Nominating Party: The United States of America

FILE NAME: USA CUN13 Soil Strawberry Fruit Open Field 

Brief descriptive Title of Nomination:

Methyl Bromide Critical Use Nomination for Preplant Soil Use for
Strawberry Fruit Grown in Open Fields (Submitted in 2011 for the 2013
Use Season)

Crop name (open field or protected): Strawberry Fruit Open Field

Quantity of methyl bromide Nominated:

Table 1: Quantity of Methyl Nominated

Year	Nomination Amount 

2013	531,737 kg



NOMINATING PARTY CONTACT DETAILS:

Contact Person:	John Thompson

Title:	Division Director

Address:	Office of Environmental Policy

	U.S. Department of State

	2201 C Street, N.W. Room 2658

	Washington, D.C. 20520

	U.S.A.

Telephone:	(202) 647-9799

Fax:	(202) 647-5947

E-mail:	  HYPERLINK "mailto:thompsonje2@state.gov" 
thompsonje2@state.gov 

Following the requirements of Decision IX/6 paragraph (a)(1) The United
States of America has determined that the specific use detailed in this
Critical Use Nomination is critical because the lack of availability of
methyl bromide for this use would result in a significant market
disruption.     .                 ■ Yes  	     ( No

					

Signature			       	Name					Date

Title:      			

(Details on this page are requested under Decision Ex. I/4(7), for
posting on the Ozone Secretariat website under Decision Ex. I/4(8).) 

This form is to be used by holders of single-year exemptions to reapply
for a subsequent year’s exemption (for example, a Party holding a
single-year exemption for 2005 and/or 2006 seeking further exemptions
for 2007).  It does not replace the format for requesting a critical-use
exemption for the first time.

In assessing nominations submitted in this format, TEAP and MBTOC will
also refer to the original nomination on which the Party’s first-year
exemption was approved, as well as any supplementary information
provided by the Party in relation to that original nomination.  As this
earlier information is retained by MBTOC, a Party need not re-submit
that earlier information.   



CONTACT OR EXPERT(S) FOR FURTHER TECHNICAL DETAILS:

Contact/Expert Person:	Jack Housenger	

Title:	Director	

Address:	Biological and Economic Analysis Division			

	Office of Pesticide Programs

	U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

	1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Mailcode 7503P

	Washington, D.C. 20460

	U.S.A.	

Telephone:	(703) 308-8200		

Fax:	(703) 308-7042	

E-mail:	  HYPERLINK "mailto:Housenger.Jack@epa.gov" 
Housenger.Jack@epa.gov 

		

LIST OF DOCUMENTS SENT TO THE OZONE SECRETARIAT IN OFFICIAL NOMINATION
PACKAGE:

1.  PAPER DOCUMENTS:  

Title of paper documents and appendices	No. of pages	Date sent to Ozone
Secretariat

USA CUN13 Soil Strawberry Fruit Open Field	14













	2.  ELECTRONIC COPIES OF ALL PAPER DOCUMENTS:  

*Title of each electronic file (for naming convention see notes above)
No. of kilobytes 	Date sent to Ozone Secretariat

USA CUN13 Soil Strawberry Fruit Open Field 















* Identical to paper documents



METHYL BROMIDE CRITICAL USE RENOMINATION FOR Preplant Soil Use (OPEN
FIELD OR PROTECTED ENVIRONMENT)

STRAWBERRY FRUIT

SUMMARY OF THE NEED FOR METHYL BROMIDE AS A CRITICAL USE 

This nomination is for the critical use of methyl bromide for the
production of strawberries in California (Table 1).  Strawberry growers
have been replacing methyl bromide and reducing its use rates in all
production areas, but a critical need remains for areas where
alternatives are not effective, have not been tested, or not allowed due
to regulatory restrictions.

California growers have a critical need for methyl bromide to treat
fields where alternatives are not available due to regulations or to
complete a fumigation program that includes a once per three year
treatment with methyl bromide to manage two new diseases.  Alternative
fumigants include 1,3-D/chloropicrin and iodomethane (methyl iodide),
which has been newly registered in California (as of December, 2010). 
Use of methyl bromide has been reduced over the years (approximately
one-third of strawberry land was treated with methyl bromide in 2006
(NASS, 2007; Table 2). 

The U.S. Government (USG) has reviewed all factors affecting transition
rates in this sector.  Based on this assessment the transition rate has
been greatly increased for this sector.  For the area covered in this
nomination, the USG believes that the narrative discussion included in
this document is technically valid.  The USG has nominated amounts of
methyl bromide based only on those sub-sectors that cannot transition
away from methyl bromide at the accelerated rate.

