APMTP, AIPMTP, orchard, 2010 Apple Survey - Leafroller

Tree Fruit Research & Extension Center

Apple IPM Transition Project

Survey Results

2010 Apple Grower Survey

The 2010 Washington apple grower and manager pest management survey went out in January of 2011 to survey practices used during the 2010 crop season. Out of 2,155 eligible participants recieving surveys, about 25% choose to participate. Those surveyed made pest management descisions on a mean of 235 acres of apples. Summary results of this survey were analyzed Fall of 2011 and are now available to view online or download here.

Grower Survey Results
Select desired tab heading to view result sections.

 

Click on the question panel to open results. Click again to close results. Javascript must be enabled to view panels.

Note on data interpretation: Some data tables include a field for "missing". "Missing" indicates that respondents chose not to answer that particular question in its entirety. Some tables include the additional field, "skipped". "Skipped" data can occur on questions where an answer was not applicable for the respondent, given their response to the preceding question.
C1: How frequently do leafrollers cause unacceptable crop damage in the apple orchard(s) you own or manage?
 
Frequency of crop damage Frequency Percent
Never 209 39.2
Less than 1 out of every 5 years 213 40.0
About 1 out of every 5 years 60 11.3
About 2 out of every 5 years 31 5.8
About 3 out of every 5 years 8 1.5
About 4 out of every 5 years 2 0.4
Every year 10 1.9
Total 533 100
Missing = 13

 

 
C2: If no controls were applied for leafroller this year, what level of crop injury would you expect by harvest?
 
Level of leafroller injury Frequency Percent
Less than 1% 112 21.3
1-2% 92 17.5
3-5% 102 19.4
6-10% 102 19.4
More than 10% 117 22.3
Total 525 100
Missing = 21

 

 
C3a: During the 2010 growing season, did you use the OP insecticides as a control for leafroller?

 

OP Insecticide Frequency Percent Missing
Lorsban (chlorpyrifos) 303 58.6 29
Guthion (azinphos methyl) 136 26.4 30
Imidan (phosmet) 53 10.3 32
Diazinon 21 4.1 31

 

 
C3b: If you used the following OP insecticides as a control for leafrollers, please indicate the number of applications you used in 2010 (frequency with percent in parentheses).
 
Number of applications
Lorsban Guthion Imidan Diazinon
1 application 209 (96.7%) 55
(41.4%)
40 (75.5%) 19 (90.5%)
2 applications 9 (3.0%) 63
(47.4%)
8 (15.5%) 2
(9.5%)
3 applications 1 (0.3%) 14 (10.5%) 5 (9.4%) 0 (0%)
4+ applications 0 (0%) 1 (0.8%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)
Total 300 133 53 21
Skipped 214 380 461 292
Missing 32 33 32 31

 

 
C4: Did your use of OP insecticides (Guthion, Lorsban, Diazinon, and Imidan) for leafroller control over the past three years (2008-2010) change?
 
Change in OP use Frequency Percent
My use of OP insecticides for leafrooler control decreased over the past three years. 133 26.8
My use of OP insecticides for leafroller control remained about the same over the past three years. 271 54.6
My use of OP insecticides for leafroller control increased over the past three years. 5 1.0
I did not use OP insecticides over the past three years. 87 17.5
Total 496 100
Missing = 50

 

 
C5a: During the 2010 growing season, did you use the OP alternatives as a control for leafroller?
 
