Implementation of Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of                          Sugar Cane                   ...
Table of Contents1.      Background .........................................................................................
1. BackgroundSugar production continues to be a major economic activity in Belize making a significantcontribution to the ...
2.2     Opening RemarksMr. Jose Vasquez of the World Wildlife Foundation (WWF) in Honduras gave the openingremarks. During...
cost as the program was still at the trial stage. The information would be readily        available in the near future.   ...
2.5     Biological Organisms LaboratoryMs. Claudia Flores, ISRP Quintana Roo, Mexico,,shared with participants an approach...
example given was that of the second burning in which it was mentioned that although thesecond burning is sometimes used t...
industry and ensure that the money is invested in such programs such as a soil studies        laboratory and exchange prog...
3.1     Pest monitoring to support decision-making related to control        method                                       ...
3.2     Methods to control the Mosca Pinta                                                          •   The plough digs a ...
3.3     Application of biological agents to control the Mosca Pinta                                                       ...
3.4     Fertilizer application                                                          •   This is a simple method using ...
3.5     Application of a bio-stimulant                                                          •   A bio-stimulant is a c...
Annex 1 – Agenda                                                    Marzo 58:30 – 9:00               Registro de Participa...
4:30                      Cierre del día 1 y revisión de programa para día de campo                          Mauricio Meji...
Annex 2 – Biodata of Participantsa. José Vásquez, Senior Agriculture Officer: Before joining WWF in 2004, José worked for ...
o Participación en el proyecto Identificación de hongos presentes en los suelos paperos           de la región del Cofre d...
g. Ingeniero Pedro Pablo Leal Castañeda   • EXPERIENCIA      o Investigador Extensionista      o Especialista en variedade...
Annex 3 – Advances in WWF’s Agricultural Program in the MAR Region  Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Suga...
Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008)   20
Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008)   21
Annex 4 – Agro-Climatic MonitoringBest Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008)   22
Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008)   23
Annex 5 – Biological Organisms LaboratoryBest Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008)   24
Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008)   25
Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008)   26
Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008)   27
Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008)   28
Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008)   29
Annex 6 – Integrated Pest Management Strategy in Sugar CaneBest Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (M...
Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008)   31
Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008)   32
Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008)   33
Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008)   34
Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008)   35
Annex 7 – Soil Studies for Integrated Management of Sugar CaneBest Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane...
Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008)   37
Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008)   38
Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008)   39
Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008)   40
Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008)   41
Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008)   42
Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008)   43
Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008)   44
Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008)   45
Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008)   46
Annex 8 – Integrated Pest Management in Sugar CaneBest Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6,...
Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008)   48
Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008)   49
Annex 9 – Effective Crop Harvesting MethodsBest Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) ...
Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008)   51
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Implementation of Best Agricultural Practices For SugarCane

2,522 views

Published on

0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
2,522
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
62
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Implementation of Best Agricultural Practices For SugarCane

  1. 1. Implementation of Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane PROCEEDINGS March 5, 2008 March 6, 2008 Crystal Palace Auditorium Manolo Hernandez’ Cane Field Orange Walk Town Goat Hill, Chan Pine Ridge Area
