CIRS Blog about Rural California
June 23, 2017
After reflecting on this topic, I realized that the best summary available is the paper which Profs. Marc B. Schenker and Stephen A. McCurdy wrote with Heather E. Riden and myself titled Improving the health of agricultural workers and their families in California: current status and policy recommendations, published by the University of California Global Health Institute in February 2015.
Instead, I’ve decided to focus today on how Marc’s leadership and influence broadened the scope of research at the California Institute for Rural Studies (CIRS). In turn, the ultimate impacts of CIRS became greater than any of us could have ever imagined.
Prof. Marc Schenker and I met for the first time on June 6, 1990, at a Conference on Health Concerns of Living and Working in Agricultural California, sponsored by UC Cooperative Extension and the School of Public Health, UC Berkeley. CIRS was asked to bring community folks to the conference as panelists to discuss specific topics of current concern, and, as well, contribute an overview presentation about rural California. CIRS arranged for farm worker advocates, leaders from predominantly Mexican-American rural areas, and staff of agencies providing health services for farm workers to participate in the conference.
As a few who are here today were aware in 1990, it was risky of Marc to seek to engage me in his new initiative. Some eleven years earlier, I was part of an effort led by California Rural Legal Assistance, inspired by the late Ralph Abascal, to sue the Regents of the University of California for ignoring the needs of a great many rural Californians, most importantly, farmworkers, but also small-scale producers, organic farmers and the rural poor. We were not seeking monetary damages, rather we wanted major changes this public institution’s priorities.
Although we prevailed in Alameda County Superior Court, the lawsuit was thrown out by the California State Supreme Court ten years later. But, from the filing of the lawsuit, very quietly, the University of California helped to start or support the Small Farm Center, the Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education Program, and the Student Experimental Farm. Moreover, the controversial Alternatives in Agriculture course, begun in 1977, was added to the formal curriculum of the College of Agriculture.
It was in this context that Marc’s invitation was most welcome. Bob Spear had let it be known that one of the purposes of the conference was to scope the possible creation of a Center for Agricultural Health and Safety at UC Davis as part of the newly authorized Agricultural Worker Safety program of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. After the conference, Marc asked CIRS to become a coinvestigator of the new Center and prepare a research proposal as part of his grant proposal for which he was Principal Investigator.
Quite frankly, in 1990, I could never have imagined what the relationship with Marc’s initiative would eventually yield. When the first NIOSH grant was awarded to the Western Center for Agricultural Health and Safety, in one of the very first discussions with him, we agreed to collaborate in undertaking a population-based survey of farmworker health that would include a modest physical examination.
We approach a farmworker clinic in Parlier, a well-known farmworker community. Joined by a few folks from Marc’s research group, and by Dave Runsten from the CIRS staff, we went to Parlier where Arcadio Viveros, Executive Director of the United Health Centers clinic, and Mayor of Parlier, welcomed us and agreed to cooperate.
I clearly recall one of the first comments Marc made to me about our work.
“If it isn’t counted, it doesn’t count!
At that time, reliable information about farmworker health was quite limited. In the absence of accurate information, anecdotal reports were sometimes extrapolated to represent all farmworkers, who were mostly invisible.
The willingness of the United Health Centers Clinic to cooperate meant that we could focus on recruiting a representative sample of farmworkers participants.
With an unknown number of migrant workers in Parlier at the time of the raisin and tree fruit harvests, some of whom lived in sheds or other structures in the back yards of settled residents, we needed a strategy to insure every worker had a known chance to participate.
This is how we did it.
The illustration here is an example of Parlier’s back houses, found by walking the streets and alleys.
All dwellings were enumerated, both the front houses as well as any suspected dwelling where workers might be living, including garages and vehicles. After some fits and re-starts, mostly by CIRS staff, 150 randomly selected farmworkers participated. CIRS published a monograph later describing the experience under the title Finding Invisible Farm Workers. The Parlier Survey.
Later, in 1998, Prof. Steve McCurdy and CIRS gained the support of The California Endowment for a much larger survey, this time statewide, with a comprehensive physical examination. The California Agricultural Workers Health Survey (CAWHS) was headed by Profs. Bonnie Bade and Stephen McCurdy, Drs. Rick Mines and Steve Samuels, Ann Souter and myself with CIRS staffer Daniel Williams and, later, the late Dr. David Lighthall.
Five communities were randomly selected, each one representing one of five of the state’s six agricultural regions. For the sixth region, we purposefully selected another, and a seventh was added on the west-side of the San Joaquin Valley.
CAWHS finding included surprises, such as an unexpected prevalence of chronic health conditions, ranging from obesity to pre-diabetes conditions and poor dentition. Access to health care services was shocking: three-quarters of workers lacked health insurance. Housing conditions for many workers were terrible.
