Progress 10/01/07 to 09/30/12
Outputs
OUTPUTS: Three phases of extension outreach were undertaken. The first was a group of three webinars to help train those working with fly issues on farms to understand the identification, life cycle and integrated controls of flies on the farm. The second and third phases of the program were targeted to large and smaller (under 50,000 birds) farms in scouting and control methods for fly control. Three extension programs were given to assist large sized farm operators and technicians dealing with house fly issues in light of the FDA egg rule. In addition, an on-farm workshop for FDA inspectors was given and house fly life cycles, scouting and monitoring programs were discussed. These FDA inspectors examined 80% of the nations production within the two years of the beginning of the egg rule. Guidelines and extension aids helped in the organized collection of pest impact on the farms (fly & rodents) so that timely controls can be enacted. This helped in compliance with the FDA rule. Four small flock offerings were offered to help reach those smaller farms that were folded into the FDA egg safety rule after July 2012. PARTICIPANTS: PA department of Agriculture Ombudsman Program, serving as coordinator of fly pest calls. Cornell University Department of Entomology and Agricultural Cooperative Extension assistance in training programs. Penn State University Department of Entomology for assistance in training programs. Penn State University Department of Poultry Science for assistance in training programs. Kreider Farms, Manheim, PA for the use of their poultry farm for training. Bob Keller Penn Valley Farms (Organic Egg Farm) for training purposes. Allied industry technical service reps from companies supplying pesticides to the poultry industry. PA Department of Agriculture field staff for assistance in fly calls during this reporting period. TARGET AUDIENCES: Primary audience has been agricultural poultry producers with animal production and their immediate neighbors. These include but not limited to poultry, dairy, beef, equine and swine enterprises. Additional audiences have expanded to governmental representatives including township officials who handle fly complaints from neighbors near animal facilities. These individuals were targeted during this period for training programs. In addition, FDA field inspectors were also included in the trainings to assist in their evaluation of fly IPM programs seen on the farms. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: Nothing significant to report during this reporting period.
Impacts
Of the 33 large-scale workshop participants 80 percent stated that they learned something new about the house fly and its ecology. Forty percent stated that they felt comfortable performing farm fly assessments. Over the remaining months of this reporting period, five participants of the workshop performed field observation studies of house fly infestations, or took calls in the farming community they are responsible for. Newspaper articles on fly control were distributed to over 50 thousand subscribers in the areas showing high fly counts. Control of flies was achieved in all but two instances on poultry farms. Adoption of scouting methods for IPM has begun with larger (50,000 hens+) egg farms. Over 78% of the PA farms scouting are using materials distributed via extension programs. Other egg farms outside of PA were able to use the count sheets and other materials as well. Interest from Europe and Asia was seen this year from web statistics. Due to this higher level of on farm fly scouting, calls to the PA SWAT fast response fly team have dropped in comparison to previous years. Smaller farms seeing the success of the larger farm programs have adopted scouting methods explained in programs given directly to them. These formed the foundation of their on-farm program. 98% of participants of the small farm program adopted two to three fly control monitoring and control practices that were discussed on their smaller farms.
Publications
- Martin, G. P. 2010. An overview of scouting for house flies. http://www.personal.psu.edu/gpm10/monitoring_haccp.html.
- Martin, G.P. 2010. Excel spreadsheet for recording house fly scouting. http://www.personal.psu.edu/gpm10/IPMcount411.xlsx.
- Martin, G. P. 2010. Speck count recording sheet for use with FDA egg rule guidelines. http://www.personal.psu.edu/gpm10/SpeckCounter.pdf.
|
Progress 10/01/10 to 09/30/11
Outputs
OUTPUTS: Extension efforts addressing house fly interactions on poultry farms was the focus of this year's activities. Three extension programs were given to assist farmers and technicians dealing with house fly issues in light of the FDA egg rule. In addition, an on-farm workshop for FDA inspectors was given and house fly life cycles, scouting and monitoring programs were discussed. These inspectors will be examining 80% of the nations production within the next two years of the beginning of the egg rule. Online documents for support of this effort include an overview of scouting for house flies: http://www.personal.psu.edu/gpm10/monitoring_haccp.html along with an excel spreadsheet that includes a monitoring & graph component for recording house fly scouting - http://www.personal.psu.edu/gpm10/IPMcount411.xlsx along with a revision of the speck count recording sheet in line with FDA egg rule guidelines http://www.personal.psu.edu/gpm10/SpeckCounter.pdf. These guidelines help in the organized collection of pest impact on the farms (fly & rodents) so that timely controls can be enacted. PARTICIPANTS: PA department of Agriculture Ombudsman Program, serving as coordinator of fly pest calls. Cornell University Department of Entomology and Agricultural Cooperative Extension assistance in training programs. Penn State University Department of Entomology for assistance in training programs. Penn State University Department of Poultry Science for assistance in training programs. Kreider Farms, Manheim, PA for the use of their poultry farm for training. Bob Keller Organic Egg Farm for training purposes. Allied industry technical service reps from companies supplying pesticides to the poultry industry. PA Department of Agriculture for assistance in fly calls during this reporting period TARGET AUDIENCES: Primary audience has been agricultural producers with animal production and their immediate neighbors. These include but not limited to poultry, dairy, beef, equine and swine enterprises. Additional audiences have expanded to governmental representatives including township officials who handle fly complaints from neighbors near animal facilities. These individuals were targeted during this period for training programs. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: Some delays in field investigations have been due to the lack of external funding to support supplies and travel. In-kind donations of some equipment have been made, yet in not enough numbers to ensure statistical significance if equipment is deployed. I will be investigating further other sources of funding. FLY IPM programming (with emphasis on scouting) will be focused next period for the smaller egg farms in the region, as they will soon fall under the FDA egg rule. Specific training will be offered to these groups.
