Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Strategies II

Total Population Management

  • Chapter
Insects, Experts, and the Insecticide Crisis

Abstract

The Huffaker Project was only one center of vibrant activity as entomologists attempted to escape from the dilemmas posed by chemicals. A second strategy, total population management (TPM),* developed alongside integrated pest management (IPM). Just as IPM was manifes-tated in a large-scale research project, so too did TPM become a visible political entity in a multimillion dollar, interstate experiment: the Pilot Boll Weevil Eradication Experiment (PBWEE), 1971–1973. Unfortunately for the layman and policy maker, proponents of both strategies frequently used the term intergrated in referring to their respective efforts. Thus, confusion developed in the 1970s as the genuine distinctions between the two paradigms were lost in a flood of rhetoric about ”integrated control.” Ultimate goals provide the key to unraveling the differences: TPM aggressively entertained the notion of the eradication of some, but not all, major pest species from large geographic areas, while IPM expressly rejected such ideas and argued eradication should be entertained only in special cases when the target insect was distributed over limited areas of land.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Reference Notes

  1. Most details of Knipling’s personal life were gathered in a personal interview, July 13–14, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  2. E. F. Knipling, personal communication, Aug. 18, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Calculated from [E. F. Knipling], Contributions to Literature by E. F. Knipling, unpublished bibliography.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Charles G. Scruggs, The Peaceful Atom and the Deadlly Fly (San Antonio, Texas: Jenkins Pub. Co., The Pemberton Press, 1975), pp. 25–44, 131 (hereafter cited as Scruggs, Peaceful Atom). Scruggs’s book is a thorough review of the invention, development, and adoption of the sterile male technique for screwworms. His investigation and mine were undertaken independently of one another. We have no substantial differences in our descriptions of the technique’s development, but our interpretations of its significance are radically different.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Emory C. Cushing to Sievert A. Rohwer, Feb. 10, 1936, Record Group 7, National Archives (RG7NA) (hereafter cited as Cushing to Rohwer).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Ralph Howard Davidson and Leonard Marion Pearis, Insect Pests of Farm, Garden, and Orchard (New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1966), pp. 610–611 (hereafter cited as Davidson and Pearis, Insect Pests).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Cushing to Rohwer.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Davidson and Pearis, Insect Pests, p. 610.

    Google Scholar 

  9. E. F. Knipling, Screwworm Eradication: Concepts and Research Leading to the Sterile-Male Method, Smithsonian Report for 1958 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1959), pp. 409–418 (hereafter cited as Knipling, Screwworm Eradication).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Cushing to Rohwer.

    Google Scholar 

  11. F. C. Bishopp, J. D. Mitchell, and D. C. Parman, Screwworms and Other Maggots Affecting Animals, Farmers Bulletin 857 (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1917), USDA, Bureau of Entomology and Plant Quarantine (hereafter cited as Farmers Bulletin 857).

    Google Scholar 

  12. Ibid. The recommendations were continued in 1922 and 1923, see Farmers Bulletin 857, revisions of 1922 and 1923.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Farmers Bulletin 857, revision of 1926; E. W. Laake, D. C. Parman, F. C. Bishopp, and R. C. Roark, Field tests with repellents of the screwworm fly, Cochliomyia macellaria Fab. upon domestic animals, J. of Econ. Entomol. 19 (1926): 536–539

    Google Scholar 

  14. F. C. Cook, D. C. Parman, and E. W. Laake, Progress report of investigations relating to repellents, attractants, and larvicides for the screwworm and other flies,J. Econ. Entomol. 16 (1923): 222–224; Cushing to Rohwer.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Cushing to Rohwer; W. E. Dove and D. C. Parman, Screwworms in the Southeastern states, J. Econ. Entomol. 28 (1935): 764–772

