Progress 09/01/06 to 08/31/13
Outputs
OUTPUTS: Conference calls for growers during their pest management season is a key activity of this work. Calls were held for both apple growers and strawberry growers. Apple grower participation was strongest with more than 20 growers regularly participating, either directly on the call or by downloading the call recording. Growers consistantly remark on the importance of this service in that it stretches capacity to meet their critical need for coaching during this season. The program supported IPM field days for grapes, bringing in key experts to share their experience in growing grapes sustainably. We held an All Networks meeting for apple growers in November where ~20 growers shared their experience about what worked in 2010 and what could be improved in 2011. We conducted research on-farm for coddling moth, disease control, tarnished plant bug, native bee pollinators and made considerable progress with coddling moth work. We offered apple, grape and cherry growers a pesticide application workshop that targeted smaller scale operations. We prepared to launch new coach training for fruit IPM, set to start in January. We continued to target services for wholesale growers, including a sustainability cert program. PARTICIPANTS: Nothing significant to report during this reporting period. TARGET AUDIENCES: Nothing significant to report during this reporting period. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: Nothing significant to report during this reporting period.
Impacts
We earlier documented the important role that on-farm coaching plays in assisting farmers in their efforts to meet pesticide risk reduction goals. Much of our effort this year has been to fuel coaching activities - through conference calls and by training new coaches - so that more growers can access this critical service. Another key outcome has been articulating issues important to wholesale apple growers and helping them to access regional markets with their products. This has included a transportation study of transportation infrastructure for apple growers in the Driftless, to be published July 2011.
Publications
- "The Driftless Region Food and Farm Project: Building a Robust, Regional Food System in Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota and Wisconsin", 2010 printed by CIAS.
|
Progress 01/01/09 to 12/31/09
Outputs
OUTPUTS: Work on sustainable fruit production and food systems were the focus in 2009. Efforts to understand the scaling up process and meeting the demand for local food, particularly in the 4-state Driftless Region. Balancing sustainability and economic development with market demand for product is critical to move significant quantities of this food into the existing wholesale marketplaces. Linking values to economics through community food enterprises requires food citizenship, commitment to place, and a sense of terroir. The work dove-tailed with the Good Food Network Upper Midwest. Eco-fruit production requires growers to retool their orchards, vineyards and berry fields with IPM-friendly approaches to pest management. Hundreds of apple, grape and strawberry growers participated in activities sponsored by the eco-fruit program in 2009, including grower conference calls, grower meetings and IPM field days, grower network events. More than 75 apple growers participated in farmer networks and pest management conference calls during the growing season. PARTICIPANTS: Regina Hirsch, CIAS, UW Madison; Doug Wubben, CIAS, UW Madison; Samuel Pratch, CIAS, UW MAdison; Lisa DiPietro, CIAS, UW Madison; Mark Sieffert, CIAS, UW Madison; Alexandra Lyon, CIAS, UW Madison; Lindsey Day-Farnsworth, CIAS, UW Madison; Brent McCown, Horticulture, UW Madison; Michael Bell, Community and Environmental Sociology, UW Madison; Alfonso Morales, Urban and Regional Planning, UW Madison; Anne Pfeiffer, UWEX; Jason Fischbach, UWEX; Jerry Clark, UWEX; Ron Doetch, MFAI; Jim Bower, Blue Planet Partners; Rich Pirog, Leopold Center, ISU; Eric Mader and Scott Black, Xerces Society; Fred Wescott and Don Roper, Wescott Agriproducts; Tom Green, IPM Institute of North America; and others. Professional development training included participation in project management courses and pesticide application courses. TARGET AUDIENCES: Nothing significant to report during this reporting period. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: For the last eight years, the eco-fruit work has focused on field implementation of various IPM strategies to control pests, and measuring actual pesticide risk on participating farms. We have documented a positive correlation between adopting IPM and pesticide risk reduction. Starting in 2009, we are refocusing our work to on-farm research projects chosen by growers and supported by production specialists. On-farm research of note includes native bee conservation, japanese beetle control, areawide management of coddling moth, disease control through irrigation. We are addressing specific information and service needs through workshops for beginning apple growers and on pesticide application innovations and a course for field consultants. We will continue with grower conference calls and continue to explore ways to work effectively with the emerging winegrape industry on pesticide risk reduction.