2.	summarize why key alternatives are not feasible

Alternatives are considered not feasible where 1) they have not been
sufficiently tested or protocols have not been sufficiently developed
for their use, 2) costs are excessive, 3) application difficulties exist
due to such factors as hilly terrain or equipment requirements, 4) areas
of environmental sensitivity or characteristics reduce their efficacy,
5) regulatory restrictions prevent their use, 6) pest pressure is to
such an extent that alternatives are not effective.  

Approximately two-thirds of strawberry land in California use
alternatives to methyl bromide (Table 2).  In California, township caps
currently restrict the use of the most thoroughly studied alternative,
1,3-D.  Restrictions could affect approximately 40-62% of total
strawberry land (California Strawberry Commission, 2008).  Township caps
restricting the use of 1,3-D (Trout, 2005) may affect between 5,700 and
9,000 hectares by 2011 (California Strawberry Commission, 2008, see
Appendix JJ.11).  

Now that iodomethane has been registered in California, it may help to
relieve township cap overages of 1,3-D.  However, iodomethane has not
been tested extensively on large-scale production land at the low rates
specified on the California label. Furthermore, California requires much
larger buffer zones (5 to 10 times those on the federal label). 
Research using higher rates (comparable to those on the federal label)
generally indicates good efficacy (see “Research” section below). 
The new fumigant should be available in several formulations with
chloropicrin, but impacts of buffer restrictions and use rate efficacy
in California will be unclear until experience with the formulations and
its activity against various pests is known.  

3.	is the use covered by A certification STANDARD?

There is no certification standard for strawberry fruit production.

4.	PROPORTION OF CROP USING METHYL BROMIDE 

Table 2. Proportion of Crop Using Methyl Bromide

Region where methyl bromide use is requested	Total crop area (ha)	Area
nominated for methyl bromide use in 2012 (Ha)	Proportion1 of total crop
area to be treated with methyl bromide (%)

California	14,5002	4,856	33

1 Based on the amount of methyl bromide nominated for the 2012 use
season for strawberry fruit production.

2 NASS, 2007. 2006-season data.

3 Based on estimates from various recent extension publications of
states associated with the requesting consortium.

5.	If part of the crop area is treated with methyl bromide, indicate the
reason why methyl bromide is not used in the other area, and identify
what alternative strategies are used to control the target pathogens and
weeds without methyl bromide there. 

The USG has reviewed all factors affecting transition rates in this
sector.  Based on this assessment the transition rate has been greatly
increased for most portions of this sector.  For the area covered in
this nomination, the USG believes that the narrative discussion included
in this document is technically valid.  The USG has nominated amounts of
methyl bromide based only on those sub-sectors that cannot transition
away from methyl bromide at the accelerated rate.

Pest problems vary, and therefore, no one strategy is appropriate for
the variety of pests and growing conditions in strawberry production. 
Alternatives are used on two-thirds of strawberry production land in
California.  For example, “Methyl bromide is often being used in
rotation with alternative fumigants.  Many growers will use alternative
fumigants for 2-3 years then rotate back to methyl bromide to clean up
emerging weed and disease problems.  While, in some locations, local
permit conditions may not allow the use of methyl bromide due to the
proximity of sensitive sites such as schools or housing, thus
alternative fumigants such a s Inline are used.  In these locations,
growers may accept lower returns over time due to higher weeding costs
and reduced yields or they will cease growing strawberries in those
fields if soil borne disease losses and weed density gets too high”
(California Strawberry Commission, 2008).  

Furthermore, in California, the choice of fumigant “is influenced by a
number of factors including the regulatory situation for a particular
ranch, their financial situation—can they afford methyl bromide, the
type of crop they are producing (summer plantings typically do not use
methyl bromide because they have a short production season while growers
in the northern district are more likely to use methyl bromide since
they have a very long season), the prevalence of disease or weed
problems, etc...” (Legard, personal communication, 2008).  Land
currently requiring methyl bromide may be able to transition to
iodomethane, but it is unclear how much, if any, fruit production will
be affected.

6.	Would it be feasible to expand the use of these methods to cover at
least part of the crop that has requested use of methyl bromide? What
changes would be necessary to enable this?

In California, expansion of alternative methods to critical areas may be
likely with the registration of iodomethane, but it is not clear what
might be the impact of iodomethane on the emergence of charcoal rot
(Macrophominia phaseolina) and Fusarium wilt (F. oxysporum)—two
diseases that have caused problems in fields not exposed to methyl
bromide in recent years.  However, research with virtually and totally
impermeable films in California suggests that sequential treatments of
fumigants such as iodomethane, 1,3-D and metam potassium could provide
effective pest management and acceptable yields (Othman et al., 2009).  

The California Strawberry Commission has funded Farming Without
Fumigants Initiative whose goal is to develop strawberry fruit
production methods that can avoid the complexities of highly regulated
fumigants.  This research includes collaboration with the University of
California and USDA (see section “Summary of Recent Research”
below).

