Food safety and environmental quality impose conflicting demands on Central Coast growers
Authors AffiliationsM. Beretti is Program Director, Resource Conservation District of Monterey County, Salinas; D. Stuart is Doctoral Candidate, Department of Environmental Studies, UC Santa Cruz.
Hilgardia 62(2):68-73. DOI:10.3733/ca.v062n02p68. April 2008.
Growers of fresh produce on the Central Coast of California currently face conflicting demands regarding measures to protect food safety and those to protect environmental quality. To explore the extent of conflicting pressures and identify the range of possible impacts on the environment, we conducted a survey of Central Coast irrigated-row-crop growers during spring 2007. The results indicate that growers are experiencing a clear conflict, and some are incurring economic hardships because their practices to protect the environment have resulted in the rejection of crops by buyers. In addition, some growers are being encouraged to or are actively removing conservation practices for water quality, and most growers are taking action to discourage or eliminate wildlife from and adjacent to croplands. These actions could affect large areas of land on the Central Coast and, as indicated by growers, they are likely to increase over time.
Bihn EA. Food Safety Begins on the Farm: Reduce Microbial Contamination with Good Agricultural Practices. 2004. Cornell University, Department of Horticulture. 2 p. www.gaps.cornell.edu/Educationalmaterials/Samples/PamphletEng.pdf .
Brittingham MC, Temple SA, Duncan RM. A survey of the prevalence of selected bacteria in wild birds. J Wildlife Dis. 1988. 24(2):299-307.
[Cal EPA] California Environmental Protection Agency. Water Quality: Irrigated Agricultural Waivers Program. State Water Resources Control Board. 2007. www.waterboards.ca.gov/agwaivers (accessed Feb. 15, 2008).
[CDC] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2006. Multistate outbreak of E. coli O157 infections, November-December 2006. www.cdc.gov/ecoli/2006/december/121406.htm (accessed June 15, 2007).
[CDHS/FDA] California Department of Health Services and US Food and Drug Administration. Investigation of an Escherichia coli O157:H7 Outbreak Associated with Dole Pre-Packaged Spinach. 2007. Sacramento CA: www.DHS.ca.gov .
Chapman PA, Siddons CA, Malo ATC, Harkin MA. A 1-year study of Escherichia coli O157 in cattle, sheep, pigs and poultry. Epidemiol Infect. 1997. 119(2):245-50. doi:10.1017/S0950268897007826 https://doi.org/doi:10.1017/S0950268897007826 PubMed PMID: 9363024
[FDA] US Food and Drug Administration. Guidance for Industry: Guide to Minimize Microbial Food Safety Hazards for Fresh Fruits and Vegetables. Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition. 1998. Washington, DC: www.cfsan.fda.gov/~dms/prodguid.html .
Fenlon DR. Seagulls (Larus spp) as vectors of Salmonellae: An investigation into the range of sero-types and numbers of Salmonellae in gull feces. J Hygiene. 1981. 86(2):195-202.
Fischer JR, Zhao T, Doyle MP, et al. Experimental and field studies of Escherichia coli O157:H7 in white-tailed deer. Appl Env Microbiol. 2001. 67(3):1218-24. doi:10.1128/AEM.67.3.1218-1224.2001 https://doi.org/doi:10.1128/AEM.67.3.1218-1224.2001
Greenway M. The role of constructed wetlands in secondary effluent treatment and water reuse in subtropical and Australia. Ecol Engin. 2005. 25(5):501-9. doi:10.1016/j.ecoleng.2005.07.008 https://doi.org/doi:10.1016/j.ecoleng.2005.07.008
Hancock DD, Besser TE, Rice DH, et al. Multiple sources of Escherichia coli O157 in feedlots and dairy farms in the northwestern USA. Prevent Vet Med. 1998. 35(1):11-9. doi:10.1016/S0167-5877(98)00050-6 https://doi.org/doi:10.1016/S0167-5877(98)00050-6
Hench KR, Bissonnette GK, Sexstone AJ, et al. Fate of physical, chemical, and microbial contaminants in domestic wastewater following treatment by small constructed wetlands. Water Res. 2003. 37(4):921-7. doi:10.1016/S0043-1354(02)00377-9 https://doi.org/doi:10.1016/S0043-1354(02)00377-9 PubMed PMID: 12531275
Jay MT, Cooley M, Carychao D, et al. Escherichia coli O157:H7 in feral swine near spinach fields and cattle, central coast. Emerg Infectious Dis. 2007. 13(12):1908-11.
Kadlec RH, Knight RL. Treatment Wetlands.. 1996. Boston: Lewis. 893 p.
Koelsch RK, Lorimor JC, Mankin KR. Vegetative treatment systems for management of open lot runoff: Review of literature. Appl Eng Agric. 2006. 22(1):141-53.
[MBNMS] Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary. Water Quality Protection Program. Action Plan IV: Agriculture and Rural Lands. 1999. Monterey, CA: http://montereybay.noaa.gov/resourcepro/reports/agactioniv_99/ag99_about.html .
Meerburg BG, Bonde M, Brom FWA, et al. Towards sustainable management of rodents in organic animal husbandry. Njas-Wageningen J Life Sci. 2004. 52(2):195-205.
Nokes RL, Gerba CP, Karpisak MM. Microbial water quality improvement by small scale on-site subsurface wetland treatment. J Env Sci Health Part A-Toxic/Hazardous Substances and Env Eng. 2003. 38(9):1849-55.
Sargeant JM, Hafer DJ, Gillespie JR, et al. Prevalence of Escherichia coli O157:H7 in white-tailed deer sharing rangeland with cattle. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 1999. 215(6):792-4. PubMed PMID: 10496130
Somarelli JA, Makarewicz JC, Sia R, Simon R. Wildlife identified as major source of Escherichia coli in agriculturally dominated watershed by BOX A1R-derived genetic fingerprints. J Env Manage. 2007. 82:60-5. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2005.12.013 https://doi.org/doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2005.12.013
Stuart DL. Reconciling Food Safety and Environmental Protection: A Literature Review (1st Ed.). Resource Conservation District of Monterey County. 2006. Salinas, CA: www.rcdmonterey.org .
Stuart D, Shennan C, Brown M. Food Safety versus Environmental Protection on the Central California Coast: Exploring the Science Behind the Apparent Conflict. UC Santa Cruz, Center for Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems. 2006. Res Brf #10. http://casfs.ucsc.edu/publications/briefs/index.html .
Tate KW, Atwill ER, Bartolome JW, Nader G. Significant Escherichia coli attenuation by vegetative buffers on annual grasslands. J Env Qual. 2006. 35:795-805. doi:10.2134/jeq2005.0141 https://doi.org/doi:10.2134/jeq2005.0141
Also in this issue:Tree Taper Model Volume Equations: I. Bark Taper Equations for California Conifers
UC agriculture programs: Investing in California's future
Cooperative conservation could save tricolored blackbirds
Plans to control light brown apple moth stir controversy
Light brown apple moth's arrival in California worries commodity groups
Methyl bromide alternatives evaluated for California strawberry nurseries
Transition to conservation tillage evaluated in San Joaquin Valley cotton and tomato rotations