INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT Insights - Organic And IPM .
INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENTInsig htsJuly 2016: Volume 13, Issue 3
I n t e g r a t e dInside4Foundations of IPM,Organic Point Way OverBarriers4Ecologically-BasedGrowers Face Obstaclesand Market Could Help4IPM and Organic MovingForward TogetherContact Us607-255-8815northeastipm@cornell.eduIPM and OrgSignature Programsyic SstemsClimateEca tionxt GNeenerationdue a n d Pe stsAdvancRural andsemIPManrbroduction SystUPedAThe Northeastern IPM Center is supported by the NationalInstitute of Food and Agriculture, Crop Protection and PestManagement, Regional Coordination Program, Grant #201470006-22484. Printed on recycled paper. 4.5M; CP 7/16Northeastern IPM Center—Writer/Editor: Chris Gonzales, Director: Steve Young,Staff: Phil Coles, Nancy Cusumano, Jana Hexter, Kevin Judd, Yifen Liu, MartinMurillo, Susannah Reese.CreditsSee “Moving Forward” Page 4Individual practices, such as soil and nutrient management, and toolslike natural herbicides and biological controls, provide short-term bene-A Two-Pronged Approachbeneficial organisms by using selective and fewer insecticides, adjusting timing of application, incorporating trap crops, and improving thehabitat for natural enemies. While introduced exotic pests, such asspotted wing drosophila, brown marmorated stink bug, and Asian citruspsyllid threaten organic and conventional crops alike, the negative impacts to human health and the environment should be weighed equallywith potential economic losses.IPM and Organic Moving Forward Togetherwww.NortheastIPM.orgChallenges and Opportunities forEcologically-Based Growersang5July 2016Volume 13, Issue 3anM a n a g e m e n tInsig htsCenter340 Tower RoadCornell UniversityIthaca, NY 14853Ch Centers a discipline, agriculturehas a need for resources tosupport research, education, Extension, and technologytransfer. Within the field of cropproduction and protection, IPM andorganic are no different. Yet, theirbasic philosophy—which placesOrganic and IPM, workingan emphasis on the environment,together, a win/win.human health, and profitability—sets them apart from other approaches. It has been said that if youcan’t beat ’em, join ’em. IPM and organic communities have definitelynot been beaten, but they are not growing as rapidly as they couldbe, considering the demand in the marketplace. The USDA’s Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education (SARE) program has fundedand supported more projects in both IPM and organic than any othergovernment agency. Perhaps their success is in their name, “sustainableagriculture.” Is it time to re-assess and re-label both IPM and organic asecologically-based?Because organic farmers are restricted from using synthetic insecticides, beneficial populations are rarely reduced to the levels foundwith other practices. IPM systems are generally designed to preserveMoney, as they say, makes the world go round. So too money hasA growing body of literature on occupational exposure to pesticidesspun the world of food, particularly food produced using IPMmakes it a high priority across the globe.and organic practices. For decades, corporations have responded to consumer preference by supplying food that is produced and soldA Model: Organics in the Marketinexpensively. With the rise in rapid communications like social mediaand the Internet, and an increasingly educated and concerned public,Money that finally flowed into organic programs, like the Nationalconsumers have begun voicing their concerns inOrganic Program (NOP), Organic Materials Reviewthe food marketplace. Consumers are choosingInstitute (OMRI), and USDA helped fuel the emergorganic, healthy, and less-processed food. Alonging movement and fledgling industry that supportwith the rise of health food stores is demand fored it. Now, organic is seeing exponential growthsustainable production practices, which are beingin production and product sales, with demand forscrutinized more closely by food suppliers andmany products continuing to exceed supply.distributors of all scales.The same cannot be said for marketing “IPMWhat will happen to conventional farminggrown,” which is hindered by low consumer awarepractices in the coming years? Will the marketness and appreciation. With federal regulation oflead to reduced use of pesticides? Or will pestithe organic label, and the marketing and educacide resistance—and toxicity in humans and thetion campaigns that accompanied it, came a surgeenvironment—lead to more regulation? Will IPMin demand for organic products