It is widely recognized that bed bug control is difficult, often requiring a combination of tools and methods to achieve elimination (Potter et al. 2006, Potter et al. 2007, Wang and Cooper 2011, Bennett et al. 2015). One of the more challenging obstacles in eliminating a bed bug infestation is addressing personal items that are infested but cannot be treated with pesticides. Some items can be hot laundered in a washer or placed in a dryer, but what about infested items that cannot be laundered? This article discusses the use of portable heat chambers for disinfesting infested items that cannot be treated with traditional pesticides or laundered (or if clients are unable to launder).

Portable heat chambers use high temperature (around 50oC or 122oF) to kill bed bugs. There are many different designs, some more portable than others. Some can accommodate items as large as a piece of upholstered furniture, however, most are geared for treating small items. Bed bugs commonly infest small items like shoes, books, clothing, etc., when these items are on, or close to, the infested bed or sofa where the host spends a significant amount of time each day. Travelers and visitors sometimes also may be concerned about getting bed bugs during hotel stays or when visiting someone with a known bed bug infestation (i.e., home health care aides, housing inspectors, maintenance staff, etc.). How effective are portable heat chambers as a solution for bed bugs hiding in small items? Here we report a laboratory study evaluating the effectiveness of a portable heater.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. The product we tested, ThermalStrike Expedition, was donated from Protect-A-Bed (Chicago) (Figure 1 A, B). The instructions suggest that the treatment time required will vary based upon the amount of contents and that treatment can be terminated once the core temperature reaches 45^oC (or 113^oF) for 90 minute or reaches 50^oC. Contents within the unit may take up to eight hours to reach 50^oC.

In the first experiment, we evaluated the effectiveness of the heating unit for killing bed bugs hiding in loosely packed suitcases. In spite of the fact that most clothing can be laundered, we chose to pack suitcases with clothing for the test as the clothing is a good insulator and allows for a more rigorous test. Three heating units were tested. In each heating unit, we loosely filled the suitcase with clothing. The suitcases were 21 by 15 by 10 inches in size. We placed two Petri dishes containing live bed bugs (a field strain was used) at two central locations inside each suitcase (Table 1). Each dish contained 10 to 14 adult males, 56 to 85 adult females, 10 to 11 third- to fifth-instar nymphs, and 75 to 285 eggs (0-5 days old) and pieces of fabric cloth as harborage (Figure 1 C, D). The bed bugs were fed a week prior to the treatment. The lid of each dish has a 2.5 cm diameter opening covered with fine nylon screen for ventilation. Two control dishes containing the similar number and type of bed bugs was placed on the counter in the laboratory (22^oC) during the treatment. Two wireless HOBO data loggers (model #U23-002, Onset Computer Corporation, Bourne, Mass.) also were placed in two locations inside each suitcase and recorded temperature every five minutes. Each sensor was placed together with a Petri dish containing bed bugs. In addition, the probe of a remote digital thermometer (part of the ThermalStrike Expedition) was placed beside one of the HOBO data loggers in each suitcase to determine when to stop the heating unit. The zippers of the suitcases were closed during treatment. The suitcases were sealed in plastic bags provided by the manufacturer. One sealed suitcase was placed in each heating unit. The heating units were unplugged from the outlets when the manufacturer-provided digital thermometer reading reached 50^oC. The Petri dishes and data loggers were immediately taken out from the suitcases and cooled down with a fan. All Petri dishes were transferred into an incubator at 26^ºC, 12:12 (L:D) light cycle. The bed bug mortality was checked daily for seven days and egg hatch was observed daily for 14 days after heat treatment.

In the second experiment, we tested the effectiveness of the heating unit for killing bed bugs hiding in tightly packed suitcases using an eight-hour treatment period. The objective was to determine whether bed bugs in more densely packed materials can be killed within an eight-hour period. Two tightly packed suitcases (14 by 10 by 9 inches) were tested. Each suitcase included both clothing and a few books. A wireless HOBO data logger was placed at the center of each suitcase and recorded temperature every five minutes. Bed bugs were hidden inside the center of the suitcases using the same methods as in the first experiment. The control dish was placed on the counter in the laboratory (25^oC) during the heat treatment. The heating units were operated for eight hours. Then the Petri dishes and data loggers were immediately taken out from the suitcases and cooled down with a fan. All Petri dishes were kept in an incubator at 25^ºC, 12:12 (L:D) light cycle for 14 days. The bed bug mortality and egg hatch were observed in the same way as in the first experiment.

