Preliminary Findings 2002 School District Integrated Pest Management Survey

1
Preliminary Findings 2002 School District
Integrated Pest Management Survey

• California School IPM Program
• Advisory Group Meeting
• August 1, 2002

2
Survey goals

• Measure schools adoption of IPM
• Measure DPRs progress in implementing HSA
• Characterize school districts and their needs

3
Survey methodology

• Compact survey fits on 8.5 X 14 sheet
• Mailed to all California districts
• Coded by school district (links to geographic,
  demographic data)

4
Survey results

• 988 school districts surveyed
• 418 surveys completed 42.4 return
• 5 error

5
Awareness of the School IPM Program

• 87 are aware of the California School IPM
  Program
• 70 have adopted IPM program (self-reported)

6
Healthy Schools Act compliance

• 84 post warning signs
• 76 provide annual notification
• 71 maintain lists for notification
• 60 maintain records for 4 years

Required by HSA
7
Adoption of IPM-related policies

• 50 have a written list of pesticide products
  approved for use
• 44 have a written policy to use least-toxic pest
  management practices
• 15 have a written policy requiring monitoring
  of pest levels

8
Effectiveness of IPM programs

• 41 IPM resulted in more effective pest
  management
• 21 IPM resulted in less effective pest
  management
• 20 IPM made no difference in pest management
  effectiveness
• 19 Uncertain/No opinion

9
Ant management

• The good news
• Most districts are caulking and using baits.
• Insecticides are low on the list.
• The bad news
• Some districts still using spray cans, even 13
  of those that say they have an IPM program (7
  of these said it was their most frequently used
  method)
• Some districts still calendar spraying.

10
Ant management Practices used

• Caulk in cracks 64
• Ant baits 58
• Soapy water spray 38
• Other 36
• Insecticides sprayed using other application
  method 25
• Improved sanitation 22
• Insecticidal spray from aerosol can 17

11
Ant management Decision-making on treatments

• When ants are first noticed 34
• After certain number of complaints by
  constituents 31
• At regular time intervals 16
• When number of ants exceed pre-established
  thresholds 13
• Other 6

12
Weed management

• The good news
• Spot herbicide treatments ranked higher than
  broadcast herbicides
• Physical controls ranked the highest
• The not-quite-as-good news
• Mulches, irrigation management rarely used
• Puzzling result on broadcast herbicides

13
Weed management Practices used

• Physical controls (hand pulling, cultivating,
  mowing) 69
• Regular spot treatment of turf/landscaping with
  herbicides 61
• Use of mulches 26
• Regular broadcast methods of turf/landscaping
  with herbicides 23
• Irrigation management 17
• Other 10
• Flaming 7

14
Most frequently used practices (ants) IPM vs.
non-IPM districts
Practice IPM No IPM
Ant baits 32 30
Insecticides sprayed using other application method 10 16
Improved sanitation 25 15
Other 9 15
Insecticidal spray, aerosol can 7 14
Soapy water spray 13 9
Caulk in cracks 4 2
15
Frequency of Community Inquiries on Pest
Management

• Districts with IPM Programs12 receive
  inquiries at least once per month
• Districts without IPM Programs, or not sure if
  they have IPM Programs8 receive inquiries at
  least once per month

16
Survey questions

• Pest management questions on two major pests
  (ants weeds)
• Monitoring recordkeeping
• Frequency of inquiries from community

17
Survey questions, contd

• Specific contracting arrangements
• Adoption of IPM-oriented policies
• Compliance with HSA
• Sources of pest management information