M I N U T E S
Southern Association of
Agricultural Experiment Station Directors
April, 21-24, 1996
Fayetteville Hilton Inn
Fayetteville, AR
LIST OF ATTENDEES
Meeting of the Southern Association of Agricultural Experiment Station Directors
April 21-24, 1996
Fayetteville Hilton Inn
Fayetteville, AR
Tom Army (ARS) David Appel (TX - ESCOP Leadership) Gerald Arkin (GA) Alberto Beale (PR) Toni Bland, Staff Assistant (ED-S) James Boling (KY) Jon Brandt (NC - AC-7) Jack Britt (NC) Bill Brown (LA) Jerry Cherry (GA) Neville Clarke (ED-S) George Cooper, CSREES D. C. Coston (SC) Nancy Cox (MS) Phil Crandall (AR - AC-4) Larry Crowder (OK) Elwyn Deal (SC) Allen Dunn (SC) Everett Emino (FL) James Fischer (SC) Richard Flagler (CO - Speaker) Lowell Frobish (AL) Frank Gilstrap (TX) Tom Helms (ED-S) Glen Hembry (FL - AC-2) Verner Hurt (MS) Richard Jones (FL) Gerald Jubb (VA) Tom Klindt (TN) Fred Knapp (KY) Kenneth Koonce (LA) George Kriz (NC) John Lee (VA) Sung Lim (AR - AC-11) Steve Lommel (NC) Bob Merrifield Mike Messina (TX - ESCOP Leadership) Russell Muntifering (AL) John Neilson (FL) Hiram Palmertree (CES) Graham Purchase (MS) James Rakocy (VI) Don Richardson (TN) Randall Robinette (MS - AC-8) Charley Scifres (AR) Don Scott (AR - Speaker) Ike Sewell (TN) Helen Shaw (NC) Milo Shult (AR) Dan Smith (SC) Ken Tipton (LA) Fred Tyner (MS) Lalit Verma (MS - AC-5) Donald Voth (AR - AC-9) Vance Watson (MS) Greg Weidemann (AR) Bobby Wells (AR - AC-1) Peggy Whan (AR - AC-3) Russell Wright (OK - AC-12) Johnny Wynne (NC) Jimmy Yeiser (AR) Eric Young (NC)
Sunday April 21, 1996
6:30 Reception - McIlroy
Monday April 22, 1996
7:00 Continental Breakfast - Sequoyah 4
1. 8:00 Introductions Approval of Agenda
2. 8:05 Approval of Agenda . . . . .Dr. D.C. Coston
3. 8:10 National Atmospheric Deposition
Program (NRSP-3). . . . . . . . . . . . .Dr. Richard Flagler
4. 8:20 Introduction to Preservation, Classification, Distribution
and Evaluation of Solanum Species (NRSP-6). . Dr. Eric Young
5. 8:30 National Animal Genome Research
Program (NRSP-8). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dr. Jim Boling
5A. NRSP-1 (CRIS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dr. Ken Koonce
6. 8:40 National Cotton Council of America
Research Committee. . . . . . . . . . . . . .Dr. Andy Jordan
6A. National Weather Service. . . . . . . . . Dr. Lowell Frobish
7. 9:20 Southern Management Information System: Selection
of Pilot Studies and Methods of Funding. . . . . . Dr. Neville Clarke
10:00 Coffee and Informal Discussion
8. 10:30 ESCOP Report . . . . . Dr. Johnny Wynne
9. 10:45 CSREES Report . . . . . Dr. Bob Robinson
10. 11:10 GPRA: Status and Future Actions....Dr. Tom Helms
11. 11:30 ARS Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dr. Tom Army
12. 11:40 SRRC & C9 Report
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Drs. Ike Sewell and D. C.Coston
12:00 Recess, Lunch (on your own)
13. 1:00 Southern Regional Listening Session
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Dr. Jim Fischer
14. 1:20 Southern Rural Development Center
. . . . . . . . . . . .Drs. Hiram Palmertree & Doss Brodnax
15. 1:50 Executive Director Transition Report
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dr. Neville Clarke
15A. Citation presented to Toni Bland
15B. Ownership and Benefits from Intellectual Property in the Southern
Region. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Dr. Richard Jones
16. 2:30 AESOP Enterprises, Ltd. . .. . . . . . . . Dr. Terry Nipp
3:15 Vans leave for Tour of University of Arkansas Poultry Center of
Excellence or Pest Control Research Center
6:30 Bus leaves for dinner at "James at the Mill"
The 1996 Farm Bill -- Implications for Research
and Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Dr. Mark Keenum
Legislative Assistant - Senator Thad Cochran
Tuesday April 23, 1996
7:00 Continental Breakfast - Sequoyah 4
17. 8:00 Goals and Procedures for Planning Groups
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Dr. Richard Jones
18. 8:45 Planning Group Break Out Sessions (Southern Directors
and Chairs of Advisory Groups). . . . . . .Planning Group Chairs
12:00 Lunch (on your own)
12:00 Luncheon Meeting of Chairs of Planning Groups
1:00 Continue Break Out Sessions
of Planning Groups. . . . . . . . . . .Planning Group Chairs
19. 2:00 Review and Act on Recommendations of
Planning Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Dr. Richard Jones
3:00 Refreshments and Discussion
3:30 Continue Review and Actions on Recommendations of Planning
Groups. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Dr. Richard Jones
20. 4:15 Comments from Chairs of
Advisory Groups . . . . . . . .Chairs of Advisory Committees
5:00 Recess
5:30 Bus leaves for Tyson's Complex on the Lake
6:15 Buffet
Wednesday April 24, 1996
7:00 Continental Breakfast - Sequoyah 4
21. 8:00 Report of the Nominating Committee
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dr. Johnny Wynne
22. 8:10 Adoption of the Association's
1996-7 Operating Budget . . . . . . . . . . Dr. D. C. Coston
23. 8:20 Joint Meeting Between 1862 and
1890 Research Directors . . . . . . . . . . . .Dr. Tom Helms
24. 8:40 Plans for Mini-Land Grant Meeting . .Dr. Tom Helms
25. 9:00 Report of the Joint Task Force
on Agroecosystems . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Dr. Jim Fischer
26. 9:20 General Discussion on Future
of The Association. . . . . . .Discussion Leader D.C. Coston
10:00 Refreshments and General Discussion
10:30 Continue General Discussion. . . . . . Dr. D. C. Coston
27. 11:50 Report of Resolutions Committee
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dr. Fred Knapp
28. 12:00 Adjourn
AGENDA BRIEFS
Meeting of The Southern Association of Agricultural Experiment Station Directors
Agenda Item 1
Approval of Agenda
Presenter: Dr. D. C. Coston
BACKGROUND
The agenda was sent to all members along with agenda briefs before the meeting.
ACTION REQUESTED
Discussion, modification as needed and approval.
ACTION TAKEN
The following items were added to the agenda which was then approved:
o Introduction of a late submission for new activity on peanut research by Dr. Frobish (referred to the Plant Systems Planning Group)
o Discussion of the loss of NOAA weather service and needs/plans for compensation (Frobish)
o Request for approval of a Southern Regional Publication from SERA-TF- 12 (Jubb)
o Further information on NRSP -1 (CRIS) (Koonce)
Agenda Item 2
Review and Approval of Minutes of Last Meeting and Interim Actions of Chair
Presenter: Dr. D. C. Coston
BACKGROUND
The minutes of the last meeting were posted on the agInnovation South homepage on the WWW after the meeting. An electronic message was sent to all members to advise that the minutes were available on the web. The interim actions of the Chair are attached.
