Unifying resistance management education for vegetable and fruit production in the Northeast

All State Extension offices in the NE-SARE region were contacted and asked to distribute the announcement flyer (uploaded to SARE reporting portal) to their departments.  This included Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Massachusetts, Maryland, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, West Virginia, Vermont, and Washington, D.C.

Crop Commodities Regional Specialists List for Cornell University (ca. 45 people)

Northeastern Berry Call-in list (ca. 50 people)

Flyers were distributed at Cornell in-service events held in Oct-Nov (ca. 100 people)

We also contacted Northeastern Weed Science Society (NEWSS, ca. 400 on mailing list), Northeastern American Society of Horticultural Science (NEASHS, ca. 100 people on mailing list), and Northeast American Phytopathological Society (NEAPS, ca. 315 people on mailing list) and asked them to distribute the flyer to their memberships.

We contacted Northeastern chemical representatives individually and asked them to share the info with their colleagues (Arysta, Bayer, Dow, DuPont, Gowan, Monsanto, Nufarm, Syngenta, UPI, and Valent).  The announcement may have reached 30-40 people within the chemical industry community.

Both SARE and NE-IPM Center announced the webinar series on their respective web sites.

Even with some overlap of membership lists, we estimate flyers sent through these mailing lists reached ca. 800 different people. Although we do not have exact numbers for distribution, we are confident we met the milestone of inviting 200 personnel and likely exceeded our target.

Video links for the 4 webinars are listed below but can be found on the UMass Cranberry Station YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC1kf2B42HAjoGrRwUCoU9hQ.

181 total individuals from 27 states, 3 Canadian provinces and 3 additional countries participated in the 4 project webinars in 2015. The demographics of webinar participants is listed later.

Titles and participant numbers for each webinar were:

Webinar 1: Introduction to General Principles of RM (McGrath), 74 participants
Webinar 2: Fungicide RM (McGrath), 78 participants
Webinar 3: Insecticide RM (Alyokhin), 39 participants*
Webinar 4: Herbicide RM (Bonanno), 47 participants

Multi-webinar participation was a strength of the project.

16 people attended 4 webinars
24 people attended 3 webinars
31 people attended 2 webinars
40 people attended 1 webinar

Webinar participants included a diverse group of agricultural service providers, university, agency and non-profit professionals, and a few farmers.

Participants by Affiliation:
53 Extension personnel
14 Industry/Consultants
11 Federal government (EPA, USDA, IR-4)
11 University personnel
11 Canadian government/research
5 State government
4 Farmers
2 Non-profit representatives       

The webinars were held Monday November 30, Thursday December 3, Monday December 7, and Thursday December 10 in the order and on the topics as noted above.  The webinars were hosted by Cornell University and lasted for approximately 1 hour each (2:30-3:30 EST).  The webinars were archived on the Moodle platform housed on Cornell Cooperative Extension Distance Learning Center (http://moodle.cce.cornell.edu/RME101).  The webinars are also available on YouTube: General overview (1): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1KwmEOtLvs&list=PL1EC8bUjtR06UVpSu-1-nb-LdBq6t9-V8&index=1; Fungicides (2): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYQg8PMFlWQ&index=3&list=PL1EC8bUjtR06UVpSu-1-nb-LdBq6t9-V8; Insecticides (3): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WOECQUl27F0&index=4&list=PL1EC8bUjtR06UVpSu-1-nb-LdBq6t9-V8; Herbicides (4): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LycGVxxgh_8&list=PL1EC8bUjtR06UVpSu-1-nb-LdBq6t9-V8&index=2.  These webinars were viewed 487, 374, 313, and 248 times, respectively as of June 19, 2018.

*We had a technical glitch on the Insecticide RM webinar.  The recording was made for the first 6 minutes but then aborted.  Dr. Alyokhin was kind enough to repeat the webinar so the entire presentation could be archived on the Moodle.  We extended an invitation to all registrants to attend the “re-do”.  Six (6) people attended the repeated webinar.   The participant number of 39 was based on the saved chat information and poll data from the first insecticide RM presentation and the repeated webinar. 

