Rodents, birds, wildlife…

The good: Position lighting away from building.

The good: Use native, well adapted and/or low input plants including those resistant to local key pests.

The good: Use plants that don’t obscure the ground or provide harborage, e.g., those with upright architecture, and space properly to allow easy inspection.

The good: Create “inspection aisles” around building perimeter using concrete, stone or other material that does not support pests or hold moisture.

The good: Select non-attractant lighting such as high pressure sodium lighting.

The bad: Vegetation too close to building provides insect travel ways and holds moisture.

The bad: Low-growing ground cover such as ivy, or other plants that provide cover for rats.

The bad: Dumpsters/compactors adjacent to buildings and entryways.

The bad: Removing topsoil prior to construction and replacing with poor soil. These turf and landscape plants are suffering from poor construction practices and overuse of fertilizers and pesticides, creating poor soil structure and biology. This particular photo shows a lawn that is less than 8 months old.

The bad: Inadequate training on maintenance of design features.

Require IPM CEUs for architects, engineers, school decision makers.

Form IPM committees or add IPM to the charge of existing committees in associations for architects, engineers, school decision makers.

Provide educational materials, programs to architects, engineers, school decision makers.

Review International Building Codes and Construction Specification Institute docs for conflicts and opportunities for IPM and propose revisions.

Develop, propose, promote funding for demo/education programs, e.g., pesticide surcharge. $$$$

Tie IPM to performance measures to raise profile and increase support.

The end.