EXTENDING KNOWLEDGE AND INFORMATIONAPPLLIED RESEARCH AND CREATIVE ACTIVITY

Current Period: 03-04-05Extension of information

LecturesNewslettersDiagnosis and recommendationUsing Mass-Media to extend information to a broad audience

Cooperative Extension RadioCooperative Extension column in local newspapers

Web siteDried Plums

SJV Dried Plum DayEnvironmentally Sound Prune Systems

PeachesNorth San Joaquin Valley Cling Peach DayCorrecting iron chlorosisEuropean rootstock evaluationsMystery damage in Carson peachesMechanical thinning of peaches

StrawberriesGeneral activities and outreach programExtension meetingsTensiometer demonstration project

GrapesBi-county Winegrape Extension MeetingUC Winegrape short courseGrape Harvest Safety DaySJV Viticulture Technical GroupResponding to exotic pest introductions - Vine mealy bugCentral CA WinegrowersOLR control using soft insecticidesTemporal distribution of bloomStatewide canker survey

AlmondsAlmond leaf scorchMiticide trial

FigsAbating wild fig treesPhenology study

Integrated Pest ManagementContinuing education for pest management professionals

Continuing education classes with Merced Collegee-mail list

Lerp psyllid control in eucalyptusBud development poster

Farmland ConservationCentral Valley Farmland TrustRural-Urban ConflictConsultationInteractive display

Leadership Development, Public Policy Education & General OutreachLeadership Merced Ag DayMerced Irrigation District educational tourState Pest Management Advisory CommitteeConsultation with Other Agencies and GroupsPublic speaking to general audiencesCA Ag Leadership Sacramento FellowshipCA Ag Leadership Washington DC FellowshipDry Creek/Merced River Education project

Horticulture for homeowners and micro-farmersGeneral extension activitiesProduction manual

Affirmative ActionAdministration

List of acronyms and abbreviations:ASI = Ag Sustainability Institute at UCDCAC = County Ag CommissionerCAL = CA Ag LeadershipCAPCA = CA Ag Production Consultants AssociationCCC = CA Commodity CommitteeCDFA = CA Department of Food and AgCE = Cooperative ExtensionFA = Farm AdvisorGIS = Geographical Information SystemGRCP – Genetic Resources Conservation ProgramIPM = Integrated Pest ManagementMB = mealy bugMBr – methyl bromideOLR = Omnivorous leafrollerPC = Program CouncilPCA = pest control advisorPI = Primary InvestigatorPL = Program LeaderSAREP = Sustainable Ag Research & Extension ProgramSFP = Small Farm ProgramSJV = San Joaquin ValleyUSDA = US Department of AgUNEX = University Extension at UC DavisVMB = vine mealy bug03, 04, 05, 06 = 2003 to 2006 respectively

IntroductionI have tried to utilize a wide variety of Extension tools to reach a broad audience and address the needs of my clientele and the citizens of Merced County. I have worked with non-traditional audiences and I have attempted to make my programs available to non-English-speaking audiences. All of our meetings are held in locations that are handicapped accessible. All events are publicized in the local press as well as trade publications in order to reach people who may not be on our mailing lists. Where there was the opportunity I made personal visits to minority farmers to acquaint them with CE and encourage them to participate.

I have a very diverse research program. This reflects my relatively broad assignment (grapes, apples, peaches, prunes, strawberries, ornamental trees, forestry, cherries, kiwifruit, blueberries, Christmas trees, figs, apricots, etc). Selection of research projects is driven by three main factors: 1) the opportunity presents itself, 2) funding, if needed, is available and 3) the project is relevant to a real problem or issue facing those growers. In each project, large and small, I have tried to clearly identify the problem or issue addressed. More importantly, I think I have been diligent in taking the information generated and extending it to my audience or using it in a future project.

After being hired in 1979 my position has gradually grown to include a very diverse array of crops. I was originally hired to be responsible for tree fruit and grapes but except apricots and figs. With the support of my CD and RD I began a limited program in public policy education. When Bob Scheuerman retired I agreed to accept ornamental trees, Christmas tree plantings, and misc. forestry and oak tree calls. When Lonnie Hendricks retired I formally assumed apricots and figs. I informally began taking phone and farm calls on nut crops.

Extension of information - ongoingOur continuing mission of technology transfer requires a variety of extension tools to extend our research based information. This section reviews activities in this area.

Lectures Like other Farm Advisors, I spend much time traveling to other counties and giving talks at other CE, UNEX and industry meetings. This is a very important part of our extension program because it put us in direct contact with audiences outside our own counties. Most importantly, it takes information we generate and extends it to new audiences. In the appendix is a selected list showing most of the lectures I have given during this period. The impact is that a large amount of research-based information and new technology has been transferred to growers and taxpayers in the region resulting in better practices.

NewslettersI produced a bimonthly newsletter, Tree & Vine Notes. Nut crop articles are contributed by neighboring Farm Advisors. The mailing list varies from 800 to 900 with many requests coming from throughout the state and some from out of state. We try to present timely and relevant information that not only conveys technically useful information but helps to highlight and promote what we do. The impact is that a large amount of research-based information and new technology has been transferred to growers and taxpayers in the region resulting in better practices.

Diagnosis and RecommendationThis may be the most important activity I do that involves all of my major and minor crops. It is important because it provides me with the opportunity to learn about problems and issues on which to base my research program. It is during these visits that I recruit research cooperators and identify sites to conduct trials. This activity provides very “teachable” moments when growers and PCAs are receptive to trying new approaches to problems or experimenting with possible solutions. I do some of my most effective extension work during these visits whether they are on the farm on at the front counter.

Impact: A large amount of research-based information and new technology has been transferred to growers and taxpayers in the region resulting in better practices. Farmers change their practices more quickly as a result of individual contacts than with any other extension tool.

Using mass-media to extend information to a broad audience. Ongoing.Cooperative Extension Radio Cooperator: Scott Stoddard, UCCE, MercedGrant support: none

Background: CE needs to have broad exposure in the community to maintain support. CE needs to extend its audience using every available tool.

Methodology: I have worked hard to establish a close relationship with our local news talk radio station. As a result, all I have to do is call up with some topic ideas and they put me on the air. For the last three years I have had a weekly radio show that runs at 6:30 and 7:30 Tuesday mornings – during the morning drive. Beginning in 2005, I asked Scott Stoddard in our office to participate in the radio show. Scott and I now alternate months - providing about 50, 5-minute shows per year. The emphasis is on production agriculture – this is not a garden show. We also promote CE programs and events.

Results: Thousands of people hear timely advice and educational information from CE on one of the most listened-to time slots.

Impact: Based on the many un-solicited comments that Scott and I receive from people, the program is widely listened to. Thousands of people who are not familiar with Cooperative Extension are now introduced to what we do. This is great exposure for CE and it helps to extend our audience base and maintain political support.

Cooperative Extension column in local newspapers. OngoingCooperators: CE Advisors in the Merced office + Brent Holtz and Ron Vargas in the Madera office.Grant support: none

Background: CE needs to have broad exposure in the community to maintain support. CE needs to extend it audience using every available tool.

Methodology: A few years ago I worked out an arrangement with our largest daily newspaper, the Merced Sun-Star, to run a weekly column. Two years ago I arranged to have that same article run in an affiliated newspaper, the Los Banos Times. All of the Advisors in the Merced office (including our 4-H Y D Advisor) participate in producing 500 word articles of current interest. Because they are providing cross-county coverage, Ron Vargas and Brent Holtz participate also.

Results: Based on the many un-solicited comments that all the Advisors receive from people, the column is widely read. Thousands of people read timely advice and educational information from CE.

Impact: Thousands of people who are not familiar with Cooperative Extension are now introduced to what we do. This is great exposure for CE and it helps to extend our audience base and political support.

Web Site - cemerced.ucdavs.eduI look for and identify material to put in the Tree and Vine section including appropriate links to resources in my program area. On popular item I maintain is a historical spread sheet of chilling hours and hours below 32F for the Livingston touch-tone station which is not accessible through the Pomology web site.

Impact: A large amount of research-based information and has been transferred to growers and taxpayers in the region resulting in better practices.

Dried Plums SJV Dried Plum Day – ongoing

Collaborators: Harry Andris, Brent Holtz, and assistance from Tulare CE office.

Grant support: costs are covered by sponsors and sometimes the prune board.

Background: I do not hold a local dried plum meeting because we have the SJV Dried Plum Day. I have spoken at that meeting and the California Dried Plum Day in Yuba City. The Prune Bargaining Association holds their regional meeting in Madera and I try to attend as a way to visit with the growers and talk informally about Extension activities.

Methodology: Since Steve Sibbett retired, Harry Andris, Brent Holtz and I have assumed responsibility for the annual even held in Tulare each year and we work together to put it on. I organized the Feb 03 meeting and I have already started working on the 2006 meeting.

Results : Average attendance = 35 with good coverage from the trade press.

Extension methods: Prune day (see above).

My role: I was primary program chair for the Feb 2003 meeting. I have already started working on and will be chair for the Feb 2006 meeting.

Impact: The impact is that a large amount of research-based information and new technology has been transferred to growers and taxpayers in the region resulting in better practices.

Environmentally Sound Prune Systems (ESPS) projectCooperators: Harry Andris and Brent HoltzGrant funding: minor

Background: A series of workshops and field days held in 02,03 & 04 around the state was the culmination of several years work by the dried plum work group to develop a sustainable farming practices program that we could market to the industry.

Methodology: (A) In March 03 we organized a ESPS training day at the Kearney Ag Center. A detailed and comprehensive binder was developed using materials that we tested and validated over the last few years. This was the text book for the course. We held five courses in different locations. Harry Andris and I were responsible for the SJV program. Harry and I collaborated on the program (many speakers spokes at all the meetings) and Harry did all of the logistics works. I moderated the program.

(B) A field day was organized and held south of Madera in Nov 03. Tables with microscopes were set up to demonstrate various IPM techniques and pest ID.

Results: (A) The KAC program was very well attended with 29 attendees paying $35.00 to attend. (B) Ten growers and PCAs attended this event. Impact: Forty growers and PCAs are now making sound pest management decisions that are resulting in more effective programs and less water pollution.

The ESPS implementation team received the IPM Innovator award in 2005 as a result of the project’s accomplishments.

Peaches This is my second largest clientele group by both numbers and acreage. Merced County is one of the state’s top five producers of peaches. Peaches are one of the most intensively farmed orchard crops in California. I respond to phone calls from around the Central Valley. Peaches have a lot of problems and are sensitive to a range of climatic changes.

Northern San Joaquin Valley Cling Peach Day – Ongoing. Collaborator: Roger Duncan

Grant support: About $500/year support from Cling Peach Board to pay for lunches.+ about $100/year - from local sponsors for refreshments.

