April 3-6, 2005 Joint ASRED/agInnovation South Meeting Minutes

 

Joint ASRED/agInnovation South Meeting

April 3-6, 2005

Corpus Christi, TX

 
Participants  |  Action Items  |  Agenda

Participants

agInnovation South: Jerry Arkin, GA Susan Barefoot, SC David Boethel, LA William F. Brown, FL Jerry Cherry, GA Lisa Collins, KY D.C. Coston, OK Nancy Cox, KY Roger Crickenberger, NC Mary Duryea, FL Bob Godfrey, VI Elizabeth Grabau, VA

Winston Hagler, NC Mark Hussey, TX Richard Jones, FL Skip Jubb, VA Tom Klindt, TN Steven Leath, NC Reuben Moore, MS David Morrison, LA Roland Mote, TN Craig Nessler, VA Donna Pearce, agInnovation South Rick Roeder, AR

Bob Shulstad, GA Clarence Watson, MS Joe Touchton, AL Greg Weidemann, AR Bob Westerman, OK Bob Whitson, TX Eric Young,agInnovation South Liaisons: Darrell Cole, ARS Dan Kugler, CSREES Other guests: Roy Cantrell, Cotton Inc. Alan Bennett, PIPRA Andy Jordan, National Cotton Council Jim VanKirk, Southern Region IPM Center

Action Items

Agenda Item 1 – Approval of the Agenda: 2005 agInnovation South Spring Meeting agenda approved (Cherry/Barefoot)
Agenda Item 2 – Approval of Minutes: Fall, 2004 Minutes approved (Arkin/Klindt)
Agenda Item 3 – Approval of Interim Actions: Interim Actions approved (Klindt/Jones)
Agenda Item 18 – Executive Director will transmit recommendations on NRSP-6 to NRSP Review Committee.
Agenda Item 19 – S-009 budget approved (Arkin/Watson)
Agenda Item 20 – Mark Hussey will transmit the agInnovation South recommendations to the Germplasm TF for consideration.
Agenda Item 26 – Dr. Richard Jones, FL, was presented the agInnovation South Leadership Award.
Agenda Item J7 – A Joint Southern Region Formula Funds Task Force committee was formed consisting of the following people:

• Jon Ort, NC State University, ASRED
• Ed Smith, Texas A& M University, ASRED
• Greg Weidemann, University of Arkansas, agInnovation South
• Paul Warner, University of Kentucky, ASRED
• David Boethel, Louisiana State University, agInnovation South
• Tom Klindt, University of Tennessee, agInnovation South
• Ron Brown, ASRED
• Eric Young, agInnovation South

Agenda Item J8 – Executive Directors will figure out revised rotation for separate and joint spring meetings.
Agenda Item 33 – A resolution of appreciation was read for Dr. Robert Whitson and staff of the Texas Agriculture Experiment Station at Texas A&M University for their roles in hosting the agInnovation South/ASRED Spring Meeting. A round of applause approved the resolution.
 

Agenda
Sunday, April 3
6:00 – 8:00 pm		Joint Welcome Reception
Monday, April 4
6:30 – 8:00 am		Joint Breakfast
8:00 – 10:00 am		Joint ASRED and agInnovation South Meeting
8:00 – 8:15		Texas A&M Welcome – Bob Whitson and Ed Smith
8:15 – 8:30	J1	Call to Order and Introductions – Ivory Lyles and Nancy Cox
8:30 – 9:15	J2	CSREES Report – Dan Kugler
9:15 – 9:30	J3	National Plant Disease and Pest Diagnostic Network Update -Joseph Krausz, Plant Pathology Department, Texas A&M University
9:30 – 10:00	J4	Southern Region IPM Center Report – Jim VanKirk (SRIPMC Director)
10:00 – 10:30 am		Joint Break
10:30 – 12:00 am		agInnovation South Meeting
10:30	1	Call to Order, Welcome, and Approval of Agenda – Nancy Cox
10:30 – 10:35	2	Approval of Sep 27, 2004 agInnovation South Meeting Minutes – Nancy Cox
10:35 – 10:40	3	Approval of Interim Actions – Nancy Cox
10:40 – 11:10		ESCOP Committee Reports
	4	Communication & Marketing – Jerry Arkin, Mary Duryea, and Ron Lacewell
	5	Budget & Legislative – Tom Klindt and Greg Weidemann
	6	Science & Technology – Bill Brown and David Boethel
	7	Planning – Skip Jubb and David Morrison
	8	Executive Committee – DC Coston
11:10 – 11:20	9	National Institute for Agricultural Security Report – DC Coston
11:20 – 11:40	10	NIMSS Update – Eric Young, Donna Pearce, and Nancy Cox
11:40 – 12:00	11	ARS Report – Chuck Onstad
12:00 – 1:00 pm		Joint Lunch
1:00 – 3:00 pm		agInnovation South Meeting
1:00 – 2:00		NRSP Reports and ’06 Budget Requests
	12	NRSP-1 – Bill Brown
	13	NRSP-3 – Jerry Arkin
	14	NRSP-4 – Mary Duryea
	15	NRSP-5 – DC Coston
	16	NRSP-7 – Garry Adams
	17	NRSP-8 – Jerry Cherry
2:00 – 2:15	18	NRSP-6 Project Renewal and 5-Year Budget – Bob Westerman
2:15 – 2:30	19	S-009 Report and Budget Request – Jerry Arkin
2:30 – 2:45	20	ESCOP Germplasm Task Force Draft Report – Mark Hussey
2:45 – 3:00	21	MRC Report – Bill Brown
3:00 – 3:30 pm		Joint Break
3:30 – 5:00 pm		agInnovation South Meeting
3:30 – 3:45	22	MRF Program Roles & Responsibilities – Eric Young
3:45 – 4:15	23	Cotton Winter Nursery and Cotton Inc. Update – Roy Cantrell (Cotton Inc.)
4:15 – 4:40	24	Executive Director’s Report – Eric Young
4:40 – 4:50	25	2007 Joint Spring Meeting Location – Eric Young
4:50 – 5:00	26	agInnovation South Excellence in Leadership Award Presentation – Nancy Cox
6:00 – 8:30 pm		Joint Reception and Dinner (off site)

 
 

Tuesday, April 5
6:30 – 8:00 am		Joint Breakfast
6:30 – 8:00		agInnovation South Chief Operating Officers’ Breakfast Meeting
8:00 – 10:00 am		Joint ASRED and agInnovation South Meeting
8:00		Reconvene Joint Session – Nancy Cox and Ivory Lyles
8:00 – 8:30	J5	DOE/NASULGC Project Report and Future Interaction with DOE Regional Office – Jim Powell (SE Regional Office, DOE/EERE)
8:30 – 9:15	J6	NASULGC’s Position Statement on the LGU Role in Regional Economic Development – Ron Brown and Eric Young
9:15– 9:55	J7	Formula and Competitive Funds Discussion – Ron Brown and Eric Young
9:55 – 10:00	J8	2007 Joint ASRED/agInnovation South Meeting – Ron Brown and Eric Young
10:00 – 11:00 am		Joint Break and Prepare for Tour
11:00 am – 8:30 pm		Joint Tour and Dinner

 

Wednesday, April 6
6:30 – 8:00 am		Joint Breakfast
8:00 – 10:00		agInnovation South Meeting
8:00 – 8:15	27	Report from Chief Operating Officers Meeting – Nancy Cox
8:15 – 8:45	28	PIPRA Update – Alan Bennett (PIPRA Executive Director)
8:45 – 9:00	29	SUNGRAINS Update – David Boethel
9:00 – 9:15	30	Farm Bill Committee Report – Eric Young
9:15 – 9:30	31	Proposed Southern Region Grantsmanship Workshop – Greg Weidemann and Eric Young
10:00 – 10:30		Joint Break
10:30 – 11:30		agInnovation South Meeting
11:00 – 11:10	32	2006 Spring agInnovation South Meeting in Mississippi – Vance Watson
11:10 – 11:20	33	Resolutions Committee Report – Clarence Watson and Rick Roeder
11:20 – 11:30	34	Fall agInnovation South Meeting, Announcements, etc. – Nancy Cox
11:30		Adjourn

 

 

Agenda Item J1.

