| Two-dollar-a-gallon diesel fuel. Soaring
electric rates when power is available. Rapidly
rising costs of fertilizer, farm chemicals, machinery,
labor, insurance everything a grower buys. Deep
cuts in water allocations. And the lowest farm commodity
prices in recent memory. The summer of 01 wont
soon be forgotten.
Rising costs, critical shortages of essential inputs,
and low farm prices have combined for a triple whammy
on California growers.
Ive been farming since 1974 and Ive
never seen an era like this, says Art Bowman,
Blue Diamond grower and partner in Salida Ag Chem.
Gerry Rominger agrees. The Arbuckle grower and Blue
Diamond board member says, In years past, from
time to time, weve had a high fuel price or high
fertilizer price or low almond price, but this year
everything from both ends is hitting us at once. All
of my inputs are expensive and everything I sell is
cheap. Its a squeeze. I dont think thats
ever happened to this extent before.
To be sure, California almond growers are experiencing
one of the most difficult cost-price squeezes in history.
The price side of the equation is the result of another
in the almond industrys long series of boom and
bust cycles. Rising costs of inputs are the result of
an unusual combination of events that will, like the
imbalance in almond supply, work itself out over time.
Growers who remember the 70s and 80s know
that good and bad times come in cycles. Every time that
almond supplies and consumption have gotten out of balance,
consumption eventually caught up to crop production
and grower prices returned to profitable levels. That
process is underway now, as Blue Diamond, the Almond
Board and other handlers work to expand almond consumption
in the U.S. and abroad.
In every market cycle since 1910, your cooperative
has spearheaded sales growth and the long-term development
of the almond market. With your continued support, your
cooperative will again lead the way back to profitable
grower returns. Meanwhile, Blue Diamond has cut operating
costs and increased efficiency at all levels
improvements that will strengthen your bottom line.
Blue Diamond, along with other farm organizations,
is also working hard to ease the strain in the water
and power markets. We make your needs known to the policy
makers and monitor progress toward resolving those issues.
The current crisis will pass, but in the meantime we
have to deal as best we can with the difficulties that
this triple whammy has dealt us. This article and those
that follow in future issues of Almond Facts will offer
tips on how to maximize your returns, minimize your
crop production costs and maintain crop quality while
protecting the future productivity of your orchard.
We welcome your feedback and ideas that can be shared
with your fellow growers. Contact your field supervisor.
WRESTLING WATER WOES
Tips on when and how to reduce water use
A lighter-than-normal Sierra snow pack and below-normal
precipitation for most of the state combined for tight
water supplies for agriculture and power production
in 2001. According to official reports, the state averaged
just 75 percent of normal for all precipitation for
October 1, 2000 through March 2001. But runoff projections
for the important watersheds of the west slope of the
Sierra that produce water and power for agriculture
ranged from a scant 46 percent of normal on the American
River to a high of just 63 percent on the Tuolumne River.
The Upper Sacramento watershed managed to accumulate
a 74 percent of normal supply. The bottom line for many
irrigators is that 2001 will be a very challenging year.
The major state and federal projects announced updated
water allocations in March that did little to encourage
their customers. The Central Valley Project announced
that agricultural contractors north of the Sacramento-San
Joaquin Delta will get 60 percent of their base allocation
while those south of the Delta will get only 40 percent.
The State Water Project, which had announced a 25 percent
allocation at the beginning of the year, increased that
to 30 percent on the strength of better-than-average
precipitation in February. Local districts with their
own supplies have widely varying allocations.
Growers who have ample groundwater available to augment
their surface supplies may make it through the growing
season with little or no strain assuming they
get enough power (or diesel) to run their pumps as much
as they would like. Others, such as growers on the west
side of the San Joaquin Valley, who have little or no
useable groundwater and only a 30 percent allocation
from the State have a serious challenge, says Blake
Sanden, irrigation specialist with Kern County Cooperative
Extension. Many of those growers have told Sanden that
they are reducing their row crop acreage in order to
have more water for their orchards.
Except for the fortunate few who have ample supplies
of water with little or no requirement for pumping,
2001 presents a water-management challenge to stretch
the available supply to make a crop not only this year
but assure one for next year, as well, while minimizing
pumping expense.
Fortunately there are water-management tools available
to help cope with this challenge. Growers who havent
already done so can adopt a water budget or follow the
advice of university researchers on deficit irrigation
of almonds. The conclusions drawn from field trials
of various deficit irrigation regimes could prove useful
this year, as might some of the following ideas on testing
irrigation system efficiency and minimizing power costs
by maximizing pumping efficiency.
