Agriculture in Concert with the Environment

STRATEGIC AGRICULTURAL INITIATIVE

 Progress Report 2007 EPA 731-R-07001 
2 

TABLE OF CONTENTS ONTENTS

 2 Vision and Mission 

 3 A New Path for EPA with Agriculture 

 4 Funding for Alternative Pest Control 

 5 IPM Transition Gradient 

 8 SAI Across the Nation 

18 Grant Recipients 

20 EPA Regions and Contacts 

The mission of EPA’s Strategic 

Agricultural Initiative is to support 

and promote agricultural and pest 

management practices that are 

economically viable and protect 

human health and the environment. 

“Farmers are not only the stewards of the 

land; they are vital partners in [our] efforts 

to accelerate the pace of environmental progress, while growing our nation's economy.” 

EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson 

Strategic Agricultural Initiative’s Vision 

American agricultural producers use 

bio-intensive farming practices that 

minimize the impact on human health 

and the environment, resulting in 

cleaner air and water and safer food. 
3 

A New Path for EPA with Agriculture A New Path for EPA with Agriculture

The Strategic Agricultural Initiative (SAI) is an 

innovative partnership between EPA and the 

agricultural community. As required by the 

Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996, 

EPA is phasing out or reducing the risks from 

many toxic and persistent pesticides. As those 

pesticides are taken off the market, farmers 

need assistance adopting new reduced-risk 

pesticides such as biological pesticides, 

advanced pest monitoring, pheromone mating 

disruption, and other Integrated Pest 

Management (IPM) practices. 

The transition to sustainable, reduced-risk 

practices requires that agricultural producers 

have access to new tools and information. In 

response to this need, EPA’s Office of Pesticide 

Programs (OPP) created the SAI as a pilot in 

1998. The successful pilot was expanded to all 

ten EPA Regions in 2002, with one SAI 

Specialist in each Region to provide technical 

assistance, outreach, and to implement the SAI 

grant program. 

The program encourages bio-intensive farming 

practices, works with farmers to change their 

traditional pest management approaches, and 

measures the impact of those changes on 

human health and the environment. 

Biointensive farming practices are economically 

viable, socially responsible, and minimize the 

impact on human health and the environment, 

resulting in cleaner air, water and food. 

EPA funds grants to demonstrate and facilitate 

the adoption of pest management practices that 

will enable growers across the country to 

transition away from the use of high risk 

pesticides. SAI partners with pesticide users, 

grower groups, agricultural educators, and the 

research community, and passes information 

and data on pest management needs and 

economically viable, safer alternatives to OPP. 

SAI supports EPA’s Strategic Plan through 

collaborative activities, outreach, and grants. 

Incorporating sustainability into the regulatory 

decision making process is consistent with 

EPA's goal of protecting human health and the 

environment from pesticide risks. 

EPA’s STATEGIC PLAN 

Sub-objective 4.1.1: Reducing Exposure 

to Toxic Pesticides. Through 2008, protect 

human health, communities and ecosystems 

from pesticide use by reducing exposure to 

pesticides posing the greatest risk. 

Sub-objective 4.1.5: Realize the Value 

from Pesticide Availability. Through 2011, 

ensure the public health and socio-economic 

benefits of pesticide availability and use are 

achieved. 
4 

Funding for Alternative Pest Control 

From 2003 - 2006, SAI helped to implement 

reduced-risk pest management strategies on 

over 1.2 million acres of farmland. This led 

to a reduction of at least 30 percent in the 

use of highly toxic pesticides on those acres. 

 

Approximately $1.5 million in Federal grant 

funding is awarded competitively each year 

though SAI. Funding levels vary between the 

ten EPA regions based on minor crop acreage. All projects address one or more of the 

following goals: 

• utilize demonstration, outreach, and education to increase the adoption of reducedrisk/IPM practices that provide alternatives 

to the use of highly toxic pesticides or pesticides impacted negatively by FQPA decisions; 

• encourage partnerships between producers, commodity groups, scientists, extension, local/state/federal government agencies, and other stakeholders to find regional solutions to pest management issues; 

• measure and document the effects of using 

reduced risk and IPM programs on the environment, human health, and the community; 

• use a whole farm systems approach that 

considers alternative pest control tactics 

impacts to air, water, and ecosystem 

health. 

National program measures capture SAI’s influence in reducing pesticide risk in American 

agriculture. Using measures created by SAI in 

2006, EPA can summarize and report the environmental progress of individual grantees 

and the program overall. 

In the field, SAI grantees are learning how to 

gauge their own environmental progress by 

using the SAI IPM Transition Gradient. 
5 

SAI’s IPM Transition 

Gradient 

The SAI IPM Transition Gradient is used 

to score and evaluate pesticide riskreduction projects across an easy to use 

continuum. It can be used to document the 

baseline level of current pest management 

practices and as a monitoring tool to 

document the progress toward the adoption 

of reduced-risk pest control methods. All 

SAI grantees evaluate their performance 

using this tool. 