in the marketand organic fill the gap? A combination of theseplace, along with greater legitimacy for organicscenarios could happen. If so, significantly moremethods within the agricultural research andresearch dollars will be needed to uncover ecologExtension establishment. Global sales of organic inically-based answers to the problems, which have2012 were approximately US 63.8 billion. Despitebeen given temporary fixes for far too long.all the growth, organic remains a tiny fraction ofAt present, adherents of the organic movementworld and US agricultural production. The US hascreate market demand for products, practices, anda total of 844 million acres (342 million Ha) of landtheir related ecosystem services. Still, more couldin agricultural production, with 0.6% of it organic.be done. IPM is a part of organic just as it is a partDepending on your viewpoint, the glass is eitherWhat are the challenges for a farmerof conventional agriculture. Will environmentalhalf full or half empty.with radishes?issues like we have never had before force changeto happen? The timing may be right for IPM to shift conventional growWhat’s in a Name?ers toward more ecologically-based practices, which would have thegreatest impact on all practices, including organic.One challenge with IPM is in the name; integrated pest management.As much as people do not like pests, they loathe even more a pest labelput on their food. In the 1990s, the New York State IPM Program and aChallengeslarge grocery store chain attempted an IPM labeling program. SupportPeople in the public sector are discussing a number of agriculture for the program was pulled in 1999, as there were several associatedrelated issues with regard to food safety, production practices, andissues such as lack of recognition of IPM by consumers, a third categoryhuman health. The National Water Quality Inventory Report to Conon already crowded shelves, stereotype associated with pesticides, andgress indicates agriculture continues to be the US’s leading source ofassociation of the word “pest” with the purchase of food.surface-water pollutants. Poor pesticide-use practices have led to moreA viable solution, for IPM, would be to follow industry in creating athan 1,000 species of insects, mites, plant diseases and weeds develnew name. Crop consultants now specialize in resistance managementoping resistance to pesticides worldwide, generating more than US 1.5and stewardship, which are synonymous with IPM in addressing pestibillion in costs per year (Pimentel 2005). Losses include damage by recide resistant weeds, insects, and diseases. A similar approach could besistant pests, costs of additional pesticide applications required to conused for labeling IPM food, such as integrated crop management (ICM)trol resistant pests, and costs associated with bringing new pesticidesor sustainable agricultural solutions (SAS). Some groups, such as theto market to replace those no longer effective due to resistance. Currentnot-for-profit food organization Red Tomato, the USDA’s Sustainableestimates are that 237 weed species have developed resistance to 155Agriculture Research and Education (SARE), and the Natural Resourcesdifferent herbicides (Heap 2014) in 66 crops in 61 countries worldwide.Conservation Service (NRCS) are already moving in this direction. WillFarm workers have elevated risks of brain, cervix, prostate, stomach,IPM adherents lag behind, or lead the way to a sustainable future?lymphatic and bone cancers. Calvert et al. (2008) reported 3,271 acutepesticide-related illnesses among farm workers between 1998 and 2005.NortheasternNortheastern6Ecologically-Based Growers Face Obstacles and Market Could HelpP e s tAldo Leopold, who in 1949 published The LandEthic, a founding text of the conservationmovement, knew the challenges for the farmer:feed a growing population, improve the productivity ofagricultural land, and protect the integrity of the environment for future generations. Today, an increasingnumber of people have expectations for higher qualityfood—for example, organic, unprocessed, unpackaged, and healthy products. Even as expectationsrise, we face water and air pollution, loss of beneficialorganisms, and increasing persistence of pests. Yetthese challenges are being met head on by the organicmovement and the IPM tradition, whose adherentssee a need for greater adoption of ecologically-basedpractices among growers and the general public.The benefits of organic growing are many: feweradverse environmental impacts, no synthetic pesticide residues, and documented improvements innutritional quality in