  2. 2. Table of Contents1. Background ............................................................................................................................. 32. Day 1 – Forum ........................................................................................................................ 3 2.1 Welcome Remarks .......................................................................................................... 3 2.2 Opening Remarks............................................................................................................ 4 2.3 Advances in WWF’s Agricultural Program in the MAR Region ................................... 4 2.4 Agro-Climatic Monitoring .............................................................................................. 5 2.5 Biological Organisms Laboratory................................................................................... 6 2.6 Integrated Pest Management Strategy in Sugar Cane..................................................... 6 2.7 The Cuban Experience in Integrated Management of Sugar Cane................................. 73. Day 2 – Field Demonstrations ................................................................................................ 8 1.5 Pest monitoring to support decision-making related to control method ......................... 9 1.6 Methods to control the Mosca Pinta ............................................................................. 10 1.7 Application of biological agents to control the Mosca Pinta........................................ 11 1.8 Fertilizer application ..................................................................................................... 12 1.9 Application of a bio-stimulant ...................................................................................... 13 Annex 1 – Agenda .................................................................................................................... 14 Annex 2 – Biodata of Participants ............................................................................................ 16 Annex 3 – Advances in WWF’s Agricultural Program in the MAR Region ........................... 19 Annex 4 – Agro-Climatic Monitoring ...................................................................................... 22 Annex 5 – Biological Organisms Laboratory ........................................................................... 24 Annex 6 – Integrated Pest Management Strategy in Sugar Cane ............................................. 30 Annex 7 – Soil Studies for Integrated Management of Sugar Cane ......................................... 36 Annex 8 – Integrated Pest Management in Sugar Cane ........................................................... 47 Annex 9 – Effective Crop Harvesting Methods........................................................................ 50Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 2
  3. 3. 1. BackgroundSugar production continues to be a major economic activity in Belize making a significantcontribution to the agriculture sector, national income and export earnings. The industry providesdirect employment to over 10,000 persons including self-employed farmers, field workers, andfactory workers. Almost half of the agriculture sector labour force is employed in the sugarindustry – this represents about 13.7% of the national working population. Approximately40,000 people (or 28% of the national population) rely on the sugar industry, taking into accountthe number of cane farmers, workers and others directly and indirectly involved in industryactivities. Sugar cane is grown on approximately 65,000 acres of land in the Corozal and OrangeWalk Districts.1On March 5 and 6, 2008 the World Wildlife Fund, the Belize Sugar Cane Farmers Associationand the Sugar Industry Control Board sponsored a two-day workshop entitled – “Implementationof Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane”. The main purpose of theworkshop was to inform participants of various projects and programs designed to addresschallenges faced by sugar cane producers across the region. The workshop exposed participantsto various technological advancements and newly developed methods designed to enhanceproduction quality and improve harvesting methods. See workshop agenda on Annex 1.Day one of the workshop was carried out at the Crystal Palace Auditorium and consisted of aseries of presentations highlighting various initiatives in Cuba, Honduras and Mexico (QuintanaRoo). Presentations were conducted by invited guests representing WWF Honduras, ISRP(Quintana Roo, Mexico), and INICA (Cuba).2 During the presentations, participants were giventhe opportunity to make recommendations, ask questions and express any concerns relating tothe various topics covered.2. Day 1 – Forum2.1 Welcome RemarksMr. Basilio Canul, member of the San Joaquin Branch Committee of BSCFA, led the invocation.Participants were then welcomed by Mr. Ismael Carillo of the BSCFA Management Committee.During his address, Mr. Carillo encouraged all participants to become actively engaged in thevarious presentations and to feel free to ask questions and make recommendations. He pointedout that the purpose of the workshop was to strengthen the cane farming industry in Belize and toidentify possible solutions to the existing challenges. Mr. Carillo pointed out that the industryhas been making slow but significant progress and much more can be achieved with greater unityamong the cane farmers. He pointed out that the sugar industry in Belize has currently achievedFair Trade certification, which should be celebrated as a major success. He mentioned that thebenefits of such an achievement are quite significant and translate into an additional $6 millionin additional financing to the industry – direct benefits to the farmers. Mr. Carillo remindedfarmers that despite the many challenges by the industry, it continues to make progress and willcontinue to do so, so long as farmers are actively involved in the programs.1 Source: Sugar Industry Brief, SICB, February 20082 The biodata of all presenters can be seen in Annex 2.Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 3
  4. 4. 2.2 Opening RemarksMr. Jose Vasquez of the World Wildlife Foundation (WWF) in Honduras gave the openingremarks. During his remarks, Mr. Vasquez gave an overview of some of the WWF relatedinitiatives across the region. Mr. Vasquez pointed out that although the WWF is a conservationorganization, it works very closely with the agricultural sector as there is a major link betweenthe two areas. He mentioned that initially, agriculture was seen as the major threat tobiodiversity simply because more than 50% of Earth’s land mass is utilized for agriculturalpurposes. Mr. Vasquez mentioned that in recent years it has been discovered that conservationand agriculture can complement each other and must do so to ensure continuity of biodiversityexistence.Mr. Vasquez mentioned that WWF has currently invested over US$312 million in over 1,300projects worldwide through its partners that are comprised of government agencies, localcommunities and NGO’s. He mentioned that the main focus of WWF’s agricultural program isto establish a scientific and technological platform that harmonizes agricultural practices andbiodiversity conservation resulting in low environmental impact and sustainable development.2.3 Advances in WWF’s Agricultural Program in the MAR RegionMr. Jose Vasquez, WWF Honduras, explained that WWF’s agricultural program sought to linkagriculture and conservation as part of the “Ridges to Reef” approach. He gave a briefpresentation on the Meso-American Reef System and proceeded to share information on relatedagricultural projects and activities.Mr. Vasquez mentioned that, recently, the WWF has turned to information technology for theimplementation of various programs including the monitoring of land use and data collection.One such program is the installation of weather monitoring stations across the region – two ofwhich have been installed in Belize (Stann Creek and Corozal). The purpose of this project wasto develop and deploy a stable weather monitoring system capable of providing timely readingsof weather determinants to be used as model input variables for precise management andforecasting of weather-related agricultural events.Participants were informed that information from the weather stations was available through theinternet. Mr. Vasquez also highlighted their BMP/Crop Cover program which sought to developbetter management practices for commercial planting in Belize particularly in the citrus industry.He said that the main purpose of this program was to identify alternatives to burning and the useof herbicides. Please refer to Annex 3 for the full text of Mr. Vasquez’ presentation.Points of interest that arose from the discussion that followed the presentation were as follows: • One of the participants suggested that the WWF consider partnering with tertiary educational level institutions (e.g., Escuela Secundaria Tecnica Mexico) in projects such as the production of Cover Crops seeds. • Participants wanted to know the cost effectiveness of substituting burning with the cover crop technique considering the cost of acquiring the seeds and/or seed production. Mr. Vasquez informed the participants that it would have been difficult to really indicate aBest Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 4
  5. 5. cost as the program was still at the trial stage. The information would be readily available in the near future. • There was also a concern as to what all the programs were trying to achieve in relation to cane production in Belize. Mr. Vasquez made it known that the reality was that Belize, despite being involved in sugar cane production for many years, was not at the production level it should be. He said that a major objective was to try to improve the process of production and the quality of production hence increasing financial yields. He mentioned that the average rate of production across the region is some 70 tons per hectare while in Belize the figure is at a much lower 45 tons per hectare. He said that the only way that Belize would improve its production rate would be if newer and better methods of production were identified and adopted.2.4 Agro-Climatic MonitoringThis segment of the workshop featured a presentation by Mr. Arnold Lara, WWF Honduras, whois currently involved in the development of a climate monitoring program in the region includingHonduras, Guatemala and Belize. Mr. Lara explained that the weather monitoring systemconsists of a series of weather monitoring stations set up at strategic locations to