[On The Road] The Next Step

In December, the National Pest Management Association, in partnership with the American Association of Pesticide Control Officials, Association of Structural Pest Control Regulatory Officials and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, held a first-of-its kind meeting at the association’s headquarters in Fairfax, Va. The Mosquito Misting System Stakeholder Forum provided an opportunity for industry stakeholders and regulators to learn more about these systems and the concerns that have been discussed among regulators.
While many of the stakeholders individually had discussed issues associated with mosquito misting systems, there had not been an opportunity for all those involved to interact with one another.
“What had not been occurring was a lot of dialogue among stakeholders. We decided (the meeting) would be a good idea and one that would result in good public policy,” said Bob Rosenberg, NPMA’s senior vice president.
Never before has such a diverse group — including pest management professionals and manufacturers — gathered to discuss an issue whose effects are felt across various levels of the pest management industry. More than 100 interested parties met to develop a clear understanding of what the problems are, issues to be addressed, data needs, initiate dialogue around what kinds of solutions might be available and develop a road map about how to move forward.
“People write laws and then new technology comes out and we find ourselves trying to fit new technology into old laws,” Rosenberg said.

WHAT’S AT STAKE. According to Randy Elkins, Coastal Mosquito Control, a misting system is a delivery system that converts liquid product into a fine mist that is then dispensed. Examples include a backpack sprayer, a truck-mounted fogger or an aerosol can. A mosquito misting system takes this technology one step further, he said. Systems start with a drum (usually 55 gallons) and include a pump, motor and gauge. The insecticide is pumped through nylon tubing and delivered to spray nozzles from a master unit. 
“Manufacturers are very involved with pest management professional training,” Elkins said. “It’s important that as we sell our product into the industry that we train on mosquitoes.” He added that misting should be a “centerpiece” approach to mosquito control. “We want to use the least pesticide available,” he said.
Kemper Modlin, Monster Mosquito Systems, gave a brief history of mosquito misting systems. He said their use began in the 1970s in barns to control an outbreak of equine encephalitis. In 2000, homeowners began seeking a mosquito solution for backyards. “(Mosquito misting systems are) part of an IPM approach, as long as (PCOs and customers) are well educated and trained,” he said.
Wayne Moran, director, regulatory and research and development at Whitmire Micro-Gen, represented conventional pesticide manufacturers. When mosquito misting systems moved into the residential marketplace, users quickly approached manufactures for insecticides they could use in them, he said. “As a representative of conventional registrants, I would caution that labeling should not be the only way to enforce these products,” he said.
In addition, David Murphy of EcoSMART discussed botanical and exempt pesticides being used in mosquito misting systems.
The discussion also featured a panel of PCOs including Bobby Jenkins, ABC Pest & Lawn Services, Austin, Texas; Mike Rottler, Rottler Pest & Lawn Solutions, St. Louis; and Rick Bell, Arrow Exterminators, Atlanta. 
Bobby Jenkins said his company has installed more than 300 mosquito misting systems. “Customers are very satisfied…This truly is exceeding expectations,” he said. “When that system is operating properly, mosquito populations are reduced by more than 95 percent.”
Rick Bell’s company “put our toe in the pool” of mosquito misting systems two years ago. The company found some external challenges with the systems, including whether or not they are “IPM” and their effect on beneficial insects. Internally, the company has worked to determine what additional licensing/certification is necessary from the state.
Mike Rottler said he welcomes assistance from state regulators and EPA, and that his company is interested in several changes to the status quo, including standards for responsible advertising and promotion of the systems, laws to regulate the sales and service of mosquito misting systems by licensed operators only, the establishment of a workgroup with key stakeholder involvement and uniform policies throughout the country.

REGULATORY COMMUNITY. A diverse group of EPA officials and state regulatory officials took the floor next. In addition, Joe Conlon from the American Mosquito Control Association had an opportunity to address the group.
Jim Roelofs, field and external affairs, state/regional liaison officer, EPA’s Office of Pesticide Programs, discussed his office’s role in registering pesticides. He said the agency has several concerns about the use of mosquito misting systems, including:
• Certain products being used are not labeled specifically for these systems.
• Should a homeowner who has a system be considered an “applicator”?
• Issues with product reregistration. “If we’re updating labels, we need to have accurate information about how these products are being used,” he said. If EPA doesn’t have the information, it has to rely on assumptions, which it doesn’t want to do. “This is a new exposure scenario we have to deal with,” he said.
Marion Johnson, chief of the insecticide branch in EPA’s registration division, discussed the issue of product registration. “We are concerned that consumers and applicators don’t have all of the information that needs to be adhered to on the label,” he said. “We don’t know what products are being used out there.”
Susan Jennings of EPA’s special review and reregistration division discussed the status of pyrethrins, PBO and permethrin. She also talked to attendees about various routes of possible exposure with mosquito misting systems.
State regulators Bonnie Rabe (from New Mexico), Sam Jackling (from New York) and Steve Dwinell (from Florida and also representing the Association of Structural Pest Control Regulatory Officials) talked about their experiences in the field with mosquito misting systems.
Rabe said she’s seen many times that mosquito misting applicators weren’t from the pest management industry (i.e., construction companies, landscape design/maintenance firms, property management companies) and that these companies have little or no pesticide experience. She also expressed concern regarding the marketing of these systems (i.e., public health protection claims and claims contrary to the label).
Jackling questioned whether these systems should be restricted use products and Dwinell brought up the issue of neighbor notification. There are nine states that require notification — Dwinell questioned whether neighbors would be required to be notified every time the system sprayed.
The American Mosquito Control Association’s Joe Conlon questioned whether mosquito misting systems contribute to resistance.

WHAT’S NEXT? As a result of the meeting, the speakers are forming a workgroup to develop more information on the following: (1) best management practices, (2) mandatory label recommendations, (3) advertising guidelines and (4) efficacy/exposure rates.
The meeting was a success in that it brought so many people together to discuss the issues facing the use and regulation of mosquito misting systems. “We don’t think we’re going to solve anything today,” Rosenberg said, but the first steps were made.
“This meeting is progress,” Bonnie Rabe concurred.

The author is editor of PCT magazine and can be reached at jdorsch@giemedia.com.