Dickcissel - a grassland bird. Photo Credit: Amy Larson

In an effort to improve the sustainability and health of their land, farmers are increasingly interested in taking a systems approach to farmland management. A systems approach acknowledges the key connections between ecological, economic, and social components. Given the ensuing complexity, measuring the health of a farm system requires good diagnostic tools. In addition, these tools need to be clear and straightforward.

Our current effort at the University of Nebraska Lincoln to develop a set of such indicators for farmers, the Healthy Farm Index, focuses on biodiversity and ecosystem services at the farm scale. One indicator in the index is the presences of a given set of birds on the farm. Birds are a popular indicator because they are sensitive to change in farm practices, found broadly in the environment, and are easy to detect by sight and sound.

The ability to detect birds by sound has spurred our research group to develop resources to aid farmers and other people interested in the songs and calls of farmland birds. As researchers, we use auditory detections of birds as one of our primary monitoring tools. With acoustic recorders, we have recorded the songs and calls of our local bird communities. Back in the lab, we use software to identify and isolate the best songs and calls. These vocalizations have been posted to our website, Farmland Birds of Nebraska, and distributed back to farmers and others interested on CDs. With the acoustic recordings, farmers can select a group of indicator species suitable for their area, learn its call, and listen for the bird while working in the field. This information can be used by the farmer in assessing their own farm or can be shared more broadly with researchers.

The recordings also allow farmers to share with consumers (many of whom are birders) an added environmental benefit of their farm. This spring we were able to take these recorded vocalizations back to one of our participating farms. In partnership with Common Good Farm, we hosted a “Birding on the Farm” tour. Local residents and other farmers spent the morning listening for and identifying the community of birds at the farm. New and experienced birders alike were surprised at the diversity found on the single farm.

In the coming months, we are expanding our network of recorders. This winter we will be monitoring winter bird communities on participating farms and testing the influences that road noise may have on bird vocalization and communication.

Heirloom tomatoes at a farmers’ market in San Francisco. Photo: advencap.

It is high season for tomatoes right now. Your local farmers’ market probably has a whole color spectrum of heirloom tomatoes, from red to green and purple, deepening to almost black. Heirloom tomatoes are getting more and more popular—but what does “heirloom” really mean? And how do these colorful tomatoes differ from their supermarket relatives?

What does “heirloom” mean, anyway?
In agriculture, the word “heirloom” doesn’t have a precise definition. It conjures up ideas of a food that is old fashioned and has been handed down for generations—which is as good a definition as any right now. Heirloom tomatoes are varieties that have been grown without crossbreeding for 40 or more years. This is in contrast to the typical supermarket tomatoes, which are hybrids that have been carefully crossbred to have particular characteristics. Often flavor is not at the top of the list. Instead, hybrid tomatoes are bred for things like resistance to pests and diseases, and firm flesh and thick skin—so they can be harvested by machines and emerge as whole tomatoes, not sauce.

But genetic mixing—or lack thereof—isn’t the only thing that separates the heirlooms and the hybrids. Let’s look at some heirloom tomato myths and truths, to get at other difference between the two tomatoes.

You can grow heirloom tomatoes from their seeds.
Correct. Hybrid Heirloom tomatoes breed true—if you take the seeds from your heirloom tomatoes, treat them right, and then plant them in the spring, the tomatoes you pluck from the vines in late summer will taste just like their parents tasted. One characteristic of heirloom crops is that they are open-pollinated; pollen is carried by natural mechanisms, like bees or wind. Compare this to commercially grown hybrid tomatoes, which must be pollinated by hand to ensure the correct combination of traits. This is a lot of work, but it’s necessary. Open-pollinated hybrid seeds might carry the good genes for a particular trait, or they might the carry bad genes. The only way to ensure a good crop of hybrids is to plant seeds that have been hand-pollinated so you get the right mix.

Heirloom tomatoes are organic.
Not necessarily. Often they are organic, but they would still be called heirlooms if growers treated them with pesticides and other chemicals. And growers would have good reason to spray: heirlooms don’t have the disease and pest resistance that hybrids have acquired over generations of selective breeding. Heirlooms are particularly susceptible to fungus, which makes them crack and split. Farmers growing heirlooms get one-third the yield (or even less) than they would if they were growing hybrids, because so many plants and fruits are damaged by pests and disease. This is one reason why heirloom tomatoes are so expensive.

Heirlooms taste better.
Often this is true, and there are a couple of reasons for it; some are inherent to heirlooms, and some are byproducts of the way they’re grown and harvested. An heirloom tomato plant often produces a total of only two fruits; all the plant’s reproductive efforts get concentrated into just a few tomatoes. This concentrated effort could be making the tomatoes more flavorful. And, heirlooms usually have more locules—the cavities with the seeds—than commercial hybrids. These locules are flavor centers, full of volatile compounds. Hybrids are less flavorful because they were never bred for flavor—although that is changing. Plus, heirlooms are often grown locally and allowed to ripen on the vine, as opposed to typical supermarket hybrids, which are picked when firm and green, and are ripened to redness in a warehouse with ethylene gas. When and how tomatoes ripen affects their flavor.

