QUESTION:

We service two movie theaters on a regular basis. One of them is around 1,300 seats while the other is close to 1,800. We have been asked by their corporate office to implement an inspection/treatment for bed bugs as a prevention. We do plenty of bed bug treatments, but nothing to this scale. What would be the best course to tackle something so monumental in size?

ANSWER:

This is an interesting question, and one that was posed several years ago by Mr. Richard Cooper, when he spoke on bed bugs at a state conference. We now know that these pernicious parasites can be found just about anywhere that people can carry them, including in busses, stores, moving vans, offices, and theaters. If the bugs are hiding in clothing in an infested home, and that clothing is then worn to the theater, it is very possible that the bugs will emerge from the clothing and hide in the seats in the theater, and once present the females will begin depositing eggs there. The question is how to effectively inspect an entire theater of seats to discover just a few of the tiny eggs, or to be able to inspect ALL possible crevices and holes that the bugs could hide in. The answer, suggested by Mr. Cooper, could be dogs. A well trained bed bug sniffing dog would be far more capable of moving down each aisle of seating and detecting the presence of bed bugs than would a well trained human inspector relying on a flashlight. A human inspector would have to miss just a couple of bugs or a few eggs and the problem would be back.

The theater management is right to be concerned about this, and showing good judgment in wanting to address it up front. But, the question is whether or not WE can do anything to prevent bed bugs if there are none there already. Pesticides have always been our materials of choice for "preventing" pests, as we relied on their residual effect to kill pest bugs for some period of time after a treatment. And, we then established a regular schedule so we could replenish that residual before it had dissipated, hopefully killing new insects that we expected to find their way to the account. This was all well and good when we had insecticides with a long residual - chlorinated hydrocarbons like DDT and chlordane specifically - but less realistic with today's materials that last only a few weeks at best. This is one reason that IPM (sanitation, habitat modification, exclusion) is so heavily emphasized now. But, unfortunately, the Common Bed Bug doesn't give much of a hoot about sanitation or exclusion. Habitat modification by eliminating clutter will be helpful, but not a total solution. And, removing food resources, despite this recommendation in one State's guidelines on bed bug management, is not a good option either if you want to continue to live in your house.

So, what kind of a treatment and at what interval would you need to do in this public theater if you were going to be successful in preventing bed bugs from inhabiting it? It would seem that the amount of pesticide needed and the frequency you would have to apply it and the unlimited number of sites you would need to treat would make prevention-by-pesticide a poor option. If you have an existing infestation then pesticides could certainly be one part of the solution to eliminate them, but to apply pesticides and then expect them to be a guarantee that bed bugs could not inhabit the theater is not realistic. Better, perhaps, would be the liberal use of non-toxic bed bug monitors, and more and more of these are coming into our market, each with some level of effectiveness. These would likely need to be monitors that could be placed where they will not be seen by customers in the theater (or they will mess with them) and would need to be there all the time and inspected quite regularly.

I would look into the availability of well trained dogs in your area as perhaps the best current option for successfully inspecting and detecting bed bugs. If they do find the bugs present treat with the proper combination of insecticides and steaming, and place monitors designed for bed bugs in as many locations as possible. It is mind boggling how many new technologies are coming in for this cottage market, but we need to be careful not to buy into every sales pitch without knowing whether or not the products work. Maybe it won't be long before some new monitoring material or trap comes along that is so incredibly attractive to bed bugs that all you need to do is place traps and all the bugs will commit suicide on them, but that is not the current case.

View past Ask Mr. Pest Control questions.

Click here to log into the Ask Mr. Pest Control Archive

QUESTION:

Hi, in your response to Richard in Texas comparing back pack sprayers to power rigs you did not address the use of diluted matierials. When you use a power rig the dilution of the chemical used is far greater than when you use a back pack sprayer. If residual time afforded by the chemical used is inhanced by the more concentrated spray from a back pack, would you infact get longer residual times using the back pack vs. the power spray rig?

