IPM was born in the USA as the ideas and working results of Californian entomologists in the early 1950s. IPM is very logical from environmental and economic point of view and is an antithesis of blind calendar tied chemical control. In 1998 USDA announced the main strategy of IPM as prevention, avoidance, monitoring and suppression (PAMS) of pests. Unfortunately, growers and pest (icide) managers did not recognize compatibility (integration) among PAMS as it was thought by the founders of IPM. Another trouble: in 1993 USDA, EPA and PDA called for a national commitment to put into practice IPM on 75% OF US crop acreage by 2000. Now, according to estimations true IPM is being practiced on only about 4-8% of US acreage (Ehler and Bottrell, 2000). Ehler and Bottrell (2000) call this situation the illusion of IPM or they claim this can be IPM without I ; or if some call the present practice IPM it is only integrated pesticide management.
Economical success has been realized in Germany where researchers, educators, growers, legislators have done their best and IPM is being practised at some agricultural areas (Galli, 2005).
In other countries rhetoric predominates exclusively when mentioning IPM also these days. Unfortunately, use of IPM as it was defined originally is rather an illusion or not even that. Main reasons of this failure are the lack of necessary human knowledge, awareness, missing of interest, investments and legal frames, but mostly the hegemony of some dominating human attitudes which cannot accept apparently uncomfortable things. For implementing IPM it is necessary multiple knowledge (comprehensive familiarity on pests, their ecology, natural enemies and all linked fields), an operative pest forecasting system (at national, regional and local level) and several working values which can be determined merely during previous investigations. IPM can put into practice with a common action of researchers, teachers, growers and legislators. Unfortunately, it needs investments from the beginnings.
The most important or basic notions in IPM are Economic Threshold (ET) and Economic Injury level (EIL) without these values there is no IPM.
HOW HAVE YOU IMPLEMENTED IPM, ET AND EIL IN YOUR COUNTRIES?
Ehler, L.E. and Bottrell, D.G. 2000. The illusion of integrated pest management. Issues in science and technology on line. pp. 6. http://www.issues.org/16.3/ehler.htm
Galli, P. (2005): 50 Jahre integrierter Pflanazenschutz im Obstbau in Baden-Württemberg. Landinfo, 5: 6-10.
Smith, R.F. and Reynolds, H.T. 1966. Principles, definitions and scope of integrated pest control. Proceedings FAO Symposium on Integrated Pest Control 1: 11-17.
Stern, V.M., Smith, R.F., van den Bosch, R. and Hagen, K.S. 1959. The integrated control concept. Hilgardia, 29: 81-101.
Michelbacher A.E. and Bacon, O.G. 1952. Walnut insect and spider mite control in Northern California. Journal of Economic Entomology, 45:1020-27.