- 25 



small growers may be less likely to attend the grower meetings where IPM 

 training has been presented, and in fact, the percentage of such growers 

 attending all grower meetings was smaller than the overall average. 

 Moreover, the majority of orchards on the IPM pilot program (1978-1982) were 

 large, and all the growers on this survey who used private consultants had 

 orchards larger than 60 acres. In addition, there may be less incentive for 

 small growers to reduce pesticides costs, since their costs are already 

 comparatively less. 



But smaller growers have a strong potential for the use of integrated 

 pest management in their orchards, since a grower with a few acres can often 

 be more flexible than a grower who manages a large acreage. For example, a 

 large grower may need 2 or more days to spray their entire orchard while a 

 small grower may accomplish this task in less than a day. As a consequence, 

 the use of post-infection scab sprays or insecticides based on scouting 

 results (eg., for plum curcul io) may be less of a problem for the smaller 

 grower. It should be noted here that the respondents with less than 20 

 acres who do scout had the lowest pesticide costs on the survey--$121 per 

 acre, and the lowest use of mi t ic ides--l .3 applications per season. We 

 would anticipate that with better use of IPM techniques this group also 

 could substantially reduce their use of insecticides and fungicides, reaping 

 both economic and environmental benefits. 



Summary and Conclusions 



In summary, principal reasons for adopting IPM were safe use of pesti- 

 cides, increases in farm profits, control of crop yield, and a more positive 

 image with neighbors and consumers. 



Compared to non-1 PM growers, IPM practitioners tended to be somewhat 

 younger and with less farming experience; were more likely to use sticky 

 spheres, pheromone traps, leaf wetness machines, and alternate row spraying; 

 were 3 times more likely to calibrate their sprayer more than once per 

 season; reported higher per acre yields, but lower pesticide costs, and 

 somewhat lower numbers of insecticide and miticide applications. 



We conclude that growers who adopt integrated Pest Management experi- 

 ence benefits in several areas, and that such benefits can more than justify 

 the cost of hiring a private IPM scout/consultant or alloting the time to 

 implement an IPM system on their own. 



Issued by the Cooperative Extension Service, E. Bruce MacDougall, Dean, in 

 furtherance of the Acts of May 8 and June 30, 191^; United States Department 

 of Agriculture and Massachusetts counties cooperating. The Cooperative 

 Extension Service offers equal opportunity in programs and employment. 



