Knowledge is continually developing about how to effectively conduct research and outreach for greater impact. For example, the “co-production” of knowledge between “experts and “users” is especially important in weed research, which is strongly limited by the spatial and temporal scales of its studies . Without practitioner insight, researchers might produce studies with limited relevance to local management conditioners .It is notable that when asked about concerns for California agronomic crop production in California, a quarter of the respondents stated they were not concerned about changing weather and climate. Yet, it has been predicted that some of the most vulnerable agricultural regions to climate change are the Salinas Valley and the San Joaquin Valley – particularly the corridor between Fresno and Merced – as well as the Imperial Valley . The increased rate and scale of weather variability in California today is unprecedented for farmers and ranchers, and there is a wealth of evidence that this changing weather and climate will impact agronomic crop production . An earlier study using process-based crop modeling predicted that heat waves in May will become common, causing yield losses of 1-10% for corn, rice, and sunflower, commercial grow racks while heat waves in June will affect corn and sunflower production . High nighttime temperatures could also speed up reproductive development and decrease the length of the grain-filling period, resulting in reduced yields .
The effects of elevated CO2 has been associated with reduced nitrogen and protein content in some agronomic crops, causing a reduction in grain and forage quality . Water resources, particularly surface water supply derived from snowpack, are projected to decline significantly . Weed management will also experience new challenges. For instance, while glyphosate has been projected to lose its efficacy on weeds as CO2 levels rise, there are also predictions that increased atmospheric CO2 concentrations will have a positive impact on several weed species, which may contribute to increased risk of crop loss due to weed pressure . As a result, both herbicide use and costs are expected to increase as CO2 levels rise . In a recent survey for California rangelands, practitioners overwhelmingly recognized an increase in weed problems in the past 5-10 years and acknowledged a negative effect of California drought on weed management given the adaptive responses of weeds .Results indicate that growers’ priorities in management decisions are often more immediate than long-term. Immediate pressures, such as water resources and economic viability of farming operations appear to take priority over longer-term adaptations of a changing climate. Therefore, it is crucial that UCCE evaluate the tradeoffs between balancing short-term priorities while helping growers adapt to future challenges.
Water availability was the top priority consideration for grower management decisions. In many cases, growers are limited by what they can grow or the acreage they can farm due to limited water supplies, hence water availability dictates year to year operations. Therefore, UCCE should focus on helping growers adopt on-the-ground, practical solutions to dealing with impending water shortages. Providing new research about how to maintain production levels with reduced water resources or increasing water use efficiency is one avenue with more immediate impacts, while improving soil health to increase the water holding capacity of our agricultural lands should be considered for the long-term. There is much to do in terms of research and extension and UC needs to devote more people resources to practical solutions for water and irrigation management. The benefits of crop rotation were a primary reason for growing agronomic crops. Crop rotation is a foundational practice for increasing on-farm biodiversity and can help manage pests, disease, weeds . However, the benefits of crop rotation are not always immediately evident, and current economic pressures could discourage rotation with lower value agronomic crops. Therefore, UCEE should think about how the benefits of crop rotation, which cannot be practiced in perennial systems as it can in annual systems, can be leveraged to gain funding for more research and extension in agronomic crops.
For example, this could include impacts on groundwater recharge or soil carbon and GHG emissions, which appeal to future challenges, while also addressing more immediate needs, such as weed management. Crop rotations can also reduce agrochemical use, which might help address concerns about agrochemical regulations . Bans on agrochemicals are outside of UCCE’s control and future effects of products that are tested in the shortterm are unknown. Investing resources in long term solutions, such as increasing on-farm biodiversity, could prevent the need for continually testing new inputs that may end up having the same fate as chlorpyrifos, neonicotinoids, and glyphosate. UCCE has received more than $5 million in grant funding through the California state budget to work on developing alternatives to chlorpyrifos. In assessing alternatives, UCCE should think about integrating practices that serve as long-term adaptation strategies, especially considering 55% of total respondents said that they were “very concerned” about input costs. Land stewardship, which was not explicitly defined in our survey but has been described by others as a “deeply held inner conviction that compels and inspires people to be responsible caretakers of the land entrusted to them” , was a top priority in management decisions for growers. The motivation for land stewardship is based on “present benefits to the landowner; benefits to future generations; and the benefits that accrue to society outside the boundary of the land” . Interestingly, while 41% of growers said that they always consider land stewardship when making management decisions, only 24% said that they always consider natural resource conservation. Land stewardship and natural resource conservation are similar in their goals to conserve resources for future generations. However, land stewardship is not a list of practices – it is instead about a person’s relationship to the land, originating from an ecological conscience that defines right and wrong . Natural resource conservation in the United States, on the other hand, is often rooted in prescriptive regulation, meaning the government mandates how a resource may be used and explicitly directs the behavior of regulated interests .The history of natural resource management in the United States is rooted in the courts. Several environmental agencies have expressed that they view excessive regulation and litigation as a serious threat to effective land management and efficient administration . For extension, this is important to note because the emphasis on land stewardship shows that growers do highly value ethical treatment of the land, while lack of emphasis on natural resource conservation may demonstrate an aversion to regulations aimed at achieving healthier land management goals. UCEE should leverage the concept of land stewardship in extension efforts, without making it feel too prescriptive. This is also important for policymakers in thinking about expanding incentive-based programs for land stewardship rather than basing the care for natural resources on punitive measures. One topic that illustrates ample opportunities for both UCCE and policymakers to work together is soil health. However, if incentive programs are to expand, vertical grow weed they must be developed with an understanding that building healthy soil is a long-term investment and immediate impact may not be observed.