Adopt A Water Budget
If a little bit of something is a good thing, more is
better. Thats a common line of reasoning. But
in a dry year, more may not be possible. Water supplies
being as low as 30 percent of normal in some areas leaves
little or no wiggle room, making cautious allocation
of a scarce resource imperative.
Tim Jacobsen of the Center for Irrigation Technology
at California State University, Fresno, says, Some
growers tend to over-irrigate. The reason they do is
because it is easier than applying the correct amount
of water. The thinking goes, if you are going to err,
err on the side of too much, not too little. With limited
water supplies this year, now would be a good time to
adopt a water budget to minimize waste and maximize
results.
Water budgeting helps growers know when, how much and
how to irrigate. It aims for optimum irrigation levels
by matching irrigation applications to the needs of
the trees and soil water holding capacity.
Using readily available programs, you calculate
your outgo your ET, how much water your trees
are using under current atmospheric conditions
and how much your soil will hold in the root zone,
Jacobsen explains. Then you irrigate to refill
the root zone by figuring how much water to apply and
at what rate.
Setting up a water budget takes some time and effort,
but once the initial work is done, it is relatively
easy to maintain and pays big benefits in crop performance
and irrigation efficiency, Jacobsen says.
To obtain more information on water budgeting contact
your farm advisor or visit Wateright on line at www.wateright.org
or the Department of Water Resources California Irrigation
Management Information System (CIMIS) site at www.dwr.water.ca.gov.
Deficit Irrigation
If it appears that you may not have a normal
supply of water this year, you may want to consider
adopting a deficit irrigation regime. University researchers
have found ways to stretch limited supplies while minimizing
damage to crops or trees. Their advice could be useful
not only this season but for the next few years. Drought
conditions often last for several seasons, so the long-term
effects of reduced irrigation should be considered.
Sanden, the Kern County Extension irrigation specialist,
advocates an approach that limits crop losses in the
current year to 10- to 15-percent kernel weight shrinkage
while protecting next years crop. This approach,
based on university research, places any necessary water
stress in the pre-harvest period while giving full irrigations
post-harvest, in September.
The Crucial Factor
Regardless of how much water a grower has,
he says, the single most important thing an almond
grower can do to help preserve next years crop
is to put on a minimum of 6 inches, preferably 9 inches,
of water in a couple of post harvest irrigations.
Dont worry about putting on water early in the
season, he counsels. What you do not want to do
is irrigate at 100 percent early in the season, then
cut it off 40 or 50 days before harvest.
Recommended Regime
If someone tells me he has only 2 feet of water
to work with, my recommendation is to irrigate at a
50 percent deficit until the first of July, about three
weeks before irrigation cut-off for normal harvest,
Sanden says. In the first week of July pump the
soil profile back up with 4 to 6 inches of water, then
cut off irrigation about two weeks before harvest. Then,
if he can, if he has micro-sprinklers or a drip system,
he should put on an inch or inch and a half of water
in between the Nonpareil and pollinator harvests. After
picking up the pollinators, he should put on the rest
of the water.
Sanden offers some other advice: A two-week harvest
cut-off is okay if a grower can put on 3 or 4 inches
of water the first week of July. The bare minimum is
a 50-percent deficit irrigation until harvest cut-off.
But if you follow a 50 percent deficit regime all the
way without a boost in early July, dont cut off
irrigation until 7 days before harvest. Then put on
the 6 to 9 inches post-harvest. If you follow this program,
you will probably lose 10 to 15 percent in shrinkage,
but youll assure yourself of a crop next year.
Field Trial Findings
Sanden bases his advice on a four-year deficit irrigation
study in which university researchers looked at long-term
effects on almonds of applying reduced amounts of water
at different times of the growing season. The effects
of the different regimes varied greatly.
The researchers concluded that with reduced irrigation
supplies, irrigation timing plays a pivotal role in
maximizing kernel yield, both in the stress year and
the following season. As a result of their study,
the researchers recommend biasing the stress to
the pre-harvest period, since it maintains fruit load,
albeit at the expense of kernel size, while assuring
a good fruit load the following season. The critical
finding, they said, is severe post harvest stress
must be avoided.
The project was led by Dr. David A. Goldhamer, Extension
Irrigation Management Specialist at the Kearney Agricultural
Center. His collaborators were Mario Viveros, Kern County
Farm Advisor; Beth Teviotdale, Extension Plant Pathologist,
and Walt Bentley, Extension Entomologist, Kearney Ag
Center. They conducted their tests in a mature orchard
on microsprink-lers near McFarland in Kern County.
ALMOND STRESS TOLERANT?
