From 2017 to 2020, the Hort Innovation Apple and Pear Fund project An integrated pest, disease and weed management program for the Australian apple and pear industry (AP16007) helped apple and pear growers develop and maintain pest-resilient farming system using integrated pest and disease management (IPDM).

Delivered by Agriculture Victoria, the program provided clear knowledge on the tools and systems required to implement IPDM, which involves effective combination of chemical, cultural and biological methods to control pests, diseases, and other undesirables in a ‘whole of system’ approach.

Meet apple and pear grower John Evans from Tasmania

John Evans’ apple and pear orchard near Geeveston, Tasmania, was a program a case study, in which John worked closely with the project team to identify potential changes to his pest management strategy and develop an IPDM action plan to follow. John documented his progress and has shared his learning journey below.

Why did John decide to participate in the program?

Prior to participating in the program as a case study orchard, John thought pests and diseases in his orchard were under control, despite some edge issues with codling moth where he used a minimal spray program. John’s goal was to capitalise on the existing low pest and disease pressure and attempt to further reduce pesticide use while maintaining effective control and confidence in the approach being taken.

What IPDM practices did John implement?

Some of the key changes that John implemented as part of the program were:

• Experimenting with line trapping for codling moth as a result of the workshop delivered through AP16007. John established codling moth traps along the border with his neighbour and in a transect parallel to the border traps but through the middle of the orchard.
• Protecting populations of earwigs and Aphelinus mali parasitoid wasp by modifying the rate and timing of sprays that might impact these important predators.

What worked well for John in implementing the changes?

The experiment with line trapping on the boundary was successful in disrupting the codling moth entering the orchard. ”The involvement with project team allowed me to understand the dynamics of the pest, so I was able to manage my risk effectively,” John said. “We had the choice of putting on a lot of chemicals, but that would have created other problems. So, we were able to manage the risk, avoid the excessive cost while also minimise the yield/quality losses.” 

The project helped John to form a better understanding of IPDM and a more strategic approach for his pest and disease management. “We were working towards IPDM even though we did not know we were going that way,” John said. “We were very much on the journey, but the research gave us better understanding of the things we had been doing without actually knowing it.”

John recognised that IPDM is often seen as risky, so the technical support provided through the project solidified growers confidence. “The project really gave us the confidence to take the extra step without thinking that it is a huge gamble,” John said. “You are not actually having to change too much; it was just understanding it better and making some finer adjustments. Many of IPDM pieces were already there, we just needed the help to bring them together in a way that worked well.”

John also sees the broader benefits of improved industry and research capacity. “There is more than just the benefit of the IPDM - you also get the explanatory benefit of the researchers, and the lifelong networking from having these people on your farm,” John said. “There used to be 120 apple growers in my region and now there are two. This helped me maintain a network with researchers and growers which is of huge value beyond the direct research.”

John can clearly see the value in implementing IPDM. “Yield may not rise, but packout will,” he said. “We went from 60 per cent packout and now we are able to do 84-89 per cent first grade on strip pick, and we are up to 94-96 per cent first grade in some instances. As an industry we need to put more money in the pocket of growers, and this program has definitely helped with that.”

What challenges did John experience?

There were no issues, but John did recognise the difficulty that could be faced by growers as they make changes. “As we move forward, people who have not adapted to the new environment will be either forced to change or will leave the industry,” John said. “It can be daunting if you’re the one pushing the envelope, so you have to just wade in. It also takes a little while for your farm to adapt and have a bio infrastructure that can cope. You can’t just stop cold turkey. So that is why I have put my hand up for these sorts of projects as it helps you to see more of what is coming and make that transition based on best advice.”

What were John’s key takeaways?

John recommends installing enough weather stations to provide localised data that can be fed into a prediction model for codling moth, light brown apple moth and scab. He also recognised that when using chemicals, equipment influenced efficacy. “If you don’t have chemical application equipment with computerised variable rate controllers and you are trying to go on calibration, then you are just guessing.” 

What are John’s next plans?

John still has plans to try to further reduce pesticides by improving timing and landscape management to help manage pest populations, such as potentially removing a Macrocarpa tree that could be supporting dimple bug over winter.