0 No transition, growers resist 

any change. 

1 Growers are interested in 

learning about reduced-risk 

pest management practices. 

 

2 Reduced-risk pest management 

practices have been initiated at 

the grower level on a pilot basis. 

 

3 Growers utilize key 

management practices to 

determine pest management 

needs. 

 

4 Full implementation of 

reduced-risk pest management 

practices. 

5 Adoption of a whole systems

approach.
6 

Implementing the Food Quality Protection Act 

(FQPA) and demonstrating environmental 

stewardship requires EPA Regional staff to be 

in direct contact with agricultural pesticide users. 

Proximity to the public and the regulated community allows Regional staff to develop real 

world perspectives on actual and potential impacts of Agency programs, ensuring their activities are tailored to meet geographicallyspecific ecological, economic, and agronomic 

needs. 

Regions communicate program goals, monitor 

progress, and share pertinent information from 

the field with EPA Headquarters. 

Most of the SAI Specialists also participate in 

the national EPA Agriculture Sectors Contacts 

group, providing a pesticide perspective in the 

Region and nationally. Jon Scholl, Counselor 

to the EPA Administrator for Agricultural Policy, 

used the SAI Specialists’ local connections to 

gain field knowledge, which is essential to 

EPA’s regulatory decisions. 

SAI facilitated tours and discussions in New 

England, the Eastern Seaboard, and California, 

covering a broad array of topics from pesticides 

to livestock production issues. 

In 2005, Regions 9 & 10 guided the OPP soil 

fumigant risk assessment team in learning first 

hand about fumigant use and possible alternatives specific to production areas and systems 

in the West. Two years later, public meetings 

were hosted by SAI staff in the west and 

southeast to provide a forum for EPA to discuss with growers and the public proposed 

mitigation practices for soil fumigants. 

With assistance from SAI staff, EPA Assistant 

Administrator Jim Gulliford visited several regions to discuss a proposed phase-out of azinphos-methyl with fruit producers, farmworker 

advocates, researchers, and state agriculture, 

environmental, and health agencies prior to 

signing a decision in the fall of 2006. The result was a tiered reduction of use rates over a 

four year period and increased no spray zones 

for homes and water while growers adopt alternative tactics. 

These are just a few examples of the type of 

service the national SAI program provides 

EPA and the agricultural community nationwide. 

Eyes and Ears in the Field and Boots on the Ground 

EPA Assistant Administrator Gulliford (second from left) 

discusses pesticide issues with apple growers. 
7 

SAI contributes to a positive presence for EPA 

across the United States. The SAI team is 

characterized by diverse backgrounds and expertise, as well as a willingness to understand 

and address growers’ issues. 

Trust between EPA, university research and 

extension services, and growers is critical to 

the problem-solving process of finding acceptable solutions to transition from higher-risk pesticide use. 

SAI actively engages in grower meetings, field 

days, advisory committees, and other outreach 

events. Partnerships with groups outside of 

EPA expand each year. This is a critical indicator of EPA’s positive field presence and the 

Agency’s ability to establish and maintain cooperative, effective relationships with the agricultural community for better environmental stewardship. 

While many organizations support the adoption 

of IPM and sustainable agricultural practices, it 

is EPA’s role to promote IPM with a focus on 

protecting human health and the environment 

from pesticide risks. 

This unique perspective is presented when SAI 

serves on advisory boards for USDA’s Regional IPM Centers, Sustainable Agriculture 

Research and Education program, and Natural 

Resources Conservation Service. 

As a result, grants and contracts awarded by 

other agencies and organizations address 

EPA’s priorities and complement SAI’s efforts. 

Since the start of SAI, 40 percent of its projects 

received additional funding due to these collaborative efforts. 

Weaving New Networks for EPA 

Seeding Alternative Ideas 

SAI assists USDA in developing commodityspecific Pest Management Strategic Plans 

(PMSPs), which outline the top research, regulatory, and educational needs to move forward 

on pest management alternative tactics. 

Region 3 supported a PMSP for lima bean production in Delaware, Maryland and New Jersey 

where it is a cornerstone crop. 

Region 4 facilitated the sweet potato growers 

and researchers to document their transition 

needs and this effort resulted in a $2 million 

dollar grant from USDA Crops at Risk program. 

Ten specialty crops were able to develop transition plans under a PMSP grant from Region 9 

to the California Minor Crops Council. 

Adoption of new tactics and technologies by a 

broader audience is best achieved by outreach, 

education and demonstration. SAI project results are being incorporated into pest control 

and best management guidelines used by producers, pest control advisors, and USDA programs. 

Region 3 is supporting a project that promotes 

successful tactics from across the Northeastern 

U.S. through grower to grower exchanges. 