ANSWER:

Good point Casey, and I think that in my mind I thought I was addressing that. I would say that there is a definite correlation between the amount of active ingredient actually applied to a surface and how long it will leave an effective residual. Since chemicals degrade by a "half life", in which, over time, the molecules change to something else, the more you apply initially the longer it will take for enough molecules to change to make the difference.

The issue of how much concentrate we add to a given spray tank size is an interesting one. Sometimes a product Label may require a specific end-use concentration that does not change just because we use a larger tank. For example, on the Talstar P label there is a chart listing the various amounts of concentrate to add to various volumes of water to achieve various concentrations of the active ingredient, and frankly it can be really confusing. If we pick just one line off this chart we find that the end use concentration can vary from 0.008 to 0.062% - a difference of nearly 8X, and that the gallons we can apply to 1000 sq. ft. varies from 1 to 10. How tough it is to pick the one you want. If we go with that low end of a 0.008% concentration and 1 gallon per 1000 sq. ft., we find the recommendation is to add 0.125 ounces of concentrate to 1 gallon of water, or 12.5 ounces to 100 gallons of water. In other words, the concentration of active ingredient does not change in this case no matter how much water we use, and thus the amount that ends up on the treated surface (in theory) would be the same.

Now, over the many years we know this is not always the case, and the EPA and most states allow us to use LESS concentrate than the Label calls for, as long as it is not specifically prohibited. This seems logical - we are allowed to use less toxicant if we know it will work, but never allowed to exceed the Label directions for dilution. In this light, some manufacturers have used the expression "PCO Rate" for using a concentrate in a larger power sprayer tank, meaning the amount of concentrate is well below that which the Label calls for, but is known by one and all to still be an effective amount for the intended pest. For those who remember it, this was how it worked with KnoxOut 2FM for ant control. Adhering to the only rates on the Label would be cost prohibitive, but using the product in a power sprayer was an effective and fast way to treat for ants, and a much lower concentration did the job.

Some labels will have these varying rates depending on the use, some may have a lower concentration called for when using a larger sprayer, and all may simply "allow" you to use a lower concentration at your discretion. But, we must carefully read the Label for each product we use to ensure there are no statements prohibiting this deviation from what the Label calls for - termite soil treatments for example. The direct answer to your question is that yes, a lower amount of a.i. on a surface would dissipate more rapidly than a higher concentration if this is how you mixed the chemical in the tank.

View past Ask Mr. Pest Control questions.

QUESTION:

What is the difference between Premise Preconstruction and I Maxx Pro 2F? Why can't you use Premise Pre on active termites?

ANSWER:

The two products are essentially identical - same active ingredient (imidacloprid) and same percentage of active ingredient in the concentrate you buy (21.4%). They also are identical to Premise 2, and differ from Premise Pro in that this last product has twice the active ingredient in the concentrate (42.8%), but it would then call for half as much concentrate mixed with water to achieve the same final use dilution. Traditionally we have seen that you have a slightly lower cost of finished gallon if you use products that begin as that higher concentration, but to be honest I am divorced from pricing here, so I cannot guarantee that is the case.

But, comparing just I Maxx Pro 2F and Premise Preconstruction, I suspect it is a matter of marketing by the manufacturer, creating a product label to fit a specific need, in this case Preconstruction applications for subterranean termites, which (when the housing market is normal) is a huge business in certain regions of the country. By creating and marketing this limited Label they may have been able to decrease their costs for registering the product for use, and thus may be able to keep the product cost lower to our industry. Again, just guessing.

However, in reading over the Label for Premise Preconstruction there actually is labeling allowing it use on existing termite problems. They more or less mention this quietly, such as the statement that where "an aerial or above ground colony is established" a supplemental treatment with the product may be needed. Or, further along on the Label there is a large section called "Retreatment", and within this wording it clearly allows the use of this product following the initial Pre-treatment if termite activity in the structure is discovered. The wording actually says that a retreatment can be done with the product ONLY if there is "clear evidence" that there is a disruption or break in the initial treatment, which is a cryptic way of saying that if termites made their way into the structure obviously it had to be through some gap in the treated soil. So, Premise Pre can be used as a re-treat for active termites, but not as the intial product if we are staying within the Labeling of the product. Ultimately it may be just a matter of product marketing, and eventually we may find this product absorbed into the other Bayer imidacloprid product under a single Label.