RESULTS. In the first experiment, it took 265-295 minutes (4.4-4.9 hours) to reach 50^oC (based on the digital thermometer). The temperature recorded by HOBO sensors at core of the suitcases were between 47-51^oC (117-124^oF) (Figure 2). The location where the three Petri dishes were placed had temperature of 48, 50, and 50^oC respectively. All bed bugs (adults, nymphs, eggs) were killed from the treatment. There was no adult or nymph mortality in the control. The mean egg hatch rate in the control was 91 percent. Mean mortality of nymphs and adults in the control was 2 percent after 7 days.

In the second experiment, the core temperature in the two suitcases reached 46 and 48^oC at 8 hours, respectively (Figure 2). All bed bug adults and nymphs were dead from the treatment. None of the adults and nymphs died in the control. On third day after treatment, both suitcases had one egg successfully hatched but nymphs died the same day. In addition, two eggs from the second suitcase attempted to hatch but nymphs failed to emerge at seven days after treatment. All 24 eggs in the control hatched after seven days. Mortality of nymphs and adults in the control was 5 percent after seven days.

DISCUSSION. Kells and Goblirsch (2011) reported that 50^oC is lethal to all bed bug development stages with an exposure time of less than one minute. The core temperature in a loosely packed suitcase reached this temperature in 295 minutes (nearly five hours). The two suitcases which were operated for 265 and 285 minutes did not reach 50^oC at the center, but none of the treated bed bugs survived the treatment. The second experiment represented the most challenging conditions for eradicating bed bugs hiding in personal belongings. Eight hours of treatment time was sufficient for eliminating bed bugs even though the core temperature never reached 50^oC.

Kells and Goblirsch (2011) found bed bug eggs were much more tolerant to heat treatment than mobile stages. The fact that two nymphs successfully emerged from eggs but died the same day and two eggs had embryo development but failed to hatch confirms that eggs are more tolerant to heat than nymphs and adults. Even though eggs were not killed immediately after heat treatment in the second experiment, they suffered a sub-lethal effect, which led to death of nymphs and failed nymphal emergence. Kells and Goblirsch (2011) estimated the lethal time to kill 99 percent of bed bug eggs was 71.5 minutes at 48oC. In our second experiment, the core temperature increased at an average of 0.06oC per minute, the same speed as that in Kells and Goblirsch (2011). The core temperature in suitcase I was 47^oC for 40 minutes and 48^oC for 20 minutes (total of 60 minutes where temperature was at least 4^oC) before the treatment ended. One egg (5 percent) hatched but the nymph died the same day. The core temperature in suitcase II was 47^oC during the last five minutes of treatment. Three eggs (12 percent) had post-treatment development but one nymph died the same day and the other two nymphs failed to emerge from the eggs. Considering that a few eggs were still able to develop after the heat treatment, it would be prudent to set 50^oC core temperature as target temperature for determining when treatment should be terminated using a ThermalStrike heating unit.

It is common that many bed bug infestations will take multiple visits to be eliminated (Cooper et al. 2015). Frequent treatment of bed linens and other personal belongings harboring bed bugs during this period is critical. A heating unit will be handy to treat these items repeatedly until all bed bugs in the residence are eliminated. When frequent laundering by clients is not possible, portable heating units (possibly provided by property management) also can be an economical alternative method. For travelers, workers and pest control professionals who frequently encounter bed bug infestations, a portable heating unit offers a convenient and safe method for eliminating bed bugs potentially hidden on clothing or personal belongs. Our study shows six to eight hours treatment time is sufficient to kill all stages of bed bugs hiding in a suitcase using ThermalStrike Expedition. The minimum time required to kill bed bugs is affected by the tightness of the materials packed in the suitcase. Loosely placing items in the heat chamber is recommended for faster kill of bed bugs.

References

Bennett, G. W., A. D. Gondhalekar, C. Wang, G. Buczkowski and T. J. Gibb. 2015. Using research and education to implement practical bed bug control programs in multifamily housing. Pest Management Science 72: 8-14.

Cooper, R., C. Wang and N. Singh. 2015. Evaluation of a model community-wide bed bug management program in affordable housing. Pest Management Science 72: 45-56.