Call to Order and Introductions

Presenter: Ivory Lyles and Nancy Cox
 
Background:
Ivory Lyles, Chair of the Association of Southern Region Extension Directors, and Nancy Cox, Chair of the Southern Association of Agricultural Experiment Station Directors, called to order the joint session.
Action Requested: None
 
 
 

Agenda Item J2.
CSREES Report

Presenter: Dan Kugler
 
Background:
CSREES Update for the 2005 Joint Meeting:
Southern Association of Agricultural Experiment Station Directors
and
Association of Southern Region Extension Directors
Dan Kugler, CSREES Deputy Administrator for NRE
April 3-6, 2005
Corpus Christi, Texas
Deputy Administrator for Economic and Community Systems
Franklin (Frank) E. Boteler has been named CSREES Deputy Administrator for Economic and Community Systems and reported April 4, 2005. Dr. Boteler has been the Deputy Director for the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission since 1998. The Commission has 120 state parks, a $180 million biennial budget and over 600 employees. From 1991-1998, he served as the Deputy Director of the Idaho Department of Parks and Recreation. Dr. Boteler received his B.S. in Psychology from the University of Maryland and a Masters and Ph.D. in forest resource management from Pennsylvania State University.
Lou Pitelka will join CSREES as Science Advisor for Competitive Programs
Louis Pitelka will join CSREES as the Agency’s Science Advisor in May 2005. Pitelka is a Professor at the Appalachian Laboratory of the University of Maryland’s Center for Environmental Science where he also is Director of the Chesapeake Watershed Cooperative Ecosystem Studies Unit (CESU). He was Director of the Appalachian Laboratory from 1996-2004. Dr. Pitelka received a B.S. in zoology from the University of California at Davis and a Ph.D. in biological sciences from Stanford University. Before moving to the University of Maryland in 1996, he held positions at Bates College, the National Science Foundation, and the Electric Power Research Institute. Dr. Pitelka’s areas of expertise include plant ecology, ecosystem ecology, and global change. His research activities have ranged from studies of the population biology of forest understory herbs to the responses of terrestrial ecosystems to climate change. Dr. Pitelka has served on numerous planning, coordinating, and review committees for both national and international organizations. He was a member of the Scientific Steering Committee of the Global Change and Terrestrial Ecosystems (GCTE) core project of the International Geosphere-Biosphere Program (IGBP) for seven years and was chair of GCTE in 2003. He currently serves on the DOE Biological and Environmental Research Advisory Committee and the EPA Committee on Valuing the Protection of Ecological Systems and Services. He is the past-President of the Association of Ecosystem Research Centers.
Note that a search is underway to fill the Agency’s Education Advisor position which was recently vacated as Mike Tate returned to Washington State University.
ISTM Deputy Administrator Vacancy Announced
CSREES has begun the recruitment process for a Deputy Administrator for Information Systems and Technology Management (ISTM). Applications and supplemental information must arrive at the address shown in the announcement by the April 6, 2005, closing date. The vacancy announcement may be obtained from the CSREES homepage at http://www.csrees.usda.gov, under “Job Opportunities.” For more information on the position, call Betty Lou Gilliland at 202-720-7441. For information on the application process, call Deborah Crump at 301-504-1448.
CSREES Announces 2005 Administrative Officers’ Meeting
The 2005 CSREES Administrative Officers’ Meeting, hosted by North Carolina A&T State University, will be held at the Sheraton Greensboro Hotel at Four Seasons, April 24-28, 2005. The Meeting provides State participants with the opportunity to share information with their peers in budget, finance, grants management, and human resources management. CSREES’ Office of Extramural Programs worked with a Planning Committee to develop the agenda for the meeting, coordinate speakers from the Agency and the States for the fifty-nine breakout sessions, and assist the host institution with preparations for the event. This meeting is attended annually by more than four hundred people from across the Nation.
Visit http://www.continuingeducation.ncsu.edu/csrees/. If you have questions about the meeting that are not answered by the website, please contact Brenda Barnett at (202) 401-6520 or bbarnett@csrees.usda.gov.
Soybean Rust Web Site
In response to the recent introduction of Phakospora pachyrhizi, or soybean rust, into the United States, USDA facilitated the development of a federal, state, university and industry-coordinated framework for surveillance, reporting, prediction, and management of soybean rust for the 2005 growing season. This site includes links to local extension offices, the National Plant Diagnostic Network, and Regional Integrated Pest Management Center Resources.
The purpose of the new USDA Soybean Rust Web Site (www.usda.gov/soybeanrust) is to support the goals of the coordinated framework and to provide stakeholders with timely and accurate information for managing soybean rust this year. This web site is a one-stop resource for soybean rust. It will be updated as new information becomes available. Contact: Bill Hoffman, Interim NPL Ag Homeland Security at bhoffman@csrees.usda.gov or 202-401-1112.
FY 2006 Appropriations Hearings
The FY 2006 Appropriations Hearings are underway and REE is currently scheduled to appear before the House Subcommittee on April 7 and the Senate Subcommittee on April 13. REE Under Secretary Jen and CSREES Administrator Hefferan will provide testimony and respond to specific questions.
OneSolution
The Business Plan for One Solution is in place and CSREES is beginning actions to effect this integrated reporting strategy with three major goals:
(1) simplify reporting and reduce burdens for funding recipients
(2) improve the quality of accountability data, better equip the agency to meet increasing performance and budget reporting expectations, and improve AREERA compliance (particularly through the development of a more structured Plan of Work
(3) reduce staff effort required to complete reporting-related processes, allowing staff members to focus on program leadership and active, portfolio-based management
Click here for OneSolution powerpoint
Reviews
CSREES Associate Administrator Cunningham’s February 11, 2005 memo to the System is an invitation to submit requests for university program reviews to be conducted October 1, 2005 through September 30, 2006. Program review is voluntary on the part of eligible institutions. The Agency believes that program reviews: 1) are important in assessing current strengths, identifying future opportunities and recommending appropriate strategies for enhancing university based programs; 2) have a positive impact on land-grant program quality; 3) provide CSREES staff with an important understanding of the dynamics of programs and program changes; 4) encourage program advancement for those undergoing the review; 5) expose review team members to new ideas in program management and resource utilization; and 6) provide CSREES with current and comprehensive information useful in responding to Congressional inquires related to the investment of Federal funds in the support of excellence in research, extension, and higher education programming.
In recent years, most program reviews have been comprehensive and focused on all mission areas (i.e., research, education, and extension) in the department or unit being reviewed. In addition, we are encouraging issue-based reviews which involve collaborative units and cooperative activities. This approach reflects the Federal emphasis on high-priority problems and issues while reviewing current resources, future needs, and considering the needs of constituents. It is our hope that program reviews will cross the traditional disciplinary boundaries.
Recognizing the mutual benefit derived from the review process, CSREES will pay the travel costs for half of the review team, up to a maximum of three team members (including the CSREES team member).
While that memo called for review requests to be submitted by April 29, we subsequently have sent out a “flyer” to the System stating that we will accept requests for reviews anytime, and arrange for and conduct the reviews as expediently as possible.
Increase Your Competitiveness in Competitive Programs
Anna Palmisano, Deputy Administrator for CSREES Competitive Programs (CP), says (1) send your faculty/staff to one of the 2 grants workshops this September (Moscow, Idaho; Washington, DC), (2) volunteer to be on a peer panel or chair a peer panel, and (3) talk/interact with CSREES National Program Leaders about the RFA development process to input your ideas. Contact Debby Sheely, CP Director for Integrated Programs at dsheely@csrees.usda.gov 0r 202-401-1924 for information.
Also note that Mark Poth, CP Director for Competitive Programs, will be on the Hill in the LEGIS program for the next seven months. During his absence, Deb Hamernik and Chavonda Jacobs-Young will fill-in.
4th National Small Farm Conference
The 4th National Small Farm Conference will be held October 16-19, 2005 at the Sheraton Greensboro Hotel -Holiday Four Seasons in Greensboro, North Carolina. Solicitations are currently being accepted through May 13, 2005 for topic presentations, speakers, poster presentations, exhibit displays, and success stories. The conference will focus on six tracks: Alternative Enterprises; Risk Management; Professional/Program Development; Marketing; Risk Management; and Bridging Gaps in Programs and Services.
Conference registration, lodging, and other information is provided soon at: (http://www.csrees.usda.gov/nea/ag_systems/in_focus/smallfarms_if_conferences.html).For information contact Patricia McAleer, Program Specialist in the Economic and Community Systems unit, at pmcaleer@csrees.usda.gov or 202-720-2635.
In meeting comments:

• Frank Boteler is the new CSREES Deputy Administrator for Economics & Community Systems
• Louis Pitelka will join CSREES as the Agency’s Science Advisor in May
• NRI overhead will change from 20% to the negotiated rate if the 2006 President’s budget passes

 
Action Requested: None
 
 
 

Agenda Item J3.

National Plant Disease and Pest Diagnostic Network Update
Presenter: Joseph Krausz
 
Background:
Click here for PowerPoint presentation
 
Action Requested: None
 
 

Agenda Item J4.

Southern Region IPM Center Report
Presenter: Jim VanKirk (SRIPMC Director)
 
Background:
Since its inception in September 2003, the Southern Region IPM Center (SRIPMC) has facilitated the development and implementation of Integrated Pest Management programs in the region using a variety of approaches. We engage a diverse array of stakeholders to help identify priorities for research, extension, education and regulatory changes. We manage two grants projects (S-RIPM and the IPM Enhancement Grants program) and contribute to proposal reviews of another (the national Pest Management Alternatives Program). We support inexpensive but effective multistate efforts in a variety of ways including funding, staff assistance and use of facilities. Through our staff and facilities we provide outreach, information exchange and education for IPM that would otherwise not occur.
In addition to reviewing activities and accomplishments, we will discuss two issues of particular concern. Part of our mandate is to develop and manage an information network that benefits IPM stakeholders in all states and territories in the region. Like our predecessor the SRPMC (at the University of Florida), we have struggled with providing coverage for all states.
Finally, the President’s fy2006 budget proposes to eliminate funding in its current form for all 406 programs including IPM Centers. We do not know whether there will be continued funding at all nor fully understand the implications of relocation of IPM Centers funding to new lines.
Click here for PowerPoint presentation.
 
Action Requested: For information only.
 
 
 
 

Agenda Item 1.
Call to Order, Welcome, and Approval of Agenda

 
Presenter: Nancy Cox
 
Background:
The meeting of the Southern Association of Agricultural Experiment Station Directors was called to order by Chair, Nancy Cox.
Action Requested: Approval of agenda
 
Action Taken: On motion/second by Drs. Cherry/Barefoot the agenda was approved.
 

