Pest control has always been — and always will be — about problem solving. Most of our memories regarding problem solving are likely to be bad ones involving math. But math problems had and still have a purpose, even though most of us could not see a purpose at the time. Solving math problems taught us how to train our minds to be logical in our thought processes. In this way, we use what we learned in math class every day, whether it be to balance our checkbooks or thinking of the best route to get home in heavy traffic.
In pest control, two types of problems may be encountered. The obvious type is a customer who has pests in their home or business. The other involves the customer who has no visible signs of pest activity but who has hired you to keep pests out. The latter type is often the more difficult because of a lack of information, much like a complicated algebra story problem. In either case, solving the problem begins with the target pest. If the customer has seen a pest, that pest can be found and identified. When a customer employs you for preventive control services, the target pest is the one with which the customer is most concerned.
Successful problem solving requires adherence to procedures, especially if you want to solve a problem quickly. Situational pest management (SPM) takes into account that every pest problem is a different situation. This is true even in different rooms within the same building, especially if two different pests are involved. This article will look at several pest situations and examine how SPM functions as a procedural problem-solving guide.
The steps involved in SPM are:
1. Identify the pest(s) involved.
2. Find where the pest(s) lives.
3. Direct control efforts at where the pest(s) lives.
4. Correct any contributing conditions.
5. Evaluate (follow-up) to ensure favorable results.
SITUATION #1. Workers on the fourth floor of an office building reported seeing ants on window sills in two adjacent areas. The ants were trailing up into the false ceiling.
Step 1: The ants were identified as odorous house ants.
Step 2: Since the ants disappeared into the ceiling and from there into the exterior wall, determining the nest site was not possible. An inspection outside — where most odorous house ant infestations originate — revealed not odorous house ants but acrobat ants invading the building from the exterior. The acrobat ant trail extended along the wall to where tree limbs touched the building. The acrobat ant nest was then uncovered in a space in the trunk of the tree.
Step 3: The odorous house ants could not be treated directly at their source because the nest site could not be located. These ants were baited using Drax ant bait. The acrobat ant nest was drenched with about one ounce of Demand CS and the entire trail was spot-treated with the same product.
Step 4: The tree branches that allowed the acrobat ants direct access onto the building were trimmed back.
Step 5: A follow-up visit the following week revealed that the odorous house ants had fed on the bait and were no longer apparent. The acrobat ants could no longer be found trailing either on the building or the tree. Subsequent follow-up visits over two years have shown no continued ant activity in either area of the building. Ants, however, do continue to be seen outside and occasionally invade other areas of the building. Continued follow-up service is a must for this building. In this case, following SPM resulted in very little insecticide treatment being required to produce effective results. The amount of time spent in solving the problem was less than 30 minutes. Investigation of the original complaint revealed a secondary ant infestation — a fact not uncommon when dealing with ants.
SITUATION #2. Two workers at a plastics manufacturer reported confirmed bites from brown recluse spiders which they claim they received at work. The facility was concerned at this news and wanted the entire facility treated for this spider.
Step 1: Before treating any building for brown recluse spiders, it is always best to confirm that this spider is actually present. Just because the person who has the bite thinks they were bitten in a particular building is not always the case. Additionally, in a very large building, if this spider is present, what is the extent of the infestation? Will it be necessary to treat all 300,000 square feet of the facility or just certain areas? A visual inspection revealed no sign of brown recluse spiders.
Step 2: In this case, the customer was sold a survey service involving the placement of nearly 400 sticky traps. After one week, the trap catch revealed not a single brown recluse spider anywhere in the facility. The traps confirmed the findings of the visual inspection. Still, the traps did capture numerous other spiders and occasional invader pests, indicating that pest problems did exist.
Step 3: Since brown recluse spiders were not evident, the extensive treatments required for that pest were not necessary. Instead, spot treatments were applied indoors in areas where the traps revealed the greatest activity of occasional invaders and other types of spiders, especially cellar spiders. Outside, a perimeter treatment was applied to the foundation and a few feet out from the building.
Step 4: The customer was advised to perform general cleanup to remove old spider webbing and clutter that could be used by spiders for harborage. Outdoors, regular mowing was implemented to keep tall weeds down and exterior cracks were identified to be sealed.
Step 5: Monitoring and regular service and perimeter treatments continue at this facility today. To date, brown recluse spiders have still not been detected within the facility.
Step 1 is always the most important step in SPM. The identity of the pest is key to a correct control strategy. In this case, unnecessary treatments were avoided by confirming whether the target pest was present and the extent of the infestation. Steps 1 and 2 showed a secondary occasional invader problem that, if not addressed, could result in a potential brown recluse spider problem in the future.