ACTION REQUESTED
Approval.
ACTION TAKEN
On the motion of Dr. Muntifering, seconded by Dr. Cherry, the minutes of the last meeting were approved.
On the motion of Dr. Kriz, seconded by Dr. Tipton, the interim actions of the chair were approved with the addition of an item dealing with DC-94-07 where a letter of April 3, 1996 was sent to C-9.
Requested series number for “Trade Flows and Marketing Practices Within the United States Nursery Industry: 1993” (S-103)
Appointed Dr. Frank Gilstrap to replace Dr. Tom Helms as Administrative Advisor to S-220, “Improved Systems of Control for Pecan Arthropod Pests.”
Appointed Dr. Frank Gilstrap to replace Dr. Tom Helms as Administrative Advisor to S-267, “Biological Control of Selected Arthropod Pests and Weeds.”
Appointed Drs. Greg Brown, Charles Scifres, Johnny Wynne, and Richard Jones to serve as a “response team” to the Government Performance and Results Act; Dr. Greg Brown to Chair.
Requested agInnovation South Nominating Committee (Drs. Johnny Wynne, Charles Scifres, and Gerald Arkin) to present a nominee (or nominees) for agInnovation South chair-elect to the Association at April meeting.
Appointed Dr. Russ Muntifering to replace Dr. Bob Merrifield as Administrative Advisor to SERA-TF6, “Agroecosystems and Sustainable Agriculture.”
Appointed Linda Clark, Auburn University, as the Southern Association of Agricultural Experiment Station Directors (agInnovation South) technical representative to NRSP-1 (CRIS).
Agenda Item 3
National Atmospheric Deposition Program (NRSP-3)
Presenter: Dr. Richard Flagler
BACKGROUND
This Project was approved first in 1982 and was more recently modified and extended with an expiration date of September, 1997. This agenda item provides for a review of the current status and plans for the coming year. The budget for the coming year is to be voted on by the Operating Officers, on recommendation of the Planning Groups.
ACTION REQUESTED
This presentation is for information in advance of recommendations by the Planning Groups and action by the Association relative to FY 1997 funding.
ACTION TAKEN
This was for information.
Agenda Item 4
Introduction, Preservation, Classification, Distribution and Evaluation of Solanum Species (NRSP-6)
Presenter: Dr. Eric Young (NC)
BACKGROUND
This Project was approved first in 1992 and was more recently modified and extended with an expiration date of September, 1997. This agenda item provides for a review of the current status and plans for the coming year. The budget for the coming year is to be voted on by the Operating Officers, on recommendation of the Planning Groups.
ACTION REQUESTED
This presentation is for information in advance of recommendations by the Planning Groups and action by the Association relative to FY 1997 funding.
ACTION TAKEN
This was for information.
Although the Southern Region only produces 7% of the nation’s commercial potatoes, most of the early season production is in this region. All of Florida’s 40,000 acres and most of North Carolina’s 18,700 acres are in the Winter and Spring production seasons. California is the only other state with significant production during these seasons. This growing season extension is particularly important to the chipping industry. The Southern Region provides Atlantic, the leading U.S. chipping variety, for the potato snack food industry just at the same time when demand is highest (the early summer picnic season) and when northern stored potatoes are either depleted or in the poorest condition. This variety was bred in the North Eastern Region using germplasm from IR- 1. Also, the two most recent varieties released from the Southern Region, Russet Nugget and Kranz both contain substantial amounts of wild germplasm provided by IR-1.
Agenda Item 5
National Animal Genome Research Program (NRSP-8)
Presenter: Dr. Jim Boling
BACKGROUND
This Project was approved first in 1993 and has an expiration date of September, 1998. This agenda item provides for a review of the current status and plans for the coming year. The budget for the coming year is to be voted on by the Operating Officers, on recommendation of the Planning Groups.
ACTION REQUESTED
This presentation is for information in advance of recommendations by the Planning Groups and action by the Association relative to FY 1997 funding.
ACTION TAKEN
This was for information.
Agenda Item 5-A
NRSP-1 (CRIS)
Presenter: Dr. Ken Koonce
BACKGROUND
This was an added agenda item and was presented for information. Handout available from office of the E.D.
ACTION TAKEN
Information only.
Agenda Item 6
National Cotton Council of America Research Committee
Presenter: Dr. Andy Jordan (NCCA)
BACKGROUND
The Research Committee of the NCCA is being reactivated with the intent of bringing Universities. Since a majority of the SAES based research is done in the South, there is opportunity for engagement in research planning and priority setting by involving the Committee with agInnovation South. In previous years, the Research Committee has held some of it’s meetings on the campus of Southern Land Grant Universities and this could be considered again. Dr. Jordan’s purpose in visiting with the members of the Association is to explore mutual interests in this type of engagement and to develop plans for one or more options emerging from the discussion.
ACTION REQUESTED
Dr. Jordan specifically asked for help on two topics:
1. Strategic Planning for Cotton Research NCAA agrees with the broadening agenda for agricultural research as it is stated at the national and regional levels (including environmental and social agendas). He suggests that the Council wishes to revisit it’s strategy, updating and revising its position from the last major study done in 1987. With the continuing draw- down of farm and commodity programs and the loss of safety nets, the Council wishes to focus on what replaces these federal programs — specifically, what part of the future risk avoidance can be provided by research and technology. The revised plan is intended to be national in scope, developed by focus groups, include farmer participants, and tie to the national plans of the land grant universities and ARS. Dr. Jordan specifically requests help from a small number of senior research administrators that can interact with members of the Council to develop a new perspective on the agenda for cotton research. He would like the identification of such people in the next few days. 2. Conservation title of the new Farm Bill: The Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) is undergoing a substantial paradigm shift as defined in the new Farm Bill. There are to be hearings in the immediate future on options and opportunities for how the new bill will affect various agricultural interests. (Environmental Quality Incentives Program — EQUIP) Part of the intent is to create incentives to enhance compliance with recommended conservation programs. Proposals are to be developed in the next 90 days. This requires a rapid turn around for the NCAA to favorably position itself. The hearings and related background are described in the Federal Register. The NCAA seeks help from the land grant universities in helping to devise programs that would be favorable to farmers, especially cotton farmers. Dr. Jordan would like to have three or four people that could provide advice in the immediate future.
ACTION TAKEN
The members of agInnovation South agreed that the Chair should take two immediate actions:
1. Identify three or four seasoned Directors of SAESs in this region, and asks the Western Region to identify one or two similar participants that are prepared to work with the NCAA Research Committee in revising the strategy for cotton research across the belt. (Tipton, Lacewell, Kaltenbach, (Clarke)
2. Identify two or three individuals who are currently involved in natural resources economics and related areas of research who would be prepared to provide short- term assistance to the Council in developing and evaluating options for implementation of the new Farm Bill vis a vis the NRCS initiatives. (Richardson (TX), (Mississippi), (California)
Agenda Item 6-A
National Weather Service
BACKGROUND
Concerns about the loss of funding for NOAA’s national weather service were surfaced by Dr. Frobish. Dr. Arkin has been very involved with this issue, working with both NOAA and USDA. The USDA chief meteorologist is leading the charge to develop an alternative service within USDA. Also in the discussion is the disposition of the regional climate centers.
ACTION TAKEN
The Chair appointed an ad-hoc committee comprised of Drs. Arkin and Frobish to further study the situation and make recommendations about actions needed from the Association.
