9 



THE SECOND STAGE OF APPLE IPN IN MASSACHUSETTS 



Ronald J. Prokopy 



Department of Entomology 



University of Massachusetts 



Through 1977, most Massachusetts apple growers controlled apple insect 

 pests by making insecticide applications every 10 to 14 days, irrespective of 

 whether pest insects were present in sufficient abundance to merit such 

 treatment. From 1978 through 1982, our College received funds from a 5-year 

 federal Cooperative Extension Service grant to initiate a pilot program of 

 integrated pest management (IPM) in Massachusetts apple orchards. The 

 entomological part of the program had 3 major objectives: to promote the 

 buildup of natural populations of beneficial predators; to reduce pesticide 

 use; and to maintain or increase the high quality and quantity of fruit 

 produced. Our overall entomological approach to achieving these objectives lay 

 in intensive, careful monitoring of pest and beneficial, natural enemy 

 population abundances in participating IPM orchards, and in advising IPM 

 growers of need, optimal timing, and type of pesticide to be applied. 



The results of this pilot program were highly encouraging. In fact, they 

 were so encouraging that 2 biologists in the program decided to form a private 

 IPM-consult antship business: "New England Fruit Consultants". From 1983 

 through 1986, NEFCO has been very active in providing IPM services to a 

 substantial number of Massachusetts apple growers. "Boston IPM", though active 

 largely in Vermont, has also provided IPM services to a few Massachusetts 

 growers. In 1986, about one-third of the apple acreage in Massachusetts was 

 serviced by these private consultants. In addition, results of a recent survey 

 we conducted [ Fruit Notes 51(2):11-16 and 51(3):19-25] indicate that more than 

 two-thirds of Massachusetts apple growers now employ IPM practices. 



To what degree have IPM practices benefited Massachusetts apple growers? 

 Table 1 presents a summary of the amount of pesticide used each year in 

 Massachusetts IPM apple orchards from 1977 through 1986. 



These results show that compared with pesticide use before the pilot 

 program, there was (on average) a 37% reduction in insecticide use and a 61% 

 reduction in miticide use during the pilot program (1978-82) and a 43% 

 reduction in insecticide use but essentially no change in miticide use in 

 orchards serviced by private consultants (1983-86). On average, fruit quality 

 in IPM orchards has equalled or exceeded that realized before the start of the 

 program. Finally, the growing of "healthier" (less-pesticide-treated) apples 

 and the reduced amount of spray drifting from the orchard into the neighboring 

 environment has created a favorable public image for IPM growers. It can be 

 concluded, therefore, that this first stage of IPM in Massachusetts apple 

 orchards has been a success. 



The second stage of apple IPM is aimed at employing new pest control 

 methodologies to achieve a further reduction in pesticide use. The first stage 

 has relied on intensive monitoring of pest and beneficial predator abundances 

 and subsequent judicious application of needed, selective pesticides least 

 harmful to predators. In our opinion, this stage has taken us about as far as 

 it can in terms of pesticide reduction. The second stage will rely on 



