Pests and Diseases

Higher Caution Will Be Required when Spraying Near Schools

New Regs on Pesticide Spraying Near Schools Begin Jan. 1

By Brianne Boyett, Associate Editor

Starting Jan. 1, new regulations will prohibit pesticide spraying near schools and licensed child day-care facilities within a quarter mile Monday through Friday between the hours of 6:00 AM and 6:00 PM.

In addition, most dust and powder pesticide applications, such as sulfur, will also be prohibited during this time.

California Ag Today spoke with Milton O’Haire, Ag Commissioner for Stanislaus County, about these new regulations.

“With these new regulations and even with our permit conditions, growers have been restricted as far as spraying around schools,” O’Haire said. “It’s making it harder for growers to actually practice agriculture because their windows for applying crop protection has shrunk even more.”

Milton O’Haire

“Previously, a grower could actually start spraying at 5:00 p.m. if school’s out already, or if the school was on a half-day, an operator could start spraying in the afternoon. These new regulation will prohibit that,” O’Haire said.

“The new regulations are slightly different than what we’ve had in place for a number of years. Since 2010, we’ve had permit conditions on all of our restricted materials permits, which are more acute or toxic materials where there was already a one-quarter mile restriction around schools. And during that time, we really haven’t had any violations or any incidents, so the growers have been following that very well,” O’Haire explained.

The new regulations target all crop protection materials, both restricted or not.

Growers will have to be more diligent about their pesticide applications and continue to monitor the spray operation to prevent drift.

“They have to be on top of the pests so they catch them very quickly, because if you have a pest infestation where before you might have been able to go out and start spraying the next day, you may not be able to do that,” O’Haire said.

“If you’re near a K-12 school, and it’s Monday for instance, now you’re going to have to wait for a window to open or come in at nighttime to actually spray,” he explained. “It is going to affect those growers that have crops near schools, and we have more than 200 growers that are going to be affected in our county.”

Previous drafts of these new regulations required parents to be notified anytime a grower would be spraying pesticides near K-12 schools or licensed daycare centers.

“There was a modification of that. What has changed in the draft regulations: now the grower must notify the school annually with a list of what would be applied during the year,” O’Haire said.

If a material is to be used that was not on the list, then the school must be notified 48 hours before application. The material must be added to the list at the school as well as notifying the Ag Commissioner.

California Ag Today2021-05-12T11:01:57-07:00December 27th, 2017|

Almond Band Canker has No Cure

Almond Band Canker Creeping up Again

By Patrick Cavanaugh, Farm News Director

Themis Michailides, a UC Davis Plant Pathologist based at the Kearney Agricultural Research and Extension Center, recently told California Ag Today that almond band canker is becoming a big problem.

“This was a very old disease, and almost forgotten, but now we have major problems, particularly in the young orchards, first leaf, second leaf, third leaf, and it can also be found in six year old trees,” Michailides said.

Band canker is a fungal disease caused by a group of Botryosphaeria fungi that are very common in major crops like grapes, almonds, pistachios, walnuts, avocados, citrus and other crops, so they have a large range.

Band canker establishes itself as a spore inoculum that resides outside and also inside of orchards and waits for the right conditions, which are wetness and also high temperatures.

“It develops first like a ring, a canker that is a horizontal canker on the trunks of the trees and decays the wood and produces sap. It’s a disease that can kill young trees in the orchards,” Michailides said.

“Once you have the cankers developed in the trunks of the trees, there’s no cure, but we can prevent it by managing irrigation, trying to keep the trunks of the trees dry,” he said. “We need to develop protective sprays in order to avoid the development of the disease in young trees.”

“Once we have the water and the temperatures rise above 50 degrees Fahrenheit, the conidia – the spores of this fungi – will germinate and infect vigorous varieties we have now through the growth cracks,” Michailides said.

“It’s getting more serious, especially now, because we see that the disease is uniformly distributed throughout the orchard, which indicates to me perhaps that the inoculum is in the trees and not coming from the outside sources. We don’t see the patterns we saw years ago, where we had the source and then a center of disease close to the source,” Michalides explained.

California Ag Today2021-05-12T11:01:57-07:00December 26th, 2017|

Orchard Sanitation is Critical This Season

Orchard Sanitation to Push Back on NOW Underscored

By Mike Stevens, Associate Editor

We are completing our coverage of the importance of orchard sanitation to push back on Navel Orangeworm (NOW) pressure for 2018.