Agenda Item 7
Southern Management Information System Selection of Pilot Studies and Methods of Funding
Presenter: Dr. Neville Clarke
BACKGROUND
At the February, 1996 meeting, the discussion of SMIS was cut short by available time and early departure of a number of members. The proposal brought forward by the Ad- Hoc Committee on this subject was that the next step in bringing the SMIS into use as a regional planning tool would be to ask one or more stations to undertake a pilot studies on several topics that arose from the discussions of the Ad Hoc Committee. The Executive Director was asked to proceed to solicit pre-proposals to undertake these pilot studies by one or a small group of stations. Three potential areas for pilot studies were discussed: (1) Applications of SMIS to GPRA and Other State Imposed SAES Impact Assessments, (2) Use of GIS-Based Methods for Siting Research Locations, and (3) Natural Resource Base Planing for Agriculture and Forestry.
In considering the charge to solicit pre-proposals, the Executive Director felt that there had really been insufficient discussion by members of the Association to provide a clear concept and approach for implementation. Inasmuch as this seems to involve the possibility of off-the-top funding for such a project, and, on the advice of the Chair, it seemed appropriate to delay further action until guidance could be obtained from the Association.
ACTION REQUESTED
(1) Review of the previous discussion on pilot study(s), (2) reconfirm the decision to proceed with this approach, (3) agree on funding mechanism and approximate amount and (4) define the methods to be used in soliciting and evaluating proposals and making award(s).
ACTION TAKEN
It was the consensus of the members of the Association that a committee be appointed by the Chair and asked to develop procedures and define pilot studies in the interim before the next meeting and bring specific recommendations for action to the Association.
Because of their previous involvement in this matter, the Chair appointed Drs. Wynne, Jones, and Fischer as an ad-hoc committee to do the following:
o Define one or more pilot studies as indicated in the agenda brief.
o Develop methods for gaining commitments of one or a small number of SAESs to conduct these studies (including consideration of a competitive process).
o Define methods for selection of pilot studies to be undertaken.
o Select one or more pilot studies for recommendation to the Association.
o Recommend methods of funding, including off-the-top funding.
As an exception to established procedures which call for annual consideration of all funding decisions at the April meeting, it was agreed that the committee would bring its recommendations to the July, 1996 meeting of the Association, where consideration will be given to off-the-top funding, if this is one of the options to be considered. The timing of this decision will allow off the top funding using FY 1997 funds, if the Association chooses to do so.
Agenda Item 8
ESCOP Report
Presenter: Dr. Johnny Wynne
BACKGROUND
Update of current ESCOP activities, including results of the Executive Subcommittee meeting held in Irving, TX, April 9-10, 1996. Copies of the ESCOP Report and ESCOP meeting minutes from the February 12-14, 1996 meeting available from the office of the Executive Director
ACTION REQUESTED
Information and action as developed from discussion. Agenda
ACTION TAKEN
This was for information. Actions related to the national level are taken up in separate agenda items.
Agenda Item 9
CSREES Report
Presenter: Dr. Bob Robinson
BACKGROUND
Dr. Bob Robinson has been invited to attend our meeting.
ACTION REQUESTED
Information and discussion with actions resulting.
ACTION TAKEN
Dr. George Cooper presented this report in the absence of the Administrator who was unable to attend.
Several discussion papers were presented in lieu of an agenda brief and are available from the ED’s office. Major topics covered were: Farm Bill, Annapolis retreat (Undersecretary), GPRA implementation, and Committee of Nine.
o Federal Agricultural Improvement Plan (FAIR) — the new Farm Bill
o Fund for Rural America: Dr. Stauber’s staff is to develop the implementation plan. Cooper expresses concern that Appropriations Committees will offset any gains through this mechanism with reductions in traditional appropriations. Note that ESCOP/ECOP and AESOP are actively campaigning to avoid this loss with a strong coalition of customers.
o Notes from the Annapolis retreat with USDA and its research and extension partners are available from the ED’s office.
o Committee of Nine: With signing of the Farm Bill, this committee is terminated. Methods to fulfill this function have not been developed. With exemption of some committees from the FACA, an optional method of seeking national consensus on regional research and on NRP/NRSP may be evolved. In the interim, the agInnovation South will continue to use SRRC as the method of quality assurance and the same methods as before to provide proposals that can be sent to USDA for approval. It is assumed that USDA will evolve an interim/ongoing method for fulfilling their responsibilities. Plans for meetings and workshops have been suspended/cancelled. Proposals by USDA to fund follow on committee actions with off-the-top funding were opposed in discussion by the Association.
o Nominations for the Undersecretary’s advisory committee, as called for in the new Farm Bill, are being solicited. They are casting the net broadly. It is incumbent on regional associations and states to ensure that quality nominations are made.
Agenda Item 10
GPRA: Status and Future Actions
Presenter: Dr. Tom Helms
BACKGROUND
The draft approach for GPRA for the REE mission area was due in OMB in mid- March. USDA officials have stated that there will be opportunity for input to this process in the immediate future with a planned second version of the approach to be completed in the summer. Executive Directors have been invited to nominate participants in “regional forums” involving non-administrators, including faculty members.
ACTION REQUESTED
This subject will be discussed by the ESCOP Executive Committee before the agInnovation South meeting and further planning for engagement will be developed. Discussion and guidance on regional and national actions is sought.
ACTION TAKEN
Dr. George Cooper led discussion on this item. Dr. Arkin was presenter for the Association. While progress has been made, there remains concern about the quality and relevance of the approach that will represent the first approach by USDA.
o Copy of hand-out available from ED’s office.
o There is opportunity for comment on the current draft until about mid-August.
o Efforts are being made to interface the NASULGC Board on Agriculture Futuring Activities with the next version of GPRA.
o It appears that the process remains short of developing meaningful indicators of impact against stated goals.
o Efforts continue to revise the CRIS to make it more useful in the GPRA process. The need for a modern management information system to do GPRA properly seems obvious.
o The Chair noted that an ad-hoc committee, comprised of Drs. Greg Brown (chair), Charles Scifres, Richard Jones, and Bill Brown, will serve as a response team for the agInnovation South in reacting to the “final” draft of the GPRA tabled by USDA.
Agenda Item 11
ARS Report
Presenter: Dr. Tom Army
BACKGROUND
The ARS report will be presented by Dr. Tom Army, Area Director of the Mid-South.
ACTION REQUESTED
Information and discussion, action as indicated.
ACTION TAKEN
The following report was presented for information.
With the passage of the Farm Bill, the National Biological Service aquaculture research centers in Marion, Alabama and in Stuttgart, Arkansas are transferred to the USDA. This includes personnel, property, facilities, etc. The facility in Stuttgart will be named the Stuttgart National Aquaculture Research Center. The mission of the Stuttgart Center is to conduct fish health management research directed at meeting the husbandry needs of the U.S. aquaculture industry. Currently,, the Center has 16 employees of which three are Fishery Biologists and one a Research Microbiologist.
Beginning on October 1, the research programs at the National Agricultural Water Quality Laboratory in Durant, OK will be consolidated with that at the Grazingland Research Unit in El Reno, OK and located at El Reno. The mission of the new research laboratory will be to develop farmland-based sustainable livestock-forage systems from an ecological and environmental perspective for the Southern Great Plains. All permanent personnel at Durant will be offered a position in El Reno.
The FY97 President’s Budget for ARS specifies program initiatives in the following research areas: 1. Food Safety Research
2. Genetic Resources & Biodiversity
3. Biocontrol of Pests and Soil Biology
4. Alternatives to Methyl Bromide
5. Integrated Farming Systems
6. Waste Management Research
7. Integrated Pest Management
8. South Florida Everglades Ecosystem
9. Biomass (Electricity Generation)
10. BARD
To fund these program initiatives, program changes at the project level are being proposed for redirection. Affected research units and personnel together with partners and cooperators have been informed of these intentions.
