New York Apple Leader Defends State IPM Program

Jim Allen, president of the New York Apple Association, recently wrote a commentary defending Cornell University’s Integrated Pest Management (IPM) program, which is facing a potential budget slashing.

Advertisement

“One of the items proposed for cuts in the state budget is a zeroing out of Cornell University’s Integrated Pest Management (IPM) program. While we understand that the budget situation in Albany (NY) is desperate, eliminating the funding to IPM is a mistake. IPM explores and creates safer and more economical ways for farmers to fight pests.

Prior to Cornell’s innovative IPM methodology, growers traditionally used more of a preventative approach to controlling pests, which include insects, plant diseases, or any weed that interferes with the production of a crop.

IPM works differently. IPM science tells us that not all insects are harmful and, in fact, some insects actually help control other harmful insects.

IPM goes way beyond offering farmers in New York better methods to grow crops; it provides consumers with safer foods and protects our environment.

IPM is designed with three major goals in mind: Reduce the use of pesticides, protect the environment, and help grow the safest and healthiest crops as economically as possible. This will provide us all affordable and safer food. By eliminating the funding for IPM, the state is turning its back on not only upstate New York’s biggest economic sector, agriculture, but is also saying to consumers that food safety is not important enough to fund.

New York is blessed to have a world-renowned research university for agriculture at Cornell, and an Agricultural Experimental Station in Geneva, offering cutting edge research on IPM practices, which is second to none in this field. Without financial support from the state, these facilities will become useless.

For our agricultural economy, for our environment, and for the safety of our residents, we encourage our leaders in Albany to reinstate IPM funding for New Yorkers.”

Leave a Reply

Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:

If the state is broke it cannot pay for everything. There are enough private concerns that can take up the slack for NYSIPM.

Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:

I’m about to take my private applicator test for applying RUP’s and have been reading the IPM chapter. This is one of the best approaches in properly managing crops and advances in this area are needed to continue.
New York, reconsider your stance on this and opt out other programs that drain your coffers. Not this one!

Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:

I disagree. Private concerns market, employ and recommend techniques, pest thresholds, IPM tools and management strategies that are the products of the NYS IPM program and its cutting edge research and extension efforts. They do not have the highly skilled staff, facilities, or financial support needed to generate them.

Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:

I’m about to take my private applicator test for applying RUP’s and have been reading the IPM chapter. This is one of the best approaches in properly managing crops and advances in this area are needed to continue.
New York, reconsider your stance on this and opt out other programs that drain your coffers. Not this one!

Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:

Cornell does not live up to its mandate as a land grant university. CU and Cornell Extension do not do enough for the diverse farmers of New York, especially when compared to other land grand universities. Let it get the funding elsewhere. Cornell has no problem with funding.

Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:

All the places NYS and USDA spends money on behalf of agriculture IPM is a foolish item to illiminate. The benefits of IPM transends all types of agriculture and legitimizes all commodities to the customer. And at the same time, protects everyone and everything up and down the food chain to the best of our present technology.

Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:

If the state is broke it cannot pay for everything. There are enough private concerns that can take up the slack for NYSIPM.

Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:

I’m about to take my private applicator test for applying RUP’s and have been reading the IPM chapter. This is one of the best approaches in properly managing crops and advances in this area are needed to continue.
New York, reconsider your stance on this and opt out other programs that drain your coffers. Not this one!

Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:

I disagree. Private concerns market, employ and recommend techniques, pest thresholds, IPM tools and management strategies that are the products of the NYS IPM program and its cutting edge research and extension efforts. They do not have the highly skilled staff, facilities, or financial support needed to generate them.

Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:

I’m about to take my private applicator test for applying RUP’s and have been reading the IPM chapter. This is one of the best approaches in properly managing crops and advances in this area are needed to continue.
New York, reconsider your stance on this and opt out other programs that drain your coffers. Not this one!

Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:

Cornell does not live up to its mandate as a land grant university. CU and Cornell Extension do not do enough for the diverse farmers of New York, especially when compared to other land grand universities. Let it get the funding elsewhere. Cornell has no problem with funding.

Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:

All the places NYS and USDA spends money on behalf of agriculture IPM is a foolish item to illiminate. The benefits of IPM transends all types of agriculture and legitimizes all commodities to the customer. And at the same time, protects everyone and everything up and down the food chain to the best of our present technology.