We recently spoke with David Haviland, UC Cooperative Extension entomologist and farm advisor for Kern County. He spoke about how sanitation is the most important practice that needs to be implemented.

David Haviland

“Yes, 2017 was a really interesting year on NOW. It was a bad year overall. Several things led up to that. The first one was sanitation was an issue,” Haviland explained. “There is not much of an excuse in the southern half of the almond industry, but with all the rain up north and the flooded orchards, yes, it was very difficult to get in and do sanitation, and we know that that is the absolute backbone of navel orange worm programs.”

Pistachios were also a concern when it comes to NOW.

NOW was right on schedule in pistachios. The pistachio crop was a little behind and so it was common to do a normal monitoring, normal spray program, and set up for a normal harvest. But then the crops sat out there for another 10 days or two weeks, which, of course, makes it very vulnerable to NOW worm damage.

“The longer you get away from your insecticide sprays, the more damage that’s going to occur, and a lot of the crop was harvested after the fourth flight occurred,” Haviland said. “When you put in the concerns with sanitation this year, and with the increased degree day accumulation, there were plenty of moths and then the crop got delayed. The overall effect was that this was a worse than normal year.”

At the same time, the industry is full of examples of growers that had very acceptable damage.

“Growers that did follow in greater pest management practices … did get their sanitation done. They documented that those things are really important, they are very effective, and the growers that weren’t able to get that sanitation done hopefully got a case study, personal experience in the value of sanitation,” Haviland said.

Every grower needs to do their part by incorporating sanitation, noted Haviland. “Obviously, if you’re the only one sanitizing amidst a bunch of growers that aren’t, that’s a concern,” he said.

California Ag Today2021-05-12T11:01:57-07:00December 19th, 2017|

David Brassard on Understanding Hard Data In Crop Protection

Reliable Answers Needed In Benefit Assessments

By Patrick Cavanaugh, Farm News Director

David Brassard of Brassard Pesticide Regulatory Solutions has many years of experience working with the EPA. Based in Washington D.C., Brassard, along with his wife, Candy, now assist in getting new products registered for use with the EPA.

Brassard spoke with us about benefit assessment in regards to the EPA and pesticide regulation and how real data collection is a much stronger source of information.

“So there’s several ways of doing benefit assessment. For instance, back in the day, we used to have the National Agricultural Pesticide Impact Assessment Program (NAPIAP) getting farm advisers’ opinions and county extension agents’ opinions about what would happen if, say, we canceled chlorpyrifos,” Brassard said.

Brassard explained that when looking at benefit assessments alone, this testing could vary greatly from area to area. Compared to concrete data, benefit assessment can look unreliable in comparison.

“Frequently, you’d go to, say, Arizona. The guy from Arizona goes: ‘Oh, we get by without it just fine.’ Then right across the border in California, they’ll say ‘Oh, no. We can’t live without it. There’d be a 20% yield loss.’ There’s a lot of discrepancies in the kind of information that we would get,” Brassard said.

“When we actually dug into it, what we found was that if you actually relied on the hard data — the product performance data, the efficacy testing, what the yield difference is — you can get much more reliable answers,” he said.

These more reliable answers are important when producers are trying to maintain access to these products.

“There was a big movement in the ’90s, and I was at the forefront of it, of moving NAPIAP from the process of just asking expert opinions about what would happen to actually getting experts to pony up some data that would support their opinions,” he said.

California Ag Today2021-05-12T11:05:14-07:00December 13th, 2017|

Measuring Crop Protection Material Tolerances

Biological Tolerances May Be Needed

By Patrick Cavanaugh, Farm News Director

California Ag Today recently spoke with Gabrielle Ludwig, Director of Sustainability and Environmental Affairs for the Almond Board of California, about the issue of crop protection in almonds. Almonds are the number one specialty crop export. Almonds also remain the number one nut in global production and are California’s number two agricultural crop.

Ludwig explained that pesticides are used and necessary in today’s almond production. Pesticide residue is a concern for not only domestic production, but also for international distribution. And with biological products such as friendly fungi and bacteria, the biological industry noted that they are safe and free of residue tolerance.

“I would say for this industry, there’s a couple of things going on in parallel, and they don’t have exactly the same problems. So one is you have the sector where it is still a chemical that you’re applying, but it may not have very much toxicity or the residues are, for whatever reason, vanished,” Ludwig said.