Personnel:
Dr. John DeLoach, Research Leader, Food and Feed Safety Research, College Station, TX resigned effective April 4, 1996 to take a position with private industry. Dr. Leon Kubena has been appointed Acting Research Leader until a permanent replacement is named.
Mr. Clay Skeens, Area Administrative Officer, Mid South Area, Stoneville, MS retired on March 30, 1996. Mr. Archie Tucker has been appointed Acting Area Administrative Officer until the position is filled.
Agenda Item 12
SRRC and Committee of Nine Report
Presenters: Drs. Ike Sewell and D. C. Coston
BACKGROUND
The SRRC and Committee of Nine report is attached.
ACTION REQUESTED
General discussion is solicited. No action other than that which might arise from the floor is anticipated.
ACTION TAKEN
See agenda item 9.
2. C/9 will meet in Washington on May 14 and 15. Business matters to be considered include:
New project proposals and requests for extensions
RRF funds allocations
NRSP and off-the-top funding
Reviews of third-year NRSP projects
Proposed Regional Workshop II
3. SRRC procedures for developing new RRF Projects were revised in March, 1996. Copies of these revised procedures will be distributed and discussed.
4. SRRC has processed on 1995 carry-over project proposal. Several new projects are in various stages of development and review.
5. The timetable (deadlines) for new/revised projects to be approved for October 1, 1996 funding follows:
Projects along with peer review comments to SRRC Chair for SRRC review June 12
SRRC review comments/corrections to administrative advisor July 5
Revised proposals to SRRC Chair July 26
Final proposals to SAAED Chair August 2
Proposals approved for SAAED Chair to C/9 for review August 12
C/9 meets to consider projects proposed September 11-12
NOTE: Proposals may be submitted, processed and approved at any time during the year. The real deadline is governed by the need for project approval in time for October 1 funding.
Updated April 18, 1996
| Activity | Title | Administrative Advisor |
Expiration Date |
Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| S-239 | Management of Animal Waste in Support of Sustainable Agriculture & Quality Water Resources (DC 94-01) | R. B. Muntifering, AL | 9/96 | New project proposal completed and sent to SRRC for review. |
| S-242 | Physiological & Ecological Relationships Affecting Biting Flies & Ticks on Pastured Cattle (DC 95-02) | L. T. Frobish, AL | 9/96 | Replacement project sent to AA for review/approval. |
| S-243 | Evaluation of Beef Cattle Germplasm Resources involving Additive & Non-additive Genetic Effects (DC 95-03) | L. T. Frobish, AL | 9/96 | New project being drafted by writing committee. |
| S-246 | The Transformation of Agriculture: Resources, Technologies, and Policies (DC 94-04) | F. H. Tyner, MS | 9/96 | Project will be completed 9/96. New project in process of peer review. |
| S-248 | Improving Reproductive Efficiency in Cattle (DC 95-05) | R. B. Muntifering, AL | 9/96 | New project being drafted by writing committee. |
| S-249 | The Impact of Agricultural Systems on Surface and Ground Water Quality (DC 95-05) | J. I. Sewell, TN | 9/96 | New project being drafted by writing committee. |
| S-250 | Assessment of the Environmental Compatibility of Textiles and other Polymeric Materials (DC 95-06) | J. I. Sewell, TN | 9/96 | Project out for peer review. |
Projects in Preparation for Renewal
| Activity | Title | Administrative Advisor |
Expiration Date |
Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DC 94-01 (S-239) |
Animal Manure and Waste Utilization, Treatment and Nuisance Avoidance | R. B. Muntifering, AL | 1996 | New project proposal completed and sent to SRRC for review. |
| DC 94-04 (S-246) |
Rural Restructuring: Causes and Consequences of Globalized Agricultural and Natural Resource Systems | F. H. Tyner, MS | 1996 | Replacement project in process of peer review. |
| DC 95-01 | Integrated Management of Plant Diseases (AC-11) | S. A. Lommel, NC | 1997 | New project being drafted by writing committee. |
| DC 95-02 | Management of Arthropod Pests of Livestock and Poultry (S-242) | L. T. Frobish, AL | 1997 | Replacement project sent to AA for review/approval. |
| DC 95-03 | Effect of Genetic and Environmental Interactions on the Reproductive Performance of Beef Cattle (S-243) | L. T. Frobish, AL | 1997 | New project being drafted by writing committee. |
| DC 95-04 | Improving Reproductive Efficiency of Cattle (S-248) | R. B. Muntifering, AL | 1997 | New project being drafted by writing committee. |
| DC 95-05 | Development and Application of Comprehensive Agricultural Ecosystem Models (S-249) | J. I. Sewell, TN | 1997 | New project being drafted by writing committee. |
| DC 95-06 | Development and Assessment of Innovative Textile Materials for Health, Safety, and Environmental Compatibility (S-250) | J. I. Sewell, TN | 1997 | Project out for peer review. |
—- NO PROJECTS IN THIS CATEGORY —-
4. PROJECTS RETURNED TO ADMINISTRATIVE ADVISOR FOR REVISION
—- NO PROJECTS IN THIS CATEGORY —-
5. REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION
—- NO PROJECTS IN THIS CATEGORY —-
6. REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION APPROVED
—- NO PROJECTS IN THIS CATEGORY —-
7. PROJECT CHANGED TO ANOTHER REGIONAL ACTIVITY
—- NO PROJECTS IN THIS CATEGORY —-
SECTION II. PROJECTS SUBMITTED TO COMMITTEE OF NINE
| Activity | Title | Administrative Advisor |
Expiration Date |
Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DC 94-07 | Pesticides in Water and Air Samples: Validation of Disk and Fiber Phase Extraction Techniques | N. P. Thompson, FL | 1996 | Project has been approved by SRRC and forwarded to C/9. |
| Activity | Title | Administrative Advisor |
Expiration Date |
Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| S-270 | Utilizing Potassium Buffering Capacity to Predict Cotton Yield Response to Potassium Fertilizer (DC 93-06) | K. W. Tipton, LA | 9/01 | Approved by C/9. |
—NO PROJECTS IN THIS CATEGORY—
5. PROJECTS REJECTED BY COMMITTEE OF 9
—NO PROJECTS IN THIS CATEGORY—
6. EXTENSION OF PROJECTS APPROVED BY COMMITTEE OF 9
—NO PROJECTS IN THIS CATEGORY—
Agenda Item 13
Southern Regional Listening Session
Presenter: Dr. Jim Fischer
BACKGROUND
The Southern Regional Listening Session, part of the Board on Agriculture’s Futuring Activities, was held in New Orleans on March 21, 1996. Attendance was excellent with about forty-two customers participating. The group’s report will be aggregated with those of the other three regions and used as input to the National Synthesis Conference which will be held in the summer. From this, an action plan will be developed for the NASULGC Board on Agriculture components including the SAESs.
ACTION REQUESTED
Discussion of the listening session results, which will be summarized and plans for relating this to the Southern Strategic Research Plan will be suggested.
ACTION TAKEN
This was for information.
Agenda Item 14
Southern Rural Development Center
Presenters: Dr. Hiram Palmertree and Dr. Doss Brodnax
BACKGROUND
The Southern Rural Development Center provides the Association an update on recent and current activities and a forecast of future events. On the occasion of the coming retirement of Dr. Broadnax, this agenda item provides an opportunity to gain his perspective based on long years of outstanding service and contribution to Southern rural development
ACTION REQUESTED
Information and action resulting from discussion.
