length of course (4.8 & 3.5), 

 expense of course (4.5, 4.5), 

 general organization (4.6 & 

 4.5), and usefulness of mate- 

 rial (4.4 & 4.2) 



Additional IPM short 

 courses are planned for 

 January and February, 

 1993. 



IPM Guidelines 



At the request of MDFA, 

 IPM guidelines have been 

 developed, for apple, straw- 

 berry, potato, sweet corn, 

 cole crops, and cranberry. 

 These guidelines were devel- 

 oped as a list of best manage- 

 ment practices by interview- 

 ing crop specialists, includ- 

 ing university faculty, extension specialists, and 

 private consultants. Practices then were evalu- 

 ated as either "essential" or "recommended," 

 and weighted according to their importance and 

 difficulty. The list again was reviewed by spe- 

 cialists and by growers participating in IPM 

 short courses. Guidelines were also sent to all 

 state commodity groups (e.g., Massachusetts 

 Fruit Growers' Association) with a request for 

 review and comment. Concerns raised by grow- 

 ers largely have been directed at whether spe- 

 cific practices are appropriate for them. We have 

 attempted to address this problem by using a 

 point system, so that no one practice is required. 

 Guidelines for six crops have been tested for 

 three seasons under the ASCS ICM cost-shar- 

 ing program, as well as in the University of 

 Massachusetts IPM program. In 1991, 57 farms 

 (2505 acres) completed the requirements for the 

 ICM program. 



IPM guidelines for apple and strawberry are 

 published in this issue of Fruit Notes. 



Surveys 



In an effort to determine clientele percep- 

 tions toward IPM, and the need for IPM educa- 

 tion and certification, we conducted surveys of 

 consumers, different levels of the food industry, 



and growers. Surveys 

 showed that all groups sup- 

 port the idea of IPM certifica- 

 tion. Over 80 percent of con- 

 sumers and the majority of 

 retailers, wholesalers, and 

 processors responding to sur- 

 veys endorsed "IPM-Grown" 

 labelling. Seventy-five per- 

 cent of growers said they 

 would enroll in an IPM certi- 

 fication program, and most 

 growers (81%) felt that they 

 are already practicing IPM. 

 Surveys also indicated a need 

 for consumer education and 

 marketing assistance. 



Marketing 



As the consumer survey 

 indicated, the general public does not know 

 much about IPM, but once informed, will sup- 

 port it. Thus, marketing and education are 

 likely to be critical to the success of a certifica- 

 tion or recognition program. Potential logo 

 designs were developed by a widely- represented 

 marketing committee and evaluated by faculty 

 of the Department of Consumer Studies at the 

 University of Massachusetts. The logo, "Part- 

 ners with Nature," was designed to "soften" the 

 idea of IPM and to emphasize its environmental 

 benefits. The final logo (see Figure) will be used 

 on all "IPM-Grown" marketing and point-of- 

 purchase material. Marketing materials will be 

 produced and distributed by the Massachusetts 

 Department of Food and Agriculture. 



Implementation of the "Partners 

 with Nature" Progam 



IPM recognition will be administered 

 through the Bureau of Agricultural Develop- 

 ment, MDFA. The University of Massachusetts 

 Cooperative Extension System will continue to 

 work in an advisory role to MDFA to develop an 

 implementation program. Details of the MDFA 

 plans for the "Partners with Nature" program 

 are discussed in this issue of Fruit Notes. 



Fruit Notes, Fall, 1992 