Kells, S. A. and M. J. Goblirsch. 2011. Temperature and time requirements for controlling bed bugs (Cimex lectularius) under commercial heat treatment conditions. Insects 2: 412-422.

Potter, M. F., A. Romero, K. Haynes and W. Wickenmeyer. 2006. Battling bed bugs in apartments. Pest Control Technology 34(8): 45-52.

Potter, M. F., A. Romero, K. F. Haynes and E. Hardebeck. 2007. Killing them softly: battling bed bugs in sensitive places. Pest Control Technology 35(1): 24-32.

Wang, C. and R. Cooper. 2011. Environmentally sound bed bug management solutions. In P. Dhang [ed] Urban pest management: an environmental perspective. CABI International: 44-63.

The middle class is gradually evaporating. The population of families with the two kids, two cars and two jobs is changing — there’s less money to spend. At least that’s what Pew Research tells us in reports like its 2015 study that states, “The American middle class is losing ground.” After four decades of being the country’s economic majority, the middle class is now outnumbered by those in income brackets above and below the “middle.”

This is good and bad news, depending on how you cut it. That means that more households are gaining financial footing. And it also means that more families are focused on buying the basics because there’s less to go around.

In 2015, 120.8 million adults were middle-income. There were 121.3 million lower- and upper-income households combined. Pew reports that middle-income Americans have fallen behind financially in the new century, with a median income in 2014 that was 4 percent less than in 2000. The housing market crash and recession didn’t help this group.

But does that mean that the typical sweet spot pest control customer — that $75,000-plus household — is backing off on pest control services? Are pest control companies feeling a lag that aligns with national statistics showing that their target audience is declining?

Not exactly.

The target pest control customer is not necessarily defined by class. “We think a person’s psychographic profile is driving who is the sweet spot, specifically a person’s tolerance to pests in the home,” says Cam Glover, managing director of marketing for Rollins.

At Terminix, the profile of a prospect is an “active” customer who wants bugs to be gone — a do-it-for-me homeowner and someone who values professional service (and can afford it). “We are looking at the changing demographic of our consumers as more of an opportunity than a threat,” says Chip Colonna, vice president, product management.

So the typical pest control customer is still there — a 35- to 55-year old consumer who owns a home. But there is an influx of new adults hitting the market. They’re called Millennials, they’re 94 million strong and they possess all of the ideal qualities pest control companies target. (The catch is the way they must be marketed to — and that’s where the adaptation for pest control companies comes in, points out Cindy Mannes, executive director, Professional Pe

st Management Alliance.) The middle class statistics are real. Pew paints a rather partly cloudy picture of this once dominant population. But what will continue to impact the pest control customer base is not really about where a household falls on the national income ladder. It is all about geography, pest tolerance, perceived value of the service and the ability to communicate in an instant. (“Thanks to the advent of technology, for most consumers the cell phone is the remote control for their lives,” Colonna points out.)

Considering Pew and other research analysts’ reports about the middle class, PCT magazine wanted to know: What does it all really matter?

Here’s what we learned about what middle class means, who pest control companies’ target customers are today, and what opportunities businesses can find if they evolve and market smartly.

WHO IS THE MIDDLE CLASS? So what does middle class mean exactly? That depends on whom you ask, and whether you’re talking about household income or lifestyle. Some experts limit middle class to those in the middle-fifth of the nation’s income span. Others define middle class by chopping off the upper and lower 20 percent of that income ladder and calling everything in between middle class.

Pew Research Center defines middle class as two-thirds to two times the national median income based on household size. So, that number can range from $46,960 to $140,900 in household income, depending on how many people make up a family unit.

Beyond household income is the way people spend: consumption. The thought is that if you’re spending more, that’s a reflection of your financial health. So tally up the annual total spent on food, transportation, entertainment, housing and miscellaneous items. That middle-fifth shells out $38,200 to $49,900 annually for cost of living, according to Notre Dame professor James X. Sullivan.

There’s a middle-class lifestyle that some will say defines who is and who isn’t. For instance, those aspiring to live in a nice home, drive a car and take a family vacation might consider themselves middle class. This is an “aspirational” way of looking at the middle class, Pew reports. For example, when President Obama took office he created a task force to raise the standards of living and this task force had to define what middle class means. They looked at these life goals as benchmarks of what constitutes the middle class.

Hill says, “I’m an economist, so at the end of the day it’s about what you can afford.”