enable data onweather patterns to be collected. Mr. Lara explained that software has been designed that allowsfor accessibility of the data through the internet. He further explained that a weather station canbe set up anywhere in the world and then linked to their main system based in Honduras.Two stations have been installed in Belize – one in the Stann District and the other in the CorozalDistrict. The system measures such things as wind speed, precipitation, temperature, leafwetness, etc. He said that the main idea of this initiative is to establish a network of stationsthroughout the sugar cane zone that would allow farmers to be better informed resulting in moreinformed decision-making. He also mentioned that the weather monitoring program would haveto be complemented by constant on-the-field monitoring so that agro-climatic patterns andrelations can be identified.One of the major concerns from this presentation was the accessibility of the information, giventhat farmers may not be able to readily access the information because of poor computer literacyor no access to computers and/or internet link. A representative of the SICB suggested that theinformation could be made available to farmers by printing out the information at theAssociations or Branch Committees and making them available to the farmers. There wasanother suggestion that information could be printed at the schools (high schools) and given tothe students to pass on to the parents. Some participants felt that printing of the informationwould not be practical and it would be better to just utilize the media houses (radio, television) todisseminate the information on a regular basis. It was noted that the monitoring system wouldfunction effectively only if the data was made immediately and regularly available to farmers –in other words, as close to real time as possible. Old data would be poor data.One of the participants mentioned that weather prediction data would be more useful as theywould be more prepared to make decisions based on prediction. It was clarified that the systemwas not designed to predict the weather but was designed to record data on weather conditions inrelation to the crop. Participants were encouraged to go online at http://www.wwf-mar.org toaccess the weather monitoring system (see Annex 4).Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 5
  6. 6. 2.5 Biological Organisms LaboratoryMs. Claudia Flores, ISRP Quintana Roo, Mexico,,shared with participants an approach that theauthorities in Mexico have adopted to deal with the Mosca Pinta (Aeneolomia posfica) epidemicin their sugar cane industry. The process as outlined by Ms. Flores had to do with the cultivationof a fungus (Metarhizium anisopliae) that infects and eliminates the Mosca Pinta. The fungushas been proven to be very effective. Participants were explained the process of producing thefungus and the process of application.Ms. Flores also outlined the advantages and disadvantages of this process. Some advantagesincluded: • it does not contaminate the environment • it poses no threat to humans, animals or vegetation • it is very affordable and easy to useCertain disadvantages included: • it is designed to address only one problem within a complex system • its success is very dependent on specific environmental conditions • its viability decreases with timeAfter the presentation (see Annex 5 for full text), participants expressed concern about whetheror not an in-depth study has been arried out on the current effects of the Mosca Pinta on thesugar cane industry in Belize. Mr. Osorio from SICB explained that although a formal study hasnot been conducted, the extent of damage by the fly is widely known and unfortunately widelyfelt. He mentioned that in some instances farmers have experienced 40% damage to crops whilein other instances farmers have experienced up to 100% damage. He pointed out thatAssociation has embarked on chemical treatment to eliminate the flies but because it has notproven as effective as anticipated, biological treatment is being considered. According to Mr.Osorio, the hotspots have been identified and as soon as resources allow, biological treatmentshould be put into effect.2.6 Integrated Pest Management Strategy in Sugar CaneIn this presentation (see Annex 6), Mr. Eric Hernandez and Mr. Miguel Castillo (ISRP, QuintanaRoo, Mexico) outlined a process for pest control as utilized by the sugar cane producers inMexico. They mentioned that the objectives of their pest control program were to: • Increase sugar cane production levels • Maintain an ecological balance without disturbing ecosystems nor risking human health • To ensure production of quality sugar cane resulting in the production of competitive high quality sugarThe presenters mentioned that one of their major focuses was to address the challenges of theMosca Pinta epidemic that was costing farmers significant losses in their crops resulting ininferior quality and lower production levels of sugar. The presenters made it very clear to theparticipants that their experiences in Obregón, Quintana Roo, have proven that in attempting toeliminate a problem, certain factors are overseen and eventually lead to other problems. OneBest Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 6
