For faster results, Steele feels an earth berm on which the buffer could be planted would speed up the effective size of the buffer.


Browsing by deer could be a problem for young trees so mesh cages were installed; and weed growth has to be controlled so they don’t out-compete the buffer plants. As well, irrigation is vital in that first few years while the young plants get established, particularly in the hot and dry Okanagan climate.


Another issue was finding enough of the chosen species at local nurseries. The vineyards of House of Rose are surrounded by conventional apple orchards and Rose is concerned about pesticide drift. While the operation is not certified organic, they follow organic practices as much as possible, she explains, and they are considering applying for certification.


“We believe in it,” she says simply. The side of the vineyard where more than 100 cypress were planted is adjacent to a conventional apple orchard, but it was only replanted in young trees this year, so the cypress can grow up to a useful size at the same time as the orchard, notes Rose. There is another side of the vineyard where she also has concerns, but they would have to remove a row of grapevines in order to have space to plant a vegetative buffer, so it’s a decision that would have to be carefully considered.


The cypress settled in really well the first year.


Choose a species that won’t grow too tall and end up shading the orchard or vineyard, notes Steele.


Choosing a buffer species must depend on site conditions and the objectives of the buffer. The BMP guidebook will be available next spring and it will include a gallery of tree and shrub species suitable for different climates on the coast and the southern interior.


Most important, growers must plan ahead, she adds.


Once planted, it’s also important to keep an eye on them for the critical first few years and beyond, watching for pests and wildlife damage, and to monitor irrigation.


“It’s just another tool in the tool box to help address environmental quality concerns on agricultural operations.” She says it’s been a really interesting project and has strengthened her knowledge just by interviewing farmers about the issues.


A river runs without it


B.C. agriculture interests weren’t considered when the Columbia River Treaty was negotiated a half-century ago. By Judie Steeves


BC-Okanagan associate professor of anthropology, Dr. John Wagner, admits he was “astounded” to discover that agriculture had no place in the Columbia River Treaty, considering the benefit the dams backing water up into Canada from that system has had on farmers in Washington State.


U


He’s been doing some research on agriculture and the treaty and says although the dams were built to provide hydro-electric power and control flooding, they have, in fact, also benefited U.S. agricultural users by providing them with cheap water for irrigation.


JUDIE STEEVES


continue to provide unintended benefits worth millions of dollars and thousands of jobs annually to the U.S. The expanded U.S. agricultural capacity created by Canadian-sourced irrigation water also allows U.S farmers to out-compete Canadian farmers, he said.


Wagner suggested the current re-negotiation of that treaty should provide an opportunity for agriculture in B.C. to gain a more-equitable share in the benefits of Canadian storage. “I tried to learn the role of agricultural agencies in the Columbia River Treaty process, and there was none,” he comments.


However, B.C. Fruit Dr. John Wagner


Growers’ Association general manager Glen Lucas says the BCFGA has been asked for input into the negotiation process for renewing the treaty before it could be terminated in 2024. It was first signed in 1964. BCFGA president Fred


Wagner notes that a number of shallow aquifers south of the border resulted from the dams built on the Columbia River, and reservoirs such as the Banks Reservoir, which feeds a million acres of farmland.


“Water would have played a role in expansion of the Washington State orchard industry,” he says, and adds, “A value needs to be put on that. “The bottom line is the Columbia River Treaty water is providing value to Washington State growers. There’s a massive amount of water available for irrigation as a result of the storage in Canada. They got that water for nothing, where our growers (in B.C.) have to pay for their water,” he says. At an international water forum this fall, Wagner reported that controlled water releases from Canadian storage facilities on the Columbia River system


Steele notes that then, more than 50 years ago, apple production in both Washington State and B.C. was about even, at 12 million boxes annually from both sides of the border. Today, Washington production has leaped to 150 million boxes, while production in B.C. has declined to about four million. “We will ask for a similar trust to the Columbia Basin Trust to fund those impacts on agriculture,” he says. “We deserve compensation for its use by agriculture in the U.S. That was never included in the original agreement,” Steele notes, adding that irrigation from that water is heavily subsidized in the U.S.


Lucas says he’s encouraged by the reception in Victoria of farmers’ concerns about the impact of the treatment on agriculture, (It has also impacted potatoes and other vegetables) but he notes this is only the beginning of a process that will take years to unfold.


British Columbia FRUIT GROWER • Winter 2015-16 11


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24