Agenda Item 2.
Approval of September 27, 2004 agInnovation South Meeting Minutes

 
Presenter: Nancy Cox
 
Background: September 27, 2004 minutes – Oklahoma City, OK
Action Requested: Approval
 
Action Taken: On motion/second by Drs. Arkin/Klindt the minutes were approved.
 

Agenda Item 3.
Approval of Interim Actions

 
Presenter: Nancy Cox
 
Background:
Interim Actions:

• Appointed Reuben Moore, (MS) as Administrative Advisor to SERA011, “Review and Coordination of Oilseed Rape Research Programs in the Southern Region”
• Appointed David Boethel, (LA) as southern representative to the Joint Cotton Breeding Committee
• Appointed David Barkley, (SC) as southern representative to the SRDC Technical & Operational Advisory Committee
• Appointed Rick Roeder, (AR) to the agInnovation South Resolutions Committee

 
Action Requested: Approval
 
Action Taken: On motion/second by Drs.Klindt/Jones the interim actions were approved.
 

Agenda Item 4.

Communication & Marketing

 
Presenter: Jerry Arkin
 
Background:
The ESCOP Communication and Marketing (C/M) Committee continues to meet using regularly scheduled conference calls and in-frequent face-to-face meetings in Washington. The committee spent time at its last face-to-face meeting in September 2004 further defining its charge and goals vis-à-vis the BAA and the BRT.
The committee has continued to support and push for the completion of the counterfactual studies and the Formula For Success bulletin, now in it’s second printing.
Other highlights of committee activities include the following:

• The C/M Committee established a Hot Topics Subcommittee, chaired by Ron Pardini to help define those areas of science and other activities that take place within the SAES system that are deemed Hot Topics and that should be used to focus the annual impact writing process. The committee has recommended to ESCOP that the review and gathering of Hot Topics for use in the impact writing process be an annual activity, and that this activity be completed by October 1 of each year.
• Where possible the C/M Hot Topics Subcommittee believes that the Impact Writing Teams try to identify those high impact projects where there is need to further develop economic, social, and/or environmental impacts, and that individual scientists be identified who can be asked to elaborate.
• The Hop Topics Subcommittee recommended to ESCOP that a half day training session on impact writing be conducted at this fall’s SAES workshop.
• T. Fretz on behalf of the C/M Committee and the BRT contacted all SAES’s electronically for assistance in identifying high impact photographs to build a photo library for the BRT’s use in future publications.
• The C/M Committee supported the Science on the Hill Exhibit, and in particular, the focus on the Science Roadmap for Agriculture.
• The C/M Committee has established a strategic planning subcommittee, chaired by Mary Duryea (FL).
• The C/M Committee has established a subcommittee to focus attention on the issue of Impact Statements, chaired by Ron Pardini (NV).
• Plans are underway for a spring face-to-face meeting of the C/M Committee.

Action Requested: None, information only.
 
 

Agenda Item 5.

Budget & Legislative

 
Presenter: Greg Weidemann
 
Background:
ESCOP budget priorities for the FY 06 federal budget were established at the summer ESCOP meeting and presented to the BAC at the summer meeting. At the Fall ESS meeting, the following priorities for potential federal budget line items were established and presented to the BAA’s Budget & Advocacy Committee at their winter meeting.
 
ESCOP FY 06 Priorities for Federal Funding (All agencies)

Primary Category	Rank	Sub Category	Rank
Environment	1	Water Quality and Quantity	1
		Invasive Species	2
		Global Climate Change	3
Food, Nutrition and Health	2	Food Safety	1
		Obesity/consumer behavior	2
		Functional foods/nutraceuticals	3
Genomics	3	Plant systems	1   2
		Animal systems
		Microbial genomics
Rural Community Vitality/Economic Development	4	Land use policy	1
		Biobased products	2
		Entrepreneurship and Leadership	3
Homeland Security	5	Facility and personnel security	1
		Energy security	2
		Risk Assessment	3
		Rapid detection of threat agents	4
Facilities	6

 
Environment: Provide a framework for understanding and addressing issues of water quality and quantity, invasive species and global climate change.
Food, Nutrition and Health: Develop systems to obtain data on the health and behavior of consumers, conduct research on the biological and physiological basis of long term disease including obesity, and develop the knowledge base on the etiology of food safety.
Genomics: Develop understanding of the structure and function of genes, the products of genes (proteins), and the products of proteins (metabolites) in plants, animals, microbes, insects, and humans.
Rural Community Vitality/Economic Development: Provide agriculturally-based systems for development of entrepreneurial activity that is sustainable, rooted in locality, environmentally sound and based on participatory, inclusive community planning.
Homeland Security: Develop the knowledge base for teaching facility and personnel security, for long-term energy sources, for risk assessment and for rapid detection of threat agents.
Facilities: Provide for facilities as stated in section 1485 of the 2002 Farm Bill- authorizes up to $10M per year awarded to each experiment station on a competitive basis with required matching funds (77 units (SAES and ARD) at $10M each amounts to $250M per year for three years).
ESCOP Priorities for CSREES/USDA Budget
ESCOP established two priorities for FY 06 CSREES budget: (1) an increase in Hatch appropriations, and (2) increase for the National Research Initiative (NRI).
With the President’s budget proposal to eliminate formula funds, these priorities have been set aside in order to address the need for continuation of formula funding as a BAC and NASULGC priority.
Action Requested: For information only.
 
 
 

Agenda Item 6.
Science & Technology

 
Presenter: Bill Brown
 
Background:
With the assistance of Bruce Gage (U of KY), the Science & Technology Committee conducted an on-line survey in Nov 2004 to re-assess the relative importance of the seven challenge areas of the Science Roadmap for Agriculture, as well as assessing expertise needed to address these challenges. The questionnaire was constructed to assess four major areas: relative priority of the seven challenges and their respective four sub-challenges; allocation of resources over the next 5 years for each of these challenges; disciplines where the current capacity was most restricting progress on addressing these challenges; and which institutions or groups were currently the most influential in prioritizing Experiment Station efforts now and in 2010. A summary report has been produced and is available at the Committee’s web site under “Working Documents” (http://cipm.ncsu.edu/escop/committee/scitec00.htm).
Eric Young attended the PIPRA (Public Intellectual Property Resource for Agriculture) annual meeting Jan 19-21 in Berkley, CA representing the Science & Technology Committee and ESCOP. PIPRA originated from a dialogue among leading universities and not-for-profit research organizations in agriculture seeking to make agricultural technologies more easily available for development and distribution of subsistence crops for humanitarian purposes in the developing world and specialty crops in the developed world. Some of the issues PIPRA would like to address relate to access to enabling technologies and research tools and a highly fragmented public intellectual property portfolio leading to problems in technology development and commercialization.
As of now, PIPRA has the following 26 members:

1. Arizona Technology Enterprises LLC (Arizona State University’s technology transfer company)
   2. Boyce Thompson Institute for Plant Research
   3. Cornell University
   4. CIMMYT, International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center, Mexico
   5. Donald Danforth Plant Science Center
   6. Fundacion Chile
   7. Iowa State University
   8. IRRI, International Rice Research Foundation
   9. Kansas State University
   10. Michigan State University
   11. North Carolina State University
   12. Purdue University
   13. Salk Institute for Biological Studies
   14. The Samuel Roberts Noble Foundation
   15. The State University of New Jersey, Rutgers
   16. University of Arizona
   17. University of Arkansas – Division of Agriculture
   18. University of California, Davis
   19. University of California, Berkeley
   20. University of Florida
   21. University of Kentucky
   22. University of Idaho
   23. University of Missouri-Columbia
   24. Washington State University
   25. Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation
   26. University of Illinois

The next meeting of the Science & Technology Committee will be May 10-11 in Cincinnati, OH.
Action Requested: None, information only
 
 
 

Agenda Item 7.

Planning

 
Presenter: Skip Jubb/David Morrison
 
Background:

1. The ESCOP Planning Committee developed an Operational Plan for the Science Roadmap (shown below). The purpose of this plan is to identify strategies that can be used to address the seven challenges identified in the Science Roadmap. One overall goal was established and four topics were identified that are important to the achievement of that goal, with strategies for each topic. The Plan was intentionally written to provide broad, simple and basic guidance, with the realization that regions and stations would need to build goals to meet their particular challenges and needs. The Operational Plan for the Science Roadmap was approved at the ESS meeting in Oklahoma City, September, 2004.

Action Requested: For information and possible discussion as to how the plan should be implemented in the Southern Region.

2. At the February 28, 2005 ESCOP Executive Committee meeting held in Washington, D.C., a motion to eliminate the ESCOP Planning Committee passed unanimously.Reasons included the fact that the Partnership Working Group is beginning to lead long-range planning and the Budget and Legislative Committee can do prioritization of research areas beyond base funding and NRI. The Budget and Legislative Committee can appoint ad-hoc committees to write descriptions of priority budget areas when needed.

• This recommendation will go to full ESCOP in July for approval.
• If approved, a by-law change will be voted on at the ESS meeting in September.

Action Requested: For information only.
 