INFORMATION AND ACTION RESULTING FROM DISCUSSION
Drs. Hiram Palmertree and Jim Boling presented information on the current effort to take a fresh look at the SRDC vision, mission and values. The Program Advisory Committee for the SRDC seeks input from the agInnovation South. Recommendations from the Planning Group on Economic and Social issues was called for by the Chair. As part of the overall review of the Center, it is anticipated that consideration will be given to recruitment of the new Director (Doss Brodnax is retiring in the early summer), review of federal funding and implementing documentation, consideration of the possibility of selecting a new site for SRDC. The current Associate Director from Alcorn State University could serve as interim director during the search process.
The Association will provide input to the SRDC Program Advisory Committee as they continue their review of the Center.
Agenda Item 15
Executive Director’s Transition Report
Presenter: Dr. Neville Clarke
BACKGROUND
The Chair asked the outgoing Executive Director to provide a perspective on the evolution of the Association, including recent history and projections to the future. This presentation will be made in the context of the national and regional environments and in relation to ongoing futuring activities across the system.
This also provides an opportunity for a brief report on the status of the Office of the Executive Director transition process as regards files and other records of the Association. A financial report will be provided projecting resources through the end of the current fiscal year (June 30, 1996). Methods for transfer of funds to MAFES and other administrative matters will be summarized.
ACTION REQUESTED
Information.
ACTION TAKEN
None. For information only.
Agenda Item 15-A
The Chair of the Association recognized the contributions of Mrs. Toni Bland, Staff Assistant to the Executive Director in a citation presented during the dinner meeting. The citation is attached to the minutes for the record. It is also available from the office of the E.D.
Agenda Item 15-B
Ownership and Benefits from Intellectual Property in the Southern Region
Dr. Richard Jones provided an updated report on the survey that he undertook last summer. It is a part of the minutes and available from the ED’s office. Dr. Jones does not anticipate further action on this subject except as it may related to the deliberations of the SERA-TF on Industry Relationships.
Agenda Item 16
AESOP Enterprises, Ltd.
Presenter: Dr. Terry Nipp
BACKGROUND
ESCOP and ECOP are negotiating with Aesop Enterprises, Ltd. for a renewal of the three year contract for services on their behalf. A referendum will be sent to individual directors from both groups on the scope and level of effort and the related costs.
Dr. Terru Nipp joined the meeting via teleconference to discuss the proposal to be used as the basis for a referendum to seek commitment of members of the Experiment Station and Extension Sections for continuing and expanding funding for the AESOP group. The proposal contained as an attachment in the agenda brief should be regarded as a working draft; some changes may be expected in the version used in the referendum. This attachment is also available from the office of the E.D.
ACTION REQUESTED
Members are asked to be prepared to discuss the proposal and pose questions to Dr. Nipp with the objective of seeking common understanding of the intent and related costs. It is intended that this will prepare Directors to make a more informed decision on the referendum.
ACTION TAKEN
For information.
Agenda Item 17
Goals and Procedures for Planning Group Activities
Presenter: Dr. Richard Jones
BACKGROUND
The Spring meeting of agInnovation South is the focal point for reviewing and taking action on all the new and continuing cooperative activities of the Association. This meeting provides a point of engagement where those who have defined the strategy follow up with developing specific decisions on new and continuing activities. This sets the stage for subsequent decisions on resource allocations that are made by individual directors.
Chairs of Advisory Committees have been invited to attend the meeting of the Planning Committee and related Groups and to offer comments at the end of this session.
Notebooks for each member have been prepared and accompany the agenda briefs. A summary of the contents of the notebooks is attached.
ACTION REQUESTED
This briefing and the related materials found in the accompanying notebook is to aid in organizing and conducting the meetings of the Planning Groups, the product of which is the recommendations which Planning Group Chairs will present in subsequent plenary session.
ACTION TAKEN
Reference the workbook provided by the Executive Directors office for the activities of the Planning Committee and its six Planning Groups which were undertaken during most of the day on April 23, 1996. Drs Jones and Clarke explained procedures and expected products to be derived from the break-out meetings of the six planning groups.
2. Current membership list for Southern Regional Planning Groups.
3. Current membership list of Chairs of Advisory Committees (with indication of participants in April meeting, where known).
4. Procedures for Planning Group Break Out sessions.
5. Recommended Time Budget for Planning Group Break-Out Sessions.
6. Summary of Total Research Portfolio (derived from CRIS) — This will be provided by Dr. Helms at the meeting.
7. Summary list of all Southern Regional Activities.
8. Summary Table of all proposed new/continuing activities.
This table can also be used to record group recommendations and Association voting on individual proposals and funding on NRSPs.
9. Proposals for new/continuing activities.
This is a compilation of the full proposals accompanied by the recommendations of the relevant Advisory Committees. All groups get all proposals. The Planning Group(s) assigned to review the activities is indicated.
10. Proposals for Continued Funding of NRSPs.
11. Working draft of the Southern Strategic Research Plan.
12. Recommendations received from Advisory Committees for updating the Mid- Term Plan (all members get all inputs, but planning groups focus on the input relevant to that group).
Agenda Item 18
Planning Group Break-Out Sessions
Conveners: Planning Group Chairs
BACKGROUND
As has been done in recent years, two of the Planning Groups will work together because of the small number of members in each. The Nutrition, Food Safety, and Health and Economics and Social Issues Groups will be combined for this meeting.
The contents of the notebooks provided for each member are shown under agenda item 16 (above).
Item 4 in the notebook describes the procedures to be followed by each Planning Group.
Item 5 in the notebook suggests a time budget for the various activities of the Group; this may be modified as needed.
ACTION REQUESTED
The requested actions are defined in item 4 of the Work Groups Notebooks.
ACTION TAKEN
The results of the deliberations of the Planning Groups are contained under agenda item 19.
Agenda Item 19
Review and Act on Recommendations of Planning Groups
Convener: Dr. Richard Jones
BACKGROUND
The second plenary session provides the opportunity to present, discuss and act on the recommendations of the Planning Groups. Notes from reports of the Planning Groups are available from the office of the E.D.
ACTION REQUESTED
Chairs of Planning Groups are requested to provide the Group’s recommendations to the plenary session on the proposals for new/continuing activities and a draft narrative of recommendations for the Mid-Term Update of the Southern Strategic Research Plan for the area of the Group’s responsibilities. Also, each Group is asked to make recommendations on any existing or proposed “new opportunity”. Groups are requested to carefully consider the recommendations of Advisory Committees. The Chair of each Planning Group is asked to provide a brief report to the plenary session which follows on the results of the Group’s deliberations.
The recommendations from Planning Groups will be voted on by members of the Association. Those votes involving funding commitments will be made on the basis of one vote per state.
ACTION TAKEN
The actions of the Association on recommendations from Planning Groups is contained in four attachments:
o Analysis of Total Portfolio, Current Regional Activities and Overland/Gaps
o Overall summary of Recommendations and Actions Taken by Association
o Actions on New and Continuing Activities
o Actions on NRSPs
o Major effort on soil and water.
o Discussion of ecosystems and aggregate projects under that category.
o DC 95-05 deals with this and fits the need/ asked about relation about task force on agroecosystems.
o Some topics could be sent to plant systems (rape, rice).
o Need to think of system as a matrix — revise the CRIS to be able to modify and improve search and retrieval.
o Relate CRIS to GPRA.
Nutrition, Food Safety and Health
o Evaluation of CRIS data: nutrition and food safety are under-invested relative to stated regional priorities.
o Has fewest resources compared with other initiatives.
o Investment relative to southern priorities.
o Longitudinal study to examine trends.
o 65% in post harvest.
