Progress 09/01/11 to 08/31/15
Outputs
Target Audience:Our target audiences include: Cooperating fruit growers on whose property we collected data. We have worked with over 100 fruit growers over the course of the project in the three regions where we conducted fieldwork, Michigan, New York, and the Pacific Northwest. After conducting fruit damage assessments and/or experimental trials and/or observations of foraging birds on their properties, we provided each of them a detailed description of the data we collected on their property, as well as trends from data throughout their region (in the aggregate, with no personal identifiers). Fruit growers and growers of other specialty crops like Christmas trees. We reached thousands of fruit growers through presentations at extension meetings, extension publications, and our website. Articles about our project appeared in Good Fruit Grower, and Fruit Grower News. We reached thousands of researchers, extension personnel, and wildlife damage managers through publications, oral and poster presentations at professional meetings, and our website. There were over 7000 visits to our website with over 12000 pageviews during the last year of the project (http:birddamagetofruitcrops.info/). Agency personnel and policy makers are some of the primary targets of our economic fact sheets that detail the costs of bird damage to regional economies. We reached hundreds of undergraduate and graduate students through classroom presentations. We had 268 downloads of publications from this project from Digital Commons@University of Nebraska-Lincoln, a public-access archive which includes peer-reviewed journal articles. We reached thousands of members of the public, including those interested in bird conservation through articles about our project in outlets like the Wall Street Journal, Bluebird magazine, and presentations and publicly accessible classes like those in ornithology offered by the Kellogg Biological Station of Michigan State University. Changes/Problems:The one major change was that we found significant problems with the land cover dataset we initially planned to use (with regard to classification of fruit crops) the National Cropland Data Layer. The dataset did not adequately classify the crops for which we needed classification. Therefore, we used another database, the National Agriculture Imagery Program, to quantify land cover types around our study blocks. This issue is the subject of one of our publications that is in preparation. Final note: Although Clemson University is listed as a collaborating/partnering organization on one of the initial pages of this report, no one from Clemson University has been involved with this project. What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?Graduate students Deanna Leigh of Western Washington University, Heidi Henrichs of Cornell University, Megan Shave, Rachael Eaton and Zachary Herrnstadt of Michigan State University, and Julie Elser of Colorado State University and U.S.D.A. developed professional skills in developing research questions, experimental design, data management and analyses, and presentation of results in written and oral forms. Undergraduate and graduate assistants Kira Banner, Karen Moxcey, Katherine East, Jason Koepke, Carolyn Bazin, Vincent Clements, Anthony Lapsansky, Virginia Winkler, Alessia McCobb, Arianna Sandeen, Allison LaRocco, Connor Rosenblatt, Emily Oja, Della Fetzer, Ellen Matheny and Makie Matsumoto-Hervol were trained in research techniques in biology, economics, or sociology, data management, and communicating with stakeholders. Shayna Wieferich and Ben Hawes, research techniques at Michigan State University, developed professional skills in data collection and management, experimental design, supervision of assistants, working and communicating with stakeholders, creating and giving presentations, and project coordination. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?Specific examples of our dissemination efforts are below, primarly from the last year of the project, 9-1-14 through 8-31-15. Similar efforts occurred in previous years and are in previous annual reports. Presentations/posters at extension meetings/workshops for specialty crop growers Lindell, C., P. Howard, C.-O. Oh, A. Anderson, R. Eaton, M. Shave, S. Wieferich, Z. Herrnstadt, B. Hawes. 2015. New strategies for managing birds in orchards. Michigan State University Tree Fruit School. Feb. 19, Eberhard Center, Grand Rapids, MI. 80 reached. Lindell, C. Bird damage in tree fruits. 2015 Northwest Michigan Orchard and Vineyard Show. Acme, MI, Jan 13-14. 80 reached. Lindell, C. Bird management in vineyards. 2015 Northwest Michigan Orchard and Vineyard Show. Acme, MI, Jan 13-14. 80 reached. Henrichs, H. M. and P. D. Curtis. 2014. Bird damage management in fruit crops. Cornell Small Fruit Open House, 3 October 2014. 51 reached Henrichs, H. M., P. D. Curtis and J. R. Boulanger. 2015. Limiting bird damage to fruit crops in New York. Producer's Expo, Syracuse, NY, 22 January 2015. 90 reached. Limiting Bird Damage in Fruit: State-of-the-Art Pest Management Tactics, August 19, 2015, at Cornell Cooperative Extension of Saratoga County, Ballston Spa, NY, developed and managed by Julie Carroll, Cornell University. Talks included were: Curtis, P. D. 2015. Bird species most responsible for damaging fruit crops. Limiting Bird Damage in Fruit Crops: State of the Art Pest Management Practices. A Vertebrate Damage Management Workshop, Ballston Spa, NY, 19 August 2015. 42 reached. Lindell, C. A. 2015. Birds in fruit crops: economic and consumer aspects of deterrence. Limiting Bird Damage in Fruit Crops: State of the Art Pest Management Practices. A Vertebrate Damage Management Workshop, Ballston Spa, NY, 19 August 2015. 42 reached. Siemer, W. F. 2015. Grower perceptions of bird damage to fruit crops in New York. Limiting Bird Damage in Fruit Crops: State of the Art Pest Management Practices. A Vertebrate Damage Management Workshop, Ballston Spa, NY, 19 August 2015. 42 reached. Lindell, C. A. 2015. Risk factors for bird damage in fruit and mitigation strategies. Limiting Bird Damage in Fruit Crops: State of the Art Pest Management Practices. A Vertebrate Damage Management Workshop, Ballston Spa, NY, 19 August 2015. 42 reached. Curtis, P. D. 2015. Scare devices investigated in fruit plantings in New York. Limiting Bird Damage in Fruit Crops: State of the Art Pest Management Practices. A Vertebrate Damage Management Workshop, Ballston Spa, NY, 19 August 2015. 42 reached. Steensma, K and S Kerr. November 2014. Survey of bird damage at the dairy-berry interface. Oral presentation at Washington State Dairy Federation Meeting, Vancouver, WA. 250 reached. Koepke, J, D Leigh, E Zwamborn, and KMM Steensma. December 2014. Investigation of falconry as a bird pest management practice in blueberry crops.Poster presentation, Washington Small Fruit Conference, Lynden, WA. 200 reached. Koepke, J, D Leigh, G Jordan, and KMM Steensma. December 2014.Exploring the distribution of bird damage in a blueberry field.Poster presentation, Washington Small Fruit Conference, Lynden, WA. 200 reached. Presentations/posters at professional meetings for researchers, extension and agency personnel Eaton, R.A. 2014. Interspecific variation in frugivore use of cultivated cherry orchards. American Ornithologists' Union Annual Meeting, Sept., Estes Park, CO. 20 reached. Henrichs, H. M., P. D. Curtis and J. R. Boulanger. 2015. Limiting bird damage to fruit crops in New York: damage assessments and potential management strategies for the future. 16th Wildlife Damage Management Conference, Gaitlinburg, TN, 3 March 2015. Reached 90. Henrichs, H. M., P. D. Curtis and J. R. Boulanger. 2015. Connections between birds, fruit crops, and the agricultural landscape: implications for reducing bird damage. Northeast Association Fish and Wildlife Conference, Newport, RI, 21 April 2015. Reached 60. Lusch, D.P.2015. Fruit Crop Classification Accuracy of the 2011 Cropland Data Layer in Michigan, New York and Washington.Association of American Geographers. Annual Conference,Chicago, IL, April 23, 2015. 25 reached. Howard, P.H. and Z. Herrnstadt. 2015. Falconry as an agritourism attraction? Annual Meeting of the Agriculture, Food, and Human Values Society, Pittsburgh, PA. June. Shwiff, S.A. 2012. Economic impacts of wildlife damage. Oregon Wildlife Damage Management Conferences, Bend Oregon. Web resources There were over 7000 visits to our website with over 1200 pageviews during the project (http:birddamagetofruitcrops.info/). We produced ten economic fact sheets detailing financial costs to regional economies of bird damage to fruit. These factsheets have been available on our website (http:birddamagetofruitcrops.info/) and hundreds have been distributed at extension meetings. Steensma, K, S Kerr, and A Adams-Progar. 2014. Birds on berries and dairies. WSU Extension Whatcom Ag Monthly http://whatcom.wsu.edu/wam/jun15_s2.html 427 unique page views. Herrnstadt, Zachary B. 2013. Consumer Reactions to Bird Management Practices on Fruit Crops (https://www.msu.edu/~howardp/ConsumerReactionsBirdMgmt.pdf). Classroom presentations Lindel, C., P. Howard, C.-O Oh., A. Anderson, R. Eaton, M. Shave, S. Wieferich, Z. Herrnstadt, B. Hawes. 