farms he manages don’t produce any tailwater because of the extensive use of drip irrigation and micro sprinklers, including acres farmed on steep slopes.

“We have backflow devices on all our wells,” said Shade, a former chairman of the California Avocado Commission. “We use green waste from the county for mulching bare land where we can’t get a cover crop to establish. We don’t use emergent weed herbicides.

“There are a number of things we’ve done that aren’t reflected in the board’s current regulatory proposal and we think regulations need to reflect the best management practices for specific areas and crops and provide flexibility to apply them,” he said.

About 23,000 acres of Central Coast farm ground is devoted to growing strawberries, said Watsonville strawberry grower Erik Jertberg. He told the board it’s essential that salts be removed from strawberry plants’ root zones so both drip and flood irrigation practices are used.

“However, the current staff proposal would require growers to manage their fertilizer applications such that 90 percent or more would be used by the crop by retaining it in the root zone.

“Currently, there are no production practices in the world for growing strawberries that would come close to achieving those goals. That cannot be the direction the board wants to go,” he said.

Tim Borel, manager of Blanco Farms in Salinas, described research and development activities at the Esperanza Ranch, which have been ongoing for more than a decade. It is in the Quail Creek watershed.

“We started investing heavily in the Esperanza in 1999, mass leveling the entire property and installing a permanent drip infrastructure to grow lettuces. This was all done before the ag waiver. Decisions were made, money was invested, and, in the current context of reducing runoff, progress was made.

“It’s this work, not added reporting requirements, that reduces runoff and improves water quality,” Borel said. “I’d like to stress that every ranch and every operation is different. What works for me may not work for my neighbor.”

The Grower-Shipper Association of Central California noted in a letter to the board that the currently proposed waste water discharge regulation is so over broad and intrusive on grower operations that the association sought independent analysis to determine the potential economic impact.

Association President Jim Bogart said that cool season vegetables, strawberries and nursery crops are “most at risk” under the board’s current proposal. These three commodities, he said, comprise more than 75 percent of all acres used for farming on the Central Coast.

Economists estimate that lost revenue from agricultural operations, if the current regulatory proposal is adopted, could range from more than $230 million to nearly $300 million a year. As a result, an estimated 2,500 to 3,300 agricultural jobs would be lost.

Kari Fisher, an associate counsel with CFBF’s Natural Resources and Environmental Division, said Farm Bureau will continue to work with the board to ensure increased understanding of best management practices for the region’s highly diverse crops and growing conditions.

(Kate Campbell is an assistant editor of Ag Alert. She may be contacted at kcampbell@cfbf.com.)

Permission for use is granted, however, credit must be made to the California Farm Bureau Federation when reprinting this item. Top