CAWHS, 1999, Findings
- Unexpected prevalence of chronic disease: obesity, pre-diabetes risk factors, high serum cholesterol, poor dentition.
- Lack of access to health care: three-quarters of workers lacked any form of health insurance
- While many male workers had never visited a U.S. health care provider, most female workers reported a recent visit.
- 11% of “dwellings” unrecognized by the USPS and assessor; 41% of male workers shared living quarters with unrelated persons.
- Unlike employment-based surveys of employed persons, some CAWHS participants had been injured at work and were unable to work at the time of the survey.
CIRS persuaded The California Endowment to provide $50 million in new funding for improving farmworker access to health care, as well as $30 of new funding to improve farmworker housing. Marc realized the significance of the findings: a young population of workers presenting obesity, increased risk of diabetes, and other indicators of poor health status, such as poor dentition.
Some years later, reflecting his commitment to public health, Marc joined with a major California grower-packer-shipper to develop a hands-on obesity prevention intervention at the company’s own health clinic. With Xochitl Castaneda, he created a Spanish-language program at the clinic.
Marc recognized that a prospective cohort study among a representative sample of farmworkers could inform efforts to address adverse health conditions found in the CAWHS. He initiated the MICASA prospective cohort research program in Mendota which also brought an oral health program to town.
WCAHS Prospective Cohort Health Study (MICASA), Mendota, California
- Enumerate all dwellings; random selection of dwellings; recruit participation by settled families, with a member employed in agriculture.
- Identify health risk factors at work and at home, as well as personal risk behaviors.
- MICAS engaged Prof. Jane Weintraub, UCSF Oral Health Disparities Program, to promote healthy dental care among all residents of Mendota.
- Currently studying risk behaviors in high-heat environments.
Marc’s hands-on initiatives in the community as part of a research agenda is in the best tradition of public health practice.
I want to turn briefly to one of the important achievements of the NIOSH Agricultural Safety Initiative, namely the development of safety interventions which were based on reliably accurate information on the work experience of agricultural workers.
The Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries, begun in 1992, is now regarded as a reliable source of information concerning acute fatal injuries in agriculture. The latest report for California is for 2015.
Occupational Fatalities, California, 2015
Source: Cal-DIR, CFOI, 2015; BLS, QCEW
|Industry category (NAICS)||Hired workers||Self-employed workers|
|Crop production (111)||16||3|
|Animal production (112)||4||0|
|Farm labor contractors and crew leaders (115115)||23||0|
|Total occupational fatalities||43||3|
|Annual average employment (FTE)||377,808||n.a.|
|Rate per 100,000 FTE||11.4||n.a.|
Regrettably, we don’t yet have a reliably accurate source of information about non-fatal occupational injuries and illnesses in agriculture. Congress forbids OSHA and NIOSH from systematically collecting information from farms with fewer than 11 workers. Most U.S. farms with hired workers have fewer than 11 employees.
Survey of Occupational Injuries & Illnesses
Footnote 5. “Excludes farms with fewer than 11 employees.”
This is a consequence of the “small farm” exclusion of OSHA.
As many of you know, the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, which established a minimum wage, the 40-hour work week, overtime pay and child labor standards, excluded agricultural and domestic workers. As Ira Katznelson history of Congressional deliberations of FLSA, titled Fear Itself, demonstrates, this exclusion was by the Jim Crow Congress of that time which sought to keep black workers from enjoying the same rights as white workers. Agricultural exceptionalism policy dates from that time. Our future task it turn that around.
I want to conclude my comments today with a heartfelt “Thank you!” to Marc for his many contributions and for launching CIRS in a new direction which I could never have anticipated.
The California Department of Water Resources reported in April 2017 that 90 inches of precipitation fell in the northern Sierra mountains, breaking the previous record set in 1982-83. California has one of the most variable climates in North America.
Most precipitation occurs during the winter months, and melting snow is moved from mountains in the north to farmers and urban consumers in the center and southern parts of the state via a system of dams and canals. The Sierra Nevada snowpack usually provides a third of the state's water supply.
Governor Jerry Brown proposed to move water around the environmentally sensitive Delta where the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers empty into the San Francisco Bay by building twin tunnels expected to cost $16 billion. The California WaterFix is controversial, generally opposed by Delta residents and farmers. The water agencies south of the Delta are expected to decide by September 2017 whether they will help to pay for the project to move water around the Delta to pumps near Tracy.
Cadiz Inc owns about 50 square miles of land above a major aquifer in the Cadiz Valley, and wants to sell the water to southern California cities. The Mojave Desert Land Trust and most environmentalists oppose the project, but the Trump administration appears to favor allowing Cadiz to pump 50,000 acre feet of water a year from the aquifer.
California's fire season began in July 2017, with major fires around the state burning the grasses and shrubs that resulted from the record rainfall of 2016-17.