  7. 7. example given was that of the second burning in which it was mentioned that although thesecond burning is sometimes used to control the Mosca Pinta population, it provides the rightenvironment for the proliferation of pests such as worms which drill into the sugar cane crops.2.7 The Cuban Experience in Integrated Management of Sugar CaneTwo Cuban experts in the field of sugar cane production – Mr. Jacinto Campos and Mr. PedroPablo Leal - delivered the following three presentations : • Soil Studies for Integrated Management of Sugar Cane • Integrated Pest Management in Sugar Cane • Effective Crop Harvesting MethodsPlease refer to Annexes 7, 8 and 9 for the full text of these three presentations.Some of the issues that were brought up after the presentations include the following: • It was felt that farmers should consider moving the industry towards a more effective system of production and management and it could begin by starting to consider and adopting soil studies. The WWF Country Representative mentioned that it was important for farmers to realize that other countries have begun moving in this direction and have seen the benefits. He felt that investments in these programs would be money well spent. • One of the farmers mentioned that farmers have been wanting that type of program (soil studies) for quite some time but the reality is that no one has taken the initiative. He mentioned that until this point, it is uncertain as to who would take the lead to move the process forward and make sure that such programs are implemented. Mr. Osorio, SICB representative, mentioned that it has already been considered but it is really up to the farmer to request it and make sure that financing such as the one received from Fair Trade be used to take care of such needs. • Another farmer mentioned that although he felt that is was very important to conduct such soil studies, he felt that more attention should be given on improving harvesting techniques. • Participants were curious to know how sugar cane was delivered to the factories in Cuba – burnt or green. They were informed by the Cuban specialists that all cane delivered to the companies had to be green and if they were burnt, farmers would be fined. • The presenters mentioned that there are three major problems in the production of sugar cane that farmers need to be aware of: 1) loss of product by improper harvesting techniques, 2) contamination of product associated with mud and other contaminants on the product, and 3) loss of purity due to excessive burning and delayed delivery. • Participants felt that it would be very beneficial if the BSCFA and the SICB would consider conducting exchange programs between sugar cane producers from Cuba and Belize. Participants also wanted to know who was in charge of organizing such activities including the exchange of sugar cane species/varieties. • Mr. Osorio mentioned that many attempts have been made to carry out such programs but the biggest factor has been continuity of programs and projects mainly due to lack of support and lack of finance. He mentioned that it is expected that farmers would take advantage of the further financial opportunities that have presented themselves to theBest Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 7
  8. 8. industry and ensure that the money is invested in such programs such as a soil studies laboratory and exchange programs. • It was mentioned that it would be a good idea if the BSCFA and SICB could partner up with an educational institution in Orange Walk for the establishment of a laboratory specializing in soil testing and other sugar cane related activities. He felt that this would be of benefit to the industry and the school. Muffles Junior College is working towards such a program and it would be wise to create some form of partnership with them. • Farmers in general felt that not enough information is being disseminated to them and that the BSCFA and the SICB need to begin doing more to ensure that this occurs as farmers are currently ignorant of the various programs and activities relating to the industry.3. Day 2 – Field DemonstrationsDay two of the workshop was a field day at Manolo Hernandez’ cane field located in Goat Hillin the Chan Pine Ridge area in the Orange Walk District. Activities included the following fielddemonstrations: a. Pest monitoring to support decision-making related to control method (yellow traps) – by Ing. Eric Hernandez and Miguel Castillo b. Methods to control the Mosca Pinta – by Ing. Eric Hernandez and Miguel Castillo c. Application of biological agents to control the Mosca Pinta (manual aspersion of the fungus Metarrhizium) – Ing. Claudia Flores d. Fertilizer application (buried) – by Jacinto Campos e. Application of a bio-stimulant – by Jacinto CamposBefore commencement of the field demonstrations, Marcos Osorio, SICB representative,expressed his appreciation to WWF for financing the 2-day workshop. He mentioned that WWFhas great interest to support the sugar cane industry.In his opening remarks, Maurico Mejía, WWF Belize representative, stated that WWF isfocusing efforts from Chetumal Bay to the Caribeban coast of Honduras to promote betteragricultural management practices without negatively affecting the income of the cane farmers.Their goal is to increase production output, whilst decreasing production costs and protecting theenvironment within the context of the Meso-American Reef region. As an example, he stated thatfarmers should consider applying biological treatments to combat the pest problem, rather thancontinuing to use insecticides. The latter is very expensive, and involves repeated financialinvestments over time.A pictorial description of the field demonstrations is presented below.Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 8