View past Ask Mr. Pest Control questions.

QUESTION:

I have a cafe that has German roaches in a steam table. Could the steam be breaking down my treatment?

ANSWER:

I would venture to say that this is entirely possible. Both the water and the heat from steam are enemies of insecticide molecules, and could rapidly deteriorate the active ingredient. I am not picturing the extent of this table, but it sounds like this could be a roach harborage that cries out for exclusion if at all possible. Also, if the area is clean then the roaches should not be able to find food resources there, so bait products might be good choices instead of a spray or dust. If you do have some enclosed voids that the roaches are hiding in you might consider a very discrete application of Delta Dust, making sure that it goes only into voids where it cannot get out and onto food surfaces. Delta Dust is supposed to be "waterproof", and while the heat may still degrade it faster than in other settings, it would repel the water. You might also consider the use of a microencapsulated product that is labeled for this site, as the microencapsulation helps to protect the active ingredient that is within. My understanding is that as long as the capsules are damp the a.i. stays inside, and when the outside of the capsule dries out the a.i. then can move through the porous capsule walls and become available to the roaches. The capsules also tend to adhere to the cockroach, increasing the likelihood of contact time with the active ingredient.

But, ideally you would love to make this table an unlikely place for the roaches to continue to hide in the future, since it is a difficult place to treat effectively. Any steps you can take to eliminate their access to hidden places will be ways to reduce the reliance on insecticides to kill them AFTER they already have gotten in. Is this one of those tables where food is served in large tubs, with steam below it keeping things warm? If so, there should be plenty of times when the table is not being used, and this could allow you to do a careful examination to see what gaps, crevices, and openings to voids could be permanently filled with caulking to prevent the roaches from finding comfortable harborage inside. Take a critical look at this table and determine just why the roaches are using it for harborage. It may be just that hiding places are available, but if there is food as well, due to spills from the food trays, then this needs to be cleaned up. Food residues should be considered an unsanitary condition that need to be removed anyhow, regardless of whether or not there are roaches feeding on them. There may also be points on the inside where water can accumulate, offering these water-loving roaches an even better place to live.

View past Ask Mr. Pest Control questions.

QUESTION:

What is the common field mouse? Is it a meadow vole? I live in the Baltimore area and the term is used all the time.

ANSWER:

Let me ramble on a moment about the problem we encounter with "common" names - the English names placed upon so many animals and plants. Depending on where you live in the country or even in the world, you will find various names used to describe these living organisms that are seen there, and sometimes the variety of names is lengthy. To pick just one critter - our current bed bug - we have references over the centuries to these being called chintzes, chinches, mahogany flats, red coats, crimson ramblers, and wall lice. Even today we refer to the one most often seen in our structures as simply a "bed bug" or the "human bed bug", but the accepted common name for it is The Common Bed Bug - and its Latin name is Cimex lectularius, distinguishing it from bat bugs, swallow bugs, and other similar species. So, when an insecticide Label lists "bed bugs" as one of the target pests, does this refer to The Common Bed Bug, or to any of the various bed bugs that may be found indoors?

This is one reason that "scientific" names - or the Latin name of a genus and a species - are established for every animal on the planet. It is a name unique to that species, and it helps us to unravel the confusion and to keep things orderly in our literature. Of course, even these scientific names are constantly changing as experts re-evaluate the relationships of living things, but they still end up with a Latin name that is used only for a single species. So, onto your question on "field mice". I like to refer to our industry experts on things, as it takes me off the hook. In this case, from the excellent "Rodent Control" book by Dr. Bobby Corrigan, he states with respect to The House Mouse (Mus musculus or Mus domesticus), it is found so commonly everywhere in the world, including outdoors, that "the public often mistakes any small mammal seen scurrying around a building as being a mouse", and the house mouse will often be called a "field" mouse when it is seen outside in the landscape of grassy fields.