7.	SUMMARY OF RECENT RESEARCH 

1) There was no significant difference in the mean of strawberry yield
from soil treated with methyl bromide and soil treated with DMDS +
chloropicrin (Othman et al., 2010).  Efficacy against Pythium and
problem weeds, such as annual grasses and pigweed, were also comparable
to methyl bromide treatments.

2) Macrophimina and Fusarium have been said to be increasing in
incidence in recent years (personal communication, 2008).  Outbreaks of
both pathogens have been associated with wilting, stunting, and dying
plants in coastal and inland strawberry production areas (Koike et al.,
2009).  Some growers have returned to using a methyl bromide treatment
after two years treatment with alternatives in order to “clean-up”
the soil contaminated with both emerging pathogens and weeds.  Koike et
al. (2009) found cultivar differences in susceptibility to the two
diseases.  

3) Norton (2008) reported that excellent weed and disease control have
been achieved with drip-applied 1,3-D/chloropicrin (InLine) followed 5-8
days later by metam-sodium.  Weed control was highly dependent on
optimal fumigant placement, which has not always been applied.  

4) Research continued regarding steam treatment of soils (Fennimore and
Samtani, 2010). Estimated costs for labor, fuel, and equipment are
$3848/acre.  While efficacy and flexibility appear to make steam worthy
of further research, disadvantages include high consumption of fuel,
carbon emissions, the need for large numbers of expensive steam
applicators, and water treatments.  Results suggests that some
treatments with steam manage various weed populations comparably to
methyl bromide soil treatments and yields after steam treatments are
similar to yields after methyl bromide (Gilbert et al., 2009; Daugovish
et al., 2009; Fennimore et al., 2009; Fennimore and Goodhue, 2009). 
Field demonstrations were used to demonstrate the latest in experiments
in fumigation and non-fumigation methods for strawberry production
(Fennimore et al., 2009).  Treatments also included various low- or
non-permeable tarps.  Steam was the only non-chemical fumigant that had
comparable weed control compared to methyl bromide.  Costs of steam
treatments were discussed by Fennimore and Goodhue (2009) with regard to
orchard replant and ornamental nursery beds.  Yellow nutsedge was more
successfully managed with steam in fall treatments (Daugovish et al.,
2009).  Physical barriers (paper and plastic mulches) appeared to reduce
populations of nutsedge.  A combination of steam and physical barriers
may be effective.  Work is continuing on steam treatment for strawberry
production.

5) Methods of strawberry production were conducted to test the efficacy
of production with non-soil substrates (Fennimore and Samtani, 2010;
Fennimore et al., 2010; Wang et al., 2010).  Advantages are comparable
or higher yields compared to fumigated soils and the lack of need for
fumigants.  Disadvantages are limitations in the volume of material
(such as coir and peat) necessary for production, and the need for
in-place irrigation and sensors making crop rotation with vegetables
difficult. Small-scale plots tested various substrates including peat
and peat with perlite or rice hulls, and coconut coir used with green
mulch or skunk mulch (Gabriel et al., 2009; Wang et al., 2009).  Initial
results indicated that most of the soilless treatments provided greater
yields than the field soil-grown strawberry plants and water use, while
variable, might be within acceptable parameters.  Pathogen populations
of Verticillium dahliae, Phytophthora cactorum, and Colletotrichum spp.
were apparently affected by various treatments, but results were
inconclusive at the early stages of testing (Gerik et al., 2009). 

6) Anaerobic soil disinfestation is being studied as a possible means of
soil pest management (Shennan et al., 2010).  This involves creating
anaerobic conditions through solarization, soil amendment with organic
matter, and high soil moisture to impede the growth of aerobic
organisms.  Initial experiments in pots indicate that Verticillium
dahliae populations decreased significantly in some experiments. 
However, the level of control was not consistent among all studies and
treatments.

7) Ongoing field demonstration trials (Noling et al., 2010c; Noling,
2009a; Noling 2009b) in Florida indicate generally positive results
regarding alternatives.  In the trials, “most alternative fumigants
evaluated produced yields which were statistically equivalent to that of
methyl bromide chloropicrin, and are being recommended to growers, with
caveat, as viable alternatives to methyl bromide.”  One caveat,
however, is that application problems with some alternatives resulted in
significant yield declines compared to methyl bromide treatments. 
Treatments included chisel applied 50:50 and 67:33 methyl
bromide:chloropicrin, 79:21 DMDS:chloropicrin, Pic Clor 60, Telone C35 +
herbicide.  In addition, drip applications were provided with Pic Clor
60 and Telone InLine.

