FINAL REPORT NEW ENGLAND MAPLE SYRUP PEST MANAGEMENT SURVEY Glen W. Koehler University of Maine Cooperative Extension

Transcription

1 FINAL REPORT NEW ENGLAND MAPLE SYRUP PEST MANAGEMENT SURVEY Glen W. Koehler University of Maine Cooperative Extension Program: Partnership Project Title: New England Maple Syrup Pest Management Concerns Survey Project Type: IPM Planning and Assessment Documents Project Director: Ann Hazelrigg and Glen W. Koehler Co PDs: Sarah Kingsley Richards, James F. Dill Start Date: 1/1/08 End Date: 3/24/11 Funding: $11,906 Summary A Dillman method survey was developed with assistance from maple industry advisors and distributed to all 745 known maple syrup producers on mailing lists for each of the New England states in summer The survey response rate was excellent at 27% with 199 surveys returned, and 158 responses from active maple syrup producers. Responses were entered into a database for tabulation and summary. Survey responses provided a comprehensive view of production volume, acreage, marketing, and detailed census of pest priorities and practices. Sales by volume of syrup was spread between bulk (43%), retail (33%), and wholesale (24%). Vertebrates were the most important pest group, followed by insects. Diseases and weeds were ranked much lower. Asian longhorned beetle dominated three separate listings for research, education, and regulatory priorities. The most common method to manage pests was thinning or removal of dead or undesirable trees and branches. No single source dominated rankings of the most important information sources. State Associations, The Maple Digest, The Maple News, Educational meetings, University & Extension staff, foresters, and other producers were all rated as important information sources.

2 Problem, Background and Justification Two thirds of U.S. maple syrup production comes from New England. Despite being a $26 million/year industry, with iconic value that contributes to quality of life and to the tourist industry, maple syrup production has received relatively little attention as an IPM venue. This is apparently due to the traditionally low use of pesticides on maple syrup trees and the focus of Extension IPM programs on commodities with more intensive pesticide use. However, new and increased pest threats to sugar maple trees have emerged in recent years. A problem with pear thrips in the 1990s highlighted the fact that sugar maple trees are subject to pest damage. EPA lists maple syrup production in New England as a high priority need for a crop profile. In 2007, a major forest tent caterpillar outbreak continued for at least the 4 th year in New England. In Vermont, 343,000 acres were affected by forest tent caterpillar defoliation compared to 230,000 in 2005 (Anonymous, 2007c). In response, 5,488 acres of sugar maple trees were treated with aerial insecticide by the Vermont Department of Forests, Parks and Recreation. Other spray operations were conducted elsewhere as the outbreak has been widespread. The saddled prominent, another caterpillar that defoliates sugar maple and other hardwoods, has increased in some locations. While not as widespread, its feeding is more damaging because it can lead to tree mortality after just one or two years of defoliation. Fall cankerworm and the green striped mapleworm are other maple defoliators with elevated populations in New England in recent years. Gypsy moth populations in New England have not been especially problematic lately, but it remains as a widespread endemic hazard. European fruit lecanium is a scale insect that feeds on sugar maple sap. Populations of this species have fluctuated and affected tree health in recent years. Asian longhorned beetle looms as major invasive risk with potential to devastate sugar maple stands. Winter moth is an early season destroyer of maple and other hardwood buds. The first known eastern U.S. infestation was discovered in Massachusetts in the mid late 1990s (Childs and Swanson, 2006). Other threats such as the fungus disease anthracnose and climate change mediated pest issues challenge the long term viability of the New England sugar maple industry.

3 Objectives The objective of this survey is provide a statistically valid census of pest management concerns and practices by maple syrup producers in New England. This objective was met. Approach and Procedures Ann Hazelrigg, University of Vermont, developed the sugar maple pest issues questionnaire. PRONewEngland state liaisons and industry experts provided feedback for the final version. Hazelrigg managed the Dillman process mailings. Glen Koehler, University of Maine, managed data entry and summary. Procedures for all of these steps are outlined in detail in the PRONewEngland Pest management Network survey template (Koehler, 2006a). Those procedures are based on the Dillman survey method developed to insure unbiased sample populations, high return rates, and statistically valid results (Dillman, 2000). Outcomes The survey design, mailings, repeat mailings, and response summary have been successfully completed. The objective of this survey were met. Impacts Until we know how and if growers are managing pests, and what their significant pest concerns are, it is not possible to accurately target efforts to increase food safety, protect the environment, and organize research and Extension projects. This survey provide statistically rigorous documentation for that missing information. It is a useful foundation for activities to help maintain a viable maple syrup industry and the $26 million dollars in sales and additional benefits as a significant contribution to the New England tourism industry. Progress The survey questionnaire and results are online at survey questionnaire 2009.pdf and syrup Survey results pdf.