    Google Scholar 

  16. U.S. Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, Department of Agriculture Appropriations Bill for 1950, Hearings, 81st Congress, 1st sess., 1949, p. 65.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Knipling, personal interview.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Knipling, Screwworm Eradication, pp. 409–418; idem, personal interview.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Jacob Bronowski, Science and Human Values (New York: Harper and Row, Pub., 1965), pp. 3–24.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Emory C. Cushing and W. S. Patton, Studies on the higher diptera of medical and veterinary importance, Cochliomyia americana sp. nov., the screwworm fly of the New World, Ann. Trop. Med. Parasitol. 27 (1933): 539–551

    Google Scholar 

  21. Emory C. Cushing, The great imposter, The Cattleman, Nov. 1969. Cushing and Patton named their species C. americana, but subsequent researchers renamed the screwworm C. hominovorax in addition to other names. C. hominovorax is the name by which it is currently known.

    Google Scholar 

  22. E. W. Laake, E. C. Cushing, and H. E. Parish, Biology of the Primary Screwworm Fly, Cochliomyia americana and a Comparison of Its stages with Those of Cochliomyia macellaria, USDA Technical Bulletin 500 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1936)

    Google Scholar 

  23. J. M. Brennan, The incidence and importance of Cochliomyia americana C. and P. and other wound invading species, J. Econ. Entomol. 31 (1938): 646–649

    Google Scholar 

  24. A. L. Brody, Natural foods of the true screwworm, Cochliomyia americana, J. Econ. Entomol. 32 (1939): 346–347; Knipling, personal interview.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Roy Melvin and R. C. Bushland, A Method of Rearing Cochliomyia americana C. and P. on Artificial Media, Pub. No. E-88 (Washington, D.C.: USDA, Bureau of Entomology and Plant Quarantine, 1936)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Roy Melvin and R. C. Bushland, The nutritional requirements of screwworm larvae, J. Econ. Entomol. 33 (1940): 850–852.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Arthur W. Lindquist, Myasis in wild animals in South Texas, J. Econ. Entomol. 30 (1937): 735–740

    Google Scholar 

  28. Idem, Study of the incidence and habits of Cochliomyia americana by means of fly traps, J. Kans. Entomol. Soc. 11 (1938): 97–104; Knipling, Screwworm Eradication, pp. 409–418; idem, personal interview.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Knipling, personal interview.

    Google Scholar 

  30. E. F. Knipling to H. J. Mueller, Mar. 6, 1950, and H. J. Mueller to E. F. Knipling, Mar. 10, 1950, both attached to E. F. Knipling to S. A. Rohwer, Mar. 15, 1950; E. F. Knipling to H. J. Mueller, Mar. 17, 1950; RG7NA; Knipling, personal interview.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Knipling to Rohwer, Mar. 15, 1950; idem, personal interview.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Knipling, personal interview.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Raymond C. Bushland and D. E. Hopkins, Experiments with screwworm flies sterilized by X-rays, J. Econ. Entomol. 44 (1951): 725–731.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Raymond C. Bushland and D. E. Hopkins, Sterilizations of screwworm flies with X-rays and gamma rays, J. Econ. Entomol. 46 (1953): 648–656; A. S. Hoyt to E. F. Knipling, Nov. 17, 1950, and R. C. Bushland to E. F. Knipling, Nov. 30, 1950, RG7NA.

    Google Scholar 

  35. E. F. Knipling to A. S. Hoyt, Feb. 19, 1952, RG7NA. For Bushland’s account of the sterilization work, see R. C. Bushland, “Sterility Principle for Insect Control: Historical Development and Recent Innovations,” in Sterility Principle for Insect Control or Eradication (Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency, 1971), pp. 3–14.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Knipling, personal interview.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  38. E. F. Knipling to A. W. Lindquist, Aug. 11, 1953, RG7NA; A. H. Baumhover, Nov. 16, 1953, Special Report K-41, Record Group 310 (Records of the Agricultural Research Service), National Archives (material from this record group is hereafter cited as RG310NA); R. C. Bushland to A. W. Lindquist, Jan. 18, 1954, RG310NA; Knipling, Screwworm Eradication, pp. 409–418. Baumhover was also sent to Puerto Rico to investigate the suitability of that island for the sterile male technique (see W. L. Propham to C. M. Ferguson, Nov. 4, 1953, RG7NA).