2015. Sustainable bird management in fruit crops. April 28. Kellogg Bird Sanctuary Field Ornithology Course. Reached 30. Leigh, D. 11 March 2015. Using pellet analysis to determine the diet of the American kestrel at three Eastern Washington sites. Oral presentation, Western Washington University, Bellingham, WA. Reached 25 undergraduates. Leigh, D. May 2015. Effects of American kestrels on fruit-eating birds in sweet cherry orchards: field methods and applications. Oral presentation, Western Washington University, Bellingham, WA. Reached 15 undergraduates Leigh, D. May 2015. Effects of nesting American kestrels on pest bird abundance in sweet cherry orchards. Poster presentation, Western Washington University Scholar's Week, Bellingham, WA. Reached approximately 150 undergraduate and graduate science students, faculty, and other scientists. Leigh, D. September 2015. Using American kestrels for bird control in sweet cherries: the benefits of encouraging natural predators. Oral presentation, Trinity Western University, Langley, BC. Reached 18 undergraduates. Leigh, D. September 2015. Limiting bird damage to fruit crops: what it's like to be a field biologist. Oral presentation, Trinity Western University, Langley, BC. Reached 6 undergraduates and 2 science professors. Presentations for the researchers and the public interested in bird conservation Lindell, C., M. Shave, P. Howard, R. Eaton, and S. Shwiff. 2015. Bird conservation activities can benefit fruit producers. Michigan Bird Conservation Initiative Workshop. March 19-21, Tustin, MI. 50 reached. Shave, M. and C. Lindell. 2014. Potential agricultural and conservation implications of an American kesterl nest box system in Michigan fruit orchards. Michigan Bluebird Society, Sept. Jackson MI. 30 reached. Shave, M. and C. Lindell. 2015. Diet and provisioning behavior of American kestrels in an orchard nest box system. Michigan Bird Conservation Initiative Workshop., March 19-21, Tustin, MI (Poster). 50 reached. Eaton, R.A., C.A. Lindell, H.J. Homan, G.M. Linz, and B.A. Maurer. 2015. Avian use of cultivated cherry orchards reflects species-specific differences in frugivory. Michigan Bird Conservation Initiative Workshop, March 19-21, Tustin, MI (Poster). 50 reached. Media New scarecrows for vineyards: car dealers' inflatable 'dancing' tube men. Nov. 28, 2013. Wall Street Journal by J. Kamp. http://m.us.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304337404579210132891841764?mobile=y Birds are eating into profits. 2015. Good Fruit Grower by Richard Lehnert. http://www.goodfruit.com/birds-are-eating-into-profits/ What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?
Nothing Reported
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
Cherries, blueberries, grapes, and apples are as attractive to fruit-eating birds as they are to humans. Fruit growers face the challenge of how to protect these healthy foods from pest birds in an environmentally sustainable manner. Our project investigated this problem from economic, consumer preference, and in-the-field management perspectives. Our economic partners from the U.S.D.A. surveyed fruit growers (nearly 1600 respondents) to estimate costs of bird damage. Results showed that California wine grape growers lose $49 million annually to birds, Michigan blueberry growers lose $14 million, and Washington 'Honeycrisp' apple growers lose nearly $27 million. The survey demonstrated that growers save hundreds of millions of dollars when they employ bird damage management strategies. However, growers view most management strategies as not very effective. Our sociologist colleagues at Michigan State Univ. used focus groups, a national survey of fruit consumers, and experimental auctions to demonstrate that consumers prefer bird management strategies they view as natural. Consumers would pay 25% more for fruit produced with bird management strategies like falconry and installing nest boxes of predatory birds that scare pest birds. Growers who advertise these bird management practices could earn more for their fruit. We at Michigan State Univ., along with partners at Cornell, Trinity Western Univ., Washington State Univ., and Oregon State Univ., worked with fruit growers in the field. We conducted bird damage assessments and experimental trials of bird management strategies to determine when fruit crops are at high risk from bird damage and which management strategies are likely to be effective in deterring pest birds. A greater proportion of fruit is lost to birds in low fruit abundance years. For example, the proportion of Michigan sweet cherries lost to birds was nearly 10 times higher in a low-fruit year (2012) compared to a high-fruit year (2014). Thus the necessity of bird management will vary according to the year. Environmentally sustainable strategies such as netting and attracting predatory birds with nest boxes are attractive to growers. At a workshop sponsored by Cornell University, 93% of the growers rated their motivation to use project information at "quite a bit" or higher, indicating that changes in knowledge have resulted and changes in bird management strategies will result. Project results have been distributed through fact sheets, presentations, and our website, birddamagetofruitcrops.info, where page views increased nearly 100% from the 2nd to 4th year. Obj. 1. Quantify economic consequences of bird damage for producers, consumers, and regional economies. Activities: Analyses of data from fruit producers; writing and submission of manuscripts; production and distribution of fact sheets. Data: Completed. Summary: Aggregate annual bird damage in five crops (sweet cherries, tart cherries, blueberries, wine grapes and Honeycrisp apples) and five states (Michigan, NY, Washington, Oregon, and Calif.) was estimated at $189 million and the aggregate benefits of managing that damage were estimated at $737 million to $834 million. Outcomes: Increased knowledge of costs of bird damage and benefits of management through fact sheets and published articles with two other articles submitted and in preparation. Obj. 2. Determine how bird damage varies within and across spatial scales (orchard, landscape, region). Activities: Bird damage assessments were conducted in over 200 fruit blocks. Proportions of different land-cover types surrounding fruit blocks were calculated at Michigan State Univ. Data: We quantified amounts of bird damage in the five fruit crops in the three regions over three years. We collected ground-truth data to correct land-cover imagery. Summary: The proportion of bird damage is higher in low-fruit abundance years compared to high-abundance years. Bird damage was lower in blocks adjacent to other blocks of the same fruit. Damage varies among the three regions. Damage is higher on edges than interiors of blocks. Outcomes: Increased knowledge about spatial bird damage patterns through presentations and written information distributed at meetings. More than half of participants in a bird damage workshop reported increased knowledge; all participants reported motivation to use the knowledge, indicating the information will be applied in the field. Analyses of data are on-going and publications will be submitted soon. Obj. 3. Identify amounts of damage attributable to specific bird species across crops and regions. Activities: Observations of bird abundance and/or activity, as well as bird damage, were conducted in over 200 fruit blocks. We used radio telemetry to track use of sweet cherry blocks by pest bird species. Data: The bird species and relative activity of the species in different fruit crops and in the different regions have been collected and compiled. Summary: Activity of bird species varies across different fruit crops and regions. For example, cedar waxwings visit Michigan sweet cherry orchards more frequently and spend more time in them each day than American robins. Outcomes: Increased knowledge through results distributed in fact sheets, our website, and presentations. One publication has been accepted with others in preparation. Obj. 4. Investigate consumer responses to management strategies and potential effects on marketing. Activities: Focus groups, a national survey, and experimental auctions were conducted to collect consumer data to examine the potential for bird management practices to influence marketing. Data: Transcripts of focus groups, survey data and experimental auction data were collected, including information on demographic variables such as gender, income, education, and ethnicity. Summary: The most positively received methods, falconry and nest boxes, were described as more natural in focus groups. The most negatively received methods, live ammunition and methyl anthranilate spray, were frequently viewed as less natural. Survey respondents indicated that they would pay an average of U.S. $0.41-0.76 more for fruit that embodied falconry or nest boxes. Disclosing production practices consumers consider more natural could elicit modest price premiums for fruit growers. Outcomes: Increased knowledge of consumer preferences for various bird management practices, and the reasons underlying these preferences, as well as information about willingness to pay for the most and least preferred practices. Over 50% of participants in a workshop learned new information about consumer preferences. Obj. 5. Begin to test management strategies for efficacy. Activities: We conducted trials to test bird deterrents in all crops and regions. Deterrents tested include scare devices like air dancers, kites, distress call recorders, and falconry. We did trials with a registered chemical deterrent in the field. We investigated the use of predatory birds as a management strategy. Data: We collected data on bird damage in experimental and control treatments for trials and recorded nest box occupancy and diet items of predatory birds. Summary: Preliminary results suggest that bird management strategies may be less necessary and less effective in high fruit abundance years. Particular environmental features, like wires overhead, increase the risk of bird damage. Nest box occupancy by predatory birds was high. Their diet includes pest insects, rodents, and birds. Outcomes: 80% of participants at a workshop in August 2015 reported they will begin to use at least one new bird management strategy based on workshop information. 20% said they would discontinue use of a previously used strategy. 27% of the growers said they would begin netting fruit crops and 40% said they would install predator nest boxes. One journal article has been published; three theses and several other publications will be submitted soon.
