Pesticide Retailer
IPM Education
Meeting Notes - May 8, 2006
Organized by the IPM Institute and the NE IPM Center. Posted on May
17, 2006. Please send errors or omissions to Tom
Green.
Participating
Augustin, Baumgartner, Braband, Brandt, Brosseau, Butler, Cloyd, Criswell,
Drlik, Enache, Feldman, Fish, Flint, Garling, A. Gold, M. Gold, T. Green,
J. Green, Gunn, Koplinka-Loehr, Malinoski, Martinez, Masters, Moses, Mysz,
Nogaki, Ratcliffe, Richards, Seikel, Windbiel-Rojas, Zeh
Thanks
to the USDA
Northeastern
IPM
Center
(http://neipmc.org/index.cfm)
for hosting the call.
New
Resources
1.
List serve for residential IPM hosted by the Northeastern IPM Center
Community IPM Working Group. Contact
Amy Galford
to be added to the list serve.
2.
Maine Board of Pesticides Control has proposed a new IPM-based rule for
use of pesticides in occupied buildings other than K-12 schools, which are
already covered by such a rule. Contact
Gary Fish with the Maine Board for more information.
3.
Presentations from the Fifth National IPM Symposium are being posted
on-line at http://www.ipmcenters.org/IPMSymposiumV/sessions/index.html.
See the sessions related to our topic at the end of this document.
Presentations not yet posted may be requested from the author(s).
Agenda
Items
1. USDA Northeastern IPM Center Community IPM Working Group – Lynn
Braband, Cornell University and Mary Kay Malinoski, University of
Maryland, co-chairs
History
-
The working group co-convened the Northeast Regional Community and Urban
IPM conference in March 2005 in
Manchester
NH
and co-organized
three sessions at the Fifth National IPM Symposium.
At
the 2005 conference, participants voted “IPM outreach to homeowners,
retailers of pest management products and multipliers (media, libraries,
teachers)” as their highest priority.
The working group chose residential IPM as a focus for 2005,
including retailer education and other outreach activities.
Symposium
sessions included turf, structural and a roundtable discussion (session
presentations listed below in References).
Twenty-two individuals participated in the roundtable discussion.
Current
activities –
Roundtable participants have continued the discussion on a list serve.
Effort is focusing on developing key messages for residential IPM.
Two
Northeastern states plan to adapt materials developed in
Pennsylvania
for their states.
The original materials were developed under a project by Steve
Bogash including a series of point-of-purchase fact sheets, see http://paipm.cas.psu.edu/popsheets.html
A
workshop is planned for summer 2007 in eastern PA. Probable
water quality and residential pest management theme, taking advantage of
location in
Chesapeake Bay
watershed.
Expected to address both landcape and structural issues.
Several
members of the group are working with Megan Moses at Scotts on a tour of
Scotts’ Training Institute facility in Marysville OH in July.
Scotts’ call center handles > 1 million calls per year.
Opportunities
to get involved - To
join the residential IPM listserve, contact Amy
Galford.
To volunteer to assist with the regional workshop, contact Lynn
Braband, or Mary Kay Malinoski.
2.
Healthy Yards, Healthy Lawns, Healthy Environment (H3) – John
Butler,
US
EPA Region
III
.
H3
is an initiative to increase encourage responsible pesticide use practices
for landscaping and spearheaded US EPA Region
III
headquartered in Philadelphia.
In 2005, Region
III
staff developed
outreach materials, participated in Earth Day and coordinated an event at
a local lawn and garden retailer to promote the objectives of the H3
campaign. Retailers with
strong sales were selected, e.g., one center records 800 sales per day.
A
major part of the H3 initiative is a demonstrational research project at
two small ponds in
Pennsylvania. The community
around a Bucks
County
pond is receiving
extensive outreach education including the door to door distribution of
educational materials. The community around a similar
Chester
County
pond is not
receiving educational outreach at this time. The water from both ponds is
being sampled on a quarterly basis and analyzed for a panel of nutrients
and pesticides. This measurable data will help determine if educational
outreach will have an impact on improving water quality. The
protocol for the study is available from John.
Additional
H3 outreach included door-to-door outreach by John and EPA staff, feature
articles in the Philadelphia Inquirer and Bucks County Courier Times
newspapers and a 15 minute segment on Comcast TV's Newsmakers show that
aired three times per day on a random basis over a two week period.
Current
activities – Events
at retailers will continue, including displays by EPA Region
III
and other
partners, both inside and outside the retail outlets and adjacent to
pesticide and fertilizer product aisles.
Outreach will be improved to focus on one or more messages, e.g.,
do not apply fertilizer to impervious surfaces.
Project
staff have begun working with Delaware Valley Earth Force in the local
schools and communities to teach the children about responsible lawn care
and landscaping practices. Service
learning projects will be a part of these efforts.