SAI looks forward to expanding this concept 

nationally in future years by increasing the dialogue on how to communicate innovative technology transfer concepts across the country. 

In addition to reducing pesticide risk, SAI is 

achieving other environmental benefits. Promotion of the use of cleaner bio-diesel fuels 

and biofumigant cover crops reduces air toxics; 

reduced tillage systems protect water, air, and 

soil quality; and precision agriculture methods 

reduce pesticide, nutrient, and water use. 
8 SAI Across the Nation 

EPA Region 1 EPA Region 1

Small scale fruit and vegetable production 

and fresh market distribution constitute agriculture in New England. Communication and 

collaboration with the agricultural community 

and other stakeholders is the primary focus 

of Region 1’s SAI. 

The Region I SAI Specialist, Andrea 

Szylvian, facilitates cooperation with other 

agencies and non-profit organizations, 

thereby creating opportunities to identify and 

work toward shared goals. 

An example of this cooperative effort is a 

partnership with the Cape Cod Cranberry 

Grower’s Association. A project was funded 

to refine weed management practices; as a 

result, the practice was added to the U.S. 

Department of Agriculture’s and National Resource Conservation Service’s Best Management Practices for cranberry production. 

This weed management practice was also 

added to the Massachusetts cranberry growers’ production guide and is eligible for USDA 

funds allocated for cost sharing. 

Collaborative efforts with the New England 

Vegetable and Berry Grower’s Association 

provided a resource to support a production 

and outreach project focused on sweet 

corn—a New England fresh market staple 

and favorite summer vegetable. Producers 

were educated on the use of biopesticides 

and Trichogramma (a parasitic wasp) release 

for control of corn earworm and European 

corn borer. 

Going beyond the scope of production, partnerships were forged with agricultural stakeholders such as Red Tomato, a not-for-profit, 

fair trade marketing organization that promotes locally grown produce. Red Tomato is 

facilitating the development of an Eco-Apple

protocol for Northeastern apple production. 

Region 1’s work with the Northeastern IPM 

Center provides an invaluable resource network for the entire pesticide program. 

As funding for cooperative extension is reduced or eliminated, New England growers 

have fewer reliable sources for consultation 

and on-going production support. As a result, growers sometimes are forced to rely on 

product sales staff for pest control advice. 

SAI’s support of commodity groups and other 

agricultural organizations provides a mechanism for additional support to well established and respected IPM programs at New 

England’s land-grant universities. 

“The SAI program has been of extreme 

benefit to the vegetable growers of New 

England. Through this program we improved growers’ ability to identify pests, 

increased grower knowledge of pest 

populations and IPM practices, improved 

the ability of Extension to communicate 

timely insect population data to growers, 

and increased grower adoption of reduced-risk practices. Our efforts in 

sweet corn alone have reduced sprays 

on thousands of acres of sweet corn 

each growing season.” 

-Rich Bonanno, New England Vegetable and Berry Growers Association 
9 

The main focus of Region 2’s SAI is to 

establish and maintain partnerships with 

agricultural organizations, grower associations, 

and other federal and state agencies in New 

York, New Jersey, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. 

Virgin Islands. These partnerships aim to 

reduce exposure to toxic pesticides through the 

adoption of farm pest management practices 

that transition growers away from the use of 

high-risk pesticides. 

The SAI Specialist, Audrey Moore, worked with 

other grant programs in Region 2, such as 

Pollution Prevention, which funded several SAI 

projects. In addition, the SAI Specialist is part 

of the Region’s cross-media Agriculture Team 

and the Pollution Prevention Council. 

The Region 2 SAI program maintains a broad 

focus and is not limited to any specific crop. 

Growers interested in developing, 

demonstrating, or applying reduced-risk 

alternatives and ecologically-based integrated 

approaches to agricultural pest management 

were eligible to apply for SAI grant funding. 

Projects demonstrating IPM or Integrated Crop 

Management included many commodities such 

as blueberries, cranberries, pumpkins, 

peaches, and wine grapes. 

A recent success was demonstrated through 

the Blueberry Reduced Risk Integrated Crop 

Management System in New Jersey. This 

recently competed project showed that 

commercial Highbush blueberry growers can 

reduce or eliminate the use of 

organophosphate and carbamate insecticides. 

In fact, pesticide use for a key blueberry pest, 

blueberry maggot, was reduced by over 50% 

with border sprays alone. Mating disruption 

replaced the use of insecticides used for white 

grub (Oriental beetle) control. 

Another success is a project demonstrating 

biological control of the Mexican bean beetle 

using the parasitic wasp. The New Jersey 

Department of Agriculture mass-produced a 

larval parasitoid for release into 86,000 acres 

of New Jersey soybean fields. 

This program reduced the need to chemically 

control beetle population in snap and lima bean 

production. The use of approximately 16,000 

pounds of active ingredients was reduced, 

yielding a savings of nearly $17 per acre, 

saving the state of New Jersey approximately 

$1.5 million dollars. 