Publications
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Accepted
Year Published:
2016
Citation:
Eaton, R.A., C.A. Lindell, H.J. Homan, G.M. Linz, and B.A. Maurer. In press. Bird species vary in use of cultivated cherry orchards. Wilson Journal of Ornithology.
- Type:
Theses/Dissertations
Status:
Other
Year Published:
2015
Citation:
Leigh, Deanna. In prep. Bird damage to sweet cherries in the Pacific Northwest and the effect of American kestrels on deterrence. Master's thesis for Western Washington University, Environmental Sciences Dept. To be submitted December 2015
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Accepted
Year Published:
2015
Citation:
Herrnstadt, Zachary, Philip H. Howard, Chi-Ok Oh & Catherine A. Lindell. Accepted. Consumer Preferences for Natural Agricultural Practices: Assessing Methods to Manage Bird Pests. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems. 1-8 doi:10.1017/S1742170515000447
- Type:
Theses/Dissertations
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2014
Citation:
Herrnstadt, Zachary B. 2014. What Agricultural Practices Are Considered Natural? Consumer Perceptions of Bird Damage-Control Methods Used on Fruit. Master of Science Thesis, Michigan State University, Dept. of Community Sustainability.
- Type:
Theses/Dissertations
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2015
Citation:
Bazin, C. and K. Steensma. 2015. An in-depth look at the species count of various frugivorous birds present in both control and kestrel occupied study plots within cherry orchards. Undergraduate thesis. Trinity Western University. Biology and Environmental Studies Departments.
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Submitted
Year Published:
2016
Citation:
Elser, J.L., A. Anderson, C.A. Lindell, N. Dalsted, A. Bernasek, and S.A. Shwiff. Economic impacts of bird damage and management in the U.S. sweet cherry production. Submitted to Crop Protection.
- Type:
Theses/Dissertations
Status:
Other
Year Published:
2015
Citation:
Henrichs, Heidi. In prep. Bird damage management in fruit crops. Master's thesis for Cornell University. Department of Natural Resources. To be submitted December 2015
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Other
Year Published:
2016
Citation:
Steensma, K., D. Leigh, and C. Lindell. In prep. Impact of two vineyard netting strategies on bird damage and canopy temperature. For submission to American Journal of Enology and Viticulture.
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Other
Year Published:
2016
Citation:
Elser, J.L., A. Anderson, C.A. Lindell, and S.A. Shwiff. In prep. Comparison of field and survey estimates of bird damage to fruit crops in five states. To be submitted to Crop Protection.
- Type:
Theses/Dissertations
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2013
Citation:
Elser, J.E. 2013. The economic benefits of bird control in U.S. cherry production. Colorado State University, M.A. thesis
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Other
Year Published:
2016
Citation:
Shave, M.E. and C.A. Lindell. In prep. American kestrels occupying new nest boxes in Michigan cherry orchards show high reproductive performance and tolerance to video camera monitoring. To be submitted to the Journal of Raptor Research.
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Other
Year Published:
2016
Citation:
Eaton, R.A. and C.A. Lindell. In prep. Complex interactions among multi-scale food abundance, group size, and species influence foraging behavior. To be submitted to Behavioral Ecology
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Other
Year Published:
2016
Citation:
Lusch, D.P. and C. Lindell. In prep. Fruit Crop Classification Accuracy of the 2011 Cropland Data Layer in Michigan, New York and Washington. To be submitted to Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing.
|
Progress 09/01/13 to 08/31/14
Outputs
Target Audience: For each of the audiences below, N = number of individuals reached. Cooperating fruit growers (N=115). These were fruit growers who participated in the project through allowing us to conduct damage assessments and bird observations, or experimental trials, in their fields. We provided each of them with a detailed assessment of the data we collected from their blocks, as well as information (in the aggregate, with no personal identifiers) about average results from other fields of the same crop in their region. Other fruit growers (N=2796 + readers of publications). We reach fruit growers through presentations at extension meetings, extension publications, our annual newsletter, and informal discussions. An article about our project were also published in the Fruit Growers News. Researchers (Natural and Social Scientists), Extension Personnel, Wildlife Damage Managers (N =215 talk and poster attendees + readers of publications). We presented oral and poster presentations at a number of professional conferences. Fruit consumers (N=24). Consumers took part in experimental auctions conducted in the Lansing, MI area. Public (N=over 2,300,000) Articles about our project were also published in the Wall Street Journal (Nov. 28, 2013, front page article, circulation = 2.3 million), ABC News website, Ithaca Journal, and Cornell Chronicle. Web users (N=2645 visits and 5013 page views). We maintain a project website (http://birddamagetofruitcrops.info/) which we update regularly. USDA Researchers, Field Station Leaders, and other USDA personnel (N=65). We distributed our annual newsletter to this audience. Bird enthusiasts (N=2000 readers). We reached these individuals through an article in the North American Bluebird Society Journal (circulation about 2000). College students and faculty (N=358). We gave lectures and poster presentations at six colleges/universities about various aspects of our project. 4-H kids and parents (N=30). Presentation about value of predators on pest species to wildlife management in agriculture. Changes/Problems: We have had two unexpected outcomes. The first we briefly touched on in last year's report. We found significant problems with the land cover dataset we initially planned to use, (with regard to classification of fruit crops) the National Cropland Data Layer. Therefore, during this reporting period our landscape analysis group used another database, the National Agriculture Imagery Program, to quantify land cover types around our study blocks. Landscape analyses with this database with regard to bird damage on fruit crops, will be conducted this coming year. The second unexpected outcome is that temporal variation in bird damage to fruit, at least during the years of our study to date, has been very high. We will address this issue in our upcoming analyses of the data collected during our efficacy trials of bird deterrent techniques. What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided? Graduate students Deanna Leigh, of Western Washington University, Heidi Henrichs of Cornell University, Megan Shave and Rachael Eaton of Michigan State University, and Julie Elser of Colorado State University and U.S.D.A., developed professional skills in developing research questions, experimental design, statistical analyses, and creating presentations for growers and scientists. These students, as well as undergraduate and graduate assistants Katherine East, Jason Koepke, Carolyn Bazin, Vincent Clements, Anthony Lapsansky, Virginia Winkler, Alessia McCobb, Arianna Sandeen, Allison LaRocco, Connor Rosenblatt, Emily Oja and Della Fetzer were trained in bird identification, fruit damage identification, taking and using geographic data, remote camera operation, data collection, communicating with stakeholders, and data management. Shayna Wieferich and Ben Hawes, research technicians at Michigan State University, developed professional skills in creating and presenting talks for growers, working with multiple stakeholders, data collection and management, and project coordination. Shayna Wieferich also received training in experimental design. Graduate student Zachary Herrnstadt, in the Department of Community Sustainability at Michigan State University, received mentoring from Philip H. Howard and Chi-Ok Oh to improve his research skills (literature reviews, surveys and experimental auctions) and writing skills and was a coauthor on a submitted manuscript and co-author on a presentation at a professional society. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest? Please see list of target audiences below with numbers reached (N=). Further below see list of presentations, posters, lectures, and media attention. Cooperating fruit growers (N=115). Fruit growers who allowed us to conduct damage assessments and bird observations, or experimental trials, in their fields. We provided each of them with a record of the data we collected from their blocks, as well as information (in the aggregate, with no personal identifiers) about average results from other fields of the same crop in their region. Other fruit growers (N=2,796 + readers of publications) . We reach fruit growers through presentations at extension meetings, extension publications, our annual newsletter, and informal discussions. An article about our project was published in the Fruit Growers News. Researchers (Natural and Social Scientists), Extension Personnel, Wildlife Damage Managers (N =215 talk and poster attendees + readers of publications). We presented oral and poster presentations at a number of professional conferences. Fruit consumers (N=24). Consumers took part in experimental auctions conducted in the Lansing, MI area. Public (N=over 2,300,000) Articles about our project were also published in the Wall Street Journal (Nov. 28, 2013, front page article, circulation = 2.3 million), ABC News website, Ithaca Journal, and Cornell Chronicle. Web users (N=2645 visits and 5013 page views). We maintain a project website (http://birddamagetofruitcrops.info/) which we update regularly. USDA Researchers, Field Station Leaders, and other USDA personnel (N=65). We distributed our annual newsletter to this audience. Bird enthusiasts (N=2000 readers). We reached these individuals through an article in the North American Bluebird Society Journal (circulation about 2000). College students and faculty (N=358). We gave lectures and poster presentations at six colleges/universities about various aspects of our project. 4-H kids and parents (N=30). Presentation about value of predators on pest species to wildlife management in agriculture. Presentations/posters at extension meetings. Lindell, C.A., S. Wieferich, B. Hawes, and M. Shave. Jan. 2014. Bird damage in tree fruits. Northwest Michigan Orchard & Vineyard Show, Acme, MI Lindell, C.A. Dec. 2013. Birds and blueberries. Great Lakes Fruit, Vegetable, and Farm Market Exposition. Grand Rapids, MI. Eaton, R., C.A. Lindell, J. Homan, G. Linz. Jan. 2014. Bird visitation and use of Northwest Michigan sweet cherry orchards. Northwest Michigan Orchard & Vineyard Show. Acme, MI. Shave, M. and C.A. Lindell. Jan. 2014. Diet of American Kestrels in Michigan Fruit Orchards. Northwest Michigan Orchard & Vineyard Show. Acme, MI. Hawes, B. June 24, 2014. Bird damage to fruit crops project overview. Integrated Pest Management Meeting. Bardenhagen Farm, Leelanau County, MI. Hawes, B. June 24, 2014. Bird damage to fruit crops project overview. Integrated Pest Management Meeting. Wunsch Farm, Grant Traverse County, MI. Wieferich, S. and C.A. Lindell. Jan. 14, 2014. Pilot study results: bird deterrence strategies. Northwest Michigan Orchard & Vineyard Show. Acme, MI. Carroll, J. and H. Henrichs. May 22, 2014. Managing bird damage in vineyards. Finger Lakes Grape Program, Spring Integrated Pest Management Field Meeting, New York. Burrows, C. and C. Rossetti. Dec. 2013. Bird Management in Fruit Crops: The First Two Years of Research. Washington State Horticulture Association Annual Meeting. Leigh, D. Dec. 2013. Deterring Birds in Blueberries : Testing Three Potential Techniques. Washington Small Fruit Conference, Lynden, WA Steensma, K., C. Burrows, C. Rossetti, and D. Leigh. Dec. 2013. Bird Management in Fruit Crops: The First Two Years of Research. Washington Small Fruit Conference, Lynden, WA. Steensma, K., D. Leigh, C. Burrows, C. Rossetti, and K. Steensma. Jan. 2014. Preventing bird damage in vineyards: pros and cons of several techniques. Milton- Blue Mountain Horticulture Society, Freewater, Oregon. Presentations/posters at academic meetings Howard, P.H., C. Oh, and Z. Herrnstadt. August 2, 2014. Are consumers willing to pay more for “natural” agricultural production practices. Annual Meeting of Rural Sociological Society, New Orleans, LA. Lindell, C.A., S. Shwiff , P. Curtis, P. Howard, K. Steensma , G. Linz, J. Boulanger, N. Rothwell, J. Carroll, C. Oh, C. Burrows, M. Longstroth, C. Kaiser, D. Lusch, S. Wieferich, H. Henrichs, D. Leigh, M. Shave, R. Eaton, Z. Herrnstadt, A. Anderson. 2014. Bird Management in Fruit Crops: Economic, Consumer, and Biological Perspectives. American Society for Horticultural Science Annual Meeting. Orlando, Florida. July 28-31, 2014. Henrichs, H.M. April 2014. Limiting Bird Damage to Fruit Crops in New York. Northeast Association Fish and Wildlife Conference, Portland, ME. Henrichs, H.M. April 2014. Limiting Bird Damage to Fruit Crops in New York. New York State Wildlife Management Association Conference, Cobleskill, NY Lectures/posters for college students and faculty. Steensma, K. and K. Steensma. May 2014. Bird damage at the berry-dairy interface in Whatcom County. U. of Washington Ecological Agriculture course. Steensma Dairy, Lynden, Wa. Steensma. K. Feb. 2014. Limiting pest birds on dairies and fruit crops in the Pacific Northwest. University of the Fraser Valley Integrated Pest Management Course, Chilliwack, B.C. Steensma, K., D. Leigh, K. East, and J. Koepke. Aug. 2014. Bird damage at the berry-dairy interface in Whatcom County. Au Sable Institute for Environmental Studies, Steensma Dairy, Lynden, WA Leigh, D. Dec. 2013. The Effectiveness of American Kestrels in Deterring Frugivorous Birds in Washington Sweet Cherries. Western Washington University (Huxley College Students). Leigh, D. April 2014. Bird damage to fruit project overview. Trinity Western University Applied Ecology class. Steensma Dairy, Lynden, WA. Steensma, K. April 2014. Limiting pest birds on dairies and fruit crops in the Pacific Northwest. Trinity Western University Applied Ecology Class, Langley, B.C. Leigh, D. May 2014. Exploring the vertical profile of bird damage in sweet cherry orchards. Western Washington University, Bellingham, WA. (Poster) Lindell, C.A. Jan. 2014. Bird damage to fruit project overview. Hope College Plant-Animal Interactions class. Holland, MI. Henrichs, H.M. Jan. 2014. Limiting Bird Damage To Fruit Crops In New York: Damage Assessments And Potential Management Strategies For The Future. Cornell Department of Natural Resources Graduate Student Association Annual Symposium, Ithaca, NY. Weblinks. Cornell Fruit Resources, www.fruit.cornell.edu, July 2014. Media. Kamp, J. Nov. 28, 2013. New Scarecrows for Vineyards: Car Dealers' Inflatable 'Dancing' Tube Men. Wall Street Journal. http://m.us.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304337404579210132891841764?mobile=y (circulation about 2.3 million) Ramanujan, K. Dec. 4, 2013. Scary 'dancers' chase birds from fruit. Cornell Chronicle. http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/2013/12/scary-dancers-chase-birds-fruit. (circulation about 40,000) Chang, J.M. Dec. 5, 2013. Inflatable flailing arm tube men double as scarecrows. ABC news. http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/inflatable-flailing-arm-tube-men-double-scarecrows/story?id=21113429 Henrichs, H. Dec. 21, 2013. Inflatable, dancing scarecrows save crops, Cornell study finds. The Ithaca Journal. http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/ithacajournal/doc/1470049671.html?FMT=FT&FMTS=ABS:FT&fmac=616876b5c1e89718c8119701777a5f94&date=Dec+21%2C+2013&author=Cornell+Service&desc=Inflatable%2C+dancing+scarecrows+save+crops%2C+Cornell+study Loria, K. March 6, 2014. Inflatable dancers scare off birds. Fruit Grower News 53(3). http://fruitgrowersnews.com/index.php/magazine/article/inflatable-dancers-scare-off-birds McKee, L.J. January 6, 2014. The latest in vineyard scarecrow. Wines and Vines http://www.winesandvines.com/template.cfm?section=news&content=126118 What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals? We were granted a one-year extension until Aug. 31, 2015. During the next reporting period we will: 1) analyze data to address objectives 1, 2, and 5 above (spatial patterns of damage, bird species responsible, and tests of bird deterrent efficacy) and submit articles to peer-reviewed journals. 2) make results of our work available to growers through extension websites and the project website, presentations at grower meetings, and articles in grower publications. 3) make results of our work available to researchers and extension personnel through presentations at meetings. 4) produce fact sheets for growers, extension personnel, and policy makers.