Heirlooms are better for you.
False: there is no evidence for this. Heirlooms don’t have more nutrients or anti-oxidants than hybrids.

A tomato tip.
Whether your shopping cart is full of heirlooms or hybrids, whether they’re red or yellow or deep purple, don’t put those tomatoes in the fridge. The cold temperature decreases whatever flavor they may have.

Under Governor Jerry Brown's proposed budget, state funding for the Williamson Act would be eliminated. Photo Credit: Jennifer Rusk

After plenty of winter rain, the hills of the Yolo Land and Cattle Company are especially green this year. That's a good thing, says owner Casey Stone, when you're raising grass-fed cattle.

"We've become more grass farmers than cow farmers. You gotta manage the whole resource and whole package," says Stone.

Stone and I are driving through his 7500-acre ranch in Yolo County, about 30 miles west of Sacramento. "These are some of our fall calvers out here," he says, pointing to just a few of his 700 Black Angus cattle, who, right now have fuzzy winter coats.

"There have only been a few families that have owned this ranch over the years since it was homesteaded back in the 1860s," he says. Stone's father started their cattle operation in the 1970s and he took advantage of the Williamson Act.

Listen to the QUEST radio story Land Preservation on the Chopping Block

Here's how it works: in exchange for agreeing not to develop their land, the Stones pay lower property taxes on their ranch. The program was created in 1965 to preserve open space in California. Today, it covers more than half of the state's farm and ranchland.

Under Governor Jerry Brown's proposed budget, state funding for the Williamson Act would be eliminated. "I think people have taken it for granted up until recently cause it's always been something that's out there," says Stone.

Stone says the program helps keep many ranchers afloat, given the volatile cattle market. "It's a very cyclical business. Eight years ago we were down in the dumps." Without the program, Stone expects his property taxes to jump 38 percent on the ranch. For his neighbors, he says, it could be higher and that creates pressure to subdivide the land. "In this type of area, everyone wants a ranchette in the country."

John Young, Yolo County Agricultural Commissioner, agrees. "The ranchers are gonna by far be hit the hardest here. The pressure on them is going to be to cut this acreage apart and start to sell it off chunk by chunk."

There may not be much development pressure today, but Young expects it to come back as the economy rebounds. And since ranchers need a lot of land to raise cattle, higher taxes will hit them hard. "Most farmers can't afford to pay those kind of taxes when it takes 40 acres for one cow/calf pair."

Counties will also be in a tight spot, if the legislature passes Brown's budget. Since counties collect lower property taxes under the program, the state usually reimburses them for the lost funds. In Yolo County, that's supposed to be 1.3 million dollars a year.

Of course, these days, all of California is facing some tough cuts, as Governor Brown said a few weeks ago. "Do I like the choices we face? No, I don't like them. But after serious study of the options left by a 25 billion dollar deficit, the budget I proposed is the best that I can devise," he said in the State of the State address.

John Young says it would fall to the counties to decide if they can continue the conservation program without state support. "Williamson Act is one of the best land conservation acts that's ever existed anywhere. So really this is a statewide issue. It shouldn't be on each individual county to decide that."

But the Williamson Act isn't just something that ranchers care about. On Howard Ranch, a 12,000-acre cattle ranch in eastern Sacramento County, Jaymee Marty is standing next to what looks like a small pond. Marty is an ecologist with the Nature Conservancy.

"A vernal pool is basically a season wetland and this is sort of a little hotspot of native diversity," she says.

These small wetlands may not seem like much, but every spring, they only appear in California's grasslands. By summer, they're completely dried up. "So you have you know hundreds of plant species that are found nowhere else in the world except in California in vernal pools." They're also home to species like ferry shrimp and tiger salamanders.

Two different vernal pools in Jaymee Marty's research. On the left is a pool that's been fenced off from cattle, while the pool on the right was left open. The fenced pool is choked with thatch and invasive weeds like Medusahead. Cattle have kept those plants down in the open pool, which Marty says is a more productive environment for tiger salamanders and other species that depend on these seasonal pools. Photos: Jaymee Marty and Jennifer Buck.

Ten years ago, Marty began a study to see if cattle were harming these tiny communities. "I thought that I was going to find that some species were really going to lose out in a grazed grassland."

Instead, Marty found that cattle help create a better environment for vernal pools. There are types of grazing that are not good for the ecosystem, says Marty, but studies have shown that rangeland is an important habitat for raptors and other wildlife.

