Area-Wide Management (AWM) of heliothis (Helicoverpa spp. ) is not a new concept. Knipling and Stadelbacher (1983) discussed the rationale of attacking heliothis populations during the first spring generation and this approach has been investigated since 1990 in the Mississippi Delta (Hardee and Bell 1996, Streett et al. 1998), In Australia, Titmarsh (1992) was the first to advocate control of the first spring generation as a management approach on the Darling Downs, but it was Sequeira (1998) who put words into action in the 1997/98 season with a regional management program in the Emerald Irrigation Area. The driving force for this action was the need to develop a pre-emptive resistance management strategy for the area to facilitate the introduction of INGARD cotton. Key components of this program were the use of early-season and late-season trap crops. It is this research that has been the catalyst for similar plans to deal with the heliothis crisis on the Darling Downs (Murray et al 1998) and elsewhere in Australia. Under the AWM programs implemented in Australia, Helicoverpa armigera (heliothis) is the primary target because this species has developed resistance to most currently used insecticides and presents a dilemma for mid and late season management in cotton and grain crops. While large immigrations of Helicoverpa punctigera (Wallengren) from inland Australia may take place during late winter/spring in some years, the tactics employed against H. armigera also should be valid against H. punctigera. The thrust of AWM is an overall reduction in H. armigera population levels. Various tactics have been incorporated into AWM strategies, and the mix of tactics varies from region to region. No single tactic will form the basis of AWM and no AWM strategy will be universally suitable.