Developed by Clyde R. Crumley, EA- IPM, Jackson, Matagorda and Wharton Counties
Relevance: Agricultural costs continue to rise nationwide while commodity prices remain low. For area producers to continue in the farming business, they must find ways to cut inputs at the same time increasing production. Integrated Pest Management (IPM) is a tool which aids producers in the reduction of those input costs. IPM considers multiple tactics for the control of pests, maintaining pest populations below a damaging level and conservation of the environment. Agriculture is one of the primary occupations in the County.
Response:
- Upper Gulf Coast Row Crop Production Conference Occurred : Jan. 26, 2010
- Matagorda County CEU Workshop Occurred : Jan. 22, 2010
- Wharton County CEU Workshop Occurred : Feb. 5, 2010
- Planted Applied Research Corn Variety Trial Occurred : Mar. 6, 2010
- Planted Applied Research Corn Trials (3) Occurred : Mar. 11, 2010
- Planted Applied Research Cotton Variety Trial Occurred : Mar. 30, 2010
- Planted Applied Research Grain Sorghum Variety Trial Occurred : April 2, 2010
- Planted Applied Research Cotton Variety Trial Occurred : April 6, 2010
- Planted Applied Research Cotton Variety Trial Occurred : April 9, 2010
- Planted Applied Research Cotton Variety Trial Occurred : April 14, 2010
- Planted Applied Research Soybean Variety Trial Occurred : April 26, 2010
- Planted Applied Research Cotton Insecticide Trial Occurred : May 5, 2010
- Applied Research Corn Fungicide Trial Occurred : May 20, 26, 27 2010
- UpperCoast IPM Newsletter & Pest Petrol Recording Occurred: May. 5, 2010
- UpperCoast IPM Newsletter & Pest Petrol Recording Occurred: May. 12, 2010
- UpperCoast IPM Newsletter & Pest Petrol Recording Occurred: May. 19, 2010
- UpperCoast IPM Newsletter & Pest Petrol Recording Occurred: May. 26, 2010
- UpperCoast IPM Newsletter & Pest Petrol Recording Occurred: Jun. 2, 2010
- Jackson County Crop Tour Occurred : Jun. 7, 2010
- UpperCoast IPM Newsletter & Pest Petrol Recording Occurred: Jun. 9, 2010
- UpperCoast IPM Newsletter & Pest Petrol Recording Occurred: Jun. 16, 2010
- UpperCoast IPM Newsletter & Pest Petrol Recording Occurred: Jun. 23, 2010
- UpperCoast IPM Newsletter & Pest Petrol Recording Occurred: Jun. 30, 2010
- UpperCoast IPM Newsletter & Pest Petrol Recording Occurred: July 7, 2010
- UpperCoast IPM Newsletter & Pest Petrol Recording Occurred: July 14, 2010
- Harvested Applied Research Corn Variety Trial Occurred : July 30, 2010
- Harvested Applied Research Corn Variety Trial Occurred : Aug. 2, 2010
- Bayer (Wharton) County Crop Tour Occurred : Aug. 5, 2010
- Harvested Aid Research Cotton Tour Occurred : Aug. 12, 2010
- Harvested Applied Research Corn Fungicide Trial Occurred : Aug. 12, 2010
- Harvested Applied Research Cotton Insecticide Trial Occurred : Aug. 25, 2010
- Harvested Applied Research Cotton Variety Trial Occurred : Aug. 26, 2010
- Harvested Applied Research Matagorda RACE Trial Occurred : Aug. 30, 2010
- Harvested Applied Research Cotton Variety Trial Occurred : Sept. 29, 2010
- Harvested Applied Research Cotton Variety Trial Occurred : Oct. 1, 2010
- Harvested Applied Research Wharton RACE Trial Occurred : Oct. 6, 2010
- Agricultural Technology Meeting Occurred: November 15, 2010
Results: Fifty program participants were selected and mailed the survey, an 18% return was observed. I gave the participants a series of questions and they responded from a post retrospective view. The results were then tabulated and summarized. On average the respondents grew and/or consulted on 1023 acres (89%) of corn, 1253 acres (78%) of grain sorghum, 1998 acres (78%) of cotton, 383 acres (44%) of soybeans, 150 acres (22%) of rice, 130 acres (11%) of wheat and 200 (11%) of hay in the 2010 cropping season which represent an excellent diversification of crops for southeastern Texas.
Outreach programs that were learned through AgriLife Extension and IPM educational activities were asked of the survey respondents and their answers included: a 100% response to cotton insect updates and cotton scouting techniques, improved my knowledge of IPM and best management practices, which has helped my farm profitability and reduced pesticide use soybeans and grain sorghum, cotton defoliation, transgenic cotton and corn varieties and their performance in my area, scouting for insect pests, crop diseases, weeds and beneficial insects, use of economic thresholds to determine when to use an insecticide and use of economic thresholds to determine when to use an insecticide; 89% response to use crop varieties best suited to my area, weed management, stink bug and creontides monitoring and management in cotton, monitoring of cotton crop status using plant mapping techniques (node above white flower, node above cracked boll, internode length, COTMAN), for soil fertility management and aflatoxin in corn and a 78% response was garnered from the early, thorough crop residue destruction (stalk destruction) importance and methods.