dairy and in some fruits andvegetables. The benefits of IPM: reduced reliance onsingle tactics, as well as reduced pesticide residues,production costs, risks, and health and environmentalimpacts. Fundamental principles of IPM can be appliedto any pest problem.One of the limitations of organic growing is therigorous restriction of pesticide and fertilizer inputs,all of which must be derived from natural products.Meanwhile, a limitation of IPM is that, on a continuum,the benefits are dependent on the extent to whichtactics are adopted. Also there is lack of consumerunderstanding of IPM.There are commonalities to organic, IPM, and evenconventional farming. Organic producers practice IPM,for example, by using cultural, biological, and in somecases chemical controls. Some ecologically-basedgrowing practices are becoming more common in conventional farming, including cover crops and reducedtillage systems. Organic food has broad consumerawareness and support, price premiums, and a clearset of standards through the National Organic Program(NOP).Still life with organic fruit and vegetables.Both types of ecologically-based growing, organicand IPM, are knowledge-intensive and require asystems approach that focuses on understanding aproblem, rather than simply applying patent- and revenue-driven products in the field. This is a major constraint to adoption of organic and IPM. Ecologically based growing may cost more in the short term, yet itpays off in the long term. Ecologically-based growingdelivers ecosystem services, such as clean water, soilhealth, and environmental biodiversity, not to mentiona sustainably-grown crop. Despite these benefits,market premiums are necessary to provide incentivesfor growing organic food, even while demand outstripssupply. Furthermore, IPM is not recognized by retailconsumers. In this context, one could argue that IPMand organic would be best served by positioning themselves together under a single “ecologically-basedgrowing” umbrella.See “Challenges and Opportunities” Page 2This issue is based on work of the North Central IPMCenter’s Organic and IPM Working Group.www.NortheastIPM.org
Challenges and OpportunitiesContinued from Cover PageAdherents of IPM and organic growing share common priorities.Ecologically-based growers need increased resources for research, technology transfer, education, and outreach. Public policy changes andprivate-sector incentives could level the playing field. There are answersfor growers battling long-fought pests like fire blight in apples andpears, late blight in tomatoes and potatoes, and agriculture weeds thatthrive in reduced-tillage systems. Ecologically-based approaches couldtackle newly introduced pests such as spotted wing drosophila, brownmarmorated stink bug, and Asian citrus psyllid. However, the politicaland social interest in learning them is often lacking. Ecologically-basedsolutions, which are rarely discovered overnight nor through a singlecompany or individual, take consistent, sustained efforts by the widestgroup who is willing to share in both the challenges and the successes.Organic and IPM groups are finally working together. But thisshouldn’t be such a revelation. Individuals using ecologically-basedmethods have been working together for centuries prior to the chemicalrevolution and Rachel Carson’s book Silent Spring. The critical issuesof today, such as climate change, pesticide resistance, and off-targetchemical movement, are driving us back to the basics upon whichorganic and IPM were founded. We need resilient farming systemsthat can endure environmental problems that are occurring naturallyand due to our own mistakes. We need to look in the mirror and askourselves the question, “Is this the best we can do?” If Aldo Leopold waslooking to a sustainable future, so should we. IPM and OrganicA2www.NortheastIPM.orgIPM and Organic Meet NeedsCommon Prioritiesof IPM and OrganicLimitations, Commonalities, and Differences11LimitationsLimitations of organicLimitations of IPMOOIPMrg &anicGrowersneed to feeda growingpopulationincreaseag landproductivitypreserve healthand environmentalintegrity for futuregenerationsmeet risingexpectationsfor higherquality foodOftenloweryield2and organic &IPM communitiesseek greateradoptionincreasingresilience ofpests arechallengesloss of beneficialorganismsbut water andair pollutionRestrictionson pesticides,fertilizersIPM continuum difficultTech TransferüEducationConsumer awareness lowOutreachConsumer AwarenessCommonalities2NaturalenemiesOrganic and IPMare bothsystems approachesto growingA New ApproachSource: Thee Northeasastern IPM