That's why the loss of more than 500,000 acres of California ranchland over the last quarter century is a concern. "It's pretty shocking. Some counties have a lot more loss than others."

And that, says Marty, is where the Williamson Act comes in. "Really the only reason that this grassland is in existence today is because it has been ranched, because people have been able to make a living off of it."

That's why she sees the Williamson Act as an important conservation tool in California. But in Sacramento, the act is competing with schools and health care for limited funding. Legislators are now holding budget hearings that will decide the future of the program.

38.623317 -122.02352

Backyard chickens (credit: Meredith Hall)

The recent salmonella outbreak has led to a recall of half a billion eggs, and has sickened thousands of people. (Check this FDA page to see if the eggs in your fridge are safe to eat.) Many of the contaminated eggs have been traced to two giant farms in Iowa. It is not entirely clear what caused the outbreak—and there may have been multiple sources. But at least some of the contaminated eggs were laid by hens that ate contaminated chicken feed. Rodents carrying salmonella had gotten into the feed. In large-scale egg farms, salmonella can spread easily. Backyard chickens can still be subject to salmonella, but at least if you’re in charge of the coop, you can be sure to take precautions to keep your birds healthy.

These precautions include keeping the habitat clean, making sure the food isn’t contaminated by rodents or other animals (reptiles carry salmonella too), and maybe even vaccinating your chickens. Vaccination is common in the UK and other parts of Europe (though in this country, the FDA has deemed it unnecessary). I have no idea if vaccines are available for backyard birds—but it might be a good idea.

Not being a bird owner myself, I wondered how a first-time chicken raiser could learn about keeping birds healthy. I read Oakland urban farmer Novella Carpenter’s book Farm City, and I couldn’t remember if her mail-order poultry had come with instructions. Then, I found out that the USDA recently started a public education campaign on backyard bird health. And, urban homesteaders swap chicken husbandry tips thanks to internet sites like Meetup. There are whole communities out there, dedicated to raising healthy birds.

Still, I am not ready build a coop on my back porch and fill it with chickens. But the salmonella outbreak and the poultry experts at the Eat Real Festival reminded me that farmers, with their great knowledge of how animals and diseases and the environment are all entwined, are the world’s original ecologists.

To learn more about eggs and the differences between supermarket eggs or farm fresh eggs, watch City Egg, Country Egg on QUEST.

37.7941971 -122.2760333

Editor's Note: This week we have the first of two special reports on pesticide drift.

In this week's Quest radio piece, I talk to two pregnant organic onion workers who got sick after an apple farmer sprayed pesticides on a nearby orchard. Following a nearly three month investigation, the Kern County Ag Commissioner issued citations finding both the apple grower and the organic company at fault (see the citations here and here). Workers told me that even after the drift started, the organic farm's supervisor encouraged them to keep bunching onions, telling them to put handkerchiefs over their mouths to block out the smell of the insecticides.

Whenever a big pesticide drift accident like this happens, it raises important questions: How often do these kinds of incidents occur? Are things getting better for people in communities near where pesticides are sprayed?

That's hard to tell, because of the way the Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR) and County Ag Commissioners keep track of the data. There's no single enforcement code to categorize incidents as "agricultural drift affecting humans."

DPR does keep a statewide database of acute illness related to pesticides, as documented in worker’s comp or physician's records. Pesticide activists say those numbers are low, because many victims don't see a doctor. And doctors don't always know how to recognize symptoms of pesticide illness, or that they are supposed to report those cases.

And here's another twist: back in 2000, DPR changed its criteria for how it evaluates pesticide illness. So you can't compare the number of incidents from the 1990s with incidents today. All that makes it very difficult to determine if growers and regulators are really doing a better job keeping the public safe from chemicals drifting off the farm, especially after the passage of bills like the 2004 law sponsored by State Senator Dean Florez.

While that law clarified rules for emergency responders and required growers to pay medical bills for uninsured victims, it doesn't seem to have led to a dramatic drop in pesticide drift incidents.

In 2006, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed a bill that would have sped up pesticide drift investigations and increased penalties. Instead, he directed DPR to streamline the enforcement guidelines for counties. Ag Commissioners can now issue a maximum fine of 5,000 dollars for each person sickened by pesticide drift.

That's a penalty some advocates, like Californians for Pesticide Reform think is far too low to act as a deterrent.

Meanwhile, County Ag Commissioners are facing budget cutbacks that may shrink their enforcement teams. Many agriculture commissioners already have just six or seven pesticide enforcement inspectors to police thousands of farms.

The Department of Pesticide Regulation says it can't enforce the law unless drift incidents are reported. The department has launched a new campaign to educate fieldworkers about pesticide drift, printing up wallet-sized cards with a toll-free hotline number in English and Spanish.

Listen to the Catching the Drift radio report online.

35.23698 -118.91297