Growers were likely referring to hemp russet mite , two-spotted spider mite , broad mite and Carmine spider mite , respectively, but this remains unclear because there are many species of mite commonly referred to as russet mite, spider mite and red mite . This similarly applies to aphids, thrips, larvae, mildew, rots and molds. Accurate species identification of these pests and diseases will remain uncertain until they can be more systematically collected and identified by UC academics or other scientists. The most common approach to pest and disease control was to apply some type of solution or chemical to the crop , followed by augmentation of natural enemies and various cultural practices .A majority of sprays were products that were biologically derived or approved for use in organic production. Products specifically used for control of arthropod pests included azadirachtin , soap solution , pyrethrins and Bacillus thuringiensis . Many respondents indicated that certain products were effective against both pests and diseases, for instance microbial pesticides , oils and compost tea . Sulfur was the most commonly applied product specifically used for disease control. In addition, 29% of respondents claimed to use certified organic products for pest and disease management but did not name any product specifically. Finally, 2% of respondents reported that they did not spray for pests and diseases at all. Augmentation of natural enemies involved the introduction of predatory mites , lady beetles , predatory nematodes and other unnamed beneficial insects . Cultural practices included removal of infested plant material , insect trapping , intercropping , use of diatomaceous earth and selection of resistant cultivars .Our survey, although of limited sample size,weed curing is the first known survey of California cannabis growers and provided insights into common forms of cultivation, pest and disease management, water use and labor practices.
Since completing this survey, we have discussed and/or presented the survey results with representatives from multiple cannabis grower organizations, and they confirmed that the data were generally in line with production trends. Evident in the survey results, however, was the need for more data on grower cultivation practices before best management practices or natural resource stewardship goals can be developed. All growers monitored crop health, and many reported using a preventative management strategy, but we have no information on treatment thresholds used or the efficacy of particular sprays on cannabis crops. Likewise, the details of species-level pest and disease identification, natural enemy augmentation and sanitation efforts remain unclear. Growers did not report using synthetic pesticides, which contrasts with findings from previous studies that documented a wide range of synthetic pesticide residues on cannabis . Product selection for cannabis is very limited due to a mixed regulatory environment that currently does not allow for the registration of any insecticide or fungicide for use specifically on cannabis , although growers are allowed to use products that are exempt from residue tolerance requirements, exempt from registration requirements or registered for a use that is broad enough to include cannabis . As such, it may be that in the absence of legally available chemical controls growers were choosing allowable, biologically derived products or alternative strategies such as natural enemy augmentation and sanitation. Our survey population was perhaps biased toward non-chemical pest management — the organizations we contacted for participant recruitment included some that were formed to share and promote sustainability practices. Or, it may be that respondents were reluctant to report using synthetic chemicals or products not licensed for cannabis plants. The only other published data on water application rates for cannabis cultivation in California we are aware of is from Bauer et al. , who used estimates for Humboldt County of 6 gallons per day per plant for outdoor cultivation over the growing season .
Grower reported estimates of cannabis water use in this survey were similar to this rate in the peak growing season , but was otherwise lower. Due to the small sample size, we cannot say that groundwater is the primary water source for most cannabis growers in California or that few use surface water diversions. However, Dillis et al. found similar results on groundwater being a major water source for cannabis growers, at least in northwest California. If the irrigation practices reported in our survey represent patterns in California cannabis cultivation, best management practices would be helpful in limiting impacts to freshwater organisms and ecosystems. For example, where groundwater pumping has timely and proximate impacts to surface waters, limiting dry season groundwater extraction by storing groundwater or surface water in the wet season may be beneficial , though this will likely require increases in storage capacity. The recently adopted Cannabis Cultivation Policy requires a mandatory dry season forbearance period for surface water diversions, though not for groundwater pumping. Our survey results indicate that the practical constraints on adding storage may be a significant barrier for compliance with mandatory forbearance periods for many growers. More in-depth research with growers and workers is needed to explore the characteristics of the cannabis labor force and the trajectory of the cannabis labor market, especially in light of legalization. Several growers commented on experiencing labor shortages, a notable finding given that recent market analyses of the cannabis industry suggest that labor compliance costs are the most significant of all of the direct regulatory costs for growers. Higher rates of licensing compliance among medium and large farms is not surprising given the likelihood that they are better able to pay permitting costs. Yet, that the majority of respondents indicated they had not applied for a license to grow cannabis, with over half noting some income from cannabis sales, indicates potentially significant effects if these growers remain excluded from the legalization process. More research is needed to understand the socioeconomic impacts of legalization, which likely extend beyond those accounted for in the state’s economic impact analysis, which primarily focuses on economic contributions that a legalized market will bring to the state .