Thus, providing long-term support to growers is necessary. While participants appear to possess a strong land ethic, the importance of long-term support in incentive programs is important because profitability is a greater priority in management decisions than land stewardship. This is unsurprising given high land, labor, and input costs in California combined with low crop value for some agronomic crops. Several studies have found that farmers’ ethical drive for land stewardship appears to decline as economic pressures increase . Dependencies on agricultural markets limit farmer choice, including the “freedom to make ethical decisions” since farmers will do what they can to reduce the risk of losing any of their crop . Going back to the example of using neonicotinoid coated seeds for pest management, growers have limited choice in the seed they purchase, and will generally favor the insurance of seed coatings when they do have a choice . Therefore, widespread voluntary change to stop using these products is not likely unless the market system in which agricultural commodities are bought and sold changes. The constrained choices growers face pose major impediments to research and policy interventions aimed at cultivating new farming ethics, such as climate smart farming practices. This is why the work of UCCE must also engage the institutions, such as policymakers and industry, that drive or constrain farmer management choices .Based on the Importance-Performance Analysis , topics that had the largest gaps in priority vs. satisfaction were testing new products, water conservation and storage, irrigation management, weed control, and soil health. These align with respondents’ greatest concerns and management challenges discussed above. Lower priority needs included greenhouse gas emissions reduction, which suggests that climate impacts and the need for GHG mitigation efforts should be framed differently to practitioners. In other words, what inspires policymakers and researchers to act against climate change may not be the same for those working on the ground. Finally, cover crops was a topic that fell into the “possible overkill” category, based on IPA methodology. While the principles of cover cropping can address management challenges expressed by growers, such as improved soil-water dynamics and weed suppression, clientele feel that the current information on cover cropping may be in excess. Understanding where to focus attention or scale back efforts highlights the importance for closing the research-implementation gap by creating adaptive research-management programs .Water conservation and storage and irrigation management are also of high importance to respondents. The immediate need for water to grow crops has led UCCE and industry to focus on developing new technologies to help growers adapt to limited water resources. Drip irrigation, for example, was introduced to California agriculture in 1969 and has since been widely studied and advocated for in its ability to increase yields and save water . UCCE worked hard to identify the economic and agronomic performance of drip irrigation, which resulted in widespread adoption. Adoption in drip irrigation has further accelerated by CDFA’s State Water Efficiency and Enhancement Program – a program that provides financial incentives for growers to install drip irrigation systems, among other system components that will reduce on-farm water use and energy . While drip irrigation does reduce water use per acre, it has not served to save much water in the aggregate because of cropland expansion. Since a drip line can reach anywhere, hundreds of thousands of acres of marginal farmland, including hillsides that could never be watered with furrow irrigation, as well as saline soils, have come under cultivation since the introduction of drip . Data from a USDA survey found that on average, farmers who report turning to UCCE as a source of irrigation information tend to use more irrigation water . Therefore, the challenges California is facing with reduction in water supply is not just a consequence of drought, but also of the growth of cultivated lands . In addition, drip irrigation does not replenish the aquifer like furrow irrigation does. One of the sustainability indicators that must be considered in Groundwater Sustainability Plans under SGMA is groundwater-level declines, which occur when groundwater withdrawals exceed recharge of the aquifer system . With drip irrigation, the aquifer system will not be recharged. Therefore, balancing technological fixes where long-term impacts are largely unknown, with ecosystem-based change is key. Based on the IPA, there is also a gap in priority and satisfaction for research and extension on “soil health”, indicating that respondents are interested in seeing more work done in this area. While many soil health principles are known, there is much to be studied around applying healthy soils practices in California, and farmers are more likely to adopt new farming practices when expert or knowledge-making institutions speak to the feasibility of adoption . Therefore, UCCE should consider focusing resources on the practical application of healthy soils practices at local levels. Because water is a unifying concern statewide, quantifying the ability of healthy soils to retain water across different regions may be a good place to start. While precipitation and temperature affect the potential amount of water available, the actual amount of available water depends on soil type, water holding capacity, and the rate at which water filters through soil .