Implementing integrated pest management in professional lawn care: a case study

Abstract

Human choices regarding land cover management practices may influence ecosystem services provided by urban green spaces. We conducted a 2-year study to compare biological (weed, insect, and disease), aesthetic (lawn quality), and economic (lawn care program cost) attributes of an integrated pest management (IPM) program, in which pesticides are applied on the basis of treatment thresholds, with a standard program, in which pesticides are applied on a calendar basis without pest monitoring. Both programs were managed by a professional lawn care operator. Although weed incidence was low, the IPM program had significantly more lawns with weed presence than the standard program during 2005 and 2006. However, only 21% of the IPM lawns required herbicide applications in 2005, and none exceeded the treatment threshold (5% weed cover) in 2006 as compared to 100% of the standard program lawns being treated for weeds in both years. The IPM program also had significantly more lawns with insect damage than the Urban Ecosyst (2010) 13:37-49 . Only 28% of the IPM lawns required insecticide applications in 2005 and none exceeded the threshold (5% insect damage) in 2006 whereas all of the lawns in the standard program received insecticide treatments in both years. Rhizoctonia blight was present on some of the lawns, but was not a common problem. Although lawn quality was high for both programs (>8, on a scale of 1-9), it was significantly higher for standard than for IPM program lawns during 2005, and June 2006 and September 2006, but not August 2006. The annual lawn management costs were lower for the IPM ($281.50) than the standard program ($458.06). Thirty one percent of the IPM program customers who continued with the study in 2006 did so because they were satisfied with the IPM program. Among those who did not continue with the program, 33% cited weed or insect problems, while 33% expected better results. The implications of these findings for implementation of IPM in professional lawn care are further discussed.

Biological Control of Weeds in turfgrass: opportunities and misconceptions

“…39 In a comparison of lawn care management programs, 66% of commercial lawn care clients reported dissatisfaction with an intergrated pest management (IPM)-based regimen that allowed ≤5% incidences of weeds and other pest problems, even when the IPM-based program was less expensive than the traditional control program. 40 This observation is consistent with consumer behavior studies in other commodities. For example, Yue et al 41 reported that that consumers' tolerance for cosmetic imperfections 34 Methiozolin dose and application regimen are from the product label (https://www.poacure.com/) and Brosnan et al 33 on apples was quite limited even if the apple is organically produced.…”

“…Over 80% of participants in a Minnesota (USA) sustainable lawn care education program reported that ‘lawn weeds usually require control’ 39 . In a comparison of lawn care management programs, 66% of commercial lawn care clients reported dissatisfaction with an intergrated pest management (IPM)‐based regimen that allowed ≤5% incidences of weeds and other pest problems, even when the IPM‐based program was less expensive than the traditional control program 40 . This observation is consistent with consumer behavior studies in other commodities.…”

Local gardening practices shape urban lawn floristic communities

“…The reduction of agrochemical inputs has become an increasingly common recommendation in lawn care programmes (Alumai et al, 2010). Morris and Bagby (2008) compared organic and conventional lawn management and found that an organic approach enables savings of $23-29 per year per single-family parcel.…”

Residential landscapes as social-ecological systems: a synthesis of multi-scalar interactions between people and their home environment

“…Symbols as in Table 3 Landscape management practices and preferences Homeowner associations often do not directly regulate irrigation, pesticide, or fertilizer use; however, they do require certain yard appearances, which often necessitate the use of these management practices human health (e.g., Karr et al 2007), beneficial urban organisms, or downstream water quality (e.g., Blanchoud et al 2004;Struger and Fletcher 2007). Integrated pest management offers opportunities to reduce these tradeoffs and negative environmental and economic consequences (Braman et al 2000;Klingeman et al 2009;Alumai et al 2010). Watering practices depend on yard cover, irrigation technology and decisions about how much and when to water.…”