Gaps
o Enhance food safety: a fair amount of activity.
o No organized regional effort in most of the nutrition area.
o AC-4 will undertake analysis of the portfolio.
o AC-14 will meet in December and they will also do gap analysis.
Processes and Products
Total portfolio
o Longer term perspective of investment over time.
o Recommend percentage approach to defining distribution.
o Could be confounded with other parts of the program in the classification system of CRIS.
o Need to build partnerships with the private sector — can we define what the extent of partnering is or should be?
Regional activities
o Interdisciplinary projects are critical.
o No approved regional projects, some IEG activity.
o They perceive it to be difficult to get interdisciplinary projects approval.
o Relevant advisory committees 4,5,6,7,14, develop interdisciplinary IEG on food processing and products and interactions with the private sector.
Social and Economic Issues
o Economic research embedded in other areas, not easy to assess the portfolio.
o Few projects that relate directly to economics.
o Concern that number of projects proposed with token statements about economics.
o Rural sociology, family development, etc — rural sociology seems under- represented.
o Most spawned from SRDC — drifting towards extension education.
o Risk management will have to take regional importance — a cross cutting issue is where it is now — needs to cut through to the firm and family level.
o AC-7 did outstanding job of responding to the request to examine the total portfolio.
o Issues surrounding industrialization are highly relevant and should take on more importance.
Animal Systems
o Animal ag underfunded relative to importance and economic benefits.
o How animal systems fit into rural development — food safety, water quality, environment.
Current regional activities
o Difficulty in getting commitments from individual stations for resources in regional research in animal germplasm.
o Need for interdisciplinary research in the animal area.
Overlaps and Gaps
o More interdisciplinary.
o When new DC come across the Director desk — be sure they get sent around to multiple plans.
Plant Systems
o No comments on the relevance and importance across the portfolio.
o In recent years, indication that we are more interested in programs that have environmental sensitivity, additional strategies for pest control, move genetics and breeding past yield into other areas, significant investment in new biology — broadly.
o Similar comments about regional portfolio.
o CRIS/GPRA relationships and historical perspective topics mentioned above were endorsed.
o Need to target the question for future analysis of the data in the CRIS system.
o Classification system makes separating out our issues difficult.
o Need to be sure initial classification is done well.
o Almost all decisions on funding are state level decisions.
o Endorse interdisciplinary need and note some progress.
* Note: verbatim transcription is available as a reference4/30/96
| Proposed Activity |
Previous Activity |
TITLE | Planning Group Recommendations and Actions of the agInnovation South |
|---|---|---|---|
| DC | S-207 | Solid-Phase Speciation of Mobile Soil Contaminants in Relation to Soil Mineralogy | The Planing Group on Environment and Natural Resources recommended approval of the revision of S-207 and advised the technical committee to interface with scientists and users who routinely use and handle pesticides. The Association approved the request |
| DC | S-216 | Food Demand and Consumption Behavior | Advisory Committees on Food Science and Technology and Human Nutrition recommended disapproval, while Advisory Committees on Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology recommended approval. The Planning Group on Nutrition, Food Safety and Health did not recommend approval nor did the Planning Group on Processes and Products. The Planning Group on Economic and Social Issues agreed that the comments of the advisory committees should be considered vis a vis involvement of more participation from scientists in human nutrition and food sciences and with the comment that there should be careful evaluation of whether or not this kind of information is not already being obtained by industry. However, this Group pointed out that the members of this regional project are really national in their distribution and very well recognized for their expertise in econometrics of consumer behavior. The opinion was expressed that there would be little interest on the part of human nutritionists in participating in this kind of project. After lengthy debate, the Association voted to approve the request to establish a development committee with the understanding that the administrative advisor would clearly convey these concerns and that the SRRC and Chair would evaluate the proposal when submitted to ensure that these concerns had been met to the best possible extent. |
| DC | S-252 | Development and Assessment of Precision Farming Techniques for the South | All advisory committees and planning groups that reviewed this proposal recommended approval. It was suggested that the disciplinary representation called for should be expanded to include those involved in cropping systems, weed sciences, economists, etc and suggested that there should be expertise added in the area of GIS methods. It was suggested that industry relationships also be considered. The Association voted to approve the establishment of the new development committee. |
| DC | S-253 | Managing Plant Parasitic Nematode by Crop Resistance | The Crops and Soils advisory committee recommended approval and offered suggestions on sharpening the focus and broadening the membership. The Environmental and Natural Resources Planning Group felt the proposal was outside their domain and declined to comment. The Plant Systems Group recommended approval as did the Processes and Products Group. The Association voted to approve the request to establish a development committee |
| DC | NEW | Quality Maintenance and Nutritive Aspects of Vegetables During Handling, Processing and Storage | This request was broadly reviewed by Advisory Committees and several Planning Groups. All recommended approval. It was suggested that the committee might consider handling and processing of vegetables within the scope of the project. The technical committee was encouraged to consider the recommendations of advisory committees. The Association voted to approve the request to establish a development committee to plan a new regional project. |
| IEG | TF | Good Laboratory Practices | This proposal was broadly reviewed by Advisory Committees and Planning Groups. All recommended approval without significant comment. The Association voted to approve the recommendation of the Task Force to establish an IEG. |
| SERA-IEG | IEG-16 | Turf | All Advisory Committees asked to review the proposal recommended approval as did the three Planning Groups that considered it. There were no substantive suggestions made. The Association voted to recommend adoption of this proposal at the joint meeting of Southern Experiment Station and Extension Directors in July, 1996. The Executive Director will present the proposal to the Southern Extension Directors at their meeting the week following this meeting. |
| SERA-IEG | IEG-34 | Fire Ants | All Advisory Committees and Planning Groups that reviewed the proposal recommended it’s approval. The Association voted to recommend it’s approval at the joint meeting of Southern Extension and Experiment Station Directors in July, 1996. The Association voted to approve the activity as an IEG, should it not be accepted as a SERA-IEG. This will ensure its continuation past the present expiration date of September, 1996. A future issues concerns the appropriate disposition of the proceedings of the annual meeting of this group. |
In some cases, the NRSP was recommended for funding with the instruction to the Southern Administrative Advisor to convey the advice that the agInnovation South would not support a renewal of the project past the period presently proposed for funding.
GENERAL: The following statement pertains to all those NRSPs in which the Association voted to provide FY 1997 funding:
Using FY 1996 funding as a base for comparison, the
Association approves FY 1997 funding at the level requested or
a percentage change the same as the change in Hatch funding,
whichever is smaller.
Interpretation:
1. If Hatch funding were to be increased 10% and the NRSP committee requested level funding, the Southern Association’s recommendation would be for level funding.
2. If Hatch funding were to be increased 10% and the NRSP committee requests an increase of 5%, the increase in funding would be at the level requested by the committee.
3. If Hatch funding were reduced by 10% and the NRSP committee requested level funding, the NRSP funding level recommended by Southern Directors would be at a reduction of 10% below the level funded in FY 1996.
