SIR GROWER & INDUSTRY ADVISORY COMMITTEE

MINUTES of the Grower & Industry Advisory Committee meeting of the OKANAGAN-KOOTENAY STERILE INSECT RELEASE (SIR) PROGRAM held at held at the Summerland Research Centre in the Main Conference Room on

April 14^th, 2004

Committee Members:

Gavin Young - Chair Grower / Consultant

Pierre Calissi BC Fruit Growers’ Association

Tarsem Dhoot Grower

Denis Larose Grower

Charlotte Leaming Sun Fresh Coop

Joseph Lucich Grower

Wayne Matthews C.S.R.D. Director / SIR Board Member

Peter Waterman Grower / Consultant

Gerry Shaw BC Tree Fruits

Peter Simonsen Grower

Committee Members Absent:

Lindsay Hainstock Okanagan Similkameen Coop - Fieldman

Paul Jeffares BC Fruit Packer’s Coop - Fieldman

Dave Mitchell Grower

Tom Ouchi Grower

Hugh Philip BCMAFF Regional Entomologist

Stan Swales Okanagan North Growers Coop

Manuel Torres Jr. BC Fruit Growers’ Association (Oliver)

Tim Watson South Valley Sales

SIR Staff:

Bob Fugger General Manager

Adrian McCluskey Public Relations Officer

Karen Nelson Recording Secretary

Call to Order -

TOPIC #2:

Approval of Minutes

The following motion was put forward:

Moved by Joseph Lucich Seconded by Gerry Shaw

“Adopted minutes for the meeting dated November 12th, 2003.”

CARRIED

TOPIC #3:

Welcome to new Grower & Industry Committee Members

Introduction of new members: Peter Simonsen & Tarsem Dhoot.

TOPIC #4 & #5:

Review of Technical Committee Recommendations, February 20^th, 2004

SIR 2004 Program Update

• The long-term post 2006 program for Zones 2 & 3 should look like what we are doing in Zone 1 beginning in 2004 .
• Zones 2 & 3 are still in a clean-up phase. Require all resources available to reduce the population to get to Zone 1 levels by 2005. Still an ambitious goal.
• Need to start with the short term strategy at this time. Scenario 3 of the Dendy report became a focal point for the start of the discussion at the Technical Committee meeting. Departed from it that it was insufficient within itself to meet the goals, but became Scenario 3 became the platform of forforwhich the new program has been made program, which includes. Low low level release, high monitoring or and alternative soft measures like mating disruption together with soft spray technology..
• Short term strategy for Zones 2 & 3 is to get to the point where scenario 3 would work. The concept is that scenario would will be a sustainable codling moth control.

Gavin Young then discussed the Technical Committee recommendations handout.

Bob Fugger added:

• For the high pressure orchards in Zones 2, 3, and Creston:

Creston: about 60 acres out of 360 acres.

Zones 2 & 3: about 900 acres

• These growers need to spray all season and will not receive any sterile insect releases until their population is down. Growers need to be less then .2% = 4 fruit per bin. The economic threshold is .5% = 10 fruit per bin.
• Growers need to spray even if ½ rate or full rate mating disruption is hung.
• If the comfort level is low, with mating disruption in the orchard, spray is optional. If there is a history, we would ask the grower to spray.
• We encourage everyone to have spray coverage for the first 6 weeks.

Gavin Young:

• Should the wording be changed from optional spraying versus supplemental spraying? Growers may get confused over the wording.
• Growers have their own knowledge of their orchards. If they know there is a hot spot in their orchard, they cannot hide behind the program and expect the fruit to be protected.
• The programs objective is to bring the population down. The growers objective is to protect his fruit. Sometimes that doesn’t overlap. How do we make it clear to the grower that he is obligated to protect the fruit?