8) Sting nematode infestation of strawberry fields impacts approximately
40% of Florida fields, resulting in plant stunting if left uncontrolled
(Noling et al., 2010b).  Remote sensing technology was used to compare
strawberry yields with plant size and relate plant size to fumigant
treatments.  Relative yields determined from the ground truth survey of
plant sizes were correlated with remote sensing information of canopy
cover.  Nematode-induced crop losses were derived from end of season
plant size assessments and remote sensing.  This information is provided
to growers to assess methyl bromide alternatives for nematode
management.

9) Trials with Pic Clor 60, Telone C35, and DMDS + chloropicrin at two
locations in Florida resulted in comparable yields to methyl
bromide-treated soils (Noling, 2010b).  While VIF film retained
fumigants significantly more than LDPE film, yield improvement was not
observed.

10) The USDA Areawide project for large-scale field demonstrations in
Florida evaluated several drip fumigants for efficacy, yield, and risk
mitigation to reduce buffer zone distances that (Noling, 2010a).  The
feasibility of using two drip tapes per bed was examined.  In addition,
there was an examination of the feasibility of double cropping
strawberries by drip-applied fumigant through previous year’s plastic
film.  Impacts of double cropping were not evaluated due to unseasonable
cold winter weather in 2009-2010.  In general, two drip tapes likely
increased plant density suggesting a higher yield.  

11) Experiments examining fumigant diffusion and soil retention of
fumigants were conducted within various moisture gradients (Noling et
al., 2010a).  In 2008, no differences in gas concentrations were
observed for Telone C35 or iodomethane (50:50) with VIF, while in 2009,
significant differences in soil gas concentrations, plant size
distributions, and strawberry yield were observed with Pic Clor 60 and
Telone C35.  

12) During the 2009 growing season in Florida, refinements were made in
soil application technologies for 1,3-D to address inconsistent soil
application.  In addition, integrated methods are being phased-in as
growers learn to take a broad view of pest management strategies. 
Transition to alternatives requires growers to integrate new fumigant
application methods, and new tillage and irrigation practices to reduce
emissions. (Noling, 2009b).

13) Trials with TIF and various alternative fumigants continued in North
Carolina (Welker et al., 2010).  In addition, activities for outreach to
growers are helping communicate new information.  Mustard seed-amended
soil was tested to determine its efficacy to suppress weed populations
and provide acceptable yields (Deyton et al., 2010).  The latest results
from ongoing experiments indicate that mustard seed meal provided
greater yield than water sealed plots.  In addition, mustard seed meal
gave similar weed control to dazomet.

14) At a research station in North Carolina, various rates of
iodomethane were tested (Poling et al., 2009).  MIDAS
(iodomethane:chloropicrin) at 200 kg/ha of 50:50 with standard tarps and
at 135 kg/ha with virtually impermeable film had the highest marketable
yields in the study and statistically similar to methyl bromide at 196
kg/ha with virtually impermeable film.  The MIDAS rate of 135 kg/ha
provided greater yields than higher rates of the product under virtually
impermeable film.  Researchers concluded that “the net benefit of
using Midas 50:50 at 120 lb/A [135 kg/ha] with VIF could easily exceed
$10,000 per acre in extra profits for the grower compared to no
fumigation.  This much economic benefit from fumigation would not likely
be observed on sites where good crop rotation is possible, but on sites
where rotation is not possible, a serious crop reduction may occur for
growers who do not fumigate.”

15) In the southeast area-wide USDA-funded trials, researchers reported
(Welker et al., 2009) “we have had great success with the alternatives
and yield data has shown comparable yields to methyl bromide fumigation
from at least one alternative.”  However, the trials showed that
“alternatives are not nearly as forgiving as methyl bromide under less
than ideal environmental conditions.”

8.	ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY OF ALTERNATIVES 

In this study net revenue is calculated as gross revenue minus operating
costs.  This is a good measure to describe the direct losses of income
that may be suffered by the users.  The net revenue does not represent
net income to the users.  Net income, which indicates profitability of
an operation of an enterprise, is gross revenue minus the sum of
operating and fixed costs.  Net income should be smaller than the net
revenue measured in this study.  Fixed costs were not included because
it is often difficult to measure and verify.

Summary of Economic Feasibility

The economic analysis of strawberry fruit production compared data on
yields, crop prices, revenues and costs using methyl bromide and using
alternative pest control regimens in order to estimate the loss of
methyl bromide availability.  For California, the primary alternative is
1,3-D/chloropicrin followed by metam sodium.  

The economic factors that drive the feasibility analysis for fresh
market strawberry fruit use of methyl bromide are increased production
costs, which may be due to the higher-cost of using an alternative,
additional pest control requirements, and/or resulting shifts in other
production or harvesting practices and yield losses.

Crop budgets were analyzed for pre-plant sectors to determine the likely
economic impact if methyl bromide were unavailable.  Various measures
were used to quantify the impacts, including the following: 

(1) Loss per Hectare.  For crops, this measure is closely tied to
income.  It is relatively easy to measure, but may be difficult to
interpret in isolation.