Region 2 reported a growing interest in organic 

farming and pesticide risk- reduction practices 

that both control pests and save growers 

money. 

Region 2’s Kathleen Callahan and Audrey Moore 

along with grantee Dean Polk at a blueberry event in 

2005. 

EPA Region 2 EPA Region 2
10 

SAI in Region 3 supports the agricultural 

community's efforts to transition from 

conventional pesticides to reduced-risk 

pesticides, alternative methods of pest 

control, and sustainable practices in food 

production. The SAI Specialist in Region 3, 

John Butler, focuses on outreach and 

education to assist growers making this 

transition in the mid-Atlantic. 

Apples and tomatoes are two crops that 

received significant funding support from the 

Region 3 grant program. Lima beans, 

melons, and peppers also received support 

because of their significance to agricultural 

production in this region. Overall, minor crops 

receive support based on a project's ability to 

assist growers in the transition from the use of 

conventional pesticides. 

One noted success was the Pennsylvania 

Department of Agriculture’s project, 

“Greenhouse Integrated Pest Management for 

the Amish and Mennonite Community of 

Lancaster County.” The project was able to 

assist these family farms in transitioning to the 

use of bio-control methods of pest control, 

thereby, creating a safer work environment for 

the family farm in keeping with their Amish 

and Mennonite lifestyles. 

In addition, the Pennsylvania Association for 

Sustainable Agriculture supported a farmbased education series of field days and 

conferences. It also assisted fruit and 

vegetable growers in changing production 

methods to reduce pesticide use on the farm. 

Region 3 sees a growing interest in the 

transition to organic production on smallscale, minor crop farms. Growing specialty 

markets, farm markets and restaurants in 

suburban and urban communities are driving 

this focus because of the consumer demand 

for healthier food. 

Region 3 also promotes the technology 

transfer of previously funded and successful 

SAI projects from all ten Regions to a broader 

audience. This is accomplished through a 

supplemental grant program that fosters the 

transition to alternative and reduced-risk pest 

management practices. 

“Amish and Mennonite growers are proud to have EPA representatives visit our 

operations and see what we have accomplished. Our individual accomplishments 

benefit the whole community.” 

-Pennsylvania Amish Grower 

EPA Region 3 EPA Region 3

SAI's John Butler (center) with Amish grower (left) and 

Cathy Thomas, IPM Coordinator for the Pennsylvania 

Department of Agriculture. 
11 

Region 4’s SAI Specialist, Lora Lee 

Schroeder, focused on reducing pesticide 

risks on fruits and vegetables, such as 

peaches, sweet potatoes, strawberries and 

Satsuma citrus in the Southeast. The Region 

also funded projects on honeybees, turf grass, 

ornamentals, cotton, peanuts and Frasier firs, 

representing the geographic diversity in the 

Southeast. 

The SAI program is making baby food safer. 

Over one billion pounds and eighty percent of 

sweet potatoes, the number one selling 

vegetable in baby food, are grown in four 

Southeastern states. 

To prove that organophosphate and 

carbamate pesticides are not needed to 

control insects under most conditions, SAI 

brought together sweet potato researchers to 

develop a research plan, which resulted in $2 

million in funding by USDA. The researchers 

proved their point, and work is underway to 

train farmers to scout for insects and not apply 

insecticides under most conditions. 

SAI also promoted the transition to organic 

agriculture. In fact, the number of certified 

organic farmers in the Southeast more than 

doubled from 2004 - 2006. 

Georgia Organics worked with fruit and 

vegetable growers, focusing its research on 

organic blueberries, peanuts, and Vidalia 

onions. 

During workshops and on-farm 

demonstrations, Georgia Organics promoted 

reduced tillage, which reduces pesticide use 

and eliminates run-off of fertilizer and 

pesticides. As a result, the number of acres 

of reduced tillage in Georgia increased from 

622,666 acres in 2000 to 1,154,204 acres in 

2004, which represents 34 percent of all 

planted acres in the State. 

EPA Region 4 EPA Region 4 

Relinda Walker (left), Region 4 SAI Specialist Lora Lee 

Schroeder (center), and Shirley Daughtry examine no-till 

broccoli at Heritage Organic Farm. 
12 

Region 5’s SAI focuses on outreach and minor 

crops, primarily fruits and vegetables, in the 

Midwest. Reducing risk by transitioning to biointensive, sustainable systems is the goal of the 

program, and economics is a driving force in 

making this transition. 

The lack of effective tools to control key pests, 

such as plum curculio and codling moth in 

orchard crops, necessitates much of the IPM 

work. As broad-spectrum organophosphates are 

phased-out, growers will need viable 

alternatives, requiring further research and 

education on IPM implementation. 

Measuring the success of the program in 

advancing IPM and reducing risk is a priority. 