Discussion regarding recommendations:

• In the first draft of the Technical Committee minutes, the word optional spraying was not put in there.
• The word optional was put in there because some of the orchards are as clean as Zone 1. When does the grower decide that mating disruption, and later on the moths, will look after his codling moth? At some point shortly after that transition, growers will not need to spray.
• Written warning notices and control orders are issued to growers if needed.
• Trap captures, within the mating disruption environment, with 10 mg lures, fewer then 5 moths over 3 weeks; they need to spray. Try to discourage using that threshold because we want them to spray. That is mainly for the summer generation.
• Newsletter does say “optional” with the second brood. Certain growers do need to be dealt with individually. Everyone is asked to spray for the first 6 weeks. Put a reminder in for growers.
• In future mail-outs, SIR will state that all growers are expected to spray for first brood.
• Releases will begin June 28th through all of Zones 2 & 3, except in high pressure blocks in orchards.
• SIR will monitor the traps. If there are high counts, the monitor will inform the grower about damage/captures. There is not enough time for the monitor to discuss spray or details. Drop off will be designated with the grower to drop off any information for the grower. A supervisor could help give advice about spraying, but not our monitors.
• Have a reminder notice left for the growers after certain treatable levels of wild CM arefound in growers their orchards. Don’t need to tell themSuggest the growers consult their fieldservice or crop consultant for the choice of sprays and timing. what to spray, just that they need to spray & the date.
• Growers call in to SIR as well to report any problems. Works well in Zone 1.
• Harvest inspection in all sites. Gives us a good picture as to where the program is.
• Cull analysis at the packinghouses. Inspectors need a refresher course. Gerry Shaw will discuss that with Hugh Philip.
• Court access. Legal advice is that we cover the entire basis prior to going forward to a judge.
• Banding results were not put into the newsletters for growers. Any grower can come to an SIR office to collect those results.
• Out of 3600 urban sites in Zone 1, 121 sites had infested fruit in 2003. That is just over 3% infested.
• In Creston: 254 gift certificates for tree removals in 2003 / 190 gift certificates issued for fruit stripping in 2003. There are 1294 sites in Creston.
• This is the 5^th year spent in clean-up in Zones 2 & 3.

Gavin Young asked the Grower & Industry Committee members if they were able to comment on what they think about the program. Is the program sufficient & acceptable to the growers? Can we have a comment on the recommendations from the Technical Committee regarding all Zones?

A general consensus from the Grower & Industry Advisory Committee:

“We recommend that the word “optional” be removed from the Lower Pressure Orchards category (1^st generation) for the Short-Term Strategy to Reduce Wild Codling Moth Populations in Zones 2 & 3 and Creston”.

Bob Fugger then added:

• The significant change in the program is the mating disruption. That is a cost increase in the 2004 budget.
• Supplies operational increased from 2003 to 2004.
• Aerial release is not in the budget after 2004 because we need to see if it works or not.it is still being tested.
• When we hung the mating disruption a few years ago, it had never been budgeted for. We ended up being short in the budget. Provincial and Federal government came up with that shortfall. With hanging mating disruption this year, we borrowed from next years budget to pay for it. We are about $650,000.00 short for 2005. The plan is to go for funding for 2005-2008. The SIR Board is working towards a proposal for the Ministry of Agriculture for funding and to use for public presentations.
• Revenue for the 2005 budget is estimated to be 1.2 million for orchards. 2.7 million for the urban.
• Parcel tax for 2005 is $101.35. The assessed value for advolerum is 19.5 cents per 1000.

Gavin Young stated:

· Should there be a statement asking Agriculture Canada to show some responsibility to support their research and their scientists in the application of this technology (mating disruption). That application will cost us money & we need to make it clear that we expect them to help finance that.

· Also need to discuss an area-wide control program with new technology ideas in mind.

· How should this program develop?

Discussion regarding cost per acre.

The following motion was put forward:

Moved by Charlotte Leaming Seconded by Joseph Lucich

“The SIR Grower & Industry tables the financial issues until a later date.”

CARRIED

Bob Fugger then discussed the presentations that need to be made for Regional Districts & local governments. Need input & leg work from growers. The growers requested the program, is it in the interest of the growers to step up and represent themselves. It is now going to be a public relations issue that needs to be done by the growers.

Gavin Young suggested that after the plan is ready for its first viewing, that it be presented to the Grower & Industry Committee in order to get an idea on what the plan is all about. We can invite additional people to that meeting. These people potentially can become the core group for their regions. They do not necessarily need to become the presenters of the plan.

The following motion was put forward:

Moved by Wayne Matthews Seconded by Pierre Calissi

“The SIR Grower & Industry would like to be one of the first groups to preview the plan prior to going forward to the public.”

CARRIED

TOPIC #6:

New Business

TOPIC #7:

Meeting Adjourned.

__________________ __________________

Chairman Secretary