Whereas, the survey asked respondents which of the following practices have been adopted as a result of information you received through the AgriLife Extension IPM program. 100% of the responses indicated that they rely on IPM and best management practices to improve profitability and reduce pesticide use, scout or have fields scouted for insects, diseases and weeds; 89% conserve or protect beneficial insects, use economic thresholds for pests, destroy or plow stalks as soon as possible after harvest to reduce pests, plant Bt transgenic varieties to help manage pests; 78% rotate crops to help manage weeds, diseases and insect pests, soil test and use soil test information to help you choose fertilizer rates; conserve or protect beneficial insects, plant transgenic varieties for weed control; furthermore 67% of the answers indicated that growers select varieties that are less prone to insects and diseases and plant transgenic varieties for weed control; 44% cultivate for weed control; only 56% of them use recommended planting dates; and finally no responses were gathered regarding the purchase and release beneficial insects.
The survey respondents were asked “to complete the next section of the survey by telling us if you used the following tools to manage pests or make management decisions in cotton, the tools were: COTMAN program; Nodes above white flower (NAWF); AflaGuard (corn); Selection of best adapted Bt varieties (cotton); Stink bug monitoring on cotton and soybeans; Creontiades monitoring in cotton as compared to this year and previous years.” 25% of the respondents use the COTMAN program on 60% of their acres, whereas 75% did not. 62% of the respondents use the NAWF on 100% of their acres, whereas 38% did not. None of the growers used the AflaGuard (corn) technology; 87% of the respondents used the Bt cotton trait on 93% of their acres whereas 13% did not. 100% used Stink bug monitoring on cotton and soybeans on 100% of their acres and 71% monitored Creontiades in cotton on 100% of the acres and 29% did not in previous years. However, now 14% of the respondents use the COTMAN program on 100% of their acres, whereas 86% did not. 86% of the respondents use the NAWF on 100% of their acres, whereas 14% did not. 14% used the AflaGuard (corn) technology on 33% of their acres; 100% of the respondents used the Bt cotton trait on 93% of their acres. 100% used Stink bug monitoring on cotton and soybeans on 100% of their acres; and 100% monitored Creontiades in cotton on 100% of the acres. When comparing these data sets to each other several conclusions can be deduced. 11% fewer growers are using the COTMAN program on 40% more individual acres. While this program has excellent attributes it user interface has been observed as to be difficult to use by clientele. Whereas, Nodes above white flower (NAWF) continues to remain popular and in fact has increased in use by some 24% which actually speaks to the positives noted in the COTMAN program. The use of AflaGuard (corn) technology addresses it introduction into the cropping system here. The selection of best adapted Bt varieties (cotton) increased by 7% with overall acreage remaining the same. This could be suggested to be an artifact of the associated cost of production. Stink bug monitoring on cotton and soybeans was unchanged in acres monitored. And Creontiades monitoring in cotton has increased by 29% in all acreage reported which is pest that has become more recognized in the last several years.
Further, the survey asked respondents: Does the Integrated Pest Management program reduce your economic risk associated with crop production? A 56% positive response was observed, 33% unsure response and an 11% negative response was recorded. Is the Integrated Pest Management program valuable to you in providing information that helps you make pest management and crop management decisions? (Scouting, reports on technology trials, newsletters etc.)? Received a 100% positive response; Does IPM program information help you reduce your production cost? 75% thought it was whereas 25% was unsure; Has the adoption of IPM practices, new varieties and best management practices allowed you to reduce agricultural chemical use on your farm? To which the respondents answered 100% yes to this question. And answered 75% positively to; Does IPM program information help you improve crop yields and quality? On average the adoption of IPM practices, new varieties and best management practices has allowed a reduction of 17% in agricultural chemical use on farms in this survey. When asked: Considering all the information you receive through the IPM program (newsletters, field scouting, meetings, one-on-one, publications, field days, etc.) What would you consider to be the value per acre of this information? Growers responded that in cotton was on average $38.60/acre, grain sorghum $20.25, $12.00 for corn, rice $15.00, soybeans $11.67 and $3.00 for wheat.
Future Plans: In evaluating the Jackson, Matagorda and Wharton Counties IPM program in 2010, several conclusions can be drawn. A majority of the agricultural producers recognize the essential components of IPM and the actual decision of when to apply a pesticide is based on either by an external influence (private consultant or IPM program) or scouting their own fields. Whereas, the source of information about specific pesticide use is overwhelmingly acquired from the private sector as well as the IPM program. These sources can play a significant role in influencing the pesticide use patterns in this three County area through educational programs (result demonstrations, newsletters and field tours). Therefore, via the IPM steering committee, a close working relationship has been forged between local private consultants and the IPM program, which reflects an ongoing effort by all parties concerned. Future plans include a continuation of the IPM program.