Recipient Organization
UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA
(N/A)
FAIRBANKS,AK 99775
Performing Department
(N/A)
Non Technical Summary
This is an Extension Implementation Project (EIP). IPM coordinator and administrative contact for this project is Dr. Casey Matney. Our goal is to improve the resiliency and sustainability of Alaska agriculture and communities through IPM strategies that reduce the rate of establishment of invasive species and mitigate the effects of existing pests. Our objectives are to: 1) strengthen support for IPM assistants and outreach efforts to enhance early detection and rapid response to pests in communities and specialty crops, especially invasive species, 2) engage in revegetation research using native plants to overcome invasive weeds and advance pollinator health while reducing pesticide risks, and 3) improve IPM distance training for pesticide applicators. Alaska has been leading the nation in the number of new farms and farmers. Not only are there more beginning farmers, but it's been revealed that the state holds the second youngest average age of producers, along with being number two in the percentage of female producers and percentage of producers with military service. These farmers need IPM information and training. While agriculture is growing in Alaska, the climate is warming two to three times faster than the global average and approximately 50% greater than the lower-48 states. Under these circumstances, Alaska is at greater risk of new pest invasion than ever before. To address these challenges, our project priorities are: IPM Implementation in Specialty Crops (21%), IPM implementation in Communities (53%), IPM for Pollinator Health (15%), and IPM for Pesticide Applicators (11%).
Animal Health Component
(N/A)
Research Effort Categories
Basic
(N/A)
Applied
(N/A)
Developmental
(N/A)
Goals / Objectives
Major Goals:Make pest identification and IPM management the standard operating procedures for all people in Alaska agriculture systems and communities. We want these procedures to be commonplace and routine.IPM Implementation in Specialty Crops Objectives:Educate farmers and the public about mollusk identification, risks to crops and ecosystems, and allow us to gain critical information to employ integrated pest management strategies to better control non-native mollusks in the state.IPM Implementation in Communities Objectives:Maintain and train IPM assistants in regions of Alaska. Increase awareness and training on pest scouting techniques, to provide Master Gardeners and other home gardeners with IPM information for their crop pests, preventing introductions, and encourage them to contribute to pest detection through submitting inquiries about unusual and problematic pests, diseases, and weeds to our offices.IPM Implementation in Pollinator Health Objectives:Evaluate the tolerance of different native pollinator plant species to persistent herbicides typically used in the control of invasive weeds and to determine if the addition of biochar to soils can help mitigate the negative effect of herbicide residues to improve the seeding establishment rate of these sensitive native plant species.IPM Education for Pesticide Applicators Objectives:Provide enhanced online opportunities for pesticide applicators to earn CEU's and incorporate relevant IPM techniques into their specialized category of pest control activities.
Project Methods
Dr. Casey Matney is the overall Program Director, and he will directly oversee other key personnel and the work associated with the IPM implementation plans. Matney will be the lead person for the IPM Implementation in Specialty Crops priority area and will oversee all work in the plant protection tactics and tools focus area. Matney will work closely to develop, organize, and teach First Detector trainings and the yearly training workshop IPM assistants. Matney will organize and manage the work of the IPM assistants to ensure the best use of their time to visit as many farms and communities as possible during the field season. Matney will also be working with the IPM assistants to set up classes for First Detectors to expand the number of people looking for pests. Matney and program assistants will be giving IPM presentations at various farm and community meetings in Alaska. These classes and presentations are two important activities with a major contribution to short-term outcomes. For the medium- and long-term outcomes, we expect that the educational and scouting activities will result in the adoption of regular pest scouting and reporting and results of IPM activities from homeowners, farmers, and ranchers as a standard practice. Ultimately, we should be able to measure a decline in the rate of pest introductions to agricultural land and an increase in the number of pests successfully managed and/or eradicated.IPM Education for Pesticide Applicators will be led by Casey Matney and assisted by Phil Kaspari who is already engaged with Alaska PSEP. He will be assisted by IPM assistants, agriculture/horticulture extension agents, and staff at the DEC. IPM topics will be selected based on discussions of need and impact in meetings to be held shortly after the funding of this proposal. A list of topics will be created and prioritized and sent to our IPM advisory board, certified applicators, and other state and local groups for discussion and modification. This list of topics will be revisited yearly and re-prioritized based on perceived needs in Alaska. Inclusion of guest presenters from WERA 1017 partners through the