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
Impact statement Cherries, blueberries, grapes and apples are as attractive to fruit-eating birds as they are to consumers. Fruit growers face the challenging problem of how to protect these very healthy foods from pest birds in ways that maintain a healthy environment. Our project has focused on the economic costs of this problem and how to deter pest birds with environmentally sustainable methods. Our economic partners from the U.S.D.A. Wildlife Research Center used a large survey of fruit growers (nearly 1600 respondents) to estimate costs of bird damage and the benefits of protecting fruit from birds. For example, Michigan blueberries growers lose approximately $14 million annually to birds and California wine grape growers lose $49 million. The research also demonstrated that growers benefit when they employ bird management, saving hundreds of millions of dollars. Fruit growers viewed most current bird management strategies as not very effective. Our sociologist partners at Michigan State University used focus groups and a national survey of fruit consumers to demonstrate that consumers prefer bird management strategies that are viewed as "natural". For example, consumers viewed installing nest boxes of predatory birds that scare pest birds favorably and chemical bird deterrents less favorably. Our partners at Michigan State University, Cornell, Trinity Western University, Washington State University and Oregon State University have worked with fruit growers in the field to determine when and where fruit crops are most susceptible to bird damage, and which management techniques are effective and environmentally sustainable. Preliminary results suggest damage is higher in years when fruit abundance is low and that field edges have more damage than interiors. Sustainable management techniques that we have investigated include inflatable air dancers that may scare birds. Results are pending. We have documented the diet of one predatory bird, the American kestrel, that can be attracting to fruit crops by installing nest boxes. Kestrels consume pest birds, mammals, and insects. We estimate that 16 pairs of kestrels in an area will consume 750 birds, 1,100 mammals, and 30,000 insects over a nesting season. Objective 1. Quantify economic consequences of bird damage for producers, consumers, and regional economies. 1) Major activities; Analysis of previously collected data from fruit producers; writing and submission of manuscripts; draft of fact sheets for producers and policy makers created. 2) Data; Data collection has been completed. 3) Summary statistics and results; Costs are substantial; for example, Michigan blueberries growers lose approximately $14 million dollars annually to birds and California wine grape growers lose $49 million. 4) Outcomes/accomplishments. Increased knowledge and publication of an article in Crop Protection about the costs of bird damage to fruit and the benefits of deterrence strategies. Publication of an article in the Journal of Wine Economics about quantifiable benefits to producers and consumers of managing bird damage to grapes. Objective 2. Determine how bird damage varies within and across spatial scales (orchard, landscape, region) 1) Major activities; Whole-block bird damage assessments have been conducted in over 200 blocks of sweet cherries, tart cherries, blueberries, wine grapes, and 'Honeycrisp' apples in Michigan, Washington, Oregon, and New York. Observations of bird activity have also been conducted in the blocks. Proportions of different land cover types surrounding fruit blocks have been calculated by our landscape analysis group at Michigan State University, using National Agriculture Imagery Program (NAIP) data. 2) Data; Levels of bird damage in the five focal fruit crops in the three regions and abundance and types of bird species in fruit blocks over three years. We have also collected ground-truth data to correct the NAIP imagery when necessary. 3) Summary statistics and results; Bird damage is higher in years of low fruit abundance and is higher in some crops, for example blueberries, than others, for example 'Honeycrisp' apples. Damage appears to be higher at edges of blocks compared to interiors and may be particularly high in edges and blocks near forest. 4) Outcomes/accomplishments. We are currently analyzing data to determine various risk factors, such as overall fruit abundance and location within a landscape, that may influence levels of birds damage. These data will be presented in publications and presentations. Objective 3. Identify amounts of damage attributable to specific bird species across crops and regions 1) Major activities; Whole-block bird damage assessments have been conducted in over 200 blocks of sweet cherries, tart cherries, blueberries, wine grapes, and 'Honeycrisp' apples in Michigan, Washington, Oregon, and New York. Observations of bird activity have also been conducted in the blocks. 2) Data; Levels of bird damage in the five focal fruit crops in the three regions and abundance and types of bird species in fruit blocks over three years. 3) Summary statistics and results; The species responsible for damage differ across the different regions, meaning that bird management strategies for growers will differ. For example, cedar waxwings appear to be more important pest birds in Michigan than in the Pacific Northwest. 4) Outcomes/accomplishments. We are currently analyzing data to determine how the abundance and type of bird species causing damage varies across crops and regions. These data will be presented in publications and presentations. Objective 4 Investigate consumer responses to management strategies and potential effects on marketing 1) Major activities; Data from a national consumer survey were analyzed, and experimental auctions with fruit consumers were conducted in the Lansing, MI area. 2) Data; Data for consumer willingness to pay for selected bird management practices were collected. 3) Summary statistics and results; Analysis suggests a willingness to pay modest price premiums for bird management strategies that include the installation of nest boxes to attract predator birds and falconry. 4) Outcomes/accomplishments. Enhanced understanding of which bird management practices to recommend to farmers based on consumer acceptance. Submission of a manuscript documenting willingness to pay price premiums for "environmentally friendly" management strategies, such as predator nest boxes and falconry. Objective 5. Test management strategies for efficacy. 1) Major activities; In cherries and wine grapes we conducted deterrent trials with air dancers in MI and NY. In blueberries we conducted air dancer trials in MI, NY, and the Pacific Northwest (PNW). In the PNW we conducted a trial with falconry and kites in blueberries and a netting trial in wine grapes. We collected information on potential American kestrel effects on fruit damage through predatory effects on pest birds and mammals in MI and the PNW. We also conducted full day bird observations in fruit blocks in apples in MI and grapes in NY to document temporal patterns of bird activity. We also conducted damage assessments, focused on bird damage, in 'Honeycrisp' apples, in MI and NY. 2) Data; We collected data on bird damage at different locations within blocks, for control and experimental treatments, in all three study regions. 3) Summary statistics and results; We are beginning to analyze data from these 2014 trials. 4) Outcomes/accomplishments; Visits to the project website, where we provide preliminary data regarding efficacy trials of bird deterrents, increased 63% in the present reporting period over the previous reporting period (from 1626 to 2645). Page views increased 42% (from 3539 to 5012). Submission and acceptance of a manuscript in Crop Protection, about possible chemical deterrents for birds.
Publications
- Type:
Other
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2014
Citation:
Siemer, W., P. Curtis, H. Henrichs, J. Carroll, C. Lindell, and S. Shwiff. 2014. Grower perceptions of bird damage to N.Y. fruit crops. New York Fruit Quarterly 22(2):25-28.
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Under Review
Year Published:
2014
Citation:
Oh, C., Z. Herrnstadt, P.H. Howard. In review. Consumer willingness to pay for bird management practices in fruit crops. Agroecology and sustainable food systems.
- Type:
Other
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2014
Citation:
Shave, M. 2014. Raptor Ecology in an Orchard Nest Box System: Diet Assessment. Bluebird, Journal of the North American Bluebird Society 36(1):18-19.