Background: Roger and I collaborate in producing this annual meeting held at the Stanislaus County Ag Center.

Methodology: The target audience is growers and allied professionals from throughout the north San Joaquin Valley and we pull a very large group from that area. The morning is dedicated to UCCE research and extension topics. Included is an industry meeting and a lunch sponsored by the cling peach board. This is an excellent opportunity to collaborate with industry on an extension activity.

My role: I chair every other year. Roger and I usually also speak at this meeting.

Results: Average attendance = 75 We usually have good coverage from trade magazines.

Impact: The impact is that a large amount of research-based information and new technology has been transferred to growers and taxpayers in the region resulting in better practices.

Correcting iron chlorosis in peaches – 02 to 05

Collaborators: noneGrant support: Only the donation of the material from formulator.

Background: Iron chlorosis is a recurring problem in peaches. Often it is due to over-irrigation but sometimes it is due to excess lime in the soil. One our research cooperators have a persistent problem that he has been treating by injecting acid into the drip system. Correction has been slow.

Methodology: I set out a replicated plot in Fall 02 where we spread a formulation of ferric sulfate in the wetted area created by the micro sprinklers. The trees were evaluated for recovery in 03, 04 and 05

Results: The treatments brought about significant recovery of the treated trees when compared to paired untreated trees.

Extension methods: I will give a talk on this treatment method at our next bi-county peach meeting.

Impact: The cooperator has already modified their management practices. After discussing with the rest of the growers at our next meeting I hope others will try it or something similar.

European Rootstock evaluations - 02 to 05

Collaborators: Cling peach workgroup.

Grant support: This was funded as a workgroup project in 02 which paid for the trees. Value of the Merced County trees was about $400.

Background: The cling workgroup has established rootstock development as a priority and most of the cling FA are participating in the evaluations of experimental rootstocks, two of which, were developed in France.

Methodology: In summer 02 I secured the cooperation of three growers on very sandy soil who have agreed to host small replicated test plots of three rootstocks (Cadaman, Hansen and Paramount) that may have resistance to bacterial cankers. I planted these plots in Feb 03. I evaluated the three plots in 04 and 05. All the rootstocks did poorly and some of them died completely.

Extension methods: This information will be extended to farmers at our annual meetings, though our newsletters and possibly with regional publications.

Impact: Anticipated impact will be growers will save much money by not trying these rootstocks.

Alternative Insecticides for Cling Peaches - 03Collaborators: Walt Bentley Grant support: About $200 worth of insecticide donated by chemical companies.

Background: There are new and interesting insecticides being developed that need to be tested on California’s specialty crops. Testing un-registered materials is difficult outside of UC field stations because of the precautions we must take to prevent treated fruit from becoming commingled with commercial fruit.

Methodology: In Spring 03 I was told by a long-time cooperator that they would not harvest a whole block because of hail damage. I seized the opportunity and established a very large, commercial-scale fully replicated insecticide trial containing three registered and three unregistered materials and an untreated check.A June evaluation of shoot strikes indicated that all the materials were reducing damage and that we could anticipate some excellent harvest data. Sadly, the contractor that was to shake the whole crop on the ground, came in early and started at our end of the field and the whole plot was lost.

Extension methods: Nothing to extendImpact: None

Mystery Damage to Carson Peaches – 03 and 04Collaborator: Marshall Johnson, UCRGrant support: None

Background: In 00-02 I received complaints from a few growers and PCAs about some mysterious damage to extra early cultivars of cling peaches. After routing samples to entomologists at KAC, we were unable to determine a cause.

Methodology: I recruited the help of Marshall Johnson and in 03 we developed a systematic weekly survey of a badly damaged block involving hand sampling and yellow sticky traps. The results of the 03 surveys were inconclusive so we repeated the sampling and surveyed in 04. We also trapped for walnut husk fly in an adjacent walnut orchard because that pest has been reported to attack peaches if populations are high enough. After two years of intensive scouting we still could not conclusively say what caused the damage. The reports of damage have stopped, at least for now, so we have declared victory and discontinued the survey.

Extension methods: Nothing to extend.

Impact: None

Mechanical Thinning of Peaches 04 & 05Collaborators: Janine Hasey, UCCE and Kitren Glosser, Dept of Plant Science, DavisGrant support: About $400 of in-kind support from the grower cooperator.

Background: Input costs of growing processing peaches and pressure from low priced imports have resulted in peaches being only marginally profitable. Labor is the major cost of growing peaches and a way to reduce that cost must be found or the crop will no longer be grown in CA.

Methodology: In 04 and 05 we conducted experiments where we looked at the feasibility of using shakers to pre-thin the trees in the spring to reduce the cost of hand thinning. The objective is to work out a protocol where enough fruit is removed evenly from the trees to significantly reduce hand thinning costs. The major problem is removing enough fruit from the bottom of the tree without over-thinning the tops where the largest fruit is.

In 04 we brought in a commercial shaker who has experience with citrus and has a specialty shaker to shake a non-replicated pilot trial for us. The effort was moderately successful but not enough to recommend the practice. In 05 we used the cooperator’s own shaker at a very low speed and conducted a large fully replicated trial to evaluate two timings. The 05 results were better but still not good enough. Janine Hasey and Kitren Gloser’s trials in the Sacramento Valley look a little better.

In 06 we will look at both modifying the pruning and different shaking strategies.

Extension methods: We have been reporting out results at our cling peach extension meetings and discussing them with the growers.

Impact: none yet.

ECONOMIC RESEARCH AND EVALUATION - Cling Peach Cost StudiesCooperators: Janine Hasey, Roger Duncan and Rich DemouraGrant funding: none

Background: All industries must have economic bench marks by which to measure performance and to project costs and returns. An important tool that is widely used are the pro-forma budgets that Cooperative Extension produces.

Methodology: In 03 three cling peach FAs and the ag econ SRA worked on a paired cost studies comparing extra early and late varieties of cling peaches. In collecting the data we tried to find growers who could give us comparative data on those practices that differed between the two varietal classes. This was difficult and time-consuming since most growers did not have this information readily available. Since all costs and returns have changed significantly, previously collected data was not useful and had to be collected anew.

Data collection took place over a four month period and involved interviews and questionnaires. We attempted to reconcile as much of the data as possible at an initial meeting and then added missing data points over the next two months. The SRA developed a rough draft that the FAs reviewed and revised. After a conference call we finally arrived at final draft of the late season pro-forma.

Results: These cost studies are available as statewide publications at local CE offices and over the web. They are one of the most popular publications that CE produces.

Impact: Cling peach producers, ag bankers, researchers, government regulators, FAs and other allied professional now have a reliable pro-forma budget that they can use in their work and will be able to make sound business decisions.

StrawberriesExtension of Information to Hmong GrowersCollaborators: Richard Molinar

CA Strawberry Board - $5000 in April 05. This money for general support for strawberry related projects. : $5000 2/1/00 to 1/31/01. $5000 for 2/1/01 to 1/31/02. $5000 for 2/1/02 to 1/31/03.

Background: This is a small group of about twenty families and three commercial nurseries. It consumes a large amount of time because of the special needs of this group which are all limited resource farmers with no formal agricultural training or college-level education in agriculture or science. It consumes a large amount of time because of the special needs of this group which are all limited resource farmers with no formal agricultural training or college-level education in agriculture or science. Many of the growers face language barriers or difficulty understanding some the technical aspects of modern production agriculture.

Methodology: Big traditional Extension meetings are not always the best way to reach this group. I rely mostly on individual contacts in the field to do my teaching.With this group I rely heavily on traditional Extension methodology and tools. I have identified a few growers that are innovators and are interested in research who are also in contact with the other growers and can help demonstrate new ideas and help me collect information about their problems and needs.

Computers and mass media are not useful in reaching this group of farmers. My goal is that they will become well-enough acquainted with modern practices that I will be able to discontinue these efforts as they transition into the mainstream of California agriculture. It is interesting working with the vast array of farming operations we have here in the Valley. We have to be flexible with our programs and extension methodologies.

Extension methods: Every year, Richard Molinar and I put on a SJV strawberry extension meeting in Merced or Fresno County. Sometimes it includes a field demonstration after the meeting in Fresno. We coordinate with the CA Strawberry Board and invite them to give industry or research updates. We make translation available at all our meetings.

Results: Attendance is 20 to 40. Attendees tell us that they find the meeting very helpful. We usually have people from Fresno, Merced and Tulare County attend.The Hmong strawberry growers have access to modern and un-biased information and are now much more informed and can make better management decisions.

Impact: My program as well as that of other Farm Advisors in the SJV has helped the fledgling strawberry industry to survive here. It is a small industry but it provides the only source of local strawberries available to local processors. The availability of locally grown fruit has been a great benefit to consumers who enjoy purchasing from family farmers through their many fruit stands. These growers have been steadily progressing in

their farming practices. They are much more effective in their pest management programs and they are much safer.Strawberry tensiometer demonstration project 2001 to 2004 Collaborator: noneGrant support: none

Background: Most of our strawberry growers over-irrigate, wasting valuable water and increasing pumping costs. After several failed attempts to explain this to growers I decided to demonstrate it using tensiometers which are simple and easy to understand.

Methodology: Using support from the Strawberry Commission, I purchased several tensiometers and recruited some growers to participate in a project where we placed the tensiometers in two locations in the field and I provided them with training to read and record their readings. I provided very simple guidelines for when to turn on the water based on the readings. This project was begun in 01 and ran til 04. I demonstrated that tensiometers can be a tool for managing irrigation in strawberries.

Extension methods: The tensiometer information has been shared at strawberry meetings and through individual consultations. Impact: Impact has been modest and gradual. Interviews indicate that growers have tried to cut back water and report some savings in their electricity usage.

Foliar nutrient trail 2004Cooperators: noneGrant support: only about $100 in materials provided by manufacturer.

Background: Strawberries do not produce fruit for very long in the spring because the plants then to “shut down” with the onset of hot weather. If we could get the plants to keep blooming and setting fruit a few more weeks each summer that would greatly increase profitability of a crop that is barely profitable as it is. Because strawberries are grown on very sandy soil in our area it was speculated that foliar nutrients may help plant health. Some local fertilizer sales people have been promoting foliar nutrients as a way to extend harvest.

To test these claims I asked one salesperson to provide me with the materials and recommended rates so I could conduct a replicated trial. I imposed four treatments of different mixes of nutrients and some “secret sauces” and sprayed the plants on 21 May and again 14 days later. We evaluated the appearance and apparent fruit set as harvest progressed and asked the grower if he could see a difference. There was no difference at all.

Extension methods: When asked by growers I tell them what I did not see.

Impact: Hopefully a few growers will stop wasting money on foliar treatments.