A 2015 Nielson Study looked at the fact that middle class isn’t necessarily about income, it’s a state of mind. “What is interesting is that the 58 percent that reported ‘living comfortably’ and 10 percent ‘free spenders’ were across all classes,” Glover points out. (The remaining 32 percent in this research said they could only afford the basics.)

So middle class is possibly not just about income. It’s how you feel about the money, and your cost of living — where the money’s going. That’s where geography comes into play. How much does it cost to “do the basics” in your community?

“That definition of middle class, I guess it’s a placeholder,” Colonna says. “But there are other things (impacting our pest control sales) that are much more important than how much money a consumer makes.”

Geography makes all the difference, Mannes says.

“There are statistics that support a declining middle class and I’m sure there are more poor people than wealthy people — but middle class in Cincinnati, Ohio, looks different than in San Francisco, Calif.,” Mannes says.

“What is critical these days is really knowing where you live and paying attention to the demographics in your community,” she adds.

Economist Ned Hill, professor of public affairs at The Ohio State University, agrees that the cost of living in different areas of the country will impact the number of middle class families there. “I believe the middle income market is stronger in places where housing costs have not escalated as much, and also in places that are a little less dense,” he says.

“The real issue is just what fraction of your disposable income is taken up by housing costs,” Hill continues. “So if you are in business, you have to make certain that you don’t pay attention to national numbers — you have to figure out what those numbers mean in your market.”

Pest control trends analyses by PPMA identify $75,000-plus as the average income level of pest control customers in a nationwide sample. But in some regions such as the Southeast, the average pest control customer might be a $50,000 household with lots of pest pressure. That same community also might have a lower cost of living than another region like the Northeast. “Pest control is ‘affordable’ based on where you live,” Mannes says.

The numbers showing a shrinking middle class are indisputable, Mannes says. But the numbers don’t tell the whole story.

“The approach for (selling) pest control might be slightly different in looking at the demographics of who is in your area and targeting those demographics — and recognizing that those might be changing,” Mannes says.

“We are looking at the changing demographic of our consumers as more of an opportunity than a threat.” — Chip Colonna, Terminix, vice president, product management.

Mannes is talking about the growing population of 70-plus year olds who are choosing (if possible) to stay in their homes longer. And, there’s the 94 million Millennials who will represent a real opportunity for pest control companies as they purchase their own homes, continue climbing in their careers and spend differently than their parents did. (“They are the do-it-for-me’s” that value services, Colonna points out.)

So what pest control firms need to focus on is not the fact that reports reveal a shrinking middle class. But rather, there will be a growing opportunity to sell pest control services to customers who will buy no matter their income. For example, if you’ve got bugs, you’ll fork over some spending money to take care of the problem rather than take those dollars to the local retailer.

“No matter what class you are in, any time you make a purchase of a product or service, you are making a trade off and there’s something you don’t buy as a result of that (decision),” Glover says. Pest control purchases “depend on tolerance.”

From a grand consumer spending perspective, Hill points out that spending is happening on the budget end (left) and the concierge end (right). He points to grocers as an example.

“There is growth in low-end, big-box, generic commodity food stores,” Hill says. “At the other end you have another type of food industry that is a mixture of convenience, entertainment and style. I call it food-tainment. The traditional mass-market firm in the middle has gotten hammered.”

Market protection for businesses in the middle will come from establishing internal cost controls, and focusing on quality. “Folks are out there on Yelp and Angie’s List…what is important (for businesses) is addressing how they get rated for promptness, courtesy and quality,” Hill says.

CONTROL AT ANY COST. Geography influences the definition of middle class. It plays a significant role in whether pest pressure is so great that the service is a priority. And location also dictates the cost of pest control services — which circles back to the issue of middle class and whether they’re still buying. The industry professionals PCT talked to said, absolutely.

“We find that what pest control companies charge in the Southeast is actually less than what they would charge in the Midwest,” said Gary Curl, president of Specialty Consultants. Route density is, perhaps, one reason. “A pest control company could service every third house in a community in the Southeast, which means they have less windshield time.”

So, those high-volume, tightly route pest control firms can be more price competitive in the residential market, Curl relates. On the commercial end, it’s different. He notices based on his firm’s research that the average cost of commercial pest control in the Southeast is more than in areas of the country with less pest pressure. “We believe that’s because when you get into a commercial account in the South, you have a lot more work to do there,” Curl says.

