MINUTES of the Grower & Industry Advisory
Committee meeting of the OKANAGAN-KOOTENAY
STERILE INSECT RELEASE (SIR) PROGRAM held at the Summerland Research Centre
in the Main Conference Room on
Committee Members:
Gavin Young -
Chair Grower, Consultant
Pierre Calissi BC Fruit Growers’
Association
Tarsem Dhoot Grower
Lindsay Hainstock Okanagan Similkameen
Coop - Fieldman
Charlotte Leaming Sun Fresh Coop - Fieldman
Joseph Lucich Grower
Wayne Matthews C.S.R.D. Director / SIR Board Member
Dave Mitchell Grower
Tom Ouchi Grower
Hugh Philip BCMAFF
Regional Entomologist
Gerry Shaw BC
Tree Fruits
Stan Swales Okanagan North Growers Coop - Fieldman
Committee Members Absent:
Suey Koga Grower
Denis Larose Grower
Brian Mennell Organic Grower
Manuel Torres Jr. BC Fruit Growers’
Association (Oliver)
Peter Waterman Grower
/ Consultant
Tim Watson
SIR Staff:
Call to Order –
TOPIC #1:
Approval
of Minutes
With some minor changes made, the following motion was put forward:
Moved by
Gerry Shaw Seconded
by Joseph Lucich
“Adopted minutes for the meeting dated
CARRIED
TOPIC #2:
Research is being
conducted. The results are all preliminary. As soon as there is an analysis
done (January 2004) we are able to comment on them.
TOPIC #3:
Gavin Young stated that the SIR Technical
Committee met in the morning (
SIR Post 2005 Questions for G&I Committee Members:
a)
How do you envision the SIR
Program post 2005?
Ø
Stand alone SIT for codling
moth control.
Ø
Part of an areawide insect pest management program.
Ø
Part of an areawide pest management program (include disease, birds,
etc.).
Ø
Part of an areawide farm management program (environmental farm plan,
irrigation management).
Ø
Part of a certified
(recognized) fruit production program.
Points made
around the table by SIR Grower & Industry Advisory Committee members:
·
Do we have
the right to decide for the taxpayers? Should there be a referendum on whether
or not they support the program? If we want an areawide
program for one of these services, it is the growers that will be paying, so it
should be the growers that tell us what they want.
·
Why are we
not following through with one of Christine Dendys
methods as noted in her report? The report also includes a dollar amount per
acre.
·
Growers
should be accountable for not spraying when needed. They need to be accountable
for their mistakes. We need to have the growers think that the SIR Program is
on their side.
·
An areawide program is needed for everyone to be active and be
involved.
·
All
different programs (Growing With Care, SIR,
Environmental Farm Plans, Water Conservation Programs, Green Thumbs) are all
going in the same direction. Over time, one of the options will likely be an areawide integrated program. Likely the biggest bang for
the buck. Combine it with other pests and other issues.
·
If growers
felt that the program was reliable, they’d be ok with it.
·
Growers
are happy with regulatory services.
·
Focus on
environmentally friendly practices.
·
Need the
program to keep things clean.
·
Zones 2
& 3 will never be as good as Zone 1. There will be hotter hot spots and
more difficult to control spots. There will be higher risk areas that we may
need proportionally more releases forever than you do in the south.
·
Getting less
than a maintenance program in Zone 1 at this time.
·
In the
future, it should be identified that if we want this program to work in the
north, that in addition to the program additional funding (outside of the
operational budget) could be sought out to get a dedicated crew to go after all
the wild trees in Zone 3. We may get the numbers down to some economic
threshold as we know it, but maybe with just the extra little kick we may be
able to do it.
·
Are the
growers satisfied with the regulatory services that are available? Should the
Regional Districts be stepping up to the plate a little more to enforce bylaws
or should the SIR Program be having more enforcement?
·
If Codling
Moth escapes, as the Technical Committee stated, let’s focus on environmentally
friendly practices that still allow the achievements of the program to still
continue while we deal with Codling Moth. Guthion, Imidan, nor Zolone will be
available for use in the next few years. We need to make sure we have soft
products available and working. Mating Disruption does have a placement for the
program, but it is not the silver bullet. The point is that if Codling Moth
does get up again, we can deal with it but we don’t want to lose the rest of
the program.
·
Definition
of areawide management means areawide
mandatory. How do we ensure mandatory compliance? Who is responsible? Would IFP
or Grower With Care incorporate Codling Moth
management as a criteria of compliance?
Wayne
Matthews noted throughout discussion:
· The SIR Program is not finished in 2005. It is an on-going program. Just need to carry on the funding.
· Christine Dendy’s report states that we need 1.9 million to continue the program. We are looking at 3 million for a sustainable program.
Tom Ouchi noted that splitting it up into two areas in question for a maintenance program (Zone 1 as one area and Zone 2 & 3 as another). Carry on for now and in a five year period we can review how to possibly tie it in with other pests (ex: leafroller).
Charlotte Leaming
made the following points that could make a sustainable program for Zone 1:
· Need better maintenance and better surveillance techniques.
· Educate growers. Some growers don’t know what Codling Moth looks like. Some don’t know when to spray. Focus on getting information out to them.
· Need better problem prediction.
· Need more effective hot spot problem solving.
The following motion was put forward by the SIR Grower & Industry
Committee:
Moved by Charlotte Leaming Seconded by
Gerry Shaw
“The Grower & Industry
Advisory Committee endorses the SIR Technical Advisory Committee motion as
read:
Post 2005 we envision the SIR Program continuing as:
1. An areawide
Codling Moth program, utilising all appropriate tools.
2. That in the future the program will be expanded to include areawide management of other pests.