    Google Scholar 

  39. R. C. Bushland to A. W. Lindquist, Apr. 7, 1954, RG310NA; Second Quarterly Report, 1954, of the Kerrville, Texas Laboratory, Section of Insects Affecting Man and Animals, Entomology Research Branch, Agricultural Research Service, USDA, attached to A. H. Moseman to A. A. M. Struycken, Sept. 9, 1954, RG310NA.

    Google Scholar 

  40. A. H. Baumhover, A. J. Graham, B. A. Bitter, D. E. Hopkins, W. D. New, F. D. Dudley, and R. C. Bushland, Screwworm control through release of sterile flies,J. Econ. Entomol. 48 (1955): 462–466.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Scruggs, Peaceful Atom, pp. 89–108, 163–171, 299–300.

    Google Scholar 

  42. E. F. Knipling, office memorandum, Sept. 2, 1954, RG310NA. B. A. Porter, head of the Fruit Insects Section of ERD, disagreed with Knipling’s list in the above memorandum. He suggested dropping biological control and resistant plant varieties as research lines for deciduous fruits and nuts. Knipling subsequently agreed with Porter’s recommendations and asked him to draw up some new ones for crops of his responsibility (B. A. Porter to E. F. Knipling, Oct. 7, 1954 and E. F. Knipling to B. A. Porter, Oct. 14, 1954; both in RG310NA).

    Google Scholar 

  43. Index to 1955 Recommendations Relating to Entomology Research of Commodity and Functional Advisory Committees Established Under Title III of the Research and Marketing Act of 1946, unpublished document, RG310NA.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Index to 1956–57 Advisory Committee Recommendations and Work Book for Research Budget Preparation for Fiscal 1959, unpublished document, RG310NA.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Leo Dale Newsom, personal interview, June 1–2, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  46. C. F. Rainwater and C. R. Parencia, Ky Peper Ewing 1898–1974, J. Econ. Entomol. 67 (1974): 568–569.

    Google Scholar 

  47. F. C. Bishopp, “Insecticides and Boll Weevils,” in Beltwide Cotton Production Conference, Summary-Proceedings (Memphis: National Cotton Council, 1955), pp. 19–20; Newsom, personal interview.

    Google Scholar 

  48. E. F. Knipling to K. S. Quisenberry, Aug. 31, 1955, RG310NA.

    Google Scholar 

  49. E. F. Knipling to Dave L. Pearce, Sept. 29, 1955, RG310NA.

    Google Scholar 

  50. For 1955, see Robert E. Stevenson to B. T. Shaw and Harry B. Caldwell, Apr. 19, 1955; for 1956, see Robert E. Stevenson to B. T. Shaw and Harry B. Caldwell, Apr. 24, 1956; both in RG310NA.

    Google Scholar 

  51. J. R. Brazzel and O. E. Shipp, The status of boll weevil resistance to chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticides in Texas, J. Econ. Entomol. 55 (1962): 941–944.

    Google Scholar 

  52. For 1957, see K. P. Ewing to Dr. Knipling, Apr. 4, 1957, and Robert E. Stevenson to B. T. Shaw and Harry B. Caldwell, Apr. 8, 1957; for 1958, see S. E. Jones to R. E. Stevenson, Nov. 5, 1957; all in RG310NA.

    Google Scholar 

  53. E. F. Knipling to K. P. Ewing, Feb. 1, 1955, and attached handwritten note to A. H. Moseman, RG310NA.

    Google Scholar 

  54. J. Ritchie Smith, Statement on Boll Weevil Eradication, Apr. 4, 1973, 3 pp., mimeo supplied by Smith.

    Google Scholar 

  55. The Senate wanted to increase the sum by $100,000, but the House prevailed in Conference. See U.S. Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, Department of Agriculture Appropriations for 1959, Hearings, Part 5, 85th Cong., 2nd sess., 1958, pp. 449–466

