OLD SERA3: Southern Region Information Exchange Group for IPM
(Multistate Research Coordinating Committee and Information Exchange Group)
Date of Annual Report: 03/26/2012
Annual Meeting Dates: 03/26/2012 - 03/26/2012
Period the Report Covers: 10/01/2011 - 09/01/2012
Period the Report Covers: 10/01/2011 - 09/01/2012
Jim van Kirk;
Brief Summary of MinutesStatement to be made to NIFA concerning the consolidation of IPM funding line? Open to discussion. Clayton Hollier supports a collective statement from SERA. Carlos offers support for consolidation of the funding line. Other arguments for support state that small programs with small funding lines are vulnerable to being cut. Consolidation may help protect those funds for IPM development and implementation. This includes adding IR-4 to the program in order to increase the size of the overall program. Tom Royer discusses the intertwining of IPM programs IR-4 and NPDN. Our IPM activities are combined at an operational level with these programs already. Norm Leppla suggests that we need to add a description of what we do to illustrate this fact. Clayton Hollier suggests that we need to offer suggestions on guidelines for determining how IPM funds are distributed through a consolidated
funding line. Currently 406 and AFRI are the only place where integrated projects (research, extension)
can be funded.
Carlos calls for a decision on what is going to be in our SERA statement going forward to this issue. Carlos offers up a draft document from Tom Melton (admin. Liaison). Document will be e-mailed (add to minutes). Statement is due by April 2nd.
Issues- Title of the funding line, issues of indirects, inclusion of IR-4,
Recommendation for language that may allow for a gradation of indirect costs over a period of time to allow for an adjustment and attempt to negotiate a finalized rates somewhere around 22 percent. Perhaps a generalized statement saying that indirects need to be addressed in an effort to protect IPM extension programs. Statement that there are benefits, but care needs to be taken to ensure that it doesnt go too far to the point of crippling programs. Statement needs to speak to indirect costs specifically. Impacts of indirect costs to IPM programs need to be minimized. Marty Draper suggests that funding caps may be raised in order to address the effect of indirect costs on programs.
Marty says to think of this as a blank slate. If the new crop protection line comes about, would EIPM program continue to exist? What would we like to see if we could rebuild from scratch. 406 allows for extension and a suggestion to maintain extension programs is necessary. Couch language to ensure that we protect our program FUNCTIONS rather that saying we need to protect specific programs. Bob
Noweirski suggests that we make the connections between IPM and IR-4 and NPDN and highlights the interactions of the functions of the various programs. Describe the functions and their interactions and also define who the stakeholders are and how the functions of these programs is positively impacting the constituents of the politicians. It is also necessary to address issues of infrastructure. Extension needs to be clearly defined and represented in the evaluation criteria and by the evaluation panels. We
may need to develop our pots of money to ensure that the spectrum of research and extension activities is covered. We do need to ensure that the pots of money are carved up in such a way as to ensure that the various functions are protected. This needs to be coupled with the evaluation criteria and with selection of the review panels.
Charles Allen suggests formation of a subcommittee to draft a statement from SERA-3 to address the topics discussed on this issue. Sub-committee to consist of Charles Allen, Carlos Bogran, Scott Stewart, Tom Royer. Jim Van Kirk will be consulted after the initial drafting of the document. Sub-committee will compile a 5 minute statement to be presented at the NIFA listening session. Paul Smith will present this statement at the listening session.
IR-4 issue: IR-4 is against being consolidated into the crop protection line and are fighting against their identity. By clearly defining needed functions, we may be able to defuse this issue and bring the IR-4 group to our table. More direct discussion needs to take place with the IR4 group in an effort to
increase cooperation among the different groups to be impacted by the consolidation of the various IPM
SERA-003 renewal due July 1: Need to update the current existing document and distribute to the group for review. Tom Royer will take the lead with the support of the other officers (Paul S. and incoming secretary). Nominations will be made following lunch.
Jim van Kirk update on IPM Centers: Steve Toth is still recovering from stroke with aphasia. He is coming in to work a few times a week. Evaluation specialist has officially started. Her role is becoming more defined. She is working on expanding and highlighting success stories. Ames Herbert in Virginia is developing a new evaluation program and Doris is participating in that venture.
Southern Region IPM is utilizing their funding this year as it is the drop dead year (FY 2010-2011). FY 2012 money will start to be used later this year one the previous funds are spent. Regulatory Information Network is being funded. That network is not competitive this year but is being done in partnership with the center. They have also agreed to update out of date crop profiles. Henry Fadamiro is heading a small farms working group funded through the center. The working group is having a meeting in June at Clemson and will address issues with 1890s, Puerto Rico, other small farm issues& This meeting will be a get-to-know one another and to set priorities for the group.
FY2013- RFA is currently out and the proposal has not been compiled or submitted yet. If awarded, it is expected that funding levels should be around what was available before this years reduction. Will continue with the small farms working group. Will be rethinking the enhancement grants program.
May focus more on the startup aspect. Input through informal channels is asked for and suggested. Some discretionary funds will be available. Enhancements will be included in the center proposal but the parameters of that program have yet to be determined. May have a greater emphasis on working groups and other collaborative efforts. The Friends of IPM awards are under evaluation. May appoint a nomination committee and accept outside recommendations as well. The submission process continues to be under-utilized, while the award process continues to be very rewarding. The program will now have a graduate student award in addition to the other awards. Center may develop another layer of committee to direct Center activities on a more consistent basis than the steering committee which only meet twice a year. May also be looking to reorganize the steering and advisory committees.