The research team set out to determine if there are
periods during the growing season when almond trees
are relatively tolerant of stress. Their methodology,
called regulated deficit irrigation (RDI) purposely
stresses trees at specific times of the season. If their
assumption that almond trees can tolerate well-timed
stress proved correct, they would be able to recommend
a regime that, in a normal water year, would save water
without reducing nut yields or quality. And in a drought
year, a successful RDI program would minimize the impact
of severely restricted irrigation on the current and
future crops.
Goldhamer and his associates experimented with three
seasonal irrigation amounts, each applied with three
different stress-timing regimes and compared these with
a control. The orchards potential water use (ETc)
was about 39 acre-inches per acre. The three experimental
deficit irrigation levels were 22, 28 and 34 acre-inches
per acre.
The A treatment imposed the stress primarily
before harvest while reserving some water for post-harvest
irrigation. In the 28-inch or 30-percent deficit irrigation
regime, the A trials received 100 percent of the normal
amount of irrigation in March and April, 50 percent
of normal May through July, and 100 percent of normal
August through mid-October, with a 50-percent application
the last half of October.
The B treatments did just the opposite,
emphasizing pre-harvest irrigation with relatively little
water for post-harvest. The B plots in the 30 percent
deficit regime received 100 percent of normal irrigation
through May, 50 percent in June and July, 100 percent
August through mid-September, and finished the season
with a 50 percent application in late September.
The C treatments stressed the trees all
season long. These orchards received 70 percent of normal
March through mid-November.
In the 22-inch regime, the A treatments got 100 percent
March through mid-April, 50 percent mid-April through
June, none the first half of July, 50 percent the second
half of July through mid-August, 100 percent the second
half of August through September, and 50 percent the
first half of October. The B treatment received 100
percent through mid-April, 50 percent from mid-April
through July, 100 percent through August, and finished
with a 50 percent application in early September. The
C treatment received 55 percent March through mid-November.
To enhance hull split and successful flower bud development,
the team took care regardless of the seasonal
irrigation amount to provide as much water as
possible in the 4-week period just before and after
harvest in both the A and B regimes.
Result: Avoid Post-Harvest Stress
While different irrigation levels and stress timing
influenced kernel size, there was little variation year
to year, the team reported. But the different treatments
greatly affected nut load. The B and C treatments in
the 22-inch and the B treatment in the 28-inch regimes
produced significantly lower nut loads in subsequent
crops. Goldhamer said that they attribute the decline
in nut load in those treatments to stress during
the post-harvest period interfering with reproductive
bud development. Our earlier work showed that post-harvest
stress reduces fruit set the following season.
There was a strong correlation between 1995 pre-dawn
leaf water potential (an indicator of stress) in early-mid-October
and 1996 fruit load, he added. This reduction
in fruit load due to post-harvest stress was primarily
responsible for declining kernel yields with time in
the B and C treatments.
Crop Effects Vary
Kernel Size: The size of kernels declined regardless
of stress timing with the most severe deficit irrigation,
the 22- and 28-inch treatments. Kernel size reduction
was greatest with the A treatment that emphasizes pre-harvest
stress in order to reserve more water for post-harvest
irrigation. The C treatment that stresses trees all
season long affected kernel size the least.
Nut Load: The A treatments (most water post-harvest)
had the least impact on nut load. In fact, says Goldhamer,
the A trials had slightly higher nut loads than the
control in the most severe 22- and 28-inch
treatments.
Kernel Yield: Yields from year to year in the 22- and
28-inch treatments were least affected by the A regime,
and were most reduced by the B regime. There were no
statistically significant differences in yield for the
34-inch regime compared to the control. The C treatment
had the highest yield of the test regimes, identical
to the control.
Unusual Relationship
For most crops, the relationship between yield and plant
water use (ETc) is assumed to be linear, says Goldhamer.
For example, reducing water use by 30 percent
would suggest that yield would be reduced by 30 percent.
But Goldhamers team discovered that this straight-line
relationship does not apply to almonds. For example,
a 45 percent reduction in ETc (the 22-inch treatment)
with both A and C timing regimes reduced kernel yield
by 15 percent, he explains. A 30 percent
reduction in ETc reduced kernel yield by less than 10
percent with the A and C regimes. But the B treatment
resulted in yield reductions more like those expected
in a 1:1 yield to water use relationship.
Save Some for Post-Harvest
The clear conclusion of the deficit irrigation study
is that front-loading your irrigation and leaving nothing
for post-harvest is not the way to go. The best yields
over time came from orchards that were stressed in the
pre-harvest months but received full irrigation post-harvest.
This strategy resulted in no reduction in nut loads;
any reduction in yields was due to smaller fruit size
|