    Google Scholar 

  56. U.S. Congress, House, Department of Agriculture and Farm Credit Administration Appropriation, 1959, H. Rept. 1584, 85th Congress, 2nd sess., 1958, pp. 12–13

    Google Scholar 

  57. U.S. Congress, House, Department of Agriculture and Farm Credit Administration Appropriation Bill, 1959, H. Rept. 1776, 85th Congress, 2nd sess., 1958, p. 4

    Google Scholar 

  58. U.S. Congress, Senate, Agricultural and Farm Credit Appropriation Bill, 1959, S. Rept. 1438, 85th Congress, 2nd sess., 1958, pp. 6–7.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Working Group on Boll Weevil Research Programs, The Boll Weevil Problem and Facility Needs to Meet the Problem (Washington, D.C.: USDA, Dec. 30, 1958), mimeo report.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Proceedings of Boll Weevil Research Symposium (Washington, D.C.: USDA, 1962), p. 95 (hereafter cited as USDA, Proceedings).

    Google Scholar 

  61. Theodore B. Davich, personal interview, May 18, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  63. USDA, Proceedings, p. 2.

    Google Scholar 

  64. J. R. Brazzel and L. D. Newsom, Diapause in Anthonomus grandis Boh.,J. Econ. Entomol. 52 (1959): 603–611. Previous to Brazzel and Newsom’s work, overwintering boll weevils were simply said to “hibernate.” Earlier programs for boll weevil control included stalk destruction in the fall so as to make it difficult for the insect to feed enough to “hibernate.” Hibernation is now generally confined to overwintering behavior for mammals, and the more precise term of diapause is used for insects. The two states are biologically different in that a hibernating animal can generally be aroused with ease, but an insect in diapause is frequently resistant to reactivation unless precise environmental conditions are met. R-d control was in a sense not radically new because of the earlier programs based on killing “hibernating” boll weevils. Brazzel and Newsom’s identification of diapause was probably important in attracting Brazzel’s attention to the overwintering period of the insects life.

    Google Scholar 

  65. J. R. Brazzel, T. B. Davich, and L. D. Harris, A new approach to boll weevil control,J. Econ. Entomol. 54 (1961): 723–730

    Google Scholar 

  66. J. R. Brazzel, Destruction of diapause boll weevils as a means of boll weevil control Tex. Agric. Exp. Stn. Misc. Pub. 511 (Texas A & M University), 1961, 22 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Don R. Rummel, “Reproduction-diapause boll weevil control,” in Boll Weevil Suppression, Management, and Elimination Technology (Proceedings of a Conference, Feb. 13–15, 1974, Memphis, Tenn.), ARS-S-71 (Washington, D.C.: USDA, 1976), pp. 28–30 (hereafter cited as ARS, Boll Weevil Suppression.)

    Google Scholar 

  68. Perry L. Adkisson, D. R. Rummel, W. L. Sterling and W. L. Owen, Jr., Diapause boll weevil control: A comparison of two methods, Tex. Agric. Exp. Stn. Pub., Texas A & M Univ., 1966, 11 pp.; Perry Adkisson, personal interview, May 30–31, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  69. O. H. Lindig, “Mass rearing of boll weevils,” in ARS, Boll Weevil Suppression, pp. 50–52; Erma S. Vanderzant and T. B. Davich, Laboratory rearing of the boll weevil: A satisfactory larval diet and ovipositiort studies, J. Econ. Entomol. 51 (1958): 288–291.

    Google Scholar 

  70. T. B. Davich and D. A. Lindquist, Exploratory studies on gamma-radiation for the sterilization of the boll weevil, J. Econ. Entomol. 55 (1962): 164–167.

    Google Scholar 

  71. W. Klassen and N. W. Earle, Permanent sterility induced in boll weevils with busulfan without reducing production of pheromone, J. Econ. Entomol. 63 (1969): 1195–1198; E. P. Lloyd, J. R. McCoy, and J. W. Haynes, “Release of sterile male boll weevils in the pilot boll weevil eradication experiment in 1972–73,” in ARS, Boll Weevil Suppression, pp. 95–102.