Through SAI, reduced-risk alternatives to 

FQPA-targeted pesticides were found and 

environmental results were achieved on over 

46,000 acres in the Midwest, mostly in 

Michigan and Wisconsin. For example, 

Michigan vineyards that adopted IPM used 31% 

less carbaryl, 51% less phosmet, and 70% less 

azinphos-methyl than vineyards managed with 

a standard spray program. 

In 2006, apple and cherry growers in Michigan 

met with EPA Assistant Administrator Jim 

Gulliford and Office of Pesticide Programs staff 

to discuss efforts to transition from Azinphosmethyl (AZM) to lower-risk alternatives. 

In 2007, Ohio parsley growers worked with the 

SAI Specialist, Barbara VanTil, to draft an AZM 

transition strategy and define how to measure 

growers’ transition to viable pest management 

options. 

Through the Wisconsin Eco-apple project, 

fifteen growers increased their use of biointensive IPM programs by 13% on 395 acres 

of fruit. The growers also reduced pesticide 

toxicity by 58%, as assessed by the apple 

Pesticide Risk Assessment Tool, a software 

program used by growers for pesticide record 

keeping and risk analysis. The software 

includes ratings for pesticide risks, such as 

worker risk or environmental risk, as well as 

pesticide price data so that growers can assess 

the cost of switching from chemical controls to 

biological pesticides. 

Barbara VanTil, SAI Specialist, and John Mayne, 

Southern SARE, discuss sustainable production. 

EPA Region 5 EPA Region 5
13 

The focus of Region 6’s SAI is on pest 

management programs that reduce the use of 

conventional pesticides, demonstrate the 

efficacy of reduced-risk practices, or 

completely eliminate the use of pesticides. 

Projects were undertaken on pecans, 

sugarcane, cotton, rice, wheat, and turf grass 

in the southern states west of the Mississippi 

River. 

Outreach by the Region’s SAI Specialist, 

Eugene Thilsted (below), included participation 

on IPM committees with land grant universities 

as well as U.S. Department of Agriculture’s IR4 programs that impact the Region. Outreach 

also included contact with commodity groups 

such as the Texas Vegetable Association and 

the Texas Nursery and Landscape Association, 

along with Farmers Market Associations. 

A cotton initiative introduced global positioning, 

field monitoring, and field topography for 

applying highly toxic nematacides in a manner 

that determined when and where the 

neamaticide is needed, instead of broadcast 

throughout the entire cotton field. Even though 

the method was tested on cotton, it was 

determined that sweet potatoes, soybeans, and 

any other crop impacted by nematodes can 

also benefit from this method. 

A wheat project demonstrated that a blanket 

treatment to control greenbugs in winter wheat 

is not needed to obtain optimum wheat yield. 

This change in approach not only saved 

growers money, but also reduced potential 

pesticide risks such as spray drift, water 

contamination, worker safety, and ecological 

effects. 

In the past, many pecan growers made 

pesticide applications according to the calendar 

instead of when needed. Thanks to SAI, pecan 

growers throughout Texas can access a 

website that tells them if an insecticide 

application is needed in their specific orchard. 

A sugarcane insect pest control initiative 

identified the importance of resistance 

management using a reduced-risk insecticide, 

tebufenozide, to prevent resistance for control 

of sugarcane borer, a major pest. By utilizing 

IPM along with insect resistance management, 

the longevity of the proper use of this reducedrisk insecticide can be extended before 

widespread insect resistance occurs. 

Another project demonstrated that peat moss 

can be used to control damaging fungal 

diseases on golf courses, lawns, and 

landscaping, without the use of pesticides. 

Spring and fall applications of peat moss 

EPA Region 6 EPA Region 6
14 

Region 7’s SAI is focused on the interaction 

between traditional field crops and specialty 

and food crops in Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and 

Nebraska. In order to encourage growers to 

adopt reduced-risk practices such as nonconventional pesticides, SAI aims to reduce the 

cost of pesticide inputs through outreach and 

efficacy research. 

The Region 7 SAI Specialist, Heather Duncan, 

focuses her energy on such outreach and 

research projects. 

A successful project funded through SAI tested 

using sunflowers to reduce soybean stem borer 

damage in soybean fields. Sunflowers were 

planted at each of the four corners of a 

soybean field to show that sunflower trap 

crops are a viable alternative to chemical 

control of soybean stem borer infestation. 

In 2005, female stem borers laid nearly three 

times more eggs per plant in sunflower than in 

soybean. 2006 growing season results 

demonstrated that the soybeans had only 5% 

infestation while the sunflower border was 96% 

infested with a number of plants containing 

multiple larvae. The project will be completed 

in 2007. 

The University of Nebraska-Lincoln is 

researching and demonstrating pest control 

alternatives to control varroa mites in honey 

bee hives. 