Bodwitch et al. report that surveyed growers characterized legalization as a process that has excluded small farmers, altered local economies and given rise to illicit markets. The environmental impacts of drying cannabis production have received attention because of expansion into remote areas near sensitive natural habitats. The negative impacts are likely not because cannabis production is inherently detrimental to the environment, but rather due to siting decisions and cultivation practices. In the absence of regulation and best management practices based on research, it is no surprise that there have been instances of negative impacts on the environment. At the same time, many growers appear to have adopted an environmentally proactive approach to production and created networks to share and promote best management practices. Organizations that we approached to recruit survey participants had a fairly large base membership , which is on a par with other major commodity groups, like the Almond Board of California and California Association of Wine grape Growers . Membership included cannabis growers, distributors and processors as well as interested members of the public, and some people were members of more than one organization, suggesting a large, engaged community. Most of the organizations we contacted enthusiastically agreed to help us recruit growers for our survey, and we received excellent feedback on our initial survey questions. Some potential future research topics include the development of pest and disease monitoring programs; quantifying economic treatment thresholds; evaluating the efficacy of different biological, cultural and chemical controls; developing strategies to improve water use and irrigation efficiency; understanding grower motivations for regulatory compliance; understanding the impacts of regulation; and characterizing the competition between labor in cannabis and other agricultural crops — to name just a few. As cannabis research and extension programs are developed, it will be critical to ensure that future surveys capture a representative sample of cannabis growers operating inside and outside the legal market, to identify additional areas for research and develop best practices for the various cultivation settings in which California cannabis is grown. In the United States, Native Americans experience a dramatically higher burden of diet-related chronic disease across the lifespan compared to the all-race population. Approximately 38% of NA adults are obese, and research from 2016 reports that preschool-aged NA and Alaska Native children had the highest obesity rates compared to all racial groups combined. During childhood, establishing healthy eating habits is vital for physical growth and cognitive development. Moreover, research has shown that a diet rich in vegetables during childhood can help protect against chronic diseases, such as obesity, heart disease, and diabetes, that develop during adulthood. Though data on diet quality of NA populations are limited, prior studies that included NAs found that diet quality is insufficient and is lower than in other populations. Preschool-aged children consume almost half of their daily calories at school, which is an important setting for food environment interventions. Childcare-based interventions are effective in improving nutrition behaviors among children and are recognized as a vital influence on learned eating behaviors. However, most of these nutrition programs have been implemented in urban schools, and little is known about school-based interventions among rural NA communities. Tribally owned and operated Early Childhood and Education programs offer preschool-aged children around two snacks and two meals per day and signify a vital organizational influence on childhood obesity disparities. Therefore, ECEs can serve as an essential location to provide healthy eating interventions for NA children.
School gardens are a common strategy to increase fruit and vegetable intake in all grades, including ECE programs; however, limited studies have used rigorous methodological designs to assess their impact on diet quality and health outcomes. A systematic review on garden-based interventions among preschoolers found that only four studies assessed fruit and vegetable intake, and only one has been conducted among NA youth. Results from this study found that increases in preferences for vegetables were significant, but intake was not . To our knowledge, there are no studies that address vegetable intake and health outcomes among NA children in ECE programs using a multi-level method, targeting the individual, family, and community. Using a community-based participatory research approach, we partnered with the Osage Nation to implement the Food Resource Equity and Sustainability for Health study, a culturally based farm-to-school intervention to increase vegetable intake among NA children and their families. The intervention was implemented within Osage Nation ECEs. The aim of this manuscript is to describe the FRESH intervention results, including changes in dietary intake , body mass index , systolic blood pressure , health status, and food insecurity among Osage Nation families. The six-month FRESH study employed a randomized wait-list controlled trial design with treatment condition assigned at the community level . The design and methods of the FRESH study have been published in detail elsewhere. In summary, our tribal-university partnership recruited NA families of children attending Osage Nation ECE programs in four communities to assess individual-level changes on children and adults. Two communities received the intervention and two communities served as wait-list controls. We randomized by community instead of ECE program to avoid crossover due to geographical proximity to members of the other study group. The FRESH Leadership Committee included four university researchers and 13 Osage Nation employees from the health, education, language, agriculture, and government divisions and led all aspects of the study. University researchers set up tables in ECE programs during school orientation, back-to-school nights, and during child drop-off/pickup to notify parents about the study and invite them to participate.ECE staff also contacted parents to notify them about the study. FRESH study flyers that promoted the study were shared through children’s backpacks and parent mailings. Flyers were also posted in classrooms around the schools. Adults at least 18 years old who met the following inclusion criteria were eligible to participate in the study: one or more family member in the household identified as NA; one or more child between the ages of three and six years enrolled at an Osage Nation ECE program; planned to reside in Osage Nation for nine months or more; and one or more adult family member willing to engage in monthly family nights at the school. Children were eligible if they were between the ages of three and six years old, enrolled in a participating ECE program, and were a household family member of an eligible adult.