Center, based on ththee work ofthe North Ceentrant l IPMM Center’s Organic and IPM Working Group.might improve several aspects of soil health, including organic matteras well as beneficial microbes, but selling a pest-suppressing chemicalbrings short-term financial gain. And innovative systems thinking is kepton the back burner for another day.Expanding AdoptionSome growers use the “high-input” strategy to meet expectations fortop yields and economic returns without regard to externalized environmental and human health costs. The business model promotes thisfocus, even for IPM and organic. When implemented by farmers whoseek to maximize short-term profits and who are not expected to payfor those external costs, the resulting environmental impacts are oftenlinked to major issues—like hypoxia in the Chesapeake Bay, Great Lakes,and Gulf of Mexico. Or groundwater contamination by nutrients andpesticides. Or unacceptable levels of soil erosion.fewer adverseenvironmentalimpacts,no syntheticpesticide residuesIPM benefitsaddress any pest,lower pesticideresidues, costs;fewer health,environmentalimpactsSource: The NortNortheasheastern IPM Center, based on the work of the NoNorthrth Central IPM Center’ser s OrgOrganic and IPM Working Group.Compensating Environmental and Societal Benefits3Fine-tunedirrigationPublic PolicyLegislationOrganic growers useIPM, such as culturaland biological controlsSupport3Some IPM growingpractices are morecommon in conventional farmingSolutions for GrowersFire BlightCover cropsorganic benefitsDollars for . . .ResearchPLevel of IPM Practicecould be easily adopted and widely used, even in conventionally-growncrops. The small share of revenue in organic and IPM production is nota fair measure of success. Knowledge cannot be bought or sold, like ajug of chemicals or a bag of compost. Farmers—whether organic, IPM,or conventional—who apply excessive inputs are seldom held accountable. However, corporate sustainability efforts are increasing pressureon all growers to improve.IPM could help growers solve many problemswith numerous pests. In the case of weeds, theknowledge infrastructure needed to practiceIntegrated Weed Management (IWM) is beingcompromised by the ease of single applicationsof herbicides to crops grown in monocultureand genetically engineered to be tolerant of achemical. It’s no wonder that weeds in much ofthe corn and soybeans in the US are managedwithout IWM. The IPM model is based onknowledge, understanding, and often requiresoutside-the-box thinking, all of which take time.The practices that do not use IWM are basedprimarily on salable products and powerfulIf you could purchase a bunch of “IPM certified”market mechanisms to push them along.carrots,wouldyou?Overcoming the Barriers to More IPMPublic funding to Land Grant universities isand Organicon the decline, yet institutions still need money to educate students andOrganic and IPM adoption—and benefits—remain far short of potential.make new scientific discoveries. However, patents, as revenue streams,Less than 1% of US cropland is certified organic (USDA ERS 2013). Onlydo not work, let’s say, on cover-cropping practices that will decreaseabout 10% of cropland benefits from a high level of IPM practices (USDAsoil pests. This forces some researchers to choose to identify the activeNRCS CEAP). Nevertheless, agriculture research, development, and outcomponents that suppress pests, which generates funding for theirreach benefit everyone. Because IPM and organic practices are knowlprogram, but prevents them from doing the ecologically-based researchedge-intensive and focus on ecologically-based problem solving, theyon cover crop systems. Actually growing and incorporating a cover cropIPM and OrganicBoth Are Ecologically-Based GrowingFoundations of IPM, Organic Point Way Over Barriersdherents of organic and IPM practices share a basic principle:emphasis is placed on human health, the environment, andeconomics. This means that the practices developed and adopted with both approaches must align with the principle. Historically,IPM has focused on pests of any stripe, and was born in response to theoveruse of pesticides. Growers have used organic practices for centurieson farms and in fields, big and small, and have developed new ideasalong the way. When the USDA established the organic certification program, growers had the option of producing foodguided by laws. Meanwhile, growers practicingIPM have operated without a clear definition.Even the highest level of IPM, which has aimssimilar to organic, receives no price premiumsor special marketing.Organic and IPM production