To protect bee hives from varroa mites, EPA 

has allowed the use of coumaphos, an 

organophosphate, when states requested 

emergency exemptions under FIFRA Section 

18. Every year 39 states, including all four 

Region 7 states, request emergency 

exemptions to use coumaphos to control 

varroa mites and small hive beetles. 

The project demonstrated that treating bee 

hives with oxalic acid was as effective as 

coumaphos and did not injure bee colonies. 

These results will be published in several 

influential journals. Through such efficacy tests 

and outreach, this project will reduce 

conventional pesticide use and increase the 

use of reduced-risk pesticides to treat bee 

colony pests. This project is one example of 

how Region 7 SAI could help reduce pesticide 

risks nationally through effective technology 

transfer. 

 

“The Kansas Soybean Commission had 

expressed interest in the approach, but this 

project would not have proceeded without the 

support of the SAI.” 

- J.P. Michaud, Kansas State University 

entomologist and sunflower trap crop 

project coordinator 

EPA Region 7 EPA Region 7
15 

Region 8’s SAI focused on research on IPM 

and sustainable agricultural practices and 

grower education in the Mountain states. 

Research and outreach addressed crops such 

as tree fruits, onions, corn, sugar beets, and 

vegetables. 

The program also demonstrated practices such 

as organic farming, using biological pesticides, 

whole-farm systems, and innovative IPM 

techniques such as thermal weed control, 

straw and other mulches, and weather 

modeling. 

Peg Perreault, Region 8’s SAI Specialist, 

conducted outreach through partnerships with 

university extension and researchers, 

participation in field days and crop tours, 

presentations at association meetings and 

conferences, and partnerships with USDA. 

Region 8 addressed alternatives to FIFRA 

Section 18 emergency pesticide registration 

exemptions and cancelled pesticides and uses. 

A drought in some states resulted in a need for 

whole farm management that would include 

water conservation. 

One project introduced a predictive, weatherbased model for controlling powdery mildew on 

grapes in Colorado to reduce fungicide use by 

at least 50 percent. The project used 

predictive modeling to reduce the number, 

frequency, and rates of fungicide applications. 

One spray application per season was shown 

to be adequate, as opposed to the six 

applications normally recommended. 

During the first two years, there was a 

reduction in the number of spray applications in 

test vineyards, resulting in significant cost 

savings while maintaining yields and grape 

quality. After attending demonstrations, grape 

growers started implementing these practices. 

One successful project replaced the use of 

several insecticides and Section 18 products 

used on Colorado onions with biopesticides 

and alternative cultural practices. 

Another project encouraged growers in South 

Dakota to be certified by the Food Alliance and 

agree not to use sixteen highly toxic pesticides. 

A precision agriculture project adopted by over 

200 corn growers in the high plains region 

resulted in reductions in herbicide use-- 

particularly atrazine --and nitrogen applications, 

and it saved irrigation water on over 200,000 

acres. 

All of these projects resulted in additional 

funding from other organizations, such as 

USDA, States, and trade associations, for 

expanded research, outreach, and 

implementation. 

EPA Region 8 EPA Region 8
16 

Region 9 SAI helps growers transition away 

from high risk pesticides to lower risk, more 

environmentally friendly practices on a wide 

array of commodities including grapes, plums, 

nectarines, peaches, almonds, and walnuts. 

According to SAI Specialist, Cindy Wire 

(pictured right), most projects 

are located in California due 

to its large agricultural 

acreage, the diversity of its 

crops, and the Region’s 

focus on the San Joaquin 

Valley. 

T h e R e g i o n a l s o 

collaborated with the 

University of California to 

fund biologically integrated farming systems 

projects, which demonstrate a whole-systems 

approach to farming on crops such as rice, 

prunes, strawberries, lettuce, and citrus. 

Table grapes were identified as one of the top 

five commodities in California responsible for 

releases of volatile organic compounds (VOCs). 

To transition grape growers away from VOC 

contributing pesticides to practices that meet 

new air quality goals, Region 9 funded a project 

targeting 94% of the 85,000 acres of table 

grapes grown in California. This project is 

moving growers away from using chlorpyrifos, 

simazine, and oxyflourfen towards reduced-risk 

pesticides such as imidacloprid and buprofezin, 

and using fewer pesticide applications. 

From 2001 to 2004, Region 9 funded IPM 

programs in three wine grape growing regions 

in California to reduce the use of diazinon and 

chlorpirofos. These separate efforts led to the 

development of a statewide Sustainable 

Winegrowing Practices program. As a result of 

this effort, the California wine grape is the first 

commodity to adopt sustainable growing 

practices commodity-wide, covering 527,000 

acres. 