With any product or service, consumers make choices. Those buying decisions are impacted by variables: How much does housing cost in your region? What’s the price at the pump? Are there lots of pests around? “What is critical is knowing where you live,” Mannes says.

The middle class statistics reported by Pew and others are not evident in sales or retention at Hoban Pest Control in Avon Lake, Ohio, which services the Cleveland suburbs. President Dave Hoban’s customer base hasn’t changed at all over the years in spite of the economy or the “diminishing” middle class. What his residential customers have in common is this: They mostly live in suburban neighborhoods, are considered “upper middle class” and they’re loyal. Oh, and they don’t want pests around either.

“We are not seeing an influx of cancellations or any change with recurring services,” Hoban reports, noting that his business is actually growing from referrals and he has cut his company’s advertising spend.

“There are no changes to be honest,” Hoban confirms.

Of course, Pew is reporting on middle-class income — not how these households feel about pests moving in. And pest pressure/tolerance is a big factor in the buying decision and why homeowners perhaps will sacrifice another service (lawn mowing) to keep their pest control service online, according to the professionals PCT spoke to for this story.

“We are looking for the customer who is proactive — who values their home and their families and is willing to invest in some type of protection,” Colonna says.

While the middle class may be shrinking, the prospect pool for pest control companies could actually be growing. That’s especially true for companies that are stretching their service boundaries. For example, Terminix introduced an exclusion service to manage wildlife in consumers’ attics. It also provides mosquito control for the outdoors.

“When people are trying to protect their homes against outside threats, that goes beyond the boundaries of the foundation of a house and includes everything from the driveway to the back fence,” Colonna says. “So, that has caused us to take a look at what we can do to help eliminate specific pest control threats to the consumer.”

The market for pest control could be getting bigger if you’re a business that’s looking beyond traditional services. Evolving as an operation will be critical for capturing those proactive customers.

This speaks to helping consumers protect their greatest asset: their homes. We buy car insurance that’s a larger percentage of the overall value of a vehicle compared to what termite services cost relative to the total cost of a home, Colonna points out. “If a customer recognizes that termites are a threat against the largest investment they’ve ever made, they are more willing to take a part of their incomes to protect their homes against that threat,” he says.

NEW OPPORTUNITY. The middle class decline has been a gradual one, though the recession in 2007 to 2009 did trigger a faster deflation among households qualifying as middle-income, mostly because this population’s greatest asset is generally real estate.

Incomes have been stagnant. According to a New York Times editorial addressing “Why Americans still Think the Economy Is Terrible,” the 2014 census numbers on U.S. incomes is “not statistically different.”

In a way, pest control growth has the same flavor. This has never been a boom industry with steep growth spurts on record — the kind of skyrocketing market ascent that IT businesses might experience.

And, “the who” concerning target pest control customer just hasn’t changed that much over the years. They’re still homeowners, still usually in that 35 to 55 age group, still making about $75,000 per year per family. “The new model (to succeed) is similar to the old model: continue to offer value that is equal to or greater than the price the customer is paying for the service,” Rollins’ Glover says.

But there’s a lot different about the potential customer universe for pest control services now, Mannes points out.

It’s all about opportunity.

“This is the first time in history we are dealing with four generations (of customers),” Mannes points out.

There are The Matures (70-plus years old), The Baby Boomers, Gen-Xers and Millennials. “This is a huge opportunity for us, but their buying habits are very different so it’s also a challenge,” Mannes says, relating that pest control companies that are slow to adopt to the digital age could miss out on this population’s business. For pest control companies, the fact that the middle class is not getting larger paychecks and statistically has less money to spend might not have anything to do with whether they sign on for service. Because if a home has a pest control problem, there’s always going to be a population of buyers in all classes that want the issue solved.

“If you are a homeowner, the chances are you are a pretty good target for (our business),” Colonna says, adding, “We are not looking at just household income.”

Again, it’s those other attributes (perceived value, home protection) that add up to sale. Income is just a slice of that, and not enough to take a bite out of pest control companies’ revenues from what we’re finding. Glover comments: “I don’t think how we have had to adapt has been as dramatic as the news and research would show.”

Glover is speaking about retaining business in a tough economy — “I would argue that pest control is a unique category,” he says.