SERA representation to SRIPMC: Doug Johnsons term is expiring as the SERA representative, and he is no longer the IPM Coordinator for KY. Suggested that Ric Bessin be contacted about becoming the new representative for SERA 003 on the advisory council. Tom Royer will take on responsibility of
communicating with both Doug and Ric.
eXtension and IPM: SWAT analysis conducted in DC. Small committee created to explore further. Keith
Douce submitted a proposal to create an IPM Community of Practice. Will serve as an umbrella to house any material pertaining to IPM within eXtension. eOrganic suggested as model to look at.
Incoming Secretary for SERA-003: Charles Allen Nominated (Tom Royer, seconded by Clayton Hollier). Unanimous vote of approval.
Evaluations and Priorities meeting in Athens, GA: Had a good meeting and ideas were suggested for moving forward with program evaluation. A proposal has not been forthcoming from that group through that. Opportunities to leverage expertise from Ayanava Majumdar and Nick Furhman coupled with organization of Doris could be utilized to develop some regional training and coordination of evaluation materials.
Priorities from that meeting are available on the SRIPMC website.
Location for the next meeting: Tom Royer will be chair of the group. Suggested site of Oklahoma City or in Tulsa. Will get back to the group at a future date after investigating pricing and such for those
locations. Date will be selected in order to avoid overlap with the SWB and SEB ESA meeting.
PublicationsBessin, R., and J. Obrycki. 2011. An IPM Scouting Guide for Natural Enemies of Vegetable Pests. ENT-67.
23 pp. http://www.ca.uky.edu/agc/pubs/ent/ent67/ent67.pdf
Bessin, R. and D. Johnson. 2011 Insecticide Recommendations for Conventional and No-tillage Field
Bessin, R. and D. Johnson. 2011. Insecticide Recommendations for Popcorn. ENT-62.
Coolong, T., K. Seebold, R. Bessin, and J. Strang. 2011. An IPM Scouting Guide for Common Pests of Solanaceous Crops in Kentucky. ID-172. 32 pp. (revision) http://www.ca.uky.edu/agc/pubs/ent/ent67/ent67.pdf
Egli, D.B. 2011. Time and the Productivity of Agronomic Crops and Cropping Systems. Agron. J. 103: 743-
Fulcher, A. 2011. UK-UT Commercial Nursery and Landscape IPM website http://utuknurseryipm.utk.edu/
Grable, C. 2011. West Kentucky Nursery Crops Newsletter. Newsletter featuring KY Nursery Crops IPM
program information. http://www.ca.uky.edu/HLA/Dunwell/WestKentuckyNurseryCrops.html
Green, J.D. and J. Martin. 2011. Weed control options on fallow crop fields. Grain Crops Update http://graincrops.blogspot.com/
Johnson, D. 2011. Insecticide Recommendations for Grain Sorghum (Milo) ENT-24. Johnson, D. 2011. Insecticide Recommendations for Soybeans. ENT-13.
Johnson, D. , R. Bessin, J. Brown, C. Hardy, C. Harper, T. Hendrick, D. Irvan, C. Kenimer, T. Miller, A. Mills,
T. Missun, and D. Perkins. Establishing a Baseline Data Set before the Arrival of Several Invasive Pests of
Kentucky Field Crops. Ann. Meet. NCB-ESA. 13-16 Mar. 2011, Minneapolis, MN. Poster.
Lacefield, E. and K. Kalberg. 2010. 2010 Kentucky Soybean Performance Tests. PR-607. Ag. Exp. Station. University of Kentucky. College of Agriculture.
Martin, J. 2011 Factors That Affect Ryegrass Control This Spring. Mid-America Farmer Grower. Issue 9. Martin, J. 2011 Factors That Affect Ryegrass Control This Spring. Kentucky Pest News 1258: 2-3.
Murdock, L. 2011. Variable Rate Nitrogen (VRN) Application On Wheat Using The Greenseeker On A
Field Basis. Mid-America Farmer Grower. Issue 5.
Wendroth, O.*, KersebaumK., Schwab G., and Murdock L.. 2011. Spatial relationships of soil properties, crop indices and N application pattern with wheat growth and yield in a field. In: Ahuja, L., and L. Ma (Eds.) Methods of Introducing System Models in Field Research, Volume 2 in the Advances in Agricultural System Modeling Series, ASA-SSSA-CSSA, Madison, WI. (in press).
Wendroth, O*., Murdock L., and Schwab G. 2011. How close is close enough? In: Stafford, J.V. (Ed.). Precision Agriculture 05. Proc. 8th Europ. Conf. Prec. Agric., Prague, Czech Republic, (in press).
Date of Annual Report: 03/03/2013
Annual Meeting Dates: 03/03/2013 - 03/03/2013
Period the Report Covers: 10/01/2012 - 09/01/2013
Period the Report Covers: 10/01/2012 - 09/01/2013
ParticipantsTom Royer OK Chairman;
Charles Allen TX Secretary;
Scott Stewart TN;
Geoff Zehnder Clemson;
Henry Fadamiro AL & SRIPMC;
Blake Layton MS;
Joe LaForest Center for Invasive Species & SRIPMC;
Rosemary Hallberg SIPMC;
Ric Bessin KY;
Norm Lepler FL;
Clayton Hollier LA