(2) Loss per Kilogram of Methyl Bromide.  This measure indicates the
value of methyl bromide to crop production.

(3) Loss as a Percentage of Gross Revenue.  This measure has the
advantage that gross revenues are usually easy to measure, at least over
some unit, e.g., a hectare of land or a storage operation.  However,
high value commodities or crops may provide high revenues but may also
entail high costs.  Losses of even a small percentage of gross revenues
could have important impacts on the profitability of the activity.

(4) Loss as a Percentage of Net Operating Revenue.  Net cash revenues
are defined as gross revenues minus operating costs.  This is a very
good indicator of the direct losses of income that may be suffered by
the owners or operators of an enterprise.  However, operating costs can
often be difficult to measure and verify.

(5) Operating Profit Margin.  Operating profit margin is defined as net
operating revenue divided by gross revenue per hectare.  This measure
would provide the best indication of the total impact of the loss of
methyl bromide to an enterprise.  Again, operating costs may be
difficult to measure and fixed costs even more difficult, therefore
fixed costs were not included in the analysis.

These measures represent different ways to assess the economic
feasibility of methyl bromide alternatives for strawberry fruit
producers.  Because producers (suppliers) represent an integral part of
any definition of a market, the threshold of significant market
disruption is met if there is a significant impact on commodity
suppliers using methyl bromide.  The economic measures provide the basis
for making that determination. 

For California strawberry producers, there is no change in impacts from
the previous year estimates as iodomethane is not yet registered.  The
loss to gross revenue for growers using alternatives to methyl bromide
is estimated to remain about 14% as compared to the use of methyl
bromide.  Table 3 illustrates the 2008 economic impact assessment for
California strawberry fruit growers.

Now that iodomethane (trade name Midas) is available for California
strawberry producers, there is a change in impacts from the previous
year estimates.   Iodomethane is used in combination with chloropicrin
in 33/67 formulation at a rate of 224 kg/ha .  The loss to gross revenue
for growers using alternatives to methyl bromide is estimated to range
from 6 - 14% as compared to the use of methyl bromide.  Table 3
illustrates the 2010 economic impact assessment for California
strawberry fruit growers.



Table 3. California : Economic Impacts of Methyl Bromide Alternatives

California 	Methyl Bromide	Iodomethane	PIC + MB	1,3 D + PIC

Production  Loss (%) 	0%	0%	15%	14%

   Production per Hectare 	49,410	49,410	41,999	42,475

* Price per Unit (us$)	$ 1.37	$ 1.37	$ 1.37	$ 1.37

= Gross Revenue per Hectare (us$)	$ 67,537	$ 67,537	$ 66,020	$ 58,057

- Operating Costs per Hectare (us$)**	$ 66,849	$ 71,426	$ 57,432	$
66,100

= Net Revenue per Hectare (us$)	$ 688	$ (3,889)	($ 8,614)	($ 8,042)

	*Loss Measures *

1. Loss per Hectare (us$)	$ 0	$ 4,576	$ 9,302	$ 8730

2. Loss per Kilogram of Methyl Bromide (us$)	$ 0	$ 22.81	$ 46.36	$ 43.51

3. Loss as a Percentage of Gross Revenue (%)	0%	7%	14%	13%

4. Loss as a Percentage of Net Operating Revenue (%)	0%	685%	1352%	1269%

5. Operating Profit Margin (%)	4%	-6%	-15%	-14%

**Note that the measures in the tables above  must be interpreted
carefully.  Operating costs do not include fixed costs and net revenue
equals gross revenue minus operating costs.

9.  RESULTANT CHANGES TO REQUESTED EXEMPTION QUANTITIES

The USG has applied an aggressive transition rate, which is reflected in
the nomination amount and detailed in Table 4. 

Table 4. Nomination Amount:  

SECTOR	STRAWBERRY FRUIT

	 California Strawberry Commission 	 Sector Total / Average 

Quantity Requested for 2012:	Amount (kgs)	                    751,596 	 
                     751,596 

Quantity Recommended by MBTOC/TEAP for 2012 :	Amount (kgs)	             
      673,085 	                       673,085 

Quantity Approved by Parties for 2012:	Amount (kgs)	                   
673,085 	                       673,085 

	Area (ha)	                        4,421 	                          
4,421 

	Rate	                           152 	                              152 

Transition from 2012 Baseline Adjusted Value	Percentage (%)	-21%	-21%

Quantity Required for 2013 Nomination:	Amount (kgs)	531,737	531,737

	Area (ha)	4406	4406

	Rate	170	170



Citations

Boyd, V. 2010. New soil-borne pest control. Citrus and Vegetable.
Sept-Oct 2010.   HYPERLINK
"http://www.citrusandvegetable.com/PastIssues/ArticleLanding/tabid/70/De
fault.aspx?tid=1&cid=839107&issueid=792" 
http://www.citrusandvegetable.com/PastIssues/ArticleLanding/tabid/70/Def
ault.aspx?tid=1&cid=839107&issueid=792 

California Strawberry Commission. 2008. Request for a critical use
exemption for methyl bromide on strawberries for the 2011 use season.