Turning on a fresh marketing switch to appeal to progressive customers in the digital age is a different story. And, the way we consume information has nothing to do with class and everything to do with wanting results in an instant. That, more than anything, will impact the way pest control companies do business today — and tomorrow. Colonna says, “The Millennials having that attribute of wanting someone to ‘do it for me’ is a benefit.”

The author is a frequent contributor to PCT magazine. Email her at khampshire@gie.net.

I consider myself both a good entomologist and an ever-evolving backyard beekeeper. So imagine my horror last fall when I lifted the covers off of my hives that previously had almost 30,000 bees (each) two weeks prior, and I suddenly saw only five bees in one and four in the other! Where did they all go? No queen was present in either. What had happened? When in the past two weeks had it occurred? These were the best hives I’d ever had in my 10 years of beekeeping, and they had produced the most honey. Had I finally experienced what has been called Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD)?

I have an unusual perspective on this topic, as I have two feet in this story: one in beekeeping, and, of course, one in structural pest management. I try to keep up with all angles of the bee story, especially as it relates to pest management. And, I was thrilled to have been recently invited by NPMA to represent the structural pest management industry (with others from my state) at the recent (Jan. 20) MP3 (the acronym stands for Managed Pollinator Protection Plan) Bee Summit held by the Maryland Department of Agriculture (MDA).

Have you noticed that “pollinators” has been the buzzword in the news media for the last 5+ years? It’s time you did notice, if you haven’t already. The term “colony collapse disorder” (where bees suddenly leave a hive unexplained and never return) emerged about 5 to 10 years ago. It is now obsolete (I learned this at the summit) and new words are emerging to cover the vast reasons bees may disappear from hives.

Whatever it’s called, it is a complex of issues causing these sudden declines in numbers of bees — both honey bees and native bees — and other pollinators, too; many things have been blamed: from parasites (Varroa destructor primarily), a mite that carries more than 31 viruses that can infect bees with diseases; to invasive pests such as the small hive beetle; to diesel fumes from 18 wheelers that transport commercial bees for pollination across the country (mostly to almond fields in California in the spring); to poor commercial or backyard beekeeping practices; to poor nutrition and diet for the bees due to loss of habitat; to global warming; to monocultures and GMO crops; to genetics and inbreeding of queen bees; and, of course, the one that piques our interest as pest managers: pesticides. (Until recently, “pesticides” meant primarily neonicitinoids on the agricultural side; but the structural pesticide market is often lumped in with the agricultural market by the public and the media. Of course, our industry’s neonicitinoids are formulated differently [in gel baits and liquids mostly] and are not the broadcast or seed coat-type applications.)

Of course, homeowners can purchase over-the-counter (OTC) products in big box stores and then apply at will. That market does not undergo the scrutiny we face in our market, and most homeowners do not read labels religiously. Interestingly, in 2015, most of the big box stores began pulling neonicitinoid products from their shelves. Their actions appear not to have been based on science, but instead on the mounting public pressure about bees and pollinators.

The president has mandated that every federal agency work together to come up with an initiative to protect all pollinators; honey bees are just the poster child. Also, interagency task forces have been formed and have been working on these issues. At the MP3 summit I learned EPA, in conjunction with state regulatory officials, is pursuing a strategy in which each state would be responsible for developing, maintaining and administering their own managed pollinator protection plans (MP3s). SFIREG (State FIFRA Issues Research and Evaluation Group) and AAPCO (Association of American Pesticide Control Officials) are taking the lead in creating a model pollinator protection plan that states could then adopt and use as their own.

Every state is to have an MP3 approach. But, it is up to each individual state to draft their own individual MP3. They are all due this spring. Maryland’s MDA stakeholders participated in the drafting of their plan at the summit, and once written as a first draft, it will be open for public comment, hopefully in April 2016. (I encourage each of you to read your own state’s MP3 and comment as appropriate when that draft comes out. At this point, these state plans and recommendations coming out of them are entirely voluntary. But even state regulators suggested at the summit to use judiciousness in what we recommended for draft as we very well may later see it evolve into regulated policy. A broader approach is therefore preferred to a specific one to include all stakeholders.)

