Integrated Pest Management Systems: Protecting Profits and the Environment

Integrated pest management (IPM) is an ecologically based, environmentally conscious method to control plant pests. IPM combines, or integrates, biological and nonbiological control techniques to suppress weeds, insects, and diseases.

Contemporary IPM programs address the potential adverse health and environmental effects of widespread pesticide use, as well as the decreased effectiveness of some chemical pesticides because many pests have developed increased resistance to these substances. IPM customizes the use of a variety of pest suppression techniques for individual situations; it uses pesticides sparingly, and only when economic conditions dictate. Consequently, IPM has played and will continue to play a major role in reducing or eliminating pesticide exposure to humans, contamination of the environment, and pesticide threats to endangered species all while providing economic advantages for farmers.

In the late 1960's, Dr. Ray F. Smith and Dr. Harold T. Reynolds of the University of California introduced the IPM concept, defining it as "a pest population management system that utilizes all suitable techniques in a compatible manner to reduce pest populations and maintain them at levels below those causing economic injury." For 20 years, the IPM approach has played a major role in reducing the damaging effects of pesticides on people, ground water, and wildlife.

Virtually all land-grant universities, as well as USDA and the private sector, have implemented IPM systems for most agricultural commodities. The principles of IPM have also been used to develop excellent pest control programs for structures and landscapes in urban areas.

Agricultural Research Service plant pathologist Kenneth Deahl finds Colorado potato beetles have done little damage to new insect-resistant potato plants. (USDA Photo by Tim McCabe, 0687X534-11)

IPM Is Born

Two research projects conducted between 1972 and 1985 brought the IPM concept to the cutting edge of farm management. Both were cooperative efforts between several universities, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the National Science Foundation. The Huffaker Project, which took place between 1972 and 1978, investigated insect and mite pest problems of five major commodities alfalfa, apples, citrus, cotton, and soybeans. The Consortium for Integrated Pest Management expanded that research to include all major pests (insects, diseases, and weeds).

As a result of these two projects, system science and computer modeling became central to the study of pest problems and their management. These projects led to other significant advances in the science of pest management, as well. For example:

Biological sampling of pests, which showed that pesticides could be applied later in the growing cycle at the point of economic damage;

Using pest-resistant crop varieties;

Using natural enemies for biological control;

Quantifying economic and environmental values of IPM systems, and;

Using the Cooperative Extension Service (CES) to help farmers implement the new technology.

Using IPM Systems

Advanced IPM systems can factor in nearly all the variables in crop or livestock production. In developing an overall pest management plan, consider these tactics:

Use pest-resistant plant varieties adapted locally from disease-free stocks;

Adopt farming practices that discourage pest development, such as carefully planned planting and harvest dates, cultivation techniques, water and fertilizer management schemes, and destruction of pest-harboring crop residues;

Introduce pests' natural enemies into the production system, such as parasites, predators, pathogens, or competitors for food;

Use crop/pest models and environmental monitoring to predict pest occurrence;

Monitor levels and types of pest infestations;

Develop economic thresholds at which damage by pests is economically significant and warrants pesticide application;

Select and time the application of the most environmentally safe pesticides when economic thresholds are reached;

Periodically evaluate the economic, environmental, and social benefits of pest management;

Regularly contact your local Cooperative Extension Service for the latest information about IPM techniques.

IPM Successes

Integrated pest management makes good economic sense. By 1987, an evaluation of IPM programs in 15 States documented that IPM users overwhelmingly showed a profit while reducing their use of pesticides. In these States, farmers using IPM increased their net profits over non-IPM users by an estimated $578 million per year. The evaluation estimated that private pest-management consulting firms may bring in revenues exceeding $400 million per year. It is easy to understand why IPM programs have continued to be emphasized by many Cooperative Extension Services despite constantly diminishing Federal financial support.

The advantages of IPM are as varied as the circumstances under which the system is used. Virtually all farmers, regardless of the size of their enterprises, can benefit from integrated pest management. Consider these case histories:

Cotton. Coordinated by the Texas Agricultural Extension Service, a regional cotton production program in the environmentally sensitive, lower Rio Grande valley utilizes a range of IPM tactics. The program is applied to 450,000 acres and has emphasized cultural rather than chemical methods of pest control to increase profits by $31 million per year and reduce insecticide use by an estimated 650,000 pounds per year. Cotton IPM programs in other regions of the State have saved Texas farmers $8.43 billion by decreasing expenditures on pesticides and increasing yields.

Among the strategies farmers have used to accomplish these results are:

Short-season, pest-resistant, varieties;

Optimal planting dates;

Reduced water and nitrogen fertilizer usage;

Pest simulation models;

Detailed season-long monitoring of pest populations and plant conditions;

Pesticide selection and timing of applications based on monitoring results and economic thresholds;

Preservation of natural enemies of pests, and;

Harvesting early and destroying plant residue to remove pest harborage.

Colorado potato beetles take only a bite or two of this insect-resistant potato plant developed by USDA scientists before they are repelled. (USDA Photo by Tim McCabe, 0687X533-22)

Soybeans and Corn. In the Midwest, corn and soybean farmers face significant pest problems from insects, weeds, and diseases. IPM tactics, incorporated with the use of corn/soybean rotations rather than continuously growing one crop or the other, have resulted in uniformly higher and more sustained yields. They also have netted larger profits for farmers and reduced the economic risks associated with continuously growing just one crop.