Demographics of Webinar Registrants (181 total):
Profession/Affiliation
70 Extension personnel
21 University personnel (U.S.)
15 Environmental Protection Agency
14 Canadian government
12 U.S. chemical company representatives
10 Growers
7 State government
6 Businesses; Individuals
5 Consultants
4 IR-4; USDA
2 Non-profit organizations; Canadian chemical company representatives
1 Agricultural supply representative; Canadian university; African agricultural ministry

 Locations-Domestic
24 New York
16 Connecticut; Massachusetts
15 Virginia
14 Pennsylvania
10 New Jersey
8 Washington, D.C.
7 Maine; Nebraska
5 Maryland
4 Colorado; Rhode Island; West Virginia
3 Florida; Ohio; Vermont
2 Delaware; Georgia; Illinois; Iowa
1 California; Kansas; Michigan; New Hampshire; North Carolina; Oregon; Utah

Locations-International
16 Ontario
2 Nova Scotia; Quebec
1 Lithuania; Sierra Leone; Switzerland

Participants were polled prior to the start of each webinar to gain a cursory assessment of their “entry knowledge” of the webinar topic.  Not all attendees participated in the polls, but response rates were high: 71 for Webinar 1 (96%), 67 for Webinar 2 (81%), 35 for Webinar 3 (90%), and 40 for Webinar 4 (85%). Results from the polls were attached (December 2016 report) Webinar Survey Tallies. 

Selected results of the Pre-Webinar Series poll include:

• About half of attendees rated their knowledge of RM as “average”.
• 54% of attendees were from Extension, 11% from the Federal government and 7% from industry.
• 24% listed Pest Management as their area of expertise, 13% cited Sustainable agriculture, and 11% said Entomology, Plant Pathology, and Weed Science (respondents could choose more than one category).

Selected results from the Fungicide/Insecticide/Herbicide Webinar Series poll include:

• Less than 1/5 of respondents correctly answered a question about resistance being a genetic change that occurs as a result of a pest being exposed to a pesticide.
• Only 3% correctly answered a question about continual fungicide use always leading to lack of control.
• Half of the respondents did not answer any questions related to insecticide resistance (cause unclear).
• Webinar participants were more likely to correctly answer questions about herbicide resistance than insecticide or fungicide resistance.

Moodle Platform:  Twenty-three (23) people “introduced” themselves on the Moodle.  The results from the polls from the webinars were posted on the Moodle.  Answers to the RM questions are included in the posting.  All four webinars are accessible from the Moodle in streaming mode, downloadable mode, along with a PowerPoint presentation. 

Demographic Survey.  Using Survey Monkey (December 2015), we invited the 181 registrants to complete a demographic survey; 56 attendees submitted responses (31% response rate).  The survey was uploaded to the SARE reporting portal in December 2015.  We were interested to know their area(s) of expertise and in what areas they felt competent to give RM advice.  We also queried to assess their interest to participate in future activities related to the grant.  Just over half of the respondents (29 people) indicated that they would be interested in receiving a “Certificate of Completion (COC)”, which would involve participation in at least 2 webinars, training growers, and participating in the verification process. 

Needs Assessment Survey.  Prior to being awarded this grant, we surveyed Northeastern educators and growers to document the need for the webinar series and other components proposed in the grant.  The results were compiled and posted on the Moodle.  The document (Sandler, H.A., L. McDermott, K.M. Ghantous, and D. Medeiros, 2015. Assessment of resistance management education and experience of educators and growers in the Northeast) is available in the RM section of our ScholarWorks page: https://scholarworks.umass.edu/cranberry_outreach_resistance/3. 

September 2016. A slide presentation (aka 'Core Module') was produced by Key Individuals Ghantous, Sandler, Sylvia, and McDermott.  It is posted on Scholarworks (UMass digital library platform) at: http://scholarworks.umass.edu/cranberry_outreach_resistance/1/. As of June 28, 2018, the slide presentation has been downloaded 142 times. The module has been accessed by 39 different institutions (most are educational, but ~25% were governmental or commercial entities).  The institutions included the US EPA, AgCanada, and many universities.  Downloads were made by people from 31 different countries with most (61%) from the US and about 6% from China. Most people found the module through Google Scholar.

October 14, 2016. Core Module slide presentation was distributed to the list of registrants (177 total including the 4 Key Individuals).  The module was uploaded in December 2016 to the UMass Scholarworks web site https://scholarworks.umass.edu/cranberry_outreach_resistance/1/ . To download the PDF, click the "Download" button on the right of the screen. To download the PowerPoint, scroll to the bottom of the page and click the link "RM Core Module_final.pptx" under Additional Files. 