    Google Scholar 

  72. T. B. Davich, J. C. Keller, E. B. Mitchell, Paul Huddleston, Ray Hill, D. A. Lindquist, Gerald McKibben, and W. H. Cross, Preliminary field experiments with sterile males for eradication of the boll weevil,J. Econ. Entomol. 58 (1965): 127–131

    Google Scholar 

  73. T. B. Davich, M. E. Merkl, E. B. Mitchell, D. D. Hardee, R. T. Gast, G. H. McKibben, and P. A. Huddleston, Field experiments with sterile males for eradication of the boll weevil, J. Econ. Entomol. 60 (1967): 1533–1538

    Google Scholar 

  74. T. B. Davich, “Sterile-male technique for control or eradication of the boll weevil, Anthonomus grandis Boh.,” in Sterile-Male Technique for Eradication or Control of Harmful Insects (Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency, 1969), pp. 65–72; Davich, personal interview.

    Google Scholar 

  75. E. F. Knipling, Some basic principles in insect population suppression, Bull. Entomol. Soc. Am. 12 (1966): 7–15 (hereafter cited as E. F. Knipling, Some basic principles). An earlier version of this paper was Knipling’s The Potential Role of the Sterility Method for Insect Population Control with Special Reference to Combining this Method with Conventional Methods, ARS-33–98 (Washington, D.C.: USDA, Nov., 1964), 54 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  76. E. F. Knipling, The Basic Principles of Insect Population Suppression and Management, Agriculture Handbook No. 512 (Washington, D.C.: USDA, 1979), 659 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  77. Anonymous, Knipling, E(dward) F(red), Current Biography 36 (May, 1975): 16–19.

    Google Scholar 

  78. Knipling, Some basic principles.

    Google Scholar 

  79. E. F. Knipling, Technically feasible approaches to boll weevil eradication, presented at Beltwide Cotton Production-Mechanization Conference, Hot Springs, Ark., Jan. 11–12, 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  80. J. Ritchie Smith, personal communication, Sept. 15, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  81. National Cotton Council, Selection of Locations for Pilot Boll Weevil Eradication Experiments, unpublished report, Aug. 15, 1969.

    Google Scholar 

  82. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  83. Fred Abel to Members of Special Boll Weevil Committee, Sept. 29, 1969, and G. S. Buck to Special Study Committee on Boll Weevil Eradication, May 13, 1970, both from files of Charles R. Parencia; Robert R. Coker to Clifford M. Hardin, Oct. 20, 1969, and Robert R. Coker to Special Study Committee on Boll Weevil Eradication, Dec. 23, 1969, both from files of Perry L. Adkisson.

    Google Scholar 

  84. Robert R. Coker to Special Study Committee on Boll Weevil Eradication, Mar. 26, 1971, files of Charles R. Parencia. The USDA’s final share of the expenses was $3.61 million, while Cotton, Inc., supplied $1.08 million and the State of Mississippi $0.56 million. See Overall Plan for a National Program to Eliminate the Boll Weevil from the United States (Memphis: National Cotton Council, Dec. 4, 1973). p, 22.

    Google Scholar 

  85. W. L. Popham and David G. Hall, Insect eradication programs, Annu. Rev. Entomol. 3 (1958): 335–354

    Article  Google Scholar 

  86. California Department of Agriculture, Bulletin, Twenty-Seventh Annual Report, 35 (1946): 187

    Google Scholar 

  87. Idem, 36th Annual Report, 45 (1956): 149–150

    Google Scholar 

  88. Thomas R. Dunlap, Farmers, scientists, and insects, Agric. Hist. 54 (1980): 93–107.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The Evergreen State College, Olympia, Washington, USA

    John H. Perkins

Authors
  1. John H. Perkins
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1982 Plenum Press, New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Perkins, J.H. (1982). Strategies II. In: Insects, Experts, and the Insecticide Crisis. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-3998-4_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-3998-4_4

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4684-4000-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4684-3998-4

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation