How to resolve AdBlock issue? 
Business News
- Details
- Written by: California Department of Fish and Wildlife
Delays due to quality only affect the Dungeness crab fishery in this area (Fish and Game Districts 6, 7, 8 and 9). Dungeness crab quality test results from Dec. 17, 2019 met the minimum guidelines established by the Tri-State Dungeness Crab Committee.
Director Charlton H. Bonham had announced a delay to Dec. 31 based on the last round of tests conducted on Dec. 3, 2019, but with these new results no additional delay is warranted.
Tri-State managers met this morning to determine that their respective Dungeness crab fisheries would open coastwide within the Tri-State region on Dec. 31, 2019.
No vessel may take or land crab in an area closed for a meat quality delay (i.e., Fish and Game districts 6, 7, 8 and 9 through Dec. 30).
In addition, any vessel that takes, possesses onboard or lands crab from ocean waters outside of a delayed area is prohibited from participating in the crab fishery in any delayed area for 30 days following the opening of those areas.
Permitted vessels that have already participated in the Dec. 15 opener south of the Sonoma-Mendocino county line would not be able to set gear in Mendocino, Humboldt and Del Norte counties until 12:01 am Thursday, Jan. 30, 2020.
This applies to any delayed areas in Oregon and Washington as well. For more information, please see CDFW's Frequently Asked Questions regarding the 2019-2020 Dungeness crab commercial season.
To help minimize the risk of whale and sea turtle entanglement in trap gear, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife recommends implementation of Best Fishing Practicesdeveloped by the Dungeness Crab Fishing Gear Working Group.
This includes following guidance on surface-gear set-up, reducing excess line, using neutralbuoyancy line and minimizing knots and lead.
For more information on Dungeness crab, please visit https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Marine/Whale-Safe-Fisheries and www.wildlife.ca.gov/crab.
- Details
- Written by: California Department of Food and Agriculture
"The BIFS grants program has helped establish some long-lasting, valuable Integrated Pest Management agricultural systems,” said CDFA Secretary Karen Ross. “BIFS practices have been found to reduce pesticide use, including chlorpyrifos and other organophosphate insecticides; improve soil fertility; decrease erosion and nitrogen leaching; and increase populations of beneficial insects, fishes, birds and game – all of which are very important in creating sustainable, climate-smart agricultural operations.”
The new BIFS project, which will last for four years, received strong support from the winegrape industry.
A review committee composed of scientists from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, University of California, California State University, state government, and a private pest control advisor reviewed and scored a number of proposals and made the award recommendation to CDFA.
Grant project leader Dr. Kent Daane of UC Berkeley and collaborators will receive $1 million in funding for “Refinement and Implementation of an Areawide Program for Vineyard Pathogens and their Insect Vectors.”
This project will establish two demonstration blocks of at least 1,000-acres each where pheromone disruption tools will be used to control vine mealybug, the insect responsible for vectoring grape leafroll disease, or GLD.
Vines infected with GLD will also be systematically removed to prevent the spread of this economically devastating disease. The project work will be done in the Lodi and Central Coast winegrape regions.
The goal of the BIFS grant program is to demonstrate and refine integrated pest management (IPM) programs designed to reduce chemical insecticide inputs, especially non-selective, biologically disruptive insecticides with higher risk to human health and the environment.
Projects foster farmer-to-farmer information exchanges and on-farm demonstrations of IPM practices while allowing growers to maintain yields and quality. Outreach efforts bring together scientists, farmers and consultants in a collaborative, co-learning environment that enables farmers to learn and adapt farming practices to local conditions.
Detailed information on this program, including the application process and application requirements, is available at: https://www.cdfa.ca.gov/oefi/opca/bifs.html .
Gov. Newsom proposed funding for this grant program and the Legislature approved it in the Office of Pesticide Consultation and Analysis’s budget to help California’s farmers transition away from the insecticide chlorpyrifos.
The Office of Pesticide Consultation and Analysis provides consultation to the California Department of Pesticide Regulation on pesticide regulatory matters, and consultative activities focus on potential pesticide regulatory impacts and pest management alternatives that may mitigate or prevent such impacts on production agriculture.
The office’s staff are also involved in other projects relating to pesticide use and alternatives.
Information on the Office of Pesticide Consultation and Analysis is available at https://www.cdfa.ca.gov/oefi/opca/.
- Details
- Written by: Lake County News Reports
That figure was down from 73 percent in the third quarter and 75 percent from a year earlier.
The report determined affordability for average wage earners by calculating the amount of income needed to make monthly house payments — including mortgage, property taxes and insurance — on a median-priced home, assuming a 3 percent down payment and a 28 percent maximum “front-end” debt-to-income ratio.