Impacts
Adoption of scouting methods for IPM has begun with larger (50,000 hens+) egg farms. Over 78% of the PA farms scouting are using materials distributed via extension programs. Other egg farms outside of PA were able to use the count sheets and other materials as well. Interest from Europe and Asia was seen this year from web statistics. Due to this higher level of scouting, calls to the PA SWAT fast response fly team have dropped in comparison to previous years. This is in consideration of a wet year with delayed harvest of hay fields bordering poultry farms.
Publications
- Martin, G.P. 2010. An overview of scouting for house flies. http://www.personal.psu.edu/gpm10/monitoring_haccp.html
|
Progress 10/01/09 to 09/30/10
Outputs
OUTPUTS: Two webinar offerings were given to stakeholders who work on house fly issues on farms. These webinars entitled FlyCamp I and FlyCamp II were designed to help train state and local officials to respond to farms (and their neighbors) with fly problems and the follow steps in the SWAT program to help in their identification, control and mitigation of issues in the areas affected. This series employed participants from the northeast, and was divided into a primary and advanced course to aid in the identification and control of flies and pests surrounding livestock and poultry production. Participants in the two programs felt better prepared for handling fly outbreaks in the farming sector and were able to communicate with SWAT coordinators with serious problems. Most of the western half of Pennsylvania counties, along with three counties in the east, and one county in New York were represented in this program series. PARTICIPANTS: Gregory P. Martin, PhD, PAS (PI) who facilitated and hosted the webinar series and gave presentations on the SWAT process of fly control and dealing with the public in outbreaks. Shelly Dehoff, PA department of Agriculture Ombudsman Program gave a presentation on the routing of SWAT calls and how fly issues are to be reported within PA. Don Rutz, PhD., Cornell University Veterinary Entomology (member of S1030 committee) and Keith Waldron, Cornell University Entomology Extension, gave presentations on the identification and control of fly pests in barns and surrounding vegetation along with the various methods of control within an IPM system. TARGET AUDIENCES: Audience members (over 45 persons) included state and county administrative and field staff who normally visit farms under regulatory programs. Natural resources staff (NRCS, County Soil Conservation Districts) who are called in times of need when house fly outbreaks on farms are heavy were also included. A few (two) poultry farm representatives were also present in the program. The use of the video delivery technology allowed for the dispersal of information across the state in a timely fashion before the major time of year for fly outbreaks. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: Nothing significant to report during this reporting period.
Impacts
The fly camp webinar materials were based upon work completed by Cornell University Veterinary Extension in Conjunction with Penn State University Entomology Extension, and Penn State Extension Poultry Science. Field experiences recorded by the primary investigator were interjected into the program demonstrating current control strategies available for the control of house flies on poultry farms and fields. Since many of the participants had little to no prior experience in this subject area, a major improvement in the knowledge of these workers was seen.
Publications
- No publications reported this period
|
Progress 10/01/08 to 09/30/09
Outputs
OUTPUTS: Extension efforts of expanding House Fly IPM knowledge to state and local agricultural officials was offered in a two-day workshop called FLY CAMP. Audience members included state department of agriculture staff, state veterinary staff, cooperative extension educators and other public officials who would potentially visit farms and municipalities that would be experiencing heavy fly infestations. This workshop also included presenters who are members of this project (PA, NY). Subjects (lecture/discussion format) covered in the workshop included pest IPM, Fly Identification, New and Emerging Technologies in Fly Control, Biosecurity, Methods for documenting fly outbreaks with assessing fly levels, and Community Relations in an Outbreak. In addition, presentations were given in Farm Mortality Management and Vegetative Buffers for farms. The second day of the workshop was devoted to a hands-on exercise at large poultry farm. Participants were involved in groups that inspected the facilities, and documented current house fly populations and evidence of active breeding. Indexing of fly numbers a general ecology of the flies was demonstrated. Participants worked through a scenario outbreak and the steps taken by state SWAT team to identify sources and document numbers of house flies and other diptera species. In addition, ongoing examination of farms experiencing high fly numbers continued by the investigator and later aided by other officials who successfully completed FLY CAMP. Over 25 different outbreaks were seen in the commonwealth with field investigations in most cases. Articles on fly controls were submitted to area newspapers in which high fly numbers were found. PARTICIPANTS: PA department of Agriculture Ombudsman Program, serving as coordinator of fly pest calls. Cornell University Department of Entomology and Agricultural Cooperative Extension for assistance in training program. Penn State University Department of Entomology for assistance in training program. Penn State University Department of Poultry Science for assistance in training program. Kreider Farms, Manheim, PA for the use of their poultry farm during the second day of the fly workshop. PA Department of Agriculture for assistance in fly calls during this reporting period. TARGET AUDIENCES: Primary audience has been agricultural producers with animal production and their immediate neighbors. Additional audiences have expanded to governmental representatives including township officials who handle fly complaints from neighbors near animal facilities. These individuals were targeted during this period for training programs. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: Some delays in field investigations have been due to the lack of external funding to support supplies and travel. In-kind donations of some equipment have been made, yet in not enough numbers to ensure statistical significance if equipment is deployed. I will be investigating further other sources of funding.