“In the United States, we can get an exemption from a tolerance, where EPA has looked at and said there’s no health risk, and there’s no need to set a maximum residue limit. For those products then the question becomes: Do you have the same standards in other markets?” Ludwig asked.

“And again, one example is that the EU does have an exemption for tolerance process, but they don’t always have the same standards so EU is more likely to set a number than United States. And we have also seen examples where the United States is setting a number and the rest of the world says there’s no need to set a number because it’s a natural occurring compound.”

“So if you look at a pheromone, which falls into a natural occurring arena, there, you’re not even spraying the trees so it’s a totally different ball game,” Ludwig said.

“With biologicals, again, it’s a different ball game. You still need to have someone say, look at it, say it’s safe; because it’s going to be exempt from a tolerance.”

“But currently, there’s no testing for it,” Ludwig said. “With DNA technology, it probably wouldn’t be that hard to start testing for biological products’ lack of residue, especially ones that go on the produce that is eaten.”

“So again, what we’re saying here is, don’t rely on the fact you can’t be tested for it because we did that in the conventional pesticide arena and it’s caught up with us,” Ludwig said.

California Ag Today2021-05-12T11:05:14-07:00December 11th, 2017|

Cannabis Growers Not Following Regs

Cannabis Growers Must Adhere to Crop Protection Regulations

By Patrick Cavanaugh, Farm News Director

There’s a whole lot of trouble going on for California cannabis growers. They need crop protection products for pests – such as mites, aphids, thrips, and mealybugs – and diseases, including powdery mildew, alternaria and pythium.

Now legally grown in the state, cannabis meets the definition of an agriculture crop and must adhere to all agricultural regulations and best management practices. This includes all Pest Control Advisor-written recommendations. As few products are approved for application on cannabis in the state, as well as nationwide, a PCA can now be cited for recommending a product that has not been officially registered and approved for a use on cannabis, specifically. With legal cannabis production going mainstream in California, PCAs face this risky predicament regularly.

“I discussed this point with Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR) Director Brian Leahy this past week,” said Rachel Kubiak, DPR Pesticide Programs Division, Cannabis Program Supervisor. “I think we are at a point now where it’s important that we make policy decisions so PCAs know, as stakeholders, what our expectations are. PCAs deserve for us to do that, so we are working internally right now to try to get a lot of answers to these questions.”

Cannabis growers will have to buy products from licensed agricultural dealers.

“I understand, in talking to different folks, that many companies are not comfortable with the liability of attaining DPR registration approval for cannabis application and are therefore advising not to sell product to cannabis growers,” Kubiak said. “I completely understand that.”

“Going forward as a department, the concern, I think, is to bring as many farmers into the legal crop protection market as possible,” Kubiak said. “They are going to go exactly where they have been buying the products from, right? And if PCAs do not sell to them, but the cannabis growers must buy from them, these growers will have to purchase their crop protection products online, from Home Depot, or anyplace else. I can almost guarantee you that 95% or probably more of the cannabis farmers I’ve talked to over the last couple of months have no idea what we are talking about regarding applying registered materials to registered crops.”

“They have no idea that you cannot buy product anyplace and apply it as a pesticide,” she explained. “They do not know how to store it. So we have a lot of work to do in a very short period of time to bring these people into compliance and understanding.”

The scenario is even dicier for California County Agricultural Commissioners. These commissioners are required to enforce regulations on cannabis, as they are for any other commodity.

“We are working with the county ag commissioners to figure out how we need to proceed with and advise on this,” Kubiack said.

“I will tell you, usually as a department,” Kubiak explained, “we are inundated by the environmental justice community. Yet, they have been completely absent to this point on this particular commodity. So it’s almost bizarre and unusual not to be hit continuously from the left. But understandably, again, we’re now getting into these forums in which the Ag community has a voice and an interest,” Kubiak said.

“I’ve heard from both sides,” she continued. “I have heard from different Ag groups and PCAs who have said, ‘You know, we see a need for this—by a whole industry of people,’” she said.

And that whole industry, the cannabis growers of California, is crossing the regulatory line in crop protection. It has been reported that cannabis growers are creating a lot of environmental damage as well as worker safety concerns. Cannabis is grown primarily indoors, and according to Kubiak, “People are using pesticides without any concept of what they’re doing. Normally we would recommend that they talk to a professional, but that puts licensed PCAs in a hard spot because they cannot write a recommendation for a product that is not legally approved for use on that product.”