OPERATIONAL PLAN FOR THE SCIENCE ROADMAP
GOAL: CREATE OPPORTUNITIES FOR FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL RESEARCH ENTITIES TO WORK TOGETHER, AND WITH EXTENSION AND EDUCATION, TO ADDRESS THE SEVEN CHALLENGE AREAS IDENTIFIED IN THE SCIENCE ROADMAP: BE COMPETITIVE IN A GLOBAL ECONOMY; ADD VALUE TO OUR FUTURE HARVESTS; ADJUST AGRICULTURAL PRACTICES TO A CHANGING CLIMATE; BE GOOD STEWARDS OF THE ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES; MAKE OUR FAMILIES AND COMMUNITIES STRONG; AND, IMPROVE FOODS AND PROCESSING FOR BETTER HEALTH.
TOPIC 1 – STRUCTURE AND ORGANIZATION – STRATEGIES:
1) Recruit and support champions; people and organizations that are recognized by all partners as leaders.
2) Leverage resources and expertise through multiple partners (federal and state agencies, and other campuses) to strengthen research.
3) Use the food systems approach to establish the role of agriculture in societal issues.
4) Establish mechanisms to insure stakeholders’ input is heard (advisory groups, focus groups).
5) Identify organizational structures that allow for and encourage collaboration, and create incentives to encourage collaboration (National Research Initiative Coordinated Agriculture Program, Multistate Research Funding process, integrated research, education and extension projects, National Research Initiative).
6) Create a system that better differentiates and identifies “niches” and builds on these so response time for addressing issues and problems can be quicker.
TOPIC 2 – PERSONNEL AND EXPERTISE – STRATEGIES:
1) Identify capacity and” gaps”, including gaps in education among diverse groups.
2) Actively recruit persons from all segments of society to educate and train the next generation of researchers to meet the 7 challenges.
3) Utilize expertise without regard to location and discipline (across campus, among campuses, domestically as well as internationally).
4) Maximize the use of technology, where appropriate.
5) Provide incentives to encourage collaboration (release time, awards, salary stipend, hourly assistant, etc.).
6) Create joint programs to leverage resources (for example, World Food Distribution training programs offered through Texas universities; Great Plains IDEA).
TOPIC 3 – INFRASTRUCTURE/FACILITIES – STRATEGIES:
1) Establish a network of service centers (equipment used by many researchers; users pay fee for service).
2) Share equipment and facilities to better utilize resources and minimize duplication.
3) Create matching sources of support for centralized service and/or shared equipment and facilities (as existing NIH or NSF programs).
4) Create Memo’s of Agreement and/or Memo’s of Understanding with Plans of Work to encourage sharing of new and existing equipment and facilities.
TOPIC 4 – FUNDING AND SUPPORT – STRATEGIES:
1) Create incentives to encourage pursuit of grants and contracts, for an example overload pay, grantsmanship training.
2) Create an incentive fund in competitive grants programs to provide matching funds for pooling resources (facilities, equipment and personnel).
3) Create a core-center approach to attract funds and promote multi-disciplinary participation in projects to which people can relate, for example obesity, renewable energy.
Action Requested: None, for information only
 

Agenda Item 8.
Executive Committee

Presenter: D.C. Coston
 
Background:

1. Task Forces Appointed
2. Formula Funds Task Force, joint with ESCOP
3. Charge:

1. Review all recent and pertinent literature for relevance and background to determine if additional materials are needed and/or required, and if there are any voids in the arguments that are being made that need to be filled.
2. Determine if and what additional written materials might be necessary to supplement existing materials to support the case for maintenance of and/or increases to the Federal Formula Fund portfolio.
3. If appropriate, formulate and recommend a strategy for the development of new supporting materials for use by the BRT, CARET and others who will make the case for maintenance and/or increases to the Federal Formula Fund portfolio.

1. Germplasm Task Force

i. Charge:

1. Help map the experiment station system’s future involvement in the National Plant Germplasm System (NPGS).
2. Make recommendations on the experiment station system’s future interaction with the NPGS related to programmatic involvement, administrative structure, and funding.

2. Leadership Development for the 21st Century: Linking Research, Academics, and Extension
3. Approved support of LEAD 21 to replace the ESCOP/ACOP Leadership Development Program.
4. Research Involvement with eXtension
5. Received an update and report from Dan Cotton and Ron Brown in November on eXtension.
   b. At their invitation, ESCOP has appointed Eric Young as liaison to the eXtension Implementation Planning Committee.
6. Core Committee Changes
7. Approved elimination of the ESCOP Partnership Committee due to its redundancy with the joint COPs/CSREES Partnership Working Group.
   b. Tentatively approved elimination of the ESCOP Planning Committee. This By-law change will be voted on during the Section meeting in September.
8. New CARET Liaison
9. Abbott Lee, Lee Brothers Inc., Chatsworth NJ, is the CARET liaison to ESCOP
10. BAA Policy Board of Directors
11. Scott Angle, University of Maryland, is the new ESCOP representative to the BAA Policy board of Directors.
12. Officers
13. Chair – D.C. Coston
    b. Chair-elect – Al Parks
    c. Executive Vice Chair – Eric Young
14. Future Meetings
15. ESCOP – Joint COPs Meeting, July 24-26, Kansas City
    b. Experiment Station Section – September 26, San Antonio, TX

 
In meeting comments:

• Lead 21 deadline has been extended to May1.

 
Action Requested: None, information only.
 
 
 

Agenda Item 9.

National Institute for Agricultural Security Report

 
Presenter: D.C. Coston
 
Background:
For an update of NIAS activities see http://agriculturalsecurity.homestead.com/index.html
 
Action Requested: None, for information only.
 
 
 

Agenda Item 10.

NIMSS Update

 
Presenter: Eric Young, Donna Pearce, and Nancy Cox
 
Background:
NIMSS status report:

• User Manual for Version 2 has been completed, however it will be continuously updated as NIMSS pages are revised and added. The User Manual is available as a PDF file from a link on the agInnovation South homepage or directly at http://cipm.ncsu.edu/agInnovation South/NIMSSUserManual.pdf
• NIMSS Oversight Committee Conference Calls are now three times a year (February/June/October).
• System Administrators and Judy Sun (NIMSS programmer) have started monthly conference calls to discuss NIMSS issues. The notes from these meetings are posted in the ESCOP webpage:
  http://cipm.ncsu.edu/escop/committee/subcom00.htm#oversight. Please direct any comments or concerns to Donna at donna_pearce@ncsu.edu and they will be discussed on the next call.
• System Administrators can now view screens as an Administrative Advisor or as any other user by logging in with that user’s login and password. This will allow them to better assist AAs and other users that have questions or problems.
• Administrative Advisors can now edit non-AES user profiles including e-mail addresses by going to Settings>>User Profile>>Edit Profile. AES participants’ information can only be modified by their experiment station director’s office or the System Administrator.
  Cleaning up of User and “Other” Station records is about 90% complete.
• NIMSS ’05-’06 budget request is $32,500.00 (click here for NIMSS budget details)
• AES directors and CSREES have agreed to move the NIMSS budget into NRSP-1 (CRIS) beginning in ’05-’06. CSREES will provide 25% of the total budget and the remainder will come from off-the-top MRF.

In meeting comments:

• NIMSS budget is now a line item in NRSP-1 budget
• CSREES will fund 25% of the NIMSS budget
• Send Donna items of concern or problems you are experiencing with NIMSS

 
Action Requested: For information only.
 
 

Agenda Item 11.

ARS Report

 
Presenter: Darrell Cole for Chuck Onstead
 
Background:
Information reported to group:
Several appointments in ARS during the past few months including, Edward B. Knipling, Administrator; Antoinette A. Betschart, Associate Administrator; Caird E. Rexroad, Associate Administrator; the retirement of Dr. Al Dedrick, National Program Staff; the appointment of Dr. Steven Kappas, National Program Staff, and Dr. Joseph Spence, National Program Staff.
The Presidents FY 2006 Budget proposed the recession of $200+M for ARS with some increases but with an overall reduction of over $100 M.
The ARS Congressional Hearings were held at the same time as the CSREES hearing on April 7, 2005.
ARS has authority to enter into Specific Cooperative Agreements (SCA) with partner institutions.
Prohibited uses of the SCA

• Circumvent the Federal hiring process
• Fund construction projects
• Modify or improve real property
• Pay travel cost for ARS employees
• Purchase equipment for ARS

ARS will be working with cooperators to ensure that the agreements are being used properly and that ARS was a full partner in the research.
 
Action Requested: None, for information only.
 
 

Agenda Item 12.

NRSP-1

Presenter: Bill Brown
 
Background:
Click here for the FY06 proposed budget for NRSP-1
 
Action Requested: None, for information only.
 
 

Agenda Item 13.