- Type:
Other
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2014
Citation:
Henrichs, H. Jan. 16, 2014. Reducing bird damage to fruit crops in New York State. New York Berry News 13(1)1-2. http://www.fruit.cornell.edu/nybn/newslettpdfs/2014/nybn1301.pdf
- Type:
Other
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2014
Citation:
Henrichs, H., P.D. Curtis, and J. R. Boulanger. April 1, 2014. Air dancers as a potential deterrent in blueberries. New York Berry News 13(4):1-2. http://www.fruit.cornell.edu/nybn/newslettpdfs/2014/nybn1304.pdf
|
Progress 09/01/12 to 08/31/13
Outputs
Target Audience: For each of the audiences below, estimated numbers of individuals reached are in the Accomplishments section. Fruit growers. We provided bird damage estimates to growers for their blocks where we conducted damage assessments, as well as regional damage estimates. Fruit consumers. The social scientists working on the project reached fruit consumers through focus groups, a national survey, and experimental auctions. Outreach audiences. These audiencesinclude fruit growers, fruit consumers, government agency personnel, extension educators andindustry personnel. We reached these audiences with presentations, and our newsletter. These audiences were also reached through our project's website (http://birddamagetofruitcrops.info/homepage.html. Researchers. We reached this audience through our peer-reviewed publications and presentations at meetings. Changes/Problems: We originally requested five years of funding and were planning to conduct pilot trials of bird deterrence techniques in field season three. We were granted three years of funding so we moved up the pilot trials to field season two (this reporting period). Also, because of very poor fruit yields in the Michigan and New York cherry and apple crops in the 2012 field season (the previous reporting period), damage estimates we conducted in that yearmay be unrepresentative of more typical years. Thus, we repeated damage assessments during this reporting period (2013) for a subset of fields where we conducted damage assessments in the previous reporting period, to be assured of having data from both an atypical and more typical year. Radiotelemetry work on American robins and cedar waxwings was conducted in this reporting period, rather than the previous one as originally planned, again because of the poor cherry yields in Michigan in 2012. Also, we discovered that the National Cropland Data Layers database we are using to categorize landcovers around study blocks categorizes many land covers incorrectly. Therefore we have had to invest a significant amount of time ground-truthing the areas around our study blocks in all three regions to be able to more accurately categorize the landcovers. This ground-truthing will enable analyses of landscape-levelinfluences on bird damage. What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided? Training opportunities have been provided forsix graduate students (Rachael Eaton, Megan Shave, Zachary Herrnstadt, Heidi Henrichs, Deanna Leigh, and Julie Elsner) and a research technician(Shayna Wieferich)) who have worked on the project. The graduate students and research technician have worked closely with the Project Directorsand Co-Directors on skills such as developing experimental design, field techniques, data management, statistical analyses, manuscript and presentation preparation and communications with stakeholders. These graduate students andthe research technician also presented and participated in our annual project meeting, and have been involved in outreach activities, aiding in their professional development. The following field assistants have been trained in field sampling techniques and data management: In Michigan: Ben Hawes,Kate Howard,Jason St. Pierre,Della Fetzer In the Pacific Northwest: Cody Rossetti, Liz Matseur, Kate Steensma, Curt Beyer, Ben Oldham, Janelle Lowen, Vincent Clements How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest? We maintained our project website, (http://birddamagetofruitcrops.info/Homepage.html), which provides information to growers and other stakeholders, asks for information and feedback, and has a blog that reports on activities. During this period, our website received, on average, 135 visits a month, and website visitors have been from 37 countries. In January, we created a newsletter summarizing our 2012 findings, which we handed out at numerous events. Approximately 1029 copies were distributed to growers and other stakeholders. We have presented at numerous conferences, meetings and other venues across the three study regions (see details below). When combined, the number of stakeholders we have reached via handouts and presentations exceeds 2,600 (see details below). We distributed 2012 damage assessment results to our growers. We provided the overall regional estimate of bird damage to each grower and the estimates for their block(s) where we conducted fieldwork. For wine grapes, we completed analyses and distributed results to the owners of the 47 blocks where fieldwork was conducted (22 in NY and 25 in the Pacific Northwest) Results were distributed to Michigan grape growers in the previous period. For cherries, we distributed results to the owners of 85 blocks (34 in MI, 23 in NY, and 28 in the Pacific Northwest). For ‘Honeycrisp’ apples, we distributed results to the owners of 65 blocks where fieldwork was conducted (18 in MI, 24 in NY, and 23 in the Pacific Northwest). For blueberries, we distributed results to the owners of 54 blocks where fieldwork was conducted (17 in MI, 12 in NY and 25 in the Pacific Northwest). We also began analyses of field data collected in 2013. As analyses of newly collected data are completed, the same information will be distributed to all producers on whose property we worked in the three regions. Outreach articles: Steensma, K. Feb. 1, 2013. Limiting bird damage in fruit crops. Farm Flash-Electronic News Publication, Whatcom County, WA.Audience: approximately 800 regional farmers. Lees, W. D. December 2012. Bird watching. Trinity Western University Website, news article. Audience: 100: students, professors, staff, administrators. Presentations/Posters: Henrichs, H.M. August 2013. Limiting bird damage to fruit crops in NY State: Pilot testing techniques. Field presentation/demonstration. Summer Fruit Tour, Cornell University, Geneva, NY. Audience: 100 berry and grape growers, educators, academics. Herrnstadt, Zach & Philip H. Howard. June 2013. "For the Birds? The Impacts of Disclosing Bird Management Practices in Fruit Crops." Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Agriculture, Food, and Human Values Society, East Lansing, MI. Herrnstadt, Zachary B. 2013. Consumer Reactions to Bird Management Practices on Fruit Crops (Research Brief). Department of Community Sustainability, Michigan State University (June).https://www.msu.edu/~howardp/ConsumerReactionsBirdMgmt.pdf. Zwamborn, E. October 2012. Investigation of the viability of falconry as an alternative bird management practice in blueberry crops. Murdock Conference in Walla Walla, WA. Audience: 300 regional farmers. Zwamborn, E. December 2012. Investigation of the viability of falconry as an alternative bird management practice in blueberry crops. Washington Small Fruit Conference, Lynden, WA. Audience: 200 professors, students, community members. Lindell, C.A. and S. Wieferich. November 2012. First year report on new bird damage studies: cherries. Great Lakes Fruit, Vegetable and Farm Market Expo. Audience: 22 growers, industry personnel, researchers. Lindell, C.A. and S. Wieferich. November 2012. First year report on new bird damage studies: wine grapes. Great Lakes Fruit, Vegetable and Farm Market Expo. Audience: 75 growers, industry personnel, researchers, public. Rossetti, C. and D. Leigh. November 2012. Limiting bird damage to fruit crops. Trinity Western University, Vertebrate Zoology Class, Langley, British Columbia. Audience: 15 students. Steensma, K., C. Rossetti, and D. Leigh. December 2012. Preliminary quantification of bird damage to northwest fruit crops. Washington Small Fruit Conference, Lynden, WA. Audience: 250 regional farmers. Lindell, C.A. and S. Wieferich. January 2013. First year report on bird damage studies in tree fruit. Northwest Michigan Orchard and Vineyard Show, Acme, MI. Audience: 45 growers, industry personnel, researchers, public. Lindell, C.A. and S. Wieferich. January 2013. First year report on bird damage studies in vineyards. Northwest Michigan Orchard and Vineyard Show, Acme, MI. Audience: 45 growers, industry personnel, researchers, public. Lindell, C.A. and S. Wieferich. March 2013. Limiting bird damage to fruit crops: first year report on bird damage in blueberries. MBG Marketing Horticulture Day, Holland, MI. Audience: 150 growers, industry personnel, researchers. Henrichs, H.M. March 2013. Limiting bird damage to fruit crops in New York (presentation). Long Island Wildlife Damage Management Conference, Riverhead, NY. Audience: 50 fruit and vegetable growers, extension educators, government agency employees. Henrichs, H.M., J.R. Boulanger, and P.D. Curtis. March 2013. Limiting bird damage to fruit crops in New York: Damage assessments and potential management strategies for the future (research poster). Long Island Wildlife Damage Management Conference, Riverhead, NY. Audience: 50 fruit growers, extension educators, government agency employees. Henrichs, H.M., J.R. Boulanger, and P.D. Curtis. March 2013. Limiting bird damage to fruit crops in New York: Damage assessments and potential management strategies for the future (research poster). Wildlife Damage Management Conference, Clemson, SC. Audience: 80 wildlife damage managers and specialists, researchers, government agency employees. Eaton, R.A. April 2013. Orchard fruit and birds who love it. Capital Area Audubon Society, Lansing, MI. Audience: 50 members of the Audubon Society. Focus groups/informal discussions: Steensma, K., C. Burrows, C. Rossetti, D. Leigh. February 2013. Grower Focus Group. Bellewood Acres, Lynden, WA. Audience: 8 regional/cooperating growers. Steensma, K., C. Burrows, C. Rossetti, D. Leigh.March 2013. Grower Focus Group. WSU Extension, Tri-Cities, WA. Audience:7 regional/cooperating growers. Steensma, K., C. Burrows, C. Rossetti, D. Leigh. February 2013. Grower Focus Group. WSU Extension, Wenatchee, WA. Audience: 2 regional/cooperating growers. Steensma, K. November 2012. Washington State Dairy Federation Annual Meeting, Cle Elum, WA, Audience: 25 Washington dairy farmers and scientists. Dissemination of newsletter/flyers: 1050 distributed to berry, grape, and tree fruit growers by Julie Carroll and Cathy Heidenreich at the following meetings:Empire State Producers' Expo, Syracuse, NY (January 2013); Summer Fruit Tour, Cornell University, Geneva, NY (August 2013); Lake Ontario Winter Fruit Schools, Lockport, NY and Sodus, NY (February 2013); Viticulture 2013, Rochester, NY (February 2013). 30 distributed to regional farmers by Deanna Leigh at the Pacific Agricultural Show, Abbotsford, British Columbia (January 2013). 150 distributed to fruit growers, researchers, industry personnel, government agency personnel at the following meetings:Great Lakes Fruit, Vegetable and Farm Market Expo, Grand Rapids, MI (November 2012); Northwest Michigan Orchard and Vineyard Show, Acme, MI (January 2013). 60 distributed to USDA-APHIS researchers, extension personnel on USDA-APHIS listserv (February 2013). Media attention: Richard Lehnert. For the birds: $2 million project seeks to document bird damage to fruit and develop workable solutions. Good Fruit Grower. Available online March 2013 at http://www.goodfruit.com/for-the-birds/. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals? Information to stakeholders: We will be providing growers with letters about their bird-caused fruit damage levels from 2013. Some blocks for which we will provide estimates were part of pilot trials of bird deterrence techniques and some were not. We will also be making presentations at orchard and vineyard shows and other educational venues. We will be analyzing data and writing publications for submission to peer-reviewed journals. We will also bemaking presentations at scholarly meetings. Finally, we will update our website with relevant information. Biological component: Field trials of bird deterrent techniques and strategies will be designed and conducted in cherries and blueberries in the three study regions. Economics component: We will examine differences and similarities in growers' perceptions of bird damage to their fruits and estimates of damage from field studies. Consumer component: Data from the experimentalauctions and a national survey will be analyzed to be able to make suggestions to fruit producers about how their bird management strategies may be used in marketing.