We feel it is similar to the recycling education that takes place
at the school level. Hopefully,
the children will go home and tell their parents about these practices and
long term, adopt these practices when they are adults themselves.
Opportunities
to get involved - John
Butler, is happy to provide
more information on the project for those who might like to replicate in
their area. More information
at http://www.epa.gov/reg3wcmd/pesticideslawn.htm
3.
"Greening Scotts" Work Group - Kathy
Seikel,
US
EPA.
This new public/private partnership has had one conference call,
which included Kathy, Donald Baumgartner, Ed Brandt, John Butler, Carrie
Koplinka-Loehr, Mary Kay Malinoski, and Jean Schwab. Their intent is to
determine how best to work with representatives from The Scotts MiracleGro
Company on teaching employees about environmental stewardship and possibly
educating consumers about the same. The work group plans to refine their
ideas via email, then converse with Rich Martinez and Megan Moses about
them.
Some
members of the group have arranged with Megan Moses to tour the Scotts
MiracleGro facility in
Marysville, Ohio, and will meet
with the director of the call center, which receives a million calls each
year. That visit might provide
an opportunity to learn more about the Scotts Training Institute.
4.
National Coalition for Pesticide-Free Lawns– Eileen Gunn, Beyond
Pesticides.
This coalition of organizations from across the
US
helps members
educate themselves and their clientele about pesticides and alternatives.
Coalition members organized a letter-writing campaign to Home
Depot, asking the retailer to offer more alternatives including organic
products. Discussions with
Home Depot have also included training for staff.
The coalition has also distributed door hangers.
More
information including a list of steering committee members is available at
www.pesticidefreelawns.org.
Opportunities
to get involved - Organizations
are invited to join the coalition by signing the declaration at www.pesticidefreelawns.org
and participating in outreach activities.
5.
National Workshop on IPM Education at Retail Point of Sale - Don
Baumgartner, US EPA Region V.
On an earlier call, Don introduced the idea of a national meeting
specifically on educating consumers about IPM at point of sale.
Ideas include presenting success stories in the first part of the
workshop, followed by breakouts potentially into separate structural and
lawn/landscape tracks. Issues
that could be addressed would include how to develop coordinated efforts
with big-box chains that addresses region-specific needs; what messages
are most appropriate/effective at point of sale in stimulating consumer
behavior change.
Customers
at point of sale may be the most motivated audience for education on
selecting the correct product and preventing reoccurrence of a problem.
Structural
pest management is important to include due to the potential for pesticide
use and hazard reduction, including health hazards and surface water
contamination. Only about 20%
of residences use the services of a pest management professional.
Several
people among our group have experience organizing national and regional
meetings. There is a Northeast
regional conference on the drawing board for 2007 (see C.1. above).
Opportunities
to get involved - A
conference call will be organized for those interested in pursuing this
potential. An announcement will be circulated to the list as soon as this
is scheduled.
6.
Replicating successful efforts in
new geographic areas – Tom Green, IPM Institute and Carrie
Koplinka-Loehr,
Northeastern
IPM
Center
.
There
are a number of successful efforts underway and a wealth of materials to
draw from. The
Great Lakes
and
Chesapeake
regions and others
could benefit from replication of these efforts.
Finding locations where leverage is present, e.g., TMDLs,
stormwater agencies with a vested interest in removing contaminants,
motivated retailers, could be a key to financial sustainability.
Projects
need to address regional needs and could be coordinated with other
existing efforts to make participation more attractive to national chains
and maximize national impact. Steps
could include developing a planning/feasibility study grant to identify
models to replicate, partners, sustainable funding sources.
Next
Steps (Koplinka-Loehr, T.
Green)
-
Organize
conference call with new guest speaker with time for discussion,
possibilities include Tom Simpson U of MD; Skip Richter, Texas
A&M.
-
Organize
two smaller group calls, one focused on national workshop, one focused
on replication of successful efforts in new geographic areas.
-
Set
up a listserve specific to IPM/water quality education at
point-of-sale
References
(1)
IPM Symposium Sessions organized Northeastern IPM Center Community IPM
Working Group
30.
Facilitating Implementation of Residential Turf Integrated
Pest
Management:
Working towards Consensus
Despite
years of educational activity aimed at minimizing chemical inputs to
residential lawns, sales of lawn fertilizers, herbicides, and insecticides
continue to rise. This workshop will look at the constraints to
implementation of residential turf IPM from the perspective of various
stakeholders in the lawn care field. The
workshop will begin with a short overview of the social, economic, and
environmental impacts of turf in residential landscapes including acreage,
cultural and economic value, resources used (water, fertilizer,
pesticides, fuel and labor), and potential environmental impacts. We will
present the basic, widely agreed upon recommendations for IPM turfgrass
management (e.g. test your soil, apply fertilizer based on soil test
recommendations, identify weeds and insects before treatment, etc . . .)
along with data regarding the extent to which these recommendations are
being translated into consumer behavior.