4. If Hatch funding were reduced by 10% and the NRSP committee requested an increase of 10%, the Southern Directors level would be 10% below the FT 1996 level.
| Number | Title | Association Action |
|---|---|---|
| NRSP-1 IR-5 |
Current Research Information Service (CRIS) | The Planning Groups all recommended approval. The Association approved the request with the additional comment that implicit in this approval is the intent of the Association to approve a one year extension of the project, if it is proposed by the NRSP technical committee and leadership. |
| NRSP-3 | The National Atmospheric Deposition Program–A Long Term Monitoring Program in Support of Research Effects of Atmospheric Chemical Deposition | All Planning Groups except Economic and Social voted to continue the project. They felt that the SAESs were minor players and that the major users of the information could fund the project. The Association voted 11 to 4 to approve the FY 1997 funding of this project |
| NRSP-4 IR-4 |
A National Agricultural Program to Clear Pest Control Agents for Minor Uses | The proposal for funding of this project in FY 1997 was approved by all Planning Groups and the Association voted to approve it. |
| NRSP-5 IR-2 |
Develop and Distribute Deciduous Fruit Tree Clones Free of Viruses and Virus-Like Agents | Three Planning Groups recommended rejection or declined to approve funding. Two recommended approval of funding but with advice to the Southern Administrative Advisor that the Southern Association would not support funding past the present approved project. One Group recommended approval. The Association approved funding until the expiration of the present project with advice to the Administrative Advisor that the Southern Association would not support renewal. |
| NRSP-6 | Inter-Regional Potato Introduction Project | One planning group voted to approve the request for funding with the notation that renewal would not be supported; four groups either declined to make a recommendation or recommended disapproval; one Group recommended funding at the level of one dollar. The Association voted to reject the proposal for funding. The vote was 12 to 3. |
| NRSP-8 | National Animal Genome Research Program | All Planning Groups recommended approval. The Association voted to approve funding. There were no specific recommendations or discussion. |
| S-009 | Plant Genetic Resources Conservation and Utilization | All Planning Groups recommended approval. The Association voted to approve this regional off-the-top funding. |
Agenda Item 20
Comments from Chairs of Advisory Committees
Presenters: Chairs of Advisory Committees
BACKGROUND
Chairs of Advisory Committees will be asked to offer comments on both process and products of the planning session and on methods to enhance the future involvement of Department Heads in the affairs of the Association.
ACTION REQUESTED
Reaction to and action on suggestions as indicated.
ACTION TAKEN
Information.
Agenda Item 20-A
Request to Publish Southern Cooperative Series Bulletin
Dr. Jubb added this as an agenda item. His handout is available from the ED’s office.
ACTION TAKEN
While approval by the Association is not required to for the Chair to authorize publication of a regional bulletin, it was determined that the sense of the Association was to encourage the Chair to authorize the publication. The Chair will make this proposal known to the Chair of Southern Extension Directors. The Executive Director will advise the Southern Extension Directors of the intent to propose this at the joint meeting in July.
Agenda Item 21
Report of the Nominating Committee
Presenter: Dr. Johnny Wynne
BACKGROUND
The following is extracted from the minutes of the February, 1996 meeting of the Association.
With the appointment of Dr. Tom Helms as Executive Director, the following actions were taken:
(a) Dr. Helms resigns as Chair of the Association effective at the end of this meeting.
(b) On the motion of Wynne, seconded by Boling, the Association unanimously voted to elect Dr. D. C. Coston to fill the unexpired term of Dr. Helms and to also fill the full term of office in the year following. The Association also intended for this to include membership on ESCOP as called for in the guidelines.
(c) On the motion of Scifres, seconded by Fischer, the Association voted to ask the Nominating Committee to recommend a replacement for Dr. Coston as Chair Elect so that final actions may be taken at the April, 1996 meeting.
(d) On the motion of Jones, seconded by Scifres, the Association voted unanimously to ask Dr. Jerry Arkin, immediate past Chair, to serve as interim Vice Chair, until this position can be filled by election in April.
The Nominating Committee will also recommend a candidate for Secretary of the Association for the 1996-97 year, beginning in November, 1996.
ACTION REQUESTED
The Nominating Committee is asked to recommend a replacement for Dr. Coston as Chair Elect and Vice Chair of the Association. After appropriate discussion, the Association is requested elect an individual to serve in this position. The term of office for the Chair Elect will be the same as the remaining term of the current chair, i.e. from April, 1996 until November, 1997.
The Association, on recommendation of the Nominating Committee will elect the Incoming Secretary of the Association.
ACTION TAKEN
o Nomination by Dr. Johnny Wynne for Dr. Richard Jones to fill the position of Chair Elect, seconded by Dr. Charley Scifres. Dr. Richard Jones was elected Chair Elect, with term beginning immediately and running through November, 1997.
o Dr. Jim Boling was nominated by Dr. Johnny Wynne to serve as a member of ESCOP for the Southern Region, seconded by Dr. Jim Fischer. The term will begin November 1996 until November 1999. ESCOP terms are as follows:
Dr. Johnny Wynne 1996 Dr. Jerry Arkin 1997 Dr. D. C. Coston 1998 Dr. Jim Boling 1999
o No action was taken regarding the position of Secretary. There is a general consensus that this position is expected to be eliminated (by amendment to the By-Laws) during the summer meeting. If approved, the position of Secretary may be replaced by an Executive Committee Member-at-Large.
Agenda Item 22
Adoption of the Association’s 1996-1997 Operating Budget
Presenter: Dr. D. C. Coston
BACKGROUND
During negotiations with the incoming Executive Director, it was agreed that the overall budget for next year’s operation would remain at the 1995-6 level. The fiscal year for the Association remains unchanged; July 1 to June 30.
In accordance with established procedures, the Association needs to approve the annual operating budget that has been negotiated between the Chair and the Executive Director.
As noted in agenda item 15, residual funds from the current office at the Texas Agricultural Experiment Station will be transferred to the Mississippi Agricultural and Forest Experiment Station when accounts have been settled.
ACTION REQUESTED
Approval of the 1996-7 operating budget for the Association.
ACTION TAKEN
o agInnovation South and MAFES have executed an agreement whereby MAFES will act as the host Station for the office of the Executive Director for the period April 2, 1996 through June 30, 2001.
o Dr. Verner Hurt will serve as Treasurer of the Association, with indefinite term of office.
o The budget was approved by the Operating Officers for 1996-7 at the same level as for the current year.
o Residual funds from the current year will be transferred from TAES to MAFES after accounts have been settled.
o MAFES will initiate the assessment of individual SAESs.
Agenda Item 23
Joint Meeting of 1862 and 1890 Research Directors
Presenter: Dr. Tom Helms
BACKGROUND
A brief meeting between these two groups was held last July after the Mini-Land Grant meeting. It was agreed that another meeting would be undertaken in 1996 at the same event. There was brief discussion of this at the February, 1996 meeting and it was agreed that a further development of the agenda would be undertaken in the interim.
Dr. Helms will provide options for the agenda and discuss the approach to developing engagement with his counterpart and an agenda for the meeting.
ACTION REQUESTED
Discussion and action as appropriate.
ACTION TAKEN
None.
Agenda Item 24
Plans for the Mini-Land Grant Meeting
Presenter: Dr. Tom Helms
BACKGROUND
The next Southern Mini-Land Grant meeting will be July 13-16, 1996 in Fayetteville. Dr. Tom Helms is the agInnovation South representative on the Program Committee.
At the last meeting of Chairs of Advisory Committees, a number of useful suggestions were made as to topics for discussion. The minutes from that meeting dealing with this subject is attached.
ACTION REQUESTED
Further discussion and input to the Executive Director on the agenda and approach for the next Mini-Land Grant meeting.
ACTION TAKEN
Information only.
1. Budget discussions with serious consideration of more sharing of resources and methods of making this happen. The possibility of a consolidation of principle responsibilities at one location for selected areas (dairy science) was used as an example. It was noted that hard decisions on consolidation will probably have to be top-down; it is not reasonable to expect departments to propose their own demise.