Kubiak said DPR is trying to bring as many of cannabis growers into the light as possible, “so that we have some regulation. Again, clearly this has been going on for a really long time, but at least now we are trying to go into areas in which we have some regulation but where people are not necessarily informed. So we bring crop protection management more into the light than ever before,” she said.

Is the DPR at a big turning point in working with county Ag commissioners?

“In the absence of putting up a product list,” Kubiak asked, “what is quasi-legal and what is not quasi-legal? We are trying to come up with solutions to some of these dilemmas.”

“There are counties that want the flexibility. Boards of supervisors and their counties are economically dependent upon this newly emerging industry that’s been in the North Coast for decades. They want the ability to use discretion. Nevertheless, Ag commissioners in other counties clearly are not comfortable with that whatsoever,” Kubiak said.

California Ag Today2021-05-12T11:01:57-07:00December 5th, 2017|

Breeding for Pierce’s Disease Resistance Has Sped Up

Traditional Breeding Helps Find Resistance to PD

By Patrick Cavanaugh, Farm News Director

The glassy-winged sharpshooter is a major vector of Pierce’s Disease, which kills grape vines. Pierce’s Disease devastated the grape industry in southern California and lead to the creation of the Pierce’s Disease/Glassy-Winged Sharpshooter Board (PD/GWSS Board). Government programs to fund research on glassy-winged sharpshooters and Pierce’s Disease invest nearly $20 million annually.

California Ag Today recently spoke with Ken Freeze, the outreach and education director for PD/GWSS. He told us about two major methods of control and prevention that the board is funding.

“There’s the area-wide control program, which does everything it possibly can to pretty much keep the glassy-winged sharpshooter confined to basically the southern part of the state,” Freeze said.

This control program prevents the further spread of Pierce’s Disease into other parts of the state, which could devastate wine growers. In addition to preventing the further spread of Pierce’s Disease, the board is also funding additional research into hopefully finding a cure.

“We’ve got UC Davis Genetics Professor Andy Walker working on Pierce’s Disease resistant grapevine before the program, and he just released some of those vines to the UC Davis Foundation Plants Services.”

Freeze said this development has been done through traditional breeding, with the assistance of some new technology.

Walker’s traditional breeding is sped up by a lot of high tech tools. Previously growers would crossbreed, however they’d have to infect the vine and see if it got Pierce’s Disease.

“That could take a year or two. Now they know the genetic markers, so when the plant has only two or three leaves on it, researchers pull a leaf, do a DNA track on it, and look for that marker,” Freeze explained. “Depending on the marker, the vine either goes to the next step in breeding or it ends up in the trash heap. So that has just sped up that process incredibly.”

“Again, that’s all just using traditional breeding,” Freeze said.

California Ag Today2021-05-12T11:05:15-07:00December 4th, 2017|

Pierce’s Disease Research Advancing

Many Projects Under Way To Reduce Pierce’s Disease in Grapes

By Patrick Cavanaugh, Farm News Director

The glassy-winged sharpshooter vectors Pierce’s Disease, which has been devastating grape growers in California for the last few years. California Ag Today recently spoke with Ken Freeze, the Outreach and Education Director for the Pierce’s Disease/Glassy-Winged Sharpshooter Board, a program that uses winegrower’s assessments to fund research. He spoke with us about research that’s been carried out to hopefully find a cure for Pierce’s Disease.

Pierce’s Disease is caused by a bacterium, Xylella fastidiosa, that reduces the vascular function of the vine. The sharpshooter insect vectors the bacteria.

“Andy Walker, with the Department of Viticulture and Enology, UC Davis, has been working on Pierce’s Disease-resistant grapevines. We just released some of those vines to the Foundation Plant Services at UC Davis,” Freeze said. “There are 14 more that are in the wings about ready to go. Some nurseries will be able to get that pretty soon, but already there are about 4,000 of his vines planted. Some of them have been planted in Georgia and Texas, which are real hotspot for the glassy-winged sharpshooter and Pierce’s Disease.”

“Here in California, 2,000 vines were planted in Napa Valley right along the Napa River. Those vines are doing great,” Freeze said.