Western IPM Center will be utilized when appropriate to bolster education for pesticide applicators in Alaska. It is envisioned that these IPM trainings for pesticide applicator recertification CEUs will have relevance to a much wider audience than our certified applicators. More online courses will be produced over the three years of the grant and in the short-term we expect to record active use of these courses by both certified applicators and others interested in IPM. In the medium-term we expect more of these programs to be developed with more people using them. Our long-term outcome is that IPM will be standard practice when a pesticide applicator is called in to control a pest.The program PD will work closely within the UAF system to effectively develop and deliver the programs of this proposal and will work with project partners and stakeholders across Alaska to ensure that information disseminated via Extension is sought after and appropriate. The proposal is currently set up as a partnership between numerous UAF CES faculty and staff. UAF IPM faculty and staff will conduct biweekly team meetings. A UAF CES IPM Advisory Board will be established to maintain communication across UAF departments and stakeholder groups. The advisory board will be comprised of members from the following organizations: Alaska Div. of Agriculture; Alaska Div. of Forestry; Alaska Pesticide Control Program; USDA Forest Service; NRCS; UAF Dept. of Veterinary Medicine; UAF Institute of Agriculture, Natural Resources and Extension; and the Alaska Farm Bureau. The UAF IPM team will continue to collaborate and network with WERA 1017 members and the Western IPM Center. Representation from these groups will assure that a wide variety of stakeholders will be aware of regional IPM issues and needs. Through formal communication, those representatives will be able to identify how their organizations can assist in creating IPM program solutions. This group of representatives will meet by teleconference to track the grant proposal programs, set overall IPM program goals, and evaluate successes. Within each priority there are additional stakeholder groups that will be called upon to provide input and collaboration independent of the advisory committee, as noted in each priority scope and in the stakeholder engagement portion of the proposal. Information gathered from this program will be disseminated to partners and stakeholders through the pathways established in the IPM Partnerships in Wide-Area Pest Monitoring and Reporting Systems portion of the proposal.Alaska has previously established IPM Partnerships in Wide-Area Pest Monitoring and Reporting Systems, that will be helpful and fundamental to an evaluation of the progress and success of this grant. The reporting system will be able to quantify the numbers of agriculture pests, results of IPM techniques, number of people using the database, and the overall impact on the rate of pest increase in Alaska. There is also an established system of gathering feedback from agricultural conferences in Alaska; commonly, over half the attendees take the time to give thoughtful responses to questions on surveys or Zoom polls about what information they found most relevant and how they will change their practices.Initial outcomes such as favorable attitudes towards IPM and increases in knowledge of IPM will be measured through stakeholder surveys. Advances in knowledge of IPM techniques and confidence in ability to apply them will be assessed through retrospective pre-post tests administered as part of IPM workshops and First Detector trainings. Farmer, rancher, and citizen's willingness to have their properties scouted in rural areas and communities will be tracked through an existing activity report system that cumulatively records client contacts throughout the year, including repeat contacts. As farms and ranches are visited by IPM assistants, a follow-up questionnaire will be emailed (or mailed if needed) to contacts to ascertain how frequently they scout for pests and their level of understanding and use of IPM practices. At this stage, clients will also be reminded of where to send pest reports, who to contact for questions, and how to send in unknown pests.Web analytics will be used to assess the efficacy of mediated outreach. Several of the short- and mid-term effects mentioned in our logic models include increased demand for online courses, regular input of pest data, and active use of the pest database. These will be tracked electronically. Such analytics can also help grant personnel assess and adjust marketing efforts to make sure as many potential clients as possible are aware of opportunities for IPM education. Other mid-term outcomes, such as regular reporting of pests to IPM assistants, and a decrease in new pests, can again be assessed through recording client contacts and administering stakeholder surveys.Follow-up surveys and interviews can be used to determine progress on some of the mid and longer-term outcomes that include sustained changes in attitude and behavior at a community level. Specific to the logic model are the increased acceptance and expectation of IPM, and its use across the state by pesticide applicators and other key stakeholder groups, with the goal of fewer pests in Alaska. Periodic formative reviews of progress on these goals will allow grant personnel to adjust course content and outreach efforts in the event any corrective action is needed. Careful record keeping over the course of the grant will allow trends in acceptance and adoption to emerge.?