Impacts
Eleven community food enterprises from around the US were interviewed and documented for publication. Through in-depth phone interviews with founders, CEOs, and managers, barriers and opportunities for scaling up were IDed. This information was shared with representatives from other universities, NGOs and businesses from the 6-state Upper Midwest at Good Food Network meetings, as well as at a USDA-sponsored writeshop on the topic brought together 20 representatives from the Driftless region to discuss regional needs for scaling up local food in a way that would meet community criteria for sustainability. Meetings to explore wholesale apple production in the Driftless Region were conducted throughout the year. Barriers and opportunities were identified, including lack of cold storage, need for greater forethought about varietal selection, and need to improve ability to work together as growers. 15 apple grower conference calls during the pest management season involved more than 60 growers in conversations about pesticide risk reduction. 12 berry grower conference calls engaged an average of 13 growers on pesticide risk reduction. 45 apple growers participated in 5 IPM grower networks. Three Grape IPM field days were sponsored, as well as one each for apple, berry and organic apple growers. Meetings were held with apple growers and berry growers to assess the usefulness of the networks, conference calls and other supported activities and to set a course for the coming year. Regular meetings to discuss the 595 IPM standard in federal conservation programs were engaged and other states were brought into the work of shifting these programs to fill the needs of diversified specialty crop producers, particularly in Ohio and Minnesota.
Publications
- Day-Farnsworth, L., McCown, B., Miller, M. and Pfeiffer, A. 2009. Scaling Up: Meeting the demand for local food. Center for Integrated Agricultural Systems research report.
- Nabhan, G., Trotter, J. Allen, T., Rogers, E., Busse, D.,Schneider, E., Motoviloff, J., Miller, M., and Ingram, M. 2009. Place-based Foods at Risk in the Great Lakes. Slow Food - Renewing America's Food Traditions report.
- DiPietro, L., and Miller, M. 2009. Extending Expertise Through Conference Calls and Blogging. Journal of Extension.
|
Progress 01/01/08 to 12/31/08
Outputs
OUTPUTS: Because our support is limited, we kept the size of our apple grower networks steady at 48 growers in 2008, despite increased interest in participation. We continued to support coaching and network coordination through a private consultant, two interns working with Extension educators in Chippewa and Bayfield Counties and with the Peninsular Ag Experiment Station in Door County. I merged work on biological control (a SARE-funded project to support the revision and publication of "Biological Control of Insects and Mites") with apple work through a workshop on biological control at Peninsular and through another workshop at the Upper Midwest Organic Farming Conference (targeted for a wider audience than apple growers). To further support decision-making during critical intervention periods, we conducted another year of IPM conference calls, this year for conventional apple production, organic apple production and strawberry production. All three of these calls will be continued in 2009, with changes to improve their effectiveness. In addition to the annual All Networks meeting, we added some additional meetings to help growers and Network Coordinators think through next steps for the project. This included meetings with wholesale growers and packing sheds to investigate limits to their efforts to build an eco-apple regional label. We are negotiating the use of an IPM protocol based on the experience of direct marketers with IPM and wholesale growers in the New England states (Red Tomato and the IPM Institute). This links with my work on food systems (Good to Grow and the Good Food Network) and farm-to-school work at the Center, as we negotiate what it will take to scale up horticultural production to meet the market demand for regionally-produced food. Efforts continue on linking IPM to NRCS conservation programs and our efforts here in WI are serving as a national model. Staff participate in monthly national conference calls to share strategies, especially helpful now that conservation programs are under revision with the new Administration. Working with the WI Berry Growers Association, we helped to set a baseline for IPM used on WI strawberry fields. WBGA is now interested in moving forward with a program modeled after the apple project in hopes of improving crop and environmental management. Grape growers, too, are interested in an IPM program. PARTICIPANTS: The CIAS eco-fruit team was Michelle Miller, program manager; Regina Hirsch, data / policy manager;Lisa DiPietro, farmer communicator; Gini Knight, design volunteer. Also engaged have been Doug Wubben and Sara Tedeschi, farm-to-school; Anne Pfeiffer, Heidi Busse, Lindsey Farnsworth, and Diane Mayerfeld, food systems; John Hendrickson and Erin Silva, organics; Cris Carusi and Ruth McNair, communications; Trish Haza and Brent McCown, administration. It is the synthesis of our work that has made this complex program possible. Campus researchers engaged in the work include Dan Mahr, Entomology; Patty McManus, Plant Pathology; Teryl Roper, Horticulture; Biran Smith, UWRF; Paul Whitaker, UW-Marathon Co., as well as researchers from outside WI to review the Biocontrol book. Networks have been coordinated by John Aue, Threshold Consulting; Matt Stasiak, Peninsular Ag Research Station; Jerry Clark, UWEX-Chippewa Co.; Jason Fischbach, Bayfield Co.;Andy Merry, Merry's Berries; Dale Secher, Carandale Farm. Extension's Emerging Agricultural Markets team has also played a role, as has Extension publication services and Mimi Broeske at the Nutrient and Pest Management Program.Grower organizations include the WI Apple Growers Association; Berry Growers Association;Grape Growers Association; Wisconsin Farmers Union; Midwest Organic / Sustainable Education Services; Michael Fields Agricultural Institute; IPM Institute; Red Tomato; Wescott AgriProducts; Wal-Mart, Sodexo. We've also worked closely with the WI Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection; the Minnesota Department of Agriculture; USEPA and EPA-V; USDA SARE and NCR SARE; NCR-NRCS/IPM working group; NRCS WI state office and the State Technical Committee. More than 60 farmers were involved in our eco-fruit and biocontrol work, including a farmer writer and farmer reviewers for the book. TARGET AUDIENCES: Target audiences have been all of the above. This is a participatory research project. We have been very successful in engaging our audiences in a meaningful way. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: Scope creep is inevitable in this sort of project. Project scope is dependent on support available for specific endeavors. In 2009, we have support to substantially expand the grape and berry portion of the work by laying the foundation necessary for complex management systems, and to direct field work in apples to applied research on specific pest management methods. We also have support to explore culinary identity as it relates to complex production systems in the Driftless Region. Growers very much want to link fruit production and pollinator habitat research. The link from eco-fruit to CIAS food systems / farm-to-school work is increasingly strong as markets for regionally produced food expand . We expect 2009 to be focused on fund raising and developing necessary relationships for these new areas of participatory research.