That required income was then compared to annualized average weekly wage data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (see full methodology below).
“Home prices rose across the country by 9 percent year-over-year in the fourth quarter of 2019, and the typical home remained a financial stretch for average wage earners. However, homes were actually a bit more affordable because of declining mortgage rates combined with rising pay to overcome the continued price run-up,” said Todd Teta, chief product officer with ATTOM Data Solutions. “As long as people are earning more money and shelling out less to pay off home loans, the market should remain strong with prices continuing to rise, at least in the near term. Those are big ifs, but for now this report offers some decent findings for both home seekers and home sellers.”
The largest populated counties where a median-priced home in the fourth quarter of 2019 was not affordable for average wage earners included Los Angeles County, CA; Maricopa County (Phoenix), AZ; San Diego County, CA; Orange County, CA (outside Los Angeles) and Miami-Dade County, FL.
The 142 counties (29 percent of the 486 counties analyzed) where a median-priced home in the fourth quarter of 2019 was affordable for average wage earners included Cook County (Chicago) IL; Harris County (Houston), TX; Wayne County (Detroit), MI; Philadelphia County, PA and Cuyahoga County (Cleveland), OH.
Home price appreciation outpacing wage growth in 76 percent of markets
Home price appreciation outpaced average weekly wage growth in 369 of the 486 counties analyzed in the report (76 percent), with the largest counties including Los Angeles County, CA; Cook County (Chicago), IL; Harris County (Houston), TX; Maricopa County (Phoenix), AZ; and San Diego County, CA.
Average annualized wage growth outpaced home price appreciation in 117 of the 486 counties (24 percent), including Orange County, CA (outside Los Angeles); Miami-Dade County, FL; Kings County (Brooklyn), NY; Queens County, NY and Santa Clara County (San Jose), CA.
At least 30 percent of wages needed to buy a home in two-thirds of markets
Among the 486 counties analyzed in the report, 311 (64 percent) required at least 30 percent of their annualized weekly wages to buy a home in the fourth quarter of 2019. Those counties that required the greatest percent included Marin County, CA (outside San Francisco) (111.2 percent of annualized weekly wages needed to buy a home); Kings County (Brooklyn), NY (103.6 percent); Santa Cruz County, CA, (outside San Jose) (103 percent); Monterey County, CA, (outside San Francisco) (88 percent) and Maui County, HI (84.9 percent).
A total of 175 counties in the report (36 percent) required less than 30 percent of their annualized weekly wages to buy a home in the fourth quarter of 2019. Those counties that required the smallest percent included Baltimore City/County, MD (11.2 percent of annualized weekly wages needed to buy a home); Bibb County (Macon), GA (12.4 percent); Rock Island County (Davenport), IL (14.4 percent); Wayne County (Detroit), MI (15.2 percent) and Richmond County (Augusta), GA (15.2 percent).
Fifty-three percent of markets more affordable than historic averages
Among the 486 counties in the report, 256 (53 percent) were more affordable than their historic affordability averages in the fourth quarter of 2019, up from 48 percent in the third quarter of 2019 and 29 percent from the fourth quarter of 2018.
Counties with at least 1 million people that were more affordable than their historic averages (indexes of at least 100 are considered more affordable compared to their historic averages) included Cook County (Chicago), IL (index of 119); Montgomery County, MD (outside Washington, D.C.) (118); New York County (Manhattan), NY (118); Suffolk County, NY (outside New York City) (114); and Fairfax County, VA (outside Washington, D.C.) (111).
Counties with the highest affordability indexes were Fairfield County, CT (outside New Haven) (index of 137); Baltimore City/County, MD (135); Lake County, IL (outside Chicago) (135); Onslow County (Jacksonville), NC (134) and Atlantic County (Atlantic City), NJ (131).
Counties with at least 1 million people that saw the biggest annual improvement in their affordability indexes included New York County (Manhattan), NY (index up 33 percent); Kings County (Brooklyn), NY (up 20 percent); Middlesex County, MA (outside Boston) (up 14 percent); Santa Clara County (San Jose), CA (up 13 percent) and Orange County, CA (outside Los Angeles) (up 11 percent).
The biggest annual gains among other counties included Butte County, CA (north of Sacramento) (index up 39 percent); Bay County (Panama City), FL (up 26 percent); Florence County, SC (up 26 percent); Cecil County, MD (outside Wilmington, DE) (up 23 percent) and Bristol County, MA (outside Providence, RI) (up 21 percent).
Forty-seven percent of markets less affordable than historic averages
Among the 486 counties analyzed in the report, 230 (47 percent) were less affordable than their historic affordability averages in the fourth quarter of 2019, down from 52 percent of counties in the previous quarter and 71 percent of counties in the fourth quarter of 2018.
