Why would you want to manage pests, not only kill?
Good question.
Well the first thing is that the old strategy of control was done with control problems from.
Kill the parasite does not always work in the long run. Pests have developed resistance to chemicals and you can only kill the robber, with clear strategies. Then you end up with errors and not super predators. DDT also great that many farmers and mosquito control people groaned when he made the market at this point pretty much useless in controlling mosquitoes. Already there was a lot of resistance in insect populations and other mosquito was determined and the worse.
Kill a pest at once can cause the growth of other parasites, who was present, but no problem. For example, we consider the case of hemlock eriophyid mite and two spotted spider mite. So you want to kill the eriophyid Sevin, and choose how he kills the mites really a great job. Sevin has no effect on two-spotted mites Mite in the least, but it is terrible on this predatory mite. Now you must not have mites, but Eriophid a population explosion of the Two-Spotted Mite. So you have only exchanged one problem for another, and gave money for the privilege.
Apart from being built eriophyid mites rarely cause serious damage to people who have an attachment. Note that I will not denigrate Sevin, used properly for the parasite, the right product at the right time may be the right choice.
Does this mean that in the integrated pest management, we are not trying to kill all the parasites?
The answer is no, it is sometimes the right way to go, but we choose our battles, and the results that we want them to be more accurate.
You want an example, is not it? OK Invasive species are one of the reasons why he be good for a strategy could be used to disappear, because these parasites usually have little or no natural enemies. If it’s a product that would kill the beetles, but decimate the natural enemies of the region, it would be the obvious choice to use chemicals, even with the loss of predators. Asian Longhorned Beetle, all trees in favor of his way, as a B-movie science fiction. Thus, although native pests would be for a time, would result in the loss of the natural enemies of these predators again and again its balance of nature.
Acceptable level of damage varies and depends on the pest control, harvesting, use, personal preferences and other factors. A dandelion on a golf course is a two-lot, but not even be noticed on a highway median. A beetle is one too many, but ten European corn borer may be acceptable on a plot of Zinnia can.
The correct application of integrated may leave a residual population of pests in an area. The good engineer is the pest population, the available natural enemies and potential of this pest to a level detrimental to assess the situation before deciding whether and how to deal with the problem.
So, if in the integrated pest management, we are not trying to kill all parasites, then why not all organically and let nature take care of everything? Under certain circumstances we can and do, but we changed our environments and again how nature can be to deal with problems. Even in a balanced system, there is ebb and flow of pest populations, and the loss of good time. We can expect, and often give up too much of nature. If you look like an apple left untreated, there are apples, but most people would not eat, although they certainly edible worms, scab, and all.
While there is still much research in the field of integrated pest management are implemented, this approach has proved to be better than traditional pest control in many cases. The proof is that many farmers have the strategy and found that they increased revenues and reduced spending.
Posted in