  9. 9. 3.1 Pest monitoring to support decision-making related to control method • The yellow bags are installed by placing them over two sticks inserted into the ground. • A hole is cut into the centre of the bag so that wind does not knock the bag down. Farmers need to be cognizant of wind direction when installing the bags. • The sticky substance that is pasted on the bag to trap the Mosca Pinta, needs to be changed every two months to ensure that the effectiveness of the trap is maintained over time. • The traps are placed in the cane fields one day before doing the count of the insects trapped on the bags. • When doing the count, the average number of insects caught on all traps in the field is calculated. The average number of “ninfas” recorded determines the type of pest control action that should be taken. • The herbicide (24D) does not affect the fungus (Metarhizium anisopliae), which is used as a biological control of the Mosca Pinta. • The first application of the fungus would be in January-February. Outbreaks of the Mosca Pinta commence by May.Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 9
  10. 10. 3.2 Methods to control the Mosca Pinta • The plough digs a 5cm channel on the ground – this is the depth at which the eggs of the Mosca Pinta occur. • The channel exposes the eggs to the elements. The eggs can then be preyed upon by insects and birds. • Sugar cane debris should be collected in the middle. • The use of the tractor/plough causes compaction of the soil, so pyhto-sanitary digging should be carried out before planting.Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 10
  11. 11. 3.3 Application of biological agents to control the Mosca Pinta • The fungus (Metarhizium anisopliae) comes in bags in the form of spores mixed with rice to prevent humidity. • The fungus has to be refrigerated during storage and transport, and needs to be used almost immediately after it is removed from a refrigerated environment. • The viability or effect of the fungus starts to reduce after 24 hours of its removal from refrigeration. • The cost of the fungus if purchased in Obregón is BZ$17.50 per application per hectare. A hectare is approximately 2.45 acres. The cost is higher in Guatemala (~BZ$20 per application per hectare). Minimum purchase of the fungis would need to be 1,000 doses. • Other costs include the construction and maintenance of a “cool room” to store the fungus. • When the bags containing the fungal spores are removed from cool storage, it must be given at least one hour to acclimatize to the surrounding climatic conditions. • The bag containing the fungal spores is then emptied into a bucket or other clean container. Distilled water is then poured over the fungal spores to wash them off the rice. • The water containing the fungal spores is then strained into a 200 litre drum. • The rice can be washed a second time to ensure that it is fully clean of spores, and the water is strained into the same drum. • The drum is then filled with distilled water and mixed thoroughly to dilute the fungal spores. • The diluted fungal spores are then sprayed over the cane field using a motorized or manual fog sprayer.Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 11
  12. 12. 3.4 Fertilizer application • This is a simple method using available technology in Belize – a plough and tractor. • The steps are three-fold: 1) plough channels along the “surcos”, 2) manually apply the fertilizer into the dug channels, and 3) cover the channels with soil. • It is important to cover the fertilizer so that the roots of the sugar cane can take full advantage of the fertilizer. This method is much more effective that simply throwing and spreading the fertilizer. • The primary active ingredients of the fertilizer are phosphorus, potassium and nitrogen. The phosphorus in the fertilizer stays where it is deposited (it does not move); potassium advances a little into the soil; nitrogen is the substance that advances more but still not much. Therefore, if the fertilizer is not buried into the soil, the roots cannot take full advantage of their properties. • Using the three-fold method, the fertilizer can bee applied even during the dry season. Whenever it rains, the fertilizer starts taking effect.Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 12
