spent the first years doing some preventative maintenance such as putting plastic lin-
ing under the bleachers and deeply aerating the fields. We have now cut costs and
labor across the board for the past seven years and the turf looks better than ever.’’^24
The Susquehanna school is currently saving more than $1,000 annually on pest con-
trol with its new IPM program.
Several school districts in North Carolina are using IPM to lower the frequency of
pest infestations as well as the cost of pest control. During the summer of 2003, the
Agricultural Resources Center & Pesticide Education Project surveyed the facilities
departments at all of North Carolina’s 117 public school districts regarding their pest
management practices. Sixty districts responded, representing more than half of
North Carolina school districts and 1.3 million students from kindergarten through
grade twelve. The survey found that many schools still use high-risk pest control
practices such as fogging buildings with pesticides or using pesticides regularly as pre-
vention. Schools with least-toxic or IPM programs consistently spent less than the
statewide average on pest control, and tended to be more satisfied with their pest
management programs overall. Some of the survey’s most interesting findings include:
- on average, North Carolina school districts spend $1.77 per student per year on
pest control, whereas districts with least-toxic pest control programs, such as IPM,
spend $1.49 per student per year; 2) 43 percent of school districts report using pesti-
cides regularly in classrooms; 3) 17 percent of school districts fog buildings with pes-
ticides; 4) only three school districts reported notifying parents when pesticides are
used at school; 5) 65 percent of districts report consciously selecting least-toxic pesti-
cide product formulations; 6) large urban districts as well as small rural districts in
North Carolina report success with IPM programs.^25
IPM’s cluster of preventive approaches (cultural, mechanical, and biological) are
easy to implement because they can be incorporated into schools’ existing custodial
and maintenance functions, such as sanitation, energy conservation, building security,
and infrastructure maintenance.
‘‘In-House’’ or Contracted Services
IPM programs can be successfully implemented by ‘‘in-house’’ school employees or
by contracting with a pest control company. A combination of in-house services with
contracted functions may be mixed and matched to the needs and capabilities of each
school system. Both approaches have advantages and disadvantages. Individual school
systems must decide what is best for them given their unique circumstances. Whether
selecting in-house or contracted services, pest management personnel should be
trained to: 1) understand the principles of IPM; 2) identify pests and associated prob-
lems or damage; 3) monitor infestation levels and keep records; 4) know cultural or
alternative methods; 5) follow recommended methods of judicious pesticide applica-
tion; 6) learn the hazards of pesticides and the safety precautions to be taken; and 7)
understand the pesticide label’s precautionary statement(s) pertaining to exposure to
humans or animals.^26
Pesticides in Schools | 125