At our Maryland MP3 bee summit, I sat at a table with a diversity of stakeholder members. They came from representatives of the Right of Way/DOT/utilities, EPA, the landscaping associations, PMPs/NPMA and MDPMA and manufacturers, DNR and conservation groups like The Xerces society, local golf course managers, local and national beekeepers’ associations, a local HOA, local school systems, University of Maryland extension agents and entomology graduate students, and the Farm Bureau. Talk about a variety of opinions on the subject! And what a cross-section of stakeholders! But, it was an excellent first meeting and it was interesting to hear how the subject impacts each stakeholder differently. Communication and education took place, and I hope I was able to communicate the need we have in our industry to be able to take care of stinging pest public health emergencies, while also being judicious and following Best Management Practices (BMPs) to protect pollinators around structures.

FINAL THOUGHTS. This issue is ever evolving and I’m only reporting the latest information I have. At the MDA MP3 summit in January, it appeared that the major issues facing bees now are universally agreed to include loss of habitat, poor nutrition and pesticides, at least according to Dr. VanEngelsdorp, a specialist in these matters at the University of Maryland. The pesticide discussion was moving away from neonicitinoids and more towards fungicides and herbicides.

A recent study from Purdue linked neonicitinoid seed coatings from the process of planting seeds and mechanically breaking those coatings (mostly corn) as being able to be picked up by foraging bees through static charges as they flew, and then carried back on their wings and bodies to nearby hives where there were subsequent significant losses. Who knew!?! Other studies have shown systemic neonicitinoids have ended up in pollen and nectar in crop flowers upon which pollinators forage. So, the neonicitinoids are not completely out of the sights of EPA yet.

In 2015, EPA proposed to prohibit the use of pesticides that are toxic to bees, including neonicotinoids, when crops are in bloom and bees are under contract for pollination services. The Agency temporarily halted the approval of new outdoor neonicotinoid pesticide uses until new bee data is submitted and pollinator risk assessments are completed. The EPA’s environmental preliminary risk assessment (PRA) and registration reviews of neonicitinoids, including their effects on pollinators, was originally due by the end of 2015. But the wheels of bureaucracy chug along slowly and thus far, only the preliminary risk assessment on imidacloprid has been released (January 2016); it identified a residue level for imidacloprid of 25 ppb, which sets a threshold above which effects on pollinator hives are likely to be seen, and at that level and below which effects are unlikely. These effects include decreases in pollinators as well as less honey produced.

A preliminary risk assessment of all ecological effects for imidacloprid, including a revised pollinator assessment and impacts on other species such as aquatic and terrestrial animals and plants, also will be released in December 2016. Preliminary pollinator risk assessments for three other neonicotinoids, clothianidin, thiamethoxam and dinotefuran, are scheduled to be released for public comment in December 2016. The White House’s PPI (Pollinator Protection Initiative) is guiding all of these efforts. Perimeter treatment uses for imidacloprid, as expected, did not lose the new bee box/icon on their labels. The neonicitinoids had already been hit with the bee advisory box for foliar applications to flowering plants when bees were present and foraging. (Remember flowering plants are not defined as just the plants you plant in your yard. They also include trees and shrubs, especially fruit-bearing ones, but also, and this is important, what are commonly considered yard weeds (dandelions, clover, mustard, wild asters, etc.). These are all major sources of pollen and nectar for bees and other pollinators. (For our industry, residential mosquito adulticide misting-type applications are most likely where we need to be most cautious, even though most of the products used here are not neonicitinoids.)

When the public comment periods are open in the Federal Register, please take the time to read and make comments. After the comment period ends, EPA may revise the pollinator assessment based on comments received, and, if necessary, take action to reduce risks from these insecticides. But, in the meantime, keep up and stay educated with the ever-evolving story, and when in the field, follow the BMPs to protect pollinators when you are making applications. Keep a list of local beekeepers’ phone numbers and emails handy. They will collect untreated honey bee swarms for you. And be sure to participate in developing and commenting on your state’s MP3 when the draft is presented.

And, the rest of the story with my beehives? Well, I learned that Varroa destructor (that nasty mite that carries the 31 different disease-causing viruses) population levels in my hives took off with the warm fall weather we experienced. (The mites suck blood [hemolymph] of adult bees and develop in the drone [male] brood cells.) At the MP3 summit, I learned I should have treated my hives with a miticide, when I saw an action threshold of three mites present per 100 bees. I was waiting for a higher threshold (traditionally, it has been 12 per 100), and I did not treat. The bees weakened and the hives were robbed by neighboring bees. My hives’ members either absconded or died. Sadly, those neighboring robber bees no doubt carried my bees’ mites to their hives.