By Brian Shobe
The California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) is now accepting public comments on its draft Requests for Grant Applications (RGA) for the $6.75 million Healthy Soils Program (HSP), authorized by the Budget Act of 2016, and funded through California’s cap-and-trade program.
The Healthy Soils Program offers grants to farmers who take action to capture greenhouse gas emissions, such as carbon dioxide, in the soil to help combat climate change.
The Healthy Soils Program will be implemented under two separate components: 1) the $3.75 million Incentives Program and 2) the $3 million Demonstration Projects. For the Incentives Program, an estimated $3.75 million in competitive grant funding will be awarded to provide financial assistance for implementation of agricultural management practices that sequester soil carbon and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Noé Montes has photographed and interviewed people in the Eastern Coachella Valley for two and a half years as part of a photo documentary project (which can be found at https://coachellafarmworkers.com). Recently, he answered the Rural California Report's questions about what the work.
Rural California Report: What is the Coachella Valley Farm Workers project and how long have you been working on it?
Noé Montes: It is a photo documentary project about the community of farmworkers in the Eastern Coachella Valley. It focuses on the individuals that are working in various capacities to address the many social justice issues and issues of inequality that exist in the community. Most of the people photographed and interviewed have been farmworkers themselves or are the children of farmworkers. It is comprised of photography, writing and audio interviews. I started working on this in January of 2015.
Photo of Castulo Estrada by Noé Montes
RCR: What inspired you to pick the Coachella Valley? Why did you want to photograph farmworkers and other community members there?
NM: One of the main reasons I wanted to photograph and interview farmworkers is that I myself come from family of farmworkers and I know that there is a lot of value on the community. There is a lot to learn from about how to develop our communities in a positive way. A lot of the previous work done about farmworkers focuses on the problems in the community and often farmworkers are depicted very simply, either as examples of inequality or to illustrate some social justice issue. I wanted to add to the conversation and our understanding of this community and see what we can all learn from them.
I picked the Coachella Valley because it is a good representative example of a rural farmworker community in California. It is a microcosm that contains all the elements present in many rural American communities. Logistically it also worked in that it is close enough to where I live (Los Angeles) that I was able to travel there regularly and often.
The number of Braceros admitted to the U.S. between 1942 and 1964 was almost five million. Many Mexicans returned year after year, so one to two million individuals accounted for the five million Bracero admissions.
During the peak year of 1956, over 445,000 Braceros were admitted to work on U.S. crop farms. Many Braceros were in the U.S. only for several months, so that an estimated 126,000 full-time equivalent jobs were filled by Braceros in 1956, a ratio of 3.5 Braceros per FTE job, suggesting that Braceros worked an average 3.4 months each. This average duration of three to four months was stable throughout the 1950s.
The average employment of hired workers on U.S. farms in 1956 was two million, suggesting that 126,000 FTE Braceros were six percent of the average hired farm workforce. Braceros were concentrated in California and other Pacific states, where there were an average of only 300,000 hired workers, making Braceros a third or more of average employment.
BY MICHAEL DOYLE AND SEAN COCKERHAM
WASHINGTON —California loses big time in President Donald Trump’s proposed fiscal 2018 budget, made public to scathing political reviews Tuesday.
Some Central Valley farm spending would fall. Nutrition programs would shrink. Certain school grants would be handcuffed, University of California research would be curtailed and reimbursements ended for the state’s incarceration of law-breaking unauthorized immigrants.
While slashing social safety nets, Trump wants a 10 percent increase in military spending and $1.6 billion in funding for a wall on the border with Mexico – a small amount for a massive project estimated to cost between $22 billion and nearly $70 billion to construct.
House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Bakersfield, defended the plans. “The White House has produced a strong, conservative budget,” he said. “While I continue to review the details, it’s obvious that the White House sticks to what is right by prioritizing defense and balancing the budget in 10 years.”
Deemed dead on arrival by congressional Democrats, Trump’s $4.1 trillion budget proposal for the new year that starts Oct. 1 disheartened some Republican lawmakers, as well. Everyone agrees it’s only a starting point for negotiations, albeit one with particular consequences for the state that Trump lost by 4.3 million votes last November.
Earlier this month, on behalf of the California Climate & Agriculture Network (CalCAN), I attended two unique and thought-provoking international conferences in Paris, France. The following is a report back on the two events.
The by-invitation conferences were loosely coordinated and overlapping, and both were the first of their kind. They were attended by approximately 350 people from at least 40 countries and every continent. Several CalCAN partners attended, as did Jenny Lester-Moffitt, Deputy Secretary with CDFA.
The Future of Food in a Changing World was organized by the Global Alliance for the Future of Food, a collaboration of philanthropic foundations. The first conference brought together 250 experts and leaders from the local to the global to gain deeper insights into the connections between climate change and food systems, to craft visions of the food systems we need today and tomorrow, and to chart potential pathways to get there.