GrapesGrapes are my largest crop and clientele group consisting of 95% winegrapes and 5% raisins. Because of my role in statewide meetings I often get questions from all over the state and sometimes out of state. I also make many farm calls to solve problems or give advice about management decisions.

Bi-County Winegrape Extension Meeting – ongoing

Collaborators: Roger Duncan

Grant support: About $50/year from business sponsors.

Background: There is a need for a group venue to discuss research and new developments with clientele. We also need a venue for straight teaching on topics that we think are important to our clientele.

Methodology: Roger Duncan and I collaborate in producing the bi-county meeting which is held each February in Turlock.

My role: I chair every other meeting. I usually speak at each meeting.

Results: Average attendance = 55 We usually have good coverage from the media.

Impact: The impact is that a large amount of research-based information and new technology has been transferred to growers and taxpayers in the region.

UC Winegrape Short Course – ongoing.Project leader = Larry Bettiga, Monterey County

Collaborators: Most of the CE Advisors and Specialists

Background: Winegrapes have a continual influx of new producers. The wine industry needs to have its members trained in the latest viticultural practices.

My role: I have been giving presentations at this short course since it was first offered about 15 years ago. The last few years I have covered the subjects of vineyard mechanization and mechanical pruning. The CE Advisors and Specialists collaborate on updating the agenda and course workbook.

Results: Average attendance = 200

Impact: This is the most offered short course that UNEX and CE produce. It often sells out. A large amount of research-based information and new technology has been transferred to growers and taxpayers in California.

Bi-County grape harvest safety day – ongoing

Collaborators: George Leavitt & Tome Martin-Duval, UCCE, Madera

Grant support: Tome secures about $3000/year in donations to cover all costs including a luncheon.

Background: On-farm accidents have killed or injured hundreds of persons. Harvest is one of the most dangerous times of the year because people are in a hurry and they are more tired.

Methodology: Every summer I assist George Leavitt and Tome’ Martin in conducting the Grape Harvest Safety Program held each July at the Madera Fairgrounds. We have 7 simultaneous presentations. Topics include: forklifts, harvesters, on-road transports, emergency first aid, fire extinguishing, hand tools, and tractors. This heavily attended event is translated into Spanish and Punjab as well as in English. It features eight different workshops. The target audience is farm employees from Madera and Merced Counties. This is very well attended and it gives us a chance to reach out to non-English-speaking employees here in the SJV.

Extension methods: (see methodology)

My role: I help in the publicity and make sure all grape growers in my county get invited. The day of the event I am on-site to assist in the operations and to be available for trouble shooting if needed. Tome does most of the work.

Results: Average attendance = 250

Impact: The impact is over the three year period abut 750 employees have been trained in safe farm practices. It can be presumed that a number of accidents and illnesses have been prevented.

San Joaquin Valley Viticulture Technical Group - ongoing

Collaborators: George Leavitt, Steve Vasquez and six representatives from the grape industry, Dr. Sanliang Gu and Dr. Bob Wample at CSU Fresno.

Background: It was recognized that there is a need for a forum for viticulture professionals to meet and discuss the more technical issues and research. It was envisioned that this forum would be more technical than would be appropriate for a regular Extension or industry meeting.

Methodology: The San Joaquin Valley Viticulture Technical group is another example of university and industry collaboration. A program committee consisting of George Leavitt, Steve Vasquez, myself and several industry people develop, each year, a list of themes for our meetings which are held every other month in Madera or Fresno.

Extension methods: (see methodology)

My role: I chair one meeting per year, which includes selecting the speakers and topics to fit the theme. I am on the program committee and I play a major role in developing topics.

Results: This is a very popular meeting with full-time viticulture professionals and other and members of the CSU Fresno. Average attendance = 40

Impact: The impact is that a large amount of research-based information and new technology has been transferred to viticulture professionals in the region. It has provided an excellent collaboration opportunity among UCCE, CSU Fresno and industry professionals.

Responding to vine mealy bug

Collaborators: CAC staff

Grant support: none

Background: Vine mealy bug (VMB) is yet but another pest that has been imported into CA and is now spreading around the state. VMB is much more troublesome than other MB species. This has demanded a rapid and major response from UCCE for new research and extension activities.

Methodology: I am a member of the Merced County VMB task force which went inactive after 03. In 03 I worked with my local CAC to develop a protocol for monitoring and trapping. It was agreed that trapping would focus on any nursery stock growing in the county and around the two wineries we have because of incoming loads from other areas. None was found until spring 05. After consulting with the CAC and the grower, I recommended they increase trapping intensity and begin aggressive insecticide treatments to try to eradicate this isolated outbreak.

Impact: In 2006 we will evaluate if the known infestation is being suppressed enough to anticipate eradication. We have increased awareness of VMB as a serious pest in the state. We have an action plan in place for Merced County.

Central CA Winegrowers 04 and 05Collaborators: Other SJV Farm Advisors, Dr Bob Wample at CSU Fresno and industry representatives.Grant support: none to me.

Background: Winegrowers in the SJV have always been poorly organized and have not had a unified voice relative to promotion, industry coordination and other issues. There is a need for more quantitative information about what cultural practices really improve wine quality.

Methodology: In 2004 CE Farm Advisors and CSU Fresno were asked to participate in the organizing of the Central CA Winegrowers group. Most of us agreed to participate on the oversight committee of a large 2-year “Buy California” grant to evaluate a variety of growing practices and site evaluations around the SJV to identify factors that can contribute to increased quality. After the first few meetings it became evident that CSU Fresno was going to be the main participant in the research project and Dr. Wample would be the PI along with Ron Metzler the Executive Director of CCW. I have continued to participate on the oversight committee, which meets 2X/year and I have participated in the field days that were held in Merced County which attracted about 20 people. My role also included recruiting a cooperator to participate in the demonstrations and the data collection.

Results: About 50-60 people in Merced County have participated in the field days learned about improved irrigation practices at the field day.

Impact: Very little so far.

OLR control in winegrapes using soft insecticides 03 and 04Cooperators: Walt Bentley-IPM Group and Marshall Johnson – UCRGrant support: project resulted in two unrestricted gifts (see appendix)

Background: There is an on-going need for insecticides that are less disruptive to beneficial arthropods and fit well into UC’s grape IPM program.

Methodology: During a farm call I became aware of a Chardonnay vineyard that usually have high numbers of OLR. Recognizing this as an excellent site for an experiment I recruited the owner to participate in a two year insecticide trial where we emphasized “soft” materials such as insect growth regulators (PGR) and biological control materials such as “Bt”.

Results: We were able to accumulate two year’s worth of excellent data showing that the soft materials were very effective in suppressing OLR populations. The results have been reported and discussed at local grape grower and pest control advisor meetings. The results have been distributed as handouts at these same meetings.

Impact: It is evident from discussions with growers and PCAs that soft insecticides are becoming more widely used in the region.

Temporal distribution of bloom in winegrapes 2005Cooperators: Nation-wide longitudinal study. Doug Gubler – UCD is the CA coordinator.Grant support: none to me.

Background: There is a national effort to determine when powdery mildew sprays can be terminated safely. Some basic information that is needed is when bloom initiates and concludes in various regions.

Methodology: I volunteered to be a data collection site and we collected observations of five varieties near Merced. The data was organized and sent to Dr. Gubler for aggregation with other sites from the state.

Results: The Merced County data was successfully collected and aggregated with other counties.

Impact: Anticipated impact would be more reliable timing guidelines for Powdery Mildew treatment programs.

Statewide canker survey 2005Cooperators: George Leavitt, UCCE, Madera, is PI. I was a cooperator.Grant funding: None to me.

Background: There is a need to more accurately characterize the severity and distribution of eutypa and bot canker in grapes in CA.

Methodology: Dr. Leavitt designed and conducted an extensive survey around the state for canker diseases. My part was to identify and recruit several growers who have older vineyards where we are likely to find cankers. George and I went to these vineyards and cut out a large sample of cankers from each. The samples were taken back to George’s lab for analysis to determine what the causal organism.

Results: None reported yet

Impact: none yet

Almonds I do not have a formal research program but I had the opportunity to conduct to projects that I deemed important.

Almond leaf scorch 2005Cooperators: Brent Holtz, UCCE, Madera is the PI and I am a cooperator.

Grant funding: none

Background: During a farm call I diagnosed an orchard with almond leaf scorch scattered through it. Talking to Brent Holtz, it was decided this would be an ideal site for an experiment to determine efficacy of an injected bactericide.

Methodology: Brent Holtz designed the experiment and I recruited the farmer to allow us to treat the trees and monitor disease response. My assistant did the injections and the monitoring. The trees were injected 2X during the year and the severity of the trees was monitored several times. The orchard will continue to be monitored for another season. It has not been decided whether they should be injected again.

Results: pending

Impact: Anticipated impact will be the development of a protocol that we can recommend that will reduce losses from the disease.

Miticide trial 2004Cooperators: noneGrant support: About $300 in miticide from the manufacturer.

Background: During a routine farm call I was shown an almond block that had a persistent and uniform mite problem. It was an ideal site to test a new miticide I had heard about.

Methodology: I recruited the grower and laid out a simple comparison of the new miticide – “Desperado” and an established miticide – “AgriMek.” The farmer applied the material for me in May. During the season I scouted the block for mites.

Results: The new material gave excellent control of the mites, comparable to the grower standard. I have not gotten around to report this data yet at our local pest management update meetings. The manufacturer is using the data to support a full registration and marketing effort.

Impact: Anticipated impact will be almond growers will have another option when controlling mite and managing resistance.

Figs

Abating wild fig trees Ongoing

Collaborators: none

Grant support: none

Background: The Kadota growers in the county have been sustaining major losses due to un-planned pollination of the flowers. This leads to fruit that has a color and texture that is outside the parameters of the current market standards. The problem is due to a proliferation of wild fig trees in riparian zones.

Methodology: I undertook some homework and research to find out what if anything I could recommend to the growers. Our weed management specialists and a chemical company technical rep were able to describe some acceptable protocols for eliminating the wild trees. I tried to come up with a control system that would be economical, low tech and effective. I went out in the summer and again in the winter and photographed what wild figs look like. I put together a color training guide that the irrigation district and the county public works supervisors could use. As these two agencies clean out ditches and sloughs, they are having their operators look for fig trees in the east part of the county and eliminate them whenever feasible.

Extension methods: I developed a hand-out showing what wild fig trees look like. I met with supervisors with county public works and the irrigation district.

Results: Some growers are abating trees along their property lines. The irrigation district and county have agreed to abate as many trees as feasible.I will continue to monitor the situation over the next few years.

Impact: Growers tell me that the problem was less severe in 05.

Fig phenology study 2005Cooperator: Dr. Louise Ferguson and I are co-PIsGrant support: none in 2005 (we will apply for support in 06)

Background: Even though figs have been studied in this state for almost a century, there has never been a full-blown phonology study done to characterize the growth and fruiting behaviors over time. These studies are usually a prerequisite to establishing IPM programs, developing guidelines for plant growth regulators and possibly other practices.