One of the IPM programs was 

established by the Sonoma 

County Grape Growers 

Association, which represents 

35 percent of Sonoma’s grape 

growers and approximately 

60,000 acres of farmland. In 

2000, the Association started 

a grower-to-grower program 

that reinforces the need to 

reduce the use of pesticides being phased out 

by FQPA. This effort helped grape growers 

reduce their use of nine targeted pesticides, 

including dimethoate, diazinon, fenmiphos, 

carbaryl, mancozeb, iprodione, simazine, 

oxyfluorfen, and propargite. From 1999 to 2003, 

there was a 32 percent reduction in pounds 

used of these active ingredients and a 31 

percent reduction in treated acres. 

 

California’s Central Valley produces four-fifths 

of the world’s almonds. Almond growers 

traditionally use FQPA-targeted pesticides such 

as organophosphates and carbamates. The 

SAI program funded IPM projects summarized 

in the Seasonal Guide to Environmentally 

Responsible Pest Management Practices in 

Almonds, a tool for growers. Demonstration 

projects like these contributed to an 85% 

decrease in dormant-season organophosphate 

use in almonds. 

"SAI has been critical to the success of Lodi-Woodbridge Winegrape Commission's sustainable 

winegrowing program, from grower outreach, to developing our self-assessment workbook, to the 

implementation of our third party-certified sustainable winegrowing program, all of which has not only 

advanced sustainable winegrape growing in the Lodi region but has influenced similar programs 

throughout California and the rest of the US wine industry." 

- Cliff Ohmart, Research/IPM Director Lodi-Woodbridge Winegrape Commission

EPA Region 9 EPA Region 9
17 

Region’s 10 SAI Specialist, Sandra Halstead, 

works in the Yakima Valley of Washington 

State, providing EPA with a unique opportunity 

to become a member of the agricultural 

community. Since 1999, SAI has built 

relationships with growers, commodity 

organizations, crop consultants, and university 

faculty in Oregon, Washington and Idaho. With 

assistance under a cooperative agreement with 

American Farmland Trust, Region 10 focuses 

on projects that assist in the transition away 

from organophosphates, carbamates, and soil 

fumigants. 

The region funded Washington State University 

to reduce the use of chlorpyrifos on grapes. 

The project demonstrated the use of precision 

application technology to spot spray pyrethrins 

at the vine base, creating a barrier to prevent 

cutworms from climbing vines and damaging 

grape buds. Grower adoption of this technique 

resulted in a 25,000 pound per year reduction in 

the use of chlorpyrifos (75 percent in wine 

grapes and 30 percent in juice grapes) and 

increased grower returns of over $6 million 

annually. 

Participating in cross media issues, with 

particular emphasis on water quality and 

endangered species concerns as they relate to 

pesticides is a priority for Region 10’s SAI. For 

example, SAI funded the Hood River Grower 

Shipper Association, a cooperative for pears, 

apples, and cherries, to work with its members 

on pesticide alternatives and best management 

practices. By the third year of the project, water 

quality monitoring detected less azinphosmethyl, chlorpyrifos, and malathion in salmonbearing streams. 

In 2005, a grant funded the design, 

demonstration, and evaluation of snap bean 

field scouting protocols and monitoring for mold 

and damage from the 12 spot beetle in the 

Willamette Valley of Oregon.Snap bean 

growers frequently applied pesticides to control 

these pests. EPA’s cancellation of a key 

fungicide and increased scrutiny of carbaryl, a 

broad spectrum insecticide, helped drive the 

project. NORPAC, a large grower-owned 

frozen vegetable processor, in partnership with 

Oregon State University, utilized local and 

regional monitoring programs to predict fields at 

high risk to pest damage and communicated 

pest control options to growers. As a result, 

there was a 75 percent reduction in pounds of 

carbaryl applied on over 10,000 acres from 

2004 to 2006. 

EPA Region 10 EPA Region 10

“SAI has had a positive role in improving the overall attitude towards EPA and how they can work 

in harmony with production agriculture and advocacy groups. This is extremely important for the 

future working relationships needed to sustain agriculture production while protecting food safety 

and environmental quality.” 

- Bob Stevens, Interim Director, Washington State University Irrigated Agriculture Research and 

Extension Center 

Sandra Halstead, SAI Specialist, and Manuel Silveria, 

Vice President of NOPAC Foods, discuss the successes 

and challenges snap bean growers face in current production systems. 
18 

REGION 1 

Caledonia County Natural Resources Conservation District 

Intervale Foundation 

University of Massachusetts Cranberry Experiment Station 

University of Connecticut 

Red Tomato, Inc. 

University of Maine 

Cape Cod Cranberry Grower's Association 

New England Vegetable and Berry Growers Association 

REGION 2

Rutgers University 

Organic Materials Review Institute 

Cornell University 

New Jersey Department of Agriculture 

Cornell Cooperative Extension of Suffolk County 

New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection 

REGION 3 

Future Harvest, Inc. 