Impacts
Data indicate that growers increase their use of IPM each year they are involved in the project, up to 78%, which is considered advanced IPM adoption. Pesticide application, in particular, is much more targeted. The link between IPM adoption and pesticide risk is reflected in the concurrent toxicity scores from growers. This impact is possible because we are reaching growers during key intervention points in the growing season. Early results indicate that while one-on-one coaching contact is preferable, conference calls and other distance education tools can play a role in supporting complex decision-making. The AppleTalk blog is key to archiving information (especially seasonal management information), measuring impact (through user access monitoring) and reaching people who are comfortable on the internet (a growing pool of growers). We increased the number of authenticated users by 45% (from 51-74), increased the average number of hits from Network members by 64% (from 51 to 64 hits on average). The blog has proven effective enough to warrant its use with the organic calls and the berry calls. The conference calls for organic apple growers also proved useful. In the first season od organic conference calls, 38 growers listed to at least one call, with an average of 7 growers participating in the live calls and another 16 listening to the recordings. The extra grower meetings this year resulted in the development of at least three on-farm research projects for 2009(mating disruption in Bayfield County, Japanese Beetle research on the farms of a number of participating growers, sprayer calibration experiments on participating farms,and potentially habitat restoration for pollinators and other beneficials). Because of our work, self-organized research was initiated in the farmer networks in 2008, such as Bayfield's SARE-supported work on abandoned orchards, Chippewa's work on wholesaling eco-apples, and UWGB's work on organic apples. More than 35 orchard growers in Wisconsin have signed up for NRCS conservation programs since 2005. One of our network growers received the highest recognition from NRCS as a conservation grower with the coveted Conservation Stewardship Program award, a green payment given to farmers who demonstrate a sophisticated conservation strategy. This is the only horticultural producer known to have received such a designation in Wisconsin. The Berry IPM baseline survey indicated that over 66% of the berry growers are not using monitoring / scouting thresholds to improve their pest management,indicating considerable room for improvement. Grape growers are interested in learning more about IPM. As for impact from the Biocontrol project, eight states have distributed the book through workshops serving hundreds of growers. The UMOFC alone served nearly 100 growers. In Wisconsin, workshops targeted to field crops (soybeans), vegetable crops (organic curcubits), and apples reached more that 100 growers. The book was used in multiple workshops on high tunnel, greenhouse, and organic production in the eight-state region.
Publications
- IPM: beyond the basics. 2008 Brochure targeted to consumers about why and how growers use IPM. [20,000 brochures printed and distributed in 2008, with another print run in process]
- Hirsch, Regina and Michelle Miller, Progressive planning to address multiple resource concerns: Integrated Pest Management in WI orchards. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation. March / April 2008 - Vo. 63, No. 2 on-line at www.cias.wisc.edu/crops-and-livestock/eqip-support-for-ipm-in-wiscons in-orchards/
- Mahr, Daniel, Paul Whitaker and Nino Ridgway. Biological Control of insects and mites: an introduction to beneficial natural enemies and their use in a pest management system. 2008 UWEX publication A3842. On-line at learningstore.uwex.edu
|
Progress 01/01/07 to 12/31/07
Outputs
OUTPUTS: 48 Wisconsin orchards are now participating in the Eco-Apple project. 38 orchards are in the four grower networks (Bayfield, Chippewa Valley, Northeast, Southeast) and 10 are in a self-organized network in Dane County. Each network coordinator and coach has met with their growers 2-4 times during the growing season. We conducted an All Networks meeting in November, with 25 growers in attendance. Key action items include improving data management tools, esp. for rigorous pesticide use reporting. Eco-Apple Project staff facilitated hour-long calls with the project's private consultant and growers every Monday morning during the 2007 pest management season from April 2 through August 13. The calls were open to any interested party, including those outside of Wisconsin Eco-Apple Networks. The private consultant was sometimes joined by Extension specialists, especially when insect and disease outbreaks were in full swing. Other growers, too, offered advice based on their own
field experience, where appropriate. Staff participated in the NCR-IPM NRCS/IPM working group conference calls and meetings. Staff also began developing an eco-berry project for strawberry growers.