Methodology: We developed a protocol for collecting data on three varieties: Mission, Calamyrna, and Kadota. Every week my assistant went out and collected detailed data about growth and fruiting. He also took pictures. We will analyze the data and determine what to change for the 2006 season.

Results: We have collected a very large amount of data. We will give preliminary report to the fig research conference in spring 06.

Impact: Anticipated impact will be a reliable phenology model that researchers and growers will be able to use to predict events in the life cycle and build other programs on.

Continuing education for pest management professionals – ongoing

Collaborator: Richard Dodson, Merced CollegeGrant support: none

Background: There is a large clientele of PCAs, Qualified Applicators (QA) and private applicators who need continuing education hours for re-licensing. These people need current, research-based information to make informed decisions and conduct their jobs in a safe and environmentally safe manner.

Methodology: Merced College is the primary sponsor and CE is the co-sponsor of a series of pest management update seminars that are held every spring and fall in our CE classroom. There are 12 3-hour sessions/year. My role: (A) Twice a year I meet with Richard Dodson, the coordinator, and identify topics and speakers. Most of the speakers come from CE. I give a presentation once per year and once per year I moderate the program while Richard is at the CAPCA meetings.

(B) I also maintain an e-mail list for those interested in tree and vine pest mangement called IPM Update. About twice per month I send out short topics and event announcements related to tree & vine pest management. All items are kept short and often contain links to sources of more information.

(C) The CAC also puts on continuing education meetings around the county targeting private applicators (growers). Most years I speak at one of these meetings.

Results: Average attendance = 70 (A) This is considered one of the best continuing education series in the Valley and it is one of the best values for the money.(B) I receive several positive comments about its usefulness of the e-list.

Impact is that considerable improvements in pest management practices have been observed in our county. Growers and pest control advisors are using more environmentally sound practices that are also more effective. Our pest management professionals can get all of their hours without leaving the county. Based on the types of questions they pose to me, I think our PCAs and QAs are the best trained in the state and have some of the best programs.

Lerp psyllid control in eucalyptus 2004-05

Collaborators – noneGrant support: paid for out of various donors account

Background: A new foliar pest has invaded California called the lerp psyllid. It causes a real mess in parking lots and years and can defoliate trees, weakening them and predisposing them to the long horned borer. Badly stressed trees can also become a fire hazard.

Methodology: As a result of failed attempts in previous years to find a “soft” material to spray on the foliage, I decided to do a demonstration trial using a systemic. In 04 I tried a ground spray of imidachlorprid – a systemic insecticide. Before I got to the site the custom applicator had already started and I was not able to remove the heavy leaf litter under the trees. This changed the trial into a demonstration of why you have to treat bare soil to get uptake.

Results: Applying imidachlorprid over heavy leaf litter is a waste of material.

Extension methods: I have shown several people the treated trees and explained to them the correct way of doing of applying the insecticide.

Impact: Several people have saved a lot of money by applying the material correctly.

Bud development poster 2003Cooperators: noneGrant support: received and honorarium of $500

Background: In 2003, Western Fruit Grower magazine and Dow Agro Sciences started developing an educational poster to show farmers and applicators all the different flower development stages were.

Methodology: I was invited to be the consultant on this project. I determined that there were several problems with which bloom stages were being depicted and with the terminology because they were using photos from other universities. I consulted with fellow Farm Advisors to make sure my assumptions were correct. I had them change the stages shown. I also modified the terminology to align it with similar tables that ANR uses in our IPM manuals.

Results: All of my recommendations were accepted and the posters have been published and distributed widely.

Impact: Many applicators and farmers are applying fungicides at the correct stage of bloom because they understand the correct terminology.

Farmland Conservation

Central Valley Farmland Trust - ongoing

Collaborators: Great Valley Center and a large group of agricultural leaders.

Grant funding: Large amount of staff support from GVC.

Background: Prime farmland is disappearing at an alarming rate all over the nation for many years. The problem is especially acute in the SJV. For the last several years I have worked in the area of farmland conservation. Resource conservation is one of the oldest program areas in CE nation-wide.

Methodology: My primary project in this program area has been the establishment and development of a farmland trust for the North SJV. There is considerable interest among farmers around the nation in starting such trust but the technical obstacles are numerous. After bringing significant personal and institutional expertise to assist in the founding and development of the Merced County Farmland and Open Space Trust I was ready to work with agricultural leaders in the region to create a trust for the NSJV. Considerable support was provided by the Great Valley Center which took it on as a major project. I have played a significant role in developing the organizational capacity and operational procedures.

My role: I was a founding director. I worked with the Merced group and groups from Stanislaus, San Joaquin and Sacramento counties to negotiate an organizational structure that would meet the needs of the different groups and still provide a tight structure that would function smoothly. I chair the board and leadership development committee. This committee makes recommendations on board leadership and development. It also oversees the accreditation process.

Results: The Trust is fully operational and is working to expand its capacity to serve area farmers. There is a big increase in the number of applications by growers who would like to place their farms into the trust. There is also an increase in memberships in the trust indicating better awareness and support in the community.

Impact: The true impact will be measured several years from now. In the short term, increased membership and applications from farmers indicates that this conservation tool is has been effective in conserving bits and pieces of this valuable resource.

Rural-Urban Conflict – 02 to current

Collaborator: Dr. Alvin Sokolow, P.I. ; CE Advisors: Romero Lobo & Sonya Hammond

Grant support: The grant is being managed by the P.I. – I don’t know what the final amount was awarded.

Background: The urbanization of once rural communities is a constant characteristic of California’s rapid population growth. Small communities traditionally dependent on agriculture or other resource extraction activities are turned into more socially and economically complex places. Such changes impact both agricultural operations and other sectors of community life. The conflicts and issues affect both sides of the agricultural-urban edge: Farmers located adjacent to or near rapidly expanding urban edges frequently experience increased vandalism, road congestion, restricted spraying and other practices, increased production costs, and complaints from new neighbors unfamiliar with country living.

Methodology: This multi-county project is attempting to better document how farmers, pesticide applicators, regulators and others have modified their practices to avoid or mitigate rural-urban conflicts. Dr. Al Sokolow is the P.I. and submitted the grant application. The Advisor in each county selected two well-defined areas of the county where conflicts are occurring and through interviews with the above groups, tries to document attitudes, and practices. Supporting material will include G.I.S. maps, planning documents, regulatory documents and anything else that may be relevant.

Extension methods: none yet

My role: I completed all my interviews in the Los Banos region. I lined up cooperators for our PGR to conduct interviews in the Livingston area. I spent an afternoon taking our PGR around to see the study areas.

Results: All the field work has been competed and we are waiting for Dr. Sokalow to get us a draft of the report.

Anticipated impact will be that we will be able to demonstrate to policy-makers the actual conflict and cost of poor planning and rural-urban conflict.

Consultation with Other Agencies and Groups. I am often invited to consult with government and community leaders about land use policy.

Interactive Display on Land Use IssuesCooperators: noneGrant support: none

Background: There is an interest among the public in land use policy and the issue of preserving farmland. I was asked by three different groups to provide an educational display about this topic.

Methodology: I put together a simple interactive display about agriculture and land use issues in Merced County. The focal point of the display are some maps I had printed and laminated showing the locations of important farmlands in the county and showing farmlands at risk from urbanization. I also display the farmlands at risk map developed the American Farmland Trust. A table and rack contained literature about agriculture and land use topics for visitors to pick up.

Results: This display was presented at the following venues:Big Valley Art and Culture Festival 2 Oct 05Merced Recycle Fest 11 June 05Big Valley Art and Culture Festival 1 Oct 05

I do not have reliable contact data because I could not stay with the display the whole day.

Impact: undetermined.

Leadership Development, Public Policy Education & General Outreach

Leadership Merced Ag Day . For many years now I have helped develop and teach Leadership Merced Ag Day, which is sponsored by the Greater Merced Chamber of Commerce. I give a formal lecture on the economic impact of agriculture and a lecture on new technology development. I also lecture on the bus. I always include and overview of the great things CE does. In 2005 I had Scott Stoddard in our office observe how I conducted the Merced Irrigation District education tour and after a briefing, he did the Leadership Merced tour for 2005. I anticipate that he and I will trade off in future years.

Impact: We have a very large pool of better trained leaders who are much better informed about agricultural issues. A large number of community leaders with no ag background now understand ag issues much better.

Merced Irrigation District Interactive Educational TourThe purpose of this tour is to develop in the audience a better understanding of the dynamics of Merced County agriculture and an introduction to the water-related issues facing farmers in the region. My part was to develop and deliver a continuous lecture during the bus tour about the cropping systems and irrigation practices in the region. I also introduced the issues related to water in the region. 15 Sept 05

California Ag Leadership (CAL)Sacramento Exchange Summer 2004Cooperators: Mike Campbell, UC MercedGrant support: Costs are covered by the CAL

Background: There is a real need to educate state agencies and legislative staff members about agriculture – its problems and its issues.

Methodology: The CAL program, each year has a fellowship program where high level state agency staff members leaders can apply to be part of an intensive educational tour of selected parts of California. The goal of the program is to develop and foster a continuing dialogue between government and the agriculture industry. The three-day intense seminar usually covers: water, labor, crop protection, pest exclusion, trade, regulatory issues, the environment and natural resources. Approximately a dozen participants will travel to a region within California and participate in a wide variety of issue-based activities related to the success and development of agriculture. They stay with CAL graduates and learn about what is unique about CA agriculture and what our problems are. Elected officials and political appointees are not eligible. The participants must be career staff members of the legislature or a state agency.

My role: 2004 was the year that the group came to my region. Mike Campbell and I developed the program, the tour and the visits while they were in our area. I lectured the group in classroom and in the bus. Mike and I made sure that UC has a high profile in the program and the seminars.

Results: This is a highly sought-after fellowship. In 2004 we had 11 fellows. There is competition to participate. Graduates report this was one of the most useful programs they have attended.

Impact: Because of my participation and input, the participants not only have a much deeper understanding of agriculture in the SJV but they also learned about the important contributions that ANR makes to the state.

Washington DC Fellowship 2005Collaborators: Mike Campbell, UC Merced, other members of CAL.

Background: Each year the CAL program has a fellowship program where high level staff members, agency leaders and congressional staffers can apply to be part of an intensive educational tour of selected parts of California. They stay with CAL graduates and learn about what is unique about CA agriculture and what our problems are.

My role: 2005 was the year that the group came to my region. I had a national program leader from the federal extension service stay with me and my wife. Mike Campbell and I developed the program, the tour and the visits while they were in our area. I lectured the group in classroom and in the bus. Mike and I made sure that UC has a high profile in the program and the seminars.

