Brief Summary of Minutes of Annual Meeting

S.G. spoke with the group, mostly about whether the group wished to remain a coordinating committee or become a regional research project. He felt that we had enough substance to make the NECC-1009 a multi-state research project. As a coordinating committee there is only the requirement to report that the committee met. R.C. called for a motion to report only minutes and a publications list. I.M. made motion. B.B. seconded. There was a general discussion of the benefits of and means for assembling standardized, centralized cultivar information. The consensus was that decisions for standardization would be left to the separate subgroups. D.G. led discussion of the differing needs of the retail grower and the wholesale grower and the importance of objectives being aligned with changing needs. Unique apples for niche markets require that we be flexible in what we use as criteria. Non-patentable apple cultivars, antiques, disease-resistant cultivars bear further consideration. D.G. distributed a list from Cheryl Hampson with some selections listed that may have limited appeal. I.M. commented that multiple harvests of many rare/antique apples are a requirement. D.M. commented that the evolution of eastern apples is ongoing and that this is an opportunity. Propagation was cited as a limitation for some cultivars. Creation of a database with marketing characteristics or a very limited set of characteristics was suggested. D.G. volunteered to help prepare a list of rare or heirloom cultivars with potential for a future planting to evaluate them. The list should indicate the unique or differentiating character(s) of each cultivar. People other than members of the NECC-1009 should be consulted in preparing the list. The list makers will be: D.G., I.M., D.M., D.R., and K.Y. R.B. led discussion of pear breeding indicating that there was still active breeding in many parts of the world as well as selections and cultivars that need testing. He gave as examples of sources of selections the Harrow program, the Cornell program, France, Germany, Italy, and Hungary. Among the cultivars needing further testing are Sunrise, Blakes Pride, Shenandoah, and 71655-014. The consensus was that a protocol and list of potential cultivars and selections to evaluate should be prepared and then cooperators solicited. OHxF87 could be the rootstock. Considerable interest in Asian was pears was voiced as well. R.B. volunteered to put together a list. B.S., J.G. and J.F. paneled a discussion about sharing of variety information. The confounding effects of climatic variability were agreed to create difficulty and that therefore expert evaluation was needed. B.S. suggested that evaluations include more interpretive summaries. Anyone doing variety evaluation was encouraged to send web links to their reports. J.C. gave a presentation demonstrating a database for online collaboration. The database was created using FileMaker and had a web interface. W.C. led a discussion about the need for the NECC-1009 to have its own website. He also brought up the question of whether the web site should be limited to the one hosted by NIMMS. Susan Brown spoke with the group (via teleconference) about club varieties and alternative licensing. She pointed out that any public presentation of pictures or data can jeopardize patentability of a selection. Susan indicated that NY428 will probably be named and trademarked but, not patented. I.M led discussion about hard cider apples. The industry is growing and has very little land-grant support. I.M suggested that we grapple with the fruit growing part of the process. He pointed out that many of the hard cider cultivars have characteristics that have been selected against in fresh market apples (i.e. Small-fruitedness, propensity to preharvest drop). Issues to be addressed are adaptability of cultivars, harvesting, preharvest drop, thinning, and fermentation. Washington has a website (http://mtvernon.wsu.edu/frt_hort/ciderapples.htm). I.M. will prepare a list of cultivars with descriptions. D.R. and Y.Y led discussion about quality of disease-resistant apples. They put forth a call for future meetings to have reports from people working on disease-resistant apples. R.C. will assemble his information on disease-resistant cultivars. R.M. discussed her plans for establishing a plum cultivar evaluation project. She is assembling a planting for evaluation under Maine growing conditions and welcomed other interested parties to sign up and make it into a multi-state project. J.G. led discussion of apricot breeding and cultivars. New Jersey has released Sugar Pearl; it is available through Gardens Alive. It was suggested that producing unified information on apricot survival would be a useful objective for the group. B.S. says Curtis is a good survivor in Michigan. J.G. will put together a list describing the apricot releases from his breeding program. Plans for a meeting in 2007 were discussed. The chair will be R.C. again. Meeting will be scheduled to avoid conflict with the Cumberland-Shenandoah, Great Lakes, and NC-140 meetings. Meeting Adjourned 4:15 pm