This paper reports on the initial findings of an ongoing research project to capture differences in pest management strategies and decision-making among growers using the California Pesticide Use Reports (PUR) database. Analysis was performed for prunes in Sutter and Yuba counties to identify on-farm innovation by analyzing the PUR for best management practices to reduce pesticide use. Results showed that large variations in pesticide use were present in 2000, with a range of less than 5 kg to more than 41 kg of pesticide applied per hectare (ha) crop planted in Sutter County and a range of less than 2 kg to close to 30 kg per ha crop planted in Yuba County. Among the 42 growers selected cultivating more than 80 ha, five growers in Sutter County and three growers in Yuba County in 2000 were identified as low pesticide use growers. The results indicated a surprising number of low to no fungicide users and an even higher number of growers using no herbicides in both counties. Twenty-nine viable low pesticide use growers were identified overall among the total 294 growers in the Sutter and Yuba counties. However, there were no spatial patterns of where these low pesticide use growers' fields were located. The transition from higher-risk active ingredients (AIs) to reduced-risk AIs used by many of the low pesticide users suggests intentional substitution. Initial yield data indicate that quantity and quality were not adversely affected by low use growers employing reduced-risk pesticides, fewer (AIs) per field, and lower rates per chemical than their moderate to high use counterparts. Diverse collaborators consisting of university researchers, environmental and community organizations, state government scientists, and growers worked together throughout the entire project, beginning with defining the research parameters, then interpreting the results, and finally suggesting practical applications for the outcomes. The paper also highlights the effectiveness of using such collaborative research relationships to explore low pesticide use alternatives, to directly exchange research findings with growers, and to encourage a farmer-to-farmer extension model.