  13. 13. 3.5 Application of a bio-stimulant • A bio-stimulant is a compound obtained from plant material that allows for the more efficient use of the natural fertilizer that is contained within the soil. • The bio-stimulant ENERPLANT was used in this field demonstration. As other bio- stimulants, it stimulates the plants to more efficiently metabolize the energy resources stored within them, even under adverse climatic conditions. • The best effect of ENERPLANT is obtained with two applications of 2.6 millilitres per hectare mixed with distilled water into a 200 litre drum: the first application 30 days after crop germination, and the second application 30 days after the first application. • Bio-stimulants have the following positive results on the sugar cane crop: plants are healthier looking, plants are greener, and growth rate is higher, among other effects. • It is advisable to use fertilizers along with bio-stimulants, to ensure a synergistic effect between both products and better results in the use of both products. “Hay que poner en práctica lo que hemos aprendido y visto en este taller, sino es tiempo perdido.” - BSCFA representativeBest Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 13
  14. 14. Annex 1 – Agenda Marzo 58:30 – 9:00 Registro de Participantes9:00 – 9:05 Himno Nacional9:05 – 9:10 Invocación9:10 – 9:20 Palabras de bienvenida, Representative, Comité de Manejo BSCFA9:20 - 9:35 Palabras de apertura Ing. José Vásquez, WWF CA9:35 – 9:50 Mensaje del Ministro de Agricultura y Pesca Hon. Montero9:50 – 10:30 Avances del Programa de Agricultura en el MAR Ing. José Vásquez, WWF Honduras10:30 – 10:50 Café10:50 – 11:30 El Monitoreo Agro climático Ing. Arnold Lara – WWF Honduras11:30 – 12:00 Discusión12:00 – 1:00 Almuerzo1:00 – 1:30 Laboratorio de Organismos Biológicos Ing. Claudia Flores – ISRP, Quintana Roo1:30 – 2:00 Programa de campo para el manejo de plagas en caña de azúcar Ings. Eric Hernández y Miguel Castillo – ISRP, Quintana Roo2:00 – 2:30 Discusión2:30 – 3:00 Estudio de Suelos para el Manejo Integrado de la Caña de Azúcar Especialista Jacinto Campos, INICA, Cuba3:00 – 3:30 Manejo Integrado de Malezas en Caña de azúcar Especialista Jacinto Campos, INICA, Cuba3:30 – 4:00 Organización de la Cosecha Especialistas Pedro Pablo Leal, INICA, Cuba4:00 – 4:30 DiscusiónBest Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 14
  15. 15. 4:30 Cierre del día 1 y revisión de programa para día de campo Mauricio Mejia y Marcos Osorio Marzo 69:00 – 2:30 Día de Campo:Reunión 8:30 a.m. frente a edificio de la Asociación de Caneros de Orange Walk, el día de campose realizara en la parcela de Manolo Hernández en Goat Hill, Chan Pine Ridge Area.Actividades: a. demostración de monitoreo de plagas para la toma de decisión sobre el método de control (trampas amarillas) Ing. Eric Hernández y Miguel Castillo – ISRP, Quintana Roo b. Demostración de métodos de control de la mosca pinta (pase de rastra fitosanitaria y trampas amarillas) Ing. Eric Hernández y Miguel Castillo – ISRP, Quintana Roo c. Demostración de aplicación de agentes biológicos para el control de la mosca pinta (aspersión manual del hongo Metarrhizium) Ing. Eric Hernández y Miguel Castillo – ISRP, Quintana Roo d. Demostración de aplicación de fertilizante, enterrado Especialista Jacinto Campos, INICA, Cuba e. Demostración de aplicación de bio-estimulante, ENERPLANT Especialista Jacinto Campos, INICA, CubaBest Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 15
  16. 16. Annex 2 – Biodata of Participantsa. José Vásquez, Senior Agriculture Officer: Before joining WWF in 2004, José worked for three years as General Manager at Frutera Real S.A in Guatemala. In this position he was active in developing a new agricultural production program for pineapple, establishing an integrated pest management program and overall management of the first major export operation for this fruit in Guatemala. He has dedicated most of his professional life to the Standard Fruit Company (Dole) in Honduras, where he worked for almost eighteen years in different functions: manager of melon and sweet corn operations, manager at the pineapple operation, superintendent of planting and field maintenance. José holds a Master in Business Administration with a major in Agribusiness from Iowa State University. He graduated with honors as Bachelor of Science with a Major in Soil Technology from the University of Florida. In his early years, José worked at the National Agrarian Institute and at the Ministry of Natural Resources in Honduras.b. Arnold Lara has more than 10 years of knowledge and experience in the management and implementation of applications in Information and Communications Technology for Development, especially in Internet Services. He has broad experience in the technological goods and services market at both national and international level. His other educational background and experience are as follows: • EDUCACIÓN o Egresado, Licenciatura en Comunicaciones y Publicidad UNITEC o Diseñador Gráfico – GBM o Programación Básica y Avanzada en Lenguaje C, GBM o Introducción a Los Sistemas Abiertos y Operación Básica del Sistema Unix/Aix Sistema Risc 6000, GBM o Analista Programador – GBM • EXPERIENCIA o Desarrollo de plataformas tecnológicas para Internet que incluyen bases de datos, manejadores de contenidos, e-commerce o Instalación, administración y soporte en Linux o Soluciones y desarrollo de aplicaciones basadas en software libre o Auditoría y consultoría en seguridad informática o Amplia experiencia en formulación, seguimiento y evaluación de proyectos tecnológicos o Instalación y configuración de Estaciones Meteorológicas de ADCON Internacional.c. Ingeniera Agrónoma Claudia Flores Carrera • EDUCACIÓN o Egresada de la Facultad de Ciencias Agrícolas, Universidad Veracruzana Zona – Xalapa, Veracruz o La tésis se realizó en el Instituto de Ecología titulada Evaluación de la patogenicidad de Fusarium ventricosum en papa y su control con Trichoderma harzianum. • EXPERIENCIABest Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 16