NRSP-3

 
Presenter: Jerry Arkin
 
Background:
 
NRSP-3, The National Atmospheric Deposition Program (NADP)-A Long-Term Monitoring Program in Support of Research on the Effects of Atmospheric Chemical Deposition
BRIEF PROJECT SUMMARY
The National Atmospheric Deposition Program (NADP) provides quality assured data and information on the exposure of managed and natural ecosystems and cultural resources to acidic compounds, nutrients, base cations, and mercury in precipitation. These data support decisions on air quality issues related to precipitation chemistry and are used by scientists, policy-makers, educators, and the public. Data are freely available via the Internet, which enables on-line retrieval of individual data points, seasonal and annual averages, trend plots, concentration and deposition maps, reports, manuals, and other data and information. (http://nadp.sws.uiuc.edu).
FY 2005 HIGHLIGHTS
Technical Committee. Halifax, Nova Scotia, was the site of the “National Atmospheric Deposition Program 2004 Scientific Symposium and Annual Technical Committee Meeting,” 21-24 September 2004. With partial support from Environment Canada, the symposium featured sessions on the recovery of U.S. and Canadian aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems from sulfur emissions reductions and decreased sulfate deposition. In a special luncheon address, Peggy Farnsworth, Director of the Transboundary Air Issues Branch of Environment Canada, acknowledged the invaluable role of the NADP and Canadian Air and Precipitation Monitoring Network in providing long-term data for assessing the emissions reduction goals set forth in the United States-Canada Air Quality Agreement. The symposium and meeting attracted 114 participants. NADP Vice Chair Cari Furiness organized the 37 symposium presentations into 8 sessions over two days complemented by a poster session with 29 presenters (see meeting proceedings athttp://nadp.sws.uiuc.edu/lib/proceedings/NADPpro2004.pdf. The symposium followed a full day of meetings by the three NADP Subcommittees, Quality Assurance Advisory Group, and Executive Committee. NADP Chair Gary Lear convened the annual Technical Committee business meeting (see minutes athttp://nadp.sws.uiuc.edu/meetings/fall04/techComm2004fall.pdf).
Extension/Education Activities. In April, NADP staff members partnered with the American Chemical Society (ACS) to develop an earth day activity, entitled “Testing the pH of Rain Water,” for elementary school students. Students were instructed in assembling a simple rain collector from household materials and in measuring rainwater pH with materials from the ACS. Students were directed from the ACS Web site to the NADP Web site (http://nadp.sws.uiuc.edu/earthday/), where they could post their pH measurements, compare them with nearby NTN data, and print a personal certificate of completion. Compared with the 2003 ACS earth day activity, participation in this activity tripled, prompting the ACS to award the NADP a Salute to Excellence for commitment to education.
Internet usage. NADP data are available at no charge via the Internet. In 2004, the site received 75,477 unique visitors, up more than 40 % from 2003. In addition, registered data users more than doubled in the last 12 months and user sessions rose by nearly 90 %. About 39 % of NADP Web site usage is for educational purposes, and the balance is for research.
Informing Policy. In its most recent report, United States – Canada Air Quality Agreement, Progress Report 2004, the bilateral Air Quality Committee, established under the United States-Canada Air Quality Agreement, used NADP data to evaluate progress under the Acid Rain Annex of the agreement. Since signing the agreement in 1991, U.S. and Canadian governments have taken significant actions to reduce acidic precipitation by requiring substantial reductions in sulfur dioxide emissions. The goal was to reduce the deposition of sulfate, the primary acidifying agent in precipitation. Canadian and U.S. sulfur dioxide emissions decreased by about 27 percent and 32 percent, respectively, since 1990. NADP NTN and AIRMoN data confirmed that these reductions were essentially matched by decreases in sulfate deposition. In both countries, reductions in nitrogen oxide emissions were much smaller, averaging 10 – 20 percent. Nitrate at NTN sites decreased in eleven northeastern states but remained unchanged or increasing elsewhere.
NTN data are being used in the Forest Health Monitoring Program (FHMP) to map inorganic nitrogen and sulfur deposition in U.S. ecoregions, as an indicator of forest exposure to air pollutants. The FHMP is a multi-agency program (http://fhm.fs.fed.us/) that was initiated in 1991 by the U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service to determine the status, changes, and trends of forest health indicators in forested ecosystems. Recent research has focused on nutrient uptake, retention, and cycling in forests and the effect of atmospheric deposition on these processes. Acidic deposition has been implicated as a factor in the loss of base cations from forest soils in the northeastern and southeastern United States and in calcium losses from red spruce needles, making this species more susceptible to damage from disease, frost, and drought.
The recent National Academy of Sciences (NAS) report on Air Quality Management in the United States describes the three NADP wet deposition networks (NTN, AIRMoN, and MDN), along with the Clean Air Status and Trends Network (CASTNet) for assessing dry deposition, as “the most comprehensive atmospheric deposition monitoring networks” in the United States today, and describes “monitoring networks as an essential part of any air quality management system.” The report summarizes some of the applications of NTN and CASTNet data to measure the progress and assess the benefits of existing air quality management programs. The NAS report also identifies the emerging interest in bioaerosols (bacteria, fungi, viruses, and allergens), which the NADP is uniquely suited to address with its nationwide network of sites. The NADP could play an important role in a surveillance system for the detection and spread of pathogens, whether domestic or foreign in origin.
Publications. An on-line database that lists citations using NADP data is accessible at http://nadp.sws.uiuc.edu/lib/bibsearch.asp.
PLANS FOR FY 2006
Serving science and education. The NRSP-3 seeks to continue to support the needs of researchers and educators by providing up-to-date quality-assured data and information on nutrients, acidic compounds, base cations, and mercury in precipitation. New on-line data presentations are under development, including isopleth map animations that track annual concentration and deposition changes of cations and anions not now included in the current map animation series.
Supporting informed decisions on air quality issues. Scientists and policy-makers have a keen interest in the atmospheric deposition of nutrients and the role of nutrient deposition in affecting unmanaged forests, shrublands, and grasslands and in affecting surface water quality, especially in the estuarine waters of the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts. The NADP Central Analytical Laboratory is measuring total nitrogen and total phosphorus in precipitation samples to explore the feasibility of adding these analytes to current measurements.
Responding to emerging issues. The NADP Program Office recently collaborated with scientists at the U.S. Department of Agriculture Cereal Disease Laboratory (CDL) to look for wheat stem rust (Puccinia graminis) spores in NTN samples. Filters containing insoluble matter from NTN samples collected at selected Midwestern sites from May to November 2004 were sent to the CDL, where plant pathologists applied polymerase chain reaction (PCR) methods to search for the spores. PCR methods are very sensitive and specific and the search frequently uncovered wheat stem rust spores on the filters. Wheat stem rust is one of many plant pathogens that are spread by wind-borne spores. In 2005/2006, this work will focus on detection of Asian soybean rust (Phakopsora pachyrhizi) spores. Asian soybean rust was first reported in the southern U.S. in November 2004. Atmospheric transport and deposition are key to the spread of this damaging pathogen. With nearly 250 sites across the country, the NADP/NTN could be a key part of a surveillance system for the detection and spread of Asian soybean rust and other plant pathogens.
NRSP-3 Budget Request Summary
Action Requested: For information only.
 
 
 

Agenda Item 14.

NRSP-4

 
Presenter: Mary Duryea
 
Background:
The IR-4 Project (NRSP-4) is a national multi-state project that supports the establishment of regulatory clearances of crop protection products with the US Environmental Protection Agency on high value specialty crops. NRSP-4 is designed to link and facilitate research efforts with universities, SAES, CSREES, ARS, commodity organizations and the crop protection industry.
Specialty crops include most: vegetables, fruits, nuts, herbs, spices, floral, nursery, landscape, turf and Christmas trees. Specialty crops are high value/low acreage crops and make up about 46% of U.S. agricultural production and $43 billion in sales.
Some 2004 Accomplishments include:

• Food Use Clearances: A record number of new food use clearances – 1,014 (955 new chemical clearances + 25 new biopesticides + 34 Section 18 uses)
• Ornamental Research and Clearances: 525 ornamental research trials and 216 clearances in floral, nursery, landscape, turf, Christmas trees and forestry crops
• Biopesticide Research: Competitive funding for Biopesticide Research for 43 projects totaling $350,000
• Methyl Bromide Alternatives: Trials to find methyl bromide alternatives in strawberries, peppers, tomatoes, and cucurbit vegetables

The budget request for FY06 is $481,172 and is the same amount stated in the Project Statement which was approved in September, 2004. The off-the-top, multi-state funds that NRSP-4 receives are provided to partially cover the salaries of senior management and their support team at the national coordination headquarters office located at the New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Station. All research activities for NRSP-4 are funding in total by CSREES Special Grants, ARS contributions and unrestricted gifts.
NRSP-4 Budget Request Summary
Action Requested: None, for information only.
 
 
 

Agenda Item 15.

NRSP-5

 
Presenter: D.C. Coston
 
Background:
The NRSP5 group took very seriously the recommendations made by the NRSP Review Committee and approved by the Experiment Station directors during the fall 2004 meeting. The group understands that over the next couple of years, funding through the Agricultural Experiment Station system will be reduced and then eliminated. The group has taken the following steps: 1) they have sent letters to industry groups informing them that until additional funding is received, the number of clones of fruit tree material that can be received and handled through the program will be significantly reduced, 2) they met with industry leaders to talk about transition, and 3) they and industry leaders have developed a strategy for managing in a post AES funding environment, and are aggressively moving forward to acquire the resources for accomplishing that.
Click here for the FY06 proposed budget for NRSP-5
 
Action Requested: For information only.
 
 
 

Agenda Item 16.

NRSP-7

 
Presenter: Garry Adams
Background: No report
 
 
 

Agenda Item 17.

NRSP-8

Presenter: Jerry Cherry
 
Background:
The NRSP-8 continues to be an active and effective program. The inclusion of aquaculture, with no additional funding, is proceeding smoothly. The program is an example of how NRSPs should function and approval of the budget is requested per normal policies.
NRSP-8 Budget Request Summary
 
Action Requested: None, for information only.
 
 
 

Agenda Item 18.