National Audubon Society with the Pickering Creek 

 Audubon Center 

University of Delaware 

University of Maryland, College Park 

Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University 

Pennsylvania Association for Sustainable Agriculture 

Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture 

REGION 4 

Alabama A & M University 

University of Florida 

Delta F.A.R.M 

University of Georgia 

Clemson University 

Auburn University 

Center for Agricultural Partnerships 

Georgia Organics 

Florida Department of Agriculture & Consumer Services 

Appalachian Sustainable Agriculture Project 

University of Tennessee 

Mississippi State University 

North Carolina University 

Rural Advancement Foundation International USA 

Tennessee State University 

REGION 5 

* Purdue University 

Michigan State University 

Organic Farming Research Foundation 

University of Wisconsin, Madison 

University of Illinois 

* Center for Agricultural Partnerships 

University of Minnesota 

Protected Harvest 

Cherry Marketing Institute and HortSystem, Inc 

IPM Institute of North America, Inc. 

REGION 6

Louisiana State University 

University of Arkansas 

Oklahoma State University 

New Mexico State University 

Texas A&M University 

The Kerr Center for Sustainable Agriculture 

REGION 7 

Kansas State University 

Missouri Environmental Resources Coalition 

Iowa State University 

University of Missouri 

University of Nebraska 

REGION 8 

Land Stewardship Project and Food Alliance Midwest 

Organic Farming Research Foundation 

Colorado State University, West Colorado Research Centers, Orchard Mesa and Rogers Mesa 

Colorado State University, Tri-River Extention 

Colorado State University, San Luis Valley Research Center 

Montana State University 

REGION 9 

California Tree Fruit Agreement 

University of California Cooperative Extension 

The Regents of the University of California Davis 

Center for Agricultural Partnerships 

University of Hawaii, Kaneohe Extension Office 

Protected Harvest 

California Dept. of Pesticide Regulaton 

University of California Sustainable Ag Research and Education Program 

Lodi-Woodbridge Winegrape Commission 

Sonoma County Winegrape Commission 

California Specialty Crops Council 

Organic Farming Research Foundation 

Food Alliance 

Agriculture and Land-based Training Association 

REGION 10 

* Amalgamated Sugar Company LLC 

* Center for Agricultural Partnerships 

* Hood River Grower-Shippers Associaton 

* Norpac Foods, Inc. 

* Optimized IPM 

* Peerbolt Crop Management 

* Potato Growers of Idaho 

* The Food Alliance 

* Oregon State University 

* Washington State University 

* Three Rivers Resource Conservation Council 

* Wy'East Resource Conservation and Development 

* USDA-Agricultural Research Service 

* funded under a cooperative agreement between EPA 

and American Farmland Trust 

SAI Grant Recipients 2003 - 2007 
19 

Field of biofumigant mustard crops which can help suppress 

soil pests and reduce the use of chemical fumigants. 

Widespread adoption of spinosad-based insecticides for cherry 

fruit fly have significantly reduced risk to consumers, applicators, farmworkers, and non-target species when compared to 

broadspectrum organophosphate materials used previously. 

Pictured here is the application technique for GF-120 fruit fly 

bait, which also is approved for use in organic production. 

SAI shows that biopesticides and 

reduced-risk chemicals work. 
20 

Region 1

Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New 

Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont 

Andrea Szylvian 

(617) 918-1198 

szylvian.andrea@epa.gov 

Region 2 

New Jersey, New York, Puerto Rico and the 

U.S. Virgin Islands 

Audrey Moore 

(732) 906-6809 

moore.audrey@epa.gov 

Region 3 

Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, 

West Virginia, and the District of Columbia 

John Butler 

(215) 814-2127 

butler.john@epa.gov 

Region 4 

Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, 

Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, 

and Tennessee 

Lora Lee Schroeder 

(404) 562-9015 

schroeder.lora@epa.gov 

Region 5

Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, 

and Wisconsin 

Heather Anhalt 

(312) 886-3572 

anhalt.heather@epa.gov 

Region 6 

Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, 

and Texas 

Eugene Thilsted 

(214) 665-2782 

thilsted.eugene@epa.gov 

Region 7

Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska

Heather Duncan 

(913) 551-7640 

duncan.heather@epa.gov 

Region 8

Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South 

Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming 

Peg Perreault 

(303) 312-6286 

perreault.peg@epa.gov 

Region 9

Arizona, California, Hawaii, and Nevada 

Cindy Wire 

(415) 947-4242 

wire.cindy@epa.gov 

Region 10

Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington

Sandra Halstead 

(509) 786-9225 

halstead.sandra@epa.gov 

National Coordinator 

Steve Hopkins 

(703) 308-0334 

hopkins.steve@epa.gov 

SAI would like to acknowledge former staff who contributed to SAI during this period: 

National Coordinators: Harry Wells and Regina Langton 

Region 5: Barbara Van Til Region 7: Brad Horchem Region 9: Ann Thrupp 

EPA Regions