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
Major activities completed: Biological. We analyzed the data from our 2012 damage assessments and distributed it to growers in whose blocks we worked. In 2013 we performed field trials of bird deterrents in Michigan, New York and the Pacific Northwest (Washington and Oregon): Sweet cherry. We performed trials using electronic sound playback devices that emit bird alarm and distress class and hawk kites that visually imitate natural predators or pest birds. These trials were completed in 16 Michigan blocks and 14 New York blocks. In the Pacific Northwest, a methyl anthranilate formulation, along with a sugar solution, were tested for efficacy in deterring birds in 8 blocks. The Pacific Northwest group performed a trial with American kestrels, a natural passerine predator, to see if active kestrel nesting boxes in the vicinity of an orchard decreased bird damage to the fruit. They assessed 13blocks with active kestrel boxes and 13 blocks without. Data on kestrel diet and local abundance were assessed in Michigan with cameras mounted in kestrel boxes and through transect sampling along routes with and without kestrel boxes. Blueberry. Trials of methyl anthranilate and sugar spray efficacy against birdswere conducted in 12blocks in Michigan and 9 in the Pacific Northwest. Inflatable “air dancers” were tested for bird deterrence in 4 New Yorkblocks and 8 Michigan blocks.We conducteda demonstration trial testing the effectivesness of netting against birds at the Southwest Michigan Research and Extension Center. A trial of the efficacy of falconry and hawk kites wasconducted in the Pacific Northwest, involving 21 blocks. ‘Honeycrisp’ apple. Trials were undertaken in all three regions to examinedifferences in deterrent effects if deterrents are moved frequently or not. These trials included 8 blocks inMichigan, 10 in the Pacific Northwestand 4in NY. In the Pacific Northwest, methyl anthranilate, along with a sugar solution spray, were tested for bird deterrence in 6 blocks. Wine grape. Trials were undertaken in Michigan and New York to examine differences in deterrent effects if deterrents are moved frequently or not. These trials included 4blocks in Michigan and 4blocks in New York. The Pacific Northwest group performed a netting trial with 14 blocks andcompared the efficacy of two different hawk kites in a limited, two-block trial. In 2013 we also performed multiple repeat damage assessments of blocks we initially assessed in 2012. These were completed mainly to deal with the very low weather-related crop yields observed in 2012. Across the three regions, we performed 29 repeat damage assessments in apples, 21in blueberries,16 in sweet cherries, 5 in tart cherriesand 19 in wine grapes. Economics. We undertook data analyses and writing of manuscripts basedon survey data collected from fruit growers in the first reporting period. This work resulted in three manuscripts, 2 accepted or published, and 1 in review (see publications section). Consumer component. We conducted a series of five focus groups (33 participants) to determine consumer interests in bird management practices and the reasons underlying these preferences. We also conducted a national survey of 1,000 respondents to quantify consumer preferences for fruit crops that embody bird management practices, as well as willingness to pay for these attributes.We then conducted experimental auctions (34 participants) to adjust the willingness to pay measures found in the more hypothetical survey. Specific objectives met: We have made significant progress towards objective 1 above, having published two manuscripts about economic consequences of bird damage. We have collected data towards addressing objectives 2 and 3. Because of poor weather and associated poor crop yields in Michigan and New York in our first field season, we needed to collect additional data in this reporting period to address these objectives. We have made significant progress towards addressing objective 4 by conducting the focus groups, national survey, and experimental auctions that will allow us to investigate consumer responses to bird management strategies. We have made significant progress towards addressing objective5 by conducting numerous pilot trials of bird deterrent techniques. We will use results from this year to choose those techniques that should be investigated at a wider scale and with more replicates in the next reporting period. Significant results, specifically major findings that have been published, resulting in increased knowledge: Aggregate bird damage in five crops and states was estimated at $189 million and the aggregate benefit of managing that damage was estimated at $737 million to $834 million. Most bird management strategies are viewed as ineffective or only slightly effective by producers. A majority of blueberry and sweet cherry growers view bird damage as having a significant impact on profits. Other major findings, resulting in increased knowledge: Preliminary results from work with consumersindicate that consumers are willing to pay more for fruits thatuse falconry or nest boxes to attract bird predators as a potential techinques to manage pest birds,and not as muchfor fruit thatuses artificial grape flavoring or the use of shotguns as bird management techniques. Changes in knowledge that resulted were a better understanding of which bird control practices to recommend to growers on the basis of consumer acceptance. Bird damage to fruit is significantly influenced by location in the landscape and appears to be greatly influenced by fruit abundance. In years with low fruit yields percent damage is greater, potentially because of the more limited cultivated and natural fruit available to fruit-eating birds. American kestrels' diet includes large numbers of insects that eat plants, including grasshoppers; voles, which can damage trees; and some fruit-eating birds, indicating they can be a low-cost supplement to fruit growers' pest management strategies. The National Cropland Data Layers database does not categorize fruit crops and many surrounding landcovers well and investigators will need to take this issue into account when using this database and probably will need to conduct extensive ground-truthing to obtain accurate land cover data. We are still working to meet parts of objectives 2,3,4,5.
Publications
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2013
Citation:
Anderson, A., C.A. Lindell, K.A. Moxcey, W.F. Siemer, G.M. Linz, P.D. Curtis, J.E. Carroll, C.L. Burrows, J.R. Boulanger, K.M.M. Steensma, S.A. Shwiff. 2013. Bird damage to select fruit crops: The cost of damage and the benefits of control in five states. Crop Protection 52:103-109.
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Accepted
Year Published:
2013
Citation:
Anderson, A., C.A. Lindell, W.F. Siemer and S.A. Shwiff. Accepted with revisions. The welfare impacts of bird damage and its control in California wine grape production. Wine Economics.
