- Download Microsoft Word file (2 pages)
- HTML version (below)
The purpose of revising a Pest Management Strategic Plan (PMSP) may be manifold: to update the critical needs lists; to add new or emerging pests; to add newly registered chemicals or delete cancelled ones; to add new growing regions or practices; or to address some combination of the above. A consistent process by which the resulting revisions are handled is important for quality control.
Each PMSP workshop document is broken into relevant sections depending upon its scope (e.g., state, regional, national, or international), the number of crops involved, and their crop stages. For this reason each PMSP is organized in a slightly different manner, making it potentially difficult for the reader to find changes between original PMSP documents and revisions or between subsequent revisions. In order to aid the reader in understanding the differences between the original and revised documents, a section titled “Previous PMSP” should be added to any revised PMSP workshop document. It should be the first section listed in the Table of Contents.
The Previous PMSP section should contain a narrative explaining why the commodity group originally decided to go through the PMSP process and what activities came about as a result of the PMSP. These could be success stories or other positive outcomes the industry experienced as a result of the PMSP. The dates and locations of the original (and/or previous revision) workshop should be listed to give context to the document. If the current revision has a different author or editor than the original this information should also be noted in the Previous PMSP section. All critical needs listed in the original PMSP that were addressed and are no longer critical needs should be clearly listed in a subsection titled “Outcomes.” (This subsection should also be noted in the Table of Contents for easy reference by the reader.) A short explanation should accompany each critical need. Examples might be as follows:
The 2002 PMSP listed registrations of sulfentrazone (Spartan) on chickpea and dry pea and thiabendazole (LSP) on lentils as Regulatory Priorities.
EPA issued a federal label for Spartan in 2003 and for LSP in 2004.
Research on green manures was listed as a Research Priority in 2004. Grant funding was obtained from the Strategic Agriculture Initiative Program (EPA Region 10) in 2005 to implement green manure cropping into the sugarbeet rotations of 10 growers and share the findings with 1,100 growers.
An Educational Priority in 2002 was “educate potato growers about importance and methods of scouting and economic thresholds.” This was addressed in 2005 by the publication of a Best Management Practices Standards Checklist, which evaluates IPM practices currently in use, monitors changes in practices, and encourages adoption of IPM practices.
A note should be made at the end of the Previous PMSP section that copies of previous PMSPs and subsequent revisions are kept at the appropriate Regional IPM Center office and anyone wishing a complete copy of the previous PMSP document should contact that Center’s Director.
- Accomplish the necessary level of revision to satisfy industry needs.
- Include a Previous PMSP section and Outcomes subsection in the new document.
- Follow all other standard procedures used by the IPM Centers to produce PMSP documents .
- Send an electronic copy of the final revised document to the appropriate Regional IPM Center.
- The Regional Center will forward a copy to the National office who will replace the former copy with this new revision.