Daugovish, O., Mochizuki, M., and Fennimore, S. 2009. Yellow nutsedge
management with chemical, physical and thermal treatments. International
Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions
Reductions (2009).   HYPERLINK
"http://www.mbao.org/2009/Proceedings/014DaugovishOSummaryNutsedge.pdf" 
http://www.mbao.org/2009/Proceedings/014DaugovishOSummaryNutsedge.pdf 

Deyton, D. E., Sams, C. E., Kopsell, D. A., and Cummins, J. C. 2010.
Using mustard seed meal to biofumigate strawberry soil. International
Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions
Reductions (2010). ;   HYPERLINK
"http://www.mbao.org/2010/Proceedings/079SamsC.pdf" 
http://www.mbao.org/2010/Proceedings/079SamsC.pdf 

Fennimore, S. and Samtani, J. 2010. Strategies to sustainably produce
strawberry without fumigants. International Research Conference on
Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions (2010).
International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and
Emissions Reductions (2010).   HYPERLINK
"http://www.mbao.org/2010/Proceedings/078FennimoreSsteamposter.pdf" 
http://www.mbao.org/2010/Proceedings/078FennimoreSsteamposter.pdf .

Fennimore, S., Ajwa, H., Subbarao, K., Daugovish, O., Martin, F.,
Browne, G., Samtani, J., Serohijos, R., Wang, D., Sjulin, T., Greene,
I., Legard, D. 2010. facilitating adoption of alternatives to methyl
bromide in California strawberries.   HYPERLINK
"http://mbao.org/2010/Proceedings/032FennimoreSAreawidestrawberry.pdf" 
http://mbao.org/2010/Proceedings/032FennimoreSAreawidestrawberry.pdf 

Fennimore, S., Ajwa, H., Subbarao, K., Martin, F., Browne, G., and
Samtani, J. 2009. Facilitating adoption of alternatives to methyl
bromide in California strawberries. International Research Conference on
Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions (2009).   HYPERLINK
"http://www.mbao.org/2009/Proceedings/016FennimoreSprogressreportstrawbe
rryAWP81709.pdf" 
http://www.mbao.org/2009/Proceedings/016FennimoreSprogressreportstrawber
ryAWP81709.pdf 

Fennimore, S. and Goodhue, R. 2009. Estimated costs to disinfest soil
with steam. Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide
Alternatives and Emissions Reductions (2009).   HYPERLINK
"http://www.mbao.org/2009/Proceedings/003FennimoreSMBAOAbstractSteambusi
ness.pdf" 
http://www.mbao.org/2009/Proceedings/003FennimoreSMBAOAbstractSteambusin
ess.pdf 

Gabriel, M. Z., Wang, D., Gerik, J., and Gartung, J. 2009. Strawberry
production in soil-less substrate troughs—plant growth. Annual
International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and
Emissions Reductions (2009).   HYPERLINK
"http://www.mbao.org/2009/Proceedings/098GabrielMMBAO2009MagdalenaRaBetp
lants.pdf" 
http://www.mbao.org/2009/Proceedings/098GabrielMMBAO2009MagdalenaRaBetpl
ants.pdf 

Gerik, J., Wang, d., Gabriel, M. Z., and Gartung, J. 2009. Strawberry
production in soil-less substrate troughs—pathology. Annual
International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and
Emissions Reductions (2009).   HYPERLINK
"http://www.mbao.org/2009/Proceedings/099GerikJMBAO2009Pathology.pdf" 
http://www.mbao.org/2009/Proceedings/099GerikJMBAO2009Pathology.pdf 

Gilbert, C., Fennimore, S., Subbarao, K., Hanson, B., Rainbolt, C.,
Goodhue, R., Weber, J. B., and Samtani, J. 2009. Systems to disinfest
soil with heat for strawberry and flower production. Annual
International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and
Emissions Reductions (2009).   HYPERLINK
"http://www.mbao.org/2009/Proceedings/015FennimoreSMBAOAbstractSteamSola
r82809.pdf" 
http://www.mbao.org/2009/Proceedings/015FennimoreSMBAOAbstractSteamSolar
82809.pdf 

Gilreath, J., Santos, B., Mirusso, J., Noling, J., and Gilreath, P.
2005c. Application considerations for successful use of VIF and
metalized mulches with reduced fumigant rates in tomato.  U. Florida
Extension publ. HS287.   HYPERLINK
"http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/pdffiles/HS/HS27000.pdf" 
http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/pdffiles/HS/HS27000.pdf 

Koike, S., Gordon, T., Ajwa, H., Daugovish, O., Bolda, M., Legard, D.
2009. Fumigant and strawberry variety evaluations in Macrophomina and
Fusarium fields.   HYPERLINK
"http://www.mbao.org/2009/Proceedings/013DaugovishOSummaryPathogens.pdf"
 http://www.mbao.org/2009/Proceedings/013DaugovishOSummaryPathogens.pdf 

Legard, D. 2008. Personal communication, email 24 September, 2008.

