IPM PRACTICES OF SOUTHERN STATES PEACH PRODUCERS IN THE U.S.A.

Fresh-market peach producers in Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Oklahoma, and South Carolina were surveyed to ascertain the realities and perceptions of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) in peach production in the southern United States. Survey responses were analyzed for perceived importance of pest problems, agrichemical usage, and the extent of and factors that influence IPM adoption. More than 75% of respondents treated for borers, plant and stink bugs, plum curculio, preharvest brown rot, and annual grasses. Nearly all respondents used chemical practices for pest control. The mean number of full-orchard sprays per ha and year ranged from 0.49 for herbicides to 3.6 for fungicides, with limited state-to-state variability. Of the 25 IPM practices cited, seven (roguing dead trees, using dormant oil sprays, removing prunings, mowing in row middles, calibrating and maintaining spray equipment, and alternating pesticides) were used by at least 50% of respondents. These are primarily prevention or suppression practices; monitoring practices (such as scouting for pests or soil analysis) were used less frequently. Twelve IPM practices were associated with larger orchards, while application of biological pesticides or other natural pest control products were associated with smaller orchards. When asked directly whether they consider themselves IPM users, more than 50% of those who had adopted between 2 and 18 practices answered no. This indicates uncertainty in perception among peach producers as to what constitutes IPM. Reasons most often cited for using IPM practices were yield improvements and cost and health risk reductions. Risk of crop loss, expense of practice, and limited available information were most often cited as reasons not to employ IPM. There was no significant difference in pesticide usage between self-reported IPM users and non-users.