Impacts
Of the 33 workshop participants, 80 percent stated that they learned something new about the house fly and its ecology. Forty percent stated that they felt comfortable performing farm fly assessments. Over the remaining months of this reporting period, five participants of the workshop performed field observation studies of house fly infestations, or took calls in the farming community they are responsible for. Newspaper articles on fly control were distributed to over 50 thousand subscribers in the areas showing high fly counts. Control of flies was achieved in all but two instances on poultry farms. Follow up on these remaining two farms has shown significant improvement in the reduction of house flies on the farm, however due to the high sensitivity in the neighborhood further controls and oversight will be needed to maintain control.
Publications
- Martin, G.P. 2008. Setting Up For a Great Fall Season. PA Ombudsman Program, PA Department of Ag. http://www.agombudsman.com/news.php
|
Progress 01/01/08 to 09/30/08
Outputs
OUTPUTS: Poultry fly populations were regarded as high in several counties of the commonwealth within the reporting period. Extension programs were developed and delivered to four separate townships as a result to high house fly counts within the communities near poultry farms as counted by fly speck cards and hanging fly tape. Participants in these meetings were residents in the affected fly area. The focus of these meetings was the identification and control of house flies in the area. In addition, a separate extension program was provided and targeted towards custom manure haulers in the area. The focus of this individual delivery was the control of house flies by evaluation of manure prior to the spreading of poultry manure. Lastly on farm IPM programs were presented to the farmers in the affected area so that scouting and control programs could be developed and implemented to help reduce fly numbers. PARTICIPANTS: Martin, G P Ph.D. PI IPM (SWAT) field investigations and Main presenter at community meetings and extension programs. Dehoff, Shelly Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture Ombudsman Program. Assistance in coordination of complaint calls and liaison between department and extension. Patterson, Paul Ph.D. Penn State University Poultry Science Department. Assistance in field studies and complaint calls. Firestein, Morgan Penn State University Cooperative Extension Berks County Assistance in field studies and complaint calls. Neighborhood liaison for community fly committee and index farmer. Roberts, John DVM Pennsylvania Dept. of Ag animal health, regional veterinarian. Assistance in field studies and complaint calls. LeBarberra, Anthony DVM Pennsylvania Dept. of Ag animal health. Assistance in field studies and complaint calls. Hanshaw, Nanette DVM Pennsylvania Dept. of Ag animal health. Assistance in field studies and complaint calls. Rutz, Don Ph.D. Department of Entomology, Cornell University. Assistance in fly biology background. Kaufman, Phillip Ph.D. ARS - University of Florida. Background on IPM controls and manure windrow management. TARGET AUDIENCES: Poultry Farms and the neighborhoods surrounding the farms. Most especially egg production facilities of over 10,000 birds producing table eggs. Neighborhoods were considered residential housing within two miles of the index egg farm and not having major populations of poultry themselves. In addition were custom manure haulers and spreaders of poultry litter and poultry manures. Additionally, township supervisors, state representatives and senators who may have been contacted in regards to outbreaks in their respective jurisdictions. All Participants received either group programs on IPM or were visited directly by program providers. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: Nothing significant to report during this reporting period.
Impacts
Poultry house fly numbers in all areas visited by the extension team were significantly reduced as measured by scouting methods delivered in the program. Residents were able to correctly identify a late season fly hatch as a non-poultry house outbreak due to the Identification methods presented in the neighborhood programs. This knowledge by the residents lead to an expedient outcome and a dramatic reduction in fly numbers within the neighborhoods surrounding the livestock farms. Of the five farms under intense study, four tried biological or cultural controls rather than spraying as the first line of fly control. This use of biological controls significantly helped in the reduction of spray resistant flies. Further work in overwintering flies will be needed to see if these are more resistant than summer bred flies.
Publications
- Martin, G.P. 2008. Evaluation of Manure Prior to Spreading - A Best Management Practice. http://www.personal.psu.edu/gpm10/ManIPM08.pdf
|
|