Over the past year or so, the national IPM community has
been coalescing around the idea of seeking $50 million in additional funding
for integrated pest management in the 2018 Farm Bill.
The one problem with that big ask is that we didn’t really
have a strong answer for why IPM needs the extra money now. “Making up for past
cuts,” "rising costs" and “to meet unmet needs” – while true – aren’t winning arguments.
However, there is a clear and compelling need for expanded
IPM efforts and funding.
On January 30, President Trump signed an executive order on
reducing regulation and controlling regulatory costs. The order instructs federal
agencies to identify two existing regulations to repeal for every new
regulation proposed, and to offset costs of new regulations by reducing the
costs to comply with existing regulations. The United States has entered a new
era of reduced federal regulation.
It’s impossible to know exactly what shape this regulatory
reform will ultimately take, or what rules the federal government, pesticide
manufacturers, farmers, ranchers and pest managers in schools, housing and
other systems will be working under.
Whatever those rules will be, we are convinced that integrated pest management will be more
important than ever for America’s pest managers.
The IPM community has a critical role to play in the months
and years ahead. Here’s why:
Many people believe that government regulations – especially
federal regulations – aren’t necessary for people to act responsibly, and that
when regulation is necessary it should be enacted at the state or local level.
The growers and pest managers we’ve met around the West
provide good evidence for the argument. The vast majority of growers recognize
their farms are part of a larger environmental system and want to be good
stewards of the land and good neighbors. The vast majority of schools want to
manage pests effectively and protect their students from both pests and pesticide
risks.
IPM gives them the knowledge and tools to do that. It gives
them a process and a structure for thinking through pest-management decisions.
With regulation, decisions are easy. If it’s banned, you
don’t use it. If it’s restricted, you use it within whatever parameters are
allowed. Regulation can become a substitute for informed decision-making, a crutch
pest managers can rely on. With strong regulations in place, you can honestly say
that you acted responsibly because you followed the label.
But if regulations are significantly dialed back as the
executive order calls for, it will fall to America’s farmers and pest managers
to make responsible pest-management decisions on their own. They will no longer
be able to assume that what’s legal and what’s responsible are the same thing.
IPM gives people the framework to make informed decisions,
guiding them through a thoughtful approach that manages pests and risks. IPM gives
growers and natural resource managers a way to know – and to show – they
continue to be good stewards of the land and good neighbors. IPM gives
community pest-management specialists confidence that they’ve made the best
decision possible as they control pests in habitats that are difficult to manage.
There is danger for growers, the agriculture industry and
others in deregulation. If individuals and industries don’t act responsibly,
they will be blamed by the public. If pesticide use goes up significantly, or
pesticide residue levels on produce rise suddenly, growers will be held
responsible. If rivers and wells that had tested clean test dirty or there’s
other significant negative environmental impacts, the ag industry will suffer. Brands
could face boycotts and public distrust of commercial agriculture and the
crop-protection industry could rise to economically critical levels.
No one wants that.
If regulations aren’t available to serve as a de facto
decision-making tool for pest managers, we must give them another tool or we’re
setting them up to fail. Integrated pest management is that tool. It’s the way
growers and other pest managers can protect themselves, protect America’s
environment and protect the reduced regulatory concept. It’s the way that we can
continue to keep the West, and America, a healthy and economically sustainable
place to live and work.
Our jobs, as IPM researchers and educators and
practitioners, just got a lot more vital.
And that means that we have to find and devote resources to
developing IPM tools that work on a regional level. It means that we have to
work together to change the conversation – to stop working within the silos of
our disciplines and collaboratively develop approaches that make sense for pest
managers. It means that we have to continue to support growers, natural
resource managers and community pest managers with effective and creative
solutions to their problems.