The introduction of the publication indicates that "The PDF document contains the Key Individuals' comments regarding various resistance management topics and should be useful for educational outreach. The PowerPoint slide presentation is intended for educators who wish to develop a resistance management educational module for their stakeholders. The presentation can be modified to fit your particular needs. Please include the acknowledgement slide (last slide) in all tailored presentations." 

February 3, 2017. The Core Module and a related survey were posted to Moodle.  All webinar participants were informed about the availability of these resources.

June 13, 2017. A video of the core module was released on the UMass Cranberry Station YouTube channel.  It has received 313 views, as of June 28, 2018. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8IYld52JNvs.

In December 2016, we organized interested primary beneficiaries into a "Short List" of 12 contacts with whom we communicated periodically through 2017. This Short List was a subset generated from the list of those who expressed desire to participate in at least one phase of the verification process (see attached file; Survey-tallies-WG-Verification-w-banner1). We emailed this group (12/20/16) to determine if they were willing to work with us over the next year.  In addition to the Key Individuals (3 from MA and 1 from NY), the Short List had representation from 9 states and 1 Canadian province. We sent an email (about using the Core Module) on December 13, 2016 to the list of all webinar registrants (177 total including the 4 Key Individuals).  We requested that they notify us of workshops at which they will hold RM sessions. Attached to that email was a survey that Educators could use during their educational sessions (included in December 2016 report; RM-survey-to-accompany-Core-Module-Presentation1).

Since most of the primary beneficiaries reported that they worked alone on educational material development, organizing and utilizing Working Groups did not evolve as we had proposed.  Despite this setback, we identified 19 people who constituted seven (7) different working groups representing small fruit, tree fruit, vegetables, and cranberry.  The working groups contained between two (2) and four (4) individuals. The working groups represented collaborations within and among six (6) different Northeastern universities (research and Extension personnel).

We contacted (by email) 19 individuals who had indicated continued interest in the project, both in terms of providing feedback (as primary beneficiaries) to the project leaders and in conducting workshops with their commodity stakeholders.  We received responses from 10 of those queried. In general, primary beneficiaries had not shared the link to the video with their stakeholders but the video received 141 views as of this writing.  Re-sending of the links to the core module and video was also mentioned as something that would be helpful. Of those who said they did not use the core module and/or the video, no specific reason was given as to why they did not use it. 

Workshops were planned and conducted by commodity outreach leaders throughout 2017 and 2018. The data on those workshops are detailed in Milestone 8. 

The Project Team reached out by phone to approximately 30 Primary Beneficiaries who had indicated (via the email sent in December 2016, see Milestone 5) they would likely conduct RM education outreach. In addition to the 4 Project Team members, workshops were held by 17 different Primary Beneficiaries who educated (likely, more than) 2,500 secondary beneficiaries (growers). Northeast educators led 28 workshops and gave 41 presentations on RM. Approximately 15 presentations on RM were made at two large regional meetings: the Empire State Producers Expo (ESPE) January 2017 and the New England Vegetable and Fruit Conference (NEVFC) in December 2017.  Sandler and McDermott were on the organizing committee for NEVFC and McDermott was an organizer for ESPE; our direct participation in these events enabled us to solicit speakers to ensure that aspects of RM were presented at the 2017 meetings and to identify our colleagues who were making presentations related to RM.  Primary beneficiaries sent emails to Project Team members to indicate they were planning and/or holding a workshop related to RM and/or we obtained this information during our phone interviews of the Primary Beneficiaries.  According to their input, workshops were held in MA (750+), ME (205), NH (245+), NJ (70), NY (750+), RI (475+), PA (200+), and VT (185); number in parenthesis indicated attendance (at least 2,450, rounded to 2,500 due to estimations). 

To find out how many growers received one-on-one support on pest management issues and pesticide selection within the context of an RM program in 2017, we contacted eight (8) Primary Beneficiaries (PB) in December 2017. We learned that more than 100 growers interacted one-on-one with PBs.  We assumed at least 6 of the PBs from the phone interviews also participated in the End-of-Project PB internet survey (where 16 people said they did one-on-one sessions, see Milestone 11), thus we estimated that a total of 18 providers participated in one-on-one sessions.