brings a common benefit: reduced consumer exposure topesticides in the diet. IPM and organic production brings another equally important benefit:biodiversity in the environment. In addition,some organic foods can have higher levels ofcertain specific nutritional components, higherantioxidant levels, and greater nutrient densitythan some conventionally produced foods.Eco-GrowingMeasurementof soil healthLate BlightDifferencesBrown Marmorated Stink BugOrganic food has broad consumer awareness and support.Spotted Wing DrosophilaOrganics also enjoy price premiums and have a standard:the USDA National Organic Program (NOP).Asian Citrus PsyllidSource: The Nortortheasheastern IPM Center, based on thehe work of theth Northh CentCentralrall IPMI Center’s Organicanicc and IIPMPM Working Group.Sourourcce: The Northeastern IPM Center, based on the work of the North Central IPM Center’s OrgOrganicanic and IPIPM Working Group.Moving ForwardMaking GainsContinued from Page 6Farmers are, of course, central to agroecosystems. Whether a groweruses certified organic, conventional, or IPM practices, too often the yieldof their crop is their sole measure of success. For sustainable agricultureto thrive, growers as well as input suppliers and even insurance providers must value additional measures of success. Improved soil health,reduced greenhouse gas emissions, reduced energy consumption,decreased pesticide use, community vitality, and other societal and environmental measures—all need to be teamed with economic success.Farmers are well-positioned to be the leaders in sustainability. Innovation, problem-solving, and conservation will
July 2016 Volume 13, Issue 3 Inside 4Foundations of IPM, Organic Point Way Over Barriers 4Ecologically-Based Growers Face Obstacles and Market Could Help 4IPM and Organic Moving Forward Together I nt e g rat e d Pe s t M a n age m e nt Insights Contact Us 607-255-8815 northeastipm@cornell.edu 340 Tower Road Cornell University Ithaca, NY 14853 .
method of approach to pest control is not feasible. Hence, we have to form an integrated approach in pest management. IPM. Integrated Pest Management is an ecological approach in which utilization of all available techniques of pest control to reduce and maintain the pest population at levels below economic injury level _.
insect infestations, and notify management when dead rodents and or birds are found. b) Management should immediately contact the pest management provider for assistance. 1.3.1. Pest Sighting Log a) Maintain a Pest Sightings Log which informs the pest control service technician of pest sightings or pest activity in the facility.
This guide uses the term Integrated Pest Management (IPM), which like organic production, emphasizes cultural, biological, and mechanical practices to minimize pest outbreaks. With limited pest control products available for use in many organic production systems, an integrated approach to pest management is essential.
This guide uses the term Integrated Pest Management (IPM), which like organic production, emphasizes cultural, biological, and mechanical practices to minimize pest outbreaks. With limited pest control products available for use in many organic production systems, an integrated approach to pest management is essential.
pest from causing more damage than is reasonable to accept. Even though a pest is present, it may not do very much harm. It could cost more to control the pest than would be lost because of the pest's damage. The three main objectives of pest control are: prevention—keeping a pest from becoming a problem, suppression—reducing pest
Integrated Pest Management Manual for Tomato leaf miner (Tuta absoluta) - 7 - Integrated Pest Management is an ecosystem-based approach to crop production and protection that combines different management practices to grow healthy crops and minimize the use of pesticides. Integrated Pest Management emphasizes the
An Integrated Pest Management decision shall consist of the following steps: 1. Identify pest species. 2. Estimate pest populations and compare to established action thresholds. 3. Select the appropriate management tactics based on current on-site information. 4. Assess effectiveness of pest management. 5. Keep appropriate records.
Definition Integrated Pest Management (IPM) is a comprehensive approach that combines effective, economical, environmentally sound, and socially acceptable methods to prevent and solve pest problems. IPM emphasizes pest prevention and provides a decision-making process for determining IF pest suppression is needed, WHEN it is needed, WHERE it .