Insecticide
Frequency Percent Missing
Delegate (spinetoram) 224 45.3 52
Horticultural spray oil 220 44.3 49
Altacor (rynaxypyr) 181 36.6 51
Success (spinosad)¹ 166 33.7 53
Intrepid (methoxyfenozide) 160 32.9 60
Esteem (pyriproxifen) 90 18.3 53
Proclaim (emamectin benzoate) 60 12.4 61
Rimon (novaluron) 54 11.2 65
Warrior (lambda-cyhalothrin) 43 9.0 66
Entrust/Success (spinosad) ¹ 41 8.5 64
Bt (Bacillus thuringiensis) 36 7.5 67
Pheromones (mating disruption) 35 6.9 40
Belt (flubendiamide) 3 0.6 65
Danitol (fenpropathrin) 3 0.6 67
Voliam Flexi (thimethoxam + chlorantraniliprole) 3 0.6 63
Voliam Express (lambda-cyhalothrin + chlorantraniliprole) 0 0 66
Other 2 0.8 306
¹ Success was (unintentionally) listed twice as a choice for leafroller, once as Success and once as Success/Entrust
 

Other:
  • Assail (1)
  • None (1)

 
 
C5b: If you used the following OP alternatives as a control for leafroller, please indicate the number of applications you used in 2010 (frequency with percent in parentheses).
 
OP alternative Number of applications  
  1 2 3 4+ Total Skipped Missing
Delegate (spinetoram) 156 (72.2%) 56 (25.9%) 3 (1.4%) 1 (0.5%) 216 289 61
Horticulural spray oil 98 (46.9%) 56 (26.8%) 26 (12.4%) 29 (13.9%) 209 277 60
Altacor (rynaxypyr) 123 (70.7%) 49 (28.2%) 2 (1.1%) 0 (0%) 174 314 58
Success (spinosad) 126 (78.8%) 31 (19.4%) 3 (1.9%) 0 (0%) 160 326 60
Intrepid (methoxyfenozide) 134 (88.2%) 13 (8.6%) 3 (2.0%) 2 (1.3%) 152 327 67
Esteem (pyriproxifen) 74 (85.1%) 11 (12.6%) 2 (2.3%) 0 (0%) 87 403 56
Proclaim (emamectin benzoate) 57 (95.0%) 3 (5.0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 60 424 62
Rimon (novaluron) 41 (78.8%) 9 (17.3%) 2 (3.8%) 0 (0%) 52 427 67
Warrior (lambda-cyhalothrin) 35 (85.4%) 6 (14.6%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 41 439 66
Entrust/Success (spinosad) 24 (61.5%) 14 (35.9%) 1 (2.6%) 0 (0%) 39 441 66
Bt (Bacillus thuringiensis) 14 (43.8%) 12 (37.5%) 5 (15.6%) 1 (3.1%) 32 443 71
Pheromones (mating disruption) 31 (96.9%) 1 (3.1%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 32 471 43
Belt (flubendiamide) 3 (100%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 478 65
Danitol (fenpropathrin) 3 (100%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 476 67
Voliam Flexi (thimethoxam + chlorantraniliprole) 3 (100%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 480 63
Voliam Express (lambda-cyhalothrin + chlorantraniliprole) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 480 66
Other (see C5a) 2 (100%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 238 306

 
C6: Did your use of OP alternatives (listed in the previous question) for leafroller control decrease, remain about the same, or increase over the past three years (2008-2010)?
 
OP alternative use Frequency Percent
My use of OP alternatives for leafroller control decreased over the past three years. 47 9.2
My use of OP alternatives for leafroller control remained about the same over the past three years. 316 61.8
My use of OP alternatives for codling leafroller increased over the past three years. 98 19.2
I did not use OP alternatives for leafroller control over the past three years. 50 9.38
Total 511 100
Missing = 35
 
 
C7: Over the past three years did leafroller injury in the apple orchard(s) you own or manage decrease, remain about the same, or increase?
 
Change in leafroller injury Frequency Percent
leafroller injury decreased by more than 5% 46 9.1
leafroller injury decreased by 2-5% 70 13.8
leafroller injury remained about the same (± 0-2%) 367 72.2
leafroller injury increased by 2-5% 20 3.9
leafroller injury increased by more than 5% 5 1.0
Total 508 100
Missing = 38
 
 
C8: Over the past three years did the cost of leafroller control in the apple orchard(s) you own or manage decrease, remain about the same, or increase?
 