However, more accurately a field mouse is one of the kinds of mice that generally stays outdoors, and these may be either Deer mice or White-footed mice, as well as even voles, which are also called Meadow Mice. So, the question I ask now is am I clearing this up, or adding more confusion. Apparently the name field mouse is applied to many kinds of outdoor-living rodents, and the meadow mouse / vole could be one of them. Just to make things a little consistent here, let's apply the scientific names of the genus of each of these mice. The Meadow Mouse or Vole is in the genus Microtus, Deer Mice and White Footed mice in the genus Peromyscus, and the common Wood Rats in the genus Neotoma.

It certainly is not worth getting into arguments with your customers over the use of common names, but clearly it is of value in choosing the proper control measures to know which rodent they really are referring to. If they tell you they have a problem with field mice, and you assume it must be Voles, you could go off in the wrong direction if it actually is The House Mouse. There also is a rampant illiteracy in this country when it comes to science and Nature, so it would be good policy never to assume that a homeowner really knows what he or she is seeing, but to verify it before you start a management effort. Far too often they even may be seeing beneficial organisms that should not be killed or eliminated, and as you expand your knowledge of the many non-pest bugs and mammals seen in our landscapes you can help educate your customers as well. Part of doing good pest control and reducing the unnecessary use of pesticides is properly choosing when you really do need to do something.

View past Ask Mr. Pest Control questions.

QUESTION:

Some in pest control rely on truck mounted power sprayers for their routine perimeter treatments. Some rely on a back-pack sprayer for these General Pest treatments. Is one method more effective than the other? Is one method more efficient than the other? Where can I locate authoritative references to studies concerning the topic?

ANSWER:

While there certainly are some situations where a power sprayer can do what a hand-pumped sprayer cannot, I think much of this boils down to personal preference, but with some explanations. If your work involves large scale applications of herbicides or perhaps insecticides on large turf settings, then the volume that the power sprayer can put out becomes a huge time saver. And, since time is money it thus is also a more cost efficient way to apply a hundred gallons or more of liquid solution. If you spray large trees or shrubs for insects or plant pathogens, again the power sprayer can deliver the large volume needed much more quickly. It also provides the "reach" necessary to get the spray solution up into the higher levels of the tree to kill the insects feeding there, or to coat the foliage to cure or prevent diseases. Some of this is nicely mitigated now with systemic products that can be injected into either the trunk or the soil, providing the needed pest management without the need to deliver pesticides into the air. The benefit here is obvious - no off-site drift due to droplets being carried by the wind.

The other benefit to soil injections or trunk applications, if they do provide effective pest management, is one of Public Relations. There is a large contingent of people who object to the wide scale application of pesticides of any kind, and the use of a power sprayer is a very noticeable one. Particularly power sprayers with gas engines become loud and perhaps objectionable in some places, and this can be mitigated with the use of a battery powered sprayer instead. These are very quiet, and at a low pressure setting can still deliver your application in a directed manner without alerting an entire neighborhood to what you are doing. A power sprayer is also a fairly large piece of equipment, so you may have to dedicate most of the bed of a truck to this one item. This may be necessary if you are doing those larger operations involving a need to apply 50 to 100 gallons or more. To attempt the same job with a 4-gallon backpack would mean you need to make dozens of refills, and apply the solution much more slowly over the area, again spending a great deal of time.

