Starting this week, farmers in the San Joaquin Valley will be prohibited from burning agricultural waste in the open, a decades-old legal mandate aimed at improving air quality.
The near-total ban on agricultural pruning and mass burning of field crops, as well as the mass burning of orchards and vineyards taken out of production, comes from the agricultural powerhouse of San Joaquin, home to some of the worst ozone and particle pollution. It marks a major change for the Valley. domestically. The state has long pushed to reduce burns, citing high rates of respiratory illnesses in the region and other health concerns related to poor air quality.
However, the regulation has encountered fierce opposition among producers and local officials who argue that more expensive alternatives to waste disposal impose burdens on California farmers and put them at a competitive disadvantage. .
The burning ban stems from Senate Bill 705, a bill signed into law in 2003 that aimed to phase out agricultural burning in the San Joaquin Valley by 2010. To appease opponents, the bill included a provision that would give the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District leeway. A deadline will be set if it is determined that “no economically viable alternatives exist” to eliminate waste. The district repeats the same action every year, with extensions granted by the state Air Resources Board.
An incinerator in the city of Madera in the San Joaquin Valley leaves piles of discarded grape vines and ash from agricultural waste.
(Thomas Obare/For the Times)
In 2021, local air districts and the Air Resources Board will gradually phase in the law, starting with large-scale farm operations, with the goal of almost completely banning open burning by January 1, 2025. agreed to do so. Congress appropriated $180 million that the Air Resources Board could use for burn-alternative funding.
This time, the deadline is approaching. As of Wednesday, the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District can now issue agricultural burning permits only for specific crops and disease prevention.
Former state Sen. Dean Flores, a San Joaquin Valley Democrat who authored the bill and until recently served on the Air Resources Board, called the milestone “very emotional.” Although he initially advocated for an immediate ban on burning, he said, “I have come to realize that real progress often requires compromise and patience.”
“Farmers needed time to adopt new technologies and practices, and this time has made this transition more sustainable and permanent,” Flores said. “The best thing right now is knowing that this moment is decisive. There are no delays, no loopholes, and no turning back.”
Historically, San Joaquin Valley producers incinerated more than 1 million tons of agricultural waste annually, according to the Air District. Black smoke swirled skyward, spewing particulate pollution. Short-term exposure to these particles is associated with asthma attacks, acute and chronic bronchitis, and premature death. Long-term exposure is associated with decreased lung function and early death in children.
Amid the wind-down, producers incinerated about 125,000 tonnes of agricultural waste in 2022 and 122,000 tonnes in 2023, down from 480,000 tonnes in 2021.
Meanwhile, in both 2022 and 2023, nearly 2 million tons of waste was processed through the Air District program, offsetting the cost of chipping, shredding, and mulching agricultural waste. The silver firing replacement grant program, which relies on state and local funding, will be funded through June 30, district spokeswoman Jaime Holt said.
Wine grape growers in the San Joaquin Valley are reluctantly preparing for the ban, said Jeff Vitter, president of Allied Grape Growers.
“It didn’t happen overnight,” Vitter said. As convenient. ”
Growers are tearing up vineyards due to age and damage, and some are removing red wine grapes due to changing market tastes, Bitter said. He said it would cost “a lot more money” to keep it from burning, estimated at four times that amount.
“None of this is good for producers,” Bitter said. “This is what they have to endure based on the laws that have been enacted and the fulfillment of their obligations.”
With the burning ban in effect, his organization is advising its members if they plan to relocate their vineyards to do so while grants are still available.
Manuel Cunha Jr., president of the Nisei Farmers League, said the grant is a “huge asset” and the producers he represents are concerned about what will happen when the money runs out.
Farmers ask, “Will we ever get help again?” Cunha said. “Otherwise, you won’t be able to pull out the tree.”
Kevin Hamilton, senior director of government affairs for the Central California Asthma Cooperative, acknowledged that it took time and money for the region’s agricultural industry to transition to more environmentally friendly waste disposal methods. But thousands of San Joaquin Valley residents are also paying the price for years of burning, he said.
“If you develop cardiovascular disease and have a heart attack, what kind of damage is done? The cause of that can be traced back to exposure to this emission,” Hamilton said. “What is the cost for all of us?”
This article is part of the Times’ Equity Reporting Initiative, funded by the James Irvine Foundation, which examines the challenges facing low-income workers and the efforts being made to address California’s economic disparities. I am.
Source link