NASS (National Agriculture Statistics Service), 2007. Agricultural
Chemical Usage 2006 Vegetable Summary.   HYPERLINK
"http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/usda/current/AgriChemUsVeg/AgriChemUsVe
g-07-25-2007_revision.pdf" 
http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/usda/current/AgriChemUsVeg/AgriChemUsVeg
-07-25-2007_revision.pdf )

Noling, J. W. 2010a. USDA ARS areawide project: Large scale field
demonstrations in Florida strawberry 2009-10. Annual International
Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions
Reductions (2010).   HYPERLINK
"http://www.mbao.org/2010/Proceedings/036NolingJAreaWide.pdf" 
http://www.mbao.org/2010/Proceedings/036NolingJAreaWide.pdf 

Noling, J. W. 2010b. USDA CSREES: Methyl bromide transitions in Florida
strawberry 2008-10. Annual International Research Conference on Methyl
Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions (2010).   HYPERLINK
"http://www.mbao.org/2010/Proceedings/042NolingJTranistionsFloridaStrawb
erry.pdf" 
http://www.mbao.org/2010/Proceedings/042NolingJTranistionsFloridaStrawbe
rry.pdf 

Noling, J. W., Thomas, J., and Cody, M. 2010a. VIF mulches, optimized
irrigation and tillage practices for fumigant use in Florida strawberry.
Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives
and Emissions Reductions (2010).   HYPERLINK
"http://www.mbao.org/2010/Proceedings/016NolingJVIFMoistureCompaction.pd
f" 
http://www.mbao.org/2010/Proceedings/016NolingJVIFMoistureCompaction.pdf


Noling, J. W., Schumann, A. W., and Cody, M. 2010b. Assessing field
distribution, crop impact and sting nematode management in Florida
strawberry. Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide
Alternatives and Emissions Reductions (2010).   HYPERLINK
"http://www.mbao.org/2010/Proceedings/046NolingJRemoteSensing.pdf" 
http://www.mbao.org/2010/Proceedings/046NolingJRemoteSensing.pdf 

Noling, J. W., Botts, D. A., and MacRae, A. W. 2010c. Alternatives to
methyl bromide soil fumigation for Florida vegetable production.
University of Florida Publ. SP170-23. May, 2010.   HYPERLINK
"http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/pdffiles/CV/CV29000.pdf" 
http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/pdffiles/CV/CV29000.pdf .

Noling, J. W. 2009a. Large scale field demonstration validation trials
in Florida strawberry. Individual research program, CSREES-USDA grant,
FLA-LAL-04553;   HYPERLINK
"http://ars.usda.gov/research/projects/projects.htm?ACCN_NO=411977&fy=20
09" 
http://ars.usda.gov/research/projects/projects.htm?ACCN_NO=411977&fy=200
9 )

Noling, J. W. 2009b. Grower field demonstration trialing of gas
impermeable plastic mulches, reduced rates of soil fumigants, and
optimized irrigation and cultural practices. CSREES-USDA grant,
FLA-LAL-04776.    HYPERLINK
"http://www.reeis.usda.gov/web/crisprojectpages/215116.html" 
http://www.reeis.usda.gov/web/crisprojectpages/215116.html )

Norton, J. A. 2008.  Metam combinations as alternatives to methyl
bromide in US-grown strawberries and mulched vegetables. Annual
International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and
Emissions Reductions (2008).   HYPERLINK
"http://www.mbao.org/2008/046Norton.pdf" 
http://www.mbao.org/2008/046Norton.pdf 

Othman, M., Ajwa, H., Fennimore, S., Martin, F., Subbarao, K., and
Hunzie, J. 2010. Dimethyl disulfide plus chloropicrin as methyl bromide
alternative for strawberry production. Annual International Research
Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions
(2010).    HYPERLINK
"http://www.mbao.org/2010/Proceedings/004OthmanM.pdf" 
http://www.mbao.org/2010/Proceedings/004OthmanM.pdf ;   HYPERLINK
"http://mbao.org/2010/4Othman.pdf"  http://mbao.org/2010/4Othman.pdf 