4 Appendices Files attached: Maple survey questionnaire 2009.pdf Maple syrup Survey results pdf

5 FINAL REPORT NEW ENGLAND RASPBERRY PEST MANAGEMENT STRATEGIC PLAN Glen W. Koehler University of Maine Cooperative Extension Program: Partnership Project Title: New England Raspberry Pest Management Strategic Plan Project Type: IPM Planning and Assessment Documents Project Director: Ann Hazelrigg Co PDs: Sarah Kingsley Richards, Glen W. Koehler, James F. Dill Start Date: 1/1/08 End Date: 2/23/10 Funding: $10,361 Summary A group of growers of raspberries and other brambles and Extension specialists met to identify key pest management issues, at risk pesticides and alternatives; and research, regulatory, and education priorities necessary to establish alternative pest management methods in the event of loss. The list of key pests for raspberry in New England consists of three insects, four diseases, and the weeds and vertebrates common to agricultural settings. These key pests are persistent problems that need to be managed every year when and where they occur. Botrytis is the most common pest encountered by growers with the greatest need for management. The PMSP identifies 15 research priorities, 7 regulatory priorities, and 6 educational needs. The document is online at Problem, Background and Justification Raspberry and other brambles contribute over $4 million annually to the small farm economy in New England. Brambles are grown on over 500 farms, and that count does not include Connecticut. There is currently no bramble/raspberry/caneberry PMSP in the national PMSP database for any eastern state. The only existing PMSP was done in 2003 for Oregon and Washington. Raspberries are among the crops commonly consumed by children. In addition, a high percentage of the crop is sold on a pick yourown basis, meaning that children could be exposed to pesticide residue in the fields during picking.

6 A PRONewEngland raspberry pest management survey was completed in 2007, and a New England raspberry crop profile draft is scheduled for February Those documents provided the necessary foundation for completing the PMSP. In addition to the grower community, there are a number of New England Extension personnel with pest management expertise for raspberry and other brambles (Lorraine Los in Connecticut, David Handley in Maine, Sonia Schloemann in Massachusetts, Becky Grube in New Hampshire, Heather Faubert in Rhode Island, and Ann Hazelrigg in Vermont). Objectives Organize a New England bramble pest management strategic plan workshop and produce a PMSP document, have the document reviewed and approved by a liaison in each of the six New England states, and post the final document online. Approach and Procedures Ann Hazelrigg, University of Vermont, organized a brambles pest management strategic plan meeting and create the PMSP document. The procedures and final PMSP document will comply with USDA requirements (Burr, 2000) and with the New England Pest Management Network PMSP protocol and template (Koehler, 2004b). Using results from the PRONewEngland survey completed in 2007, the crop profile in progress, and their own experience and knowledge, growers and Extension specialists identified regulatory, research, education, and extension IPM priorities, and discuss strategic plans for existing and potential pest challenges. The resulting document has been submitted to the national PMSP database. The New England Pest Management Network has an established system for completing PMSPs. State liaisons supplied contact information and enlist growers, industry representatives, Extension specialists, and other pertinent stakeholders as participants for the PMSP meeting. State liaisons were responsible for determining that the draft PMSP is valid for their state, or for bringing changes needed to the attention of the PMSP author. Outcomes The PMSP meeting was held, the plan was drafted and reviewed, suggested changes were made, the document was finalized, posted online at PRONewEngland.org and submitted to the national PMSP database.

7 Impacts The New England Raspberry Pest Management Strategic Plan identifies at risk pesticides and propose future research, regulatory, and education priorities necessary to establish alternative pest management methods in the event of loss. These priorities will be used to inform EPA and state agency decisions and outline a development path for pest management researchers and educators. This information will be of great value in the pursuit of funding to address research and education needs identified through the Strategic Plan. The funding of the research and education priorities to establish effective alternative pest management methods needs to reflect the diversity of pests and the variety of habitats in raspberry fields. The current pest management programs will be made more effective through implementation of actions proposed in this plan. Progress This project was successfully completed. Appendices Files attached: Raspberry PMSP pdf