NRSP-6 Project Renewal and 5-Year Budget

 
Presenter: Bob Westerman
 
Background:
The Inter-Regional Potato Introduction Project: Acquisition, classification, preservation, evaluation and distribution of potato (Solanum) germplasm (NRSP 6) national research support project terminates September 30, 2005. The renewal proposal and 5-year budget will be discussed and comments/recommendations passed on to the NRSP Review Committee for consideration in forming their recommendations to the ESS. The ESS will vote on project renewal and the proposed 5-year budget at their meeting Sep 26 in San Antonio.
Please see the NRSP 6 renewal proposal and the executive summary and supplement from the CSREES review of this project for more background. Additional details can be found on NIMSS at http://www.nimss.umd.edu/ by viewing project NRSP_TEMP006.
 
Action Requested: Comments and recommendations of renewal of NRSP 6 and the proposed 5-year budget.
 
In meeting discussion:

• NRSP-6 committee is proposing an reduction in off-the-top funds of 5% a year over 5 years, for total reduction of 25%
• Proposal is well written and agInnovation South supports the proposed work and approving the project.
• agInnovation South recommends reducing the off-the-top funding to zero by the end of the 5-year project.
• agInnovation South recommends eliminating any off-the-top funds that are used specifically for research within the first two years.

 
Action Taken: Executive Director will transmit recommendations to NRSP Review Committee.
 

Agenda Item 19.

S-009 Report and Budget Request

 
Presenter: Jerry Arkin
 
Background:
 
MULTI-STATE RESEARCH PROJECT S-009
PLANT GENETIC RESOURCES CONSERVATION AND UTILIZATION
 
Crop collections of importance to the Southern Region have been supported since 1949 through a joint partnership, designated as Multi-State Research Project S-009, between the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Plant Genetic Resources Conservation Unit and the Southern State Agricultural Experiment Stations. For over 50 years, the S-009 Project has served as a major component of the National Plant Germplasm System, and its activities have markedly improved crop technology in the Southern Region, the U.S., and abroad, by providing plant genetic resources and associated information.
Accomplishments for 2004:

• A total of 24,151 accessions (almost 14,000 in S-009 region) were distributed in 922 orders to users worldwide in 2004.
• Seed longevity is improved by storage in -18 C rather than 4 C. Since 2001, all original seed and seed of new regenerations is placed in -18 C storage at Griffin. Currently, 48,566 accessions or 57.7% of the collection have at least one inventory sample stored at – 18 C. Germination tests were conducted on over 9,100 accessions.
• Molecular characterization was conducted on the seashore paspalum, finger millet, bamboo, and bermudagrass collections. The guar collection was characterized by genetic marker analysis, agronomic data, and HPLC analysis of isoflavones.
• Program visibility was increased by hosting the 2004 GRIN Site meeting at Griffin with 40 attendees from 22 germplasm sites and by presentations on Griffin program to ARS National Program Staff in Beltsville, MD, and to BIO 2004 International Biotechnology conference (over 17,000 attendees) in San Francisco, CA.
• Digital images of 560 chile peppers and 439 cowpea accessions were taken and placed on GRIN as requested by scientists on the Pepper and Cowpea Crop Germplasm committees.
• ARS provided a temporary funding increase of $46,000 in 2004 for an additional seed germinator, 100 chile pepper pollination cages, and a grass seed thresher to improve germination and regeneration operations in the collection.

S-009 Budget Request
Increase the S-009 FY06 personnel services budget in the amount of $6,102 for a total S-009 FY06 budget of $402,733. The requested increase reflects a 2% increase in salaries based on The University of Georgia salary projections.
Plant Genetic Resources Conservation and Utilization funding request for FY2006
Click here for a detailed report
Action Requested: Approval of S-009 FY06 Budget Request.
 
In meeting comments:

• Request a 2% increase to meet the University of Georgia’s salary increase
• Requested amount for FY06 is $402,733, up from FY05 $396,631

Action Taken: On motion/second Drs. Arkin/Watson the S-009 budget was approved.
 

Agenda Item 20.

ESCOP Germplasm Task Force Draft Report

 
Presenter: Mark Hussey
 
Background:
The ESCOP Germplasm Task Force was appointed in September 2004 to evaluate the State Agricultural Experiment Station System’s current and future interaction with the National Plant Germplasm System related to programmatic involvement, administrative structure and fiscal support. The Task Force has submitted a draft report with recommendations to ESCOP.
The five regional research associations are reviewing this draft report at their spring meetings and have been asked to send comments to Tom Fretz, the Task Force’s ED support, by May 1, 2005. ESCOP hopes that this will be a starting point to build a stronger working relationship between the Agricultural Experiment Station system and the NPGS and to provide more effective support for national plant germplasm efforts.
 
Action Requested: Compile any comments on draft report and send to Tom Fretz by May 1, 2005.
 
In meeting discussion:

• agInnovation South agrees with the recommendations in the Germplasm TF draft report, particularly the need for a national joint oversight/coordination committee.
• agInnovation South recommends the national committee consider establishing a single NRSP that would replace all the current off-the-top funded activities, both national and regional, related to germplasm collection, preservation, and distribution.
• NRSP-4 could be looked at as a model of how an NRSP coordinates the activities of many different entities.
• The national committee should keep in mind that agInnovation South is recommending NRSP-6’s budget be zeroed out in five years in anticipation of another type of national support mechanism for its activities.

 
Action Taken: Mark Hussey will transmit the agInnovation South recommendations to the Germplasm TF for consideration.
 

Agenda Item 21.

MRC Report

 
Presenter: Bill Brown
 
Background:
 

1. Status of multistate activities that are scheduled to terminate September 30, 2005.

 

Activity	Admin Advisor	Current Designation	Status
NEW	Skip Jubb, VA	SDC303	In peer review
S285	Jerry Cherry, GA	SDC305	In MRC review
S290	DC Coston, OK	SDC309	In MRC review
S291	Jerry Cherry, GA	SDC308	Working on final proposal
S292	Jerry Cherry, GA	SDC311	Working on final proposal
S294	Bill Brown, FL	SDC307	Working on final proposal
S295	Susan Barefoot, SC	SDC313	Working on final proposal
S296	Tom Klindt, TN		Will terminate
S297	Steve Leath, NC	S_temp942	In Exec Comm review
S299	David Morrison, LA	SDC312	Working on final proposal
S300	Richard Jones, FL		1-year extension requested
S301	David Boethel, LA	SDC314	Working on final proposal
S302	Greg Weidemann, AR	SDC315	In peer review
S303	Mark Hussey, TX		Working on DC proposal
S304	Bob Westerman, OK	S_temp1142	In AC review
SERA3	David Boethel, LA		Email sent Feb 1 to SERA and SCC Administrative Advisors about need for renewal proposals. Deadline for proposals to be in NIMSS for review is July 1.
SERA4	John Hayes, SC
SERA23	Jim Harper. NC
SERA30	Bob Shulstad, GA
SERA32	DC Coston, OK
SCC22	Al Smith, GA
SCC33	Clarence Watson, MS
SCC75	Bill Brown, FL

 

2. At the Fall agInnovation South meeting, the MRC was asked to consider whether or not department heads should be appointed as Administrative Advisors to “S” projects and to make a recommendation on this question at the Spring meeting.This issue is on the agenda for the MRC conference call on Thursday, March 30.
3. Any other issues or concerns relative to the multistate activities review and approval process may be discussed at this time.

Action Requested: A decision on the question of department heads being appointed as Administrative Advisors for “S” projects.
 
In meeting discussion:

• Department Heads should only serve as AA’s for SERAs and SCCs
• Continue to use the policy we have in place now
• AA’s won’t approve annual meetings if the annual report has not been submitted in NIMSS
• Donna will send reminder to AA after 60 days requesting annual report

 
Action Taken: None

Agenda Item 22.

MRF Program Roles & Responsibilities

Presenter: Eric Young
 
Background:
A powerpoint presentation will be given on the roles and responsibilities of people in various positions relative to use of Multistate Research Funds, including the Secretary of Agriculture, Experiment Station directors, and regional associations.
 
 
Action Requested: None, for information only.
 
 

Agenda Item 23.
Cotton Winter Nursery and Cotton Inc. Update

 
Presenter: Roy Cantrell (Cotton Inc.)
 
Background:
Please click here to download a copy of the presentation
 
Action Requested: None, for information only.
 
 

Agenda Item 24.