We formally interviewed (by phone) 19 growers (Secondary Beneficiaries) in Spring 2018; 9 were cranberry growers and 10 were diversified vegetable and small fruit growers. All growers reported that attendance at the training sessions improved their understanding of pesticide resistance management (RM). In addition, every grower reported implementation of techniques learned in the training on their farms.  Techniques widely used included changing the variety planted, increased rates of pesticides used, and decreased number of applications (veg/small fruit growers). Tank mixes and targeted applications with new and varied chemistries were consistently implemented among cranberry growers.  All growers implemented these techniques despite seeing no economic incentives (e.g., no labor savings, no pesticide savings, and sometimes no improved efficacy). Seventy-nine percent said one impact that resulted from these changes (i.e., RM implementation on their farms) in their IPM program was increased confidence in their pest control program.

We formally interviewed (by phone) 19 commodity specialists (Primary Beneficiaries) who reported making presentations utilizing RM concepts. Most primary beneficiaries reported including information that they learned from the NE-SARE PDP supported RM Webinar Series in their presentations, even if they did not specifically use the core module. Utilization of the actual Core Module (which was based on the webinar series) was reported by nine (9) specialists covering vegetables, small fruit, cranberry and tree fruit workshops; several respondents noted that they used the Core Module at multiple venues.

In the interviews, we asked specific questions relating to the milestones and goals of this project. Three PB were planning to use the video in future meetings. The usefulness of a fact sheet (a product not specifically proposed as part of this project) on RM was mentioned by two interviewees as a product that could/might be helpful for them in their educational outreach. In general, interviewees did not provide specifics (even if pressed) on why they did not use and/or how we could further facilitate usage of the products produced by this grant.

Five (5) PB reported disseminating surveys to their stakeholders who attended outreach educational sessions. The four Key Individuals (Project Team members) collected and collated these data into a report format and the summary of the grower surveys administered by PB is available in Scholarworks (https://scholarworks.umass.edu/cranberry_outreach_resistance/2).

We distributed a Survey Monkey poll in mid-May 2018 to the 181 webinar attendees.  The purpose was to capture information on the use of the products generated by the project by Primary Beneficiaries (PB) in RM education in the Northeast.  We also asked respondents to estimate number of growers trained.  Fifty-three people responded (29% response rate) representing 10 states plus 3 provinces of Canada. Extension personnel accounted for 60% of the respondents with government personnel accounting for 20%. 85% participated in the webinar series; 21% used the Moodle Platform or used/adapted the Core Module slide presentation. Twenty-three percent (23%) or 28% watched the video of the Core Module or worked with colleagues to present information about RM, respectively. 84% said their understanding and awareness of RM was greater now than prior to the training provided by the project. Nearly half of 44 respondents reported working on educational outreach by themselves; of those who interacted with colleagues, 90% reported that the RM sources provided by this project helped (moderately to very much) in unifying their RM outreach. The webinars, watching the core module and tailoring the core module were the top 3 resources important in outreach development. The resources provided by this grant increased the confidence of the PB in helping growers understand MOA (84%), assisting growers with developing pesticide rotations and schedules (76%), helping growing establish a whole-farm RM plan (60%), identifying improper RM strategies (80%), suggesting nonchemical techniques (86%) and working with colleagues to deliver RM (59%).

Thirty-four (34) Primary Beneficiaries reported training growers in seven different ways but presentations at grower/industry meetings were the primary outlet (68%), followed by one-on-one sessions and distribution of information via newsletters, fact sheets and management guides (47%).   Twenty-three (23) PB gave presentations at industry meetings to more than 2,000 growers; 16 PB did at least 290 one-on-one sessions (some growers received multiple sessions). According to categorized estimates provided by respondents, more than 3,600 people received RM information through newsletters (16 PB reporting), 7 PB held workshops (small, informal venues) that were attended by more than 350 growers and 4 PB reached nearly 700 growers through web alerts or other social media outlets. We suspect the newsletter recipient estimate may be higher than actual due to "overlap"; we would however feel very comfortable with a number around 2,800 or so as the Veg Notes newsletter reaches >2,000 people.

Thirty-one (31) individuals indicated they wished to obtain a Certificate of Completion (COC). The recipients represented Primary Beneficiaries from 9 different states.