Twenty years ago, I lived in Germany. I recently re-read
some of the first letters I wrote describing my new home. In them, I pointed
out everything that was different – from the way windows open to the lack of roadside
billboards. But as time went on, I stopped noticing the differences and would
only see them again when people came to visit and I could experience the
country anew through their eyes.
I’ve incorporated that lesson at work. When I hire people,
my first advice to them is to write down everything that seems unexpected or
unusual, because through fresh eyes we can see our operation in a new
perspective. And there is usually something valuable in what they see and say
that veterans in the organization overlook or take for granted.
I’ve been heeding my own advice as I’ve reacquainted myself
with integrated pest management activities and needs in the West. I’ve called
and met and talked with stakeholders throughout the region, and have been
listening and noting what seems unusual. And what stands out is something that
doesn’t show up in my notes as often as I expected: areawide IPM.
To me, integrated pest management solutions are rooted in
ecosystem-level approaches. This was always clear when I worked in forest
pathology, and as I listen to others, I see that some of the most successful ecosystem-level
examples of integrated pest management have been ones of areawide cooperation.
Pests don’t have borders. It simply makes sense that IPM
shouldn’t stop at borders either, whether that border is at a field or forest,
or at a backyard fence or state line.
From last month’s story
on safflower to this month’s video
on protecting Pacific Northwest watersheds, the Western Integrated Pest
Management Center has been highlighting areawide IPM. It isn’t hard to find
other examples.
In Montana, wheat streak mosaic virus is best controlled
when every farmer eliminates the green
bridge, live plants that allow the mite that spreads the disease to survive
and move downwind to other fields. Losses from wheat streak mosaic virus can be
100 percent, and with no registered chemicals to control the vector, areawide cooperation
is the only way to manage this pest.
Other successes are found in natural ecosystems where county parks and
neighboring communities work together to control the spread of Lyme disease,
in agriculture where growers use mating disruption pheromones
to reduce codling moth pressure while vastly reducing pesticide use, in
multi-state efforts to biologically
control leafy spurge, and in communities where fire ants are suppressed
while respecting and working with residents opposed to pesticide use.
To battle new pests, there are efforts to expand areawide
IPM into communities, enlisting citizen scientists to monitor pest movements.
Indeed, Western residents have been called on to participate in areawide monitoring
of emerald ash borer, zebra and quagga mussels, brown marmorated stink bug, Asian citrus psyllid and many more.
I see these successes and efforts as examples of why
areawide IPM is important. Areawide efforts rely on cooperation between
neighbors – whether those neighbors are next door or in the next state – and result
in an environmentally responsible, economically viable and regional reduction
in pests.
The IPM community in the West
should broaden our response to invasive and endemic pests and proactively
develop areawide IPM solutions. Solutions shouldn’t come because we’ve run into
chemical resistance or regulatory issues, but rather in a proactive effort to slow
resistance and reduce risk. After all, as the safflower and codling moth cases
show, an integrated, areawide response can improve control and reduce pesticide
use.
It’s time to amplify the terms
areawide and areawide integrated pest management, and I think we can do that by
working cooperatively. Working cooperatively means harnessing citizen
scientists to do more than monitor pest movement. Citizens can also be enlisted
to prevent and suppress pests. Working cooperatively also means that natural
resource managers and farmers can step across their borders and co-develop
areawide IPM solutions.
As I mentioned in my
first post, we are creating a theory of change for the Center. On a white
board in my office, I’ve been writing key ideas for that theory of change and the
first word that made it to the board was catalyst.
That’s what I think a regional coordination program should do for areawide IPM
– act as a catalyst.
So what does it mean for the
Center and the region we serve?
It means we will support areawide
IPM ideas, practices and research. It means we will encourage pest managers to
develop, test and use areawide approaches that make managing pests safer and
more economical. It means we will focus on solutions that are novel and can
move beyond borders.
As always, let’s continue the conversation.