Speakers from the lawn care industry, from academia, and from
environmental organizations will address the following questions from the
perspective of their respective organizations: what are the significant
problems they perceive with current turf management practices; what are
the challenges faced from an organizational and societal perspective; what
solutions can their organization offer.
Our goal will be to identify areas of agreement and disagreement.
We will also attempt to identify consumer marketing messages that may be
adopted by academia, environmental organizations, and industry alike to
more effectively influence consumer behavior. The workshop will conclude
with an assessment of how we can make IPM education programs more
effective through better regional or national collaboration. This
discussion will be continued in the companion Roundtable Session “Where
Do We Go with Residential IPM.”
Moderators
and Organizers:
Marion
S. Gold, Cooperative Extension Education Center, College of
the Environment & Life Sciences, University of Rhode Island, Kingston,
RI; Rick Johnson, Pesticide Education Program, The
Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA
9:00
30.1 Introduction-An
Overview of the Social, Economic, and Environmental Impacts of Turf,
Marion S. Gold, Cooperative Extension Education Center,
College of the Environment & Life Sciences, University of Rhode
Island, Kingston, RI; Rick Johnson, Pesticide Education
Program, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA
9:10
30.2 Consumer
Behavior and Turfgrass Management, Bruce
Augustin,
The Scotts Company, Marysville,
OH
9:40
30.3 Alternatives
to Conventional Lawn Management: Impediments to Implementation, Jay
Feldman, Beyond Pesticides,
Washington
DC
10:10
30.4 What
Turfgrass Science Tells Us, Frank Rossi, Turfgrass
Science and Extension Turfgrass, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY
10:40
30.5 Panel
Discussion: What Steps Can We Take as a Team (Industry, Academia,
Government, and Non-Profit Groups) to Promote Residential Turf IPM?
50.
Facilitating Implementation of Structural Integrated
Pest
Management
in Residential Settings
Reaching
homeowners and tenants concerning integrated pest management is a
challenging task. In this workshop, speakers will assess the status of
such outreach in structural IPM and discuss how it might be improved.
Topics that will be addressed include homeowner perceptions of pest
management, health connections, partnering with industry, and reaching
diverse audiences. Sponsored by the NE IPM Center's Community IPM Working
Group, this is a companion workshop to "Facilitating Implementation
of Residential Turf IPM: Working towards Consensus" and the follow-up
roundtable discussion on "Where Do We Go with Residential IPM?"
Moderator
and Organizer:
Lynn Braband, New York
State Integrated
Pest
Management
Program,
Cornell
University,
Rochester,
NY
3:30
50.1 Introduction,
Lynn Braband,
New York
State Integrated
Pest
Management
Program, Cornell
University,
Rochester,
NY
3:35
50.2 How
Does "Jill and Joe Homeowner" Perceive Pest Management?, Cindy
Mannes, National Pest Management Association,
Lansdale, PA
3:55
50.3 Connecting
with Health Promotion Outreach, Daniel
Kass, New
York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, New York, NY
4:15
50.4 Partnering
with the Structural Pest Control Industry, Jack
Marlowe, Eden Pest Management, Olympia,
WA
4:35
50.5 Effectively
Reaching Diverse Residential Audiences, Larry
Swain, Michigan Department of Agriculture, Lansing, MI
4:55
50.6 Panel
and Audience Discussion, Jody
Gangloff-Kaufmann, New
York State Integrated
Pest
Management
Program, Cornell
University,
Farmingdale, NY
5:25
50.7 Concluding
Remarks, Lynn Braband, New
York State Integrated Pest Management Program, Cornell University,
Rochester, NY
65.
Where Do We Go with Residential Integrated
Pest
Management?
This
roundtable discussion will pull together ideas from the “Facilitating
Implementation of Structural IPM in Residential Settings” and
“Achieving Consensus for Residential Turf IPM” workshops. The purpose
is to develop a roadmap for action in these areas where use, misuse, and
exposure to pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizer by residents is
greatest. Reaching homeowners is a difficult task as many take
recommendations on face value from the Internet, pest control companies,
nurseries, garden centers, and landscape/lawn care companies. Only a small
percentage use Extension as a source of reliable, unbiased information.
The roundtable participants including, speakers from both sessions, will
try to come to a consensus on how to deal with diverse ideas on
recommendations and practices in structural and residential turf settings.
We will develop a common language for IPM recommendations and then compile
effective outreach methods to deliver them to residents, and pest control
and landscape/lawn care companies. This roundtable discussion is sponsored
by the Community IPM Working Group of the Northeastern
IPM
Center.