PARTICIPANTS: The list of participants is extensive and can be provided in excel format.
TARGET AUDIENCES: WI fruit growers - currently apples, cherries, strawberries, blueberries.
PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: The project scope has expanded beyond apples to include cherries ( as part of the effort to expand the federal EQIP program to cover pest management issues in orchards), strawberries (at the request of strawberry growers who saw the potential for improved management at an industry level), blueberries (when the opportunity to work with MSU to provide an IPM workshop materialized), and other emerging horticultural crops (grapes, hazelnuts, unusual fruits, etc..).
Impacts
There is a trend toward higher IPM scores and lower pesticide risk scores for farmers involved in the ecoapple project. IPM scores are clearly increasing over time. The average baseline score across networks and years is just under 50%, while after three field seasons in the program, participants averaged 77%. Looking at data analyzed between 2004 (the first year of fieldwork) through 2006 (the last year of pesticide reporting), there is an average 25% reduction in pesticide risk. Specifically, there is a 56% drop in the reported high scores from 2004 to 2006 as growers being to trust the field level data they are collecting. There is some increase in scores for in 2006 from 2005, we think because of the impact on disease from the 2005 drought. Because we have so few years data and we did not factor pest pressure into the scoring system, it is difficult to set a target pesticide risk range for growers to function within. The conference calls during pest management
season were useful. 81% of those providing feedback gave the calls a usefulness rating of four or five, with five being "very useful." Two-thirds said that the conference calls replaced the need for at least one private phone call with the consultant. About 60% said that if this service were no longer free, they would be willing to pay for the service. Of those who would be willing to pay, most said they could spend about 10 dollars per call.
Publications
- No publications reported this period
|
Progress 07/01/06 to 12/31/06
Outputs
We worked with 37 apple growers in the 2006 season to implement and document pesticide risk reduction. To attain this objective, we supported grower networks to facilitate learning, provided coaching to assist growers with implementing IPM and began to analyze farm specific data, in part through finding new ways to manage pesticide records. Growers met in November to discuss the project successes and limitations. A key factor discussed was the need for more support from coaches during the critical pest management times. We intend to work with coaches this year to increase the usefulness of the Apple Talk blog in extending their reach during critical pest management times. We are initiating a weekly conference call for participating growers to speak with coaches about issues at hand. The calls will commence in April and go through July. Data analysis is progressing steadily, but slowly. A number of growers are experimenting with submitting pesticide use data using the
spreadsheet software we provided this year. We had a special one-hour training at the November meeting where growers could speak with the software developer about how to apply the software. It became as much a training in the importance of keeping good records as it was a session on how to use the software. We hope to have 2006 analysis complete by early spring. Staff member Regina Hirsch organized a two day training program for NRCS district conservationists and soil conservationists to train them about the intensity of orchard management and the benefits of the EQIP Pest Management Standard for orchardists in Wisconsin. Trainers were UW-Extension orchard specialists Dan Mahr, Patty McManus and Teryl Roper; the project's IPM consultant John Aue; Barbara VanTil from EPA; Pat Murphy from NRCS' Resource Conservationists; and Michelle Miller from CIAS. The training covered basic orchard insect, disease, and weed management, introduction to orchard IPM; current and future orchard
pesticide regulations; the positive results of the Wisconsin Eco-apple Project using IPM and coaches; and how to write conservation and IPM plans for growers with an EQIP contract. We had NRCS personnel representing 18 counties attend. We also conducted three in-orchard training course this summer (July and August 2006) to bring together orchard growers and their representative NRCS district conservationists. Growers were invited to participate in the field days to give them an opportunity to interact with local NRCS employees and learn more about EQIP signup. We discussed EQIP with growers through four venues: in the grower newsletter, at the November meeting for all network growers, at a workshop on EQIP organized by Bayfield UWEX in November, and at the 2007 winter grower conference in January. We are in the early stages of initiating an eco-berry project, modeled after the eco-apple project.
Impacts
At least 30 fruit growers will change their current calendar spray behavior to an IPM based decision-making behavior during the years 2006-2008. Of these 30 growers at least 2/3 will reduce toxicity risk based on their PRAT score by 40% or more and will increase IPM adoption from their baseline year.At least 50% of these growers will be active in area orchard networks where they will work closely with coaches and glean IPM and orchard management information from other network members, UW-extension, and other orchard IPM professionals.
Publications
- No publications reported this period
|
|