  17. 17. o Participación en el proyecto Identificación de hongos presentes en los suelos paperos de la región del Cofre de Perote, Veracruz. En el Instituto de Ecología S.A. de C.V., Xalapa, Veracruz. o Colaboración en el proyecto Identificación de hongos utilizados en el control biológico del cultivo de papa. Perote, Veracruz. o Encargada del proyecto Extracción e Identificación de hongos micorrízicos. En la Universidad Veracruzana. o Asesora técnica de productores de hortalizas bajo invernadero (Proyecto PAPIR). Puebla. o Actualmente encargada del Laboratorio de Organismos Benéficos, en el Ingenio de San Rafael de Pucté, Quintana Roo.d. Ingeniero Eric Hernández Zapata • EDUCACIÓN o Egresada del Instituto Tecnológico Agropecuario No. 18 • EXPERIENCIA o 1994 – Memorias Profesionales Inducción de la Floración en Mango” o 1995 – Laboró en el cultivo de la piña para la compañía HERDEZ de México o 1996-2007 – Responsable del Ejido Sac-Xan o 2008 – Responsable del Departamento Técnico de Campo.e. Ingeniero Miguel Castillo Luna • EDUCACIÓN o 2001-2006 – Estudios en el Instituto Tecnológico de Ursulo Galván, Veracruz, México. • EXPERIENCIA o 2004 – Servicio Social en Agropecuaria, A. C-A S.A de C.V. o 2005 – Memorias Profesionales en Reproducción y Cría de Mojarra Nilótica. En el Municipio de Juchique de Ferrer, Veracruz o 2006 – Participación en el Congreso Nacional de Control Biológico Aplicación de Entomo-Patógenos y Lib. de Insectos Benéficos o 2007 – Participación en el curso Control Biológico de Plagas en Córdova, Veracruz o 2007 – Participación en el Encuentro Fitosanityario de la Caña de Azucar, Culiacán, Sinaloa o 2007 – Participación en el Congreso Nacional Control Biológico de la Langosta Migratoria, Mérida, Yucatán o 2006-2008 – Responsable del área de plagas en campo en el Ingenio San Rafael de Pucté S.A. de C.V.f. Ingeniero Jacinto Campos Asin • EXPERIENCIA o Sub-Director del Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones de la Caña de Azúcar de Cuba o A cargo de los Servicios Científico Técnicos que se le brinda a productores cañeros. o 43 años de experiencia en el cultivo de la caña de azúcar o Colaboración técnica con el Sugar Industry Control Board (Belice).Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 17
  18. 18. g. Ingeniero Pedro Pablo Leal Castañeda • EXPERIENCIA o Investigador Extensionista o Especialista en variedades y semilla de caña de azúcar del INICA – Cuba o 40 años de experiencia en caña de azúcar o Colaboración técnica con el Sugar Industry Control Board (Belice).Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 18
  19. 19. Annex 3 – Advances in WWF’s Agricultural Program in the MAR Region Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 19
  20. 20. Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 20
  21. 21. Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 21
  22. 22. Annex 4 – Agro-Climatic MonitoringBest Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 22
  23. 23. Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 23
  24. 24. Annex 5 – Biological Organisms LaboratoryBest Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 24
  25. 25. Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 25
  26. 26. Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 26
  27. 27. Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 27
  28. 28. Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 28
  29. 29. Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 29
  30. 30. Annex 6 – Integrated Pest Management Strategy in Sugar CaneBest Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 30
  31. 31. Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 31
  32. 32. Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 32
  33. 33. Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 33
  34. 34. Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 34
  35. 35. Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 35
  36. 36. Annex 7 – Soil Studies for Integrated Management of Sugar CaneBest Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 36
  37. 37. Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 37
  38. 38. Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 38
  39. 39. Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 39
  40. 40. Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 40
  41. 41. Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 41
  42. 42. Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 42
  43. 43. Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 43
  44. 44. Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 44
  45. 45. Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 45
  46. 46. Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 46
  47. 47. Annex 8 – Integrated Pest Management in Sugar CaneBest Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 47
  48. 48. Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 48
  49. 49. Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 49
  50. 50. Annex 9 – Effective Crop Harvesting MethodsBest Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 50
  51. 51. Best Agricultural Practices for the Production of Sugar Cane (March 5-6, 2008) 51

×