- (Focus Area) Food
A recent Spring 2024 issue of the California Bountiful magazine, features Nutrition Policy Institute's collaborative research with Impact Justice and ChangeLab Solutions on their Farm to Corrections California project. The article titled, “Program benefits inmates, small farms and local economies,” by Linda DuBois highlights the initiative created from the project, “Harvest of the Month.” This initiative supports local agriculture and nutrition promotion, individual well-being, and equitable access to fresh, diverse food options within the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation state prisons. Learn more about the program in this news story.
Over 38,000 participants in the federal Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children, commonly known as WIC, completed a satisfaction survey in summer of 2023. Conducted across 21 participating WIC state agencies in all US Department of Agriculture administrative regions, the survey showed high satisfaction with the WIC program and that participants feel respected, valued and included by WIC staff. The hybrid WIC services introduced during the pandemic were successful, with two-in-three using in-person services, over half using remote services and nearly all finding it is easy to schedule appointments. The top reasons for WIC participation were the fruits and vegetables in the WIC food package followed by other foods and the education and support from WIC staff. Participants expressed interest in using WIC benefits at farmers markets and requested expanded fruit and vegetable options in states that don't authorize canned or frozen options. The survey illuminated challenges participants experience when shopping for WIC foods, reasons for not buying all their WIC foods, and their desire for expanded shopping options. Results align with the recently finalized WIC food package changes. Findings are available in the report “2023 WIC Multi-State Participant Satisfaction Survey” published online on April 9, 2024. The project was conducted by Lorrene Ritchie, Danielle Lee, Celeste Felix, Ken Hecht and Hannah Thompson from the Nutrition Policy Institute, Loan Kim, Theresa Tran, Claire Burton and Amanda Kiang from Pepperdine University and Georgia Machel from the National WIC Association. The project was funded by the National WIC Association through a grant from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
- Author: Brianna Aguayo Villalon
- Editor: Marisa M Tsai
- Editor: Wendi Gosliner
US safety net programs provide aid to low-income households through cash and in-kind assistance, such as food and healthcare benefits. Using data from the Assessing California Communities' Experiences with Safety Net Supports ACCESS,study researchers examined patterns of multi-program take-up, that is participation conditioned on eligibility in California. Sociodemographic factors associated with multi-program take-up were also identified. Among the four safety net programs examined (i.e., Earned Income Tax Credit or EITC, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program or SNAP, the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children or WIC, and Medicaid), NPI researchers found relatively low multi-program take-up of SNAP and WIC. Meanwhile, the take-up of Medicaid was high, both as an individual program and among those participating in other programs. Sociodemographic factors, including Income, age, and primary language spoken were associated with multi-program take-up. To improve multi-program participation, study researchers recommend streamlining application processes to reduce administrative burden, data sharing among safety-net programs, and targeted recruitment of under-enrolled subgroups. Increasing multi-program take-up of safety net programs among California families can contribute to improved health equity and address key social determinants of health. This study was conducted by NPI researchers Marisa Tsai and Wendi Gosliner, Joseph Yeb with Tufts University School of Medicine, Kaitlyn Jackson and Rita Hamad with Harvard School of Public Health, and Lia Fernald with the University of California Berkeley, School of Public Health.
- Author: Daniel K Macon
As of this writing, we're on track for a "normal" rainfall year here in Auburn. Even if the rainy season ended with last week's storm, we'll finish the year at 90 percent of our long term annual average. In the high country to our east, the story is even better - the snow-water equivalent is sitting at 110% of the April 1 average. For the Nevada Irrigation District (NID), which serves western Nevada County and northwestern Placer County, low elevation rain and high elevation snowpack are a great combination - their reservoirs are full!
But despite all of this positive weather and water supply news, those of us who rely on NID water to irrigate pasture and other crops are facing the prospect of drought through the late spring and early summer (and possibly beyond). Earlier this year, a massive landslide damaged a portion of PG&E's South Yuba Canal below Spaulding Reservoir. In addition to moving water out of the high country for power generation, the canal allows NID to bring water from its upper watersheds down to Scotts Flat Reservoir east of Nevada City. From Scotts Flat, NID supplies farmers and ranchers throughout western Nevada County.
At the same time, PG&E's Spaulding 1 Power House also suffered significant damage, putting it offline. All of the water that NID moves down to Rollins Reservoir near Colfax comes through Spaulding 1 - and Rollins serves farmers and ranchers in North Auburn, Lincoln, and Sheridan.
