Table 1. Apple grower response to a questionnaire on the potential value of second-level IPM 

 practices for Massachusetts orchardists. A total of 63 of growers responded. Responses are ranked 

 in the order of priority assigned by responders. Numerical values represent the comparative 

 strength of response, with highest values indicating the highest priority. 



100 Helps create a positive image with the general public and legislators that apple growers 

 are doing their very best to minimize pesticide use. Could help forestall further legal 

 restrictions against pesticide use in orchards. 



91 Buildup of beneficial natural enemies as a consequence of no sprays after mid June. 



70 Reduces or eliminates pesticide residue on fruit at harvest. 



62 Reduces rate at which pests become resistant to pesticide. 



44 Helps educate customers coming to roadside stands that growers are being very environ- 

 mentally responsible. 



33 Promotes worker safety and timely horticultural practices (for example, summer pruning 

 and mowing) by allowing worker entry into orchards at any time from late June to harvest 

 without restraint associated with abiding by mandated re-entry times. 



32 Reduces incidence of pesticide drift into border areas, thus helping to allay fears of abut- 

 ting neighbors or helping to reduce legal liability from potential drift into lakes and streams. 



27 Offers a way to preserve future markets for Massachusetts apples (that is, to avoid market 

 restrictions) in the face of increasing competition from "advanced IPM" or "green" apples 

 now being produced in Europe and the West Coast. 



4 Reduces potential legal complaints from trespassers. 



1 Reduces grower liability to customers in pick-your-own orchards. 



Has no potential value. 



photographer could be called in to photograph the ing a truly positive image of Massachusetts apple 

 display for distribution in the media. growers in the mind of the general public, and par- 

 Engaging in first-level IPM and especially in ticularly consumers of apples, if the tools of IPM 

 second-level IPM could go a long way toward build- are used as tangible symbols of the IPM process. 



•^ *^ *^ *^ *^ 

 0^ 0^ rp% #^ r^ 



Fruit Notes, Fall, 1995 