Counties with a population greater than 1 million that were less affordable than their historic averages (indexes of less than 100 are considered less affordable compared to their historic averages) included Wayne County (Detroit), MI (index of 78); Tarrant County (Fort Worth), TX (83); Dallas County, TX (85); Oakland County, MI (outside Detroit) (86) and Travis County (Austin), TX (88).
Counties with the lowest affordability indexes were Vanderburgh County (Evansville), IN (index of 69); Genessee County (Flint), MI (72); Canyon County (Nampa), ID (74); Benton County (Kennewick), WA (76) and Blount County, TN (outside Knoxville) (77).
Among the counties with at least 1 million people, none saw their annual affordability indexes get worse. Counties that did see the biggest year-over-year fallback in their affordability indexes included Saint Louis County, MO (index down 16 percent); Jefferson County (Watertown), NY (down 16 percent); Saint Louis City/County, MO (down 15 percent); Jasper County (Joplin), MO (down 12 percent) and Saint Clair County, MI (outside Detroit) (down 10 percent).
The ATTOM Data Solutions U.S. Home Affordability Index analyzes median home prices derived from publicly recorded sales deed data collected by ATTOM Data Solutions and average wage data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics in 486 U.S. counties with a combined population of 235.2 million.
The affordability index is based on the percentage of average wages needed to make monthly house payments on a median-priced home with a 30-year fixed rate mortgage and a 3 percent down payment, including property taxes, home insurance and mortgage insurance.
Average 30-year fixed interest rates from the Freddie Mac Primary Mortgage Market Survey were used to calculate the monthly house payments.
- Details
- Written by: California Department of Food and Agriculture
Each of the projects received strong support from commodities which could be affected by invasive pests.
A review committee composed of scientists from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, University of California, state government and private pest control advisors scored the proposals and made recommendations to CDFA.
Each of the following projects will last three years:
• Project leaders Dr. Mark Hoddle and Dr. Jocelyn Millar of the University of California, Riverside, will receive $348,893 for “Proactive Management of Avocado Seed and Stem Feeding Weevils, Heilipus spp. (Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Molytinae).” This project will develop pheromones, identify natural enemies in the host range, and quantify flight capacity of the avocado seed weevils. Native to Mexico and invasive in Ecuador, these weevils feed directly on avocados and could cause substantial damage to the California avocado industry. The California Avocado Commission pledged an additional $150,000 to support this project, a testament to their concern over this pest. The work will be conducted mainly at UC Riverside and in Mexico.
• Project leader Dr. Ian Grettenberger and his research collaborators from the University of California, Davis, will receive $499,847 for “A proactive approach to prepare for the invasion of Tuta absoluta into California.” T. absoluta, a tomato leafminer, is a serious pest throughout Europe, Africa, western Asia and South and Central America and could decimate California’s tomato industry. This project will proactively test targeted insecticides, identify native natural enemies that could be used in biological control, and conduct work to assist in breeding plants resistant to this pest. This project will be conducted at UC Davis, throughout California, and in Chile and Peru.
• Project leaders Dr. Alejandro Del Pozo-Valdivia, Dr. Ian Grettenberger and Dr. Daniel Hasegawa of the University of California, Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources, will receive $261,543 for “Detection, biology and control of the exotic Swede midge (Contarinia nasturtii) for California cole crops.” Swede midge is a pest of cole crops in the Northeastern U.S. and Canada and could cause significant management issues for California’s large cole crop industry. This project will collect important information about the biology of Swede midge, test low impact insecticides and botanical products as options for control, assess the possibility of weeds as alternative hosts, and work with growers to start monitoring for the pest. This project will be conducted mainly at UC Davis and in the Salinas Valley.
The goal of the Proactive IPM Solutions grant program is to anticipate which exotic pests are likely to arrive in California and to identify and test IPM strategies that can be rapidly implemented if the pests become established in California.
CDFA is responsible for preventing and mitigating invasive pests in California. Techniques resulting from the Proactive IPM Solutions Program will allow for rapid deployment of future management plans.
Detailed information on this program, including the application process and application requirements, is available at https://www.cdfa.ca.gov/oefi/opca/proactive-ipm.html.
Funding for this grant program was allocated to CDFA’s Office of Pesticide Consultation and Analysis, or OPCA, to help California’s farmers transition away from the insecticide chlorpyrifos.
OPCA provides consultation to the California Department of Pesticide Regulation on pesticide regulatory matters with a focus on potential pesticide regulatory impacts and pest management alternatives that may mitigate or prevent such impacts on production agriculture.
OPCA staff are also involved in other projects relating to pesticide use and alternatives.
Information on the Office of Pesticide Consultation and Analysis is available at: https://www.cdfa.ca.gov/oefi/opca/.