I ordered new bees to start up again this spring, and I will be monitoring for mites regularly, when they start taking off in June. If I have three or more mites per 100 bees this summer, you can bet I will be treating with a miticide.

See below for a timeline related to pollinators in the news.

Dr. Kathy Heinsohn, B.C.E., is a technical and training entomologist for American Pest, Fulton, Md. Prior to that position, she was staff entomologist with NPMA and a regional entomologist with Western Pest Services. In all her positions, she has been responsible for developing and delivering training and technical programs for PMPs and their customers. She is currently a member of the Copesan Technical Committee and NPMA’s Technical Committee.

Copesan is an alliance of pest management companies with locations throughout North America. To learn more, visit www.copesan.com.

Last month, the National Pest Management Association (NPMA) announced that COO Dominique Stumpf would succeed Bob Rosenberg as CEO, news I was so happy to hear. I’ve known Stumpf for all of my 18 years at PCT and she’s hard-working and thorough, responsive and knowledgeable. She has extensive experience in many areas of NPMA, and with her expertise managing NPMA PestWorld, she is uniquely qualified to understand the special relationship the association has with both members and suppliers.

In interviewing members of the NPMA Board of Directors the day of the announcement, there was a sense of relief that a final decision had been made about the position. From what PCT heard, NPMA staff was ecstatic when she was named CEO, clapping and cheering at the news. There had been uncertainty at the NPMA office after an initial round of interviews, held last fall, did not result in a new leader being chosen, as was originally planned. PCT heard from sources that some staff had been “on edge” the past several months, knowing that they — and their projects — were in various states of flux.

When the dust settled from a second round of interviews conducted by the Succession Planning Committee, which included 17 phone interviews and seven in-person interviews, the list was narrowed to three candidates. In the end, Stumpf was the last person standing.

Russ Ives, NPMA president, said he learned a lot about Stumpf going through this process. “I knew her as part of normal member interactions,” he told PCT. “But in this process we asked all kinds of questions that we might not have had a chance to ask before. We got a sense of her vision and thoughts that extended beyond her current areas of responsibility.

“(The Succession Planning Committee) made sure we had done our due diligence. And out of all of that we affirmed the opinion that Dominique is perfect for this role,” Ives added.

Chuck Tindol, chair of the Succession Planning Committee, agreed and told PCT that Stumpf “grew under Bob’s mentorship. She is more detail-oriented than Bob, who is creative and consensus-building and Dominique is action-driven and gets things done.”

For Stumpf, the road to the CEO suite took longer than I’m guessing she would have liked. She was interviewed in the fall but not offered the job at the time. The Succession Planning Committee decided to hire an executive search firm, which scoured the industry and association world for Rosenberg’s potential successor. Stumpf was included in the second round of interviews and stayed positive while performing her COO duties. “I just saw not being hired in the fall as an opportunity to keep serving in my current role to make sure they felt I was a viable leader for the association,” she told me on the day of the announcement. “I felt like I was on an on-the-job interview at all times, so I always wanted to ensure I was doing my best. I was taking the opportunity to learn and create a role for myself.”

And Rosenberg couldn’t be more pleased. “NPMA is in a very good place right now but it’s time for a change,” Rosenberg said. “Dominique was the obvious choice and she’ll be great.”

WHAT ABOUT BOB? It’s been 27 years since Bob Rosenberg arrived at NPMA and as his retirement reverberates throughout the industry, it will be a change for a generation of PMPs who have never known him not to be around. His dedication is well known and from PCT’s perspective, there’s virtually no one we’d rather spend time talking to at a tradeshow or on the phone.

He won’t only be missed by PCT. He’ll be missed as an NPMA staffer and friend. “Bob has been a friend and colleague for 19 years. We’re in store for a lot of changes — not just me taking on his role, but staff learning to get by without Bob as a presence,” Stumpf said. “He is our friend and colleague and he will definitely leave a gap — not just in leadership but in our world.”

And Rosenberg kept working right until the end of his tenure. “Bob has been good about communicating to the board and executive committee about his intentions throughout this process,” Ives told PCT. “When the whole process took us past the date he planned to retire, his commitment to the association stood out and there was no complaining. He kept doing what he was doing, helped keep staff focused, exhibited great patience and reaffirmed that commitment to the association and members. He’s been a treasure.”

The author is editor of PCT.