2. Presentations on and discussion of the modern management structures in industry with flattened organizations and removal of layers of management.
3. The question of the propriety of inviting key legislators at both state and national levels was raised.
4. Consideration of how synergies can be built between parts, with methods to shore- up the extension function. This group perceives Extension as having lost ground in other regions and wishes to ensure that it does not happen in the South (the Futuring Activities are intended to address this issue).
5. The opportunity to explore better linkages with the Affiliate Groups could be further explored.
6. The linkage with groups outside traditional colleges of agriculture that are increasingly involved with the research, teaching, and extension functions could be considered. Linkages with the ASCARR universities and their programs in agriculture would be productive.
7. The cost versus benefit of the increasing demand for accountability within the system at all levels. How can this be done more efficiently; how can the process be streamlined?
8. Address the management philosophy around the differences between managing process vs end results
9. Methods to deal with the problem of lack of disciplinary visibility and recognition for accomplishments in agriculture programs
10. The use of distance learning and shared curricula as a means of more effective use of decreasing resources — discuss and make use of the concept of an “academic common market”.
Agenda Item 25
Report of Joint Task Force on Agroecosystems
Presenter: Dr. Jim Fischer
BACKGROUND
The Task Force has asked a committee of scientists to review examples of existing research projects on agroecosystems from SAESs in the region and from this to provide a prospectus on what is implied and involved in this area. The objective is to continue to explore the possible need for a joint regional effort between Experiment Station and Extension.
The Committee has completed its review and will have a report for distribution at the meeting. This report will cover the requested assessment and will recommend that the committee, which has worked via teleconference, meet face-to-face with the objective of developing a plan for a joint activity in agroecosystems. There appears to be a clear perception of need and an active interest in this action on the part of the group.
ACTION REQUESTED
The Association is asked to review and react to this report in anticipation that it will be taken to the joint meeting of Southern Extension and Experiment Station Directors at the Mini-Land Grant Meeting in July. A similar preview of the report will be made to Southern Extension Directors at their meeting in late April.
ACTION TAKEN
There was general discussion of Dr. Fischer’s report. It was agreed that further interaction with the committee that the Task Force has empowered is to be undertaken and an additional sense of direction will be brought to the next meeting. Preliminary discussion suggests that an IEG or SERA-IEG will be proposed. It was noted that Extension is not heavily subscribed to this topic at the moment. They will need additional background information to make an informed decision.
April 5, 1996
To: Members, Agro-ecosystem Taskforce
From: Larry Libby
Subject: Evaluation of State Projects
Following are my overall evaluations of the state project summaries judged against the three criteria suggested in my letter of March 22. Those criteria are: 1) Scale of analysis — landscape, watershed or other large scale unit beyond a field or even a single farm; 2) Interactions among major subsystems in the ecosystem; 3) Multi- disciplinary research and/or extension, with meaningful interaction among the disciplines. You may feel other criteria are needed, but these are my attempt to focus on those features that distinguish real agro-ecosystem work from our more traditional projects. I reviewed the state submissions with these in mind. They are highly variable within states making summary judgements difficult, and we know that the project statements submitted are just a subset of what is really out there. But given the inherent difficulties in all of that, what can we observe and communicate to the directors about how we are doing agro-ecosystem work? Scores are on a scale of 1 to 10.
SCALE MULTIDISCIPLINARY INTERACTIONS Georgia 4 2 2 SANREM 8 7 8 4 or 5 projects. SANREM shows excellent scale and other potential
FL 8 6 7 1 project, Buck Island Ranch good scale, lacks social science
TN 2 3 2 1 project, little to go on, no social science
NC 3 4 3 10 to 12 projects, each with 2 disciplines or so, little integration. Several have social science. Lo input project (6337) particularly good.
OK 4 4 4 13 projects. Watershed scale of analysis good. Social science included. Little integration of disciplines, disjointed.
TX 7 7 7 6 projects. Good scale of analysis with hydrologic unit.
AL 4 4 3 11 projects. Coastal plain Bottomlands good scale of analysis, others less so. Tend to be very micro. No social science.
PR 6 5 5 6 projects. Tropical agro-ecosystem project good scale. Island economy and ecological unit helpful to the work. Social sciences included.
LA 4 5 6 20 projects, largest of all reporting states. Limited definition of ecosystem, little social science except in extension, has significant extension component. Coastal restoration projects best integration. Most diverse of all reporting states.
KY 3 5 5 11 projects. Limited interactions, usually 2 systems only. Little social science.
SC 6 4 5 1 project. Watershed scale of analysis.
VA 6 8 6 1 project. Some social science included.
I have not tried to give a single score to each state, though that could be done at this point. Overall, it appears that a scale of analysis tens to be less landscape or ecosystem level. The two exceptions are the Florida Buck Island project which is partially funded by a grant from the MacArthur Foundation and the SANREM CRSP project in Georgia with AID funding. Watershed projects also broaden the scale of analysis beyond a specific production unit. The traditional Experiment Station funding structure inevitably moves toward more specific, targeted studies involving relatively few disciplines. When each scientist with .25 FTE Research appointment must be PI on a project, the incentives do not favor large scale, multi-disciplinary integrated projects with long time horizons. Few projects make good use of the social science disciplines. Several have some firm level economics but very few consider community effects.
We received little information about extension work on agro-ecosystem level. Again, Buck Island and SANREM are exceptions.
If you have not already, please look over the state summaries and give me your thoughts. I will share results with the full task force and communicate full results to Jim Fischer. Thanks for your help. I need your feedback right away. I will summarize what I have by April 15.
Agenda Item 26
General Discussion on The Future of The Association
Discussion Leader: Dr. D. C. Coston
BACKGROUND
With changes in staff and leadership in the Association, this provides an opportunity for discussion of the future directions and areas of emphasis to be undertaken.
ACTION REQUESTED
Active Participation by all members of the Association.
ACTION TAKEN
Information only
Agenda Item 27
Report of the Resolutions Committee
Dr. Fred Knapp
BACKGROUND
Drs. Dudley T. Smith, Bernie L. Daniels, and Vera Wall have left the ranks of the Association since the last meeting and Dr. Ken Tipton has announced his retirement effective June 30, 1996. Resolutions recognizing their contributions and thanking them for their service will be presented.
In addition, a resolution thanking the University of Arkansas and the Arkansas Agricultural Experiment Station for hosting this meeting will be presented. These resolutions are available from the office of the E.D.
ACTION REQUESTED
Adoption.
ACTION TAKEN
Resolutions acknowledging the contributions and service to agInnovation South by Drs. Vera Wall, Dudley T. Smith, L. B. Daniels, and Ken Tipton, were each unanimously approved.
In addition, a resolution acknowledging the efforts of Dr. Charles Scifres, the staff of the Office of the Director, Arkansas Agricultural Experiment Station, University of Arkansas, and the excellent facilities and services provided by the Fayetteville Hilton Hotel, received unanimous approval.
Agenda Item 28
agInnovation South April 1997 Meeting Site
BACKGROUND
Dr. Jim Fischer invited the agInnovation South to meet in South Carolina for its 1997 spring meeting.
ACTION TAKEN
On the motion by Dr. Larry Crowder, seconded by Dr. George Kriz, the request to meet in South Carolina was approved.
Agenda Item 29
Adjournment
Presenter: Dr. D. C. Coston
BACKGROUND
It is anticipated that this meeting will adjourn on or before 12:00 noon on April 10, 1996
ACTION REQUESTED
Vote to adjourn.
ACTION TAKEN
The meeting was adjourned at 12:00 on April 24, 1996