Results: In 2005 we had 19 fellows. The participants received an intensive training in the uniqueness of CA agriculture and the unique problems we faced. They heard about ANR’s role in solving problems and extending new technology.

Impact: Nineteen career members of the Washington establishment have a much deeper knowledge about the uniqueness of CA agriculture. They also understand ANR’s role in technology transfer and solving problems.

State Pest Management Advisory CommitteeBackground: The objective of this effort is to promote the use of sound science in public policy making related to pesticides.

Methodology: I represent UCCE on the statewide Pest Management Advisory Committee. Our statutory mission is to help the Department of Pesticide Regulation develop sound policies related to pest management. We provide technical expertise and advice to the Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR) related to pest management issues. We also review and make recommendations for funding of projects submitted to the DPR-funded grants programs.

Impact: Improved public policy that is scientifically sound and economically sound. It has also ensured that CE has had input into this important policy area.

Public speaking. I occasionally get asked to speak to service clubs about agriculture issues. This is a great opportunity to teach non-farm audiences about ag and the critical issues facing farmers. It is also a good chance to talk about the great things CE does. Impact:

Impact: Hundreds of people now have a better understanding of CE and its mission and the importance of agricultural issues to everyone.

Horticulture for Homeowners and Micro-Farmers

County Activities - ongoingHome Horticulture - ongoing

Collaborators: Grant funding: none

Background: In an urban state like California, there is a huge demand for information on home and urban horticulture. In Merced County we all do our own public service calls. Since there are now only two plant science Farm Advisors left in our office, this has become a big time commitment.

Methodology: I do not make house calls but I do receive and respond to many phone calls and office visits. I diagnose and make recommendations. I maintain a full library of resource materials for answering questions.

Extension methods: I have a modest section on our web site about home horticulture. I maintain a flash card rack of common home pest management questions at the county library. I re-fill the rack as needed. The flash cards have the web site for the UC IPM project where home owners can access much more information.

Impact: Taxpayers have access to reliable unbiased information about home horticulture and using pesticides.

Production Manual – Deciduous Fruit Growing for the Homeowner and Micro-farmer – 2003-05

Collaborators: Chuck Ingles, Pam Geisel, UCCEGrant funding: ANR will be paying all production costs.

Background: ANR has many publications available for homeowners but there is not a comprehensive manual to fill the educational needs of gardeners and micro-farmers of deciduous fruit trees. After much discussion, we decided there would be a good market for such a manual.

Methodology: In fall 01, Chuck Ingles, Pam Geisel and I met in Merced and developed a detailed outline for a comprehensive book on growing fruit trees in the home orchard and for small scale farmers. All of the manuscripts have been written or assembled from material already published. We have collected a large number of photographs from various sources.

My role: I authored three of the chapters: Climate and soils, fertilization, and failure to bear. The three of us extensively reviewed and edited all the other chapters who were authored by various ANR academics. I took many of the pictures. I met several times with Chuck and Pam to review and discuss materials and organization.

Results: The manuscript was accepted for publication Sept 04 and we hope to go to print some time in 06.

Impact: Anticipated impact is gardeners and micro-farmers of deciduous fruit trees will improve their horticultural practices. Improved horticultural practices will result in more prudent use of fertilizers and pesticides which will result in less water and air pollution.

Dry Creek/Merced River education project – 02 to 05.

Collaborators: Local NRCS staff; Gwen Huff Community Alliance for Family Farmers was project leader.

Grant support: State Water Board grant to CAFF.

Background: The Merced River watershed is impacted by run-off from farming operations. I was asked by CA Alliance for Family Farmers to be on the management team for this outreach to farmers in the Merced River watershed.

Methodology: Using a variety of outreach tools and special events we have been able to obtain the cooperation of several land owners who are interested in minimizing the impact of their farming operations and also to avoid regulatory interference in the future.

My role: I served on the management team which set goals and decided on what outreach activities to conduct. I helped to identify what landowners might be interested in the program and I made some initial contacts for them. We helped develop a landowner survey and helped interpret the responses.

Impact: Several landowners in the watershed area have a better understanding of the problems and issues related to watershed management and ag runoff. Landowners have also learned about what options and management practices are available to them. They also know how to find assistance from government programs. My benefit has been to establish relationships with CAFF and some state and federal environmental agencies.

Affirmative ActionSignificant has been my work with mass media. My radio programs and my newspaper columns reach a very large and broad audience. The radio program is run during the morning drive which has very high listener numbers. I stipulated that I did not want it to run at 5:00AM when only a few diary producers or truck drivers are up. I have worked with ANR Spanish language broadcasting to extend information deeper into the Spanish speaking community. My 500 word column in the two largest newspapers in the county gives us extensive exposure to the community.

I aggressively promote all of our extension events in the mass media to increase potential audiences. I have made personal contacts with under-represented persons to make them aware of my program and the resources we have available.

In research, I have recruited non-white cooperators. My strawberry research and extension efforts targeted specifically the Hmong community of farmers. I specifically invited a Latino to participate in my mechanical thinning work.

All of my educational events are held in handicapped accessible locations. If there is a substantial number of attendees that do not speak English, we offer translation.

In 03 and in 04 I met with at-risk teenagers at our local continuation high school. Almost all these kids are non-white. I gave them a power point presentation about careers in ag and why they need to stay in school. I give them a pencil from the community college and a simple hand-out.

I sometime make personal contacts with those who are in need of extra attention. In November 04 I invited a disabled Latino couple to meet with me so I could give them advice and written materials to help them in their effort to start a small farm.

Our bi-county grape safety day reaches a very large audience of Latino and Sikh workers.

ADMINISTRATION

Program Leader WorkI became Program Leader (PL) October 1, 2004. While I had much leadership experience in Cooperative Extension, I had no administrative experience or program manager experience. Because of this I was faced with a very steep learning curve. I spent much time asking questions and studying procedures and policy.

Statewide ProgramsI am responsible for three current and one future statewide programs. During this period I worked on becoming intimately familiar with these programs and their staff members. The PLs held a day-long meeting of the SP directors at Davis. We developed a schedule for “5-year” reviews. I arranged for Des Jolly to give a briefing to PC about the Small Farm Program.

SAREPA major effort has been developing my leadership function with the Small Farm Program, Sustainable Ag Research and Extension Program (SAREP) and Genetic Resources Conservation Program. The situation with SAREP was sensitive with the recent departure of the Director and Associate Director. Establishing myself as clearly in the line of authority with the SAREP staff needed to be done with much diplomacy and firmness. Our success in stabilizing the situation is due in large part to the local leadership of Rick Roush.

One issue that arose about the time I became PL was the issue of continued funding for organic farming outreach programs that are funded by Columbia, Heller and True North foundations. The foundations were not happy with some delayed progress reports and a perceived lack of commitment to organic programming. The AVP, Rick Roush and I went to go to San Francisco to discuss their concerns with them. I think we were effective in convincing them of UC’s commitment to sustainable agriculture and that state’s organic farmers. The situation has improved, with promises to continue support.

Joint Director for SAREP and ASII worked with the AVP, CAES and the Dean’s office to develop the MOU for the new Ag Sustainability Institute at UCD and SAREP director. Getting a search plan in place was challenging and involved a series of meetings with Interim Director, Cal Qualset and the Executive Associate Dean, Jim McDonald. I am grateful for the good working relationship we have with CAES.

Genetic Resources Conservation (GRC) ProgramThis is the smallest the three programs but does not lack in importance. Activities to-date have been to meet with the program director and air problems and issues. The main issue is the small size of the staff. I supported a proposed statewide Advisor position to work of GRC projects but it was turned down.

Small Farm Program (SFP)During this period I attended the small farm workgroup meeting and training tour. I have been working with Des Jolly on issues related to his retiring. I also recruited and organized the chair and team that will perform the 5 year review. I facilitated the re-appointment of Dr. Jolly until his retirement.

Master Gardener Coordinator (MGC)Working with various internal stakeholders in CE and at Davis we developed a position description and recruitment plan for the future statewide MGC. I recruited a search committee and chair and they are in progress. We hope to have this position operational late this spring or early summer.

Building relations with the ANR campusesI have made concerted efforts to develop a good working relationship with Dean van Alfen, the associate deans, and the leadership of the plant sciences department. Their cooperation is essential because of the prominent role the CAES plays within ANR. I have also invested time in making personal visits to plant sciences Faculty and Specialists at UCR. This has been most productive. I have plans to do the same at Berkeley.

CE program visits and consultationsIn my travels to meetings I have tried to incorporate program visits to FAs around the state. This is helping me to become more familiar with programs outside my commodity area. These visits, along with visits with campus faculty allow academics an opportunity to share problems and ideas with me. This really helps me become an informed member of the Program Council. I look for ways to give friendly advice and to answer questions.

Core Issues Grants programThe PLs play a leadership role in the Core Issue Grants (CIG) program. We are involved in every step of the process from solicitation to the awards. During this period I managed the peer review of two rounds of grants.

Workgroup fundingManaging the WG funding process has been intensive at times but I am happy with the products and outcomes. I have a large number WGs and much time was spent familiarizing myself with them. I respond to many questions from WG chairs. I have attended two continuing conferences so far and plan more in the future. I have been holding conversations about the need for an organic research WG. Attitudes are mixed. I met with faculty members at UCR about starting two new WG – Plant Growth Regulators, and Desert Cropping Systems. During this period I managed one complete WG reporting and funding cycle.

Federal ReportsThe PLs are responsible for reviewing, selecting and editing, if necessary, the CRIS reports and UC Delivers article to be used for the annual report. We decide which USDA reporting themes should be identified with each report. We also write the introductory narratives for the report. During this period I completed one complete round and part of another.

National Grape & Wine InitiativeAt the request of the VP, I became involved in the National Grape and Wine Initiative – a collaborative effort of Land Grant Universities and other colleges along with industry to convince congress to greatly increase investment in grape and wine related research and extension efforts. I represented ANR at two sessions so far, one in Chicago and one in Sacramento. I also represented ANR at a national workshop sponsored by ARS to develop priorities for research and researcher positions. The next Initiative meeting will be Sacramento. An outgrowth of this effort will be an extension leadership meeting in Texas this spring to focus on grape and wine Extension needs. I will be attending that and assisting in organizing as needed.

CA Commodity CommitteeWhen I was hired, I was told that enhancing our industry linkages and support would be a part of my job. Efforts to date have included solidifying my roll as ANR’s liaison to the CA Commodity Committee (CCC). The CCC chairman and I have finished the program for the spring meeting and I will be contacting members soon about attending.

