That's been well known for eons. The more you use, the more you'll need. It was certainly emphasized in my pest management courses when at Va. Tech., as well as in my entomology and pathology studies over 30 years ago. Pesticide resistance is, and always has been, a big deal.

That pest species (arthropods and fungi, in particular) develop immunities is very much understood by everyone, it seems, but homeowners. Fungicides might be the most susceptible to the rapid evolution of fungal organisms. So much so that it's a normal policy to mention the necessity of chemical rotation on the label insert included with fungicides.

Indiscriminate use of big box pesticides (insecticides, fungicides, miticides, fungicides) is a big problem. It has become too easy to reach for a chemical.

The good news is that private consumers are becoming better at educating themselves and finding alternatives to the chemicals found on the shelf at the store.

That's a big DUH! Let the bugs fight it out. I tried for years to get a neighbor to understand that she couldn't spray for pests and expect her $$$ ladybug purchases to stick around where there was no food. They'd come to my place for the aphids and stay for the whiteflies.

My exception is ant nests in places I want to work. Those I kill with the "queen-killing" hormone stuff.

And this wasp, alas, built her nest in the wrong spot. I needed that pole saw and the shed it was in. We foamed and squashed her.

"The more you use, the more you'll need."

Not a good thing, but you have to admit, that is an awesome business model!

Anyone that has paid the least attention to what has been posted here for years will know that I have been a strong advocate for using less insecticides, so I do not need pandering from some that have not done so. Since this is the first University study I have seen I would like to keep a copy of it, which is why I asked if anyone else has the url for it.

Asking for something that broad in scope does nothing to help most people narrow down a result for what you're looking because it's like asking about "that song on the rock radio station"...it could be 1 of 100s.

No one's pandering or questioning how you use insecticides...and it's odd you're accusing others of not doing what you're doing because they didn't produce a magic link to a very vague description of a study that could be 1 of 100s that exist out there.

There's tons of studies out there about this issue finding same/similar results. Many college/universities/extension have entire departments devoted to this notion. IPM research and support services are practically old hat at this point...and beyond that, much research is done outside of IPM led programs which eventually feed back into IPM programs.

This post was edited by nc-crn on Mon, May 5, 14 at 17:34

"No one's pandering or questioning how you use insecticides"
Nothing in what I have written here could possibly be construed by anyone as coming even close to the above quote or the rest of the inane reply, except possibly by someone that cannot reasonably understand what is written.

"which is why I asked if anyone else has the url for it."

Where exactly did you ask for it?

Understanding what is written isn't the problem, understanding what is meant is a different story.

Lloyd

url or universal resource locator. How sites are found on the internet. More than happy to help you understand.

Show me where you asked for the url.

"Unfortunately I have lost the url for this study. I think it was from the University of Maryland."
A reasonably intelligent person would grasp the quote above as asking for the url. For the rest I probably could have said something on the order of Oh, please someone send me the url.

lol...if a reasonably intelligent person had written the original post it would have been clear that they were actually looking for something instead of making a general comment. You've posted many incorrect and outright false statements (remember the "no rubber in tires" you came up with? That was hilarious, I still chuckle at that one!) with no supporting urls. It helps when what you write is actually what you mean instead of what you think you mean.

Lloyd

Doug Landis at Michigan State published a great study that identified the plants that were most favored by carnivorous insects, i.e. those that eat the vegetarian pest-of-plant insects. It has stayed with me forever that #1 is boneset and #2 is sweet alyssum. We have lots of both in our garden and have limited insect problems. Notice that the flowers on each of these are very small, attractive to very small insects, such as those minute wasps (1/50 to 1/10 inch long) that are the invisible but tireless killers of insect eggs and larvae. I hope someone finds this useful and practical. Regards, Peter.

"Unfortunately I have lost the url for this study. I think it was from the University of Maryland."

The way I read this is that you had the URL and was going to link it to support your first paragraph, but lost it and couldn't. I didn't see a question being asked.

Rodney

Careful, Rodney - you are self-identifying as 'un-reasonably intelligent.'

Aside from coddling moth, I've never had a problem with any insects in my fruits including strawberry, raspberry, 2 peach trees and 11 apple trees. Once there was a small, localized Bagworm colony in one apple tree. I haven't had any insect problems and do scout for them, in addition; there have been no sprays, I'm hoping to continue the no sprays and suppose the critters can fight it out for themselves. This year having getting whacked by Coddling Moth for the 1st time last year I'm trying monitoring traps and GDD models to pinpoint the spray timing to nail the 1st generation moth hatch with Spinosad + oil.

Honestly, I don't care to spray anything, too much work, cost and it's usually HOT at that time of year but will if needed on a limited basis.

Strongly agree about the resistance issue and homeowners having done extensive research into the issue. I doubt the typical homeowner appreciates the scope of the problem and how to avoid it; in addition, they have so few alternatives it can be difficult to avoid resistance but not impossible. Just leaving an untreated area is a good start.

Last year my peaches were almost all damaged by insects. I have never used pesticides. How can I treat the fruit without pesticides?

Using less is not the same as not using any insecticide. What insect do you have?
What is the least toxic insecticide that may control this insect but not do harm to predators? For example, don't spray Carbaryl when Bacillus thuringiensis - Kurstaki will do the job.
Apply the control.
Reassess.

Have y'all ever heard of a two-hitter ? That's when ya don't apologize, and yer mama ends up havin' to smack ya upside the head, and you hit the dirt! Lol !

Mack de Schmackt

(Ich liebe dich meine mutti und oma)

ultimately we need to raise the brix as high as possible. that will make the "bad" insects stay away, or not eat enough to worry about. the article at http://www.westonaprice.org/health-topics/the-quest-for-nutrient-dense-food-high-brix-farming-and-gardening/ will explain it pretty good.

I just read a juried study written by Dr. Nobody at the University of Advanced Importance that says there needs to be a special forum established here called Aggressive Pi**ing Matches. Participants would be rated by how many honest threads they've destroyed in the confusion of ego with value. I'll post the link if I ever find it again.

@Charlie>> How can I treat the fruit without pesticides?
I really don't think you can, not at a retail level anyway. Pesticides are expensive and I'd think orchardists (is that a word?) would gladly skip their spray applications if they could, but the markets won't let them. They're selling IMAGE to the fresh fruit consumer. Food processors just smash the blemished stuff and make apple sauce.

BTW: In a directly related note, don't ever ever ever ever eat commercially made apple butter. Never. Trust me.

Charlieboring: there are physical barrier methods for peach and appe crops if you are willing to put in the work. Apples, while the fruit are about 1/2" - 1" in dia. have a prepared 1 qt. ziplock bag placed over them that keeps the Coddling moths out for the rest of the season. If you are lucky, the bgs go on before the 1st generation of moths have attacked your fruit.

I spray the first gen. with Spinosad to keep the damage down and then bag to take care of the following generations and get by usually with minimal moth damage. There is now a product called Cyd - X that is a virus specific only to Coddling Moth that is very effective when properly applied and very soft on the beneficials and honeybees but it is not labeled for use in all of the US.

As for peaches, sockies, yes those little nylons that only fit your foot are put on peaches to keep the worms out of them. some folks swear by them, I don't know having nly used them one year and not leaving many sock- free fruit to compare with that year. Sockies are stretched over the young appx. 1/2" diameter fruit and tied around the back side of the branch the where the fruit is attached to the branch. Some folks soak the footies in Surround and dry them out before putting them on the peaches.