California Coast & Ocean

That view was supported in a U.C. Santa Cruz research brief published in fall 2006 by the Center for Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems. Citing more than 80 studies, it noted that removing vegetation-based practices such as filter and contour buffer strips, grassed waterways, vegetative barriers, and constructed wetlands, "would not only reverse progress towards addressing water quality issues, but could also potentially increase the presence and transport of pathogens." Although food safety and environmental protection are interconnected, the research brief argued, they are now on a collision course in the Salinas Valley.

"Millions of dollars of taxpayer money have been invested in helping farmers develop sustainable agriculture and address non-point source pollution," said Jovita Pajarillo, associate director of EPA's Region 9 water division. "Now we're hearing horror stories about growers going out with bulldozers to remove hedgerows. You can't blame them; they've lost millions. But such practices may result in an enforcement action against them because of water quality concerns."

Pajarillo works with the California Roundtable, a coalition of environmental groups and agencies that, along with food safety and agricultural industry representatives, is trying to address the conflict. They hope to bring the major buyers to the table and begin a dialogue. So far that hasn't happened.

"I see both sides digging in their heels," said Michael Payne of the Western Institute for Food Safety and Security at U.C. Davis. "What's needed here is common sense and individualized risk assessment for a particular farm. . . . Some practices are no-brainers, and others we don't have research on." Payne hopes the money that industry is now pouring into the Institute's research will help it become a meeting ground.

Dr. Benbrook was less enthusiastic about the priorities of the industry-funded research. "Are people being honest about what farmers need to do?" he asked. "I'm not super-impressed with the lack of focus on critical variables such as managing cow manure. There's been a systematic effort to leave the cattle industry out of the dialogue. 'Let's not look under that rock.' And that's ridiculous. . . . There's no feral pig lobby, and pigs are a convenient scapegoat for this. Let's learn something new about this bacterium [E. coli 0157:H7] and find some different ways to prevent and deal with it."

The science of how E. coli gets into produce is still in its infancy. According to Linda Harris, a U.C. Davis food safety researcher, "It's less than a decade old." She believes that "we will never eliminate food-borne illness entirely." Meanwhile, the conflict between food safety and environmental protection has left Central Coast growers twisting in the wind.

If and when the next outbreak occurs, will the onus again be put on them?

Carl Nagin is a Berkeley-based reporter whose work has appeared in the New Yorker and on the PBS documentary series Frontline.