Othman, M., Ajwa, H. A., Fennimore, S., Martin, F., Subbarao, K.,
Browne, G., and Hunzie, J. 2009. Strawberry production with reduced
rates of methyl bromide alternatives applied under retentive film.
Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives
and Emissions Reductions (2009).   HYPERLINK
"http://www.mbao.org/2009/Proceedings/055OthmanMAbstract2009Strawberrypr
oductionwithReducedRatesofMethylBromideAlternatives.pdf" 
http://www.mbao.org/2009/Proceedings/055OthmanMAbstract2009Strawberrypro
ductionwithReducedRatesofMethylBromideAlternatives.pdf 

Poling, E. B., Schiavone, R., and Franck, C. T. 2009. Influence of MIDAS
50:50 and MIDAS 98:2 on strawberry plasticulture yields in North
Carolina. Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide
Alternatives and Emissions Reductions (2009).   HYPERLINK
"http://mbao.org/2009/Proceedings/113PolingBsummary.pdf" 
http://mbao.org/2009/Proceedings/113PolingBsummary.pdf 

Poling, E. B. and Schiavone, R. 2008. Strawberry plasticulture research
with MIDAS 50:50 and MIDAS 98:2 in North Carolina, 2007-2008 (Central
Crops Research Station, Clayton).   HYPERLINK
"http://ncsu.edu/enterprises/strawberries/files/2009/09/poling-report200
7_2008.pdf" 
http://ncsu.edu/enterprises/strawberries/files/2009/09/poling-report2007
_2008.pdf 

Shennan, C., Muramoto, J., Koike, S., Bolda, M., Daugovish, O.,
Mochizuki, M., Rosskopf, E. N., Kokalis-Burelle, N., Butler, D. 2010.
Optimizing anaerobic soil disinfestations for strawberry production in
California. Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide
Alternatives and Emissions Reductions (2010).   HYPERLINK
"http://www.mbao.org/2010/Proceedings/023ShennanC.pdf" 
http://www.mbao.org/2010/Proceedings/023ShennanC.pdf 

Trout, T. 2005. Impact of township caps on Telone use in California.
Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives
and Emissions Reductions (2005).   HYPERLINK
"http://mbao.org/2005/05Proceedings/127TroutT%20mb-pest-use-telone-rpt05
-mbao.pdf" 
http://mbao.org/2005/05Proceedings/127TroutT%20mb-pest-use-telone-rpt05-
mbao.pdf 

Wang, D., Gerik, J., Gartung, J., Sjulin, T., Fennimore, S., Rowe, D.,
Greene, I, Legard, D. 2010. Yield and water assessment of strawberry
production in raised-bed troughs. Annual International Research
Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions
(2010).   HYPERLINK
"http://www.mbao.org/2010/Proceedings/041WangDStrawberryRaisedBeds.pdf" 
http://www.mbao.org/2010/Proceedings/041WangDStrawberryRaisedBeds.pdf ).

Wang, Gartung, J., Vaughan, P., Gerik, J., Gabriel, M. Z., and Legard,
D. 2009. Strawberry production in soilless substrate troughs—water
management. Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide
Alternatives and Emissions Reductions (2009).   HYPERLINK
"http://www.mbao.org/2009/Proceedings/017WangDMBAO2009RaBetwater.pdf" 
http://www.mbao.org/2009/Proceedings/017WangDMBAO2009RaBetwater.pdf 

Welker, R. M., Driver, J. G., Rivard, C. L., Louws, F. J. 2010. Outreach
and new approaches for methyl bromide alternatives through the USDA
areawide project. Annual International Research Conference on Methyl
Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions (2010).   HYPERLINK
"http://www.mbao.org/2010/Proceedings/040LouwsF.pdf" 
http://www.mbao.org/2010/Proceedings/040LouwsF.pdf 

Welker, R. M., Driver, Rivard, C. L., and Louws, F. J. 2009. Research
and extension efforts to enable successful transition away from methyl
bromide fumigation. Annual International Research Conference on Methyl
Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions (2009).   HYPERLINK
"http://www.mbao.org/2009/Proceedings/041WelkerRMBAOProceedings2009.pdf"
 http://www.mbao.org/2009/Proceedings/041WelkerRMBAOProceedings2009.pdf 

/

0

2



p

v

|

1

2

3

V

X

x

z

|

㜀$␸䠀$

葝﹈

h

h

㜀$␸䠀$

/ HYPERLINK
"http://www.mbao.org/2008/Proceedings/009WelkerRMBAOAREAWIDEFJL.pdf" 
http://www.mbao.org/2008/Proceedings/009WelkerRMBAOAREAWIDEFJL.pdf 

USA CUN13 Soil Strawberry Fruit Open Field		Page   PAGE  1  of  
NUMPAGES  15 