Executive Director’s Report

 
Presenter: Eric Young
 
Background:
Executive Director’s Report
agInnovation South Spring Meeting
Corpus Christi, TX
April 3-6, 2005
agInnovation South Activities
agInnovation South Office
Donna and I have settled into our new offices in the Southern Region IPM Center suite on NC State’s Centennial Campus. Arrangements with the regional center are working out very well and involve many complimentary benefits. Since Oct 1, 2004, Donna and I have been supporting D.C. Coston as the Chair of ESCOP. This has added somewhat to our workload for 2004/05, particularly for Donna related to meeting organization and follow-up, conference calls, and correspondence, which will continue until Oct 1, 2005.
Website
We are continued to update and add to the agInnovation South web site to increase its usefulness by agInnovation South members. The most significant change in 2004 was a major revision and update of the Guidelines for Southern Directors relative to administration of multistate projects, which incorporates the NIMSS system, revised nomenclature for multistate activities, and other recent changes. The new guidelines can be seen at http://cipm.ncsu.edu/agInnovation South/infobook/guide23.htm.
Also new on our homepage is a link to the new Multi-Institutional Collaboration Assistance web site, which includes the Scientist Expertise Spreadsheet, Outlying Research Station Database, and Sample Multi-Institutional MOAs. This site is described in more detail below.
Multistate Research Committee
The MRC has been active this winter and its members working hard to assure we have a high quality multistate portfolio. We were unable to meet in February at the SAAS conference due to conflicts of some members. However, we did meet by conference call to discuss a number of policy issues related to our multistate activities portfolio. Also, we took that opportunity to have Donna walk the MRC members through all the NIMSS screens that they use for various committee activities. Many of these changed significantly when the new NIMSS version came on line this past fall.
Multi-Institutional Collaboration Assistance
In an effort to facilitate multi-institutional collaborations among Southern experiment stations, I have been working in collaboration with Jay Ritchie (SSRC Monitor Lab, MS State Univ.) to develop some web-based tools that we hope will assist directors in establishing these collaborations. These tools include: Scientist Expertise, an interactive spreadsheet of research faculty in agInnovation South member institutions, other 1862 institutions in states bordering the southern region, and all 1890 institutions; Outlying Research Stations, an interactive map of all agInnovation South member institutions’ outlying research stations and searchable database on research activities at those stations; and sample MOAs/MOUs from on going multi-institutional collaborations.
agInnovation South Assignments
S-1014, Mineral Controls on P Retention and Release in Soils and Soil Amendments, Administrative Advisor
AC-6, Horticulture, Administrative Advisor
Joint Cotton Breeding Advisory Committee and Tecoman Winter Nursery Steering Committee
T-STAR Caribbean Basin Advisory Group
Liaison to the Association of Southern Region Extension Directors
Liaison to the Association of Research Directors (1890s)
ESCOP Activities
Proposed Formula Fund Cuts Impacts
In an effort to document the impact of the President’s proposed cuts in Hatch, McIntire-Stennis, and Animal Health formula funds, the EDs helped coordinate collecting individual state’s potential impacts and summarized those impacts for each region. The states’ impacts and regional summaries are available on the BRT web site at http://www.nasulgc-bac.com/budget_cuts.htm
National Information and Management Support System (NIMSS)
The significantly revised version of NIMSS was released this past August and is generally much more friendly to first-time or infrequent users. I serve as chair of the NIMSS Oversight Committee and Tom Fretz, NE Executive Director, is the database manager. Tom and I successfully negotiated with CSREES to provide 25% of the NIMSS total budget beginning in 2005/06 and incorporate it into the NRSP-1 (CRIS) budget to better ensure sustained support from off-the-top Multistate Research Funds.
NASULGC – DOE/EERE Collaboration
The first year of collaborative projects between NASULGC and DOE/EERE has been completed and a final report on all activities has been given to NASULGC President Peter Magrath and DOE Assistant Secretary David Garman. During 2005, I will co-Chair a project to increasing the working relationships of EERE scientists and engineers with university faculty by expanding the joint university/EERE lab workshops that were begun in 2004. Workshops will be planned this year at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Colorado and Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee.
Leadership Development for the 21st Century (LEAD 21)
I have served as co-Chair of the Leadership Planning Committee, which developed LEAD 21, and now serve as the Interim Board of Directors Chair. This new program was approved in November to replace the ESCOP/ACOP and NELD programs as the primary national-level leadership development program serving the needs of land grant universities’ colleges of agricultural, environmental, and human sciences and CSREES. It is intended to meet the future needs for leadership development of faculty, specialists, program and team leaders, research station and center directors, district and regional directors, department heads and chairs, and others.
The first class of LEAD 21 will begin in June 2005 and a formal call for applications was distributed in late January. Program details along with application information can be found on the LEAD 21 web site at http://www.fanning.uga.edu/LEAD21/
PIPRA Representative
As part of my role with the ESCOP Science and Technology Committee, I serve as a liaison between ESCOP and the Public Intellectual Property Resource for Agriculture (PIPRA). In that capacity, I attended the PIPRA annual membership meeting this year at UC Berkley.
ESCOP Assignments
ESCOP (Executive Vice-Chair)
Science and Technology Committee (Executive Vice-Chair)
NIMSS Oversight Committee (Chair)
NRSP Review Committee
NIAS Board of Directors
LEAD 21 Interim Board of Directors (Chair)
NASULGC – DOE/EERE Collaboration Projects Committee
Farm Bill Committee
National Multistate Coordinating Committee
eXtension Implementation Planning Committee
Action Requested: For information only
 
 

Agenda Item 25.
2007 Joint Spring Meeting Location

 
Presenter: Eric Young
 
Background:
The agInnovation South and ASRED Spring meeting rotations are currently scheduled to be the following over the next few years.
agInnovation South                     ASRED
2006 – MS                  2006 – LA
2007 – TN                   2007 – KY
2008 – PR                    2008 – NC
2009 – VA                   2009 – OK
2010 – NC                  2010 – PR
2011 – AR                   2011 – SC
2012 – SC                   2012 – TN
2013 – OK                  2013 – TX
2014 – KY                  2014 – VA
 
We are scheduled to meet jointly with ASRED in alternate years, ie. 2007, 2009, etc. In 2003 and this year, ASRED agreed to have the joint meeting hosted by the institution that was scheduled in our normal rotation. Ron Brown and I would like to work out a schedule that would be a compromise between both associations’ rotation. This will be discussed jointly at the end of Tuesday morning’s joint session.
 
Action Requested: Determine options for schedule compromise with ASRED for future joint meetings.
 
In meeting discussion:

• Suggested that we alternate between our schedule and ASRED’s schedule to determine location of joint meetings every two years.

 
Action Taken: None

Agenda Item 26.

agInnovation South Excellence in Leadership Award Presentation

 
Presenter: Nancy Cox
 
Background:
Nancy Cox, agInnovation South Chair, will present the annual agInnovation South Leadership Award.
 
 
Action Taken: Dr. Richard Jones, FL, was presented the agInnovation South Leadership Award.
 

Agenda Item J5.

DOE/NASULGC Project Report and Future Interaction with DOE Regional Office

 
Presenter: Jim Powell (SE Regional Office, DOE/EERE)
 
Background:
DOE and NASULGC institutions are into the second year of an agreement that builds on the capabilities of Land-Grant institutions and provides mechanisms for closer collaboration between the two entities. Jim Powell will review successes of the first phase of the agreement and focus on additional and continuing ways that DOE and LGUs can interact.
 
Click here for PowerPoint presentation
 
In meeting comments:

• Web sites of interest related to the DOE/NASULGC project are:
  • http://www.ncfap.org/specialprojects/
  • http://www.eere.energy.gov/

 
Action Requested: None, for information only.
 
 

Agenda Item J6.
NASULGC’s Position Statement on the LGU Role in Regional Economic Development

Presenter: Ron Brown and Eric Young
 
Background:
Dr. Charles C. Muscoplat, Vice President for Agricultural Policy and Dean of the College of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Sciences at the University of Minnesota, made a presentation to the Board on Agricultural Assembly at the NASULGC Annual Meeting in San Diego this past November. The title of the presentation was “Agriculture: I Don’t Want to Talk About It”. Dr. Muscoplat’s presentation can be seen by clicking here.
NASULGC has since appointed a policy group, chaired by Dr. Muscoplat, to draft a NASULGC position statement on the role of the land-grants in regional economic development. The policy group welcomes any comments and/or suggestions regarding the land-grant institution’s role in regional economic development as they develop this statement.
Dr. Muscoplat and Dr. Carla Carlson, University of Minnesota Assistant Vice President for Agricultural Policy who is also part of the policy group, will call in to our meeting during this agenda item to discuss the group’s deliberations so far and listen to comments from the directors.
 
Action Requested: Comments and suggestions for the policy group’s consideration.
 
In meeting comments:

• Putting a complete integrated team in place with relevant disciplines is critical
• Partnering with other colleges (medical, natural resources, human sciences, etc) and non-agriculture community is also very important.

 
Action Taken: None

Agenda Item J7.

Formula and Competitive Funds Discussion

Presenter: Ron Brown and Eric Young
 
Background:
The President’s FY 06 budget proposed 50% cuts in Hatch and McIntire-Stennis formula funds, with elimination in FY 07, and elimination of Animal Health funds. Significant cuts in Smith-Lever funds have also been proposed in recent past President’s budget. Compensating increases in the FY 06 USDA competitive funds indicate that this was a decision directed at how funds are allocated, not how much funding is available.
The continuing battle to maintain formula funds and the slow increase in competitive funds over many years has generated discussion about the relative merits of federal funding allocated by formula and by competition. The BAA Policy Board of Directors is currently considering how to initiate a system-wide discussion on this issue. Therefore, it is timely to take this opportunity when the southern region extension and experiment station directors are meeting jointly to discuss this issue from our region’s point of view.
Both ECOP and ESCOP have commissioned investigations on formula funds in recent years. As further background for our discussion, please see the executive summaries of ECOP’sSmith-Lever Formula Funds Survey and ESCOP’s Counterfactual Study. In addition, ESCOP and ECOP appointed the joint Formula Funds Task Force to make recommendations on how to most effectively advocate for federal formula funds. This Task Force has only begun it’s deliberations and has not issued a report yet, however two members, Wendy Wintersteen (Iowa State Director of Extension) and Tom Fretz (NC regional experiment station Executive Director) have written a draft thought piece that draws upon some of the Task Force’s discussions. Please see a Nation At Risk for their thoughts on this issue.
Below are some questions to generate discussion. Following the questions is a draft position statement on this issue authored by Ron Brown and Eric Young, offered as a beginning for a potential joint position statement from the southern region research and extension directors.
Discussion Starters

1. Are there feasible ways to target formula funds and cooperate regionally on high priority issues and, thus, be more accountable? For research? For extension?
2. Can integrated programs be funded with formula funds and better satisfy those who prefer elimination of formula funds?
3. Can impacts be measured in a summative way across the region and be attributed to formula funds? (research may already do this to an acceptable degree)
4. Is the desire to move from formula funds a programmatic decision or a political decision? Is it a control issue? Is the issue compounded by a lack of consensus within “the family?”