Making the transition from Bob Webster to me for the CCC and commodity liaison oversight took several months and several meetings between Bob and myself. There are a few ANR and industry members who were not happy with the way things were run in the past. I have tried to engage people in conversations about the process and I think most are happy with things at this point. The grape and wine community is very happy about Deborah Golino and Kent Daane becoming liaisons and assuming leadership for their respective grant programs.

Research liaisonsI have been delegated authority to recruit and appoint research liaisons to the various commodity research boards. This is a very important responsibility because I must appoint a person that is knowledgeable about the commodity, the research being done and has the confidence and support of the industry. These positions and the grant programs they are responsible for can be very political. Extensive consultation with the commodity leaders is essential prior to making appointments.

Position allocation processOn of the annual activities that ANR members care the most about is the process of selecting which academic positions will be reviewed. The PLs are active in the whole process beginning with working with different program groups to develop their priorities and soliciting comments on position priorities. During this period I spoke to various

groups about the process and I participated in a planning meeting with RD Manton and CV CDs and Advisors about agronomy staffing. As part of PC we participate in the debate and deliberation over positions.

Trade Adjustment Act (TAA)I am UCs contact for the US Department of Commerce TAA program. If and when money comes available to provide training for farmers who have been injured by trade policies, it is my responsibility to recruit and enable an ANR academic to deliver the program. During this period we had funds available to train commercial fishermen. The program was delivered by our Sea Grant staff. We also had money for olive growers. This program was delivered by Louise Ferguson and Steve Blank as project leaders and by cooperating Farm Advisors.

ANR Budget InitiativeThe PLs are working closely with Lanny Lund and other leadership on the very important ANR budget initiative. During this period I identified and recruited the focus groups that developed programmatic initiatives that are now being discussed with industry leaders and stakeholders. I assisted Lanny in moderating and recording the deliberations of the two groups I was responsible for: ag sustainability and food safety and security.

Annual Performance ReviewsDuring the review period I completed one cycle of the performance review cycle. I was responsible for reading and evaluating the PRs in my program area. I presented them to the Senior Administrative Council and participated in the deliberations on the candidate.

Personnel IssuesAs the PL, I have been working with a SP Director and the AVP on the issue of a staff member who had to be removed from a leadership position. This issue is still being resolved.

As PL I have been in consultation with RD Manton about chronic problems with two Advisors that are in my program area. I reviewed with her, her plans for remediation and gave my support. I have followed up with her on the progress of these two employees.

Water Quality Control BoardI have been supporting Mary Bianchi and her planning committee in putting together a training program and field trip for new WQCB enforcement staff. An obstacle has been concern that any farmers that host the field trip will expose themselves to enforcement action. Some of the committee members wanted to eliminate the field trip but Bill Frost and I intervened and wrote letters of support for a field trip, encouraging them to support Mary’s efforts to work out an accommodation. At this point it appears that the course is going forward.

Program CouncilDuring this period, I traveled to and participated in every PC meeting and PL meeting. These meetings require substantial preparation prior to attending and active participation in the meeting itself.

Projects from prior periods and not covered above.

Environmentally Sound Prune Systems (ESPS) project – 01 to 03.

Collaborators: Prune workgroup. The statewide project leader is Bill Olson.

Grant support: It was funded by the DPR as a part of the Pest Management Alliance Program. My share for local scouting 9/1/98 to 12/31/01 was $1815. I don’t have records of what the project as a whole was awarded.

Background: This is a statewide project undertaken by the prune workgroup to validate production systems that are more environmentally friendly and require fewer chemical inputs.

Methodology: There is a major research component. Two of the sites in the program were in Merced County. I recruited two growers and worked with a consultant. My technician and I did pest, disease and irrigation data collections. We used this information to guide the decisions of the farmer. This information is collected and reported as a statewide project. The data is used to validate or modify the models being tested. Last year one site was pulled out and the other grower could not make a commitment so I did not participate in the research and field demonstration component in 02. I continue to collaborate with the surveys and workgroup meeting and planning process.

Extension methods: Information gathered was extended to interested growers and PCAs at our regular IPM breakfast meetings in 00 & 01. I reported what was observed and how successful we have been and what my recommendations are. Our scouting reports and recommendations were sent via FAX to the consultant every week for implementation. Statewide progress in the program is reported using a special newsletter that is sent to prune growers statewide.

My role: Conducted field surveys, train a technician, supervise scouting and surveys. Report the information to the workgroup.

Impact: The impact has been a measured improvement in pest management practice statewide as measured by surveys conducted by the project team.

Restoring lost fruit wood in Doctor Davis cling peaches – 98 to 00

Collaborator: Ted DeJong

Grant support: None

Background: A few of our cling peach varieties are notorious for loosing all their fruit wood in the lower part of the tree as the result for increase competition for light. This is a consequence of planting a higher densities and not reducing the height of the trees.

Methodology: After consultation with Dr. Ted deJong, I established a replicated test plot in the winter of 98-99 where I compared two methods of pruning aimed at stimulating fruit wood in the lower half of the tree against a control. This project was concluded in Nov 00.

Results: I demonstrated that fruit wood can be rejuvenated using either of the two methods utilized.

Extension methods: The results have been used in my farm calls to growers with similar problems. The data was presented at the International Peach Symposium at UC Davis and were published in Acta Horticulture by the International Society for Horticultural Science.

Impact: The cooperator has changed his practices and the trees are recovereing. The impact is hard information is now available for making recommendations on how to manage mature peach trees.

Spray thinning of cling peaches – 97 to 01.

Collaborators: none

Grant support: none

Background: Hand thinning is the second most labor intensive operation following peaches. In 1998 the cling peach workgroup adopted the demonstration of spray thinning as a high priority and all the Farm Advisors agreed to set up demonstration plots. Part of the project is to determine what rates work in our area and varieties.

Methodology: In 97, 98 & 99 I conducted trials with two different materials at three different locations to demonstrate the use of spray thinning to reduce production costs.Using this baseline of information I conducted two trials in 00 using the plant growth regulator Rallex, on extra early clings in two locations.

Results: At one site we had no effect, and the other we made modest savings in thinning. In 01 I set up a large blossom thinning trial with a surfactant called Entry. It was a disaster. The material blew the crop completely off. I later found out from the grower that the block was water stressed after harvest and into the winter. Such a condition was counter-indicated by the manufacturer. This was a good demonstration of how blossom thinning can not be done on stressed blocks. Word quickly spread and I could not get a cooperator for 02.

Extension methods: All the information from my trials has been presented at our NSJV Cling Peach Days.

Impacts: The impact has been to convince growers that we don’t have a good program for spray thinning to offer them yet.

Alternatives to methyl bromide fumigation for strawberries – 99 to 00.Collaborators: noneGrant support: Strawberry Commission (see above)Background: With the phase-out of methyl bromide (MBr), there is a critical need to evaluate the current alternatives and explore new options if strawberry growing is to continue in the state.

Vapam alone as a pre-treatment for planting – 99 to 00.Methodology: In fall 99 I set up a replicated trial to look at Vapam fumigant alternative to MBr. This was done at one of our Hmong strawberry grower’s fields near Atwater. For we monitored plant growth and fruit yields.

Results: Yield data, indicated Vapam would hold up for the short term as alternative for MB.

Solarization and Vapam as alternatives to MBr in strawberries – 99 to 00.Background: A logical progression for my research on MBr alternatives is to look at entirely different systems. Richard Molinar and Jim Stapleton have done some preliminary research looking at solarization as a non-chemical alternative. Growers have also been experimenting with Vapam, a liquid biocide, injected through the drip tapes in the beds.

Methodology: In the summer of 1999 I established two replicated trials under similar conditions to compare four treatments: Vapam alone, Vapam plus solarization, solarization alone, and untreated check. Sure enough, one of the cooperators was out of town and his uncle punched holes in one of our test plots. (Good thing I setup an extra). The second grower decided to not wait the prescribed time and started preparing for planting after only two weeks.

Extension methods: Extension methods: The results of this research were presented at our strawberry growers meetings in Stockton, Merced and Fresno and were published in the CA Strawberry Board statewide newsletter that is sent to all growers.

Results: The data showed that the solarization treatment easily elevated the bed temperatures to the prescribed level but two weeks was not long enough to provide economic control. We also had troubles with picking crews ignoring the bilingual “do not pick” tape and bird netting we put over the plot. This injected so much variability into the harvest data that the treatment effects were lost. What we got from this project was to demonstrate that you need to wait a month for solarization to work well. I have not been able to convince growers to try solarization on their own.

Impact: The impact is area farmers are now using Vapam as an alternative to methyl bromide. This has saved them money and the permit hassles associated with methyl bromide applications. I also have a real case study to cite when giving people advice about solarization.

Strawberry water use study - 2000

Collaborator: Dr. Tom Trout, USDA-ARS

Grant support: This was funded with a grant from the Strawberry Commission.

Background: There is absolutely no published information about water use by strawberries in the SJV. We have no idea what range of irrigation efficiencies exist nor if there is any potential for water and energy savings.

Methodology: 2000 was the last of a three year study were Dr. Tom Trout and I attempted to measure actual irrigation water use in three strawberry fields in north Merced County. This was part of a multi-county study conducted by Tom that is still on-going.

Extension methods: none

Results: Water use was erratic and varied considerably from grower to grower. Due to repeated mechanical problems data was incomplete. This data was appended to a much larger data base that Tom plans to use to make generalizations about water use in the state.

Impact: There was no impact other than to get a couple growers a little more interested in irrigation research.

Pesticide and food safety with strawberry growers – 00 to 01

Collaborators: none

Grants support: small grant from the Small Farms Center

Background: Pesticide and food safety has been a major concern among CE and regulatory agencies. I have communicated with our growers about the importance of pesticide safety not only for their families but for food safety as well.

Methodology: Using a modest grant from the UC Small Farms Program, I purchased a supply of Pesticide Safety for the Small Farm which is translated into Hmong, and Lao. I have been taking these out personally to growers and talking to them about pesticide usage and I have left a copy of the handbook in the language they request. I asked them if they had questions and told them about resources available. I was in consultation with the Small Farms Program in 00 and 01 in their efforts to develop materials on pesticide use and safety. Using conference calls we have identified publications that need developing or revising.

Extension methods: (see methodology)

Results: It is very interesting to note that those farmers who have even a modest English speaking ability prefer to have an English version of the handbook. The reason cited is they often do not trust the translation to be 100% accurate because there are many words and phrases that do not have equivalencies in the other language and they do not know the level of expertise of the translator. They would rather work through the English version knowing they can always ask about anything they don’t understand. All South-East Asians have a child or college student at home who is highly literate in English and can explain difficult phrases and technical jargon.

Impact: My efforts and those by the CAC are paying off. The CAC reports that there are much fewer problems with compliance of pesticide and safely laws with this group. Impact #2: Small Farms Program publications have been improved.

Methyl iodide for strawberry nursery plant production – 00 & 01

Collaborator: Christopher Winterbottom, CA Strawberry Board and later research consultant.

