![[logo] US EPA](https://webarchive.library.unt.edu/eot2008/20090510020511im_/http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Interpest, Inc.'s 2006 Strategy
Strategic Approach
Interpest provides pest management services for commercial food processing, preparing and distribution facilities where traditional pesticide usage has historically been the preferred method of eliminating insects. Interpest plans to reduce pesticide usage in these facilities dramatically by implementing the following activities:
1. Eliminate the use of aerosol products in food producing and preparing facilities by 100%. For 2006 we seek to measure the number of clients that we can train to not perform aerosol applications between our services.
2. Identify insect introductions and species by increasing the use of non-pesticidal insect detectors in a grid pattern throughout each facility.
3. Utilize food grade caulk to seal or modify insect harborages in lieu of applying any pesticide. We will look at calculating amounts of caulking clients give to us for this.
4. Provide a detailed entomological inspection and report to each client quarterly on what they can do to correct any conditions that are conducive to pests.
5. Eliminate any interior applications of ant baits.
Progress on 2005 Activity 1
Eliminate the use of aerosol products in food producing and preparing facilities by 100%..
We met our objectives and have eliminated the use of aerosol products in food producing and preparing facilities by 100%. Invoices from our chemical distributors and service reports were analyzed used to confirm that no aerosols were purchased or applied. However, some of our clients chose to utilize aerosols "in-house". We did not recommend this, in fact we sought to have them eliminate this practice as well. Our 2006 objectives will include guiding clients whom
Progress on 2005 Activity 2
Identify insect introductions and species by increasing the use of non-pesticidal insect detectors in a grid pattern throughout each facility.
We tripled our usage of non-pesticidal insect monitors from 2004-2005. 2004 consumption was $23.00 per month for every 10k of revenue. 2005 we spent about $70.00 per 10k. We confirmed with by analyzing invoices from our chemical distributors, and service reports left with our clients. This significant increase is also due to a shorter operation season in 2004 than in 2005.
Progress on 2005 Activity 3
Utilize food grade caulk to seal or modify insect harborages in lieu of applying any pesticide..
We compared the use of caulk and various other materials to repair cracks and crevices where insects live and breed from 2004 to 2005. Although we met our goals by increasing the use of these exclusionary materials, our numbers are probably better than our data even shows. Several large clients insisted that they provide the caulking materials for us so that both our people and their maintenance personel were utilizing the same products. These offerings were not calculated into our overall consumption. (This was an issue created by their HACCP plan) In 2004, we spent an average of $10 on caulking materials per 10k of revenue. 2005 averages were at $14 per 10k.
Consumption of insects baits and dust were also analyzed but did not decline. We thought there would be a reduction in these materials since voids were repaired rather than treated. However, during this period, we took on several clients, and groups of accounts that had significant pest issues that had to be resolved by both insect baits and dusts. Exclusion practices were used later. In 2006 we will look to account for new clients with serious problems, and deduct baits and dusts used for the first 30 days of service.
Progress on 2005 Activity 4
Provide a detailed entomological inspection and structural report to each client quarterly on what they can do to correct any conditions that are conducive to pests.
We met our objective by over 100%. Each client recieved detailed structural, sanitation, and storage reports quarterly as planned with many of them provided monthly. Several clients were provided thes on a weekly basis. These were calculated by anylizing client files.
Progress on 2005 Activity 5
Eliminate any interior applications of ant baits.
We met this objective by 100%. No interior ant baits were purchased from our chemical distributors for 2005. Client files were also analyzed to ensure no applications were made.
Activities for the Coming Year
Activity 1
Eliminate the use of aerosol products in food producing and preparing facilities by 100%.
How does this activity reduce pesticide risk?
Traditional pest control tactics for these facilities incorporates aerosols to treat equipment, high ceilings and other hard to reach areas as well as cracks and crevices where insects harbor and breed. This practice leaves residual on many food surfaces and places risks to employees still working within the facility. It also chases insects to new areas or into more sensitive areas. Eliminating these aerosols will reduce risks in multiple areas. Pesticide residues on food surfaces, reduced pesticide exposure to service personnel and client employees, and eliminate the risk of contaminating foodstuffs or packaging
How will you measure the risk reduction gained from this activity?
Annual purchases of aerosol products and equipment will be compared for 2005 to 2006 with the goal of eliminating these purchases 100%. Comparisons will be made for every $10,000 of revenue, or average route value.
Activity 2
Identify insect introductions and species by increasing the use of non-pesticidal insect detectors in a grid pattern throughout each facility.
How does this activity reduce pesticide risk?
Non-pesticidal insect detectors allow us to identify introduced insects before they can begin to proliferate. This allows us to accurately identify the pest, have indication of the direction of the entry, and numbers in which the introduction has taken place. From here, we can inspect the immediate area, find the small infestation and eliminate it without the use of pesticides. This usually requires vacuuming any insects present, and then sealing the crack or void used as a harborage with a food grade caulk or foam material.
How will you measure the risk reduction gained from this activity?
Annual purchases of insect detectors will be compared for 2005 to 2006. Comparisons will be made for every $10,000 of revenue, or average route value.
Activity 3
Utilize food grade caulk to seal or modify insect harborages in lieu of applying any pesticide.
How does this activity reduce pesticide risk?
Insects do not typically live in open areas. They take refuge within cracks and crevices that develop as a building ages. Caulking and sealing cracks and crevices where insects live and breed eliminate the need for a pesticide application completely.
How will you measure the risk reduction gained from this activity?
Annual consumption of caulk will be compared for 2005 and 2006. This will be compared to purchases of insect baits and dusts for the same period that would have been injected into these areas if this practice had not been implemented.
Activity 4
Provide a detailed entomological inspection and structural report to each client quarterly on what they can do to correct any conditions that are conducive to pests.
How does this activity reduce pesticide risk?
Many pests can be prevented and pesticide applications eliminated if the client understands what he/she can do to modify their structure to be less conducive to the various pest pressures around their facility. Correcting negative airflow, screening dock doors, installing door sweeps, replacing filters on air intakes are all examples of what we look at for each client. This inspection is performed by an entomologist, with a report and conversation with the client on the findings.
How will you measure the risk reduction gained from this activity?
Each year we will compare the number of reports provided with the number of accounts in our portfolio. We will calculate a percentage of clients receiving these reports on the frequency we have set as a goal.
Activity 5
An interior application of any pesticide creates risks. Ants have become the pest within our industry that causes more calls than any other. Ants are often treated by placing toxic baits either in the form of a gel, granule, or bait-puck on the inside of the structure. This practice often lures more ants into the building. Ants do not typically eat on site but rather cut pieces of the pesticide bait and carry it back to the nest often dropping pieces and contaminating the items that they crawl over as they return. Eliminating this practice removes any toxin, regardless of its level of toxicity from exposure to people or foodstuffs.
How does this activity reduce pesticide risk?
Eliminate any interior applications of ant baits.
How will you measure the risk reduction gained from this activity?
Annual account reviews will involve an on-site inspection as well as reviewing all service reports. Any use of ant baits on the interior will be measured in percentage of accounts that utilized these baits on the interior for 2005 as compared to 2006.