Railway Track & Structures - March 2009 - (Page 29)

although control/elimination of existing colonies was achieved, it is highly probable that these bridges will be attacked again. Continuous monitoring programs for FST have been recommended to the railroad company. It remains to be seen if this or other railroad companies will embrace longterm monitoring for FST. Oftentimes lapses between inspection intervals were incurred because of the inability of the railroad to allocate human resources to supervise bridge inspections. Above ground bait stations were recommended in many instances, but the railroad requested that baiting be principally restricted to in-ground stations. Overall, this was a very successful program with FST population elimination and/or reduction around all bridges. Given all environmental concerns, baiting was the most appropriate choice of control technologies for remedial control of FST on these railroad bridges. The application of conventional barrier-type soil injected termiticides with their associated risk potential for runoff into ground water, was the principal concern by the railroad company for treatment of these specific bridges. Other locations that do not have water hazards or contamination issues might integrate a combination of technologies to control FST in an effective integrated pest management program. All of the bridges in this study had areas below trestles where water was present and, as such, presented an unacceptable risk for conventional soil-injected termiticide applications. The time needed to thoroughly inspect and monitor these bridges was significant, with significant costs to the railroad company. Similarly, because railroad company representatives had to be present for all subsequent inspections of bait stations, coordination for scheduling of regular visits was significantly more difficult. In many instances, bait stations were not monitored in as timely a manner as would be desired if this hindrance was not present. This is likely the reason why monitoring for FST was discontinued at these bridges. It is not uncommon in many structural applications of baiting technologies such as Sentricon® for consumers to suspend continued monitoring since the threat or perceived threat is diminished by successful applications from pest management professionals. We strongly advise that railroads should more actively pursue programs that offer population reduction of FST through the use of baiting programs and improved preservation methods of wooden materials used in the construction of rail lines and bridges. Acknowledgements We would like to thank J. Grossman and R. Meyers for their participation in the use of detection equipment at the Green’s Bayou Bridge in Houston. Special thanks are extended to Cheri and Leo Holder of End-O-Pest Pest Control for allowing us access to their baiting records. Thanks are extended to C. Riegel for her insight and experience in dealing with FST around railroads in New Orleans, and B. Bushman for assisting with the preparation of digital images. This research was supported in part by the Center for Urban and Structural Entomology, Texas A&M University, and a grant from USDA. www.rtands.com Railway Track & Structures March 2009 29 http://www.rtands.com

Table of Contents Feed for the Digital Edition of Railway Track & Structures - March 2009

Railway Track & Structures - March 2009 Contents On Track Industry Today Supplier News AREMA News NRC News TTCI R&D NRC Smashes Attendance Bridge Inspection Battling Bugs Ballast Fundamentals Vital to Keeping Track in Shape Products and Literature People Calendar Sales Representatives Advertisers Index Website Directory Professional Directory Classified Advertising Chicago Perspective

Railway Track & Structures - March 2009

For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.