Change in cost of leafroller control Frequency Percent
The cost of leafroller control decreased by more than 10% 8 1.69
The cost of leafroller control decreased by 3-10% 28 5.5
The cost of leafroller control remained about the same (± 0-3%) 227 44.6
The cost of leafroller control increased by 3-10% 182 35.8
The cost of leafroller control increased by more than 10% 64 12.6
Total 509 100
Missing = 37
 
 
C9: How often did you use the following IPM practices as part of your management program for leafrollers?
 
IPM tactic Never Rarely Occasionally Often Missing
Field monitoring for damage 44 (8.7%) 40 (7.9%) 121 (23.8%) 303 (59.6%) 37
Resistance management strategies 175 (36.4%) 45 (9.4%) 86 (17.9%) 175 (36.4%) 65
Degree day models 166 (34.3%) 45 (9.3%) 104 (21.5%) 169 (34.9%) 62
Pheromone traps 298 (61.3%) 21 (4.3%) 51 (10.5%) 116 (23.9%) 60
Economic or treatment thresholds 203 (43.4%) 75 (16.0%) 83 (17.7%) 107 (22.9%) 78
Border sprays 315 (65.6%) 49 (10.2%) 63 (13.1%) 53 (11.0%) 66
Biological controls (parasites or predators) 323 (68.0%) 59 (12.4%) 44 (9.3%) 49 (10.3%) 71
Alternate row spraying 345 (71.3%) 57 (11.8%) 60 (12.4%) 22 (4.5%) 62
Reduced pesticide rates 321 (67.2%) 72 (15.1%) 68 (14.2%) 17 (3.6%) 68
Other 71 (93.4%) 0 (0%) 2 (2.6%) 3 (3.9%) 470

Other
• Bins, prop piles, wood piles
• Didn't pay much attention
• Don't have leafroller problem
• Mating disruption
• More pesticide applied
• Spray all rows
• Spray on block history

 
 
C10: Did your use of the IPM practices as a control for leafroller change?
 
IPM tactic Did not use Decreased Same Increased Missing
Resistance management strategies 109 (22.9%) 19 (4.0%) 260 (54.6%) 88 (18.5%) 70
Degree day models 105 (21.9%) 14 (2.9%) 277 (57.8%) 83 (17.3%) 67
Field monitoring for damage 34 (6.7%) 18 (3.6%) 385 (76.1%) 69 (13.6%) 40
Economic or treatment thresholds 126 (26.9%) 19 (4.1%) 282 (60.1%) 42 (9.0%) 77
Border sprays 197 (41.5%) 25 (5.3%) 220 (46.3%) 33 (6.9%) 71
Pheromone traps 185 (38.3%) 23 (4.8%) 242 (50.1%) 33 (6.8%) 63
Biological controls (parasites or predators) 209 (44.3%) 23 (4.9%) 222 (47.0%) 18 (3.8%) 74
Reduced pesticide rates 193 (41.0%) 22 (4.7%) 239 (50.7%) 17 (3.6%) 75
Alternate row spraying 200 (41.8%) 37 (7.7%) 225 (47.1%) 16 (3.3%) 68
Other 58 (43.0%) 5 (3.7%) 70 (51.9%) 2 (1.5%) 411

Other
• More pesticides applied
• Spray on block history
• Sprays all.

 
 
C11: What percentage of the apple acres you own or manage do your answers to Questions C1 through C10 (questions about leafrollers) apply to?

 

Percentage of acreage Frequency Percent
1-10% 21 4.1
11-25% 9 1.7
26-50% 12 2.3
51-75% 25 4.8
76-99% 41 7.9
100% 410 79.2
Total 518 100
Missing = 28
 

 

Secondary content using h2 tag.

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

Heading using the h3 tag

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

WSU-Tree Fruit Research & Extension Center, 1100 N Western Ave., Wenatchee, WA 98801 509-663-8181, Contact Us