But, for your typical perimeter treatment around a typical home, a backpack may be more desirable. The amount of water used is less important that the total amount of active ingredient placed on the treated surfaces. It may be really fast to walk around the structure with the power sprayer, rapidly applying the spray along the base of the structure and into pest insect hiding places. But, it also is more difficult to control that spray. Run-off is very likely, particularly under the eaves where you may be treating for spiders or wasps. Having your pesticide spray running down the wall or dripping off the rafters could even be a violation of a label, if that label specifically states that you must avoid run-off. A backpack or hand sprayer would be much easier to control, applying a light mist to the surface up to the point of run-off, but stopping short of it. You could more carefully direct your application around items that should be avoided, such as patio furniture, pet items, etc. And, the application with the back pack is essentially silent, so neighbors are not going to be disturbed or upset about what you are doing next door.

One question that does come up is security of these pieces of equipment. When they are in your vehicle and you are not immediately present at the vehicle, you must ensure two things. One, that they are not stolen, and two that both have their lids secured to prevent someone from messing with what you have inside. Don't put it past anti-pesticide folks to dump something into your tank that would cause you serious problems. I have seen this happen. A power sprayer tank can be locked quite easily with a padlock, but the lid on a back pack is harder to secure. It is illegal to "drive" with application equipment in the driver's cab, but you may have to consider temporarily placing the sprayer in a locked cab while you are away from the vehicle. Discuss this first with your local regulatory folks. And, of course, just setting the sprayer in the back of the truck while you then go back to talk with the customer, or check the back yard, runs the risk of having someone steal that equipment.

I really don't know that I've ever read any references on this to refer you to. It is more a matter of personal choice. It will take you a little longer to go around the perimeter of the structure with a back pack, but you get the benefits of a quiet operation, more properly directed application of the material, a less expensive piece of equipment, and less drift and run-off. If you have ever used a power sprayer you also may have been the cause of broken planters, busted sprinkler heads, or damaged plants as you dragged that long hose around the property. The power sprayer becomes most useful when doing larger jobs of turf or trees, where the power and the output are needed.

View past Ask Mr. Pest Control questions.

QUESTION:

I'm looking for a solution to a problem with flickers, which are hanging around by vent screens, and may have gotten into one. They also are creating a mess all over the exterior.

ANSWER:

Flickers are a few species of fairly large birds that are closely related to woodpeckers, so they have many of the same habits. Some of these habits are pretty undesirable around homes, such as drumming on hard surfaces and drilling holes in the sides of wooden structures. The benefit of flickers is undeniable, but we also must address that fact that their bad habits need to be stopped. Woodpeckers tend not to migrate to those warmer climates that many other kinds of birds do, so they hang around in their normal habitats all winter long. A nice covering of feathers or not, they still probably get cold, and look for cozy places to hang out to stay warmer, and if an attic is available it could be used. You indicate that this flicker, or several of them, may have breached the exterior and found their way inside, but that you are not certain of this. This is something that needs to be determined before moving onto any exclusion work. You would not want to repair entry points but then lock a bird inside the structure. If you do find that birds are getting inside you should install a flap of some kind that allows them to leave but not to return. This time of year there will be no young birds involved, so all adult birds should be leaving daily.

If there is some problem with the vent screens, such as holes in them, that allows the birds to move through, these must be repaired. Permanent exclusion is the ideal answer for preventing problems on the interior. You then can evaluate the other areas of the exterior where these birds seem to be landing, and install some devices to physically prevent them from accessing those places. If it is under the eaves of the roof line then one good permanent solution is bird netting. This can be installed from the exterior wall out to the edge of the roof, and once installed should keep these birds from going under the eaves. There also are "Bird Slope" panels sold by Univar that can be installed in selected areas under the eaves. They are slick plastic with a 45 degree angle to them, and birds cannot get a grip to land on them. The various devices available should last for many years once installed.

As far as flickers and other birds loitering on the property and dumping their doo doo all over the place, well, that's what birds doo.......... or do. There may be some reason they are coming to this property, such as the availability of food resources that could be removed. It may just be because of trees in the area providing landing and roosting sites. If these kinds of resources cannot be removed you might discourage the birds with the use of scare devices such as flickering tape or streamers. If the mess they are making is only a concern on the structure, then preventing the birds from landing on the structure by installing preventive barriers will be the best answer.