Grant support: Funded entirely by the Strawberry board but I did not need any funds for my activities so I don’t know what the actual award was.

Background: The nursery industry is desperate for effective methods to disinfest nursery soils to the degree where they can be certified by CDFA. Methyl iodide has been identified as an excellent material that should perform as well as MBr which is the industry standard.

Methodology: In 00 & 01 I participated in a Strawberry Board project to evaluate methyl iodide (MI) as a substitute for MBr for producing strawberry nursery stock. Strawberry stock is an important crop in Merced County and we have three commercial producers (a lot). This was a team project involving the strawberry board research director, a plant pathologist in Davis, a CU weed scientist and more. The stock is started in high elevation nurseries, transferred to a low elevation in Merced County and then harvested and send to a packing shed in Stanislaus County.

Extension methods: The data has been presented by the project leader at strawberry industry/Extension meetings. The data had been fully reported in the industry newsletter called the Pink Sheet.

Results: The nursery harvested from the MI plots was of equal quality and yield to that of the MBr plots.

My role: My responsibility was facilitating the fumigating, planting, and harvesting of the plants at the low level site in Merced County. This also involved working out the technicalities with our local CAC about the MI application.

Impacts: The impact of this study and others like it is MI is being registered as an alternative for MB which will be a major benefit to California’s nursery industry in general and strawberry nurseries in specific.

Strawberry runner control to prolong harvest - 00

Colaborator: Richard Molinar

Grant support: A small gift from the manufacturer of the material we used.

Background: Strawberries in the SJV are not very profitable because we have a short harvest. One of the reasons for this is the plants go into a vegetative state with the onset of hot weather.

Methodology: In 00, Richard Molinar conducted a trial where we attempted to control runner growth to prolong fruiting in strawberries using the plant growth regulator prohexadione calcium. Richard, the company technical rep and I developed the protocol, Richard made the applications and I wrote up the report.

Extension methods: none

My role: I helped develop the protocol and I wrote up a report.

Results: The results were disappointing. The next year the company was not very supportive of the project to we discontinued it.

Impact: The impact of this project was to propose that this procedure may be too expensive considering that we got poor results.

Mechanical pruning winegrapesMechanical pruning of older winegrape vineyards – 98 to 02.

Collaborator: This is a major project that was begun in the winter of 98-99 with guidance from Dr. Nick Dokoozlian.

Grant support: I received a $10,000 grant from the American Vineyard Foundation that they allowed me to extend into spring 03.

Background: The justification for this project is the fact that most winegrape producers in the SJV are loosing money and some are bulldozing their vineyards. Pruning is the second most expensive operation in grapes. With labor costs increasing and the price of winegrapes declining, many SJV grape FAs have concluded that mechanizing the pruning process is a prerequisite to winegrapes being profitable in the SJV.

Methodology: After doing a literature search and visiting mechanically pruned sites in Kern and Madera Counties, I determined there are some significant data gaps related to converting older vineyards in the SJV. I set up five replicated trials on five varieties at a large ranch near Merced. I imposed three treatments: standard spur pruning, box pruning and minimal pruning.

Extension methods: I have been presenting data at various meetings. I have held one field day. Besides talking on this subject I developed a handout for the winegrape short course and other uses.

My role: Was to develop the concept, the protocol with assistance from Dr. Dokoozlian and to conduct the trials and collect the data. I hired the technicians and I am still writing up the results.

Results: The treatments have been successful and have generated much data. I finished collecting data fall 02 but I am maintaining the treatments because I am getting requests by growers who want to see how the treatments look four years later. Fall 02 I developed a rough draft for a California Agriculture article and I hope to have it accepted some time in 03.

Impact: Several growers in the SJV are proceeding with mechanical pruning and many of them have consulted with me about my trials and have asked for guidance.

Controlling excess vigor in winegrapes – 99 to 01

Collaborator: Dr. Nick Dokoozlian, Viticulture Specialist

Background: Excess vigor is often a problem in winegrapes. A variety of management practices are used to control vegetative growth. My work with apples caused me to wonder if prohexadione calcium could also be used on grapes. Unfortunately, there is nothing published and the manufacturer has no experience.

Methodology: I secured the help of Dr. Dokoozlian to establish a pilot project at the KAC early spring of 99. Nick applied the treatments. Initial results showed that our rates and frequencies were too low. I contacted the product developer in Germany and was given a revised protocol. We modified the treatments in 00 and again in 01.

Extension methods: none

My role: I contacted the product developer and I developed the treatment protocol and secured the material.

Results: We have concluded that is probably not useful in grapes.

Impact: none

OLR control using mating disruption – 99 to 02

Collaborator: Walt Bentley, IPM Specialist

Grant support: none

Background: There is considerable interest in using mating disruption to control worm pests in all our commercial fruit crops. I introduced this technology to Merced County peach growers 18 years ago. Two products have been introduced to control OLR in grapes but results have been mixed. The problem has been with the dispensing mechanism.

Methodology: In early 1999 Walt Bentley and I found out about an innovative method of dispensing the pheromone using a paraffin emulsion. Walt was able to secure enough material to treat about ten acres and we set up a trial using two concentrations in Chardonnay grapes. We monitored the block closely and just prior to harvest evaluated the fruit for worm damage.

Extension methods: The results of this work have been reported at our local grape grower meetings, the pest management update at the Grape Pest Management Research Conference at KAC. A poster on the subject was presented at the American Society of Viticulture meetings. Some trade magazine articles have covered the project and results. I developed a hand-out that has been used a local and regional meetings.

My role: I imposed the treatments and supervised collecting the data. I did the write-ups and Walt Bentley reviewed them for me. Walt helped me apply the material one the years.

Results: The results are very encouraging and the grower and PCA are excited. We repeated the project in two locations in 00 and 02. Disputes over patents have delayed its commercial introduction.

Impact: We have a new biological control tool for worm pests – if it is brought to market. This will help reduce reliance on traditional pesticides.

SJV Apple Extension meetings 83 to 99 Collaborators: All the SJV apple Farm AdvisorsGrants: none

Background: During the 80s and 90s there was a big need for research based information about apple growing in the SJV. It was a new crop and there was much bad information going around. It was clear that we needed some Extension meetings for the Central Valley.

Methodology: I was one of the primary organizers of the very first Granny Smith Symposium held at the Turlock Fairgrounds in January 1985. It was attended by over 200. After that I was the instigator in organizing a series of SJV Apple Symposiums that were held around the valley in places like Madera and Dinuba. I had trouble keeping up enthusiasm for a Valley-wide meeting so Kathy Kelley, Brent Holtz and I collaborated in putting on a tri-county apple extension meeting each year which was held in the Merced Office. We took turns being the program chair although we all contribute suggestions for topics and speakers. The targeted audience was apple growers and allied professionals from Stanislaus, Merced and Madera Counties but we attracted growers and professionals from throughout the San Joaquin Valley to this meeting.

Results: These meetings were very well attended in the early years with numbers ranging from 100 to 2000. As acreage and interest declined, so did attendance. After 1999 the meetings were discontinues. Joe Grant continues to hold apple meetings in conjunction with the Mid Valley Apple Growers Association.

Impact: A very large amount of research-based information was transferred to growers and consultants. Cultural and pest management practices in the SJV were strongly influence by our efforts and early systems that were based on systems from New Zealand and the eastern US were slowly replaced with the systems the CE Advisors and Specialists recommended.

Integrated Pest Management, Update breakfasts and individual consultations and recommendations. – 1980 to 2001Collaborator: Lonnie Hendricks through 01.Grant support: none

Background: This was a cross-commodity program with Lonnie Hendricks. There is a great need for up to date information about IPM and current event in the pest management community. CE is responsible for agriculture’s transition to more environmentally friendly systems. We introduced much of the biological control and IPM systems that are in use today.

Methodology: The major effort in this area was our biweekly IPM Update Breakfast meeting which is held from March through July. Nine meetings total. During the year I collect data from peach, grape strawberry, and prune fields. I analyze the information and use it to develop recommendations for pest management strategies for those crops. Those strategies are presented at the breakfast meetings where participants are encouraged to discuss and debate anything and everything. On occasion we have guest speakers but we usually do the program ourselves. When Lonnie retired I discontinued the meetings because they are too much work for one person. The second component is individual consultations in the office and in the field.

Extension methods: (see methodology)

My role: Was to collect trapping data, survey orchards, talk to growers about what is going on, develop lesson plans, lead my part of the discussions, arrange for a meeting site, help set up the meeting venue, help do the paperwork related to continuing education credit, and write about selected portions in our newsletter.

An important part of this program is personal consultations with growers and pest control advisors. During the year I receive many, many calls from all over the region about pest management problems. I do my best to help people come up with solutions or I refer them to people with the right expertise. We receive numerous walk-in visits to identify arthropods and pathogens. Since we only have two plant science Advisors – this has become a big in-office activity. The impact is that considerable improvements in pest management practices have been observed in our county. Growers and pest control advisors are using more environmentally sound practices that are also more effective.

Results: We had good attendance from Merced County and a sprinkle of participants from other counties. Even though the meetings are informal, they still took about three hours of prep time for each session. Average daily attendance = 20

Impact: The impact is that considerable improvements in pest management practices have been observed in our county. Growers and pest control advisors are using more environmentally sound practices that are also more effective. IPM is now a daily part of farming thanks to UCCE.

Lerp psyllid control in eucalyptus – 99 to 02

Collaborators – none

Grant support: none

Background: A new foliar pest has invaded California called the lerp psyllid. It causes a real mess in parking lots and years and can defoliate trees, weakening them and predisposing them to the long horned borer. Badly stressed trees can also become a fire hazard.

Methodology: In Spring 99, 01 and 02 I put out small test plots to see if we could control it using garlic oil, “Infiltrator”, “TKO” and a surfactant. We want to find a harmless material that homeowners can spray all over the place and not hurt the kids and pets.

Extension methods: My experience from these trials are being used to shape my recommendations to people seeking advice on this problem.

Results: These soft materials were worthless.

Impact: I am able to recommend that people save their money and nature take its course.

Controlling excess vigor in apples. 97 and 98Collaborator: Kathy KelleyGrant support: none

Developing young apple trees is costly because of the aggressive pruning that is needed to force them to conform to modern high density configurations. The tender growth of late spring growth flushes can be very susceptible fire blight disease.

Methodology: In 1997 and 1998 I carried out two small-scale, fully replicated trials on two varieties where we determined the protocol necessary to slow down vigorous growth using a new plant growth regulator called prohexadione calcium – a gibberellin biosynthesis inhibitor. Simultaneously, Kathy Kelley was independently running trials on apples in the Salida area.

Results: This provided us with some excellent comparisons. We were able to demonstrate that growth could be controlled and that this technique was probably ready for larger commercial scale trials when registration was completed.

Extension methods: Our projects were the subject of a feature article in California Farmer magazine. The results of this research were presented to growers at our regional apple meetings and to PCAs at the pest management update meetings. I also presented my data at a prohexadione calcium research meeting in Portland Oregon in March 1999. Several growers have expressed interest in doing large trials once registration is received.

Impact: The chemical company backed out on their plans to register the material and it never became legal to use.

Peach rootstock resistance to bacterial canker. 97 & 98Collaborators: noneGrant support: none

Background: Bacterial Canker is the leading cause of peach tree death in Merced County. With the loss of methyl bromide, it is anticipated that losses will increase.

Methodology: In the winter of 97-98 I ran a replicated rootstock trial to evaluate a new rootstock that is available in small numbers that had shown promise for bacterial canker resistance in the southern US.

Results: This trial was damaged last year when the grower over-applied compost and damaged the root systems and the project was terminated.

No impact

Removing water sprouts to increase light and improve size in peaches. 97Collaborators: noneGrants: none

Background: Peaches are very sensitive to light and will quickly shade out the lower fruit wood in high density situations. Fruit size can also suffer. In early summer 1997 I was called out by two leading peach growers to discuss their concerns that the fruit was not sizing. I observed that the trees had very poor light distribution and I convinced them to try set up a trial where we eliminated all the upright growth in some of the trees to increase light.

Methodology: I set the test up as replicated test plots. Two months later and again before harvest we measured fruit size.

Results: There was a difference but it was not statistically significant. The growers did observe a response in shoot growth below. From this trial we concluded that there was value in my recommendation but we needed to do it much earlier in the year and they have adopted the practice. This trial enabled me to take several photos on the effects of shading and I developed them and the observations into a lecture that I gave at our regional peach meeting. This trial was also the basis for the project reported above where I was able to restore lost fruit wood in Dr. Davis variety.

Impact: The cooperator modified his pruning system and the trees are recovering.

Strawberry variety evaluation for Merced County 95-96Collaborators: Richard MolinarGrants: Strawberry Board - $5000

Background: Until Richard Molinar and I began looking at variety performance there absolutely nothing published about variety adaptation to the SJV.

Methodology: In the fall 1995 we established our first replicated variety trial near Atwater produced excellent information (1996 harvest) about varieties that were obviously not adapted to our climate.

Results: My data showed that Chandler and Camarosa are the highest yielding varieties depending upon year and all the others tested were not economically feasible. Using this information we were able to set up subsequent trials for 1997 and 1998. We now have hard data about variety performance that has been presented at our strawberry growers meetings in Stockton, Merced and Fresno and were published in the CA Strawberry Board statewide newsletter that is sent to all growers.

Impact: Area strawberry growers are emphasizing Chandler and Camarosa in their plantings and are achieving better yields.

Comparison of first and second year strawberry plantings. 97-98 Collaborators: noneGrants: Strawberry board – 5000 that also supported the other strawberry work.

Background: In the SJV it is a common practice to carry over a portion of one’s strawberry acreage as second year plants. It is accepted that these plants do not yield as much and even have smaller fruit but the huge savings in redevelopment costs compensates for the difference. As Farm Advisors we have always wondered exactly what this difference was and growers could only give us rough estimates.

Methodology: In Fall 1997 I had the opportunity to find out. My fumigation research cooperator was going to pull exactly half of his planting and re-develop it and carry over the other half. I secured permission to establish randomly selected sample zones that we harvested multiple times the next spring.

Results: This gave us our first real data on yield differences with second year plantings. The second year plants did significantly poorer. The results of this research were presented at our strawberry growers meetings in Stockton, Merced and Fresno and were published in the CA Strawberry Board statewide newsletter that is sent to all growers.

Impact: Strawberry growers had decided that keeping a second year block still works well in their management system because they do not do cost and profit analysis on the blocks separately and they consider the lower profit levels acceptable. Thus there was no impact from this work.

Biological control of codling moth in apples 96 & 97 Collaborator: Walt BentleyGrants: none

Background: Codling moth is the primary insect pest of apples, causing millions of dollars worth of losses statewide. With the loss or increased restrictions on organophosphate insecticides, there is serious need to find reduced-risk alternatives. S. spinosa is a biological insecticide that has very low environmental risk and high worker safety.

Methodology: Under the guidance of Drs. Walt Bentley and Bob vanSteenwyk, I set up a two replicated trials in apples in spring 1996 to evaluate S. spinosa as a control for codling moth. The test was repeated in 1997. Results of this study were presented at regional apple grower meetings and the pest management update seminar. The results were published in the UCCE Plant Protection Quarterly and in the SAREP statewide newsletter.

Impact: Growers in the SJV started incorporating the commercial formulations into their pest management programs. This has resulted in lower negative impacts on beneficial arthropods.

Biological control of OLR in grapes. 98 & 99 Cooperators: Walt BentleyGrants: none

Background: The natural extension of my work with S. spinosa was to see if it will control omnivorous leaf roller (OLR) which is the primary worm pest in grapes. The standard control of cryolite at bloom, even though it is environmentally friendly, is being restricted by wineries because of international trade issues. Walt Bentley and I felt that S. spinosa held potential for OLR control since it has a dual mode of action and is considered a “soft” material.

Methodology: In 1998 we established a replicated trial in the Snelling area that yielded good results. We modified the treatments slightly in 1999 and moved the site to another ranch and had good results there also.

Results: The data demonstrated that S. spinosa can be incorporated into grape pest management programs in the SJV. The results of this work have been reported at our local grape grower meetings, the pest management update and at the 1998 and 1999 Grape Pest Management Research Conference at KAC.

Impact: The commercial formulation was eventually registered and it is used in many pest management programs in the Valley – reducing negative impacts on beneficial arthropods.

Biorational cling peach orchard systems. Project leader - Janine Hasey Grants: Can’t find information any more

Backround: Peaches in the early 90 still had not achieved really significant progress in transitioning to softer programs.

Methodology: In 1996 the cling peach workgroup received a grant to implement a biorational pest management program for peaches. Working with Walt Bentley, I recruited three growers who would commit to a “soft” pesticide program and see it through to harvest. The program depended upon mating disruption, Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) sprays, and biological control.

Results: The program was not very successful as all three growers experienced damage or had to spray the block out. It was most successful from a research standpoint in that it demonstrated where we needed to improve before the program would be ready for wide-spread trials. Information from this project was presented at our IPM Breakfasts and at our peach grower meeting.

Impact: Minor but it did contribute much information to base future projects on.

Related trial:Controlling peach twig borer and scale with an insect growth regulator. In the effort to find “softer” materials to control important insect pests in peaches, I established a replicated trial in 1997 to evaluate a new insect growth regulator being tested by Norvartis. We applied the material in the dormant period and again at petal fall and compared it against Supracide, an industry standard.

Results: In this trial, insect damage was so low we were not able to obtain significant differences. I did not repeat this trial in favor of the next project.

Impact: none

Identifying the Extension needs of S-E Asian Farmers 98 & 99PI: Steve MendivilGrants: None

Background: In the mid 90’s, S-E Asian farmers became more visible as a clientele group in the SJV. Very little was known about what their real needs were relative to extension work in the crop sciences.

Methodology: Steve Mendivil develop a project where he and selected Farm Advisors would interview farmers about what their needs might be from UC. In 1998, I cooperated with Steve Mendivil in doing a series in interviews with non-English-speaking farmers about what their needs are from UC. I identified several Hmong farmers and we visited them personally at their farms and homes.

Results: The results of this project were to be published out the Vice President’s office but Steve became ill and was not able to complete the project. The data was never written up and Steve Nation and I were not able to find it.

Impact: Other than some goodwill generated with the interviewees, there was no impact.

Pesticide Safety OutreachCollaborators: NoneGrants: $200 from Small Farm Program

Background: Pesticide and food safety has been a major concern among CE and regulatory agencies.

Methodology: Using a modest grant from the UC Small Farms Program, I purchased a supply of Pesticide Safety for the Small Farm which are translated into Hmong, and Lao. I took these out personally to growers and talked to them about pesticide usage and I have left a copy of the handbook in the language they request. I consultated with the Small Farms Program in their efforts to develop materials on pesticide use and safety. Using conference calls we have identified publications that need developing or revising.

Results: It was very interesting to note that those farmers who have even a modest English speaking ability prefer to have an English version of the handbook. The reason cited is they often did not trust the translations to be 100% accurate because there are many words and phrases that do not have equivalencies in the other language and they do not know the level of expertise of the translator. They would rather work through the English version knowing they can always ask about anything they don’t understand. All South-East Asians have a child or college student at home who is highly literate in English and can explain difficult phrases and technical jargon.

Impact: The pesticide handling practices of S-E Asian farmers gradually improved as evidenced by interviews with the CAC.SJV grape symposium 1980 to 1998 and Raisin Short Course 96 & 97Collaborators: George Leavitt, Harry Andris, Pete Christensen, Bill Peacock, Bob Beede and Don Luvisi.Grants: none

Methodology: Until 1998 I was part of the committee that put on the SJV Grape Symposium. George Leavitt and I co-chaired the event every three years.. I moderated and was a speaker. It was held in Fresno County.In 1996 & 1997 CE offered a short course in raisin production at the KAC. I gave a talk on soils and site selection and gave a modest amount of input on program development. I volunteered to give the interview when the local television station covered the event the first year.

Results: The Symposium is a long-standing and well known event in the SJV. It has always had good attendance. The short course was well-attended and covered by the media.

After Roger Duncan was hired, we started the Northern San Joaquin Valley Winegrape Seminar, held in Turlock and withdrew from the SJV meeting. The target audience is grape growers and allied professionals in the two county area although we often get attendees from beyond that area.

Statewide Mealy Bug Task Force 1999Collaborators: several other CE academics and CDFA staff.

In 1999 I was asked to be part of the Statewide Mealy Bug Task Force. A large team of UC, CDFA, USDA and industry experts convened to develop and action plan to deal with the proliferation of exotic species of mealy bug that were beginning to spread into the SJV. We held our first meeting in Fall 1999 in Fresno. We met again in 2000 and I stopped attending because I did not feel I was making a significant contribution.

Round table discussion with Ann Veneman. In November 1996, I arranged for State Secretary of Agriculture Ann Veneman to be the featured speaker for our Farm-City Banquet. I thought it would be beneficial to our agricultural leaders if they had a chance to participate in a direct discussion with the Secretary. I organized a 1:15 p.m. session just prior to the banquet and several leaders from agricultural organizations, the Board of Supervisors, chambers of commerce and the fair board participated. I moderated the session and we were able to cover a broad range of topics. Most of the participants told me they were very grateful to CE for organizing this and that they had learned much about state agricultural policy issues.