Position Statement on Formula and Competitively Allocated Federal Funding
Southern Region Directors of Research and Extension
April 2005
DRAFT 3/23/05
The Smith-Lever, Hatch, and McIntire-Stennis Acts authorized the use of federal funds for direct payment to each state to support agricultural and forestry research and extension. These Acts also specify how the allocations are to be made and the requirement for state matching funds. In addition, many federal competitive peer-reviewed funding sources have been established by Congress that provide funds for agriculture and forestry, including NRI, NSF, and NIH. These funding agencies have a highly evolved scientific-merit based selection process that determines allocation of funds within identified priority areas.
A balanced portfolio of funding sources for agricultural research and extension in the Land Grant university system is essential. Federal, state, and private funds that support public research and extension programs combine to provide a broad range of stakeholder interests that demand significant impacts and high value-return to society. It is also critical that these funds be allocated through both formula and competitive decisions as a way to ensure continuation of local user-guided research and extension.
Competitive peer-review mechanisms for funding decisions, that are scientific-merit focused and curiosity driven, help to maintain high program quality and creativity, but provide little assurance that an optimal value return will be derived by society from the investments. By contrast, administratively driven highly consultative processes involving federal, state, and agribusiness interests that make most decisions on the use of formula allocated funds, help to ensure societal relevance, but depend on the administration to maintain high quality.
Research and extension programs that receive broad support from public and private sources can truly offer the entire spectrum of discovery through application, but it requires a stable base of support to maintain focus on specific outcomes over a long time frame. Research and development is inherently an uncertain enterprise of exploring the unknown, testing hypothesizes, and trial & error applications, frequently over many years. Federal funds allocated by formula provide the foundation and continuity from year to year that is required to sustain this process. For example, in the case of hybrid corn, perhaps the most significant agricultural research breakthrough of the 20th century, it took 40 years for Luther Burbank’s’ insights into hybrid vigor to become widely commercialized by Henry Wallace and a number of additional years to obtain widespread adoption of the technology.
Ideally, the Land Grant universities want to maximize both the quality of their research and extension programs and the value-returns to society from public investments. A balanced combination of long-term formula allocated base support and short-term competitive funding makes this possible.
Action Requested: For discussion and potential development of a joint position statement.
 
Action Taken: A Joint Southern Region Formula Task Force committee was formed consisting of the following people:

• Jon Ort, NC State University, ASRED
• Ed Smith, Texas A& M University, ASRED
• Greg Weidemann, University of Arkansas, agInnovation South
• Paul Warner, University of Kentucky, ASRED
• David Boethel, Louisiana State University, agInnovation South
• Tom Klindt, University of Tennessee, agInnovation South
• Ron Brown, ASRED
• Eric Young, agInnovation South
  

 

Agenda Item J8.
2007 Joint ASRED/agInnovation South Meeting

Presenter: Ron Brown and Eric Young
 
Background:
In meeting comments:

• ASRED accepts the agInnovation South proposal of alternating between the agInnovation South schedule and ASRED schedule to determine location of joint meetings every two years.

Action Taken: Executive Directors will figure out revised rotation for joint and separate meetings.

Agenda Item 27.

Report from Chief Operating Officers Meeting

 
Presenter: David Boethel for Nancy Cox
 
Background:
Nancy Cox, agInnovation South Chair, will report on items discussed and actions taken at the Chief Operating Officers meeting held Tuesday morning.
 
In meeting report:

• David Boethel reported that the Southern Region is operating in the black and that there will be no increase in assessments for FY06
• Eric and Donna were commended for a job well done
• agInnovation South five year Strategic Plan will be discussed at the fall meeting

Action Requested: None, for information only.
 
 

Agenda Item 28.

PIPRA Update

Presenter: Alan Bennett (PIPRA Executive Director)
 
Background:
An overview and update will be presented of the Public Intellectual Property Resource for Agriculture (PIPRA). For background, see the PIPRA One-pager and Science article.
 
Click here for PowerPoint presentation
 
Action Requested: For information only.
 

Agenda Item 29.

SUNGRAINS Update

 
Presenter: David Boethel
 
Background:
SUNGRAINS Cooperative Agreement
A newly revised version of the SUNGRAINS Cooperative Agreement was sent out to several members of the Southern Association of Agricultural Experiment Station Directors on March 17. This version of the agreement seeks to address the issues raised during the conference call held on February 9. Specifically, a change from “Pooled Royalties” to “Research Fund Fee” was made to vocalize the commitment of the SUNGRAINS participants to higher funding of their small grain breeding programs. Additionally, SUNGRAINS now stands for Southeastern Universities Small Grain Breeding Cooperative Agreement to avoid confusion with a university of that name in Louisiana.
It is our hope that all of the Experiment Stations that would like to be a party to this Cooperative Agreement will have had time to review the agreement and send their suggestions to Patrick Reed (Intellectual Property Associate at the LSU AgCenter) prior to our April meeting. Ideally, action on this agreement can take place at the meeting.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Mr. Patrick Reed (225-578-7742), Dr. Steve Harrison (225-578-1308), or me (225-578-4182).
In meeting discussion:

• Changed name from Southern to Southeastern
• When SUNGRAINS agreement is settled, we need to look at other small grain agreements
• LSU will sign off on the SUNGRAINS agreement and then pass it around to other states in alpha order to sign and pass on.

 
Action Requested: None, for information only.
 
 

Agenda Item 30.

Farm Bill Committee Report

Presenter: Eric Young
 
Background:
The Farm Bill Committee is a standing committee of the BAA Policy Board of Directors and is charged with assuring the land grant system is “prepared, unified, and nimble” with respect to reauthorization of the Farm Bill in 2007 and any prior amendments or adjustments. Jeff Armstrong, Dean, College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Michigan State, is serving as Chair. The committee is composed of five subcommittees, each responsible for one of the key Farm Bill titles.
Conservation – Jack Payne, Utah State
Research & Education – Fred Cholick, Kansas State, and Catherine Woteki, Iowa State (co-chairs)
Rural Development – Marc Johnson, Colorado State
Energy – Stan Johnson, Iowa State
Forestry – Steven B. Daley Laursen, University of Idaho
Four of the five Farm Bill Subcommittees have been active (Energy, Rural Development, Forestry, and Research & Education). The Forestry and Research & Education Subcommittees have provided drafts of specific wording for Farm Bill language. The Conservation Subcommittee has not been active and Jack Payne has just volunteered to chair this subcommittee.
Each of the subcommittees will be developing specific wording that it would like to propose for the various Farm Bill titles. As these are developed they will be discussed in bimonthly teleconferences of the committee. Any comments or other input from the system should be sent to the appropriate subcommittee chair for consideration. It is expected that congressional hearings on the Farm Bill will begin in late 2005, initially as general stakeholder listening sessions around the country followed by focused hearings in D.C.
In addition to the Farm Bill titles, the Committee will also work on reauthorization the National Nutrition Monitoring and Related Research Act (NNMRR Act). This is a very important piece of legislation since it authorizes funds for collecting data used to assess the current state of health of US citizens and conduct market basket surveys, among other things.
 
Action Requested: For information only.
 
 

Agenda Item 31.

Proposed Southern Region Grantsmanship Workshop

 
Presenter: Greg Weidemann and Eric Young
 
Background:
CSREES continues to provide grants workshops to the land grant community on a regional basis. In addition, Scott Angle and Tom Fretz have provided workshops for the land grant community under the auspices of the NE regional office. Due to high demand, they have limited their workshop presentations. The opportunity exists for the Southern Region Directors to utilize materials from the NE region and present workshops within the Southern region on a request basis.
 
Action Requested: Discussion and possible action
 
In meeting discussion:

• Greg Weidemann, Susan Barefoot and Steve Leath have agree to help develop a grantsmanship workshop for the southern region

 
Action Taken: None

Agenda Item 32.

2006 Spring agInnovation South Meeting in Mississippi

 
Presenter: Vance Watson
 
Background:
Mississippi State Agricultural Experiment Station in Mississippi will host the 2006 agInnovation South Spring meeting. The meeting will take place in Biloxi, MS on the Gulf Coast. Look for upcoming information on dates, place and times.
 
Action Requested: None, for information only.
 
 

Agenda Item 33.

Resolutions Committee Report

Presenter: Clarence Watson and Rick Roeder
 
Background:
Resolution in Appreciation will be offer to Dr. Robert Whitson and the Texas A&M Agricultural Experiment Station.
 
Action Taken: A resolution of appreciation was read for Dr. Robert Whitson and staff of the Texas Agriculture Experiment Station at Texas A&M University for their roles in hosting the agInnovation South/ASRED Spring Meeting. A round of applause approved the resolution.

Agenda Item 34.

Fall agInnovation South Meeting, Announcements, etc

Presenter: Nancy Cox
 
Background:
The next agInnovation South meeting will be Monday morning, September 26, 2005 in San Antonio, just prior to the Experiment Station Section Meeting and the SAES/ARD Workshop.
Meeting adjourned at 9:10 a.m.