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Under Review
Year Published:
2014
Citation:
Elser, J.L., A. Anderson, N. Dalsted, A. Bernasek, and S.A. Shwiff. The economic implications of bird damage and control in U.S. Sweet Cherry Production. Submitted to the Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Under Review
Year Published:
2014
Citation:
Tupper, S., S.J. Werner, J.C. Carlson, S.E. Pettit, J.C. Wise, C.A. Lindell and G.M. Linz. European Starling feeding activity on repellent treated materials: effect of test matrix. Submitted to Crop Protection
|
Progress 09/01/11 to 08/31/12
Outputs
OUTPUTS: We developed and distributed 7,666 mail surveys to fruit growers in Michigan, New York, Washington, Oregon, and California. We targeted growers of sweet cherries, tart cherries, blueberries, wine grapes, and honeycrisp apples. The survey, "Bird damage to fruit crops", assessed growers' perceptions of bird impacts on their profits, the techniques they use to deter birds, and the effectiveness of those techniques. Data from 1,590 surveys provided usable information. The data have been analyzed and a manuscript focusing on the costs of bird damage and benefits of deterrence efforts is nearly ready for submission. We conducted field studies in the Pacific Northwest (Washington and Oregon), Michigan, and New York to estimate bird damage in sweet cherries, wine grapes, blueberries, and honeycrisp apples. We conducted studies in tart cherries in Michigan. We estimated damage in 72 sweet cherry blocks, 10 tart cherry blocks, 53 blueberry blocks, 66 honeycrisp apple blocks, and 63 wine grape blocks for a total of damage assessments in 264 blocks. We randomly selected 60 plants (cherries, apples, blueberries) or 100 vines (wine grapes) in each block and counted or estimated the numbers of intact and bird-damaged fruits for each plant. Damage sampling may take place again in 2013 in some crops in Michigan and New York because of low weather-related fruit yields in 2012. We are currently analyzing the data and distributing it to growers. For each block, we calculate the percent damage in each edge of the block (north, south, east or west; the edge is the outer two rows) and in the interior (all rows besides the outer two on each edge). We then weight damage levels by the proportion of each block that is part of an edge or interior, and calculate an overall damage level for the block. We then average the results for all blocks within a region (Michigan, New York, or Pacific Northwest) to obtain a regional bird damage estimate for each crop. We have completed these analyses for wine grapes in Michigan and are working on the analyses for the other crops in the other regions. We conducted 15-minute bird counts in each block where we estimated damage to generate lists of bird species consuming fruit and their relative abundance. We are analyzing these data. We also monitored several cherry, grape, and apple fields in Michigan for over 1700 hours with seven motion-sensitive cameras to detect birds in crops. From the recordings, we obtained 58 sightings of birds and 27 of mammals in sweet cherries, 2 sightings of birds in apples, and 20 sightings of birds and 23 of mammals in wine grapes. We conducted a cage test of a potential bird repellent, SucraShield, on European starlings, at the USDA testing facility in Fort Collins, Colorado. Results indicate SucraShield is not worth investigating in field trials. We are training two graduate students and provided summer employment for nine recent college graduates or current college students. PARTICIPANTS: Catherine Lindell (PD) is coordinating the project and leading the biological component. Stephanie Shwiff (CoPD/PI) is leading the economic component of the project. Paul Curtis (CoPD/PI) is leading the field and extension activities in New York. Philip Howard (CoPD/PI) will be leading the consumer information portion of the project, beginning in the 2nd year. Karen Steensma (CoPD/PI) is leading the field and extension activities in the Pacific Northwest. George Linz (CoPD/PI) oversaw the lab tests of SucraShield as a potential repellent. Jay Boulanger (CoPD/PI) is coordinating and assisting with field work in New York. Erin Lizotte (CoPD/PI) assisted with study design and implementation in Michigan. Nikki Rothwell (CoPD/PI) assisted with study design and implementation in Michigan. Juliet Carroll (CoPD/PI) assisted with survey design and implementation in NY. Chi-Ok Oh (CoPD/PI) will be working with Dr. Phil Howard on the consumer information portion of the project. Colleen Burrows (CoPD/PI) assisted with study design and implementation in the Pacific Northwest. Mark Longstroth (CoI) assisted with study design and implementation in Michigan. Clive Kaiser (CoPD/PI) assisted with study design and implementation in the Pacific Northwest. Dave Lusch (CoI) coordinated geographic information data entry and landscape analyses. Rebecca May coordinated communications among participants, field technicians, and growers. Rachael Eaton, graduate student, oversaw field operations in Michigan. Heidi Henrichs, graduate student, oversaw field operations in New York. Deanna Leigh, field technician, oversaw field operations in the Pacific Northwest. Shayna Wieferich was a field technician in Michigan. Ben Hawes was a field technician in Michigan. Bryant Dossman was a field technician in Michigan. Cody Rossetti was a field technician in the Pacific Northwest. Natalie Jamerson was a field technician in the Pacific Northwest. Jesse McKeen-Scott was a field technician in the Pacific Northwest. Benjamin Oldham was a field technician in the Pacific Northwest. Katy Kirkpatrick assisted with development of outreach materials and project logistics. Karen Moxcey assisted with survey data analysis. Partner organizations( Institutions): Michigan State Univ., Cornell Univ., Trinity Western Univ., Washington State Univ., Oregon State Univ., USDA-National Wildlife Research Center; (Commercial firms): Cherry Bay Orchards, King Orchards, Black Star Farms, Mawby Vineyards, Galen Blueberries, Cornerstone Ag Enterprises, Newroyal Orchards, Standing Stone Vineyards, Harvest Ridge Vineyards, Sakuma Brothers; (Industry groups): Cherry Marketing Institute, MI Grape & Wine Industry, NYS Berry Growers. Collaborators: Michigan State University Extension Training and Professional Development: The graduate students (2), undergraduates and recent graduates (9), and project manager (1) were trained in skills such as experimental design, field techniques, data management, statistical analyses, manuscript and presentation preparation, and communications with stakeholders. We also had one undergraduate who aided in blueberry data collection as a volunteer and is helping with extension efforts. TARGET AUDIENCES: Fruit growers, consumers, researchers and other stakeholders were served by access to our website (http://birddamagetofruitcrops.info/Homepage.html), which provides information about the project, asks for information and feedback, and has a blog that reports on activities. We have completed analyses of the data from the grower survey we distributed and have drafts of fact sheets that we will distribute to fruit growers, consumers, policy-makers, and other researchers once they are finalized. Information from the survey will also be posted on the website when finalized. A manuscript based on these data is nearly ready for submission. This manuscript will reach researchers and extension personnel. We are in the process of providing bird damage data to the individual growers on whose property we worked, as we finish data analyses. We have already provided this information to vineyard owners of 15 blocks where we conducted damage assessments in Michigan in 2012. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: Very low yields of sweet and tart cherries and apples in NY and Michigan in 2012 mean that we will have to repeat some of the bird damage assessments we conducted in 2012. Fruit production was far below normal in 2012 in Michigan and New York because of abnormal weather. It was unseasonably warm in the spring, causing trees to begin to flower. Then there were several freezes, causing damage to developing buds. For example, Cherry Bay Orchards, based in Michigan and the country's largest producer of tart cherries, produced about 1% of its normal yield. Sweet cherry losses were also severe in Michigan with yields of 10-15% of normal. Total apple production in NY for 2012 is expected to be lower than any year since 1948, with production 52% below that for 2011. Given these low yields, we have some concern that the bird damage assessments we conducted in 2012 will not accurately represent damage from a more "typical" year. Therefore, we will repeat some damage assessments in 2012, meaning we will have less time for the bird observations and demonstration projects we initially planned or are currently planning. However we believe that we can repeat assessments in only a subset of blocks, and so limit (but not eliminate) the impact on other project components. With regard to personnel, Erin Lizotte, a Co-PD, has moved to another Michigan State University extension office in Michigan and is no longer working in a fruit-growing region. Therefore she will no longer work on the project.
Impacts
For the economics component of the project, our first year outcomes included completion of a literature review and compilation of price and production data. These outcomes have been accomplished and incorporated into a draft manuscript, along with results from our grower survey that is nearly ready for submission to a peer-reviewed journal. Other short-term outcomes included increased producer and public knowledge of the issue of bird damage to fruit, patterns of damage, and costs of damage. We have interacted with numerous growers through our fieldwork and grower survey in the first year. We developed a website for the project, (http://birddamagetofruitcrops.info/Homepage.html), which provides information to growers and other stakeholders, asks for information and feedback, and has a blog that reports on activities. Our website is receiving, on average, 91 visits a month, and website visitors have been from 13 countries. We also developed an informational sheet about the project that was distributed to approximately 50 growers and other stakeholders. For the biological component of the project, we completed the first-year damage assessments and have begun to analyze the data. For wine grapes in Michigan, we have completed analyses and have distributed the results to the owners of the 15 blocks where fieldwork was conducted. We provided the overall regional estimate of bird damage to each grower and the estimates for their block(s) where we conducted fieldwork. As analyses for the other crops and regions are completed, the same information will be distributed to all producers on whose property we worked in the three regions. Our first-year outcomes include the development of an advisory board for the project. We contacted growers to serve on this board and 9 agreed, 3 from New York, 3 from Michigan, and 3 from the Pacific Northwest. We also have 3 research/extension people from California on the board, to enhance communication with the California agricultural community. The rest of the board includes the project participants and graduate students. The advisory board had its annual conference call on March 12, 2012 which focused on receiving grower input about the direction of the project. The consumer responses portion of the project is beginning in the second year.
Publications
- Lindell, C.A. 2012. Birds in the fruit: Can we convince them to dine somewhere else The Apple Press, Spring 2012 Vol. 4(2):15.
|
|