SITUATION #3. A prominent hotel had a continual problem with ants that grew from a minor problem to one that had spread throughout the hotel. One Saturday, a group of service technicians and their supervisor spent four to five hours treating every room in the hotel using procedures to control Argentine ants (their identification of the ant involved). The problem actually seemed to immediately worsen following the treatment.
Step 1: The ant involved in the case was not Argentine ants. Pharaoh ants were subsequently identified by the company entomologist as the culprit. Thus all of the treatment efforts put into the hotel were for naught and actually resulted in spreading the ants further.
Step 2: Complaint records and notes kept by the pest control supervisor were used to determine which rooms were infested. Interestingly, the previous services had always focused on the rooms and ignored hallways, planters and elevators. An inspection revealed these areas were also infested.
Step 3: Over a two-week period, every room and area in the hotel was baited using both Maxforce Pharaoh Ant Killer stations and Drax ant bait (in electric outlet boxes and pipe voids). Planter boxes were also baited as these seemed to harbor numerous ant colonies.
Step 4: The hotel was asked to provide additional cleaning in certain areas to improve bait acceptance.
Step 5: Over the next several months frequent follow-up was completed in every room and baits changed or added as necessary. After the ant activity decreased to almost nonexistent, the baiting program was allowed to lag behind other service efforts. Before one year was out, the ants returned and the baiting program was not adjusted to compensate for the increased activity. The problem was allowed to again get out of hand before another comprehensive baiting program was again implemented.
This case was doomed for difficulty at the beginning and at the end. Again, identity of the pest involved was paramount to success. Misidentification resulted in considerable wasted effort and a worsening problem. After the problem was seemingly solved, lax follow-up produced a resurgence of the infestation — a big no-no when dealing with pharaoh ants in a large building. In such situations, treatment with residual insecticides results in severely fragmented pharaoh ant colonies that are often forced deep into hidden voids of the building. The initial baiting effort eliminates the colonies foraging openly in the rooms and other exposed areas. Deeply hidden colonies then move out to take advantage of the more ideal, newly vacated territory. Proper SPM strategy dictates a well-planned follow-up pharaoh ant baiting program for at least 12 months in heavily infested large commercial buildings.
SITUATION #4. A homeowner offered continual complaints to her service technician regarding the large cockroaches she saw in her house every week. The service technician was diligent in providing extra services and treating the areas of the home where the homeowner saw the cockroaches.
Step #1: The pests involved were smoky-brown cockroaches.
Step #2: Since smoky brown cockroaches originate from outside, then invade the attic before entering the living spaces of the home, the technician was not treating the sources of the infestation. He wasted nearly all of his time when treating inside where these cockroaches were seen. An inspection of the attic revealed numerous cockroaches. Outside, cockroaches were flushed by the dozens from under the siding at the soffit level and were found in the firewood pile and among flagstones. The cockroaches were also likely living in tree holes in the many trees on the property.
Step #3: The cockroaches in the attic were treated by a combination of dust application in cracks by the roof peak and spreading Dursban cockroach bait into the soffits and around boxes. Outside, dust was applied into all exterior cracks of the home. Bait was applied into the firewood pile, in the limb crotches of trees and around the flagstones.
Step #4: The customer was asked to move the firewood pile to the back part of the property and to trim branches back from the house. A caulking service was offered but was declined by the customer, who said her husband would complete that task.
Step #5: Subsequent service visits involved continued exterior baiting and bait application in the attic. In this case, the technician had completed step 1 but neglected steps 2 and 3. He never identified the sources of the infestation and then directed efforts at those sites. The goal should have been to keep the numbers of cockroaches on the property to such a low level that they were less likely to invade the house.
SITUATION #5. A medical building was infested by mice. Mice were reported from numerous areas of the 12-story building.
Steps 1&2: Since the mice (the target pest) were so widespread in the building, a survey of the entire building was completed. Nurses and maintenance workers were asked where they specifically noticed rodent activity. The results were plotted on floor plans and mouse activity was noted in all 12 areas.
Step #3: Since no permanent traps or stations could be maintained in the facility, the devices were placed during the evening after the building closed and then were picked up the following morning prior to opening. More than 30 traps were used at each site.
Step #4: After the successful trapping program, the openings around plumbing under sinks and other areas were plugged and sealed.
Step #5: The process described in step 3 was repeated over several nights until no mice could be captured. More than 24 mice were captured. Continued monitoring and a pest reporting system revealed no further mouse activity. In this case, step 2 was very critical due to the limited ability to use rodent control devices. It was imperative that the areas requiring trapping efforts be narrowed to the areas of activity. The initial survey took considerable time but paid off in a quick resolution of the problem.
As shown by these examples, the steps of SPM can be used to solve any pest infestation. Considerable time is often wasted by technicians who treat before they gather any information about the situation. The problem is the pest itself. It is there for a reason, and the reasons for its continued proliferation must also be identified. SPM works because it considers these factors before any treatments are completed.