The second conference was titled Sequestering Carbon in Soil: Addressing the Climate Threat and was organized by Breakthrough Strategies & Solutions, philanthropic consultants. I served as a conference planning committee member along with others from Canada, Germany, France, Ghana and California. We met for six months leading up to the conference to provide input on the conference objectives, structure, content, speakers and participants.
BY SEAN COCKERHAM AND MICHAEL DOYLE
WASHINGTON — California Republicans representing some of the nation’s most Obamacare-dependent areas in America took a giant political risk on Thursday by voting to repeal the landmark health care law, as they believed their political danger was eased as they got something to brag about back home.
They said they were convinced for much the same reason as so many other undecided Republicans who helped give GOP leaders the health care win they had so desperately sought: The addition of $8 billion to the bill to help with insurance costs for people with pre-existing conditions.
The congressmen dismissed estimates that the money isn’t nearly enough: an analysis by the liberal Center for American Progress said it would subsidize care for only 76,000 people out of millions.
California, which had one of its wettest years ever in 2016-17, declared a drought emergency in January 2014 and ended it in April 2017. Over 30 inches of rain fell in parts of the Central Valley that normally receive less than 20 inches, and some Sierra mountain areas received over 60 feet of snow.
Instead of worrying about whether there would be enough water for summer irrigation, many water managers worried about having enough room in dams and reservoirs to prevent flooding. The water content of the Sierra snowpack, which normally peaks in April, was over 160 percent of average in April 2017, compared to five percent of average in April 2015. In 1983, the April Sierra snowpack had a water content that was over 200 percent of average.
California normally uses about 33 million acre feet of water, including 26 million acre feet for farming and nine million acre feet for consumers and industry. Among urban residents, half of water is used for lawns and landscaping.
In normal rain years, about 38 percent of the water used for agricultural irrigation is groundwater. During drought years, less surface water is conveyed via dams and canals, and groundwater is 60 percent of agricultural irrigation water. Land often subsides as water is pumped from underground, falling 50 feet or more in many areas of the San Joaquin Valley during the 2012-16 drought.
WASHINGTON —Organic growers in California and other farm states appear split over an industry promotion proposal that’s blossomed into a heated dispute.
Some growers want aseparate program that touts organic products in much the same way that other programs promote cotton, beef or eggs. Others want no part of generic advertising for organics funded by industry “check-off” fees.
With a Wednesday public comment deadline imminent, more than 11,000 public responses had flooded the Agriculture Department as of Friday. The volume and pace of the organic program commentaries led the “What’s Trending” section of the entire federal regulatory website, and they reflect wildly different perspectives.
On the one hand:
“The check-off model provides a tried and true vehicle for the organic sector to invest our own dollars in our collective continued growth at no cost to the taxpayer,” Steven Nichols, a certified organic egg producer in San Bernardino County, stated on April 6.
On the other:
“I have been an organic farmer in California for the past 10 years and the last thing I need is another layer of burdensome, time consuming and costly overhead to my already very busy life,” Fresno County farmer Eldon Thiesen wrote the Agriculture Department on March 23.
Agriculture has two major sectors, crops and livestock. Crops require the most hired workers, many of whom work seasonally, while livestock employs a higher share of year-round workers. Total crop labor expenditures were $23 billion in 2012, and livestock labor expenditures were $10 billion.
All data sources agree that California has about 30 percent of U.S. crop worker employment, followed by three states with 5 to 6 percent, Washington, Florida and Texas. Two more states have about 3 percent of crop worker employment, Michigan and Oregon, so that over half of crop worker employment is in six states.
The distribution of hours worked in livestock is different. Texas and California each have 10 percent of livestock hours worked, followed by Wisconsin with 6 percent and Iowa and New York with almost 4 percent each, so that one third of livestock hours worked are in the five leading states. Livestock hours are less concentrated than crop hours because there is no California among livestock states.
WASHINGTON—Fresno resident and folklorist Amy Kitchener will help tend the nation’s collective memories as a trustee of the American Folklife Center at the Library of Congress.
The co-founder and executive director of the Alliance for California Traditional Arts, with offices in Fresno, San Francisco, Santa Cruz and Los Angeles, Kitchener has been tapped for a six-year term on the American Folklife Center’s board of trustees. The position will put her atop a world-class archive and expose her to a wide array of cultural movers and shakers.
“We’re the stewards, guiding the center,” Kitchener said in an interview March 7. “It’s an exciting prospect.”
Congress established the American Folklife Center in 1976 to “preserve and present American folklife” through research, documentation, archival preservation, live performance and more. The center, among other efforts, hosts the Veterans History Project, which stores the personal accounts of American war veterans, as well as the Civil Rights History Project.