THE REAL STORY

I imagine this scenario: A customer walks into a retail shop and is prepared to make a sizable purchase. The customer asks some questions about the different types of flowers on display: Which flowers are the most appropriate for the occasion at hand, what color schemes would be best, etc. The retailer answers all questions immediately and with confidence. Then the customer states that she would like to purchase flowers that have not had any pesticide application and those that have had minimal use of only very "safe" materials.

How would you respond, if posed that question? Are you armed with relevant information to give the customer a confident answer, or would you tell that you are unsure? A standard answer is that only pesticides registered by the EPA (and thus have undergone extensive safety testing) are used, but this may not be a satisfactory answer for the customer.

Such questions are not unrealistic. There is a universal focus on using less pesticides because of concerns for the environment, our own health and safety and that of farm workers. A recent survey of U.S. consumers indicated that 13 percent would pay a premium for organically grown product, 36 percent would be willing to pay more for foods that are free of pesticide residues and 52 percent are willing or eager to buy products that are produced using environmentally sound methods. While this information is focused on food crops, it is easy to see this concern spilling over into floriculture crops. In addition, the media periodically attempt to exploit the sensational aspect of potentially unsafe pesticide use in agriculture, including floriculture.

So how do you answer the question? Convey this fact: The floriculture industry is a leader in developing ways to produce high quality products the retail florist and consumer demand while using less and less pesticides. Additional facts: Many floriculture crops (both cuts and potted flowering plants) are susceptible to some of the most difficult-to-control pests: spider mites, whiteflies, thrips, aphids, etc. In turn, these pests thrive in the greenhouse environment where we strive to maintain a perfect climate and, consequently, provide food for these pests year- round. While the floriculture industry used to be dependent on pesticides to produce the perfect commodity retailers have come to expect, since the mid-1980s, there have been some major changes in the way floriculture producers control their pest problems.

As older pesticides are registered (by law) using today's modern protocols, many products labeled for the greenhouse have lost registration. In addition, the registration of new "traditional" pesticides has slowed to a trickle for minor-acreage crops, like in floriculture, because the magnitude of the cost ($50 to $70 million dollars for a new pesticide) often cannot be justified.

While the greenhouse floriculture industry represents a minor market for the pesticide industry, we are not necessarily a minor market for other pest control industries. Alternatives to pesticides include biologically based control tactics such as natural predators and parasites, microbial pesticides, pheromones, plant immunization, physical, mechanical and cultural controls such as crop tillage, rotation, mechanical removal of pests and plants that are bred for genetic resistance to pests. EPA regulates biologically based pesticides, but often the requirements are less demanding and hence, these products cost less (about $5 million) to register. The other alternatives are not regulated at all. Consequently, there is a flood of these products being produced and registered, many targeted for use on floriculture crops.

We are seeing many growers embrace the registration of biologically based control tactics, and the entire industry is beginning to shift to these materials. This is important information for retailers to impart to their customers. These products are usually safe, pose no threat to the environment or to farm worker health and safety. They're often designed to be used in conjunction with other control strategies (resistant cultivars, etc.) that also serve to reduce pest problems.

A total package consisting of various biologically based pest control tactics represents an integrated pest management (IPM) program. Most growers around the country have one or more elements of an IPM program at work in their greenhouses. The American Floral Endowment (AFE) has made safe pest control development one of their major funding priorities. In consultation with the Society of American Florists (SAF), the AFE puts as much as $400,000 a year into developing IPM strategies. The retail florist needs to be aware of this: Your organization is paving the way for the safe production of flowers and plants. The funding has been so substantial and the research conducted so significant, that in many situations, the floriculture industry is used as a model system for the development of IPM programs in other agricultural crops.

What about the flowers produced in other countries? While they are not subject to the same pesticide regulatory regimen as the United States, there can be no detectable residues of pesticides not registered in the United States on products shipped into this country. In addition, Colombia, S.A., has its own registration rules that require flower growers only use those pesticides that are approved for use in the U S. Furthermore, many foreign growers do have one or more aspects of an IPM program in place in their operation, and many try to concentrate on biologically based pesticides.