View past Ask Mr. Pest Control questions.

QUESTION:

I have english laurel with shothole fungus and mildew, and also with the leaves curling on the ends. What should I use?

ANSWER:

The curling of the leaves could be a result of the mildew, which may cause distortions of the infected leaf areas, or possibly some other problem such as aphids, which also can cause leaf distortion where they feed in high numbers. If it is aphids then you could treat with a labeled insecticide to eliminate them when they first appear. You could also consider the use of a soil-applied systemic for control of aphids on many ornamental trees and shrubs, and Merit is one product that is excellent for this use. It can be applied in late winter to early spring, even prior to foliage appearing on deciduous plants, and the active ingredient will remain in the foliage for the season, doing a great job on aphids and many plant-feeding leaf beetles.

The shot hole fungus is also called Coryneum Blight, and this disease and the powdery mildew thrive in wet, humid conditions. This often can occur due to watering practices, especially if the foliage is watered at night during warm weather, allowing the water to remain on the leaves for extended hours. This greatly encourages the growth of various fungi on foliage, and if this is the case your customer should be encouraged to alter the watering time either to daylight hours, when the sun can then dry the foliage quickly, or watering below the foliage since it does not need to get wet.

For shothole fungus it is recommended that affected foliage be pruned off the plant as quickly as possible. The spores of the fungus, like so many plant fungi, are spread by insects and water. This can be a vicious cycle if the foliage is being watered by irrigation, where the disease is constantly spread to new areas of the plant. Again, avoiding watering the foliage can help reduce the disease problem. For deciduous trees and shrubs you can treat with a "dormant" application of a fungicide, such as Bordeaux or copper products, in late spring, and in California this often needs to be on the plant before the end of February to get it there before the new foliage begins to appear. For evergreen plants you can use one of many fungicides that are labeled for Coryneum Blight, such as Daconil, Banner Max, or Chlorothalonil. These will probably also be helpful against the mildew, but good watering practices are really important in preventing mildew in the future.

View past Ask Mr. Pest Control questions.

QUESTION:

I use Niban on the exterior for ant & roach control. I also like a product called Larva-Lur for large roach control in attics and the exterior. In your opinion, can you mix the two products together in the same container & use them, without harming the efficacy of either of the two products? Also, would this be considered a label violation in your opinion. Thanks!

ANSWER:

We can answer the last part of your question first, and this will also answer the middle part. The Larva-Lur label specifically states that it is NOT to be "formulated" into any other end-use products. I take this to mean that you are not allowed to mix Larva-Lur with any other bait for a single application of the two together. However, there would be nothing wrong with using both baits in the same area, but as separate placements. You actually ask if they could be placed in the same container, and again this sounds okay. I would avoid dumping one onto the other, just to completely avoid that "formulate together" statement on the label, but using them near each other sounds find. Larva-Lur contains propoxur (an organophosphate) and Niban contains boric acid, so you do have two separate active ingredients, and propoxur has long been a pretty good product for cockroach control. Of course, back about 30 years Baygon Bait was the ONLY cockroach bait available, so it got a lot of use.

The larger species of roaches do seem to accept granular baits very well - American, Oriental, Smoky Brown - and these are good formulations to use outdoors where the bait can be protected from rain or irrigation. The propoxur is going to deteriorate much more rapidly than boric acid will, so Larva Lur bait placed outdoors will likely lose its effectiveness within a much shorter period of time. However, any granular bait that gets wet will lose palatibility to the roaches, so either place them in a covered location or within a station designed for insect baits. This also keeps them from being investigated by birds or dogs. Using both baits shouldn't have any effect on the efficacy or acceptance of the baits, and in fact it is a good idea to offer a variety of baits for ants and roaches. You rely on having the bait accepted and eaten, and one never knows what the mood will be of the insect. Offering a choice increases the odds that one or the other will be eaten.

View past Ask Mr. Pest Control questions.