At the moment, PG&E hopes to have a partial repair in place by early June, but NID will need to rely on it's low-elevation storage in Scotts Flat and Rollins to serve its irrigation customers. Without the ability to move water below Spaulding, NID projects that both Scotts Flat and Rollins will be significantly drawn down by mid-June. This week, PG&E indicated that some repairs might take much longer (stretching into August or September - more information here). Consequently, they are asking for voluntary conservation measures from both irrigation customers and treated water customers. As more information becomes available, I suspect that mandatory cutbacks may be on the table. The NID Board of Director will meet tomorrow to discuss the situation.
All of this brings ranchers to the unique position of managing for drought during an otherwise "normal" water year. Most of the recent droughts we've experienced in the foothills have been the result of a lack of precipitation and/or warm temperatures during the fall, winter, or spring months (see my post "A Taxonomy of Rangeland Drought" from February 2022). This year's "accidental" summer drought poses a different set of challenges. Many of us want to do our part to help NID conserve water during this emergency, but what are the options that best keep our pastures alive and our our livestock fed?
Traditionally, NID has conserved water during drought by asking customers to reduce the miner's inches they purchase - easy to accomplish simply by changing out the boards in our boxes. In thinking about my own sheep operation, reducing our 8 miner's inches to 6 would mean one of two options: first, I could simply try to put 66 gallons per minute out through a sprinkler system designed to deliver 88 gallons per minute, or second, I could leave one zone of the pasture unirrigated all season. At this point, option 2 makes more sense - I would optimize irrigation on the most productive portions of my pasture and let the least productive section go dry. In the long run, this means replanting that portion of the pasture (or permanently turning it back into less productive dryland forage).
An alternative that NID may not be equipped to accommodate would be to end my irrigation season earlier than normal - that is, to shut off the water to my pasture around September 1. The bulk of my pasture growth comes in the first 8 weeks of the irrigation season. When we hit the high temperatures and long days of July, forage growth goes into a "summer slump" and productivity declines. As the days grow shorter and the temperatures moderate (usually!) in September, our water demand falls and our pasture forages begin preparing for dormancy. With full water deliveries through the end of August, my pastures would likely survive if we didn't irrigate for the last 7 weeks of the season.
In either case, we'll need to think about balancing livestock demand with a diminished supply of summer forage. We can either reduce the number of mouths on the pasture, or purchase more feed (either hay or rented pasture) - or some combination of the two. One of our strategies has always been to match our production cycle with the forage cycle - we typically wean and sell our lambs as the spring flush of forage is ending (in essence, reducing our stocking rate to match a lower carrying capacity in the midst of the summer). Since we also rely on NID for our stock water, I'll need to think about strategies to ensure we're able to get water to the sheep through the summer, as well. NID will credit our accounts for this voluntary reduction in water, which could offset the cost of buying feed. In addition, a voluntary reduction this year will not impact our water deliveries in future years.
We've created a Drought Decision Support Tool to help you consider YOUR options. The first step is to inventory your forage resources for the coming summer and fall. Are you locked in, or do you have some flexibility in accessing additional leased pasture? Alternatively, are there some steps you can take to reduce your stocking rate this summer (like weaning your calves early or keeping fewer replacement heifers)? We've also developed a series of Excel spreadsheets to help you compare the financial impacts of culling females versus weaning early versus buying feed.
During the 2012-2016 drought, my mantra was "hope for the best, but prepare for the worst." While I certainly hope that PG&E is able to complete the repairs at Spaulding more quickly than they are currently projecting, I think it's time to prepare for the worst.
- Author: Brianna Aguayo Villalon
- Editor: Christina E Hecht
- Contributor: Lorrene Ritchie
- Contributor: Dania Orta
- View More...
In a recent research brief, Nutrition Policy Institute researchers highlight the benefits of California's School Meals for All program which offers breakfast and lunch to all K-12 students at public and charter schools every instructional day, at no charge, regardless of household income. The program began in the 2022-2023 school year after temporary federal pandemic funding for universal meals ended. Prior to the pandemic, household income determined school meal charges. The brief shares findings from a 2023 NPI survey examining parents' perceptions regarding the policy's impact. Among a diverse representation of all income levels and ethnic groups, 80% of all parents were in support. Christina Hecht, NPI's senior policy advisor, presented these findings and other NPI research on School Meals for All to the California State Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Education Finance on Wednesday, March 20, 2024. In her public testimony, Hecht explained that “...65% of parents across all income levels believe the School Meals For All program reduces stigma for their child about eating a school meal.” Findings can inform further efforts to continue the expansion of California's School Meals For All program to reduce financial strain, food insecurity, stress, and stigma among families. The research was led by Dania Orta-Aleman, Christina Hecht, Monica Zuercher, Ken Hecht, Samantha Sam-Chen, Lorrene Ritchie, and Wendi Gosliner from NPI and Juliana Cohen from Merrimack College.