“We’ve got another project. University of Florida plant pathologist Dr. Don Hopkins has found a benign stain of Pierce’s Disease. It’s like inoculating a vine with a smallpox vaccination. That’s actually a company that’s working on commercializing that now,” Freeze explained.

“We’ve got another project that involves a modified root stalk that sends either a protein or a molecule up into the vine – a non-modified scion – five different ways that stops the Xylella fastidiosa bacteria literally in its tracks before it can cause Pierce’s Disease in the vine. That’s just a small sample of some of the really good projects.”

“One grower told me: ‘It’s not the end of the tunnel, but we can see it,’” Freeze said.

California Ag Today2021-05-12T11:05:15-07:00December 1st, 2017|

Navel Orangeworm Control Critical

Orchard Sanitation is Critical This Season To Lower NOW Numbers

By Patrick Cavanaugh, Farm News Director

Emily Symmes is the area Integrated Pest Management farm advisor for the Sacramento Valley in the statewide IPM program. She recently spoke to California Ag Today about the high level of Navel Orangeworm (NOW) damage in nut orchards throughout California this past season.

“We had a lot of unique circumstances. The amount of rainfall we got in late 2016 into 2017 was pretty unprecedented and really led us into a really bad navel orangeworm year because we couldn’t get out and sanitize our nut crops,” she said.

Emily Symmes

“NOW is ubiquitous, and there is an increased nut crop footprint in California, with more than one million acres of almonds, plus pistachios and walnuts,” Symmes explained. “All play host to NOW, as well as a host of natural plants. This thing isn’t going anywhere. And it was pretty bad in 2017 in terms of harvest damage.”

One of the key factors for higher navel orangeworm damage was not being able to get into the fields because of the standing water.

“There were a couple of other factors as well. Typically, rainfall and moist conditions can help NOW mortality in the winter. We tend to think that it can help rot the nuts and do us some favors, but we have to be able to get out and get the nuts shaken or get pulling crews in and get those things on the ground. And then them being on the ground is not always a sure thing. Sanitation was huge in terms of NOW problems this year,” Symmes said.

Heat units also played a part in the development of more NOW pressure. There were a lot of moths flying around longer and laying eggs.

“It got hot in mid to late June, and it seemed to just not let up. What that meant was, in terms of our degree-day models or the heat unit that drive insect development, it ended up getting pretty far out ahead of what is typical, if there is anything such as typical. But certainly ahead of the last couple of years,” Symmes explained.

By September, we were about two weeks ahead in degree-days and that means that the moths were out earlier. They’re flying around. They’re laying eggs on the nuts when they’re still on the trees.

Symmes stressed that the importance of sanitation is to minimize the site where the NOWs mature.

“It’s really important to remember that sanitation efforts aren’t just directly killing any worms that are over-wintering in your orchard. Yes, it does that. But it also minimizes those sites where your first and second generations are going to develop next year,” she said.

California Ag Today2021-05-12T11:01:58-07:00November 29th, 2017|

Future of Integrated Pest Management

IPM: A Decision Making Process

By Joanne Lui, Associate Editor

Lori Berger is the academic coordinator for the University of California’s statewide Integrated Pest Management program. She spoke with California Ag Today recently about the sustainability of IPM and where it’s heading in the future.

“IPM is part of a sustainable approach to pest management. It’s very holistic. It’s a decision-making process. It incorporates all factors in an environment and in a situation, and it uses all human resources.”

Berger believes that even though IPMs are sustainable, the system might not work as well as it should.

“IPM has been around for 50 years, but our system is somewhat stuck in that we tend to be more reactive than proactive,” she explained. “If there’s an event such as an invasive pest or some … pesticide incident, some huge regulatory change or some legislative pressure, it’s like all of a sudden the system needs to reboot itself. We need to look deeper into the system and be working in a more embedded way across platforms and people.”

Berger told us that instead of looking at things in a linear way, it’s important to look at all the parts and how they relate to each other to find flaws in the system.

“As scientists, we tend to look at things cause and effect. We were looking into optimizing the whole by looking at the parts, but now taking things that are more of a systemic level, we’re trying to looking at the parts and also how they work in relationship to each other. That’s to where we can realize some of our biggest gains that there’s not as much at stake, or there’s less risk for all parties, and people are more aware of what’s going on.”

Patrick Cavanaugh2021-05-12T11:01:58-07:00November 28th, 2017|

Previous 131415 Next